Jeffro
This is typical of the nonsense the apologist tries. In one comment, I correctly stated that a Babylonian calendar day started on the evening of April 3, which is the day of April 4. There was no inconsistency at all, but the dishonest ‘scholar’ tries to claim something was acknowledged ‘at last’.
--
The simpler fact is if you are going to refer to the tables then quote the table correctly and PD lists for the beginning of Nisan is April 4 and not April 3 for the year 588 BC.
----
Note that there was actually an intercalary month before Nisan of 587BCE, which is of no help to the lying apologist.
--
The fact is that PD shows for the year 588 BC that there is an intercalary month or extra month was added to the preceding year 0f 587 BC which means that the New Year began not in April but May 588 BC.
--
Simanu never starts in July. The false association of an eclipse on 15 Simanu (5 July 568BCE) with one on 15 July 588BCE is a Watch Tower Society contrivance, which only further demonstrates their dishonesty and yours. (Note that ‘scholar’ has again claimed here that the 15th day of Simanu was July 1, but the Watch Tower footnote actually asserts that 15 Simanu was 15 July and that Simanu began July 1.)
--
VAT 4956 shows differently and is not a contrivance as the eclipse dated July 15 588 matches well with the eclipse mentioned in VAT 4956 -3 Simanu which is further supported by the tablet's reference to an additional month which means that the New Year did not start until May2/3 which is is well explained in the footnote 17.
VAT 4956 - Lunar eclipse on 15 Simanu (Babylonian 3rd month) -
Therefore Simanu began 15 days earlier -
There was a lunar eclipse July 15 588 BC Julian calendar
Thus, the first day of Simanu would be June 30/.1 July 588 BC Julian calendar
Therefore, Nisanu would have begun two months earlier on May2/3 588 BC
Normally, according to P&D the new year would have begun on 4 Nisanu-3/ 4 April 588 BC - Julian calendar
VAT 4956 states that an extra month was added after the 12th month Addaru of the preceding year which then means that the new year of 588 BCE did not start until May 2/3.
Thus, the date of this lunar eclipse in 588 BC well fits the data on the tablet, VAT 4956
scholar JW