07-08-2010, 09:48 AM
veritas re Wrote:
[quote=coccus ilicis]
[quote]This technique arrives at 626 BCE, the start of the Neo Babylonian Empire.
The approach goes like this:
Start at 539 BCE – the accepted end of the Neo Babylonian Empire. Add 88 years, which is the total length of the Neo Babylonian Empire (the WT gets fuzzy at this point because it shoots down the 607 BCE fall of Jerusalem but its worthwhile to check WT pubs about this). This puts us to 626 BCE, the beginning of Nabopolassar’s (Nebuchadnezzar's father) 21 year reign.
Here’s a thread where I posted a Neo Babylonian Empire timeline that lists all the kings and the length of each reign, along with some of the proofs for the 539 BCE fall of Babylon – and a 587 BCE fall of Jerusalem - that are presented in The Gentile Times Reconsidered. By doing this math, it’s clear that Nebuchadnezzar was not yet the king in 607 BCE, yet Jerusalem was destroyed in his 18th year. The WT accepts 539 BCE as a fixed date, but they do not accept all the proven methods used to get to 539 BCE, which involve astronomical observations that fixes certain key dates of Nebuchadnezzar’s forty three year rule that makes it impossible that Jerusalem fell in 607 BCE.
[quote]This technique arrives at 626 BCE, the start of the Neo Babylonian Empire.
The approach goes like this:
Start at 539 BCE – the accepted end of the Neo Babylonian Empire. Add 88 years, which is the total length of the Neo Babylonian Empire (the WT gets fuzzy at this point because it shoots down the 607 BCE fall of Jerusalem but its worthwhile to check WT pubs about this). This puts us to 626 BCE, the beginning of Nabopolassar’s (Nebuchadnezzar's father) 21 year reign.
Here’s a thread where I posted a Neo Babylonian Empire timeline that lists all the kings and the length of each reign, along with some of the proofs for the 539 BCE fall of Babylon – and a 587 BCE fall of Jerusalem - that are presented in The Gentile Times Reconsidered. By doing this math, it’s clear that Nebuchadnezzar was not yet the king in 607 BCE, yet Jerusalem was destroyed in his 18th year. The WT accepts 539 BCE as a fixed date, but they do not accept all the proven methods used to get to 539 BCE, which involve astronomical observations that fixes certain key dates of Nebuchadnezzar’s forty three year rule that makes it impossible that Jerusalem fell in 607 BCE.
Thanks, it looks interesting. From memory I had tentatively arrived at 606/7 for Nebuchadnezzar's first attack on Jerusalem recorded at Daniel 1, while he was still a crown prince, and about two years before he became king. But I'll have to look at it again. I will deifinitely make use of your work.
Thanks again,
coccus