‘scholar’:
You first made the claim that BM 21946 supports 587 BCE rather than 607 BCE
I never actually said that at all, and I initially thought the inept ‘scholar’ was simply lying. But it occurs to me that he was just confused about my correct statement that modern scholarship (as opposed to modern parroting of older scholarship) favours 587BCE because I included a parenthetical clause that this is particularly since the publication of BM 21946 established dating for earlier events in Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. He really is quite tedious. 🤦♂️