Mingled Voices
The next definite contact between Israel and Egypt is found in the
graphic and terse statement of II Kings 17:4,
“And the king of Assyria found conspiracy in Hoshea: for he had sent
messengers to So king of Egypt, and brought no present to the king of
Assyria, as he had done year by year: therefore the king of Assyria
shut him up, and bound him in prison.”
From this point on, the records of Egypt and Palestine are so enmeshed
and tangled with the records of Babylon and Assyria that we cannot
separate them in their presentation. This king So is identified as the
Egyptian monarch Shabaka, who is also known by the names Sebichos,
Sabakon, Sabacoa, and Seve. He seems to have been a man of implacable
cruelty, if we may judge from the Greek record of his manner of
succession. He was preceded on the throne by Bakenrenef, who was one of
the wise and kindly lawgivers of Egypt. This noble ruler was one of the
first of all the Egyptian kings to come in direct contact with the
classical Greeks. The Dorian invasion had now come to an end and the
Greeks were free to trade and colonize in the Mediterranean, and in the
vigour of their advance they had pressed on to the mouth of the Nile.
They had established a close connection with Sais, and by 700 B. C. had
entrenched themselves strongly in the culture of that section of Egypt.
The Pharaoh of our present interest, So, invaded that section of Egypt
and captured Bakenrenef in a swift and short campaign. The Greek records
relate that after treating his defeated enemy with brutality, So then
burned him alive. He then established himself as king and ruled not only
all of Egypt but Ethiopia as well. He was thus a contemporary of
Shalmaneser, Sargon, and Sennacherib, all of whom have a direct bearing
upon the records of the Old Testament. One of the interesting
discoveries made at the royal library at Nineveh was a seal bearing the
name of Shabaka, or So. The visitor to the British Museum, upon entering
the Assyrian Room, may pause before Table Case “E” and see this
fascinating exhibit of the actualities of these events.
In about the year 700 B. C., according to the record of Holy Writ, when
Shalmaneser had dealt kindly with Hoshea, who had accepted his yoke and
agreed to pay tribute, the faithless king of Judah entered into
conspiracy with Sebakah. Since the common name, So, is the one that is
used in the Scripture, we shall refer to this pharaoh by that name from
this point on. The tribute that Hoshea should have paid to the king of
Assyria he diverted, and paid it into the hand of So for the help that
was promised him in throwing off the yoke of Assyria. There is abundant
reason to believe, from all the collateral records, that this conspiracy
was promoted by So and Hoshea.
This action on the part of the Hebrew king was entirely unwarranted and
consisted of a breach of faith on his part. Indeed, the prophet Hosea
utters a stern and unmistakable reproof against this action in the
strong words of the first verse of his twelfth chapter:
“Ephraim feedeth on wind and followeth after the east wind: he daily
increaseth lies and desolation; and they do make a covenant with the
Assyrians, and oil is carried into Egypt. The Lord hath also a
controversy with Judah, and will punish Jacob according to his ways;
according to his doings will he recompense him.”
As a result of this conspiracy, Hoshea was captured by the king of
Assyria and carried away into an imprisonment. The plan did not work out
as the faithless allies had intended. Shalmaneser invaded Palestine to
punish this rebellion. This wise and able general divided his forces, so
that a major portion of his military strength lay between Egypt and
Palestine at a part of the border that was easily defended. When So
found that the cost of reaching Hoshea with aid was to be a major battle
which would endanger his entire dominion, he simply defaulted and left
Hoshea to bear alone the brunt of the battle. The prophecy of Hosea was
thus literally fulfilled. With the faithlessness that Hoshea had
manifested toward Shalmaneser, he had been rewarded by the defection of
So from his covenant.
It is interesting to note that So seemed to have been a little ashamed
of his conduct, for he offers a rather flimsy excuse for his failure to
stand by his contract. His statement is that Hoshea had paid only half
of the price agreed upon and for that reason he came not to his aid.
In this invasion of Shalmaneser’s, many of the Hebrew people were taken
captive. Hoshea, after being for some time incarcerated in disgrace and
punishment, was forgiven by Shalmaneser and restored to his throne and
dominion. Shalmaneser seems to have reasoned that having once failed and
having tasted of punishment, Hoshea was now to be trusted. Thus, the
first conspiracy ended with the common people of Samaria paying the
price. Two years later the faithless and foolish Hoshea again listened
to the siren song of rebellion as it was sung by the deceitful So and
again rebelled against his over-lord and benefactor. Shalmaneser, in
great wrath, again moved against Samaria, which resisted in a bitter
struggle that lasted three years.
Although the following details are not all mentioned in the text of II
Kings, seventeenth chapter, they are emphasized by the change of person
in the record. In this bitter conflict of three years, no help came from
Egypt. The seventh verse of the text says that the children of Israel
had sinned against the Lord, their God. They had gone again into
idolatry and had put themselves back under the yoke of Egypt, from which
God had repeatedly redeemed them. The miserable and faithless So turned
out to be a bruised reed indeed! But while this campaign was being
fought, Shalmaneser disappeared. A revolution took place in the homeland
and the common oriental disease which may be described as six inches of
steel between the ribs, quietly removed Shalmaneser from the scene. A
usurper named Sargon, who writes his own genealogy and calls himself
“the son of Nobody,” succeeded to the throne.
Thus in the seventeenth chapter of II Kings we have many royal persons,
and in order to keep the records straight, we set them forth this way:
Hoshea was the king of Samaria; and he reigned over Israel nine years.
Shalmaneser the Fifth was the king of Assyria, who is mentioned in the
third verse by name.
The fourth verse continues a record of Shalmaneser, in carrying away
Hoshea and punishing him.
So is the pharaoh with whom we have been dealing.
The king of Assyria who is not named in the sixth verse, is Sargon,
who succeeded to the throne after the probable murder of Shalmaneser.
This Sargon is the second man of that name to have reigned in Assyria.
The time of his reign may be given as from 722-705 B. C. The first
Sargon reigned sometime in the twentieth century, B. C.
Sargon the Second thus reigned for almost eighteen years. He was a
war-loving monarch, and that eighteen year reign was one continuous,
unbroken series of foreign campaigns. Combining his forces with the
small host of the Philistines, he joined battle with the Egyptians at
Raphia. Going directly to this campaign, after the termination of his
campaign against Samaria, he administered a crushing defeat to the
forces of So and had no further difficulty with this pharaoh during the
balance of his reign.
