Home|Contents

The Old Testament as History
Part 5


Rex Banks



The Reign of Solomon.

Rehoboam and Shishak

The Tel Dan Inscription.

The Moabite Stone.

Assyria and the Northern Kingdom.

Assyria and the Kingdom of Judah.


The Reign of Solomon

The biblical description of conditions during the reign of King Solomon has presented a challenge to many who have attempted to harmonise scripture with the archaeological data while adhering strictly to the "conventional chronology". Rohl points out that according to the Bible, in Solomon's time "great trading networks were established," and as a result "Jerusalem and the other cities of Israel were renewed and invigorated by the influx of luxury materials, in addition to the artisans needed to turn the exotic produce into marketable goods". Craftsman from Phoenicia constructed "palaces and state apartments for the King of Israel and his Egyptian Queen, turning Israel into a truly royal city". Rohl quite correctly points out that if the King's reign was characterised by such luxury, sophistication and interaction with surrounding nations "we shall expect to find considerable evidence of Solomon's wealth and Israel's internationalism within the archaeology of the period". But according to Rohl this evidence is lacking.

Rohl explains the problem in a nutshell : "There are no magnificent buildings, no fine artefacts adorned with semi precious stones and inlays, no gold, silver or ivory, and no signs of a flourishing international trade". He quotes Kenyon who observes that there are no "striking signs of economic prosperity," and points out that there is no evidence for the "famed Phoenician craftsmanship in stonecutting, so prized by Solomon". In fact the period identified by the "conventional chronology" as the time of Solomon's reign "can only be described as a period of general impoverishment in the cultural history of the Levant". Clearly this is good news to those who have a vested interest in discrediting the historicity of the Bible, but fortunately for the rest of us, this is not the whole story.

The fact is that freed from the yoke of the "conventional chronology" the picture changes dramatically. Rohl illustrates this with reference to one of Solomon's most important cities, Megiddo. Evidently the "conventional chronology" places the reign of Solomon at a time when Megiddo was characterised by "relative impoverishment" but according to the "new chronology," Solomon ruled during a period when Megiddo was a city of "great wealth and cosmopolitan character". Among other things archaeology has uncovered the following at the site of the ancient city of Megiddo: a magnificent palace, 50 metres in length with two-metre thick walls containing a great horde of gold, jewellery ivory and suchlike; a "cache of ivories ...(which) constitutes the largest and richest collection of Canaanite carved ivory yet discovered in Palestine"; a triple entry gateway to the city; a great temple with exterior walls three metres thick. Rohl points out that in light of this it is clear that Megiddo "reached its cultural zenith....precisely when we place the kings of Israel from David to Ahab in the 'new chronology'."

Rohl also draws attention to artifacts which may confirm certain specifics of the biblical record. He reminds us that one of Solomon's greatest building achievements was the Jerusalem Millo which has "been understood to mean a massive terrace system constructed with stone retainers as walls backfilled with rubble". This terracing was designed to increase the building area within Jerusalem. In 1961 Kathleen Kenyon uncovered a "vast stone terracing system which stretched along the East scarp of the old city (and which) ...added at least 6000 square metres to the occupational area of early Jerusalem". Evidently Kenyon believed that she had uncovered Solomon's Millo, but working under the old chronology she was forced to date it on the basis of pottery to about 1400 B.C. Rohl continues: "If we apply the New Chronology's dates for the Amarna period...we get a date of circa 1030 -970 B.C..." Again this fits nicely with Scripture, because Solomon succeeded David in about 970 B.C.

Other discoveries may also be significant in light of certain details contained in Scripture. For example we are told of an ivory piece depicting a typical Egyptian scene, including a king flanked by two sphinxes, and we are reminded of the fact that Solomon married an Egyptian princess (1 Kings 3:1) and possessed a throne flanked with lions. (1 Kings 10:18-20) Interestingly Solomon is said to have built a palace for his Egyptian wife in Jerusalem, and under the "new chronology" the remains of the only Egyptian style building to have been discovered in this city date to the time of Solomon. The wife's house was "up from the city of David" (2 Chron. 8:11) and the Egyptian - style building stood on a hill to the north of the Damascus Gate overlooking Jerusalem. Of course the evidence is inconclusive, but we do appear to have the right structure at the right time and in the right place.

