Also an entire book, great as it might be, isn't a handy and easily-referenced summary.
When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed? Why It Matters - What the Evidence Shows
by wannabefree 224 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
-
VM44
Two pieces of information that I would like to present here concerning "Ptolemy's Canon" and the Almagest.
1) Why is Ptolemy's kingslist called a "Canon"?
The wiki article on the word "Canon" states:
From Latin canon, from Ancient Greek καν?ν (kanón, “measuring rod, standard”.
Therefore Ptolemy's kinglist, or Canon, was to serve as a "Measuring Rod" in order to date astronomical events.
2) In what work did Ptolemy publishe his kinglist or Canon?This is an important piece of information for anyone considering obtaining Ptolemy's Almagest in order to examine his kingslist.
Carl Olof Jonsson wrote the following in one of his online articles:
"But Almagest never contained the Ptolemaic Canon with its chronological tables. This kinglist was included in another work by Claudius Ptolemy known as the Handy Tables."
So a person might not find the kinglist in a copy of the Almagest unless it specifically contains Ptolemy's "Handy Tables."
3) What was the original title of the Almagest?
From the Almagest wiki article we find that the original Greek title of the work is, when translated, "Mathematical Treatise."
"The treatise's original Greek title is Μαθηματικ? Σ?νταξις (Mathematike Syntaxis), and the treatise is also known by the Latin form of this, Syntaxis mathematica. It was later titled He Megale Syntaxis (The Great Treatise), and the superlative form of this (Ancient Greek: μεγ?στη, "greatest") lies behind the Arabic name al-majis?i, from which the English name Almagest derives." -
lepavoux
When was Ancient Jersalem Destroyed? 607BC or 587BC?
Answer, it does not matter, why not? Because there was only one fulfillment of Nebuchadnezzar's dream with Daniel Chap 4 of the chopped down tree, there is no 2520 years concoction that has been around for hundreds of years!
Satan never sleeps with all his wicked tricks.
-
AnnOMaly
So that it doesn't get swamped and lost in this thread, I started a new topic on the WT article's Berossus section. There are some links and scans there you may find useful.
-
Cadellin
YOU GUYS ARE THE BEST! Ann-o-maly, VM44, wannabefree and everyone else who posted links or explanatory info here, thank you!
In particular, the dishonesty regarding the Christopher Walker quote is stunning. It's a replication of the same kind of intellectual dishonesty and quote mining that the old Creation book is full of (not to mention the newer brochures). Its the same old thing that these bastards KNOW has stumbled people badly. On the other hand, it's also the stuff of wake-up calls. THe challenge is to get JWs to see through this nefarious game.
-
VM44
The time has come to ask this question.
How did Ptolemy use the chronological kingslist (the "Kings Canon") in order to date astronomical observations?
We need some examples.
-
VM44
"In general, Ptolemy’s canon is regarded as accurate. But in view of its omissions, should it really be used to provide a definite historical chronology?"
The answer, based upon the evidence the article's author chose NOT to include, is....Yes!
-
AnnOMaly
How did Ptolemy use the chronological kingslist (the "Kings Canon") in order to date astronomical observations?
The astronomical observations were already dated. Ptolemy's mission, I guess, was to improve on or postulate theories/explanations for patterns emerging in various celestial events. So you needed to know when such a phenomena occurred (year, month, day), its characteristics, its position in the sky, what time of night/day it happened, how frequently the same or similar event repeated, etc. Therefore, you need a calendar to refer to. The King's Canon served the purpose of being able to count years like a modern calendar would.
"In general, Ptolemy's canon is regarded as accurate. But in view of its omissions, should it really be used to provide a definite historical chronology?"
The WTS loads the question. 'Ptolemy's Canon' was never meant to be "a definite historical chronology" - it was meant to be a year-by-year time line to aid calculations. If he wanted to provide a detailed history of every single claimant to the Babylonian throne, he would have written his own Chronicon! Omitting some fly-by-night usurpers and counting their short reigns in with more accepted and established kings for the sake of simplicity does not make the Canon 20 years too short.
-
VM44
I found this article very interesting to read.
"Applied Historical Astronomy: An Historical Perspective," by J.M. Steele.
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2004JHA....35..337S
Select "Print this article" in order to create a PDF file that you can download.