Wednesday, December 17, 2025

King Ashurnasirpal brings critically relevant elements to a reconstructed Jonah

 


 

by

 

Damien F. Mackey

  

The name “Esarhaddon” can by no means be considered a good fit for “Osnapper” (var. “Asnapper”, “Asenaphar”). Ashurbanipal fits somewhat better,

but an even better fit still is the name Ashurnasirpal.

 

 

 

It is typical for conventional historians to presuppose that any pagan account that resembles a biblical one always has the chronological precedence.

 

I have spent many articles arguing that the opposite is generally the case.

 

So, when a presumed c. 300 BC writer records a tale that is, in some instances, uncannily like the much older Jonah story - as Bill Cooper (d. 2021) had rightly noted (“The Historic Jonah”, EN Tech. J., vol. 2, 1986, pp. 105–116) - my immediate reaction to this is that the Oannes legend must have arisen from the Jonah story.

 

Certainly the latter resonates with Berosus’s description of the Mesopotamians who “lived in a lawless manner like the beasts of the field”.

And, again, the two names, “Jonah” and “Oannes”, are indeed very similar.

 

It is common to identify Oannes with the Mesopotamian water god, of knowledge, Ea (Sumerian Enki). And the account of Berosus seems to have commingled Mesopotamian theology with a garbled recollection of the biblical Jonah incident.

 

Some of the geography of Berosus, however, “Euxine Sea” (Black Sea), “Erythrean Sea” (Indian Ocean?), is completely irrelevant to Jonah, and is, moreover, internally contradictory.

Bill Cooper was right on the mark in describing what must have been the mental state of the Ninevites at the time of Jonah’s arrival - except that he has located all of this too early (so I think), to the era of king Tiglath-pileser so-called III.

 

Things were far, far worse, I have suggested, at my preferred moment in time for Jonah (early Esarhaddon):

 

The ‘Jonah incident’ historically identified

 

(4) The 'Jonah incident' historically identified

 

Moreover, God was never going to use a pagan ‘theology’ to reinforce his message.

 

The “representation of [Oannes] ... preserved to this day” (Berosus) is the well-known fish man (kullulû) of which Bill Cooper had provided a photo on his p. 111 (fig. 7).

 

It is none other than the prophet Jonah himself, depicted on a wall of Ashurnasirpal’s NW Palace of Nimrud (Calah).

 

Question: But wouldn’t Ashurnasirpal have ruled too early, whether conventionally speaking or in revised history, to have been Jonah 3:6’s “king of Nineveh”?

 

Determining Ashurnasirpal’s historical place

 

Given Ashurnasirpal’s conventional dates (c. 883-859 BC), when considered in the context of the prophet Jonah’s known contemporaneity (cf. 2 Kings 14:25) with Jeroboam II, king of Israel (c. 793–753 BC or 786–746 BC), then it is most unlikely that any conventional scholar has selected Ashurnasirpal as Jonah’s “king of Nineveh”.

 

And, amongst revisionist historians, the heavy focus has been upon Ashurnasirpal’s presumed son and successor, Shalmaneser III, because of the fact that his reign is thought to have fallen right in the middle of Dr. I. Velikovsky’s re-located (500 years down the time scale) El Amarna [EA] period.

Dr. Velikovsky himself (Ages in Chaos, I, 1952) had tried various ploys to explain the apparent towering presence of Shalmaneser III smack dab in the middle of EA, when the Assyrian king referred to in the letters (EA #’s 15 and 16) was the differently named Ashuruballit.

 

This difficulty has since become known as “The Ashuruballit Problem” (TAP).

 

Many have grappled with it, but none, Dr. Velikovsky included, has managed to solve it.

 

Some have opted to leave Dr. Velikovsky’s revision behind and try to develop a new system of revision.

 

Considering the compelling EA synchronisms that Dr. Velikovsky was able to secure, however, albeit amidst a host of difficulties, I have not chosen that road of departure, of ‘throwing out the baby with the bathwater’, of:

 

Distancing oneself from Velikovsky

 

(4) Distancing oneself from Velikovsky

 

but prefer to look for answers to awkward situations like “The Assuruballit Problem”.

 

Emmet Sweeney first released the stranglehold for me, and it concerned Ashurnasirpal.

 

Emmet may have been the first to suggest that Shalmaneser III had to be moved fractionally out of EA, thereby relieving TAP, and that his supposed father, Ashurnasirpal, was the important Ashuruballit, EA’s “king of Assyria”.

 

That was a new idea and immediately seemed like a good one to me.

Now I felt that we were getting somewhere, as we no longer had to try to match the name Shalmaneser with Ashuruballit, but with the more alike (at least theophorically) Ashurnasirpal.

 

Since then, though, I have moved on to a far more radical solution for TAP, as outlined, for example, in my article:

 

Chaotic King Lists can conceal some sure historical sequences

 

(4) Chaotic King Lists can conceal some sure historical sequences

 

Taking as correct Marc Van de Mieroop’s ‘Middle’ Assyrian list, as set out on p. 294 of A History of the Ancient Near East ca. 3000 -323 BC:

 

Adad-nirari [I]

Shalmaneser [I]

Tukulti-Ninurta [I]

Assur-nadin-apli [I].

 

I would now regard Shalmaneser as a predecessor, rather than the successor, of Ashurnasirpal.

 

The first chapter of the Book of Tobit, with its neo-Assyrian succession of “Shalmaneser”; “Sennacherib”; and “Esarhaddon”, becomes vital here, as does my identification of Tukulti-Ninurta [I] of the above king-list with Sennacherib:

 

Tukulti Ninurta and Semiramis

 

(4) Tukulti Ninurta and Semiramis

 

Sometimes the revision requires a deeper digging than even the initial deep dig.

 

Shalmaneser [I] of the list, our pesky Shalmaneser III of TAP, now becomes the Shalmaneser (known as V) who, according to Tobit, preceded Sennacherib.

Here we now have the Tobit 1 succession re-visited: Shalmaneser; Sennacherib; Esarhaddon (the name Sargon rightly omitted, because Sargon was Sennacherib):

 

Adad-nirari

Shalmaneser = Shalmaneser

Tukulti-Ninurta = Sennacherib

Assur-nadin-apli = (Ashurnasirpal) = Esarhaddon

 

TAP? What problem?

 

Now that Ashurnasirpal has been established as belonging very late in the neo-Assyrian era, we can return to the Jonah images connected with him. E.g. the fish man.

 

Dagan, Two Jonahs, “Osnapper” (Asnapper)

 

Later, it is said, the figure came to be associated with the god, Dagan: (“Kulullu (“Fish Man”) “Dagon”): http://symboldictionary.net/?p=300

 

"
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/proxy/_Y8tbealX9wPbP1kqADjjLo6OrMLHE59FawUGfp2mjEbYyVdl9RZ05xzA_ocYb9eGkyOBlUxkRS5OpngpOPXL3z2tmAZvv4MTe-F5jGvVgPTSWOIHbo4Wbu5gA=s0-dThis figure was known to the Assyrians as Kullulû, meaning “fish man.”

 

The kullulu was a guardian figure, a dweller of the sacred Absu, the watery underground domain of the God Ea. Figures of the fish-man were often concealed in the construction of buildings to serve as protective charms.

 

From about the fourth century, the figure was associated (probably erroneously) with the god Dagan (meaning “grain”), most commonly known by his Hebrew name, Dagon. Dagan was a vegetation god, the father of the god Baal, the mythological creator of the plow.

 

Dagon is mentioned several times in the Hebrew scriptures, where he is associated with the Philistines. It is to Dagon’s temple that the Ark of the Covenant is taken after being captured from the Hebrews; the next morning, they discover the statue of the god lying on the floor, sans head and hands".

[End of quote]

 

Jewish tradition appears to concur with my view that Jonah at the time of the reign of Jeroboam II was well separated in time from Jonah when he witnessed at Nineveh, whose king is said to have been called “Osnapper”. 

 

So much so, in fact, that rabbinical tradition will actually speak of 'two Jonahs'.

 

Eight years ago (16th May, 2017) I had written on this:

 

“König, again, will make a point reflecting on chronology; one that will be of great significance later on in this series, as we come to discuss the period of floruit of Jonah, and his age. At the same time König will tell of the Jewish tradition that the Assyrian king in the Book of Jonah was “Osnappar” (var. As[e]napper), whom König would tentatively equate with a known neo-Assyrian king, “Assurbanipal” (var. Ashurbanipal) (A History of Israel, 2nd edn., SCM Press Ltd., London, p. 313, n. 11):

 

Jewish tradition, however, contains also the information that the history contained in the Book of Jonah was enacted in the reign of Osnappar (Ezr 4:10) [Assurbanipal?], and, seeing that the date of Jeroboam II, and that of Osnappar were different, the rabbinical tradition spoke of two Jonahs, of whom the first was of the tribe of Zebulun and the second of the tribe of Asher (see, further, Fürst, Der Kanon d. AT nach d. Ueberlief. in Talm. und Midrasch, p. 33 f.).

