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

[Pudgy]

What is see is that you, Georgie, as the self appointed “Vicar of Warwick” are trying to support anything that will lead people to agree with the supposition about which EVERYBODY ON THE PLANET WAS WRONG ABOUT that God’s Kingdom by Christ was established circa 1914. A theory of a billion words, but without any factual basis whatsoever.

No real evidence of any type, by anyone, anywhere supports that idea.

WWI was a coincidence … no more.

NO EVIDENCE … zero, zip, nada, goose eggs to the contrary.

I can look out my window and SEE that the Great Tribulation has NOT occurred.

I can look out my window and SEE that Armageddon has not occurred.

I can look out my window and SEE that God’s Kingdom does NOT rule.

(… I trust Jehovah has his reasons …)

I can easily see, as a non-scholar that doesn’t really give a damn, that JWI’s data is better than YOUR data, and easily see that YOUR rhetoric is evasive, deliberately misleading and MOST IMPORTANTLY, entirely Agenda driven.

It’s like watching two guys in a movie arguing about what size tires work best on a 1971 Corvette Convertible pulling a U-Haul trailer at various speeds up to 120 miles an hour …. when the car was destroyed in a collision with reality 37 years ago.

It really, really, REALLY does not matter.

I can easily see with droopy eyelids and ADD that JWI’s data, arguments, and presentation makes more sense than yours.

….. but I can look out the window, or stand in my yard, and see it doesn’t matter.

But that’s OK … I have notebooks full of drawings and data and calculations, teaching myself Celestial Navigation with a Sextant and a Chronometer on the open ocean, and I have no reasonable expectation of ever being on a boat or ocean again before I die.

I think you are entirely wrapped too tight as the self-appointed Vicar of Warwick.

 

[JW Insider]

@George88: I know that your accusations that I am the one deflecting are untrue, and I'm pretty sure that the 3+ people on this forum who might still be following the conversation also figured that out many, many pages ago. But I will go ahead and answer your questions one more time, even though I already responded directly to all of them. Perhaps, by comparison, it will serve to further highlight your attempts to divert and evade and dodge. 

I will mention up front however, that I already knew that you and scholarJW would do nothing but evade such a simple question, but the more important point is that this type of evasion is true of ALL Witnesses who know the answer. It's even seen in the very careful wording of the Insight book's Chronology article. Once you do more research on your own, you begin to realize that the WTS publications, especially since 1981, had to start choosing their words much more carefully so as to avoid admitting what they now knew to be true, and what they didn't want readers to know. I'm embarrassed by the technique, because it's also a type of evasion. The 1969 Watchtower eclipse mistake and the 2011 Watchtower that fell for Fururi's fumbling fiasco were also embarrassing, but the culprit was probably just a lot of "wishful thinking." Agenda driven research is typically myopic.

So I will answer your questions one more time in one of my next posts, but before I do, I will remind our expansive audience that the simple question to you was:

What BCE year does Babylonian astronomy evidence point to for the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign? 

Here are your responses:

19 hours ago, George88 said:

Do not divert the topic; the responsibility to provide proof lies with you, not me. I am already aware of the answer. Now it is your turn to discover it for yourself, without relying on baseless speculation and theories that conveniently favor your claim

7 hours ago, George88 said:

I am not inclined to provide you with the answer

6 hours ago, George88 said:

I have the answer, why don't you?

You simply evade, evade, evade, and then try to claim that I am the one evading. 

Also, you can throw out your reliance on COJ as a boogeyman, and just use the "expert" authors and researchers that the Watchtower Society quotes instead:

*** it-1 p. 453 Chronology ***
Ancient Near Eastern Texts, edited by J. B. Pritchard, . . . D. D. Luckenbill: . . .—Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia
. . .  A. T. Olmstead, . . .—Assyrian Historiography, . . . Professor A. W. Ahl (Outline of Persian History). . . . Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, by A. K. Grayson, 1975 . . . . .A Babylonian clay tablet is helpful for connecting Babylonian chronology with Biblical chronology. . . .  (Inschriften von Cambyses, König von Babylon, by J. N. Strassmaier, . . . Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel, by F. X. Kugler, Münster, 1907, Vol. I, pp. 70, 71) These two lunar eclipses can evidently be identified with the lunar eclipses that were visible at Babylon on July 16, 523 B.C.E., and on January 10, 522 B.C.E. (Oppolzer’s Canon of Eclipses, translated by O. Gingerich, 1962, p. 335) . . .The latest tablet dated in the reign of Cyrus II is from the 5th month, 23rd day of his 9th year. (Babylonian Chronology, 626 B.C.–A.D. 75, by R. Parker and W. Dubberstein, 1971, p. 14) As the ninth year of Cyrus II as king of Babylon was 530 B.C.E., his first year according to that reckoning was 538 B.C.E. and his accession year was 539 B.C.E. . . .  . . . (Chronicles of Chaldaean Kings, London, 1956, p. 1) . . . Encyclopædia Britannica, 1971 . . . Solar and Lunar Eclipses of the Ancient Near East From 3000 B.C. to 0 With Maps, by M. Kudlek and E. H. Mickler . . . Professor O. Neugebauer . . . —The Exact Sciences in Antiquity,. . . . George Rawlinson . . . . P. J. Wiseman, 

Or we can use persons on the following lists of experts, researchers and authors found in the 2011 Watchtower about VAT 4956:

*** w11 11/1 p. 28 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part Two ***
[all text snippets below taken directly from the article's footnotes, with only a few repetitions]

• Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, by A. K. Grayson, published 1975, 2000 reprint, page 8.
• Neo-Babylonian Business and Administrative Documents, by Ellen Whitley Moore, published 1935, page 33.
• Archimedes, Volume 4, New Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, “Observations and Predictions of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers,” by John M. Steele, published 2000, page 36.
• Amel-Marduk 562-560 B.C.—A Study Based on Cuneiform, Old Testament, Greek, Latin and Rabbinical Sources. With Plates, by Ronald H. Sack, published 1972, page 3. . . . Amel-Marduk 562-560 B.C.—A Study Based on Cuneiform, Old Testament, Greek, Latin and Rabbinical Sources. With Plates, pages 3, 90, 106.
• Catalogue of the Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, Volume VIII, (Tablets From Sippar 3) by Erle Leichty, J. J. Finkelstein, and C.B.F. Walker, published 1988, pages 25, 35.
• Catalogue of the Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, Volume VII, (Tablets From Sippar 2) by Erle Leichty and A. K. Grayson, published 1987, page 36.
• Neriglissar—King of Babylon, by Ronald H. Sack, published 1994, page 232. The month on the tablet is Ajaru (second month).
• —Nabonidus and Belshazzar—A Study of the Closing Events of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, by Raymond P. Dougherty, published 1929, page 61.
• Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts From Babylonia, Volume V, edited by Hermann Hunger, published 2001, pages 2-3.
• Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Volume 2, No. 4, 1948, “A Classification of the Babylonian Astronomical Tablets of the Seleucid Period,” by A. Sachs, pages 282-283.
• Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology, by David Brown, published 2000, pages 164, 201-202.
• Bibliotheca Orientalis, L N° 1/2, Januari-Maart, 1993, “The Astronomical Diaries as a Source for Achaemenid and Seleucid History,” by R. J. van der Spek, pages 94, 102.
• 16. Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts From Babylonia, Volume I, by Abraham J. Sachs, completed and edited by Hermann Hunger, published 1988, page 47.
• 17. Babylonian Eclipse Observations From 750 BC to 1 BC, by Peter J. Huber and Salvo De Meis, published 2004, 
• . . . (An Astronomical Observer’s Text of the 37th Year Nebuchadnezzar II), by Paul V. Neugebauer and Ernst F. Weidner, pages 67-76, . . . (Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy—Astrology, by David Brown, published 2000,
• (“The Earliest Datable Observation of the Aurora Borealis,” by F. R. Stephenson and David M. Willis, in Under One Sky—Astronomy and Mathematics in the Ancient Near East, edited by John M. Steele and Annette Imhausen, 
• This analysis was made with the astronomy software entitled TheSky6™. In addition, the analysis was augmented by the comprehensive freeware program Cartes du Ciel/Sky Charts (CDC) and a date converter provided by the U.S. Naval Observatory. . . .

So, let's forget about your precious need for COJ's association with the dates in question, and only make use of the same resources that the Watchtower thought useful to list. 