Again let me emphasise I am not suggesting that the "new chronology" is correct in all details. Nor am I suggesting that the new chronology supplies the only means of harmonising the scriptural account of Solomon's reign with the archaeological data. What I am arguing is that we must not permit commitment to any man-devised chronology create problems of harmonisation between Scripture and archaeology where none exist.


Rehoboam and Shishak

In Part 3, we said a word about chronology, and made mention of the attack upon Jerusalem during the reign of Rehoboam by an Egyptian Pharaoh whom the Bible identifies as Shishak. We made the point that Champollion's incorrect identification of Shishak as Sheshonq may well have created real problems for biblical archaeology. We also said that today some revisionists identify Shishak with Ramesses 2nd, 3rd or 4th, with Tuthmoses 3rd and others.

Those who would like to investigate this further will find a great deal of challenging material in A Test of Time by David Rohl and Centuries of Darkness ( principal author Peter James). Rohl believes that Shishak is Rameses 2nd, and James identified him as Rameses 3rd. (See Part 3) Rohl argues that there may be a record of Jerusalem's having been plundered by Rameses 2nd and draws our attention to an inscription discovered at Thebes. This inscription, located on a block atop the North pylon of the Ramesseum reads: "The town which the King plundered in year eight - Shalem". Rohl points out that Shalem was the ancient name of the city of Jerusalem. Elsewhere he suggests that a battle scene found upon the "Ashkelon Wall" at Karnak may well depict this incident.


The Tel Dan Inscription.

According to the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs (http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH00uu0) "The mound of the biblical city of Dan is located at the foot of Mount Hermon in the northeast of the country". We are told that "natural advantages and its location on the main trade route from Galilee to Damascus made Dan the most important city of the northern part of the Kingdom of Israel". Evidently it is one of the most attractive archaeological sites in Israel and "Every year since 1966, large areas have been excavated ...(and) the discoveries are of special importance for understanding the biblical narrative which repeatedly mentions the city of Dan". One discovery in particular, the so called Aramaic Stele has attracted much interest and debate. Information supplied by the Ministry explains why:

"Fragments of a large inscribed basalt stele were found in the square located in front of the Israelite city gate complex. The largest of these fragments measures 32 x 22cm and, of the original inscription, thirteen lines have been partially preserved. The language is ancient Aramaic. The 9th century BCE and the beginning of the 8th century BCE were marked by military conflicts between the kings of Israel and the expanding kingdom of Aram-Damascus. (1 Kings 15:20) Thus the stele was erected by one of the Aramean kings of Damascus who captured Dan - although which king cannot be ascertained as yet. It is probable that in lines 7-8 two kings of Israel and Judah, who ruled at the same time, are mentioned: Jehoram, king of Israel and Ahaziah, king of Judah, referred to as a king of the House of David. These two kings were allies and were defeated by Hazael, king of Aram-Damascus. (2 Kings 8:7-15, 28; 9:24-29; 2 Chron. 22:5) The stele describing Hazael's victory over his enemies was in all probability, erected by him when he conquered Dan in the mid-9th century BCE. It is reasonable to assume that Jehoash, king of Israel, who fought the Arameans three times and defeated them (2 Kings 13:25) recovering territories previously lost, including the city of Dan, symbolically smashed the stele erected there by Hazael, king of Aram-Damascus. Although the broken stele raises serious historical problems, it is one of the most important written finds in Israel and the first non-biblical text which mentions the House of David by name. It is hoped that more fragments of this unique stele will be uncovered in future excavations." (emphasis mine)

Since some scholars deny that David ever existed, there has been a great deal of controversy about how to translate the word bytdwd some insisting that it cannot be a reference to the house of David, some questioning the authenticity of the fragments and some insisting that the inscription contains the earliest non-biblical reference to the House of David by name. Clearly it is not easy for the nonspecialist to make an informed decision about this matter, but perhaps in time more of the Tel Dan inscription will be discovered. John T Willis has written in the Restoration Quarterly (Volume 37/Number 4):

