JW Insider

The next king after Evil-Merodach based on business tablets is Neriglissar. His reign lasted 4 years. Giving us the following update for our chart:

[edited: after this first version of P&D another tablet was published showing Nisannu the 6th of this fourth and last year of his reign.]

So our simple chart has been updated with the 2 official years of Amel-Marduk. We will abbreviate with E-M after the Bible's transliteration of the name as Evil-Merodach. We have also added some "events" at the top of the chart: the three exiles mentioned by Jeremiah at Nebuchadnezzar's year 7, 18, and 23. Plus Jehoiachin's 37th year of exile, when he was released. 

We already spoke about the end of Nebuchadnezzar's reign which transitioned to the beginning of Amel-Marduk (Awil-Marduk). For reference we'll put the beginning and ending for Nebuchadnezzar's reign below AND put both the beginning and ending of Amel-Marduk just below it

.What we learn from this is that after the 43 years of Nebuchadnezzar, the accession year was that same 43rd year of Nebuchadnezzar and then he had a first official year and a second official year. Amel-Marduk therefore reigned for only 2 years.

There are other publications that discuss business tablets at greater length and are very interesting, but for now we will just use P&D, because that book focuses on the ones that help determine the beginning and ending of each king's reign. Then we can use that data to fill in our "chart."

We'll start with Nabopolassar. According to several contemporary inscriptions, and the Babylonian Chronicles themselves, Nabopolassar was the father of Nebuchadnezzar. Pay no attention yet to the BCE years mentioned, this was only to show that we have a clear-cut record of the beginning of his reign, even mentioning the months of the accession year.

Now we move on to the end of his reign, just to figure out how many years he ruled:

So we already have Nabopolassar ending his reign at his death in "Year 21" which was also therefore the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar, such that the official "Year 1" of Nebuchadnezzar started on Nisan 1, "New Year's Day."

It's not just the length of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, but the length of the reigns of every Babylonian king of this period (technically, the "Neo-Babylonian" period) can be shown by looking at these dated business tablets. These don't contain BCE dates, of course, they just contain the name of the king and what year of his reign it was, along with the month and day.  

Here's what the WTS publications have said about them:

*** kc p. 187 Appendix to Chapter 14 ***
Business tablets: Thousands of contemporary Neo-Babylonian cuneiform tablets have been found that record simple business transactions, stating the year of the Babylonian king when the transaction occurred. Tablets of this sort have been found for all the years of reign for the known Neo-Babylonian kings in the accepted chronology of the period.

And it's not just "thousands." The actual number may approach 100,000. With at least an average of 600 for every year of the Neo-Babylonian kings. 

Also, "Insight," states that these are not copies, of course. They are true contemporary documents. And they are secular, transactional, and therefore have no religious or ideological axe to grind. 

*** it-1 p. 453 Chronology ***
. . . the many cuneiform business documents . . . were truly contemporary . . .
 

In fact many of such tablets have been found even going back into the prior Assyrian era. Note this from "Insight:"

*** it-1 p. 188 Asenappar ***
Ashurbanipal is best known, however, for his literary interests, a unique trait among the formidable Assyrian monarchs. Beginning in 1845 C.E., excavations revealed a great library formed by Ashurbanipal at Nineveh, containing some 22,000 clay tablets and texts. In addition to incantations, prayers, and hymns, the thousands of cuneiform writings include treatises on history, geography, astronomy, mathematical tables, medicine, grammar, as well as business documents involving contracts, sales, and loans. They are viewed as a valuable source of information about Assyria.

*** it-1 p. 448 Chronology ***
While archaeologists have recovered tens of thousands of clay tablets bearing Assyro-Babylonian cuneiform inscriptions, as well as large numbers of papyrus scrolls from Egypt, the vast majority of these are religious texts or business documents consisting of contracts, bills of sale, deeds, and similar matter.
 

And well into the Persian period, too. The use of clay tablets was not phased out until parchment and paper became more prevalent for business documents. But the clay has the advantage of lasting a few thousand years in dry climates. 

