Seventy years Desolation- History or Myth

by scholar 33 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • JCanon
    JCanon

    Thanks Gamaliel for the great reference to the "Babylonian Chronicles".

    Just for your information, this seems to be a very pro-Biblical webpage. Some highlights are that it notes that these are copies from earlier documents and they don't understand why they were necessary, etc. It is not obvious to them that the reason for the "copies" was to make revisions.

    Also of note is that the information in the tablets regarding the capture of Jehoiachin is listed and it is in the "seventh year" of Nebuchadnezzar in the last month of the year which is Adar. In the synchronized list, though, it reflects the Biblical reference that it was in the "eighth year" of Nebuchadnezzar that Jehoiachin was deported. So they don't note any discrepancy between the text reference to the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar and the Bible's reference to the 8th year.

    But it's hard to avoid since, thanks to the text, we know that the king was deported in the last month of the year, Adar, after having ruled for just 3 months and 10 days. That means Zedekiah would have been appointed that last month. The chronology chart thus shows year 8 of Nebuchadnezzar as the "accession year" of Zedekiah and starts his first year in the NINTH year of Nebuchadnezzar, which indeed, is necessary if by his 11th year it is the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar.

    Of course, even the WTS plays games with this last reference since with Jehoiachin's exile being so late in the year, the very last month, unless the reference is to that last month, then most of the years of his exile are consistent with being 8 years different than that of Nebuchadnezzar, the same as with Zedekiah (i.e. the 11th year of Zedekiah was the 19th of Nebuchadnezzar, 11 minus 3 = 8). 2 Kings 25:27 says, "And it came about in the 37th year of the exile of Jehoiachin the king of Judah, in the 12th month, on the twenty seventh day of the month, that Evil-Merodach the king of Babylon, IN THE YEAR OF HIS BECOMING KING, rasied up the head of Jehoiachin the king of Judah out of the house of detention."

    Now the Bible says that Jehoiachin was deported in the eighth year at the "turn of the year". Now if that means on the very last day of the year, then this is very late in the 37th year of Jehoiachin's exile and thus it would be the 45th year of Nebuchadnezzar's rule. But even if we considered this to be late enough in the year to be the very beginning of his 37th year of exile, Nebuchadnezzar still would have ruled for 44 years. The chronology from the WTS and from Babylon only show him ruling for 43 years.

    My comparisons suggest that this was late in the 37th year of his exile and that his exile wasn't counted until the last day of the year, which is why we are being given this last specific dating. Taht would mean that Nebuchadnezzar ruled for 45 years and thus we can assign a 2-year reduction to his rule which fits other references. For instance, Josephus says that Evil-Merodach ruled for "18 years" whereas the Babylonian records (and even later Josephus) reduces this to 2 years. Point being, we have one reference that doesn't allow us to readily adjust the rulership of Evil-Merodach easily from 18 years. Other references establish that another 6 years of reduction belongs to Darius the Mede per the Bible, and that Nabonidus ruled for 19 years. In order for there to be a 70-year period from the 23rd of Nebuchadnezzar to the 1st of Cyrus, two more years are needed which can be explained by a 45-year original rule by Nebuchadnezzar.

    The above, thus, suggests that the "turn of the year" is a reference to the last day of the month, specifically.

    Now there is one more issue which I probably need to check out and that is whether or not the year of Jehoiachin's deportation was during an intercalary year. If so then it would mean that he was deported late in the 13th month of the year during that intercalary month, in which case the 27th day of the 12th month would definitely not have begun his 37th year but would be just ending it..

    ??? I'll get back to you on this. No biggee, but interesting since this thread and reference are here.

    Canon

  • Alleymom
    Alleymom

    JCanon --

    So they don't note any discrepancy between the text reference to the seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar and the Bible's reference to the 8th year.