"The preserved portion of the inscription discovered at Tel Dan is clear and, for the most part, easy to translate. Its author is an Aramean king or chieftain who is boasting about his victories over the king of Israel and his army and the king of Betdawd, probably Judah. Thus far, suggestions that bytdwd in line 9 means something other than "the House of David" are much less convincing than that it means "the House of David". This being the case, this newly discovered inscription from Tel Dan contains the only certain ancient reference to David and the House of David outside the OT."(http://www.rq.acu.edu/ Volume_037/rq03704willis.htm)<(http://www.rq.acu. edu/Volume_037/rq03704willis.htm>) <(Http://www.searchnz.co.nz)> <www.searchnz.co.nz>

The Moabite Stone

Scripture records that David defeated the Moabites and that they "became servants to David, bringing tribute" (2 Sam. 8:2), but that following the death of Ahab more than a century later, Mesha king of Moab "rebelled against the King of Israel". (2 Kings 3:5) Although at that time the prophet Elisha promised the king of Israel victory over Mesha, it appears that the armies of Judah and Israel disengaged from battle when the Moabite king offered his oldest son as a burnt offering upon the walls of the city of Kir-hareseth. (2 Kings 3:27) More than 100 years ago, extra biblical reference to this Moabite rebellion was discovered in the form of an inscription upon a stela of black basalt which has come to be known as the Moabite Stone.

The Catholic Encyclopaedia describes the Moabite Stone as "perhaps the greatest biblical discovery of modern times". Evidently the Stone "resembles a headstone" but more importantly it is "inscribed with thirty-four lines of writing, in which Mesa gives us the chief events of his reign". The article continues:

"The historical allusions and geographical names which we find in this inscription of Mesha tally so well with the O.T. that a suspicion could be aroused as to the genuineness of the stone". (Jour. of the Am. Or. Soc., XXII, 61)

Suspicions have been aroused, but scholars almost unanimously set them aside as groundless.

From the fact that Jehoshaphat was upon the throne of Judah and Jehoram was upon the throne of Israel at the time of the Moabite rebellion, it is possible to date this event sometime in the 840's B.C.

A translation of the Moabite inscription can be found at K. C. Hanson's Collection of West Semitic Documents (http://www.stolaf.edu/people/kchanson/westsem.html <(http://www.stolaf.edu/people/kchanson/westsem.html>) Not only is mention made of Mesha, but also of Omri who was one of the most powerful kings of Israel. What's more, we learn that Omri was responsible for the conquest of north Moab. We read:

"I am Mesha, son of Kemosh[-yatti], the king of Moab, the Dibonite. My father was king over Moab for thirty years, and I became king after my father. And I made this high-place for Kemosh in Qarcho . . . because he has delivered me from all kings, and because he has made me look down on all my enemies. Omri was the king of Israel, and he oppressed Moab for many days, for Kemosh was angry with his land. And his son then reigned in his place; and he also said, "I will oppress Moab!" In my days he said so. But I looked down on him and on his house, and Israel has been defeated; it has been defeated forever! And Omri took possession of the whole land of Medeba, and he lived there in his days and half the days of his son: forty years. But Kemosh restored it in my days." (emphasis mine)

Mention of Kemosh confirms the fact that was the name of a god who was worshipped in the land (e.g. Num. 21:29; Jud. 11:24). Boasting about his triumphs Mesha says:

"And Kemosh said to me, "Go, take Nebo from Israel". And I went in the night and fought against it from the daybreak until midday, and I took it and I killed the whole population: seven thousand male subjects and aliens, and female subjects, aliens, and servant girls. For I had put it to the ban for Ashtar Kemosh. And from there I took the vessels of Yahweh, and I presented them before the face of Kemosh." (emphasis mine)

Of particular interest here is the reference to Yahweh, since this is the earliest extra biblical mention of the God of Israel. Too, we learn from the inscription that "the Old Testament custom of...the ban was likewise observed in Moab". (Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible) Some 12 towns are mentioned in the inscription, and significantly they all bear names which we know from the Old Testament.

Finally, it may well be that the most significant reference upon the Moabite Stone has only recently been discovered. Randall Price says:

"Recently, the French scholar Andre Le Maire has added new support to an identification of the Tel Dan Inscription with the historic King David. He has identified the reading of the name David in a formerly unreadable line "House of D..."on the Mesha Stele (or Moabite Stone). If this proves to be the case after scrutiny by other scholars, it will serve as a second example of the phrase "House of David."

And thus after more than a century after its initial discovery the Moabite Stone continues to enhance our under-standing of the biblical record.