The point is that there are so many that we can reasonably test the length of any king's reign by looking at the years on the business tablets for any particular king. Even when there are fewer tablets in the Assyrian period, there are enough to draw conclusions. For example:

*** w11 10/1 p. 31 When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part One ***
Sin-sharra-ishkun ruled for seven years, and 57 economic tablets of this king are dated from his accession year through year seven

So, we'll see what we can learn from them, especially through the Assyrian and Babylonian period.

7 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

So he's one of those who wanted a beard? lol

Or maybe they all still hate beards, but one of them had to sacrifice his personal preferences to show that the GB will lead by example. Perhaps he drew the "short straw" as they say here. 

Maybe next time, another one will go without the tie: 

11 minutes ago, ComfortMyPeople said:

You will all agree that the new approach to the treatment of disfellowshipped ones is simply wonderful. It's not everything I would like, but we are on our way, thank Jehovah. Furthermore, women's pants, ties... are gradually disappearing as part of the pharisaism that gave so much importance to clothing.

Yes. I was just starting another topic on the content of the update. It's an excellent step, imo, too.

Edited to add: For now I just decided to post it on an already existing 'Updates' topic.

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/categories/VODStudio

So, although the Bible does not say that Nebuchadnezzar reigned for 43 years, we have been able to surmise this by counting back from the first year of Amel-Marduk (Evil-Merodach). It turns out that archaeologists have discovered literally thousands of dated tablets from Nebuchadnezzar's reign with an average of hundreds for each and every year. All of them stop at "Nebuchadnezzar Year 43." The evidence is convincing enough that the Insight book makes the following statement:

*** it-1 pp. 238-239 Babylon ***
One cuneiform tablet has been found referring to a campaign against Egypt in Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year . . .  Finally, after a 43-year reign, which included both conquest of many nations and a grand building program in Babylonia itself, Nebuchadnezzar II died in October . . . and was succeeded by Awil-Marduk (Evil-merodach). This new ruler showed kindness to captive King Jehoiachin. (2Ki 25:27-30) Little is known about the reigns of Neriglissar, evidently the successor of Evil-merodach, and of Labashi-Marduk.
More complete historical information is available for Nabonidus and his son Belshazzar, who were evidently ruling as coregents at the time of Babylon’s fall.

it's interesting to look at the archaeological evidence and see how it corroborates the Bible account.

(Jeremiah 52:31) . . .Then in the 37th year of the exile of King Je·hoiʹa·chin of Judah, in the 12th month, on the 25th day of the month, King Eʹvil-merʹo·dach of Babylon, in the year he became king, released King Je·hoiʹa·chin . . .

The Bible said it was in the year that Awel-Marduk began to reign (i.e., his accession year, not his "first year") that he released Jehoiachin near the end of the twelfth month of that accession year. If the account had claimed that it happened in the sixth month (September/early October) then the account would not fit with archaeology. But it fits well:

Note some examples given in P&D (Parker and Dubberstein). Here is some of the tablet evidence for the end of Nebuchadnezzar's reign and the start of Amel-Marduk: [VI/14/43 means the sixth month and 14th day of YEAR 43, (September) and a later one was found dated the 26th of that same sixth month (October).] Then the first tablets for Amel-Marduk begin on that same date of the last one for Nebuchadnezzar VI/26/43 (October 7).

Ezekiel counts years from the date of the largest number of exiles taken, in Nebuchadnezzar's 7/8th year, so when Ezekiel mentions the 27th year [of exile] he must be referring to about the 35th year of Nebuchadnezzar. That might be placing this prophecy only about 2 years before the reference to a tablet from his 37th year that refers to a campaign against Egypt. That's the same one that the Insight book mentions (above) for Year 37:

(Ezekiel 29:17-19) . . .Now in the 27th year [of exile], in the first month, on the first day of the month, the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: ¹⁸  “Son of man, King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon made his army labor greatly against Tyre. Every head became bald, and every shoulder was rubbed bare. But he and his army received no wages for the labor he expended on Tyre. ¹⁹ “Therefore this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says, ‘Here I am giving the land of Egypt to King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon, and he will carry off its wealth and take much spoil and plunder from it; and it will become wages for his army.’
 

