"Furuli's hypothesis is self-contradictory. If it were true that the planetary positions "represent backward calculations by an astrologer who believed that 568/67 was year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar II," and if it were true that "the original tablet that was copied in Seleucid times was made in 588/87," which Furuli argues was the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, then the astrologer/copyist must have dated the tablet to the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar from the very beginning! No modern manipulation of the date would then have been necessary".
Could someone please explain this self contradiction made by Dr. Furuli?
by I_love_Jeff 5 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
AnnOMaly
One of Furuli's conclusions is that the tablet was tampered with in modern times - that somebody used a "grinding machine" to etch in Neb's regnal year as 37 (p. 290, 333 - see the bottom of Prof. Hunger's review for quotes).
However, if another of F's conclusions is true, that a Seleucid scribe mistakenly (or to create a chronological scheme) dated the tablet to Neb's 37th year, why would modern day handlers of the tablet have needed to fake it?
-
Phizzy
I think Furuli clutches at straws to bolster the 607 date, he must have lost all credibility in academic circles over this issue, if not all credibility totally.
Astronomy is not his field, yet he questions the opinions of those whose field it is.
He is supposedly making afurther study of the tablets, I wonder if his ego would allow him to say," I was wrong" ?
-
AnnOMaly
I think, for him, further study will lead to him trying to re-date more tablets.
-
Vidqun
For the record, I don't know much about chronolgy. But, like a good detective, I would wonder about "motive." What would be the motive of a person in 1906 (or later) to want to tamper with the evidence? All the tablets and cylinders point to 587/586 BCE as the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, thus according to secular chronology. Even the WTS admits that. However, if someone were to tamper with a tablet to point to another date, e.g., 607 BCE, then I would become suspicious. It would be out of sync, the only tablet to do so.
I understand the argument of the seventy year desolation. Quite a few scriptures indicate 70 years. Counting back from 538 BCE, specifically 539 BCE (the release of the Jews by Cyrus), would bring one to 606/607 BCE. Only problem with that view is that it is supported by Bible writers only, and perhaps Josephus. All secular evidence points to 587/586. Perhaps Furuli should stick to this argument, rather than taking on secular scholars or their sources.
-
Londo111
Hmm...there is no real case from the Bible either for 607.