 

[End of quotes]

 

No need, however, to go to the extreme of creating ‘two Jonahs’. The prophet's long life can satisfactorily be accommodated by means of his alter ego, Hosea (= Isaiah):

 

De-coding Jonah

 

(4) De-coding Jonah

 

Ezra 4:10 (cited above) refers to “... the rest of the nations which the great and honourable Osnappar deported and settled in the city of Samaria, and in the rest of the region beyond the Rive”.

“Osnapper” (אָסְנִפִּר) is here lauded as “great and honourable”, a description that the Jews would hardly have used for, say, a Sennacherib, or for the general run of other inimical Assyrian kings.

 

But they might well have done so in the case of the one special individual, Esarhaddon, who had repented at the preaching of Jonah (my view), who had allowed the pious Tobit to return home to his family, and who had greatly exalted Tobit’s nephew, Ahikar, in the kingdom of the Assyrians.

 

Just as tradition has created ‘two Jonahs’, though there should be only one, historians have created two, three, or even five same-named Assyrian kings, though, once again, there was generally only the one.

The problem arises due to the over-stretching of chronology, the solution to which requires a folding of ‘Middle’ Assyrian into the ‘Neo’ Assyrian period.

 

Esarhaddon as Ashurnasirpal-Ashurbanipal


Kings unnecessarily duplicated

 

I was very greatly surprised to read the following piece of information as provided by Mattias Karlsson regarding the almost total lack of statuary depicting the, albeit megalomaniacal, Ashurnasirpal ("Early Neo-Assyrian State Ideology Relations of Power in the Inscriptions and Iconography of Ashurnasirpal II (883–859) and Shalmaneser III (858–824)", p. 39. My emphasis):

 

http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:637086/FULLTEXT01.pdf
“Staying in Nimrud, two gateway lions (A111) and a statue of the king (AI12, Fig. 18) from the second half, based on the date of the temple inscription, have been excavated from the Sharrat-niphi temple of Nimrud. .... The statue in question is the only known one which depicts Ashurnasirpal II. ...”.

 

Clearly, the grandiloquent Ashurnasirpal is badly in need of one or more alter egos.

 

What happens, of course, when same-named kings become dupli- tripli- cated, due to chronological over-extension, is that scholars are forced to puzzle over whether this or that particular document, record, building, artefact, etc., belongs to King I or King II, King III, etc.

 

This has happened in many instances:

 

More ‘camera-shy’ ancient potentates

 

(4) More 'camera-shy' ancient potentates

 

And so, in the case of the White Obelisk, some will confidently date this to the time of Ashurnasirpal I (c. 1049-1031 BC), e.g. Mattias Karlsson (op. cit., pp. 53-54):

 

“As for sources whose datings by scholars alternate between different time periods, the 290 cm high White Obelisk from Nineveh depicting tribute, royal warfare, cult, hunting, and banquets are in line period rather than to Ashurnasirpal II. ....This conclusion is derived from various stylistic features such as the fact that also the king’s officials wear fez-shaped hats. This clearly points to a Middle Assyrian date, since the officials and nobility of Neo-Assyrian times do not wear these headgears. .... Additionally, the coarse style which characterizes the reliefs on the White Obelisk is very different from the elegant style on the Rassam Obelisk. Since Nineveh, the provenance, was an important core city the coarseness of the reliefs can not simply be explained away as being “provincial art” from the time of Ashurnasirpal II.

 

Rather, it should be understood as part of a chronologically determined art development, closely related to the “Broken Obelisk” of Ashur-bel-kala (1073-1056).

 

.... It is mostly philologists who have dated this obelisk to the second king. .... The main argument here is that the shrine bīt-natḫi, mentioned in the inscription on the White Obelisk ... is otherwise spoken of only by Ashurnasirpal I .... This may however be just another result of the hazardous preservation of sources”[,]  


while others will argue that it pertains to Ashurnasirpal II (c. 883-859 BC):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashurnasirpal_I

“The White Obelisk … is sometimes attributed to [Ashurnasirpal I] by historians, but more usually to his later namesake, Aššur-nāṣir-apli II, because its internal content (hunting, military campaigns, etc.) better matches what is known about his reign …”.

 

The fact of the matter is that the White Obelisk probably belonged to just the one king Ashurnasirpal.


Along similar lines, I had, in my postgraduate thesis on King Hezekiah of Judah (2007), folded the ‘Middle’ Babylonian king, Merodach-baladan I (c. 1170-1158 BC), with his namesake Merodach-baladan II of similar reign length (c. 720-709 BC), partly on the basis of historians being unsure whether a certain item of building belonged to Merodach-baladan I or to II.

 

Now, the comment that I made above about the surprising lack of statuary for Ashurnasirpal applies basically as well to the Assyrian king, Shalmaneser V (c. 727-722 BC, conventional dating), who lacks any known relief depiction - at least according to the article “Shalmaneser V and Sargon I”):

https://emp.byui.edu/SATTERFIELDB/Rel302/Shalmaneser%20V%20and%20Sargon%20II.htm

 

“The revolt of Israel against Assyria during the days of King Hoshea, last king of Israel, brought on a siege by the Assyrians (1 Kings 17).  The siege was led by Shalmaneser V, King of Assyria (there is no known relief depiction of Shalmaneser V).  During the siege, he died.  Sargon II replaced Shalmanezer V as King of Assyria, who finished the siege and sacked Samaria”.

[End of quote]

And my comment will apply again, amazingly, even to that master-king, Nebuchednezzar ‘the Great’.

Dr. I. Velikovsky wrote of the astonishing fact that (Ramses II and His Time, p. 184. My emphasis): “At Wadi Brissa in Lebanon, Nebuchadnezzar twice had his picture cut in rock; these are supposedly the only known portraits of this king”.

 

Ashurbanipal ‘replicating’ Esarhaddon

 

Fittingly, Esarhaddon is considered as a plausible candidate for “Osnapper” - along with Ashurbanipal.

There is no tension at all with that in my revision, according to which Esarhaddon was Ashurbanipal.

And so here I would like to introduce my two major Assyrian alter egos for Esarhaddon: namely, Ashurbanipal and Ashurnasirpal.

 

Elsewhere, I quoted John H. Walton re an inscription of Esarhaddon’s telling that the king had humbled himself with “sackcloth”. 

Walton (et al.) will repeat this in The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, p. 780), but will now include as well “Ashurbanipal”.

 

Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal seem to be commonly confused in antiquity, as well as later.

One can find many instances of Ashurbanipal seemingly replicating Esarhaddon. 

Previously, for example, I have written of this particular case:


“Arcadio Del Castillo and Julia Montenegro have made a valiant effort to identify the elusive biblical “Tarshish” in their article:

 

THE LOCATION OF TARSHISH: CRITICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Revue Biblique, 123, 2016, pp. 239-268

https://www.academia.edu/35529906/THE_LOCATION_OF_TARSHISH_CRITICAL_CONSIDERATIONS?auto=download

 

“But what struck me when reading through this article is yet another case of, as it seems to me, a ‘historical’ duplication, Ashurbanipal claiming what Esarhaddon claimed.

Writing of the neo-Assyrian sailing efforts, the authors tell as follows (pp. 252-254):

 

… the only record we have of them sailing the Mediterranean is when Sargon II gained control of Cyprus, which was further secured by his successors, Sennacherib, Esarhaddon, and Assurbanipal, 668-627 BC….

Of course, the text of the Assyrian Inscription of Esarhaddon defines the extent of the Assyrian king’s domain, in maritime terms, from one area in the direction of the other, but we believe its extent would have been within maritime limits of the Assyrian Empire itself. ....

 

What is conclusive is the fact that in Esarhaddon’s Inscription the reference to the kings of the middle of the sea comes after enumerating his conquests, which are listed as: Sidon … Arza … Bazu … Tilmun … Shubria … Tyre … Egypt and Pathros … and Kush. And, since Bazu seems to be situated in the northwest of Arabia and Tilmun on the Persian Gulf, very possibly Bahrain … what seems more logical is to assume that it is a delimitation in both seas of the cosmic ocean, this is the Upper Sea and the Lower Sea.

 

So it would be a broad area that extended beyond the Mediterranean; and reference is made to it just before saying that the Assyrian king had established his power over the kings of the four regions of the Earth …. What can of course be readily accepted ...  is that there is a clear parallel between the Inscription of Esarhaddon and a text of Assurbanipal, which is inscribed on Prism B: after stating that he ruled from the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea and that the kings of the rising sun and the setting sun brought him heavy tribute, Assurbanipal says that he has brought the peoples that live in the sea and those that inhabit the high mountains under his yoke … and this reference, as we understand it, is very like Esarhaddon’s text, since it is also “a general summary”. .... 

