WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2

by AnnOMaly 322 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • AnnOMaly

    Alleymom, thank you for your hard work in providing those scans, etc. May I ask you for just one more?

    p. 24 says,

    As mentioned earlier, gaps in the history documented by the Babylonian chronicles suggest that we may not have a continuous chronological record. 10 Could others have ruled between the reigns of these kings? If so, additional years would have to be added to the Neo-Babylonian period.

    [Endnote] 10. Consider the example of Neriglissar. A royal inscription regarding him states that he was "the son of Bel-shum-ishkun," the "king of Babylon." (Italics ours.) Another inscription calls Bel-shum-ishkun the "wise prince." The original word rendered "prince," rubû, is a title also meaning "king, ruler." Since there is an obvious discrepancy between the reign of Neriglissar and his predecessor, Amel-Marduk, could this "king of Babylon," Bel-shum-ishkun, have ruled for a time between the two? Professor R. P. Dougherty acknowledged that "the evidence of Neriglissar's noble ancestry cannot be disregarded."-Nabonidus and Belshazzar-A Study of the Closing Events of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, by Raymond P. Dougherty, published 1929, page 61.

    This supposed unknown king, Bel-shum-ishkun, has already been discussed by Jonsson HERE (scroll a third of the way down), but please could we have a scan of p. 61 where Dougherty comments about Bel-shum-ishkun and his son's 'noble ancestry' that shouldn't be disregarded? Only a snippet view is available on the net which says,

    "However, the evidence of Neriglissar's noble ancestry cannot be disregarded, as it furnishes a basis for his importance as a man of affairs before he became king and explains his ability to make a marital alliance with the house of Nebuchadnezzar. The similarity of Nabonidus' rôle is striking." (p. 61, n. 115)

    It would be nice to see the whole thing in context, as it appears that this is yet another quote the WT has lifted to give the impression there is possible support for the issue it raises ... and yet it does nothing of the kind.

  • Doug Mason
    Doug Mason


    I expect I will be able to provide my fuller rebuttal of the October article tomorrow.

    It appears that Amazon carries the book by Dougherty (a reprint, no doubt) for $20 plus postage.


  • cantleave

    Alleymom you hard work is very much appreciated!

  • breakfast of champions
    breakfast of champions

    EVERYONE - fantastic work! Thanks so much for all the info. Very cool.

  • AnnOMaly


  • Alleymom

    AnnOMaly, post 2039 -- Here is the scan of Nabonidus and Belshazzar, p. 61.

    Nabonidus and Belshazzar, page 61

  • DesirousOfChange

    I think the reason this article is not in the study version of the WT is this copy is likely to be in every publishers hand in the KH for four or five weeks.

    The last thing the WTS wants is discussions of it between R&F members at the KH.

    The public edition gets picked up at the KH on Tuesday or Thursday night and never sees the light of day again.


    George, I think you have a valid point!

  • stillajwexelder

    Somebody on the writing committee clearly has a masters degree in SPIN

  • stillajwexelder

    I am suprised SCHOLAR has not commented on this thread - or am I missing something

  • thetrueone

    SCHOLAR gave up because he overwhelmingly lost the debate concerning the date of the final destruction of Jerusalem.

    Of course the WTS will and would try to spin information to vilify their purposed date, if they dont they loose all

    credibility as the said chosen organization.

    With that much at stake and with all they have self proclaimed openly to the public, its not surprising at all that they would be intellectualy dishonest.

    As in most religions there are usually a foundation of established agreed to set of lies to foster power and control over others.

    In case of the WTS and the JWS these were also created as to attract attention and to further proliferate the WTS's literature.

    God didn't choose the WTS. the WTS. choose themselves for profiting and benefiting reasons.

Share this