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

[JW Insider]

I just checked that second eclipse after the 588 eclipse of the fourth month, and I get this:

I caught the picture just a 10 seconds late but it was 4:51 AM and 47 seconds (=4:52) before the umbral eclipse began. 

And the moon sets at 7:14 am (COJ: 7:12) still fully eclipsed. 

The differences of nearly a minute for the eclipse and 2 minutes on the setting below the horizon might be partly because I am in Hallah, Iraq instead of setting exactly for Babylon's coordinates in Iraq. 

So I get 7:14 minus 4:52 for a total of 2 hour and 22 minutes when the tablet says 2 hours and 20 minutes. 

I won't quibble. 

Looks like Furuli and the Watchtower article pointed to an eclipse from 588, but it was definitely the one marked for Nebuchadnezzar's Year 17, not 37.  And it was not the one in VAT 4956.

[JW Insider]

Just an aside, but I find it curious that Daniel is praying about the 70 years and he is told that the greater fulfillment is not just 70 years but 70 WEEKS of years. But that 70 weeks is broken up into two pieces. A 49-year piece and a 434-year piece. 

(Daniel 9:24, 25) . . .“There are 70 weeks that have been determined for your people and your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, to finish off sin, to make atonement for error, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up the vision and the prophecy, and to anoint the Holy of Holies.  You should know and understand that from the issuing of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Mes·siʹah the Leader, there will be 7 weeks, also 62 weeks. She will be restored and rebuilt, with a public square and moat, but in times of distress.

I don't read too much into it, but there are some commentators who believe that this is a direct reference to the fact that Daniel recognized the Persians were ruling now, and the Temple had now been destroyed for 49 years (587 BCE to 538 BCE). The 62 weeks or 434 years could start counting after the completion of the rebuilding with a public square and a moat. 

Notice that the Insight book doesn't have anything more than conjecture about the 7 weeks:

*** dp chap. 11 p. 191 par. 21 The Time of Messiah’s Coming Revealed ***
The work was evidently completed to the extent necessary by about 406 B.C.E.—within the “seven weeks,” or 49 years. (Daniel 9:25) A period of 62 weeks, or 434 years, would follow.

Of course, starting from some time within the reign of Artaxerxes for the 434, (443 BCE?) plus the final 7 year week, this way of splitting the numbers can, at best, only reach about as far as the birth of the Messiah 2BCE/4BCE, not his arrival at baptism.
 

But then again, that might explain Herod's agitation and the magi looking for signs about that time.

Then again, someone could apply those 49 years to the completion of Herod's Temple:

(John 2:20) . . .“This temple was built in 46 years (from 18 BCE), and will you raise it up in three days?” 

But then again, what about those missing 3 years?

This is not a real suggestion below (for those 49-46=3 years), but, just for fun, it just shows that the possibilities are endless when you begin playing with chronology and "the mysterious numbers of the Jewish Temple." 

(Revelation 11:1-4) . . .And a reed like a rod was given to me as he said: “Get up and measure the temple sanctuary of God and the altar and those worshipping in it.  But as for the courtyard that is outside the temple sanctuary, leave it out and do not measure it, because it has been given to the nations, and they will trample the holy city underfoot for 42 months.  I will cause my two witnesses to prophesy for 1,260 days dressed in sackcloth.” These are symbolized by the two olive trees and the two lampstands and are standing before the Lord of the earth.
 

[Matthew9969]

On 2/9/2024 at 8:48 PM, xero said:

Here is a list of lunar eclipses visible in Mesopotamia between 600 and 650 BCE, along with the percentage of the moon eclipsed:

Date	Percentage of Moon Eclipsed	Eclipse Type
Before 627 BCE: March 19, 650 BCE | 87% | Penumbral Lunar Eclipse February 8, 650 BCE | 49% | Partial Lunar Eclipse January 8, 649 BCE | 99% | Total Lunar Eclipse December 8, 648 BCE | 79% | Partial Lunar Eclipse November 7, 647 BCE | 28% | Partial Lunar Eclipse October 7, 646 BCE | 89% | Total Lunar Eclipse September 6, 645 BCE | 41% | Partial Lunar Eclipse August 5, 644 BCE | 94% | Total Lunar Eclipse July 4, 643 BCE | 60% | Partial Lunar Eclipse June 4, 642 BCE | 99% | Total Lunar Eclipse May 3, 641 BCE | 40% | Partial Lunar Eclipse April 2, 640 BCE | 92% | Total Lunar Eclipse March 2, 639 BCE | 55% | Partial Lunar Eclipse February 1, 638 BCE | 99% | Total Lunar Eclipse January 31, 637 BCE | 72% | Partial Lunar Eclipse December 30, 636 BCE | 32% | Partial Lunar Eclipse November 29, 635 BCE | 92% | Total Lunar Eclipse October 28, 634 BCE | 49% | Partial Lunar Eclipse September 27, 633 BCE | 98% | Total Lunar Eclipse August 26, 632 BCE | 68% | Partial Lunar Eclipse July 26, 631 BCE | 99% | Total Lunar Eclipse June 25, 630 BCE | 58% | Partial Lunar Eclipse May 25, 629 BCE | 92% | Total Lunar Eclipse April 24, 628 BCE | 63% | Partial Lunar Eclipse April 9, 627 BCE	100%	Total Lunar Eclipse
March 29, 626 BCE	87%	Penumbral Lunar Eclipse
February 18, 625 BCE	96%	Total Lunar Eclipse
January 8, 624 BCE	97%	Total Lunar Eclipse
December 8, 623 BCE	41%	Partial Lunar Eclipse
November 7, 622 BCE	91%	Total Lunar Eclipse
October 7, 621 BCE	22%	Partial Lunar Eclipse
September 6, 620 BCE	82%	Total Lunar Eclipse
August 5, 619 BCE	96%	Total Lunar Eclipse
July 4, 618 BCE	52%	Partial Lunar Eclipse
June 4, 617 BCE	99%	Total Lunar Eclipse
May 3, 616 BCE	28%	Partial Lunar Eclipse
April 2, 615 BCE	88%	Total Lunar Eclipse
March 2, 614 BCE	40%	Partial Lunar Eclipse
February 1, 613 BCE	90%	Total Lunar Eclipse
January 1, 612 BCE	46%	Partial Lunar Eclipse
December 31, 611 BCE	98%	Total Lunar Eclipse
December 30, 610 BCE	73%	Partial Lunar Eclipse
November 29, 609 BCE	23%	Partial Lunar Eclipse
October 29, 608 BCE	83%	Total Lunar Eclipse
September 28, 607 BCE	35%	Partial Lunar Eclipse
August 27, 606 BCE	90%	Total Lunar Eclipse
July 27, 605 BCE	48%	Partial Lunar Eclipse

I don't see a Mitsubishi any where on that list.

[Pudgy]

Good one! (…assuming my sub-references are interpreting correctly.)

In addition to Zeros they made tanks and ships!

 

[xero]

18 hours ago, George88 said:

Not at all. I wholeheartedly endorse 607 BC as the correct date. However, I utilize the dating system from secular history to validate it

How does that work, since nothing secular has attachments to anything we can verify w/o astronomical triangulation?

[xero]

13 hours ago, George88 said:

Understanding historical events involves delving into the past to gain insight into the present. A skilled researcher knows exactly where to find the necessary information, much like navigating by the stars. If the destruction of "Nineveh" occurred in 612 BC, what astronomical evidence supports this event?

Then you have references to the destruction of Nineveh in 606 BC and the siege of Nineveh in 635 BC.

Either we conduct our own research or acknowledge the flawed nature of JWI's research. It is not possible to have it both ways.

The only way I've found any historians able to date with any certainty events in the past is when the initial recorders were accurate as to both the astronomical events these were seeing as well as the events which were occurring at the same time. Without the astronomical events you don't have any precision. Of course I'm referring to dates prior to our Common Era.

[Pudgy]

In Land Surveying it works the same way in spatial location as in temporal location.

You have to have solid data in both systems to fit “System A” to “System B”, and only then can you translate and rotate so there are no gaps or overlap.

Without a solid “benchmark” in BOTH systems, your data will not match.

[JW Insider]

15 hours ago, George88 said:

The new topic should be "Uncovering Discrepancies in Secular History" or something along those lines. Thank you.