    The last reference on the last page of the site is:

    Green, Alberto R. "The Chronology of the Last Days of Judah: Two Apparent Discrepancies." Journal of Biblical Literature. Vol. 101. (March 1982) 61-62.

    Scroll back through this thread and you will see that I offered a copy of this article to anyone who is interested.

    I subscribe to the ANE list and I skim through the Journal of Cuneiform Studies table of contents. I don't recall seeing any academic articles on your claims about a hidden chronology in VAT 4956. Do you have any references?

    Marjorie

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    Alleymom, please don't waste your time with JCanon. Pretty much everything he posts is entirely a figment of his fertile imagination. He is also the Messiah, anointed in 1992 in a garbage dumpster, you know.

    AlanF

  • Euphemism
    Euphemism

    JCanon... would you by any chance be known as DC on another site?

  • scholar
    scholar

    JCanon

    Would you please identify yourself and state your academic qualifications. I have to agree with AlanF that much of your chronology is simply drivel designed to confuse rather than illuminate. I know that many would say the same for WT chronology even though once they believed it but your theories lie outside any scholarship and is simply empty and vacuous meandering. At least WT chronolgy has a long tradition and is slowly challenging orthodoxy but your stuff is frankly nonsense.

    scholar

    BA MA Studies in Religion

  • rem
    rem

    Wow, did I just agree with something Scholar wrote?

    rem

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    Actually, "scholar", JCanon's "chronology" is on a par with Watchtower's.

    AlanF

  • scholar
    scholar

    Alan F

    Except for the interpretation of the seventy years!

    scholar MA MA Studies in Religion

  • JCanon
    JCanon
    Alleymom, please don't waste your time with JCanon. Pretty much everything he posts is entirely a figment of his fertile imagination. He is also the Messiah, anointed in 1992 in a garbage dumpster, you know.

    Hi Alleymom, Alan...

    Alan, I'm surprised you feel it necessary to exaggerate in order to distract people from discussing this topic. Of note, you do NOT offer your own disposition on this topic to be criticized or discussed. Having an alternative opinion is one thing. Simply "handwaving" with your own presumed credibility is another.

    But since you bothered posting here, in my own defense, as far as the topic at hand, the chronology.

    My position is simply a combination of Martin Anstey's take on the chronology for this period and that of Josephus. So it's not as Alan would characterize, a "figment of my imagination" as if I invented some new and unrelated chronology. Martin Anstey believed the secular records from this period were corrupted since it disagreed with the Bible's chronology which he felt REQUIRED that Cyrus fulfill the "70 weeks" prophecy which limits to 483 years the interval from the time the Jews returned from Babylon until the Baptism of the Messiah. THIS IS NOT MY IDEA and it was covered by the very respected Olof Jonsson in his work on chronology called "Gentile Times Revised, 3rd Edition. You can read right in his work where 457-455BCE would be the dating for the 1st of Cyrus by this interpretation.

    But everything after that is academic. If you date the 1st of Cyrus in 455BCE, then follow the Jewish historian Josephus at <i>Antiquities 11.1.1</i> where he dates 70 years (again, not MY IDEA!) from the 23rd of Neubuchadnezzar (the last deporation; Jer. 52:30), then you are required to date the 23rd year of Nebuchadnezzar to 525BCE. Once you have that dating then the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar falls in 529BCE and you must date the fall of Jerusalem that year. It's as simple as that.

    Alleymom, since AlanF volunteered to dismiss my arguments, why not ask him to present his own take on the 70 years. If it's any better than my own, he should be able to defend it. But even so, at least you can make up your own mind after hearing both arguments. Alan wants you to side with him without any substantiation. You have to wonder WHY he would do that, right?

    Canon

  • JCanon
    JCanon
    JCanon... would you by any chance be known as DC on another site?

    Hmmm....I don't think so. But I have had to adopt so many names at so many different sites, Iose track. What site are you speaking of? I don't post on any legit JW sites since I can't get in. "DC" doesn't ring any bells.

    Canon

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit