Posts by scholar

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Vidqun

Here's some articles and books on the subject. The list is not up-to-date. There's many more. Compare the "Insight" articles and Furuli's books with these. Secular history and Bible history compares well with each other with few contradictions. The authors of these articles have no hidden agenda:
Since Wiseman’s complete translation of the Chronicles in 1956, many pertinent studies and reviews have appeared which deal specifically with the problems of the chronology of the last days of Judah. Among the more important, from the most recent in chronological order, are the following: A. Malamat, “The Last Years of the Kingdom of Judah” and H. Tadmor, “The Chronology of the First Temple Period,” The Age of the Monarchies: Political History (WHJP 4/1; ed. A. Malamat; Jerusalem: Massada Press, 1979) pp. 44–60; pp. 205–21; B. Oded, “The Last Days of Judah and the Destruction of Jerusalem (609–586),” Israelite and Judaean History (ed. John H. Hayes and Maxwell Miller; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977) pp. 469–476; A. K. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles; A. Malamat, “The Twilight of Judah: In the Egyptian-Babylonian Maelstrom,” VTSup 28 (1975) pp. 121–145; E. Stern, “Israel at the Close of the Period of the Monarchy: An Archaeological Survey,” BA 38 (1975) pp. 26–54; E. Kutsch, “Das Jahr der Katastrophe: 587 v. Chr.,” Bib 55 (1974) pp. 520–545; D. J. A. Clines, “The Evidence for an Autumnal New Year in Pre-Exilic Israel Reconsidered,” JBL 93 (1974) pp. 22–40; J. M. Myers, “Edom and Judah in the Sixth-Fifth Centuries b.c.,” Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright (ed. H. Goedicke; Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1971) pp. 377–392; K. S. Freedy and D. B. Redford, “The Dates in Ezekiel in Relation to Biblical, Babylonian, and Egyptian Sources,” JAOS 70 (1970) pp. 462–485; K. T. Anderson, “Die Chronologie der Könige von Israel und Juda,” ST 23 (1969) pp. 69–119; S. B. Frost, “The Death of Josiah: A Conspiracy of Silence,” JBL 87 (1968) pp. 369–382; A. Malamat, “The Last Kings of Judah and the Fall of Jerusalem,” IEJ 18 (1968) pp. 137–156; S. H. Horn, “Where and When was the Aramaic Saqqara Papyrus Written,” AUSS 6 (1968) pp. 29–45; “The Babylonian Chronicle and the Ancient Calendar of the Kingdom of Judah,” AUSS 5 (1967) pp. 12–27; G. Larsson, “When did the Babylonian Captivity Begin?” JTS 18 (1967) 417–423; E. R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965) pp. 161–173; John Bright, Jeremiah (AB 21; Garden City: Doubleday, 1956) xlvi–lv; J. Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology (Princeton: Princeton University, 1964) pp. 87–92; D. N. Freedman, “Old Testament Chronology,” The Bible and the Ancient Near East (ed. G. Ernest Wright; Garden City: Doubleday, 1961) pp. 265–299; M. Noth, “Die Einnahme von Jerusalem in Jahre 597 v. Chr.,” ZDPV 74 (1968) pp. 133–157; F. Nötscher, “ ‘Neue’ babylonische Chroniken und Altes Testament,” BZ 1 (1957) pp. 110–114; E. Vogt, “Die neubabylonische Chronik über die Schlacht bie Karkemish und die Einnahme von Jerusalem,” VTSup 4 (1957) pp. 67–96; D. N. Freedman, “The Babylonian Chronicle,” BA 19 (1956) pp. 50–60; A. Malamat, “A New Record of Nebuchadrezzar’s Palestinian Campaign,” IEJ 6 (1956) pp. 246–256; J. P. Hyatt, “New Light on Nebuchadrezzar and Judean History,” JBL 75 (1956) pp. 277–284; H. Tadmor, “Chronology of the Last Kings of Judah,” JNES 15 (1956) pp. 226–230; E. R. Thiele, “New Evidence on the Chronology of the Last Kings of Judah,” BASOR 143 (1956) pp. 22–27; W. F. Albright, “The Nebuchadrezzar and Neriglissar Chronicles,” BASOR 143 (1956) pp. 28–33.
--
I wish to inform you that I have all of these in my theological library with the exception of those Journal articles or publications in German. Have you read any of these publications or journal articles or are you simply 'big noting' yourself?
scholar JW
Link Dislike Like

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

I don't even need to respond to your other nonsense because this well demonstrates the level of your dishonesty and/or ineptitude. It is the scholarly consensus and a matter of historical fact, and not merely my 'specious claim', that Daniel was written during the Seleucid period.