Sure. I moved the "discrepancy-related" posts between you and @BTK59 going back to Wednesday because this was when the topic of discrepancies came up most directly. If I have moved too many or not enough, just let me know. Also, here on this topic, I have left @xero's question to you under this topic here that he started, and your response to it, even though it was based originally on that same back-and-forth between George88 and BTK59. Let me know.

https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/90970-uncovering-discrepancies-in-secular-history/

 

[xero]

The upshot of all this so far feels a little bit like a carnival side-show "cover the spot" game only worse.

You have to get the cuneiform translations correct (some argue about the translations)
You have to argue for the cuneiform documents not being altered (some argue they've been altered)

You have to download multiple pieces of software and plot and print each one so you can scrutinize them. (make sure they all have the same resolution and viewpoint)
You have to remember that weird carry the one math thing (or is it minus the one) for BCE dates when you put it into the software.
You have to assume that the software is computing all this correctly, so you'll want to get a chart of eclipses and spot check the software using eclipses in modern times and locations.
You have to assume these have correctly created the right constellations using Babylonian/Assyrian names.
Then you have to research and see if there's evidence that the intercalary months which got added, got added when and where the authorities say they got added. (not all agree)

Or you can just quote your favorite authority and go with that.

[Pudgy]

The BIG question is …

… is it worth all that effort to prove something happened that really didn’t happen,  in 1914?

[JW Insider]

13 hours ago, xero said:

The upshot of all this so far feels a little bit like a carnival side-show "cover the spot" game only worse.

Exactly on each point!!!

Now imagine Jehovah telling a "faitfhul slave" or pre-cursor of that "faithful slave" that the only way Jesus is going to distinguish between the 5 wise virgins and the 5 foolish virgins (in our time period) is based on their acceptance of a specific mix of secular chronology and "Bible" chronology.

And it's a chronology that started out as:

• Oh look how great Ptolemy is; all astronomers agree that his dates are perfectly well-established!

Which soon turned into:

• Look how terrible Ptolemy is; his chronology is suspect because he gives different dates than the ones we need prior to 539. Let's go so far as to highlight a book that calls him a "criminal." 

Which turned to:

• Oh look how great the Nabonidus Chronicle is; it proves that Cyrus overtook him in his 17th year.

Which turned to: 

• Oh wait, let's stop mentioning the Nabonidus Chronicle; turns out that the number 17 was added by expert secular authorities, and that the same chronicle links him directly to the full length of Neriglissar's reign, which is the one tiny window of vulnerability we still need to raise suspicion about a possible 20 year gap!!

Which turned to:

• Oh look how great Strm. Cambyses is, it tells us directly that 539 is the only absolute date in ancient history!!

Which turned to:

• Whoops! Now we have to admit that this only works if we accept the authority of secular experts to correct numerous known mistakes and copyist errors on that same tablet, the astronomical tablets' understanding, and ancient tablet methods for measurements of two eclipses, and the authority of modern experts to date those eclipses taking into account the slowdown of the earth by about 16,000 seconds, and a non-contemporary King's list (like Ptolemy's) that is assumed to be correct, and some secular business contract tablets that help establish the length of the reign of Cyrus and Cambyses, (and which we reject when used elsewhere) and some [hi]stories by much later Greek historians that we don't really trust on most other matters.

Which turned to:

• Look how great the Olympiad dating system is; if we accept that it has been properly tied to the current BC/AD eras, it appears to tells us that the dates for Cyrus are accurate.

Which turns to:

• Oh wait! We reject the same Olympiad dating system even from much more recent times when it conflicts with our theory of Artaxerxes which we would like to say is 10 years off.

 

[JW Insider]

Imagine, then, that approved association with Jehovah's people MUST include acceptance of a mix of secular chronology and "Bible" chronology!!

*** w86 4/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
Approved association with Jehovah’s Witnesses requires accepting the entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those Scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses. What do such beliefs include?
. . .That 1914 marked the end of the Gentile Times and the establishment of the Kingdom of God in the heavens, as well as the time for Christ’s foretold presence.

*** w83 1/1 p. 12 par. 5 The Kingdom Issue to the Fore! ***
Properly, then, the ending of the Gentile Times in the latter half of 1914 still stands on a historical basis as one of the fundamental Kingdom truths to which we must hold today.
 

Rather than:

(2 Timothy 3:15-17) . . .. All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.