So far only two posts have been moved from the topic over here, affecting posts from @George88 and @Pudgy: 

https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/90964-bible-related-timelines-supported-by-archaeology-but-without-astronomy/

We have begun the numbers with Josiah, aligning his death at 629 BCE per the WTS dates in light blue, and 609 BCE per the standard dates in light green.

*** it-1 p. 418 Carchemish ***
Then, after the fall of Nineveh, the Assyrian capital, Pharaoh Necho led his army northward to the aid of the Assyrians. King Josiah of Judah unwisely tried to turn the Egyptian forces back at Megiddo and was killed in the attempt (c. 629 B.C.E.). (2Ch 35:20-24) In 625 B.C.E. a decisive battle was fought at Carchemish 

We also see that the well-known standard date for the battle of Carchemish is 605 BCE, and the "Insight" book uses the date 625 BCE. Those dates naturally line up together too, and can be traced up to the "accession" year of Nebuchadnezzar and the 4th year of Jehoiakim. 

And this aligns well with the Bible verse in Jeremiah:

(Jeremiah 46:1, 2) . . .This is the word of Jehovah to Jeremiah the prophet concerning the nations: ²  For Egypt, concerning the army of Pharʹaoh Neʹcho the king of Egypt, who was along the Eu·phraʹtes River and was defeated at Carʹche·mish by King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon in the fourth year of Je·hoiʹa·kim son of Jo·siʹah, the king of Judah:

Up to here, our simple timeline checks out well. 

While we're here, we might as well address the fall of Nineveh:

*** it-2 p. 505 Nineveh ***
Date of Nineveh’s Fall. Though effaced from the extant cuneiform tablet that relates the fall of Nineveh, the date for this event, the 14th year of Nabopolassar, can be supplied from the context. It is also possible to place the destruction of Nineveh in the framework of Bible chronology. According to a Babylonian chronicle, the Egyptians were defeated at Carchemish in the 21st year of Nabopolassar’s reign. The Bible shows this to have taken place in the fourth year of Jehoiakim’s reign or in 625 B.C.E. (Jer 46:2) Therefore, the capture of Nineveh (about seven years earlier) in the 14th year of Nabopolassar’s reign would fall in the year 632 B.C.E.
 

And of course, the WTS date of 632 for the Fall of Nineveh aligns with the standard date of 612 on the above chart. For reference let's add it, as we now have some non-controversial information from the Insight book that archaeological tablets tell us that the fall of Nineveh was in Nabopolassar's 14th year and the battle of Carchemish was in Nabopolassar's 21st year. We will add them both. Note that the 21st year of Nabopolassar must have been his last because that was also the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar.

To make it easier to doublecheck our numbers in the chart against Edwin Thiele or the Insight book, for example, we can reference them against the two competing timelines under the chart. The top one will be the standard timeline, and the one below that will be the WTS timeline. Since those are the two timelines that get the most coverage on this forum, I will just include them both for reference. (Not to discuss the differences between them, or argue which one might be more correct.)

(2 Kings 25:27) . . .And in the 37th year of the exile of King Je·hoiʹa·chin of Judah, in the 12th month, on the 27th day of the month, King Eʹvil-merʹo·dach of Babylon, in the year he became king, released King Je·hoiʹa·chin of Judah from prison. . .

Now we know that we can continue our count of Jehoiachin's exile to it's 37th year. We don't know if Nebuchadnezzar had already died and another king had reigned in his place. But if Nebuchadnezzar was the king up until Evil-merodach, then we should also be able to figure out how many years that King Nebuchadnezzar reigned:

So, 2 Kings and Jeremiah give us enough information to see that Nebuchadnezzar appears to have ruled for 43 years and that in that 43rd year of his reign another King, Evil-Merodach, began to rule in his place. Some of these numbers could be off by up to one year. They might have averaged out correctly by cancelling each other out. Or the potential one-year errors could have added up and made our chart off by up to 3 or 4 years. It's not meant to be perfect, but to give us a pretty good idea that we can come very close to a Biblical timeline with just the information in the Bible itself. 

