Dear Bonnie..
No, it is I who am really tired!! It was a couple of years ago..the date effects 607 but was actually talking about the battle of Charchemish (spelling) which throws everything off by the 19-20 years that are between 605 and 624. So I am sorry for the confusion, but it still makes the point in A.K. Graysons book in the preface. Here is my comments from my original findings. I just bumped the thread to the top.
O.K. Everyone,
Here are the scanned copies I promised I would post. Thanks to my WONDERFUL husband, he made it all possible, as he is a computer whiz! These copies show the out and out deception on the part of the organization. Once again, we find proof of them misquoting different scholars in order for the organization to appear to have credentials for proof of their date system. If I never checked their date out and never had any reason to doubt them, then I would have never have seen the deception. Hope someone will benefit from these as much as we have.
See scanned copy of Insight Book page 480, which reads :
In this his accession year he returned to Hattu, and "in the month Shebat [January-February, 624 B.C.E.] he took the vast booty of Hattu to Babylon." (AssyrianandBabylonianChronicles, by A. K. Grayson, 1975, p. 100)
Now look at the actual scanned page from this very book I checked out from the library. Page 100 Notice there is NO date!! Look closer at the Insight Book Scan. In brackets they insert the date 624 B.C.E. inside the quotation marks. Clearly anyone reading this would never question that the date 624 B.C.E. was actually the date given by this renouned scholar.
Then, lets look at scanned page 19 from this same book. Notice what date A.K. Grayson DOES give: 605 B.C.E. NOT 624 B.C.E.!!! Interesting that the Society has to alter the Battle of Carchemishs dates because they have changed the date of the destruction of Jerusalem.
Sincerely,
Lady Liberty