In the British Museum, Table Case “B,” which occupies a section of the
second Northern gallery of the Assyrian Room, contains some magnificent
baked clay cylinders which are the original annals of Sargon. These
priceless records came from the ruins of a tremendous building excavated
by M. Botta at the ancient site of Khorsabad, which was later proved to
have been the palace of Sargon. Most of the sculptured objects from this
discovery are in the Museum at Paris. These written records, however,
which are of infinitely more value to the student, are fortunately on
deposit in the British Museum.
In the Assyrian Saloon of the British Museum the interested student will
also behold an inscription bearing the identification number 12,
whereupon are recorded the names and titles of Sargon the Second,
together with a brief and epitomized account of his conquests in various
sections along the coast lands of the Mediterranean, including his
famous victory in Judah.
A more complete record is found in the Assyrian Room. In Table Case “E,”
exhibits 11 and 12, are two nine-sided prisms containing a graphic
account of the expeditions of Sargon. All of his campaigns in Palestine
are covered and include his conquest of Israel, which he calls “Omri
land.” (These exhibits are identified by the Museum numbers 22,505 and
108,775.)
A further record of Sargon’s bearing upon the text of the Old Testament
will be found in the Assyrian Room in wall case No. 9. Exhibits 1-11 are
fragments of an eight-sided cylinder containing part of the records of
Sargon, particularly recording the campaign against Ashdod, which is
also preserved for us by Isaiah in the twentieth chapter, verse one. The
people of Ashdod had made a league with Judah and this outburst of
Isaiah’s was a stern reproof against this procedure. The prophet
objected chiefly because the league depended upon the strength of Egypt.
To the end of his life, Isaiah never gave up his justified distrust of
that country. This, in a brief summary, presents the records of
Shalmaneser and Sargon as they authenticate the Biblical account of the
conduct of the wretched So. Sargon recounts that Azuri, who was king of
Ashdod, had refused to pay the tribute that was due to the Assyrians.
Consequently he was deposed by Sargon, who elevated his brother Akhimiti
to the place of dominion. Whereupon the people of Ashdod rebelled and
raised Yamini to the throne. They then entered into a conspiracy with
Philistea, Edom, Moab, Egypt, and Judah. Sargon recounts their defeat
and the bringing back under the sway of his yoke the cities and peoples
who joined the conspiracy.
A graphic and significant story is contained in the brief and short
words of Sargon’s own record—“Samaria, I looked at. I captured. 27,280
families who remained therein I carried away.” The tragic end of Hoshea
and all of his noble counselors and advisers is thus summed up in a
brief and terrible sentence.
Sargon the Second was followed in turn by Sennacherib, of whom a great
deal is known from his monuments. Their testimony coincides with the
story of the Southern Kingdom during the reign of Hezekiah. Three years
after the ascension of Hoshea to the throne of Israel, Hezekiah began to
reign over Judah at Jerusalem. He had a long and interesting reign,
occupying the throne for twenty-five years. In the course of his reign,
Sargon the Second died, and Sennacherib inherited the throne.
Encouraged by the success of his predecessor Sargon in foreign
campaigns, Sennacherib invaded Judah to round out his empire. Hezekiah
accepted his yoke without offering resistance, and paid him a vast
tribute.
We are now in the eighteenth chapter of II Kings which repeats part of
the events of the tragedy in Israel as they were observed by the scribe
in Judah. The invasions of Shalmaneser and Sargon are recapitulated and
the carrying away of the people of Samaria by Sargon is again
authenticated. But the scribe is more interested in recording the events
that make so stirring a chapter in the closing days of the kingdom of
Judah. In verses thirteen to seventeen, the story of this first invasion
and the surrender of Sennacherib, is told in these words:
“Now in the fourteenth year of king Hezekiah did Sennacherib king of
Assyria come up against all the fenced cities of Judah, and took them.
“And Hezekiah king of Judah sent to the king of Assyria to Lachish,
saying, I have offended; return from me: that which thou puttest on me
will I bear. And the king of Assyria appointed unto Hezekiah king of
Judah three hundred talents of silver and thirty talents of gold.
“And Hezekiah gave him all the silver that was found in the house of
the Lord, and in the treasures of the king’s house.
“At that time did Hezekiah cut off the gold from the doors of the
temple of the Lord, and from the pillars which Hezekiah king of Judah
had overlaid, and gave it to the king of Assyria.”
Between the sixteenth and seventeenth verses of the eighteenth chapter
of II Kings, ten silent years roll by. They are voiceless as far as our
text is concerned, but they are vocal when we listen to the monuments.
It may have been about 705 B. C. when Hezekiah accepted the yoke of
Sennacherib. In the meantime Sennacherib had strengthened his alliances
and was prepared to essay a conflict with Egypt. The nephew of So, who
is called Tirhakah in the Bible, murdered the successor of So, which was
his son, Shabataka. Having gained an empire by this ruthless spilling of
the blood of the rightful heir, Tirhakah began an ill-fated reign. He
rashly matched strength with Sennacherib, who was more than willing to
add Egypt to the nations who bore his yoke. The armies of Assyria and
Egypt joined battle at the border at the site of Libnah and a mighty
conflict resulted. Realizing the strategic importance of an enemy who
would threaten the rear of the Assyrian host, Tirhakah made overtures to
Hezekiah and invited him to join in a rebellion to throw off the yoke of
Assyria. Hezekiah being willing to save the enormous tribute that
beggared his country annually, listened to the voice of Isaiah who
advised him to join the rebellion. So Hezekiah pronounced defiance
against Sennacherib and all of the Assyrian hordes and announced the
independence of Judah. The battle of Libnah was then fought, and
Tirhakah was disgracefully defeated. The pitiful remnant of his army
fled and left Sennacherib the unchallenged conqueror of his day.
The position of Hezekiah can well be imagined. The strength and might of
Egypt had been brushed aside by the armed power of Assyria, and tiny
Judah was put in the position of defying the greatest military power of
that era. While Sennacherib was busy in a mopping-up campaign at Libnah,
he sent three trusted generals to lay siege to Jerusalem and to demand
the surrender of Hezekiah. The blasphemous oration of one of these
generals, Rab-shakeh, is given voluminously in the eighteenth chapter of
II Kings. There was a good deal of truth in some of Rab-shakeh’s
arguments. He described Pharaoh as “a bruised reed upon which if a man
leaned, it would pierce his hand and wound him to the death.” He rightly
said that no other countries had been delivered from Sennacherib by the
power of their gods. His error was in assuming that therefore the God of
Israel would also be defeated by the power of Sennacherib. He gave the
king some short while to think over the policy of surrender, and sat
down to invest the city. Hezekiah, in his bitter dilemma, sought out
Isaiah, whose advice he had followed with such disastrous results.