We could even go back another 400 years or so to the start of the Davidic kingdom. 

But it might be more interesting to doublecheck our numbers in the chart so far against others who have put a lot of thought into this, or perhaps we are even ready to see what archaeology might provide in terms of tablets and inscriptions. But we still don't need any astronomy or BCE dates. 

(2 Kings 24:12-15) . . .King Je·hoiʹa·chin of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, . . .  and the king of Babylon took him captive in the eighth year of his reign. ¹³ Then he took out from there all the treasures of the house of Jehovah and the treasures of the king’s house.. . . —he took 10,000 into exile. No one was left behind except the poorest people of the land. ¹⁵ Thus he took Je·hoiʹa·chin into exile to Babylon;. . .

We learn that that Jehoiachin has now started a time of exile in Babylon. And we also learn that this is the 8th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. We'll assume, for now, that this did not include an accession year just before the start of the 8 years, so we'll add the "a" for accession and try to double-check later if that assumption holds. 

But then we read in Jeremiah 52 that this was also considered the 7th year of his reign:

(Jeremiah 52:28) 28 These are the people whom Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar took into exile: in the seventh year, 3,023 Jews.

This tells us that we probably need to understand that sometimes the Bible counts with the accession year as a separate year, as if it was "zero" and sometimes includes the accession year as "year one." to solve this in the next picture after adding Zedekiah and the siege in his 9th, 10th and 11th year.

(2 Kings 24:18-25:4) . . .Zed·e·kiʹah was 21 years old when he became king, and he reigned for 11 years in Jerusalem. ... And Zed·e·kiʹah rebelled against the king of Babylon. ²⁵In the ninth year of Zed·e·kiʹah’s reign, in the tenth month, on the tenth day of the month, King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon came with all his army against Jerusalem. He camped against it and built a siege wall all around it, ² and the city was under siege until the 11th year of King Zed·e·kiʹah. ³ On the ninth day of the fourth month the famine was severe in the city, and there was no food for the people of the land. ⁴ The city wall was broken through,. . .

Now we need to add 11 years for Zedekiah, and we have another siege event. This one lasts much longer than the 7th/8th year of Nebuchadnezzar. It lasts from the 4th month of Zedekiah's 9th year through the 4th month of Zedekiah's 11th year (2 years). We also know that Nebuchadnezzar is still king through Zedekiah's 11th. And we will later learn that Jehoiachin is still in exile. 

That gives us the following picture:

I have marked the 9, 10, and 11th year of Zedekiah (in red) based on the time of the siege mentioned in 2 Kings 24 & 25. And I have numbers at the bottom of the chart still counting the years of Jehoiachin's exile.

(2 Kings 24:1, 2) . . .In Je·hoiʹa·kim’s days King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon came against him, and Je·hoiʹa·kim became his servant for three years. However, he turned against him and rebelled. ² Then Jehovah began to send against him marauder bands of Chal·deʹans, Syrians, Moʹab·ites, and Amʹmon·ites. He kept sending them against Judah to destroy it, . . .

The previous king Jehoahaz was taken to Egypt after only 3 months of rule, and he died in Egypt. And Jehoiakim has been raising taxes to pay Pharaoh Necho. But now he is the servant of Babylon for three years.

We might safely assume that these three years are the final three years of Jehoiakim's reign. Below I have marked in red the probable three years of servitude to Nebuchadnezzar. 

This implies that Babylon has succeeded Egypt as the primary power over the region by now, and it apparently happened between year 2 and year 8 of Jehoiakim. 

Later we can try to figure out how much more the Bible can tell us more about the start and the length of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. 

(2 Kings 24:6-8) . . .Then Je·hoiʹa·kim was laid to rest with his forefathers; and his son Je·hoiʹa·chin became king in his place. ⁷ Never again did the king of Egypt venture out of his land, for the king of Babylon had taken all that belonged to the king of Egypt, from the Wadi of Egypt up to the Eu·phraʹtes River. ⁸ Je·hoiʹa·chin was 18 years old when he became king, and he reigned for three months in Jerusalem. . . .

