SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)

[JW Insider]

Just now, Arauna said:

You throw things together that one must work out separately to get to the correct number.

No. The INSIGHT book mentioned all these pieces of Babylonian/Persian archaeology that they needed to work out separately to get the correct number.

1 minute ago, Arauna said:

you just threw in the lump nebuchadnezzar 18 year reign - sloppy...... sloppy. 

Not sloppy at all. It's part of the exact same clean and clear evidence that the WTS relied on to get to 539 BCE. The WTS may not accept it, but is is very clean evidence from Nebuchadnezzar's reign (including his 18th year) that shows that the 539 BCE date is correct. Just as correct as the statement that Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year is 587 BCE. The only real difference is that there are MORE and CLEANER and more COMPLETE evidences from Nebuchadnezzar's time which can be used as evidence to show that 539 is correct, than there are from Cambyses' time. But either way 539 is correct.

6 minutes ago, Arauna said:

Since olympiads were like clockwork "major"  events every four years - they are pretty reliable as a secondary source after the bible. Moon eclipses is a third resource.

How do you think that anyone was able to attach BCE dates to Olympiads without astronomical evidence? You haven't answered that yet. And I'm pretty sure I know why.

The Bible contains absolutely ZERO BCE/CE dates. Not one. Ever.

Moon eclipses are a pretty good source for identifying BCE/CE dates, and they turn out to be relatively simple. Every person here could learn how to use them as a resource.

11 minutes ago, Arauna said:

Since olympiads were like clockwork "major"  events every four years

So what happens when you break that clock by rejecting 10 years worth of those events. Historian Julius Africanus wrote his "Chronography" in 221 CE, and using the "clockwork" major events, was able to show that the 20th year of

The Watch Tower Society’s confidence in the Olympiad reckoning is even more illusory, however. This is because, while they accept the Olympiad dates given by ancient historians for the reign of Cyrus, they reject the Olympiad dates given by these historians for the reign of Artaxerxes I, despite the fact his reign fell much closer to our time. Thus, when Julius Africanus, in his Chronography (published c. 221/22 C.E.), dates the 20th year of Artaxerxes was the "4th year of the 83rd Olympiad." If Cyrus in 539 is true, that means 445 BCE for that date. But the Watchtower rejects this and says his 20th year is 455 BCE.

*** INSIGHT-1 p. 182 Artaxerxes ***
During the 20th year of his reign (455 B.C.E.), Artaxerxes Longimanus granted permission to Nehemiah to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the walls and gates of the city. (Ne 2:1-8)

 

[Ann O'Maly]

4 minutes ago, Arauna said:

He is a bible student not a star gazer.

Don't insult the guy! CC considers himself a veritable polymath.

7 minutes ago, Arauna said:

He should accept bible chronological dates before he accepts the dates of people who were not historians...... but had other pagan occupations.

So, getting back to your easy-peasy-lemon-squeezy method for obtaining the year of Cyrus' death without stars and calendars, are you going to enlighten us at all about what that method is? I have my Insight book handy.

52 minutes ago, Arauna said:

Ptolemy wrote about the stars 600 years after events in Babylon  and cannot be verified as historically accurate because there is no other documents to verify it.

...other than the vast wealth of cuneiform astronomical texts direct from the period, thus a reliance on Ptolemy is unnecessary (which has been the case for well over 100 years).

57 minutes ago, Arauna said:

and its chronology creates great confusion with Asurbanipals reign.

Irrelevant. Assurbanipal was an Assyrian who lived before the neo-Babylonian period. 

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

Interestingly the Cyrus cylinder was found in Babylon - not in any capital of Persia. ... [Etc., etc.]

Irrelevant.

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

But interestingly the cyrus cylinder has an event on it which happened after he brought order to the city - some time after 539 bce

Do you have an easy-peasy-lemon-squeezy method for obtaining the year of Babylon's conquest without the use of stars and calendars? My fingers are poised to work those Insight book pages! 😉

[Arauna]

On 12/21/2020 at 5:35 PM, AlanF said:

Don't confuse me with facts! Just tell me what to think!"

That is the prerogative of scholarly  theories" which are accepted by peers who think too much of their own personal opinions.

[Ann O'Maly]

28 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

Try intelligence by using the "Delta-T" methodology which is better for the TT-UT

🤣 Delta-T now. Oh please. 

[Ann O'Maly]

4 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

Stick to typing in your normal job. Leave the intelligence to those that understand, and are trying very hard to accept what's before them by secular evidence. Can't have it both ways, girly!! 

Do you understand the distinction between astronomical dating and BCE dating now, CC? Did the diagram help?

[Arauna]

On 12/21/2020 at 5:33 PM, AlanF said:

you still can't figure out how 3 million Israelites left no traces in Sinai.

The scriptures are clear:  Israel  moved around and did not build permanent structures from mud bricks or stone.  They had food provided for them by God and their poop was organic...... worms r molds could eat it.  

BUT the best kept secret is this: there is evidence that they were in Egypt (only 300 years earlier than the scholars say). In Avaris in the Delta region they have found Joseph's pyramid and 12 small pyramids for the fathers  of the tribes. There is also an ancient  canal called Joseph's  canal. This existed approx.  3520 years ago. 

If you just read stuff against the bible you will never get to see the evidence which proves its historic authenticity. 

[Arauna]

On 12/21/2020 at 5:26 PM, Ann O'Maly said:

But I was interested in your 'much easier method' for

I have looked it up so many times on internet - no matter what subject I look up regarding Persia...... one always gets the same date for the death of cyrus.  There is NO dissent regarding this date. 

[AlanF]

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

So even if there is historical (olympiads) evidence we MUST have astronomical evidence according to you.......because this is the only evidence that will be conclusive...... even though there is proof that one must not put too much store on incomplete descriptions of "heavenly events" which could be misleading and often were copied from events written down by other writers. Please read the section in the insight book about eclipses.

Still too clueless to post anything besides irrelevant jibber-jabber.

[AlanF]

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

I do not need your ' compliments.' ....or attention.

Don't worry about compliments, dearie.

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

Satan was always accusing jehovah of the very acts that he was perpetrating. Do you understand that phenomena?

It's painfully evident that Dunning-Kruger has rendered you capable of reasoning.

[AlanF]

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

He is a bible student not a star gazer. He should accept bible chronological dates before he accepts the dates of people who were not historians...... but had other pagan occupations. People  who by chance wrote hundreds of years later about events and quoted others in their work......... full lunar eclipses for example are not half eclipses......  it could be mistaken for the other, especially when copied from another's writings.

Continuing clueless: There are no "bible chronological dates" without first attaching one of the Bible's relative chronologies to a secular date. Why do you think the Insight book discusses why 539 BCE is a solidly established date?

[AlanF]

55 minutes ago, Arauna said:

I was reading it this afternoon.  I think you read I to it what you want to. 

No evidence or arguments given -- none needed to dismiss such nonsense.

[AlanF]

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

It is an additional proof - not the only proof for the date. 

Oh? What are the additional proofs?

Uh oh. A request for evidence. Run for the hills!