[End of quotes]

 

And here is another example, this time from Eva Miller (“Crime and Testament: Enemy Direct Speech in Inscriptions of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal”, Journal of Ancient Near Eastern History, Volume 6: Issue 2, 2020, “Abstract”):

 

“In Assyrian annals, the narrative device that we would call ‘direct speech’ is employed very rarely throughout most of Assyrian history (beyond the framing device of the entire text as royal speech), with an uptick in its popularity in the royal inscriptions of the last two well-attested Neo-Assyrian monarchs, Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal (Gerardi 1989: 245–46). ... Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal employ this literary feature more often than their predecessors ...”.

[End of quote]

 

Ashurbanipal, we find, supposedly repeats Esarhaddon’s efforts.

Thus Wikipedia’s article, “Esarhaddon”: “Ashurbanipal left in 667 BC [sic] to complete Esarhaddon's unfinished final campaign against Egypt”.

....
“Ashurbanipal, who would famously gather ancient Mesopotamian literary works for 
his famous library, had already begun collecting such works during the reign of Esarhaddon. It is possible that Esarhaddon is to be credited with encouraging Ashubanipal’s collection and education …”.

 

Name comparisons

 

The name “Esarhaddon” can by no means be considered a good fit for “Osnapper” (var. “Asnapper”, “Asenaphar”). Ashurbanipal fits somewhat better, but an even better fit still is the name Ashurnasirpal.

Troy Lacey, in “Recent Archaeological Finds in Assyria Corroborate Scripture”:

https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/recent-archaeological-finds-assyria-corroborate-scripture/

sees this Ashurnasirpal as the type of resettling Assyrian king as depicted in Ezra 4:10, though he follows the conventional dating that has Ashurnasirpal as a “prior ruler to those mentioned above whose reign is conventionally dated from 883–859 BC”.

Thus he writes:

 

“Ashurbanipal, the author of the last inscription above, was the son of Esarhaddon and is also mentioned in Scripture but, depending on the translation, may be called by that name or by Asnappar, Osnapper, or Asenaphar in Ezra 4:10, where he is also listed as an Assyrian king who relocated non-Israelite people to the regions of Samaria.

 

“It is worth noting that a few of the inscriptions found in the 1987–1992 excavation, as well as the newly discovered tunnel inscriptions, corroborate biblical people and place-names, as well as the biblical accounts of Assyrian practices.

 

For example, an inscription of Ashurnasirpal II (prior ruler to those mentioned above whose reign is conventionally dated from 883–859 BC) states,

 

The ancient city Calah which Shalmaneser, king of Assyria, a ruler who preceded me, had built—this city had become dilapidated; it lay dormant (and) had turned into ruin hills. I rebuilt this city. I took people which I had conquered from the lands over which I had gained dominion, from the land Suḫu, (from) the entire land Laqû, (from) the city Sirqu which is at the crossing of the Euphrates, (from) the entire land of Zamua, from Bīt-Adini and the Ḫatti, and from Lubarna (Liburna), the Ḫatinu. I settled (them) therein.

 

“The above Ashurnasirpal II passage not only demonstrates a prevailing methodology of resettlement as recorded to still be practice generations later [sic], as in Ezr a 4:10 (NKJV), but the city of Calah is also mentioned in Genesis 10:11–12”. 

[End of quotes]

 

The names, “Ashurnasirpal” (Aššur-nāṣir-apli ... “the god Aššur is the protector of the heir,”): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashurnasirpal_I

and “Ashurbanipal” (Aššur-bāni-apli, meaning “Ashur has given a son-heir”): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashurbanipal are quite similar, both phonetically and as to meaning.

 

And Esarhaddon had another name featuring similar elements “Ashur ... mukin apli”: Ashur ... (is) establisher of a legitimate heir”.

 

Another similar name that is going to be important for us is that of the Assyrian king, Ashur-nadin-apli, successor of Tukulti-Ninurta. Ashur-nadin-apli was variously named Ashur-nasir-apli (that is, Ashurnasirpal).   

 

In conventional terms, Esarhaddon’s reign (c. 680-668 BC) runs far shorter than does that of Ashurnasirpal (c. 883-859 BC), but more especially than that of the very long-reigning Ashurbanipal (c. 668-625 BC), whose lengthy 43-year reign will turn out to be the correct figure for our composite “king of Nineveh”.

 

Recalling the fish-man 

 

Why is Ashurnasirpal, Ashurbanipal, important in the Jonah context?

 

Ashurnasirpal is important, I suggest, because he was the one during whose reign there was depicted the bas-relief of the fish-man figure (as reproduced in Bill Cooper's article) on the wall of his North-West Palace at Nimrud (Calah).

 

Was this ‘the sign of the prophet Jonah’ (Matthew 12:39), now depicted in carved stone by the architects of the Great King of Assyria?

 

Large whales were being hunted, too, at the time of Ashurnasirpal.

P. Haupt, in “Jonah’s Whale” (Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 46, no. 18), tells of king Ashurnasirpal receiving as tribute from Phoenicia some teeth bones that Haupt thinks must have belonged to a sperm whale (pp. 155, 156):

 

“Sperm-whales are found in the Mediterranean, although they are not frequent. ... in a passage of the cuneiform annals of Assur-nacir-pal [Ashurnasirpal] we read that this Assyrian king received, as tribute from Tyre, Zidon, Arvad, and other places on the Phoenician coast, ivory teeth of the blower, the creature of the sea. This blower with ivory teeth cannot have been a narwhal ... or walrus ... these animals are not found in the Mediterranean. The sperm-whale has, on each side of the lower jaw ... from 20 to 25 conical (slightly recurved) teeth which consist of the finest ivory”.

 

Haupt, who does not actually believe that Jonah could have survived for three days in a whale, tells, nevertheless, that (p. 162): “... the head of a giant sperm-whale may be more than 30 feet long”.

 

The Assyrian king must have been impressed with his gift of whale teeth bones.

Haupt again (p. 157):

 

“... Assur-nacir-pal (885-860) states that he placed two blowers of Ad-Bar-stone at the gates of the palaces in the ancient capital of Assyria, Assur, now known as Kileh Shergat ... the ideogram Ad-Bar means basalt and ... the field-director of the German excavations at Kileh Shergat reports that a great many basalt fragments of sculptures have been found, but the restoration of the figures has not been accomplished.

Assyriologists did not know that nakhiru ... blower meant sperm-whale”. 

 

The city of Calah (at Nimrud) was important, too, for Esarhaddon.

Thus writes Barbara N. Porter (Images, Power, and Politics: figurative aspects of Esarhaddon's Babylonian policy, 1994, pp. 71-72): “... Esarhaddon was actively engaged in the expansion of the already large fort and palace complex, or ekal masarti, in the Assyrian city of Calah (Nimrud), not far from Nineveh. .... This building was the centerpiece of Esarhaddon's extensive program to redevelop Calah as a military and administrative center for Assyria, a program that continued to the end of his reign”.

 

And it will be during the reign of Ashurbanipal that there occurs the first appearance of “Oannes”.

Thus Frank M. Conaway (The Kundalini Yoga Christian Master Is, 2014, p. 68) writes: 

 

“Biblical scholars have speculated that Jonah may have been in part the inspiration behind the figure of Oannes in late Babylonian mythology .... The deity named “Oannes” first occurs in texts from the library of Ashurbanipal (more than a century after the time of Jonah) [sic] as Uanna or Uan, but is assimilated to Adapa ..”.

 

[End of quote]

 

Assimilating holy, miracle-working men to gods (apotheosis) is what pagans have tended to do.

Did not the Lycaonians seek to deify the miracle-working Paul and Barnabas? (Acts 14:11-12):

“When the crowd saw what Paul had done, they shouted in the Lycaonian language, ‘The gods have come down to us in human form!’ Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul they called Hermes because he was the chief speaker”. 

 

Again, Daniel 2:46: “Then King Nebuchadnezzar fell prostrate before Daniel and paid him honor and ordered that an offering and incense be presented to hi”.

 

Severe illness

 

Famously, Ashurnasirpal (I, so-called), likewise Esarhaddon, likewise Ashurbanipal, suffered from a long and extraordinary illness.

 

Ashurnasirpal will desperately pray to the goddess Ishtar for a cure ... “lamentation over the kings underserved suffering for a persistent illness” (Donald F. Murray, Divine Prerogative and Royal Pretension: Pragmatics, Poetics and Polemics ..., 1998, pp. 266-267): 

http://jewishchristianlit.com/Texts/ANEhymns/lamIshtr.html

 

....

‘I have cried to thee, suffering, wearied, and distressed, as thy servant.
See me O my Lady, accept my prayers.
Faithfully look upon me and hear my supplication.
Promise my forgiveness and let thy spirit be appeased.
Pity! For my wretched body which is full of confusion and trouble.
Pity! For my sickened heart which is full of tears and suffering.
Pity! For my wretched intestines (which are full of) confusion and trouble.
Pity! For my afflicted house which mourns bitterly.
Pity! For my feelings which are satiated with tears and suffering.
O exalted Irnini, fierce lion, let thy heart be at rest.