The thirty-seventh chapter of Isaiah contains the answer that Isaiah
made, and the exact words of his prophecy are also found in the
nineteenth chapter of II Kings, verses six and seven. To comfort
Hezekiah, Isaiah said to the king’s messenger: “Thus shall ye say to
your master, Thus saith the Lord, Be not afraid of the words that thou
hast heard wherewith the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed
me. Behold, I will send a blast upon him, and he shall hear a rumour,
and return to his own land; and I will cause him to fall by the sword in
his own land.”
It is well to keep this prophecy of Isaiah’s in mind until we see how
perfectly it was fulfilled in complete detail. In the thirty-fifth verse
of II Kings, the nineteenth chapter, the “blast” occurred. The statement
is made that the angel of the Lord went out and slew 185,000 of the
flower of the Assyrian army.
The next verse says in graphic words, “So Sennacherib king of Assyria
departed.”
The literal translation in English of that graphic word would be, “So
Sennacherib king of Assyria ‘beat it’.” We cannot blame him for the
haste of his departure. Arising after a night of slumber to find 185,000
of his best warriors mysteriously slain, terror must have smitten his
heart. At that exact moment word reached him of a rebellion in his own
land. This was the “rumour” of which Isaiah had prophesied. He returned
to put down this rebellion and never again invaded Judah.
Twenty years later he was murdered. Between verses thirty-six and
thirty-seven of the nineteenth chapter of II Kings, a full score of
years passed by. After his murder, his son, Esar-haddon, came to the
throne and continued the story of conquest and intrigue.
In the meantime, the defeated Tirhakah was unquestionably chagrined to
learn that little Judah had been delivered from the power that had
defeated him. To apologize for his own failure to support Judah,
Tirhakah claimed credit for the defeat of the Assyrian horde by claiming
that his god, Amon, had caused the camp of the Assyrians to be invaded
by millions of field mice. He claimed that these tiny rodents in one
night ate up all the bowstrings of the army and thus they were unable to
fight. His interpretation of the event is a bit sketchy, to say the
least!
In the Assyrian Room at the British Museum, a very important exhibit
will be seen in Table Case “E”. This is a six-sided clay prism
containing an unabridged record of Sennacherib’s own account of these
stirring events. Here he has given us his story of the invasion of
Palestine and the siege of Jerusalem in the days of Hezekiah. So
important is this record that we produce here, in its entirety, the
fifth oblique (or plane) of this great prism:
“In my third campaign I went to the land of the Hittites. I marched
against the City of Ekron and put to death the priests and chief men
who had committed the sin of rebellion and I hung up their bodies on
stakes all around the City ... but as for Hezekiah of Judah, who had
not submitted to my yoke 46 of his strong cities, together with
innumerable fortresses and small towns that depended upon them by
overthrowing the walls and open attack, by battle, engines and
battering rams I besieged I captured; I brought out of the midst of
them and counted as a spoil 200,000 persons great and small, male and
female, besides mules, camels, sheep, asses and oxen without number:
“Hezekiah himself I shut up like a bird in a cage in Jerusalem his
strong city. I built a line of forts against him and kept back himself
from going forth out of the great gate of his city. I cut off his
cities which I had spoiled out of the midst of his land and I gave
them to Metinti, king of Ashdod, and Padi King of Ekron and Til-Baal,
King of Gaza and made his country small. In addition to their former
yearly tribute and gifts I added other tribute and homage due to my
majesty, and I laid it upon them. The fear of the greatness of my
majesty overwhelmed him, even Hezekiah, and he sent after me to
Nineveh my royal city, the Arabs and his bodyguards, whom he had
brought for the defense of his royal city Jerusalem, and had furnished
with pay along with thirty talents.... Eight hundred talents of pure
silver, carbuncles and other precious stones, a couch of ivory,
thrones of ivory, and elephants hide and elephant tusks, rare woods of
all kinds a vast treasure, as well as Unachs from his palace, and
dancing men and dancing women. And he sent his Ambassador to offer
homage.”
This fascinating document is one of the greatest treasures that
archeology has produced for the careful student of Christian
apologetics. It is notable not only for what it tells but also for much
that is left unsaid. In the grim, brutal days of these ancient
conquerors, a defeated enemy could expect little mercy at the hands of
the victorious. The kings of Assyria ruled by fear and by the
implacable, swift certainty of punishment for rebellion. Sennacherib
here refers to a common practice of his day, that of impaling rebellious
enemies as a lesson to other vassals. In this particular document he
recounts how they hung the bodies of the rebel leaders on stakes around
their captured cities.
The technique of this execution was simple. A heavy post was driven into
the ground until it was about as high as a tall man’s shoulder. The top
of the post was sharpened to as fine a point as the tools of that day
would permit. In some cases, the rebel was picked up by a pair of burly
executioners who swung him through the air and jammed him down with
great force upon the pointed stake. There they whirled him as a sort of
a human pinwheel until life quickly fled his shattered form. This was a
comparatively merciful way of impaling. In other cases the victim was
set upon the sharpened stick until gravity bore down his suffering body
to the point where death relieved him after hours, and even days of
misery and torment.
But while Sennacherib recounted the successful punishment of the rebels
of the many cities who had joined in this uprising, it is to be
carefully noted that he changed the tone of the record in the case of
Hezekiah. He could not say that he impaled him or otherwise punished him
for the rebellion! All he could say was, “As for Hezekiah himself, I
shut him up like a bird in Jerusalem, his capital city.” Sennacherib can
tell of the fenced cities and small villages in the outskirts of Judah
which he despoiled from the hand of Hezekiah, but he never laid hand on
the person of the king himself, nor did he enter the sacred city. The
“blast” of Isaiah’s prophecy can alone account for the failure of
Sennacherib to crucify Hezekiah along with his other rebellious enemies.
Also it is to be noted that by a violation of chronological accuracy,
Sennacherib “saves face,” after the ancient custom of the Eastern lands.