[Pudgy]

…. From George88:

@BTK59

“Pudgy appears to be seeking another altercation, but it would be wise to let it pass. Do not squander your valuable time. These individuals enjoy feigning kindness despite being anything but.”

Kindness is in the eye of the beholder.

I will, and have, risked traffic accidents to get a turtle off a road.

I capture spiders in the house and take them outside.

However, I do spray cockroaches with 91% alcohol without remorse.

 

[JW Insider]

@George88, You also still attempt the same thing scholarJW attempted several times with me in the past by trying to claim that this is apostate data, that it is COJ methodology. This time around, even scholarJW admitted that COJ only repeated the standard evidence given by others. So I doubt that this particular "ruse" is working so well any more. Here are just some of your examples:

On 2/29/2024 at 1:20 PM, George88 said:

any true scholar who has access to the information that the proud boy COJ overlooked

6 hours ago, George88 said:

It is not me defending COJ by accepting his data, it is you.

On 2/29/2024 at 3:01 PM, George88 said:

individuals like yourself, who persistently spread apostate propaganda

19 hours ago, George88 said:

It is not me who stubbornly supports apostate views; it is evident that you are

19 hours ago, George88 said:

but rather where apostate views apply it.

On 2/28/2024 at 5:11 PM, BTK59 said:

no matter how hard apostates try to change the narrative with random schemes.

It is evident that Carl Olof Jonsson . . . 

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Carl Olof Jonsson's wild speculation is full of holes

It's a clever ruse, only for those who don't realize that Carl Olof Johnson had nothing to do with this data. In the next post I'll supply some names of persons that the WTS thinks are better to quote from. None of them have ever shown support for the WTS Chronology, however.

[JW Insider]

@George88Also, you can throw out your reliance on COJ as a boogeyman, and just use the "expert" ,, researchers, and authorities that the Watchtower Society quotes instead:

*** it-1 p. 453 Chronology ***
Ancient Near Eastern Texts, edited by J. B. Pritchard, . . . D. D. Luckenbill: . . .—Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia . . .  A. T. Olmstead, . . .—Assyrian Historiography, . . . Professor A. W. Ahl (Outline of Persian History). . . . Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, by A. K. Grayson, 1975 . . . . .A Babylonian clay tablet is helpful for connecting Babylonian chronology with Biblical chronology. . . .  (Inschriften von Cambyses, König von Babylon, by J. N. Strassmaier, . . . Sternkunde und Sterndienst in Babel, by F. X. Kugler, Münster, 1907, Vol. I, pp. 70, 71) These two lunar eclipses can evidently be identified with the lunar eclipses that were visible at Babylon on July 16, 523 B.C.E., and on January 10, 522 B.C.E. (Oppolzer’s Canon of Eclipses, translated by O. Gingerich, 1962, p. 335) . . .The latest tablet dated in the reign of Cyrus II is from the 5th month, 23rd day of his 9th year. (Babylonian Chronology, 626 B.C.–A.D. 75, by R. Parker and W. Dubberstein, 1971, p. 14) As the ninth year of Cyrus II as king of Babylon was 530 B.C.E., his first year according to that reckoning was 538 B.C.E. and his accession year was 539 B.C.E. . . .  . . . D. J. Wiseman
Chronicles of Chaldaean Kings, London, 1956, p. 1) . . . Encyclopædia Britannica, 1971 . . . Solar and Lunar Eclipses of the Ancient Near East From 3000 B.C. to 0 With Maps, by M. Kudlek and E. H. Mickler . . . Professor O. Neugebauer . . . —The Exact Sciences in Antiquity,. . . . George Rawlinson . . . . P. J. Wiseman, [same as D. J. Wiseman, above.]

