607 BC vs 587 BC: Archaeoastronomy for Everyone

by Londo111 28 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Jeffro

    Cold Steel:

    Sigh...Jerusalem was destroyed in 586.


    One thing that I noted was the Babylonian exile IN 586!

    Correct year for the destruction of Jerusalem is 587. (This is also correctly indicated in the quote Cold Steel provided.) The fall of Jerusalem is indicated in the Bible as both the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar without counting his accession year (Jeremiah 52:29 * ), and his 19th year including his accession year (2 Kings 25:8; Jeremiah 52:12). His accession year was 605. It's basic arithmetic.
    *Most of Jeremiah chapter 52 is a copy of 2 Kings chapter 25, but verses 28-30 are a later interpolation from Babylonian sources, hence they do not count accession years.

    However, the main exile began in early 597 (Ezekiel 33:21; 40:1; Jeremiah 52:28-30).

  • Jeffro

    In 1972, Awake! dismissed "VAT 4956" (quotes theirs) as a "defective copy" with "numerous gaps", but in 2011 it supposedly became an accurate source for supporting their delusional chronology.

    The fraudulent 2011 Watchtower article about VAT 4956 cites Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy–Astrology (David Brown), in an attempt to claim that the positions of the planets in VAT 4956 are not reliable. However, Brown actually states that the Babylonians had specific names for the planets, and it is those planet names that appear on the tablet.

    Your video is a great way to simply demonstrate the Watch Tower Society's dishonesty.

  • Londo111

    Thank you. I'm hoping this acts as a tutorial that will "teach people to fish", that is, do the Archaeoastronomy research for themselves. The Society made many claims in their article about what anonymous "researchers" found, but they failed to show the work. A picture is worth a thousand words. The citation in the 2011 article of David Brown's book was one of the things that woke me up, along with them having Nissan 1 in 588 BC start in the month of May. I started to realize they were not just wrong...for anybody can be honestly mistaken...but this was outright deciet.

  • Londo111

    In the above mentioned November 2011 Watchtower article, in note 17, it says:

    According to VAT 4956, this eclipse occurred on the 15th of the third Babylonian month, which suggests that the month of Simanu began 15 days earlier. If the eclipse fell on July 15, 588 B.C.E. according to our Julian calendar, then the first day of Simanu would be June 30/July 1, 588 B.C.E. Therefore, the first Babylonian month (Nisanu) would have started the new year two months earlier, on May 2/3. While normally the year of this eclipse would have begun on April 3/4, VAT 4956 states on line 6 that an extra month (intercalary) was added after the twelfth (last) month (Addaru) of the preceding year. (The tablet reads: “8th of month XII 2 .”) Therefore, this made the new year actually not start until May 2/3. Thus, the date of this eclipse in 588 B.C.E. well fits the data on the tablet.

    However, as I was again studying VAT 4956 last night, I found the following:

    * Line 16 says, “The 9 th , solstice.”

    * In Line 12, we find it is month 3, that is Simanu.

    * In Line 17, we find an eclipse on the 15 of month 3.

    The Watchtower is saying that the eclipse occurred on July 15, 588 BC under their adjusted calendar. However, taking in Line 16, that would mean that summer solstice was on July 9 th , 588 BC. However, the summer solstice in 588 BC, was on July 29 th . Their calendar is in error.

    Of course, VAT 4956 points to 568 BC. The 9 th of the 3 rd month was June 29 th , 568 BC. That would make the 15 th of the 3 rd month, July 4/5.

    Forgive me if this has already been brought out. And if there is a flaw in my understanding here, let me know.

  • Pterist

    Thanks Londo111

  • Londo111

    Oops, I meant: However, the summer solstice in 588 BC, was on June 29 th . Their calendar is in error.

    This is a good page for determining solstices of the past: http://www.calsky.com/cs.cgi/Sun/5?

  • Jeffro

    Obviously they expect most JWs to accept whatever they say, and not to actually verify anything. Their article claims:

    While normally the year of this eclipse would have begun on April 3/4, VAT 4956 states on line 6 that an extra month (intercalary) was added after the twelfth (last) month (Addaru) of the preceding year.

    There was indeed an Adar II the previous year, but it doesn't push the start of the new year into May. Nisan never starts in May. It's only about a third of the time that Nisan starts in early April, otherwise it begins in March.

    The last day of Adar I in 588 BCE was March 6. The last day of Adar II was April 4.

    The entire purpose of intercalary months is to get the calendar back in sync, because it would otherwise be a month behind the solar year.

    The fact is that "the year of this eclipse" began on April 4, because "an extra month (intercalary) was added after the twelfth (last) month (Addaru) of the preceding year."

  • MeanMrMustard
  • Jeffro

    Where did storm troopers find a horse?? Or baseball bats for that matter?

  • Jeffro

    I wonder if 'scholar' would be interested in trying to justify the Watch Tower Society's deceitful claim that Nisan 588 BCE began in May...

Share this