A conqueror of his standing and authority cannot admit that he was
defeated before the walls of Jerusalem. Therefore, at the end of this
record he gives a list of the treasure _that Hezekiah had paid before in
his original subjection_! This listing of tribute is falsely made to
appear as though it were _after_ the siege of Jerusalem. By the simple
expedient of introducing at the end of a defeat the record of a previous
payment, Sennacherib seeks to delude posterity and wipe out the memory
of his one outstanding defeat. This great prism of this Assyrian
conqueror is unquestionably one of the strongest bricks in the wall of
defense that archeology is erecting around the Sacred Word of God.
There are many other records left by Sennacherib that are also of
tremendous importance. The British Museum has a magnificent section
which is devoted very largely to those Babylonian and Assyrian
chronicles, many of which coincide with this period of history. The
murder of Sennacherib that was prophesied by Isaiah and recorded in the
nineteenth chapter of II Kings, is accredited and substantiated by
archeological sources.
We learn from the records of Babylon that the years between the debacle
at Jerusalem and the death of Sennacherib were occupied with wars much
nearer home. We read in those chronicles that the Elamites of Suziana,
together with certain allied peoples, again rose in rebellion. It took a
number of campaigns, which ultimately ravished the whole of Suziana, to
put down this uprising. In fact, the campaigns of subjection were not
entirely successful until Babylon was destroyed in 689 B. C. In the
interim, when not busy subduing his Elamite subjects, Sennacherib
campaigned in Cilicia, where he overcame the armed force of the Greeks,
penetrating as far as Tarsus in his victorious marches. The Babylonian
records conclude by saying that he was assassinated by his sons in the
year which by our reckoning would be known as B. C. 681.
In the Babylonian Room of the British Museum, Table Case “E” contains an
exhibit which bears the Museum number 92,502. This consists of a clay
tablet which is an extensive chronicle written in the Babylonian
characters. It delineates a list of the principal events which occurred
in both Babylon and Assyria over an extensive period of time.
The history begins with the third year of the reign of Nabu-Nasir, who
ascended his throne in Babylon in 744. The record continues to the first
year of Shamash-shum-ukim, with whom we shall deal in a future
reference. In the third column of this chronicle, lines thirty-four and
thirty-five state that Sennacherib was killed by his son on the
twentieth day of the month Tebet in the twenty-third year of his reign.
This murder is rather graphically described in terse, but satisfactory
terms in the record of the nineteenth chapter of II Kings.
There is no more definite and positive example of the coincidence of
archeological discovery with the text of the Scripture than is provided
by the records of Sennacherib. Though dead for more than two and
one-half millenniums, he indeed has a tale to tell! We can condense his
record into one graphic, simple sentence which we can sign with the name
of this great king, “The historicity of the Sacred Page is
unquestionable in the light of archeology!”
The next pharaoh of antiquity who challenges our interest with his
confirmation of the Scripture, is variously known by the name of Necho,
which is his prenomen as used in the Scripture text, and by the Egyptian
forms of Nekau and Uohemibra. He was, perhaps, the greatest of the later
conquerors who sought to extend the power of Egypt, and he was certainly
the last of that remarkable group. He expended a good deal of the
revenues of the crown in rebuilding the canal of Seti the First, which
had formed a waterway between the Nile and the Red Sea. It is difficult
at times to place absolute credence upon the numerical estimates of the
ancient chronicles of Egypt, but it is highly probable that Necho
employed more than a hundred thousand men in this work. Herodotus gives
great honour to Necho, telling us that he sent out certain ships of
Phoenicia which circumnavigated Africa. He maintained a mercenary army
of Greeks, and had one fleet in the Mediterranean, and the other in the
Red Sea. His record in the Scripture is tangled inextricably with that
of Assyria and Babylonia, and for that reason we must sketch-in the
background of this coincidence and appearance.
Shalmaneser the Fifth began the phenomenal rise to ascendency of the
great power of Assyria. Babylon was the chief adversary and the
strongest foe that Assyria faced in the development of her world empire,
which ultimately climaxed in Sennacherib. Finding it impossible to
preserve the loyalty of the Babylonians, who were a proud and haughty
people, Sennacherib finally destroyed Babylon and carried away its
people into captivity. When Sennacherib died, according to the record of
the nineteenth chapter of II Kings, his son, Esar-haddon came to the
throne. Esar-haddon, more of a statesman than a conqueror, rebuilt
Babylon. He united Assyria and Babylon into one great domain, naming the
combined kingdom Babylonia. For the sake of administration and as a
gesture of amity, he made Babylon his capital. Thus the rebuilt city
became the seat of government and the center of the culture of
Babylonia.
The name Esar-haddon means “victorious,” or “conqueror.” One of the
greatest of all the mighty kings of Assyria, he was a worthy successor
of Sargon, Shalmaneser, and Sennacherib. His name occurs but three times
in Holy Writ. The first occurrence is II Kings 19:37, where it speaks of
his ascent to the throne. The next occurrence is in Isaiah 37:28 where
this record of II Kings 19:37 is confirmed by the hand of the prophet,
who was an active participant in those stirring events. Later, Ezra
refers to him in the second verse of his fourth chapter. In this latter
reference, the remnant who returned from the Babylonian captivity name
him as the cause of their captivity and acknowledged that he gave them
the freedom to worship their own God in their own way.
In the reign of Menasseh, Esar-haddon died and was succeeded by two
sons. The elder of these was the famous Assur-bani-pal, who was made
over-lord of the entire kingdom, with the section that was once called
Assyria as his particular domain. His younger brother, Shamis-shum-ukim
was given dominion over Babylon, where he reigned as vassal to his
wealthy brother. The British Museum is replete with the records and
materials from the reign of Assur-bani-pal and from the brief and tragic
rule of Shamis-shum-ukim as well.
The fine hand of Egyptian intrigue enters into the record at this point,
again tangling up the Assyrian records in a triangular bout between
Judah, Egypt, and Babylonia. The Pharaoh Necho, alarmed by the growing
power of Babylonia, gathered together a mighty host and invaded the
territory of the great Assyrian king. As a preliminary to this invasion,
the Pharaoh Necho persuaded Shamis-shum-ukim to rebel against his older
brother and to declare his independence. Into this conspiracy Necho
succeeded in drawing Syria and Judah. The blow was struck at the
dominion of Assur-bani-pal while he was battling certain tribes near his
Eastern border. When the couriers brought him word of the revolt of his
brother, and of the coalition formed against him at the instigation of
Necho, Assur-bani-pal made a swift and remarkable march, returning to
his threatened territory. Necho hastily assembled his army, and the
major battles were fought on the terrain of Syria. Syria was quickly
reduced, Babylon pacified, and Assur-bani-pal emerged completely
victorious.