O angry wild ox, let thy spirit be appeased.

Let the favor of thine eyes be upon me.
With thy bright features look faithfully upon me.
Drive away the evil spells of my body (and) let me see thy bright light.
How long, O my Lady, shall my adversaries be looking upon me,
In lying and untruth shall they plan evil against me,
Shall my pursuers and those who exult over me rage against me?
How long, O my Lady, shall the crippled and weak seek me out?
One has made for me long sackcloth; thus I have appeared before thee.
The weak have become strong; but I am weak.
I toss about like flood-water, which an evil wind makes violent.
My heart is flying; it keeps fluttering like a bird of heaven.
I mourn like a dove night and day.

I am beaten down, and so I weep bitterly.
With "Oh" and "Alas" my spirit is distressed.
I - what have I done, O my god and my goddess?
Like one who does not fear my god and my goddess I am treated;
While sickness, headache, loss, and destruction are provided for me;
So are fixed upon me terror, disdain, and fullness of wrath,
Anger, choler, and indignation of gods and men.

 

I have to expect, O my Lady, dark days, gloomy months, and years of trouble.
I have to expect, O my Lady, judgment of confusion and violence.
Death and trouble are bringing me to an end.
Silent is my chapel; silent is my holy place;
Over my house, my gate, and my fields silence is poured out.

As for my god, his face is turned to the sanctuary of another.
My family is scattered; my roof is broken up.
(But) I have paid heed to thee, my Lady; my attention has been turned to thee.
To thee have I prayed; forgive my debt.
Forgive my sin, my iniquity, my shameful deeds, and my offence.
Overlook my shameful deeds; accept my prayer;
Loosen my fetters; secure my deliverance;
Guide my steps aright; radiantly like a hero let me enter the streets with the living'.

....

 

Did readers pick up Ashurnasirpal's reference here (seemingly straight out of Isaiah 38:14? KJV: ‘I did mourn as a dove’): “I mourn like a dove”?

 

Ashurbanipal suffered an enduring illness. This intriguing prayer was found in Ashurbanipal’s library:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/iraq/article/new-fragments-of-gilgames-and-other-literary-texts-from-kuyunjik/1F360E8054C85DAC9FBF8B1BD322D416/core-reader

….

 

... My bed is the ground! (penitential prayer alsīka ilī)

 

The prayer alsīka ilī is one of the few extant examples of the group of the šigû-prayers, individual laments addressed to a deity in which the penitent acknowledges his sins and asks the god for absolution. ….

 

1. Incantation šigû: I have called upon you. My god, relent!

 

2. Relent, my god! Accept my supplication!

 

3. Harken to my weary prayers!

 

4. Learn at once the disgrace that has befallen me!

 

5. Keep listening to my lament, which I have made!

 

6. May the night bring you the tears which I weep!

 

7. Since the day (you), my lord, punished me,

 

8. and (you), the god who created me, became furious with me,

 

9. (since the day) you turned my house into my prison,

 

10. my bed is the ground, my sleeping place is dust,

 

11. I am deprived of sleep, distressed by nightmares,

 

12. I am troubled [in my ...], confused [in my ...].

 

B 9. I have been enduring a punishment [that I cannot bear.] ….

 

And Esarhaddon?

Karen Radner provides this quite unsettling account of Esarhaddon’s most unusual and constant illness (in “The Trials of Esarhaddon: The Conspiracy of 670 BC”, 2007):

https://www.academia.edu/441293/2003_The_Trials_of_Esarhaddon_the_Conspiracy_of_670_BC._In_P._Miglus_and_J.M._Cordoba_eds._Assur_und_sein_Umland._Isimu_Revista_sobre_Oriente_Proximo_y_Egipto_en_la_antiguedad_6_2003_165-184_published_2007_?auto=download

“.... Modern day man may well be able to muster considerable sympathy for Esarhaddon whose symptoms were indeed rather alarming: As we know from the correspondence left by the royal physicians and exorcists … his days were governed by spells of fever and dizziness, violent fits of vomiting, diarrhoea and painful earaches. Depressions and fear of impending death were a constant in his life. In addition, his physical appearance was affected by the marks of a permanent skin rash that covered large parts of his body and especially his face. In one letter, the king’s personal physician – certainly a medical professional at the very top of his league – was forced to confess his ultimate inability to help the king: "My lord, the king, keeps telling me: ‘Why do you not identify the nature of my disease and find a cure?’ As I told the king already in person, his symptoms cannot be classified.” While Esarhaddon’s experts pronounced themselves incapable of identifying the king’s illness, modern day specialists have tried to use the reported symptoms in order to come up with a diagnosis in retrospect?’. ...”.

[End of quote]

 

For something akin to this in modern times, read Richard B. Sorensen's account of Charles Darwin's strange and terrible illness in "The Darwinian Emperor is Naked" (2011): https://www.academia.edu/42232462/The_Darwinian_Emperor_is_Naked

 

Unsurpassed cruelty

 

When, previously, I have described Esarhaddon as “outdoing others with his cruelty and vengefulness, terrifying”, I had particularly in mind his alter ego of Ashurnasirpal, the cruellest of the cruel amongst the generally merciless Assyrian kings. 

 

Erika Belibtreu writes of it in her article, “Grisly Assyrian Record of Torture and Death” (Editor, H. S. (2002;2002). BAR 17:01 (Jan/Feb 1991). Biblical Archaeology Society): https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f4af/bb82f1b7920fa9444e29eb128bd13832cd46.pdf

 

“The inscriptions and the pictorial evidence both provide detailed information regarding the Assyrian treatment of conquered peoples, their armies and their rulers. In his official royal inscriptions, Ashurnasirpal II calls himself the “trampler of all enemies … who defeated all his enemies [and] hung the corpses of his enemies on posts.” † The treatment of captured enemies often depended on their readiness to submit themselves to the will of the Assyrian king: 

 

“The nobles [and] elders of the city came out to me to save their lives. They seized my feet and said: ‘If it pleases you, kill! If it pleases you, spare! If it pleases you, do what you will!’” † 

 

“In one case when a city resisted as long as possible instead of immediately submitting, Ashurnasirpal proudly records his punishment: 

 

“I flayed as many nobles as had rebelled against me [and] draped their skins over the pile [of corpses]; some I spread out within the pile, some I erected on stakes upon the pile … I flayed many right through my land [and] draped their skins over the walls.” †

 

“The account was probably intended not only to describe what had happened, but also to frighten anyone who might dare to resist. To suppress his enemies was the king’s divine task. Supported by the gods, he always had to be victorious in battle and to punish disobedient people:

 

“I felled 50 of their fighting men with the sword, burnt 200 captives from them, [and] defeated in a battle on the plain 332 troops. … With their blood I dyed the mountain red like red wool, [and] the rest of them the ravines [and] torrents of the mountain swallowed. I carried off captives [and] possessions from them. I cut off the heads of their fighters [and] built [therewith] a tower before their city. I burnt their adolescent boys [and] girls.” †


"A description of another conquest is even worse:


“In strife and conflict I besieged [and] conquered the city. I felled 3,000 of their fighting men with the sword … I captured many troops alive: I cut off of some their arms [and] hands; I cut off of others their noses, ears, [and] extremities. I gouged out the eyes of many troops. I made one pile of the living [and] one of heads. I hung their heads on trees around the city.” †

 

“The palace of Ashurnasirpal II at Nimrud is the first, so far as we know, in which carved stone slabs were used in addition to the usual wall paintings. These carvings portray many of the scenes described in words in the annals”.

[End of quotes]  


Erika Belibtreu now moves on to describe the grisly Esarhaddon:

 

“Sennacherib was murdered by his own sons. Another son, Esarhaddon, became his successor. As the following examples show, Esarhaddon treated his enemies just as his father and grandfather had treated theirs:

 

“Like a fish I caught him up out of the sea and cut off his head,” † he said of the king of Sidon; “Their blood, like a broken dam, I caused to flow down the mountain gullies”; † and “I hung the heads of Sanduarri [king of the cities of Kundi and Sizu] and Abdi-milkutti [king of Sidon] on the shoulders of their nobles and with singing and music I paraded through the public square of Nineveh. †".

 

And, finally, she tells of the abominable cruelty of Ashurbanipal, supposed son of Esarhaddon:

 

“Ashurbanipal, Esarhaddon’s son, boasted:

 

“Their dismembered bodies I fed to the dogs, swine, wolves, and eagles, to the birds of heaven and the fish in the deep…. What was left of the feast of the dogs and swine, of their members which blocked the streets and filled the squares, I ordered them to remove from Babylon, Kutha and Sippar, and to cast them upon heaps.” †


“When Ashurbanipal didn’t kill his captives he “pierced the lips (and) took them to Assyria as a spectacle for the people of my land.” † The enemy to the southeast of Assyria, the people of Elam, underwent a special punishment that did not spare even their dead:

 

“The sepulchers of their earlier and later kings, who did not fear Assur and Ishtar, my lords, (and who) had plagued the kings, my fathers, I destroyed, I devastated, I exposed to the sun. Their bones (members) I carried off to Assyria. I laid restlessness upon their shades.

