by Jeffro 41 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
But since no JWs are game to postulate a year for Nebuchadnezzar's attack on Egypt after Jehoiakim started paying tribute, I'll open the floor to everyone else...
What years are possible in the JW chronology for placing the attack on Egypt that caused Jehoiakim to stop paying tribute?
"What years are possible in the JW chronology for placing the attack on Egypt that caused Jehoiakim to stop paying tribute?"
This is one of those questions that will be answered in the "New Scrolls" . . .
. . . just like "Why does the T-Rex need those big teeth to husk a coconut?"
boc:
Why does the T-Rex need those big teeth to husk a coconut?
'Evidently', T-rexes ate coconuts (which were larger and huskier at the time) because there were only vegetarians before the Flood. Duh.
Gregorian, as in January to December. As opposed to Nisan or Tishri based years.
Ahh, I get you. Doh.
If January 589 is to be considered the 10th month of his 9th year, the 4th month of his 11th year should also be moved back to 588, however, this throws other things out of sync.
Not necessarily (Young, pp. 28, 36, 37). It's all to do with accession vs. non-accession, Nisan-Nisan vs. Tishri-Tishri counting and their combinations.
What years are possible in the JW chronology for placing the attack on Egypt that caused Jehoiakim to stop paying tribute?
Their only option that fits with the chronicle's sequence is 621/0 BCE ... before Jehoiakim became vassal. I can't find any dated reference to this battle on the WT CD Library - not even a hint - unless I missed it.
AnnOMaly:
Their only option that fits with the chronicle's sequence is 621/0 BCE ... before Jehoiakim became vassal. I can't find any dated reference to this battle on the WT CD Library - not even a hint - unless I missed it.
There is a reference to this battle in Insight (volume 2, page 480), where they imply 621:
During his second, third, and fourth years as king he conducted additional campaigns in Hattu, and evidently in the fourth year he made Judean King Jehoiakim his vassal. (2Ki 24:1) Also, in the fourth year Nebuchadnezzar led his forces to Egypt, and in the ensuing conflict both sides sustained heavy losses.
But it doesn't make sense from the perspective of the reason Josephus provides for Jehoiakim later refusing to pay tribute.
And you may as well give up trying to reconcile their chronology with the Babylonian chronicle (BM 21946). Not only is JW chronology badly out of sequence, but they also have Nebuchadnezzar demanding tribute in his fifth year when the chronicle says he stayed in Babylon.
AnnOMaly:
Not necessarily (Young, pp. 28, 36, 37). It's all to do with accession vs. non-accession, Nisan-Nisan vs. Tishri-Tishri counting and their combinations.
You're quite right. I'm going to stop being lazy and work out the decision tables properly for myself like I've done previously for the Cyrus period.
Not necessarily (Young, pp. 28, 36, 37). It's all to do with accession vs. non-accession, Nisan-Nisan vs. Tishri-Tishri counting and their combinations.
I've categorically determined that Ezekiel, Jeremiah and 2 Kings (for the period in question) use Tishri dating and count accession years. Daniel uses Nisan dating and does not count accession years. And it's resolved a minor problem I'd had with the reign of Jehoiakim. Splendid.
This has resulted in some very minor changes to my timeline and charts provided previously. These have also been updated.
I'm going to stop being lazy and work out the decision tables properly for myself like I've done previously
Wow! Kudos! It would take me so long to unscramble all the data and set it out logically - as interesting as the project might be. That's why I like the one Young has already prepared :-)
I've categorically determined that Ezekiel, Jeremiah and 2 Kings (for the period in question) use Tishri dating and count accession years. Daniel uses Nisan dating and does not count accession years. And it's resolved a minor problem I'd had with the reign of Jehoiakim
Yes, Daniel and the end of Jer. 52 seem to be using the standard Babylonian accession method of counting.
Young concludes that,
- (certainly from Josiah onward) the T-T method was used for Judean kings in Jeremiah, Ezekiel and 2 Kings;
- for Babylonian kings in 2 Kings, N-N and non-accession is used;
- for both Babylonian and Judean kings in Jeremiah (but not the end of ch. 52), reigns were counted in the non-accession way. It's uncertain whether Babylonian kings were counted T-T or N-N here as both scenarios work;
- Josiah's reign in 2 Kings was counted T-T, accession!
- weirdly, there was a switch to non-accession reckoning in the case of Zedekiah in 2 Kings/Chronicles and Jeremiah.
See also the other article by Young, pp. 228, 246.
Wow! Kudos! It would take me so long to unscramble all the data and set it out logically - as interesting as the project might be. That's why I like the one Young has already prepared :-)
I like to do my own research. (That way, if I'm wrong I have no one to blame but myself.)
I used Excel to lay out each quarter (i.e. 3 months) of the period from 612 until 586, with a row each for the Gregorian, Nisan (accession and non-accession) and Tishri (A & NA) based years. I then placed each of the relevant scriptures in the possible rows for each dating system. Using this method, I was able to eliminate incompatible dating systems, essentially using the same method as the 'decision tables', but more visual.
I couldn't identify any kings of Judah that don't count accession years in 2 Kings, Ezekiel or Jeremiah. (But I only went back as far as the end of Josiah's reign.)
So it looks like Young got it right. Good on him!
Yes, Daniel and the end of Jer. 52 seem to be using the standard Babylonian accession method of counting.
Jeremiah 52:12 (copied from 2 Kings 25:8) does count Nebuchadnezzar's accession year. It's only the interpolation from Babylonian sources at Jeremiah 52:28-30, which uses Nisan-based counting and doesn't count accession years.
(Deleted. I shouldn't second-guess myself.)