Necho, not having had time to prepare his defenses, was overthrown,
defeated, and forced to bow in subjection to Assur-bani-pal. From the
record of the victorious king, we offer the following paragraph as a
condensed but detailed account of these tremendous events:
“After removing the corpses of the rebels from the midst of Babylon,
Cuthra, and Sippara, and piling them in heaps, in accordance with the
prophecies I cleaned the mercy seats of their temples. I purified
their chief places of prayer I appeased their angry gods and goddesses
with supplications and penitential psalms. Their daily sacrifices
which they had discontinued, I restored and established as they had
been of old. As for the rest of them who had flown at the stroke of
slaughter, I had mercy on them. I proclaimed an amnesty upon them. I
brought them to live in Babylon. The men of the nations whom Sam ...
had led away and united in one conspiracy, I trod down to the
uttermost parts of their borders. By the command of Assur, Beltis, and
the great gods my helpers, the yoke of Assur which they had shaken off
I laid upon them. I appointed over them governors and satraps, the
work of my own hands.”
From this account it will be seen that Assur-bani-pal slew his
rebellious brother and destroyed the principal leaders of the revolt,
with the exception of those who had pleaded for mercy. As a result of
this defeat at Charchemish, Necho was dethroned and led in chains to
Babylon. This Chaldean conqueror had a policy that was unique for his
day. It was his consistent practice to deal mercifully with the
repentant. When the Pharaoh Necho professed sorrow for his conduct,
Assur-bani-pal, following his established custom, restored him to Sais
where he was to rule Egypt as a province of Babylonia.
At this time, Josiah of Judah also accepted the yoke of Assyria and
became a vassal of Assur-bani-pal. From what we learn of the character
of King Josiah, we would expect that he would be faithful to his pledges
and promises and, indeed, this very faithfulness was the cause of his
death. The Pharaoh Necho, smarting under his defeat and wounded deeply
in his pride, quietly gathered together a tremendous army and rebelled
against Assur-bani-pal the second time.
In this second conflict, Charchemish was the chosen battle ground.
Although many strategic battles had been waged back and forth about this
important center, this is generally referred to as the First Battle of
Charchemish. This reference is undoubtedly predicated upon the fact that
the ultimate struggle between Assyria and Egypt, which gave the latter
power a world dominion, centered about this field.
In order to reach the battle ground, the Pharaoh Necho marched his horde
across the terrain of Palestine. The story of what followed is familiar
to every student of the Old Testament. In the thirty-fifth chapter of II
Chronicles, beginning with the twentieth verse and ending with the
twenty-seventh, this incidental tragedy is told. Josiah, who had taken
the pledge of fidelity to Assur-bani-pal, gathered together his small
army and sought to prevent this passage of the Egyptian army across his
domain. It is recorded that Pharaoh sent his heralds to Josiah offering
to leave the land of Palestine unmolested on condition that they gave
him no opposition in his plans for battle. The pharaoh went so far as to
claim that he was on the business of God. Although King Josiah had
disguised himself in the common dress of a humble man-at-arms, he seems
to have been recognized. The sharpshooters among the archers picked him
as their target and he fell sorely wounded. He died after being taken to
Jerusalem, and all of the people of Judah and Jerusalem mourned for him.
Jeremiah the prophet deeply loved the godly king because of his fidelity
to the law, and the fourth chapter of the Book of Lamentations contains
part of the dirge of Jeremiah concerning the death of the king.
In the meantime, hindered by the abortive attempt of the faithful Josiah
to delay his passage, Necho swept on to the banks of the Euphrates where
a notable battle was fought. The assault of Necho found the Assyrian
monarch unprepared. The force that he had gathered at Charchemish was
inadequate to defend his borders, and Assur-bani-pal was defeated. In
the meantime, Jehoahaz had succeeded his father Josiah and was reigning
at Jerusalem. The sway of the young king was short and ended tragically
after ninety days. On his way home from his victory at Charchemish, the
Pharaoh Necho deposed Jehoahaz because of his father’s conduct and put
Eliakim on the throne. Thus the younger brother of Jehoahaz became king
over Judah in his place.
The Pharaoh changed the name of Eliakim to Jehoiakim and once more Judah
became a vassal to the might and power of Egypt. The unfortunate
Jehoahaz, laden with chains, was carried away to Sais. There he dragged
out a miserable existence until death brought him a happy release from
captivity and degradation. The Pharaoh Necho imposed upon Palestine a
fine for their opposition which would be about the equivalent in our
modern currency of $200,000. In considering the difference in purchasing
power, however, that would be about $3,000,000 in our money.
These incidents are either expressly stated or are referred to in many
portions of Holy Writ. We first find them in the twenty-third chapter of
II Kings.
The twenty-sixth chapter of Jeremiah, verses twenty-one to twenty-three,
contains a bleak record of the hardship and oppression that resulted
when men of God were slain for speaking God’s Word concerning the events
of this grim and dismal affair.
In the nineteenth chapter of Ezekiel, the third and fourth verses of
this record, the prophet sings a lamentation over the “lion’s whelp” and
sorrows that “he shall be bound in chains in the land of Egypt.” Then
from the fifth verse on, the prophet caustically berates the land
because that another of the lion’s whelps, suddenly raised to maturity,
devoured the men who had raised him and laid waste their land and
cities.
Our present interest, however, is to be found in the records that deal
with these events in the sources of archeology. It would be
inconceivable that the mighty Necho should fail to boast of his power
and victory when he had won so notable an ascendancy over all of his
enemies. In the voluminous records of the Pharaoh Necho, the
vainglorious boasting of this long-dead monarch comes to us today as a
welcome, added voice to the rapidly swelling chorus that testifies to
the historical accuracy of the Old Testament.
Leaving the record of Necho, however, for the present moment (as he
enters the story again in the reign of the succeeding Babylonian
monarch), we turn to the sources of Babylonian and Assyrian antiquity
for the authentication of these affairs by the mighty Assur-bani-pal.