 

I deprived them of food-offerings and libations of water.” †

 

“Among the reliefs carved by Ashurbanipal were pictures of the mass deportation of the Elamites, together with severed heads assembled in heaps. Two Elamites are seen fastened to the ground while their skin is flayed, while others are having their tongues pulled out. There is no reason to doubt the historical accuracy of these portrayals and descriptions. Such punishments no doubt helped to secure the payment of tribute—silver, gold, tin, copper, bronze and iron, as well as building materials including wood, all of which was necessary for the economic survival of the Assyrian empire”.

 

[End of quotes]

 

Was Ashurbanipal a vindictive type?

According to Lori L. Rowlett (Joshua and the Rhetoric of Violence: A New Historicist Analysis, 1996, p. 112): “Ashurbanipal’s] treatment of his enemies (internal and external) is particularly horrible and vindictive …”.

 

And yet this - our biblical “king of Nineveh” - was surprisingly literate and scholarly, having created a marvellous royal library at Nineveh, and having also proudly proclaimed: ‘I read the beautiful clay tablets from Sumer and the Akkadian writing, which is hard to master. I had the joy of reading inscriptions on stone from the time before the Flood’.

 

Friday, September 12, 2025

Peter as a potential descendant of the Simeonite prophet Jonah

by Damien F. Mackey Maybe Jesus called Peter “Simon son of Jonah” (Matthew 16:17) because Peter actually was a descendant of the prophet Jonah? First of all, there are several extraordinary likenesses between the stories of Peter and Jonah. James Jackson has picked up some of these at: https://jamesjackson.blog/2024/10/21/day-293-again-why-does-jesus-call-peter-simon-bar-jonah-in-matthew-16/ …. Why Does Jesus Call Peter Simon Bar-Jonah in Matthew 16? “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed.” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭16‬:‭4‬ ‭ESV‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ ________________________________________ “And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭16‬:‭17‬ ‭ESV‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ Through the Bible: Matthew 16 In Matthew 16, Jesus tells the Pharisees and Sadducees who ask Him to show them a sign that “no sign will be given to [them] except the sign of Jonah” (verse 4). This is a repeat of an earlier scene in Matthew (Matthew 12:38-42); only this time, Jesus doesn’t give the extended explanation of what He means by the sign of Jonah: For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:40) My question was, why repeat it at all? As I’ve said before, every word matters in the gospels. What is said, when it’s said, what is left out. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the human writers wrote exactly what God intended. So there has to be a reason. A possible answer may be that in Matthew 16:17, Jesus calls Peter “Simon Bar-Jonah” for the first and only time in Scripture. So is it a coincidence that Matthew repeats the “sign of Jonah” phrase, and calls Peter “Simon son of Jonah” just thirteen verses later? Again, in God’s inspired Word, there are no coincidences. Let’s look at the two stories: Peter has just made his great confession of Christ. It’s a great moment for him. He gets a new name. No longer is he Simon, son of Jonah, the prophet who was swallowed by a fish. Now he’s Peter, a name which means “rock.” And Jesus is going to build his church on this rock (see Day 293: What Did Jesus Mean by “Upon This Rock?”). Only, Peter doesn’t always seem very rock-like. Just a few verses later, Jesus is going to rebuke him and compare him to Satan (see Matthew 16:23). Later, Peter will sink even lower. Given a chance to speak up for Jesus, he denies him three times (see Matthew 26:69-75). Overcome with grief and shame, Peter flees the courtyard and weeps bitterly. So let’s think about Jonah. He was given a message. He didn’t want to proclaim it. So he ran, and was swallowed by a fish, where he stayed for three days. Then, the fish spits him back onto the beach, and God reinstates him as a prophet, giving him the same message he did at the beginning. (See Jonah 2:10-3:1) On the night Jesus was arrested, Peter was truly the son of Jonah. He was warming himself at a charcoal fire (John 18:18), when a servant girl asked him if he was one of Jesus’ disciples. At that moment, the Rock, who had once stood at the Gates of Hell and proclaimed Jesus as the Christ, had a golden opportunity to deliver God’s message. Instead, he denied that he even knew Jesus. Then he ran away and “wept bitterly.” I would imagine he spent the next three days feeling like he had sunk about as low as a person could sink. Kind of like being in the belly of a fish. After Jesus was resurrected, John’s gospel records an amazing scene between Jesus and Peter; a scene that “just so happened” to take place on a beach. And involved fish. And a charcoal fire. “When they got out on land, they saw a charcoal fire in place, with fish laid out on it, and bread. Jesus said to them, “Bring some of the fish that you have just caught.” So Simon Peter went aboard and hauled the net ashore, full of large fish, 153 of them. And although there were so many, the net was not torn.” ‭‭John‬ ‭21‬:‭9‬-‭11‬ ‭ESV‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ And there on the beach, Jesus reinstated Peter. He gave Peter three chances to confess his love for Jesus—one for every time Peter had denied him. Then, just as God gave Jonah the same message as He had given him at the beginning (“Go to Nineveh, that great city, and preach against it”); Jesus repeated the same words to Peter in John 21:19 as He did in Matthew 4:19: “Follow me.” Beloved, we are all going to have our share of “Sons of Jonah” moments. Times when God tells us to do something, and we let fear, or selfishness, or rebellion swallow us up. But sin has a way of chewing us up and spitting us out, leaving us empty and washed up. That’s when Jesus says, “Come have breakfast.” He lovingly restores. He extends His invitation to follow Him. And we go from being a son of Jonah to a child of the king. [End of quote] This nice little piece by James Jackson does not, however, touch upon the amazingly like situations of Jonah wallowing in the sea, drowning, and being rescued by a great fish, and Peter wallowing in the sea, drowning, and being rescued by Jesus Christ, symbolised by a fish: The great fish in the Book of Jonah, apart from symbolising the “king of Nineveh” (Jonah 3:6), Nebuchednezzar, who swallows Israel whole, only to spit her out (Jeremiah 51:34), more benignly symbolises Jesus Christ as Saviour. +++++ The historical reconstruction of this era has proven to be extremely complex. It is all set out in step-by-step detail in my article: De-coding Jonah (1) De-coding Jonah In short, the prophet Jonah (var. Nahum) is, among his many guises, the great Isaiah; while Jonah’s “king of Nineveh” is, as implied by Jeremiah, King Nebuchednezzar - especially in his alter ego guise as the potent king, Esarhaddon, (like Nebuchednezzar suffering a terrible, enduring sickness; re-building Babylon; and attacking Egypt). For the pervasive Simeonite element amongst some famous prophets of Israel, including Jonah (Nahum)/Isaiah, see my article: God can raise up prophets at will - even from a shepherd of Simeon https://www.academia.edu/69393027/God_can_raise_up_prophets_at_will_even_from_a_shepherd_of_Simeon Although the prophets of Israel were traditionally Levites (Moses, Samuel, Jeremiah, and so on), a Simeonite family had once been selected to play a major prophetic rôle of long duration, commencing with the patriarchal Amos, an avowed non prophet (Amos 7:14-15): “Amos answered Amaziah, ‘I was neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet, but I was a shepherd, and I also took care of sycamore-fig trees. But the Lord took me from tending the flock and said to me, ‘Go, prophesy to my people Israel’.’” Amos was the same as Micah, who has come to be known as “Amos redivivus”: Prophet Micah as Amos (2) Prophet Micah as Amos and we find this same Micah, a Simeonite, named in the Book of Judith as the father of Uzziah (Isaiah) who was now stationed in “Bethulia”, the sacred northern fort of Bethel (Shechem) to which Amos himself, a southerner, had been sent to minister. Judith 8:14-15: “Then the Israelites came down from their town and found [Achior]; they untied him and brought him into Bethulia and placed him before the magistrates of their town, who in those days were Uzziah son of Micah, of the tribe of Simeon, and Chabris son of Gothoniel, and Charmis son of Melchiel”. That Jonah, under an alternative name of his as Nahum (cf. Tobit 14:8 KJV; 14:8 GNT), was a Simeonite, is the traditionally accepted view: https://www.monasticrepublic.com/en/orthodox-synaxarion/december/prophet-nahum?srsltid=AfmBOoo5FJ1_mxfGHzITh3__sDGBVtazsizT7n9ufI4mD8xS_RHF7O0j “Nahum is interpreted as "rest" or "comfort" to all. He was from the tribe of Simeon …”. Amos (Micah) I have also identified as the prophet Zephaniah (Sophonias), who is likewise considered to have been a Simeonite: https://www.oca.org/saints/lives/2021/12/03/103465-prophet-zephaniah “The Prophet Zephaniah (Sophonias) was a contemporary of the Prophet Jeremiah and the Prophetess Oldama. He was from the tribe of Simeon …”. “Oldama” here is Huldah, a prophetess, who, too, was Simeonite: the heroine, Judith: Judith and Huldah (4) Judith and Huldah This long-lived prophetic trio, Amos, Isaiah (Jonah) and Judith (under all of their various names), collectively played an enormous part in the history of Israel and Judah, during some its most tumultuous times. Whereas the Patriarch, Jacob, had been furious with his sons Simeon and Levi for their bloody ruse against the Shechemites, after their sister, Dinah, had been raped (Genesis 34), Judith, for her part, who completely ignores Levi in favour of her eponymous ancestor Simeon, is full of praise for what he had done (Judith 9:2-4): ‘O Lord God of my ancestor Simeon, to whom you gave a sword to take revenge on those strangers who had torn off a virgin’s clothing to defile her, and exposed her thighs to put her to shame, and polluted her womb to disgrace her; for you said, ‘It shall not be done’—yet they did it; so you gave up their rulers to be killed, and their bed, which was ashamed of the deceit they had practiced, was stained with blood, and you struck down slaves along with princes, and princes on their thrones. You gave up their wives for booty and their daughters to captivity, and all their booty to be divided among your beloved children who burned with zeal for you and abhorred the pollution of their blood and called on you for help. O God, my God, hear me also, a widow’. And she, too, will, like Simeon, take to the sword to slay the foe, the Assyrian “Holofernes”, who was intent upon seducing her (12:12) - Judith thereby being a symbol of the inviolate Jerusalem towards which the Assyrian army was heading with brutal intent. Peter - not only a son of Jonah, hence, possibly, a descendant of the prophet Jonah, a Simeonite - likewise bore the name of the eponymous Simeon. He was Simeon bar Jonah! And he, like Simeon and Judith before him, would brandish a sword (John 18:10): “Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant, cutting off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus)”. Even the alternative name of Peter’s father, John (cf. John 1:42 and 21:15-17), recalls, in its Greek form of Ιωάννης, the Jonah like fish-man, Oannes (Uanna), of ancient legend (see my article, “De-coding Jonah”).