Assyria and the Northern Kingdom

The kingdom of Assyria has a long and rich history prior to the 9th century B.C., but it was only following a new period of expansion at this time that the nation came into contact with Israel. According to Britannica:

"The Assyrian kings began a new period of expansion in the 9th century B.C., and from the mid-8th to the late 7th century B.C., a series of strong Assyrian kings - among them Tiglath-pileser III, Sargon II, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon - united most of the Middle East, from Egypt to the Persian Gulf, under Assyrian rule."

Fortunately the Assyrians kept careful records of their political, economic and religious activities, and not surprisingly the excavation of many of Assyria's principal cities has brought to light a number of references to the nations with which they interacted, including the nation of Israel. It is interesting to note that the Assyrian records frequently refer to Israel as the "land of Omri," which may suggest that the Assyrian King Asshur-nasir-pal, who led an expedition against Karkemish and Syria in 878 B.C. came into contact with Omri at that time. This is not mentioned in either the Old Testament or the Assyrian records. Omri had occupied the throne for almost a decade prior to this expedition.

The Assyrian records do however make specific mention of Omri's son Ahab, husband of the infamous Jezebel. Donald Wiseman tells us:

"An Assyrian text of Shalmaneser 3rd tells how he fought a massive battle at Qarqar on the Orontes north of Domascus in 853 B.C. This was against a coalition under Irhuleni of Hamath and Benhadid 2nd of Aram- Damascus...This document is the first direct chronological point of reference between Israel and Assyria, for Shalmaneser lists 'Ahab the Israelite' as providing '2000 chariots and 10,000 men.' " (The Expositors Bible Commentary vol 1 [emphasis mine])

Incidentally "Archaeology has verified the record of Ahab's great building achievements in Samaria... The workmanship (of his fortifications) has been judged to be the best yet found in Palestine". (The Interpreters Dictionary of the Bible) We recall that the Bible speaks of "the ivory house which he built" (1 Kings 22:39) and "carved ivory pieces in great numbers were found among the ruins of the city...an indication of the wealth of the kingdom at this time". (ibid)

According to Scripture, Ahab's wicked house is destroyed by one Jehu, whom the Lord appointed as His instrument of vengeance. (2 Kings 9:6 - 10:17) Unfortunately after a promising beginning (2 Kings 10:18-28) Jehu also proved faithless to his God (2 Kings 10:29-31) and we are told that during his reign of 28 years (2 Kings 10:36) "the Lord began to cut portions from Israel" (2 Kings 10:32). In 1846 an Assyrian inscription recording the subjugation of Jehu by Shalmaneser 3rd was discovered upon an impressive monument known as The Black Obelesk which was recovered from the Assyrian city of Nimrud. Now displayed in the British Museum, this monument preserves a picture of Jehu or his representative offering tribute, along with an inscription which reads: "Tribute of Iaua [Jehu], son of Omri. Silver, gold, a golden bowl, a golden beaker, golden goblets, pitchers of gold, tin, staves for the hand of the king, javelins, I received from him". Evidently this act of homage took place in Shalmaneser's 18th year.

Sometime about the740 B.C. "Pul, king of Assyria, came up against the land (northern Israel) and Menahem (the current king) gave Pul a thousand talents of silver so that his hand might be with him to strengthen the kingdom under his rule" (2 Kings 15:19). From the "Babylonian Kings List" we learn that Pul is Tiglath-pileser 3rd, king of Assyria from 745 to 727 B.C. The Assyrian annals of this king record that "Menahem...fled and submitted to ....(Pul)...silver, coloured woollen garments, linen garments...as his tribute."

In 722 B.C. the faithless northern kingdom came to an end when "the king of Assyria captured Samaria and carried Israel away into exile to Assyria" (2 Kings 17:6). Scripture identifies the then king of Assyria as Shalmaneser ( Shalmaneser 5th) and the then King of Israel as Hoshea. (2 Kings 17:1, 3) Israel's deportation was due to the Lord's anger (v.17) at their infidelity (v.7), and the Assyrian annals confirm that "Israel...was devoured by the Assyrian armies in 722 B.C. when Sargon 2nd (Shalmaneser's successor) entered Samaria its capital, put the King and the nobles to death and transported the remaining citizens to sites are away in the East." (John Romer Testament: The The Bible and History) Romer cites details of the campaign from the "icy Assyrian record" which reads in part:

"...a commoner without claim to the throne, a cursed Hittite, schemed to become king of Hamath, and persuaded the cities of Arvad, Simirra, Damascus and Samaria to desert me...He I flayed, the rebels, I killed in their own cities...I besieged and conquered Samaria, led away as booty 27,000 inhabitants, forming, from among them a regiment of 50 chariots...I replaced the deported inhabitants with new immigrants. Finally, I set my officers over them and imposed upon them the tribute of the former king."