Now, indeed, it becomes difficult to choose the most effective and
pointed evidences, as we are embarrassed with so vast a wealth of
material. It would take many days indeed for a careful student to
exhaust the possibilities in that collection of the material of
Assur-bani-pal that is found in the British Museum alone. In this
notable and incomparable deposit of priceless fact and information,
there is no more striking section than that which is derived from the
works and records of this stormy ruler.
In about the year 666 B. C. this conqueror finished the third of his
campaigns against Egypt, and with the sack of the City of Thebes, again
established the dominion of Assyria over Egypt. The mighty king then
turned his military attentions to the northern regions of his empire and
thrust his borders out to an unprecedented extent. At the same time,
with a part of his forces he waged a long war with the Elamites on his
southeastern border and subjected that country to the yoke of Assyria.
Putting down the Elamite uprising with a stern and bloody hand, he left
a lesson in implacable cruelty that the Elamites never forgot.
In the Nineveh Gallery of the Assyrian section of the British Museum may
be seen great sculptured slabs from the walls of Assur-bani-pal’s
palace, which are numbered 45 to 50. At our last visit they were to be
seen on the Eastern side of the gallery. These relics completely
illustrate his conquest of Elam. Exhibits 45 to 47 further show the
crushing of the Elamite forces, and the action is so dramatically
depicted that the careful student may sense the excitement which seems
to prevail. A voluminous text accompanies the pictured action so that
there is no possibility of mistaking the meaning of the illustrations.
At this time Shamis-shum-ukim joined in the great revolt to which we
have referred in a foregoing paragraph of this chapter. There are two
accounts in the archeological records as to the end of Shamis-shum-ukim.
Although a twin brother of Assur-bani-pal, he was some hours the
younger, and thus was nominally subject to him under Assyrian law. One
account says that he was taken prisoner and that Assur-bani-pal had him
burned at the stake. The other account says that Shamis-shum-ukim,
seeing he was about to be defeated, locked himself in a small section of
the palace, which he set afire and burned himself rather than surrender.
There was at this time a revolt in the Egyptian section of the empire
which resulted in some long conflicts, which are also given in these
records. It was also at this period that Assur-bani-pal left the record
above cited, of the pacification of Babylon and the submission of
Josiah.
The British Museum has a very large collection of letters from the
library of Assur-bani-pal at Nineveh, many of which are of high
significance in the study of these historical episodes. These letters
cover a broad scope as they include the reports, requisitions, and
communications of dignitaries. Some of these came from the crown prince,
others from local governors and still more from various military
captains. They deal in specific detail with military operations,
uprisings, rebellions, and their suppression. They tell of the dispatch
of troops to the provinces, with lists of expenses and expenditures.
Such intimate details of Assyrian science as the reports of astronomers
for regulating the calendar of the year are found there, and
illuminating comments upon the political trend of the days. There are
many references to these episodes, as would naturally be expected.
One of the great monuments to be found in the Babylonian Room of the
British Museum, and numbered 90,864, is a stone stele with a rounded
top, that is a treasure indeed. The upright full-length figure of
Assur-bani-pal is shown in his capacity of high priest. This stele
contains a lengthy chronicle recording the names, honors, and genealogy
of the monarch and tells of his godly conduct and fidelity to his
religion. There is a note of sadness and an index to the character of
this great Assyrian in the line where Assur-bani-pal declares that he
himself had appointed his twin brother Shamis-shum-ukim “to the
sovereignty over Babylon so that the strong may not oppress the weak.”
Passing over a great many of these sources, we come now to the Assyrian
Room where, in Table Case “E,” we find two ten-sided prisms of
Assur-bani-pal which bear the Museum numbers 91,026, and 91,086. These
lengthy records are inscribed with the outstanding incidents in the
earlier years of his busy life. Beginning with an epitomized statement
concerning his birth and education, as all good biographies should
begin, he took occasion to recognize the great prosperity of Assyria
that immediately followed his elevation to the throne. Then quickly the
warrior king launched into some graphic descriptions of his principal
military expeditions. Here he tells of the two expeditions against
Tirhakah in Egypt, to which we have referred above. Among the allies who
accompanied him to fight under his banner, who were already subject to
him, he mentions levies from Cypress, Asia Minor, Syria, and
_Palestine_. After citing the events and victories of five campaigns,
the record then introduces the sad tragedy of Shamis-shum-ukim, a
portion of which we have cited in a preceding paragraph. In all, there
are nine campaigns covered in these prisms, and the student of
historical accuracy may find great substantiation for his confidence in
the truth and fidelity of the Word of God from these fascinating
records.
In the same case is an eight-sided clay prism of Assur-bani-pal,
numbered 93,008. This also contains a shorter reference to these same
events. To convey an adequate and detailed account of the materials
available from the time of Assur-bani-pal and his unfortunate brother
would require a large volume by itself. We have come to that point,
however, where Assur-bani-pal’s record concludes as it touches the
Scripture. So we satisfy ourselves temporarily with this brief
introduction of an epitomized section of those evidences.
Three years after the battle of Charchemish, where Assur-bani-pal was
temporarily defeated, a new and forceful conqueror appeared in the
person of Nebuchadnezzar the Second. Assur-bani-pal was succeeded by
Nabopolassar, who will be ignored in this record because of the fact
that he is not named by name in the text of the Bible. Nabopolassar,
however, had a gifted son who succeeded him as Nebuchadnezzar the
Second, and who began his training for the crown by assuming command of
the army as the chief general under his father and with his parent’s
consent.
The first great campaign that Nebuchadnezzar fought, brought Egypt back
under the dominion of Babylon. To see the background of this event, it
must be noted that after the death of Assur-bani-pal, the Medes invaded
Nineveh and captured that stronghold. Whereupon Nabopolassar reasserted
the independence of Babylon and conducted a number of brilliant
campaigns to secure the ascendency of his kingdom and to establish his
supremacy over the entire ancient world.
When Nineveh fell, the Pharaoh Necho, with whom we are now dealing,
entered the story again. Necho invaded Syria and Palestine and
successfully campaigned up to the banks of the Euphrates. At Charchemish
he met the host of Nebuchadnezzar for what is known as the Second Battle
of Charchemish. Necho entered this conflict with considerable
confidence, due to his previous victory on this same field. This time,
however, a different experience awaited him. Nebuchadnezzar crushed the
Egyptians with an overwhelming defeat and drove them back to their own
border. As a result of this battle, all Palestine, with the exception of
Judah, acknowledged the authority of Nebuchadnezzar. The Babylonian
general took Jehoiakim captive and slew the Pharaoh Necho.