So now we have another short reign of only 3 months, and we will assume that those three months all fell within the same year that Jehoiakim has begun his 11th and final year and died. If part of those three months crossed over into the new year, then we should have pushed his three month reign into the following year. We might be able to check this assumption, but for now, we will play it safe and keep it within Jehoiakim's 11th year.  

(2 Kings 24:10, 11) During that time the servants of King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon came up against Jerusalem, and the city came under siege. ¹¹ King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon came to the city while his servants were laying siege to it.

So now we have another event noted and it had to be timed within that short three month period when Jehoiachin is king. It's also the last of those three years we already marked in red. This is a siege of the city, but we don't yet read about the temple being destroyed, or a break in the walls as we will read later. 

So, here's where I'll start:

(2 Kings 23:22, 23) . . ..  But in the 18th year of King Jo·siʹah, this Passover to Jehovah was held in Jerusalem.

The 18th year of Josiah is the last year mentioned, so for now we will put 18 boxes in a spreadsheet to represent his reign. (From another account we will learn that he actually reigned about 31 years, but I wanted to just add things as we learn them.) I put a white box in front of those 18 years to represent a starting count at 0, or just in case  "official" years didn't start counting until the first "new year" of his reign. The Babylonians would call this an "accession" year and didn't start officially counting "year one" "year two" etc., until each new year started.

(2 Kings 23:29-31) . . .In his days Pharʹaoh Neʹchoh the king of Egypt came to meet the king of As·syrʹi·a by the Eu·phraʹtes River, and King Jo·siʹah went out to confront him; but when Neʹchoh saw him, he put him to death at Me·gidʹdo. ³⁰  So his servants transported his dead body in a chariot from Me·gidʹdo and brought him to Jerusalem and buried him in his grave. Then the people of the land took Jo·siʹah’s son Je·hoʹa·haz and anointed him and made him king in place of his father. ³¹  Je·hoʹa·haz was 23 years old when he became king, and he reigned for three months in Jerusalem. . . .

So now we have assumed that Josiah's 18th year was his last, and that during this year he is killed in the battle with Egyptian Pharoah Necho and that his son Jehoahaz is reigning for 3 months in that last year of Josiah. I had to fill in the full year even though this was only 1/4th of a year. 

(2 Kings 23:34-36) . . .Furthermore, Pharʹaoh Neʹchoh made Jo·siʹah’s son E·liʹa·kim king in place of his father Jo·siʹah and changed his name to Je·hoiʹa·kim; but he took Je·hoʹa·haz and brought him to Egypt, where he eventually died. ³⁵ . . . ³⁶ Je·hoiʹa·kim was 25 years old when he became king, and he reigned for 11 years in Jerusalem. . . .

So now we will assume that Jehoiakim began his 11 year rule immediately after Jehoahaz was deposed. We will also assume tht this first year can start at 0, or count as an "accession" year might, and will add 11 boxes after that year to represent 11 official years. 

That was all pretty straightforward, although we made some assumptions about the "zero" year or "accession" year which might be throwing our count off by a few months or even up to a year. But it's as close as we can know for sure so far.

But now things start getting a little more interesting . . . .  

In this topic, I'd like to see how much we can learn about Bible timeline as it relates to Jewish history and what we know about Egypt, Assyria, and Babylon. But let's see how far we can get using only references from the Bible and from archaeology. And only from NON-ASTRONOMY-RELATED archaeology. Therefore, there will be no BCE dates argued or discussed. We already have other topics for that.