Wednesday, September 3, 2025

Comparing Ashurnasirpal so called II to Chaldean Nebuchednezzar the Great

by Damien F. Mackey Dreams, visions, superstition, megalomania, cruelty, fiery furnace, messing with the rites, building of Babylon, mysterious and enduring illness, madness, conquest of Egypt - these were some of the ‘symptoms’ exhibited by the bunch of Assyro-Babylonian (Persian) ‘kings’ whom I have lumped together as being various faces of the one historical Nebuchednezzar. Names such as: Esarhaddon who, deliberately reading the specified ritual number upside down, rebuilt Babylon, who also suffered a long, dreadful and alienating illness, and who attacked Egypt. Ashurbanipal whose 43-year reign was the same length as Nebuchednezzar’s, who apparently had a burning fiery furnace, and who absolutely smashed Egypt. Nabonidus who is regarded by some biblical commentators and historians as being the true model for the ‘Nebuchadnezzar’ of the Book of Daniel. Highly pious, superstitious, suffering from madness and foreboding dreams. Cambyses who was also quite mad, and whose other name was “Nebuchednezzar”, and who, too, conquered Egypt. Now I have some new candidates for consideration, Ashurnasirpal (especially II) and Nabopolassar (yet to be integrated), neither of whom have I found easy to place in a revised context. Ashurnasirpal has been, to date, a real headache for revisionists to place in any satisfactory way. And that same statement applies even more to his supposed son, Shalmaneser III, a great king who initially ended up straddling the mid-C9th BC right where Dr. I. Velikovsky had located the El Amarna [EA] period, prompting Velikovsky to attempt identifying Shalmaneser III with the Kassite ruler of Babylonia at the time of EA, Burnaburiash II (c. 1359 – 1333 BC, conventional dates). My suggested folding of ‘Middle’ and ‘Neo’ Assyria “As we know from the correspondence left by the royal physicians and exorcists … [Esarhaddon’s] days were governed by spells of fever and dizziness, violent fits of vomiting, diarrhoea and painful earaches. Depressions and fear of impending death”. Following on from my identification of Tukulti-Ninurta so-called I as the neo-Assyrian king, Sennacherib (a connection originally suggested by Phillip Clapham): Can Tukulti-Ninurta I be king Sennacherib? https://www.academia.edu/40246318/Can_Tukulti-Ninurta_I_be_king_Sennacherib I must now consider the possibility that “Ashurnasirpal”, said to have been the son-successor of a Tukulti-Ninurta (II), was the actual successor of Sennacherib, that is, Esarhaddon, who is, in turn, in my scheme of things, Nebuchednezzar himself: Esarhaddon a tolerable fit for King Nebuchednezzar https://www.academia.edu/38017900/Esarhaddon_a_tolerable_fit_for_King_Nebuchednezzar "As we know from the correspondence left by the roya1 physicians and exorcists … his days were governed by spells of fever and dizziness, violent fits of vomiting, diarrhoea and painful earaches. Depressions and fear of impending death ...”. Admittedly this is something of a long stretch in the present scheme of things. While, fittingly, the father of Tukulti-Ninurta I is said to have been a Shalmaneser – just as in my revision the father of (Sargon II =) Sennacherib was a Shalmaneser, his son is said to have been one Ashur-nadin-apli. Tukulti-Ninurta II, on the other hand, who was the father of Ashurnasirpal II, is said to have had a father named Adad-nirari (II). Tukulti-Ninurta II, though, does not even rate a mention in the index at the back of Marc Van de Mieroop’s text, A History of the Ancient Near East ca. 3000-323 BC. Putting it all together, I would tentatively suggest this sequence: Shalmaneser (I, III); Tukulti-Ninurta (I, II); Ashur-nadin-apli-Ashurnasirpal (I, II) equates to, respectively: Shalmaneser (V); Sargon II-Sennacherib; Esarhaddon-Ashurbanipal-Nebuchednezzar “In the understanding of the people of the Near East at that time, [Ashurnasirpal II] really was “king of the world”.” Joshua J. Mark Joshua J. Mark tells us much about this great and cruel king in his article, “Ashurnasirpal II”: https://www.ancient.eu/Ashurnasirpal_II/ some of which I give here with my comments added: Ashurnasirpal II (reigned 884-859 BCE) was the third king of the Neo-Assyrian Empire. His father was Tukulti-Ninurta II (reigned (891-884 BCE) whose military campaigns throughout the region provided his son with a sizeable empire and the resources to equip a formidable army. My comment: If the revision that I am putting together in this article - albeit tentatively - is heading in the right direction, then these dates for Ashurnasirpal and his father will be far too high. The “father”, Tukulti-Ninurta so-called II, who does not even rate an entry in the index at the back of Van de Mieroop’s book (as we have already found), stands sorely in need of a significant alter ego, that being, as I have suggested, none other than Sargon II-Sennacherib. Joshua J. Mark continues: Ashurnasirpal II is known for his ruthless military conquests and the consolidation of the Assyrian Empire, but he is probably most famous for his grand palace at Kalhu (also known as Caleh and Nimrud in modern-day Iraq), whose wall reliefs depicting his military successes (and many victims) are on display in museums around the world in the modern day. In addition to the palace itself, he is also known for throwing one of the most impressive parties in history to inaugurate his new city of Kalhu: he hosted over 69,000 people during a ten day festival. The menu for this party still survives in the present day. My comment: One of my alter egos for Ashurnasirpal is Esarhaddon, who was indeed interested in Kalhu: http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/nimrud/ancientkalhu/thecity/latekalhu/index.html .... Esarhaddon, however, took a great deal of interest in the city. Around 672 BC, towards the end of his reign, he rebuilt part of the city wall and made significant improvements to Fort Shalmaneser. He added a new terrace and created an impressive new entrance consisting of a vaulted ramp which led from a newly-rebuilt postern gate TT directly into the palace through a series of painted rooms. Inscriptions on both sides of the gate commemorated this construction work, as did clay cylinders which were perhaps originally deposited inside Fort Shalmaneser's walls .... It is possible that Esarhaddon's activities at Kalhu were intended as a prelude to reclaiming it as royal capital. There is some, albeit very limited evidence, that he may have lived at Kalhu briefly towards the end of his reign: a partially preserved letter mentions that the king's courtiers "are all in Kalhu", perhaps indicating that the court had moved there from Nineveh (SAA 13: 152). .... My comment: As for Ashurnasirpal’s being “ruthless”, his cruelty is legendary (see below). And in this he resembles his other alter ego, Ashurbanipal (‘Ashur is the creator of an heir’), whose name is almost identical to Ashurnasirpal (‘Ashur is guardian of the heir’). The following piece tells of Ashurnasirpal’s, of Ashurbanipal’s, overt cruelty: https://searchinginhistory.blogspot.com/2015/02/cruelty-instrument-of-assyrian-control.html Many Kings of Assyrian had displayed proudly their cruelty towards their enemies. Sometimes in reliefs or in their annals, New Assyrian [kings] gave detail[s] of their gory exploits against their opponents. King Ashurnasirpal laid out many of his sadistic activities in one of his annals. He liked burning, skinning, and decapitating his enemies. When he defeated a rebelling city, he made sure they [paid] a huge price. Disobedient cities were destroyed and razed to the ground with fire, with their wealth and all material riches taken by the king. Their youth and women were either burned alive or made into slaves or placed into the harem. In the City of Nistun, Ashurnasirpal showed how he cut [off] the heads of 260 rebelling soldiers and piled it together. Their leader named Bubu suffered horrific punishment. He was flayed and his skin was placed in the walls of Arbail. In the city of Suri, rebelling nobles were also skinned and were displayed like trophies. Some skin were left to rot but some were placed in a stake. Officials of the city suffered decapitation of their limbs. The leader of the Suri rebellion, Ahiyababa, underwent flaying and his skin was then placed in the walls of Niniveh. After Ashurnasirpal defeated the city of Tila, he ordered to cut the hands and feet of the soldiers of the fallen city. Other than that, some soldiers found themselves without noses and ears. But also, many defeated soldiers had their eyes gouged out. The heads of the leaders of the Tila were hang[ed] in the trees around the city. Ashurnasirpal was not alone in having a psychotic mind. Many of his successors followed his brutality towards enemies. .... The intellectual King Ashurbanipal also had a share of cruelty. Although he was known for his great library in Nineveh, he was not as merciful as he seemed. One time, an Arabian leader name Uaite instigated a rebellion. Ashurbanipal managed to defeat Uaite and captured him and brought back to Niniveh. There, he brought upon a humiliating punishment. He was tied like a dog and placed in a kennel alongside with dogs and jackals guarding the gates of the great Assyrian capital of Nineveh. .... The Book of Daniel’s “Nebuchadnezzar” was likewise an insane and cruel creature, he being perhaps “the basest of men” (Daniel 4:17): https://biblehub.com/commentaries/daniel/4-17.htm And setteth over it the basest of men — If this be applied to Nebuchadnezzar, it must be understood, either with respect to his present condition, whose pride and cruelty rendered him as despicable in the sight of God as his high estate made him appear honourable in the eyes of men; and, therefore, was justly doomed to so low a degree of abasement: or else it may be interpreted of his wonderful restoration and advancement after he had been degraded from his dignity. .... [Ashurnasirpal] reigned for 25 years and was succeeded by his son, Shalmaneser III, who reigned from 859-824 BCE. My comment: If the revision that I am putting together in this series - albeit tentatively - is heading in the right direction, then Ashurnasirpal’s reign was far longer than “25 years”, was 43 years. And Shalmaneser was by no means his “son”, but was his grandfather. Early Reign & Military Campaigns ... by the time Ashurnasirpal II came to the throne, he had at his disposal a well-equipped fighting force and considerable resources. He put both of these to use almost at once. He was not so much interested in expansion of the empire as in securing it against invasion from without or rebellion from within. My comment: Ashurnasirpal was, in fact, very much “interested in expansion of the empire”. When fitted with his alter egos, he becomes the conqueror of even the distant land of Egypt. He also was required, as an Assyrian king, to combat the forces of chaos and maintain order. The historian Marc Van De Mieroop writes, “The king, as representative of the god Assur, represented order. Wherever he was in control, there was peace, tranquility, and justice, and where he did not rule there was chaos. The king’s duty to bring order to the entire world was the justification for military expansion” …. While Ashurnasirpal may not have considered expansion a priority, he certainly took order in his realm very seriously and would not tolerate insubordination or revolt. His first campaign was in 883 BCE to the city of Suru to put down a rebellion there. He then marched to the north where he put down other rebellions which had broken out when he took the throne. He was not interested in having to expend more time and resources on future rebellions and so made an example of the rebels in the city of Tela. In his inscriptions he writes: I built a pillar over against the city gate and I flayed all the chiefs who had revolted and I covered the pillar with their skins. Some I impaled upon the pillar on stakes and others I bound to stakes round the pillar. I cut the limbs off the officers who had rebelled. Many captives I burned with fire and many I took as living captives. From some I cut off their noses, their ears, and their fingers, of many I put out their eyes. I made one pillar of the living and another of heads and I bound their heads to tree trunks round about the city. Their young men and maidens I consumed with fire. The rest of their warriors I consumed with thirst in the desert of the Euphrates. My comment: Interestingly, Joshua J. Mark (“Assyrian Warfare”) applies this horrific Suru episode instead to Ashurbanipal: The Assyrian kings were not to be trifled with and their inscriptions vividly depict the fate which was certain for those who defied them. The historian Simon Anglim writes: The Assyrians created the world's first great army and the world's first great empire. This was held together by two factors: their superior abilities in siege warfare and their reliance on sheer, unadulterated terror. It was Assyrian policy always to demand that examples be made of those who resisted them; this included deportations of entire peoples and horrific physical punishments. One inscription from a temple in the city of Nimrod records the fate of the leaders of the city of Suru on the Euphrates River, who rebelled from, and were reconquered by, King Ashurbanipal: “I built a pillar at the city gate and I flayed all the chief men who had revolted and I covered the pillar with their skins; some I walled up inside the pillar, some I impaled upon the pillar on stakes." My comment: In the Babylonian Chronicles Nebuchednezzar mentions his conquest of Suru: “The king of Suru; the king of Hazzati ...”