| Show THE TESTIMONY OF ARCHE archaeology those who deny aguy the divine author ity of the sacred scriptures resort to and tty try to prove proe that much of the ibe early narrative is but reproduction of ancient hea has hen bon myths lately the Ch aluman account of golesis by george smith bas ba been quoted as aa showing allowing that the bit bik lical account of the flood the tower of f babel and nimrod iPa a exploits were cnown knowd by wis inhabitants ot of the shores of tigris aud a ud euphrates Euphra tea thou ands sinda of years yearn before the books ascribed to molinell were writ written ions and the inference tereace in curl duely enough is drawn that it is in all myth sud aud HoL lillig more mr are among the must interesting made in later years A whole library DOORS books engraved 0 or terra ter cotta tablets wag rf und in the mound of to la the rains ot of what was wan once oace the royal pah palace ce ot of Akey rian kings binge the tablets were ail d to frag meals but by much labor and ingenuity a number of these were fitted together and some understanding of the general contents was obtained mr smith estimates the number of tablets ablena to in the royal library at nineveh at over treating treat log on a great variety of subjects the copies that contain the genesis narratives mr smith says all belong to the age of who reigned over assyria a little more than six hundred years before our era they are consequently of a much later date than is claimed for the book of genesis in ID the bible but as the assyrian tablets are considered merely copies of records it is in assumed that the composition of the narratives belongs to much earlier ages chronology is albest ab best a difficult subject but when it comes to penetrating the depths of this remote antiquity the explorer is often lost in the labyrinths labyrinth of events babelonia babylonia baby ionia lonia was invaded by the As syrians about one thousand three hundred years year before our cur erst erd ai a d the babylonian records must therefore at least antedate that year so much seems seema clear but how much older they are must be left to future discoveries to prove moses flourished in the seventeenth century before christ and may ma y for ought we know have been with the babylonian authors whose works were copied in later ages by assyrian sob scholar olare chronology then furnishes no argument for the supposition that in his nefize genesis capitti the babylonian tablets mr own observations observation on this point are pertinent he saye say think all will admit a connection ot of some sort between the biblical narrative and those of berosus and the cuneiform text but between and palestine was a wide wid extent of country inhabited by different nations nat ione whose territories formed a connecting link between these extremes the aradean and hittite races who once inhabited the region alo g the euphrates and in syria have passed away their history has been lost aud and their mythology and traditions are unknown until future researches on the sites site of their cities shall reveal the position in which their traditions stood towards those of babelonia babylonia Baby louia lonia and palestine we shall not be able to cle clear a ar up the connection between the two chaid AGO ace of gen 84 one thing is in absolutely certain the author of the book ot genesis rt corded events that had bad really transpired and were recorded record eds among the various primitive nations of the old world this to Is the only reasonable conclusion to be brawn from the fact that both traditions and the written history of various countries agree in all the main facts and the dit dic covery ot or the assyrian fragments frag meota adds d 11 to the proofs of we toe genuineness and a a authenticity of the books of moses it was known from what happens to be preserved of the writings of Bero eup a babylonian writer who knew the greek language and lived about years before christ that the baby ion 1 sun were acquainted with traditions relating to the creation the era before the deluge and other biblical cuJe but his bis testimony was WAB not accepted as evidence of the high antiquity of these traditions the evidence in the assyrian fragments is of more ostie eatie factory nature and cannot be disputed |