Thus the haughty Assyrian conqueror, not realising that he was an instrument of God's vengeance, records his victory over the ten tribes of Israel, thereby leaving behind confirmation of the biblical account of this tragic event.


Assyria and the Kingdom of Judah.

The northern kingdom fell in the sixth year of the reign of good king Hezekiah of Judah (2 Kings 18:10), and in the fourteenth year of his reign (701 B.C.). "Sennacharib king of Assyria came up against all the fortified cities of Judah and seized them". (2 Kings 18:13) This aggressive act was in response to Hezekiah's having forged an alliance with Egypt and having ended the payment of tribute to Assyria.

Having anticipated and the Assyrian response, Hezekiah prepared Jerusalem for siege by constructing a tunnel by which to bring water into the city from the Gihon Spring which was located at the southern end of the Kidron Valley. The tunnel was a masterpiece of engineering, the result of having carved through some 1750 feet of limestone. Wayne Jackson (Christian Courier Aug 28 1999) has stated:

"This tunnel was explored by Edward Robinson when he arrived in Jerusalem in April of 1838. He made the first scientific study of this amazing engineering feat. The conduit, cut from solid rock in a rather circuitous route, was 1,750 feet long, with an average width of 2 feet, and an average height of 6 feet. Because the workmen's chisel marks changed directions at about the half-way point, Robinson speculated that two crews had dug the tunnel, starting at opposite ends, finally meeting in the middle. Some 42 years later, his theory was confirmed."

In June of 1880, some school boys, playing in the cool waters of Siloam, wandered into the tunnel. One of them discovered strange markings on the wall about 20 feet in from the pool. The carvings were reported and, some months later, Professor A.H. Sayce came and sat for hours in the mud and water transcribing the inscription by candlelight. The writing consisted of six lines of ancient Hebrew script which described the triumph of the ancient engineers' remarkable feat in constructing the tunnel. A copy of the inscription can be found at the web site of Holy Land Pilgrimages, Inc. (http://www.galilee.com/hezekiah's_tunnel.htm <(http://www.galilee.com/hezekiah's_tunnel.htm>) It reads:

"Behold the tunnel. This is the story of its cutting. While the miners swung their picks, one towards the other, and when there remained only 3 cubits to cut, the voice of one calling his fellow was heard - for there was a resonance in the rock coming from both north and south. So the day they broke through the miners struck, one against the other, pick against pick, and the water flowed from the spring towards the pool, 1200 cubits. The height of the rock above the head of the miners was 100 cubits."

Wayne Jackson points out that the tunnel reveals "the phenomenal skill of those Hebrew engineers of more than 2,500 years ago". He explains that the "conduit was not in a straight line, but in an intentionally designed S-shape which required precision skill by the workman operating from opposite directions". More important still, the discovery " confirms the accuracy of the Old Testament record concerning the defensive manoeuvres of Hezekiah against the Assyrian threat".

In 701 B.C. the inevitable Assyrian response to Hezekiah's refusal to pay tribute eventuated when Sennacherib "came up against all be fortified cities of Judah and seized them". (2 Kings 18:13) A fearful Hezekiah sends a message to the Assyrian king at Lachish offering to meet any tribute demands (2 Kings 18:14) and surrendering the gold overlay from the doors and doorposts of the temple (v.15). At this point there is some disagreement about the sequence of events. Some have suggested that the events which follow took place during the campaign of 701 B.C. while others believe that they occurred during a later expedition around about the year 686 B.C. The scriptural record favours the first position. Anyway, encouraged by the prophet Isaiah, Hezekiah refuses to yield to further Assyrian demands, and an enraged Sennacherib determines to destroy Jerusalem. However the Lord assures Hezekiah of His protection, and we are told that in a single night "the angel of the Lord went out and struck 185,000 in the camp of the Assyrians; and when men rose early in the morning behold, all of them were dead". (2 Kings 19:35) The Assyrian king returns home to Ninevah (v.36) where some years later he is assassinated (v.37).