--

This theory that you accept is known as the Maccabean Hypothesis and is well debunked by many scholars and by WT scholars even Rolf Furuli in his latest scholarship- When Was The Book Of Daniel Written? A Philological, Linguistic, And Historical Approach, 2017, Awatu Publishers

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Rocketman123

Right Neil ?

---

Wrong!

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

Wrong again, 'scholar'. Daniel's use of Nisan/accession dating is consistent throughout the book of Daniel, and it was the dating system used in Babylon where the story is set (and where Daniel was purportedly educated), the subsequent Persian period when JWs believe Daniel was written, and the Seleucid period when Daniel was actually written.

--

This amounts to just special pleading on your part ignoring historical facts about the reigns of Jehoiakim and Nebuchadnezzer and ignores the precise timing of Jehoiakim's vassalage to Neb. The dating system that you allege is simply nonsense- a theory similar to your spurious claim that Daniel was written in the Seleucid period.

----

eremiah's use of Tishri/non-accession dating is also consistent for kings of Judah. There is insufficient information in Jeremiah to confirm whether he uses Nisan or Tishri dating for Babylonian kings (though likely Nisan consistent with 2 Kings), but he consistently uses non-accession dating (except for the Babylonian interpolation at Jeremiah 52:28-30, which is evident from the relative references to the 7th and 18th years).

---

This comment although true in terms of principles of Chronology as recognized by WT scholars is open to many problems highlighting the issues of Methodology. The simple fact that our methodology in constructing a viable scheme of Chronology is superior to other scholarship and your bogus scheme.

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

t's already obvious that you're too deep in your delusion. You don't need to keep affirming it.
--
I will leave the delusion to your good self.
scholar JW
Link Dislike Like

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

scholar', you're just going round in circles with the same claims, so no extended response is required. Your claims that actual scholars support the JW view of the exile are entirely dishonest, and your use of the term "exilic scholars" as a qualifier is not particularly helpful. (A Google search for "exilic scholars" and "70 years" together yields only two results; one is a scam and the other is a JW-related forum comment by you. Changing "70 years" to "seventy years" yields 6 results, being either of similar 'quality' or otherwise not supportive of your views.) You know very well that actual scholars view the exile from early 597 BCE and the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BCE, and secular historians do not conflate Babylon's 70 years with the exile (and nor do Ezekiel or Jeremiah). Jeremiah explicitly states that Babylon's 70 years end and then Babylon is called to account, and Daniel explicitly indicates Babylon being called to account in the agreed year of 539 BCE. Jeremiah further explicitly states that attention is given to the Jews' return from exile after the 70 years had ended. There is simply no getting away from the fact that the 70 years ended in 539 BCE and are therefore not the same as the period of exile.

--

You are ignorant of current scholarship especially with regard to the subject of the Exile-Jewish Exile for there are scholars who are properly termed 'Exilic scholars' who specialize in this period of Jewish history such as Rainer Albertz. There is no need for me to 'go round in circles' for I unlike you, know the subject, its implications for theology and history.

Scholars properly date the Exile from the Fall to the Return and not earlier which saw at least one deportation of some Jews prior to the Fall and they do conflate the 70 years of captivity with the Exile of 70 years for there is no other period or different 70 year periods. There is only one period of 70 years and this can only be construed byJerr that period of Exile-Captivity-Servitude.

Jeremiah quite explicitly states that the 70 Years ended not with the Fall of Babylon but after the 70 years was fulfilled, such event occurred only after Babylon's Fall with its own ongoing judgment of desolation.