Or we can use persons on the following lists of experts, researchers and authors found in the 2011 Watchtower about VAT 4956:

*** w11 11/1 p. 28 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part Two ***
[all text snippets below taken directly from the article's footnotes, with only a few repetitions]

• Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, by A. K. Grayson, published 1975, 2000 reprint, page 8.
• Neo-Babylonian Business and Administrative Documents, by Ellen Whitley Moore, published 1935, page 33.
• Archimedes, Volume 4, New Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, “Observations and Predictions of Eclipse Times by Early Astronomers,” by John M. Steele, published 2000, page 36.
• Amel-Marduk 562-560 B.C.—A Study Based on Cuneiform, Old Testament, Greek, Latin and Rabbinical Sources. With Plates, by Ronald H. Sack, published 1972, page 3. . . . Amel-Marduk 562-560 B.C.—A Study Based on Cuneiform, Old Testament, Greek, Latin and Rabbinical Sources. With Plates, pages 3, 90, 106.
• Catalogue of the Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, Volume VIII, (Tablets From Sippar 3) by Erle Leichty, J. J. Finkelstein, and C.B.F. Walker, published 1988, pages 25, 35.
• Catalogue of the Babylonian Tablets in the British Museum, Volume VII, (Tablets From Sippar 2) by Erle Leichty and A. K. Grayson, published 1987, page 36.
• Neriglissar—King of Babylon, by Ronald H. Sack, published 1994, page 232. The month on the tablet is Ajaru (second month).
• —Nabonidus and Belshazzar—A Study of the Closing Events of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, by Raymond P. Dougherty, published 1929, page 61.
• Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts From Babylonia, Volume V, edited by Hermann Hunger, published 2001, pages 2-3.
• Journal of Cuneiform Studies, Volume 2, No. 4, 1948, “A Classification of the Babylonian Astronomical Tablets of the Seleucid Period,” by A. Sachs, pages 282-283.
• Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy-Astrology, by David Brown, published 2000, pages 164, 201-202.
• Bibliotheca Orientalis, L N° 1/2, Januari-Maart, 1993, “The Astronomical Diaries as a Source for Achaemenid and Seleucid History,” by R. J. van der Spek, pages 94, 102.
• 16. Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts From Babylonia, Volume I, by Abraham J. Sachs, completed and edited by Hermann Hunger, published 1988, page 47.
• 17. Babylonian Eclipse Observations From 750 BC to 1 BC, by Peter J. Huber and Salvo De Meis, published 2004, 
• . . . (An Astronomical Observer’s Text of the 37th Year Nebuchadnezzar II), by Paul V. Neugebauer and Ernst F. Weidner, pages 67-76, . . . (Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy—Astrology, by David Brown, published 2000,
• (“The Earliest Datable Observation of the Aurora Borealis,” by F. R. Stephenson and David M. Willis, in Under One Sky—Astronomy and Mathematics in the Ancient Near East, edited by John M. Steele and Annette Imhausen, 
• This analysis was made with the astronomy software entitled TheSky6™. In addition, the analysis was augmented by the comprehensive freeware program Cartes du Ciel/Sky Charts (CDC) and a date converter provided by the U.S. Naval Observatory. . . .

I just found another:

*** w69 3/15 p. 187 Astronomical Calculations and the Count of Time ***
The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, E. R. Thiele, p. 53.
 

So, let's forget about your precious need for COJ's association with the dates in question, and only make use of the same resources and authorities that the Watchtower thought useful to list. 

[JW Insider]

All right. Since you won't try to answer the question yourself, I'll start here with your latest questions and work backwards to the point where I already answered them the first time.   

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Is this the person COJ reached out to?

Don't know and don't care. You are the one who clearly cares more about COJ. I suppose you could look it up.

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Evading the question about the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar. You have not yet provided solid evidence that the tablets in question that refer to the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar were specifically generated for the "destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC" when other battles were being fought to indicate the same year, by using the same information on those tablets. I urge you to support your assertion with credible facts.

I am certainly not, as you say: "Evading the question about the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar." The Bible indicates that his reign lasted very close to 43 years; so I believe he had a 43rd year, therefore I believe he had a 37th. There are many business tablets dated to that year, along with one of the oldest and most famous astronomical diaries. I have no problem with any of the information on any of them. I am able to confirm that the diary dated that year does indeed refer to astronomy events that can be calculated to 568 BCE and 567 BCE. Although there are always a few readings that can be quite similar to any other year (even this year, 2024 CE) there are a lot of them that can ONLY have happened in that particular year 568 BCE.

I have no way of verifying whether some or any of the historical information is true, meaning whether Nebuchadnezzar himself was actually involved in any campaigns referenced for that same year. At least we know that the Babylonians were more forthright about their defeats and their fears than say, the Assyrian and many Egyptian records, so I am willing to give the information on the astronomical tablet the benefit of the doubt.