All of these events are recorded by the Pharaoh Necho, by
Assur-bani-pal, and by certain humbler captains and leaders. The
Pharaoh’s record is complete up to the time of the second battle. But as
Necho did not survive this campaign, there is a dramatic break in his
record. However, what is wanting from the Egyptian sources, is happily
supplied from those of Babylon.
It is not to be expected that the young conqueror would remain silent
concerning his early victories. His father, Nabopolassar, also recounts
with some satisfaction the military ability of his son. Through all of
his reign, however, Nebuchadnezzar was more of a builder and architect
than conqueror, although he frequently took the field in notable
military action. Most of the relics from his reign have to do with the
building of great temples and edifices. There are, however, a number of
fragmentary chronicles such as that which, in the Babylonian Room of the
British Museum in Table Case “E,” bears the number of 33,041. This
recounts a later expedition undertaken by Nebuchadnezzar in the
thirty-seventh year of his reign. This was to put down an uprising in
Egypt.
There are innumerable tablets and records in the British Museum that
attest the order and genius of the government in the forty-two years of
Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. We will refer to this later when we come to the
closing period of his great career. We have introduced the historicity
of Nebuchadnezzar now, and the coincidence of his account which climaxes
the reign of Necho, to establish at one more point the historical
accuracy of the Old Testament text.
The last Pharaoh who comes into the account of the Sacred Book is
positively identified as Hophra. He is called Apris by the Greeks, and
is frequently found in the hieroglyphics under the name of Psammetichus,
the Second. His name, Hophra, occurs in the Scripture only once, which
is the forty-fourth chapter of Jeremiah and the thirtieth verse. Here
the three great characters of this last drama are found conjoined in
these simple words:
“Thus saith the Lord; Behold I will give Pharaoh-hophra king of Egypt
into the hand of his enemies, and into the hand of them that seek his
life; as I gave Zedekiah king of Judah into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar
king of Babylon, his enemy, and that sought his life.”
Hophra was a rash, inexperienced, over-confident ruler who wasted what
small strength and wealth his kingdom possessed in useless warfare
against mighty powers which were manifestly beyond his ability to cope
with. The background of his contact with the Sacred Record begins with
his conspiracy that enmeshed Zedekiah. This entire rebellion was a
faithless and degraded example of lack of honour and responsibility to a
plighted and pledged word. This is primarily so because after the defeat
of Necho and his subsequent death, Nebuchadnezzar raised Hophra, the son
of Necho, to the throne of Egypt where he governed as a satrap. He was
to reign for Babylon, and had taken the oath of fidelity to his
over-lord and master.
To make matters worse the conduct of Zedekiah added insult _to_ injury!
When Nebuchadnezzar dethroned Jehoiakim and carried him bound in chains
to his subsequent death in Babylon, he was followed on the throne by
Jehoiakin who reigned for a very brief period. Then Nebuchadnezzar
raised Zedekiah to a position of power and on his twenty-first birthday
elevated him to the governorship of Jerusalem. For the better part of
eleven years, he reigned more or less successfully. He seems to have
been a graceless scoundrel and utterly without honour. Completely
violating their treaties and their oaths of fidelity, Pharaoh and
Zedekiah joined in a conspiracy and rebelled against the power of
Nebuchadnezzar. It is a matter of wonder to the modern student that
these kings of Judah never learned their lesson.
The Chaldeans besieged Jerusalem to put down this revolt, and Hophra
marched to its aid. Because the company of Chaldeans was small, as
Nebuchadnezzar had not anticipated a strong resistance, the wise
captains of this advance-guard did not join battle with Hophra, but
retired in good order rather than fight a hopeless conflict when they
were so strongly outnumbered.
The city of Jerusalem went wild with delight and rejoicing over its
deliverance. The gloomy Jeremiah warned the leaders in vain that the
Chaldeans would return, and in overwhelming force. Refusing to listen to
the prophecies of Jeremiah, the people treated him harshly and cast him
out. While the city was rejoicing at this early victory, Jeremiah
himself gave a manifestation of confidence in the ultimate fulfillment
of his own prophecies, when he fled from the city and delivered himself
voluntarily into the hands of the Chaldeans. In the meantime, Hophra,
overcome with pride at his easy victory, boasted with blasphemy that not
even could God defeat him! The sycophantic Zedekiah acquiesced in this
boasting and blasphemy and showered the foolish Hophra with unlimited
compliments.
With Jeremiah gone and all of Judah turning to the ways of idolatry, God
did not lack champions. Messengers and prophets were sent rapidly to
Zedekiah and to the princes of the kingdom, but they mocked the
messengers of God and despised His words. They misused His prophets,
until the wrath of the Lord rose against His people beyond remedy.
Therefore, says the thirty-sixth chapter of II Chronicles,
“He brought upon them the king of the Chaldees, who slew their young
men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no
compassion upon young man or maiden, old man, or him that stooped for
age; he gave them all into his hand.”
The strongest voice that was raised for God in this dark hour was that
of Ezekiel. At this time, the prophet was in Babylon and from there he
spoke the words that are found in the first sixteen verses of his
twenty-ninth chapter. This is undoubtedly one of the most comprehensive
and remarkable prophecies concerning any nation that the student of this
fascinating subject may deal with. For the sake of refreshing the mind
of the reader, we publish here this prophecy in full:
“In the tenth year, in the tenth month, in the twelfth day of the
month, the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, set thy
face against Pharaoh king of Egypt, and prophesy against him, and
against all Egypt: Speak, and say, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I
am against thee, Pharaoh king of Egypt, the great dragon that lieth in
the midst of his rivers, which hath said, My river is mine own, and I
have made it for myself.
“But I will put hooks in thy jaws, and I will cause the fish of thy
rivers to stick unto thy scales, and I will bring thee up out of the
midst of thy rivers, and all the fish of thy rivers shall stick unto
thy scales.
“And I will leave thee thrown into the wilderness, thee and all the
fish of thy rivers: thou shalt fall upon the open fields; thou shalt
not be brought together, nor gathered: I have given thee for meat to
the beast of the field and to the fowls of the heaven.
