I recently got into an online discussion with an athiest and he threw these at me. Any help would be appreciated.

Daniel 5:1-2 says Belshazzar was king of the Chaldean Empire (Babylon), and son and successor of Nebuchadnezzar. In reality, Nebuchadnezzar's son and successor was Amel-Marduk. He was assassinated by his Brother-in-law Nergal-Ashur-Usur, who took the throne. His reign was followed by his son Labashi-Marduk, who was opposed by a faction that overthrew him and placed Nabu-naido on the throne. Belshazzar (who's name was actually Bel-shar-utsur) was the son of Nabu-naido. He was NEVER king, but crown prince, and was no relation at all to Nebuchadnezzar.

Hosea 5:13 tells us the Assyrian King at that time was named Jareb. There was never an Assyrian king by that name, and the name of the king who did rule at that time was Tiglath-Pileser the third.

Daniel 5:30-31 says that Darius the Median took over the Babylon empire, but it was Cyrus of Persia who overthrew the Babylonian Empire. While there is a Darius the first in history, there is no mention of a Darius of Median anywhere.

Esther 1:9 tells us Vashti was queen of Persia at the time the story occures, but the queen at this time was actually Amestris, and there never was a queen of Persia named Vashti. Vashti was the name of an Elamite goddess. Most probably that is the origin of the name in this story.

2 Samuel 24:9 "And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men." Israel and Judah had 1.4 million fighting men. That's more than the U.S. had in 2001.

NT:

John 1:28 "These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing." But no such site is known in history. Some translations (ASV, NAB, NIV, RSV, NRSV) rename Bethabara as Bethany, but Bethany is a suburb of Jerusalem and, therefore, not "beyond the Jordan."

Thanks,

YBIC,

Alan.

Alan,

Thanks for writing. Probably the best site to look up the answers to these kinds of issues is www.tektonics.org. But I'll try to answer your questions here, and if you need more detail, I'd try that site.

Daniel 5:1-2 says Belshazzar was king of the Chaldean Empire (Babylon), and son and successor of Nebuchadnezzar. In reality, Nebuchadnezzar's son and successor was Amel-Marduk. He was assassinated by his Brother-in-law Nergal-Ashur-Usur, who took the throne. His reign was followed by his son Labashi-Marduk, who was opposed by a faction that overthrew him and placed Nabu-naido on the throne. Belshazzar (who's name was actually Bel-shar-utsur) was the son of Nabu-naido. He was NEVER king, but crown prince, and was no relation at all to Nebuchadnezzar.

It's true that Balshazzar was not the true "son" of Nebuchadnezzar, but the Hebrew word for "son" can refer to any kind of descendent or heir, meaning that even if he wasn't directly related, he could still be called Nebuchadnezzar's "son". However, Herodotus suggests that Nebuchadnezzar's wife, Nitorcris, was the mother of Nabu-naido's wife, making her the maternal grandmother of Belshazzar, thus making Nebuchadnezzar the step-grandfather of Balshazzar. Just as Jesus was the "son of Abraham", though actually a distant relative, this would make Belshazzar the "son of Nebuchadnezzar".

As for his not being a king, the critic there is a little behind on his research. At least he's ahead of those who used to argue that these character's never existed at all. Xenophon wrote of the fall of Babylon, and said that Nabodinus (aka Nabu-Naido) was in custody at the time, and that the current king was slain. While he didn't name the king, there's little doubt he was referring to Balshazzar, since he was Nabu's son. And besides that, the critic argues that Balshazzar was a "crown prince", right? The Hebrews didn't have such a word, and the nearest functional word to such a title is essentially the same as "king".

Hosea 5:13 tells us the Assyrian King at that time was named Jareb. There was never an Assyrian king by that name, and the name of the king who did rule at that time was Tiglath-Pileser the third.

I'm not finding anything on this question, but there are many Biblical characters that critics argue "never existed" until the evidence is found that they did (they used to argue that Balshazzar never existed, and I came across someone arguing just recently that David never existed!)

Daniel 5:30-31 says that Darius the Median took over the Babylon empire, but it was Cyrus of Persia who overthrew the Babylonian Empire. While there is a Darius the first in history, there is no mention of a Darius of Median anywhere.

The historical evidence in this area is a bit weak, but what we have suggests that Darius was an alternate name for Gubaru (a Babylonian governor) or for Cyrus of Persia himself. The original wording of Daniel 6:28 seems to suggest that Darius and Cyrus are the same person.

Esther 1:9 tells us Vashti was queen of Persia at the time the story occures, but the queen at this time was actually Amestris, and there never was a queen of Persia named Vashti. Vashti was the name of an Elamite goddess. Most probably that is the origin of the name in this story.

Two possibilities here. One is that the king had more than one wife (polygamy was common at the time, and is even suggested of the king in Esther 2:14-17). The other is that "Vashti" was actually a title given to Amestris, meaning "the best" or "sweetheart".

2 Samuel 24:9 "And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men." Israel and Judah had 1.4 million fighting men. That's more than the U.S. had in 2001.

Yep. So? If the critic here is trying to suggest that this means that Israel and Judah's population must have exceeded the U.S.'s 2001 population, he should think again. Practically every adult male was a soldier for Israel and Judah.

John 1:28 "These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing." But no such site is known in history. Some translations (ASV, NAB, NIV, RSV, NRSV) rename Bethabara as Bethany, but Bethany is a suburb of Jerusalem and, therefore, not "beyond the Jordan."

The "Bethany" that John is referring to may be a still-unknown village, or he may be referring to a region known as Batania, which was beyond the Jordan.

Hope this helps,

God bless,

David