As to what seems like a specific question that asks for solid evidence solid evidence that the tablets in question that refer to the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar were specifically generated for the "destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC"

This seems a lot like asking me to provide solid evidence that the Lincoln-Douglas debates were specifically generated  to help George Washington win the Revolutionary War in the previous century before Lincoln. Why would I want to find evidence to support something I have never claimed, and a premise that I find completely ridiculous? I will never want to or try to provide evidence that whatever Nebuchadnezzar was reported to have done in his 37th year was specifically generated for the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BCE.  

Perhaps you only meant to ask if a tablet that indicates that his 37th year was 568 BCE somehow also provides evidence that the destruction of Jerusalem was in 587. Of course it doesn't. All it does is provide evidence that Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year was 587 BCE. If someone's is proven to be 37 years old this year, then that is absolute PROOF that they were 27 years old 10 years earlier, and that they were 18 years old 19 years earlier. So any true evidence that Nebuchadnezzar was in his 37th year in 568 BCE (if true) is also evidence that 27th year was 10 years earlier, and his 18th year was 19 years earlier, therefore, 587 BCE. 

If you don't agree with the points I just highlighted in red, above, we probably could just stop the conversation right here and stop wasting each other's time, with your evasions and my need to repeat the same answers over and over. So I'll go on to the next, but I am also asking you if you agree with the points I just highlighted in red in that last paragraph. Are you willing to at least respond to that question about whether you agree to only what's in red?

That will give us a place to start, and then we can move on to whether you believe that there is really any TRUE evidence that Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year was 568 BCE.

[JW Insider]

3 hours ago, George88 said:

Now use the information of the Watchtower the right way, and don't distort it to mean 587 BC.

I'd say that every one of those authors and researchers and experts that the Watchtower quoted as authoritative believed that Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year was 587 BCE. No exceptions. Of course, so far I've only been able to find about half of those sources and resources making a specific comment or reference to Nebuchadnezzar's years of reign, and/or the Neo-Babylonian reign as a whole. All the ones I have found, with no exceptions, consistently point to his reign from his accession in 605 BCE, and his calendar regnal years from 604 to 562 BCE. That puts his 18th year exactly in 587 BCE, using only the Watchtower's experts and authorities. 

[JW Insider]

I am now going back to a previous post of yours.

8 hours ago, George88 said:

Please inform me when you are prepared to disprove the historical facts that have been presented to counter your inaccurate position on the year 587 BC.

I will not attempt to disprove historical facts. I am also not concerned with "MY" position on the year 587 BCE. I am still only stating that the evidence points to 587 BCE as Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year. It's not my position. It's the position of all the current authorities the Watchtower quotes where they refer to Nebuchadnezzar's reign. So far, not one exception.

[JW Insider]

8 hours ago, George88 said:

 In addition to correctly determining the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign using the 18-year cycle from 568 BC, astronomical tablets can also provide important insights into other events in that region, excluding China.

You cannot determine Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year of reign using the 18-year cycle from 568 BCE. The tablet indicates that his 37th year is 568 BCE. This has nothing to do with any 18-year cycles. If you are referring to records about "Saros cycles" they only help confirm that his 37th year was 568 BCE. Any confirmation that his 37th year is 568 is also confirmation that his 18th year is 587 BCE. 

Whether these same tablets can provide important insights into other events in the region is fine. I'm more concerned with the astronomical events on the 37th year tablet and several other tablets that ALL consistently indicate that his 18th year is 587 BCE.

[JW Insider]

8 hours ago, George88 said:

Dr. Steele, a renowned scholar, acknowledges that there are errors in the reading of certain astronomical data, rendering the interpretation unreliable. This admission mirrors the similar acknowledgments made by Dr. Grayson and Dr. Wiseman.

That is correct. But so that this point doesn't mislead anyone, all three of these scholars believe there is more than sufficient evidence confirming that Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year was 587 BCE.

[JW Insider]

8 hours ago, George88 said:

Yes, the Babylonian Chronicles do mention Jerusalem in 597 BC, which a knowledgeable military historian would undoubtedly recognize as significant in understanding military campaigns.