Given the reluctance of ancient kings to acknowledge setbacks and defeats, it is not surprising that the Assyrian account of these events differs in certain particulars from the scriptural narrative, but still the record which Sennacherib preserves of this campaign confirms the accuracy of the Bible at this point. The Catholic Encyclopaedia contains the following excerpt from Sennacherib's account of his expedition against Hezekiah:

"But as for Hezekiah of Judah, who had not subsmitted to my yoke, forty-six of his strong walled cities and the smaller cities round about them without number... I besieged and captured. Two hundred thousand one hundred and fifty people, small and great, male and female, horses, mules, asses, camels, and sheep without number I brought forth from their midst and reckoned as spoil. Himself [Hezekiah] I shut up like a caged bird in Jerusalem, his royal city. I threw up fortifications against him, and whosoever came out of the gates of his city I punished. His cities, which I had plundered, I cut off from his land and gave to Mitinti, King of Ashdod, to Padi, King of Ekron, and to Cil-Bel, King of Gaza, and [thus] made his territory smaller. To the former taxes, paid yearly, tribute, a present for my lordship, I added and imposed on him. Hezekiah himself was overwhelmed by the fear of the brilliancy of my lordship....Thirty talents of gold, eight hundred talents of silver, precious stones, guhli daggassi, large lapis lazuli, couches of ivory, thrones of elephant skin and ivory, ivory, ushu and urkarinu woods of every kind, a heavy treasure, and his daughters, his palace women, male and female singers, to Nineveh, my lordship's city, I caused to be brought after me, and he sent his ambassador to give tribute and to pay homage."

Significantly the Assyrian king boasts of having captured forty-six cities around Jerusalem, which accords with the general statement of 2 Kings 18:13, and although he speaks of having shut up Hezekiah like a caged bird in Jerusalem, he does not claim to have captured the city, which also harmonises with the biblical account. His failure to mention the loss of 185,000 men is understandable, but this memorable event appears to have been preserved in legend. The fifth century B.C. historian Herodotus records that during a visit to Egypt, he was told about Sennacherib's expedition into Egypt " with a great host of Arabians and Assyrians". According to an Egyptian tradition preserved by Herodotus, "one night a multitude of fieldmice swarmed over the Assyrian camp and devoured their quivers and their bows and the handles of their shields likewise, insomuch that they fled the next day unarmed and many fell". (The History 2:141) This deliverance was attributed to the god Vulcan in response to the prayers of one Sethos. Since the mouse was the symbol for plague, the connection with sudden death is understandable, and perhaps the Egyptian tale preserves a garbled version of the incident described in Scripture. Interestingly Sennacherib never again undertook a military expedition to the West or to Palestine.

Finally let's say a word about the city of Lachish, which is specifically mentioned in the biblical account in connection with Hezekiah's message of surrender. (2 Kings 18:14) John Romer points out that, although Jerusalem avoided the Assyrian onslaught, Lachish "a dignified ancient fortress to the south west of Jerusalem did not". He adds:

"Its solemn mound, lying in the low Judaean hills, still bears the marks of the Assyrian assault upon it...Assyrian relief sculptures show the final assault; the implacable regiments of Assur are all in their regulation armour and the desperate defenders awaiting them on the walls. Other reliefs show the sad line of defeated Judeans - the world's first images of refugees- directed by the victors, their possessions loaded onto camels and heaped into chariots....And as they pass the tent of the Assyrian king, two of the soldiers carefully flay the leading citizens of Lachish lying pegged out upon the ground." (Testament: The Bible And History)

Excavations at Lachish have confirmed the accuracy of these Assyrian relief sculptures. We read in The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopaedia of the Bible: "In the debris outside the walls, scattered arrowheads, pieces of scale armour, sling stone's, and an Assyrian type helmet were found, and large earth ramps also were found built against the gateway area just as Sennarherib's relief depicts..."

Isaiah tells us that God used Assyria as an instrument to carry out His divine plan (Isa. 10:5 ff) and it may well be that the Lord is continuing to use the records left behind by this bloodthirsty nation to confirm the historicity of the biblical narrative. Home|Contents