. This treatment of defeated cities would become Ashurnasirpal II’s trademark and would include skinning insubordinate officials alive and nailing their flesh to the gates of the city and “dishonoring the maidens and boys” of the conquered cities before setting them on fire. With Tela destroyed, he moved swiftly on to other campaigns. He marched west, fighting his way through other rebel outbreaks and subjugating the cities which opposed him. The historian John Boardman notes that “a major factor behind the increasing resistance was probably the heavy tribute exacted by Ashurnasirpal…one has the impression that a particularly large amount of booty was claimed by this king and that corvee [forced labor] was imposed universally” (259). Ashurnasirpal II led his army on successful campaigns across the Euphrates River and all the way to the Mediterranean Sea, where he washed his weapons as a symbol of his conquests (an act made famous by the inscriptions of Sargon the Great of the earlier Akkadian Empire after he had established his rule). My comment: Ashurbanipal, likewise, ‘washed his weapons in the Sea’ (Warfare, Ritual, and Symbol in Biblical and Modern Contexts, p. 223): “Inscriptions from ... Ashurnasirpal II ... and Ashurbanipal ... record washing their weapons in the Mediterranean Sea and offering sacrifices ...”. Although some sources claim he then conquered Phoenicia, it seems clear he entered into diplomatic relations with the region, as he did also with the kingdom of Israel. The surviving populaces of the cities and territories he conquered were, as per Assyrian policy, relocated to other regions in the empire in order to distribute skills and talent. My comment: If Ashurnasirpal were also Esarhaddon-Ashurbanipal-Nebuchednezzar, as I am proposing, then he most certainly conquered Phoenicia, Israel, and more. For example: Esarhaddon: https://www.livius.org/sources/content/anet/291-esarhaddons-prism-b/ .... the Assyrian king Esarhaddon (r.680-669) tightened the Assyrian grip on the cities of Phoenicia. Sidon was sacked in 677/676 and its people were deported. In the next year, 676/675, the cities of Syria and Cyprus were ordered to contribute building materials for a monument in Nineveh. The inscription mentions two groups of contributing kings: those ruling over the Levantine cities and those ruling the colonies in the west. It also mentions their tributes. The text has attracted considerable attention because it also mentions King Manasseh of Judah, who ruled from 687 to 642. .... Esarhaddon's Prism B [1] I called up the kings of the country Hatti and (of the region) on the other side of the river Euphrates: Ba'al, king of Tyre; Manasseh, king of Judah; Qawsgabar, king of Edom; Musuri, king of Moab; Sil-Bel, king of Gaza; Metinti, king of Ashkelon; Ikausu, king of Ekron; Milkiashapa, king of Byblos; Matanba’al, king of Arvad; Abiba'al, king of Samisimuruna; Puduil, king of Beth-Ammon; Ahimilki, king of Ashdod .... Ashurbanipal: https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/the-assyrians-of-ashurbanipals-time-were-just-as-into-pillage-and-destruction-as-isis/ Ashurbanipal overcame chaos by conquering Egypt, campaigning against Phoenician Tyre, and warring against the Elamites …. One of the most arresting sculptures in the exhibition shows him dining with his wife in the luxurious gardens of his palace in the aftermath of his victory over Elam. He reclines beneath a particularly luscious grapevine (his gardens were irrigated by a network of artificial channels); the head of the Elamite king is staked on the branch of a tree. .... Nebuchednezzar: https://www.thebiblejourney.org/biblejourney2/33-judah-after-the-fall-of-israel/king-nebuchadnezzar-of-babylon-invades-judah-/ ... in 589BC, Zedekiah rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar and Jerusalem was beseiged again for over a year and a half before finally falling in 587BC. The Temple was destroyed and the population was taken into exile in Babylonia (see 2 Kings 25:1-10). Nebuchadnezzar then proceeded to conquer Phoenicia in 585BC and to invade Egypt in 567BC. The dominance of Babylonia only came to an end when King Cyrus of Persia captured Babylon in 539 BC, and Babylonia became part of the Persian Empire (see Ezra 1:1). Joshua J. Mark continues: Having accomplished what he set out to do on campaign, he turned around and headed back to his capital city of Ashur. If there were any further revolts to be put down on his march back, they are not recorded. It is unlikely that there were more revolts, however, as Ashurnasirpal II had established a reputation for cruelty and ruthlessness which would have been daunting to even the most ardent rebel. The historian Stephen Bertman comments on this, writing: Ashurnasirpal II set a standard for the future warrior-kings of Assyria. In the words of Georges Roux, he ‘possessed to the extreme all the qualities and defects of his successors, the ruthless, indefatigable empire-builders: ambition, energy, courage, vanity, cruelty, magnificence’ (Roux 1992:288). His annals were the most extensive of any Assyrian ruler up to his time, detailing the multiple military campaigns he led to secure or enlarge his nation’s territorial dominion. From one raid alone he filled his kingdom’s coffers with 660 pounds of gold an equal measure of silver, and added 460 horses to his stables. The sadistic cruelty he inflicted upon rebel leaders was legendary, skinning them alive and displaying their skin, and cutting off the noses and the ears of their followers or mounting their severed heads on pillars to serve as a warning to others (79-80). .... His famous Standard Inscription told again and again of his triumphs in conquest and vividly depicted the horrible fate of those who rose against him. The inscription also let the dignitaries from his own realm, and others, know precisely who they were dealing with. He claimed the titles “great king, king of the world, the valiant hero who goes forth with the help of Assur; he who has no rival in all four quarters of the world, the exalted shepherd, the powerful torrent that none can withstand, he who has overcome all mankind, whose hand has conquered all lands and taken all the mountain ranges” (Bauer, 337). His empire stretched across the territory which today comprises western Iran, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, and part of Turkey. Through his diplomatic relationships with Babylonia and the Levant, he also had access to the resources of southern Mesopotamia and the sea ports of Phoenicia. In the understanding of the people of the Near East at that time, he really was “king of the world”. “Nebuchadnezzar Syndrome”: Dreams, visions: “Assurnasirpal built a palace and a temple for the dream god Mamu ...”: http://oracc.museum.upenn.edu/nimrud/ancientkalhu/thepeople/assurnasirpalii/index.html Superstition: "Fear and Superstition in the Northwest Palace of Aššurnaṣirpal II". https://www.academia.edu/34275633/_Fear_and_Superstition_in_the_Northwest_Palace_of_ Megalomania, cruelty: “Ashurnasirpal II is the epitome of everything you would ever want out of a psychotically deranged vengeance-sucking ancient conquest-mongering megalomaniac who drove his jet-fuel-powered chariot across a road paved with corpses so he could kill a lion with his fists”. http://www.badassoftheweek.com/index.cgi?id=461274131521 Fiery furnace, lions’ den: “Many captives I burned with fire”. “The Assyrian king Ashurnasirpal II (883-859 BC) is reported to have maintained a breeding farm for lions at Nimrud”. http://www.jesuswalk.com/daniel/3_faithfulness.htm Messing with the rites (unorthodox): “Ashurnasirpal II holding a bowl, detail of a relief. Note the King’s facial expression, headgear, hair, earring, necklace, mustache, beard, wrist bracelet, armlets, daggers, and the bowl he holds with his right hand. The left hand holds a long royal staff. The King’s attire is superb. What is unusual in this scene is that the King’s royal attendant is “taller” than the King himself!” http://etc.ancient.eu/exhibitions/wall-reliefs-ashurnasirpal-ii-north-west-palace/ Mysterious and enduring illness: His prayer to the goddess Ishtar ... “lamentation over the kings underserved suffering for a persistent illness” (Donald F. Murray, Divine Perogative and Royal Pretension: Pragmatics, Poetics and Polemics ..., pp. 266-267): http://jewishchristianlit.com/Texts/ANEhymns/lamIshtr.html .... I have cried to thee, suffering, wearied, and distressed, as thy servant. See me O my Lady, accept my prayers. Faithfully look upon me and hear my supplication. Promise my forgiveness and let thy spirit be appeased. Pity! For my wretched body which is full of confusion and trouble. Pity! For my sickened heart which is full of tears and suffering. Pity! For my wretched intestines (which are full of) confusion and trouble. Pity! For my afflicted house which mourns bitterly. Pity! For my feelings which are satiated with tears and suffering. O exalted Irnini, fierce lion, let thy heart be at rest. O angry wild ox, let thy spirit be appeased. Let the favor of thine eyes be upon me. With thy bright features look faithfully upon me. Drive away the evil spells of my body (and) let me see thy bright light. How long, O my Lady, shall my adversaries be looking upon me, In lying and untruth shall they plan evil against me, Shall my pursuers and those who exult over me rage against me? How long, O my Lady, shall the crippled and weak seek me out? One has made for me long sackcloth; thus I have appeared before thee. The weak have become strong; but I am weak. I toss about like flood-water, which an evil wind makes violent. My heart is flying; it keeps fluttering like a bird of heaven. I mourn like a dove night and day. I am beaten down, and so I weep bitterly. With "Oh" and "Alas" my spirit is distressed. I - what have I done, O my god and my goddess? Like one who does not fear my god and my goddess I am treated; While sickness, headache, loss, and destruction are provided for me; So are fixed upon me terror, disdain, and fullness of wrath, Anger, choler, and indignation of gods and men. I have to expect, O my Lady, dark days, gloomy months, and years of trouble. I have to expect, O my Lady, judgment of confusion and violence. Death and trouble are bringing me to an end. Silent is my chapel; silent is my holy place; Over my house, my gate, and my fields silence is poured out. As for my god, his face is turned to the sanctuary of another. My family is scattered; my roof is broken up. (But) I have paid heed to thee, my Lady; my attention has been turned to thee. To thee have I prayed; forgive my debt. Forgive my sin, my iniquity, my shameful deeds, and my offence. Overlook my shameful deeds; accept my prayer; Loosen my fetters; secure my deliverance; Guide my steps aright; radiantly like a hero let me enter the streets with the living. ....