“And all the inhabitants of Egypt shall know that I am the Lord,
because they have been a staff of reed to the house of Israel.
“When they took hold of thee by thy hand, thou didst break, and rend
all their shoulder: and when they leaned upon thee, thou brakest, and
madest all their loins to be at a stand. Therefore thus said the Lord
God; Behold I will bring a sword upon thee, and cut off man and beast
out of thee.
“And the land of Egypt shall be desolate and waste; and they shall
know that I am the Lord: because he hath said, The river is mine, and
I have made it.
“Behold, therefore I am against thee, and against thy rivers, and I
will make the land of Egypt utterly waste and desolate, from the tower
of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia.
“No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass
through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years.
“And I will make the land of Egypt desolate in the midst of the
countries that are desolate, and her cities among the cities that are
laid waste shall be desolate forty years: and I will scatter the
Egyptians among the nations, and will disperse them through the
countries.
“Yet thus saith the Lord God; At the end of forty years will I gather
the Egyptians from the people whither they were scattered;
“And I will bring again the captivity of Egypt, and will cause them to
return into the land of Pathros, into the land of their habitation;
and they shall be there a base kingdom.
“It shall be the basest of the kingdoms; neither shall it exalt itself
any more above the nations: for I will diminish them, that they shall
no more rule over the nations.
“And it shall be no more the confidence of the house of Israel, which
bringeth their iniquity to remembrance, when they shall look after
them: but they shall know that I am the Lord God.”
Analyzing this prophecy, we note the personal element that is introduced
when God arrayed himself against Hophra and all of the land of Egypt.
This people who, as we have seen, worshipped the Nile and counted it a
deified object, had also acquiesced in the claims of Hophra who went so
far as to state that he was the one who had made the river and caused it
to continue to flow. Adopting this figure, the prophet speaking for God,
says that Hophra shall be caught like the fish and cast into the fields
by the side of the banks.
The sixth verse states that all the population of Egypt is to be taught
a bitter lesson. They shall know forever that God is Lord, in the
punishment they shall reap for their defections against Israel.
Verse eight contains the information that this punishment is to take the
form of an invasion that shall leave the land desolate and waste. This
punishment was to come upon the land and the people because of their
idolatry and their sins against Israel.
From verses ten to twelve, a bleak picture is drawn of utter desolation
which shall prevail in their land for forty years. The prophecy then
turns upon the pivot of the thirteenth verse to a time of a partial
restoration. This restoration, however, is limited in the Divine Word to
the effect that Egypt shall be the basest of the kingdoms of the earth.
It shall never be permitted to exalt itself again in the council of the
nations. It is to be eternally diminished and debased.
The consequent history of Egypt has been a complete vindication and
fulfillment of this prophecy. Nebuchadnezzar invaded Judah and carried
away the last remnant of that graceless people into captivity in
Babylon. All those who had joined in the defection of Zedekiah, great
and small, old and young, they slew with the sword. Then the angry
Nebuchadnezzar swept on into Egypt and devastated that land, until, it
is recorded, “not a living thing, man or beast,” was left in that once
populous country.
For forty years it lay, wasted and idle. Then the counselors of
Nebuchadnezzar advised that the land be colonized in order that it might
produce revenue for the crown. The first attempt failed because of the
climate and the unique conditions of agriculture in a country that
required constant irrigation and whose crops depended upon the sole
source of moisture the river Nile. Therefore, the counselors gathered
together such remnant of the Egyptians as remained from the captivity
and sent them back to repopulate the land.
Every student of history will recall that Egypt _has been_ the basest of
kingdoms from that hour to this. It has been dominated in turn by the
Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Arabs, the Turks, the French, and
the British.
One notable effort was made in historic time to raise Egypt to its
former grandeur and power. The reader will recall the great campaign of
Napoleon by which he thought to revive this Mistress of Antiquity and
make Egypt an adjunct of his own imperial greatness. If Napoleon had
read and believed the twenty-ninth chapter of Ezekiel, he could have
spared himself this useless and expensive campaign. We all recall that
when victory seemed to be in sight, Napoleon’s power and greatness
shattered itself upon an immovable rock. This was composed of the small
remnant of indomitable British who refused to recognize the fact of
their defeat when it stared them in the face. And that courageous and
noble refusal to give up, when they were quite evidently hopelessly
overthrown, was again vindicated in the final result. The army of
Napoleon was broken, discomfited, decimated, and defeated. Finally, it
was deserted by its discouraged leader, who probably never knew why he
had failed. He was not fighting against the allies only, nor was he
defeated entirely by British valour. Napoleon was fighting against the
Word of God and the will of Him whose hand is able to raise to power and
to cast down again. From that hour to this, and even in our present
moment of historic time, Egypt remains the basest of the kingdoms of the
earth.
To come back to the miserable Hophra, his final end came when he was
assassinated by his own general, whose name is given by the Greeks as
Amasis and who appears on the monuments under the name of Iahmose.
Amasis occupied the throne until the final conquest by Nebuchadnezzar.
We note again the coincidence of ancient records with the accounts that
portray these events in the books of II Chronicles, Jeremiah, and
Ezekiel. Voluminous sections of the Word of God are extended a strong
and friendly hand of historical authentication by the secular records
which have survived from that time.
In the British Museum will be found tablets, stelae, portraits, and
sculptured remnants from Egypt which have been derived from those
unsettled times. In the Egyptian collection of the British Museum, the
exhibit numbered 1358 contains a portrait of Hophra. There are also a
number of scarabs in Table Case “B” in the Fourth Egyptian Room, and a
fragmentary sistrum in the Fifth Egyptian Room, all of which bear the
name of Hophra and authenticate his record.
Thus we have seen in a brief but accurate recapitulation of generations
and centuries of history that dead men do tell tales! We have Hophra’s
record together with the annalistic tablet of Amasis to aid us in our
understanding of these stirring days. Added to that, the record of
Nebuchadnezzar brings additional confirmation of the thesis that is
maintained in this brief work.
_The evidence of archeology as it bears upon the text of God’s Word is
final and complete wherever men have delved into the records of those
days._
It may not be exactly what was in the mind of the Lord Jesus Christ when
He uttered the words, but we can certainly apply to the generation in
which we live, His striking statement:
“If men should hold their tongues, the very stones would cry out!”
And if _living_ men will not speak the truth concerning the finality of
the Bible—_dead men must!_