My Thoughts on the Archaeological Discovery Concerning Belshazzar and the Nabonidus Cylinders

I remembered buying the book "Why I Believe" by the late D. James Kennedy (though it's now the old, out-of-print edition). Chapter 2 is titled "The Stones Cry Out". Today, I was also reading through Daniel 5. Another commentator named J. Vernon McGee also wrote of this matter. What wasn't surprising was that some people were trying to discredit the existence of King Belshazzar who was later overthrown by the Persians. The man was known to be irreverent as he used the vessels from the Jewish Temple caught many decades ago. I wonder why would a man do such a thing as to use much older vessels when he had for himself some brand new vessels? I wouldn't even dare to do that to antique vessels. Belshazzar's existence was proven by the discovery of the Nabonidus Cylinders which are in the British Museum. McGee quotes from a book called "Daniel, the Key to Prophetic Revelation" by John Walvoord. McGee also mentions Raymond Doughtery's scholarly research that proved that indeed, Belshazzar, was a historical person. Belshazzar was a grandson of Nebuchadnezzar from decades ago. Before that, there was also Evil-Merodach.

I could remember how Kennedy would have described it. To summarize, Belshazzar jointly ruled with his father Nabonidus. These four clay cylinders were found at the Temple of Moon God. I think this moon god that they worshiped was also appropriately named Sin I speculate that Muslims unknowingly worship this moon god as Allah. The four cylinders contained information such as prayers for Belshazzar and that Gobryas a Persian general entered at that day Belshazzar was slain. Kennedy wrote his book "Why I Believe" to prove that Christianity isn't about blind faith but reality-based. The gathering of information is rather impressive in digging through archaeology. Herodotus, a Greek historian, also manages to confirm the existence of Belshazzar as the second ruler during the reign of Nabonidus.

I was thinking about the arrogance and lax nature of Belshazzar. Obviously, Belshazzar was not a good regent to his father. It's assumed that his father was out on the battlefield. Such a foolish act of having a party in the midst of a war was done by him. McGee also mentions the Greek historian Xenophon who mentions how the Persian army managed to detour a canal of the Euphrates River back into the main channel and letting the army flow under the walls of the city. Belshazzar was too reliant on the stronghold of the city. Any historical study would prove that Babylon had a very strong architecture. The way McGee describes the city wall is amazing. Can you imagine if you had 15 miles square and made of sturdy brick? I think the people failed to learn from the fall of Jericho. Jericho had a very thick wall yet it fell down by a divinely-ordained earthquake. In this case, God divinely ordained the Persians' time to rule and decided it was time to end the Babylonian Empire's glory. 

Why was Daniel to be the third ruler of the kingdom after interpreting the bad omen written by God Himself on the wall? It's because, for one, Nabonidus the father was the first ruler. Belshazzar ruled as king in the absence of his father. So, Daniel was offered the rank as the third ruler since Belshazzar was the second ruler. As Kennedy would write it, the critical bubble burst on the face of the critics who wanted to discredit Daniel. The study of the Bible will always require one to search for evidence to defend it. Not everyone will believe the evidence but the stones will cry out.