Monday, September 1, 2025

Jonah may have actually died in the ‘fish’ and gone to Sheol

‘I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me forever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O Lord my God’. Jonah 2:6 We read at: https://www.biblebro.net/jonah-died-in-the-whale/ Jonah Died In the Whale First note that this is not a greatly supported teaching … Like most bible believers, I once believed that Jonah miraculously lived in the belly of the whale for 3 days before he was spit up onto land to warn the people of Nineveh to turn to God. The more I studied the situation and the language, the more I realized that it’s a strong possibility that Jonah died in the whale and was resurrected. Jesus & Jonah Died and Went to Sheol Jonah is a type of Christ. Here’s what Jesus said: Matthew 12:39-40 – “But he (Jesus) answered and said unto them (religious leaders), An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” [Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly] – Yes, a whale’s belly, not just “a great fish” as some insist because of Jonah 1:17. [the Son of man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth] – Was Jesus alive in the ground? No, and neither was Jonah alive in the whale. Jesus died and went to Sheol, as did everyone who died in those days. …. Jonah 2:1-2 – “Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish’s belly, And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice.” [the fish’s belly] – belly H4578 = the stomach, abdomen, inside or outside part of the belly. Note that this word is different than that used in “the belly of hell”. [the belly of hell] – belly H0990 = the belly, the womb, or of depth of Sheol (fig.). Hell H7585 = š ‘ôl; Sheol, the world of the dead, abode of the dead. In other words, Jonah’s soul was in the pits of hell. [Comment: Sheol was not exclusively hell]. The “belly” here is not describing the whale’s stomach, but Sheol. Jonah 2:6-7 – “I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me forever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O Lord my God. When my soul fainted within me I remembered the Lord: and my prayer came in unto thee, into thine holy temple.” [the bottoms of the mountains] – The bottoms of the seas, which were recorded to be the lowest parts of the earth, hence the gates of Hell (Job 38:16-17). In the resurrection of the wicked dead, the seas give up their dead, and so does death and hell (Rev 20:13). Note the connection between the bottoms of the seas and Hell. [the earth with her bars was about me forever] – He was in the eternal place of Sheol where the bars, or “gates of hell” (Matt 16:18) had him locked up. “I was going to stay in hell forever [sic], but you brought my dead body back to life, up from corruption. [thou brought up my life from] – You brought me back from the dead. See Acts 2:27. [my soul fainted] – “I prayed from the whale, passed out, died, prayed from Sheol, and was resurrected.”