Also, I'll try to keep myself more organized, and keep the topic more organized. To that end, here are the proposed guidelines:

1. Unrelated comments get moved to a subtopic (to be created and linked).
2. Comments are to be strictly on the topic of Bible-related timelines. That means the Bible's format-- NO BCE dates. The following questions contain the type of "research" we'll look at, and they use the Biblical format for timelines -- not BCE dates, which cannot be derived from the Bible or even from secular archaeology, except when they include astronomy.  
   • "Where does the 10th year of Zedekiah fit on the timeline?"
   • Does that 10th year of Zedekiah match up to the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar?
   • "How do we include the 37th year of Jehoiachin's exile?"
   • Does the Bible show us how many years that Nebuchadnezzar reigned?
   • What's the last year of Nebuchadnezzar that gets mentioned in the Bible? The 23rd, a later year?
   • The Bible mentions the 18th year of Josiah, could he have had a 19th or 20th year that wasn't mentioned?
3. No ad hominem comments. Related to that, people can upvote their own comments all they want, even with their own sock puppets, but a downvote without an explanation is pretty much just another empty ad hominem. Downvotes are only allowed if one addresses whatever he or she is downvoting.  
4. When Bible timelines are mentioned, please quote the necessary parts of the verse or passage so people don't have to look it up.
5. We are not discussing the accuracy, motivations or prejudices or levels of interpretation for Egyptian, Assyrian, Babylonian or Persian archaeology/inscriptions.
6. Similarly this won't be a topic about Biblical interpretations either. No discussions about the best way to interpret the "70 years," or definitions of "the exile," exiles, desolation(s), etc..

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.
 

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.

46 minutes ago, xero said:

So you're saying they are wrong. Got it. 

LOL. Too easy. There are about 25 different ways to check this with Stellarium. The best one is to notice that the eclipse in question (Furuli's eclipse) was not observed, even though they knew it was happening (below the horizon). But the second one just 6 months later in 587 BCE was not only observed but is indicated to have been seen in the early morning watch and set fully eclipsed after 2 hours and 20 minutes.

I have to admit that I wouldn't have thought to check this one if I hadn't recently read a page put up by Carl Olof Jonsson that addresses Furuli's theory here: http://kristenfrihet.se/kf2/review.htm

For that reason, I will just copy what he said, but I'll check out Stellarium right after posting this:

The second eclipse in month X – six months after the first – took place on January 8, 587 BCE. This date, therefore, corresponded to the 13^th of month X in the Babylonian calendar. This agrees with Parker & Dubberstein’s tables, which show that the 1^st of month X (Tebetu) fell on 26/27 December in 588 BCE. The Babylonians divided the 24-hour day into 12 beru or 360 USH (degrees), so one beru was two hours and 5 USH (= degrees of four minutes each) were 20 minutes. According to the tablet, then, this eclipse began 2 hours and 20 minutes before sunrise. It was total (“All of it was covered”), and it “[set eclips]ed,” i.e., it ended after moonset. What do modern computations of this eclipse show?

My astroprogram shows that the eclipse of January 8, 587 BCE began “in the morning watch” at 04:51, and that sunrise occurred at 07:12. The eclipse, then, began 2 hours and 21 minutes before sunrise – exactly as the tablet says. The difference of one minute is not real, as the USH (time degree of 4 minutes) is the shortest time unit used in this text. [The USH was not the shortest time unit of the Babylonians, of course, as they also divided the USH into 12 “fingers” of 20 seconds each.] The totality began at 05:53 and ended at 07:38. As moonset occurred at 07:17 according to my program, the eclipse was still total at moonset. Thus the moon “set while eclipsed.”

Furuli attempts to dismiss the enormous weight of evidence provided by this tablet in just a few very confusing statements on page 127 of his book. He erroneously claims that the many eclipses recorded “occurred in the month before they were expected, except in one case where the eclipse may have occurred two months before.” There is not the slightest truth in this statement. Both the predicted and the observed eclipses agree with modern computations. The statement seems to be based on the gross mistakes he has made on the previous page, where he has misidentified the months on LBAT 1421 with disastrous results for his calculations.

