Has the WTS ever published a complete list of babylonian kings??

by cultswatter 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  cultswatter

  Lets cut to the chase shall we. I'm looking for the WTS list of Babylonian Kings and the years they reigned. . Evidently the WTS discredits any historical list of babylonian Kings. That being the case just WHAT detail does the WTS SPECIFICALLY stumble upon?? Do they think that there is a MISSING babylonian king?? or does th WTS consider the years that the baylonian kings reinged as being incorrect. Please note that the WTS does agree upon the reign of Nabonidus as does everyone else. The WTS agrees that in 539 Babylon fell as does everone else

  It is my sincere hope that the WTS has published their OWN kings list accoording to their inspired interpretation of the bible and history.

  The format that I hope to see presented is as follows. I want a WTS kings list in the same format as the following kings list

  http://www.quotes-watchtower.co.uk/607_b_c_e.html

  Now people when we get the WTS kings list we can just compare the two lists and see once and for all just where the dispute lies. And now people don't tell me that I need to read a 75 page report on just how complicated this whole thing is
• 

  Zico

  They've never published a specific list, or shown specifically where the discrepancy is suppose to lie, their argument against 587 is based entirely on 'The evidence isn't fully conclusive' and 'it contradicts the bible' Their isn't really much to it.
• 

  SirNose586

  The most they've done is to post the "reign" of Nebuchadnezzar (which is a uniform 19-20 years off from accepted historical sources) and to give the length of the reigns on the subsequent kings; they've never made a chart for others to study. To do so would be to expose an embarassing 20 year gap in their list, one which they would try to explain by saying "There might be records missing for 20 years" or "There was another king (NEVAWUZZA) perhaps." Both are pathetic answers to a problem that THEY created by changing dates to fit their BS reasonings.
• 

  cultswatter

  There is a poster I think it is M.J. His picture icon is a king named (NEVAWUZZA)

  Is this true ?? that the WTS does not want to conjecture about the king (NEVAWUZZA) so they have never published a complete kings list. That is amazing considering the AID to bible Understanding should have covered that material. I bet Freddy Franz counselled the writers of the AID book not to include a Babylonian Kings list as historians would have torn that all to pieces.

  It seems as usual the WTS sweeps history under the carpet. Anyway I would like to assemble a virtual WTS kings list for amusement sake
• 

  Alwayshere

  Here you are: W86 11/1 "Nebuchadnezzar reigned for 43 years." W65 1/1 "Evil-merodach reigned 2 years." W65 1/1 "Neriglissar reigned for 4 years." It-2 p.457 " Nabonidus is believed to have ruled some 17 years." Now add 43+2+4+17= 66 years. Babylon fell 539, add 66 to 539 and you get 605 for Nebuchadnezzar's 1st year as King. Not 624 as the WTS says. The Bible at 2Kings 25:8-9 says the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar was Jerusalem's desolation. counting 605 as the 1st year of Nebuchadnezzar's regin, second as 604. on down to 587, 587 is his 19th year. Hope this helps.
• 

  ninja

  no...nor have they produced a list of boobylonian queens
• 

  Leolaia

  The following quote would suggest that all the "missing years" would have to be placed inside Nabonidus' reign:

  *** w65 1/1 p. 29 The Rejoicing of the Wicked Is Short-lived ***

  Amel-Marduk (Evil-merodach) as the oldest son succeeded Nebuchadnezzar to the throne in 581 B.C.E. He did a kindness to one of the Judean captives, by which kindness he unwittingly carried out Jehovah’s purpose. Second Kings 25:27-30 states: "It came about in the thirty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin the king of Judah, in the twelfth month [in 580 B.C.E.], . . . Evil-merodach the king of Babylon, in the year of his becoming king, raised up the head of Jehoiachin the king of Judah out of the house of detention; and he began to speak good things with him, and then put his throne higher than the thrones of the kings that were with him in Babylon. And he took off his prison garments; and he ate bread constantly before him all the days of his life." Jehoiachin (or Jeconiah) had seven sons in Babylonia, including Shealtiel, whose nominal son Zerubbabel became governor of rebuilt Jerusalem, and through whose line of descent Jesus Christ came.—1 Chron. 3:17-19; Hag. 1:1; 2:23; Ezra 5:1, 2; Matt. 1:12.

  Evil-merodach reigned two years and was murdered by his brother-in-law Neriglissar, who reigned for four years, which time he spent mainly in building operations. His underage son Labashi-Marduk, a vicious boy, succeeded him, and was assassinated within nine months. Nabonidus, who had served as governor of Babylon and who had been Nebuchadnezzar’s favorite son-in-law, took the throne and had a fairly glorious reign until Babylon fell in 539 B.C.E.
• 

  Hellrider

  Evidently the WTS discredits any historical list of babylonian Kings. That being the case just WHAT detail does the WTS SPECIFICALLY stumble upon??

  The detail in question is that the jews returned in 537/538 b.c....and the Bible says the land lay "desolate for 70 years...",so they count backwards 70 years, and voilà, arrive at 607, which fits well with their 1914-date (of course, assuming that the 2520 DAYS were ever meant to be years in the first place, which they are clearly not). And anyway, the Bible never says that the there were supposed to be 70 year without a TEMPLE, which is what the WTS has based their whole idea on, it just says "desolate", a word that could mean a number of things.

  Do they think that there is a MISSING babylonian king?? or does th WTS consider the years that the baylonian kings reinged as being incorrect.

  To the WTS, either one would do...but as the first option is extremely unlikely, they`ll settle for the second. But they have never presented a "kings-list", because such a list would be nothing more than speculation, but they have hinted to the "length of reigns". It`s all bs.
• 

  Leolaia

  Oh, they've given a king list before, they just don't bother to fill in the dates:

  

  From: Your Will Be Done on Earth, 1958, p. 365
• 

  NanaR

  Cultswatter:

  When I was in high school in the late 60s and studying World History, I remember excitedly picking up the Babylon the Great book and comparing its chart of world events with information in my high school history book. I was very puzzled to find that they didn't match.

  It took me another 30 years or so to start asking more questions. I'm a slow learner.

  Anyway, the Babylon book is not on the WT CD, but go here if you would like to take a look (thanks Atlantis!!):

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/133727/1.ashx

  You might want to download the other book too, as it is not on the CD either.

  Ruth