I agree. With the correction that the Babylonian Chronicles do not mention the year 597. No Babylonian chronicle or inscription mentions any BCE date, just as the Bible doesn't mention any BCE dates. Only the confirmation from any or all of the tablets containing lunar, solar, and planetary observations can be calculated to indicate the BCE date. The Babylonian chronicles mention Jerusalem in 597 only in the sense that they put the event in Nebuchadnezzar's 8th year. And of course, this is the same thing as saying that Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year is to begin in 587 BCE. 

You don't even have to be a knowledgeable military historian to know that. 4th grade math is sufficient. 

[JW Insider]

4 hours ago, George88 said:

The question you continue to evade is where on those tablets is the explicit mention of the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC? Just as the Babylonian Chronicle specifically notes an attack on Jerusalem in 597 BC, I need similar wording for the event in 587 BC, where are they?

Completely false again.

Now we are finally back to the question I kept answering over and over, very directly and explicitly, but you EVADED my answer to pretend I hadn't answered it. So at this point just go back to the posts around February 12th where It's just as I answered before when you brought up Wiseman. You can see yourself flailing in the link below (from February 12th) here because you seemed so angry that I had already answered you, and it must have made it awkward for you to keep pretending that I hadn't.

The answer is still going to be the same: We don't have any Babylonian Chronicles for Nebuchadnezzar's 18 or 19th year. In fact, as I pointed out from the pages of same Wiseman book you were quoting from, those Chronicles are cut off, stopped, and missing from about his 11th year on. Wiseman still says that Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year is 587, and he still puts the actual destruction of Jerusalem in 587, while admitting that there are also ways to calculate the actual destruction of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year in 586 BCE. But I'm not worried about what the Babylonian Chronicles say, or how much you rely on them. It's the Bible that associates Nebuchadnezzar's 18th and 19th years with the destruction of Jerusalem. I'm only concerned with what BCE year the Babylonian astronomical evidence associates with his 18th (or 19th) year -- NOT the destruction of Jerusalem. It's up to you whether you want to accept or reject the Bible on that point. Babylonian Chronicles don't even exist for those years. (Or at least they haven't been discovered yet.) 

I notice that even on February 12th, you had already had this question answered several times:

https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/90904-trying-to-nail-down-612-bce-as-the-date-of-ninevehs-destruction/?do=findComment&comment=189002

On 2/12/2024 at 12:12 PM, George88 said:

On 2/12/2024 at 3:46 AM, JW Insider said:

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 18th and 19th 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 1st year, his 2nd, etc., on up to his 11th year. Wiseman calls this 11th year 594 BCE and he elsewhere acknowledges that Nebuchadnezzar reigned for 43 years.  

You have not provided a proper response. Instead, you are employing your typical evasive tactics to justify your calculations for the wrong purpose. I am specifically asking for the location in the Chronicles where the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC is mentioned. I am aware of Dr. Wiseman's assumption, and just like you, the disloyal COJ, and others who wish to work backward from 568 BC, there are numerous reasons to arrive at a different conclusion.

WHERE IN THE CHRONICLE DOES IT SPECIFICALLY STATE THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM HAPPENED IN 587 bc WITHOUT USING THE DISTORTED CALCULATIONS?

On 2/12/2024 at 3:04 PM, JW Insider said:

On 2/12/2024 at 12:12 PM, George88 said:

You have not provided a proper response.

All right. I already provided a correct and complete response. But for you, I will try again.

On 2/12/2024 at 12:12 PM, George88 said:

I am specifically asking for the location in the Chronicles where the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC is mentioned.

Why would you ask that? I have specifically claimed that it is NOT in the Chronicles. First, there no way to connect the regnal years in the Chronicles with BCE years. Second, as I have stated, the Chronicles only refer to Nebuchadnezzar's reign up to his 11th year. Evidence OUTSIDE the Chronicles would put this 11th year at 594 BCE, which stops several years short of 587 BC

  On 2/12/2024 at 12:12 PM, George88 said:

WHERE IN THE CHRONICLE DOES IT SPECIFICALLY STATE THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM HAPPENED IN 587 bc WITHOUT USING THE DISTORTED CALCULATIONS?

OK. There you go again. It's the same answer I gave here and in threads going back for several years on this forum. The answer is: NOWHERE. Using distorted calculations, it's NOWHERE. Using perfectly sound calculations, the answer is still NOWHERE.