7 hours ago, xero said:

Babylon; when it so happened that our city was desolate during the interval of seventy years, until the days of Cyrus king of Persia. (Seems to indicate 70 years concluding w/Cyrus @539 BCE)
 
Now as to what I have said before about the temple at Jerusalem, that it was fought against by the Babylonians, and burnt by them, but was opened again when Cyrus had taken the kingdom of Asia, shall now be demonstrated from what Berosus adds further upon that head; for thus he says in his third book: "Nabuchodonosor,

There is a portion you have skipped between these these two paragraphs above, and it looks like a recap of the proof of Babylonian dominion over many nations around them (just as Jeremiah 25 spoke of). In Jeremiah the 70 years are not for Judea and Jerusalem, but they are 70 years for Babylon. In this recap, Josephus says that the initial desolation (overpowering and taking of captives) had already begun under the rule Nebuchadnezzar's father, Nabopolassar. Immediately following the sentence about the 70 years:

He then says, "That this Babylonian king conquered Egypt, and Syria, and Phoenicia, and Arabia, and exceeded in his exploits all that had reigned before him in Babylon and Chaldea." A little after which Berosus subjoins what follows in his History of Ancient Times. I will set down Berosus's own accounts, which are these: "When Nabolassar, father of Nabuchodonosor, heard that the governor whom he had set over Egypt, and over the parts of Celesyria and Phoenicia, had revolted from him, he was not able to bear it any longer; but committing certain parts of his army to his son Nabuchodonosor, who was then but young, he sent him against the rebel: Nabuchodonosor joined battle with him, and conquered him, and reduced the country under his dominion again. Now it so fell out that his father Nabolassar fell into a distemper at this time, and died in the city of Babylon, after he had reigned twenty-nine years. But as he understood, in a little time, that his father Nabolassar was dead, he set the affairs of Egypt and the other countries in order, and committed the captives he had taken from the Jews, and Phoenicians, and Syrians, and of the nations belonging to Egypt, to some of his friends, that they might conduct that part of the forces that had on heavy armor, with the rest of his baggage, to Babylonia; while he went in haste, having but a few with him, over the desert to Babylon; whither, when he was come, he found the public affairs had been managed by the Chaldeans, and that the principal person among them had preserved the kingdom for him.

So he is referring to the year 605, and perhaps even a campaign that started in 606. Josephus also mentions that the temple lay desolate for 50 years until the 2nd year of Cyrus which was 537. That places the actual destruction of the temple itself in 587 BCE. But he apparently thinks of the 70 years from about 606 to about 539 (or possibly even 607 to 537). 

Josephus wrote his first history book much earlier, and at that time seemed to think that the temple had been destroyed 70 years before Cyrus, and this is the easier, more common-sense reading of 2 Chronicles, and a possible way to read Jeremiah and Daniel (but not Zechariah). But this time he doesn't actually say the temple was desolate for 70 years, but that it was desolate 'during the 70 years.' And then he specifically speaks of the Temple as "desolate" for 50 years up until Cyrus. That would fit nicely with Zechariah's mention of the 70 years of the Temple itself nearly 20 years after Cyrus. 

(Zechariah 1:12-16) . . .So the angel of Jehovah said: “O Jehovah of armies, how long will you withhold your mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with whom you have been indignant these 70 years?”  . . . ‘This is what Jehovah of armies says: “I am zealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great zeal.  . . . “Therefore this is what Jehovah says: ‘“I will return to Jerusalem with mercy, and my own house will be built in her,” declares Jehovah of armies, “and a measuring line will be stretched out over Jerusalem.”’
 

And, nearly 20 years AFTER Cyrus, we also see that the lamentations related to Jerusalem's destruction have now been going on for 70 years:

(Zechariah 7:2-6) . . ., men to beg for the favor of Jehovah, saying to the priests of the house of Jehovah of armies and to the prophets: “Should I weep in the fifth month and abstain from food, as I have done for so many years?” . . . ‘When you fasted and wailed in the fifth month and in the seventh month for 70 years, did you really fast for me?  And when you would eat and drink, were you not eating for yourselves and drinking for yourselves? 

The Insight book admits that these 5th month and 7th month wailings were for the anniversaries of the final destruction of the Temple and assassination of Gedaliah. There had been 70 years of such wailing now that it was nearly 20 years after Cyrus.

