Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction

[JW Insider]

9 minutes ago, George88 said:

You consistently have a tendency to deny anything presented to you, acting as if you hold the ultimate authority, despite being far from it.

Sorry about that. What have I denied that you presented? Examples? Just one?

9 minutes ago, George88 said:

I, on the other hand, will persist in warning people about the distortions you spread.

Well you should if that's what I'm doing. But I don't think it will mean as much if you won't produce a single example.

[Pudgy]

…. I was wondering how long it would take for others to lose patience with Wally.

….. probably two more days ought to be.enough to reach critical mass.

[Pudgy]

The bottom line of all this bickering and insults, and “dueling experts”, accompanied by frantic toothless banjo solos is this:

Armageddon did NOT occur in 1874, 1888, 1914, 1915, 1925  … or 1975.  I did not occur  before the end of the millennium, in 2000.

So …. does it REALLY matter about 539, or 537, or 607 etc.?

What BOTH sides are trying to support … DIDN’T HAPPEN.

There is not the slightest shred of evidence to support ANYTHING other than a “Great War” between nations … happened in 1914.

[Pudgy]

27 minutes ago, George88 said:

@Pudgy How long did it take for people to lose patience with you, despite being a protected individual?

Just how am I “protected”?

… and what the hell does that even mean?

Your hatred and jealousy of me has distorted your thinking.

You see things so very clearly that DO NOT EXIST.

HERE IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE:

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Can you provide the exact reference in the Babylonian Chronicle where it states the information you mentioned?

This was the chronology that Wiseman himself provided on page vi, page 2 and page 32 of "Chronology of Chaldean Kings." Wiseman, as I have said, doesn't use the Babylonian Chronicle to produce "BCE" dates. Neither do I. It doesn't contain any such dates. The point was about the chronology he accepts, and that I accept, and that you reject. After all these studies in 1956, you can see that he continues to support this same chronology in 1985. As I said before, that chronology is not in the Chronicles, it's in the astronomical diaries and astronomical tables, many of which were originally produced at the very time that Nebuchadnezzar himself was alive.

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Your interpretation of the chronology is flawed and lacks credibility.

I am not interpreting it. I let my astronomy software interpret it. If it is flawed, it means that the 539 date for Cyrus' conquering of Babylon is also flawed because the software gets that perfectly, too. And I've checked it against several different reports from others who use different astronomy software. It perfectly matches the other software too.

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Present concrete evidence from the Babylonian Chronicles that supports the date 587 BC instead of engaging in misleading tactics.

It's misleading to continue acting as if you can find 587 in the Chronicles. It's in the Babylonian astronomy diaries and tables. Just because the astronomy tables happen to fit several of the descriptions about what happened in the accession year, first year, seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar doesn't mean that this is where the BCE dates come from. There are no BCE dates in the Chronicles. 

2 hours ago, George88 said:

So, if we consider a military campaign, your account suggests that Jerusalem was destroyed in 598/7 BC.

As I said, I don't have to consider the Chronicles, or the military campaigns, or "my account" of anything. I only have to look at the Bible where it says that it was Nebuchadnezzar's 18th and 19th year. Then the astronomical tablets tell me that those years were 587 and 586. They also tell me, of course, that his 7th year was 598. 

If you think the Bible was wrong and that the exiles taken in his 7th year refers to the full destruction of Jerusalem, that's your prerogative. If you think the Bible was wrong when it says he sieged and destroyed Jerusalem in his 18th and 19th year, that is also your prerogative. If you want to mix up those two events and add something to the evidence based on speculation that's also your prerogative. 

2 hours ago, George88 said:

The numbers you mentioned are insignificant when we are discussing military conquest operations.

You mean the numbers of exiles that the Bible mentioned? Maybe they only counted the most elite of the exiles. It doesn't matter, I still accept the Bible's account. 

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Based on this reasoning, it can be deduced that Dr. Wiseman employed calculations starting from 626 BC, the beginning of Nabopolassar's reign, just like any scribe would have done. However, I fail to understand the purpose of misinterpretation in those particular years.

Same here. It's also what my astronomy software gives me for the beginning of Nabopolassar's reign. I see no reason or purpose for any misinterpretation, either. Why would anyone want to "misinterpret" those years? Unless of course they need his 14th year to be 632 when Wiseman's calculation (and my astronomy software) will give us 612. And I can think of only one place where that interpretation is found. 

[JW Insider]

25 minutes ago, George88 said:

Visitors can clearly see the manipulation in your post-JWI, where you take a swerving approach to favor yourself. Let's hope people are not that naive.

Let's hope someone won't be afraid to point out an example, rather than just making empty claims.

[Pudgy]

If you ever put Georgie on the spot, asking for him to prove his assertions, he ALWAYS chokes, and launches ad hominem attacks, and irrelevant diversions.

[Pudgy]

29 minutes ago, George88 said:

The ad-hominem attacks I learned from all of you. What's your point? @Pudgy

 

[JW Insider]

9 hours ago, George88 said:

Where exactly in the Babylonian Chronicles does Dr. Wiseman mention and cite the 18-19 year number?

Already answered. I don't know where you got the idea that Wiseman ever cited the 18-19 year number. Look back at my posts. I said Wiseman uses the chronology that puts Nebuchadnezzar's 18^th and 19^th years at 587 and 586. The Chronicles themselves do not contain any BCE-numbered years. They include Nebuchadnezzar's reign from the accession ("zero-^th") year to his 1^st year, his 2^nd, etc., on up to his 11th year. Wiseman calls this 11^th year 594 BCE and he elsewhere acknowledges that Nebuchadnezzar reigned for 43 years.  

He also dates his 37^th year to 568 BCE:

 

So, yes indeed, Wiseman uses the chronology that puts Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year in 587 BCE and his 19th year in 586 BCE. Can you calculate some OTHER BCE year that Wiseman's chronology indicates for those regnal years?

You should also check the book you most recently cited from Wiseman (Nebuchadrezzar and Babylon) which states the following:

Note that this quote above from page 11 gives the reference to Jeremiah and shows again that Wiseman uses the chronology that puts the destruction of Jerusalem (which Jeremiah says is in the 18^th year) as 587 BCE. 

In fact, Wiseman starts the initial siege late in the year 588 so that the entire operation ends in the 18^th year 587 BCE (using Nisan to Nisan reckoning), but the footnote also included below shows that by Tishri to Tishri reckoning some have argued for 586:

And on page 38 and 39 Wiseman cites the verse from Jeremiah 52:30 that I quoted above and naturally assigns that 23^rd year to 582.

So it should be pretty obvious that he consistently used the same chronology that puts years 18 and 19 at 587 and 586 BCE. 

[Srecko Sostar]

9 hours ago, George88 said:

Hoćete li da Srećko pokrene novu raspravu o nedavnim događajima u Houstonu u Texasu? Upravo sam primio e-poruku s informacijama o tome.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/police-shooting-reported-at-joel-osteens-lakewood-megachurch-in-houston/ar-BB1i7DGz

 

Reports, like this unfortunate event, which takes place in the premises of other churches, show that the claim of JWs that the world hates only them has no basis. This event shows that there are people who hate the members of "Babylon the Great" too.

[Srecko Sostar]

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Since I have never said anything about that particular gap between the Babylonian and the Persian empire, who is making the distortion? If it's not me, who were you talking about when you said I was sharing distorted views? Are you saying you have NO examples of views I have distorted, but that you made the claim anyway? 

This is Georg's frequent practice.

[Anna]

I AM going to try and work my way through all 11 pages (so far) of this soon....