Daniel describes the continuance of the 70 years as a period up to the Fall of Babylon and beyond with the lamentation of the Exile by means of prayer which would come to end.

Jeremiah, Daniel and Ezra all agree that the 70 years ended not with the Fall of Babylon but only with the Return of the Jews which occurred after 539 BCE. Further, if you count back 70 years from 539 BCE you get to 609 BCE with nothing happened in that year, no significant historical event .

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Rocketman123

Scholar why dont you just be intellectually honest and just say the ancient Hebrews did not suffer 70 years of desolation but came close to being captive by the Babylonians for almost 70 years,

---

Intellectual honesty compels one to affirm the biblical and historical fact that the Jews experienced an Exile in Babylon for 70 years whilst their homeland remained desolate and captive to Babylon for 70 years.

---

Ancient Jerusalem did not get invaded and destroyed in 607 BCE but the overwhelming evidence points to 586 BCE.

---

Ancient Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE as proved by the overwhelming evidence which disproves 586 or 587 BCE

---

All that happened to the inhabitants of Jerusalem including those set about kings are documented into history and supported by archeological findings including the bible.

---

Correct so just read the Bible and understand what really happened during that period of history as confirmed by archaeology and secular history.

---

Being dishonest is not a virtue to ones character, not least a practicing Christian.

Link Dislike Like----

I will leave the dishonesty to youscholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

Seems to be a verb missing there, but let's ignore that for now... Shame on you trying to confuse Vidqun when you should know very well that Jehoiakim's 'third year' as referenced by Daniel uses Nisan/accession dating and refers to the year that began in Nisan 605 BCE and specifically to events in early 604 BCE, as opposed to Jeremiah's reference to his fourth year using Tishri/non-accession dating.

---

True and False. What is only true about your post is that I omitted a verb. What is false about your post is the claim that Daniel in this instance used a different calendrical system. This is simply a claim made by some scholars but fails to account for an accurate history for the reign of Jehoiakim and Nebuchadnezzar. Inaccurate history has no place in Chronology.

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

My chart of the flawed JW chronology certainly highlights many of the faults with JW dogma. An updated version will be posted next month (no revelations, just some minor layout changes). It's always best to check the site for the current version as old links won't work.

---

What your pretty chart demonstrates the validity of WT Chronology and its scholarship based on biblical evidence.

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

Your assessment of the early Neo-Babylonian period is correct, but JWs insert 20 years into the Neo-Babylonian period after Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, pushing back the years assigned to his reign. So it’s not as simple as querying Nebuchadnezzar’s conquest of Jerusalem ‘before’ his victory at Carchemish. What we, and all of scholarship for the period, know was 605 BCE, historical revisionists like ‘scholar’ and other JWs call 625 BCE.

---

All that we have done is factored in the definite historic period of the biblical' seventy years' which proves that there is at least a gap in NB Chronology of at least 20 years and according to Furuli's research may be a longer gap.

---
The Watch Tower Society vacillates between ignoring the problem - not attempting to defend 607 for decades - and occasional dishonest attempts to defend their view (like in 1981 when they said VAT 4956 was defective and unreliable, or 2011 when they said VAT 4956 completely supports their view). The fact is that the JW position is indefensible, so after JW apologists’ paltry attempts (such as their easily refuted claims about VAT 4956) at justifying their doctrine fail, they just fall back to the unbiblical mantra of ‘70 years of exile’. They don’t really care about the actual facts because of the powerful delusion connected to their end-times beliefs.

--

No need for vacillation but simply keeping up with the fact that scholarship improves or advance over time so now we have a more positive view of VAT 4956 due to Furuli's research.

The 'unbiblical mantra of 70 years of exile' is well supported by major Jewish historians and others such as Rainer Albertz and is consistent with the subject of 'Exile' in the OT history.

We show our concern for facts and that is why we have published such books as Aid and INSIGHT which a complete history for the Divided Monarchy and NB Period also our facts are well presented in your pretty chart on JW Chronology which proves that we rely on all of the facts and nothing but the facts for we are a people of facts so to speak.!!!

scholar JW