(Zechariah 8:18, 19) . . .The word of Jehovah of armies again came to me, saying:  “This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘The fast of the fourth month, the fast of the fifth month, the fast of the seventh month, and the fast of the tenth month will be occasions for exultation and joy for the house of Judah—festivals of rejoicing. So love truth and peace.. . .
 

*** it-1 p. 812 Fast ***
The Jews established many fasts, and at one time had four annual ones, evidently to mark the calamitous events associated with Jerusalem’s siege and desolation in the seventh century B.C.E. (Zec 8:19) The four annual fasts were: (1) “The fast of the fourth month” apparently commemorated the breaching of Jerusalem’s walls by the Babylonians on Tammuz 9, 607 B.C.E. (2Ki 25:2-4; Jer 52:5-7) (2) It was in the fifth Jewish month Ab that the temple was destroyed, and evidently “the fast of the fifth month” was held as a reminder of this event. (2Ki 25:8, 9; Jer 52:12, 13) (3) “The fast of the seventh month” was apparently held as a sad remembrance of Gedaliah’s death or of the complete desolation of the land following Gedaliah’s assassination when the remaining Jews, out of fear of the Babylonians, went down into Egypt. (2Ki 25:22-26) (4) “The fast of the tenth month” may have been associated with the exiled Jews already in Babylon receiving the sad news that Jerusalem had fallen (compare Eze 33:21), or it may have commemorated the commencement of Nebuchadnezzar’s successful siege against Jerusalem on the tenth day of that month . . .
 

So assuming 539 is right (and I assume it is) then the Bible chronology supports secular chronology, although Bible chronology contradicts WTS chronology here in Zechariah.

9 hours ago, xero said:

So are we saying this isn't true?

Of course it isn't true. And it's easy to check this out for yourself. The very book quoted in "support" of the idea shows it isn't true. 

• As already noted, Furul was looking at the FOURTH month of the Babylonian calendar and just pretending it was the THIRD month.  
• VAT 4956 says this eclipse was in the THIRD month.
• Furuli wants to take a FOURTH month eclipse from 20 years earlier (NEB 17) and make it seem like that eclipse was the THIRD month eclipse recorded on VAT 4956.

So all we should have to do is see whether there actually was a FOURTH month eclipse in year 17 that matches the correct THIRD month eclipse in year 37 from VAT 4956, and then we would know where Furuli's claims have gone either right or wrong:

The book that the Watchtower quotes is here:

https://archive.org/details/huber-2004-babylonian-eclipse-observations-from-750-bc-to-1-bc/page/186/mode/2up?view=theater

Here are the eclipses from 586:

Here are the eclipses from 588:

I included all the eclipses in the adjacent years for later reference. 

So, Furuli's FOURTH month eclipse actually did happen back in Nebuchadnezzar's year 17, which was 588 BCE. Since year 17 was 588, then year 37 is 568 BCE. 

But the same reference completely demolishes Furuli's claim in more ways than just a straightforward listing of the eclipses. Go back to page 86, and note that there are other tablets just as important as VAT 4956 in dating Nebuchadnezzar's reign, and most of them also deal with OTHER eclipses. Unfortunately for Furuli, his 588 eclipse is also found on one of these other tablets, and it is dated to Nebuchadnezzar's 17th year on that tablet:

LBAT 1420 contains observations from many years of Nebuchadnezzar's reign from his first year to his 29th year and lines 16 to 18 contain Furuli's eclipse: July 15 588, but note that it is also here marked in the correct month, month FOUR not month THREE.

And, of course, every other legible line on LBAT 1420 also consistently points to the "standard" years of Nebuchadnezzar, as if we needed 20 witnesses for a matter to be established instead of just 3 witnesses. None of these 20 additional witnesses supports the WTS/Furuli view. 

This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 

@Mic Drop,

I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled. 

But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc.. 

The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??"

Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.   

Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence.

Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)

I just figured out why i was getting nearly the same reading every 30 years for Saturn. I just asked Google how long it takes Saturn to orbit the sun:

Saturn takes 29.4 Earth years to orbit the sun. This is equivalent to 10,759 Earth days or an average orbital speed of 9.68 kilometers per second. 

Isn't astronomy fun???