[b-hebrew] repost of full question
Dirk Frulla
fiveacorns at yahoo.com
Sat Apr 19 03:00:01 EDT 2008
Thanks for responding!
I know there are some lines of evidence that historians would cite that are kinda weak. But as far as the Neo-Babylonian era goes, here are the lines of evidence I am aware of (some of which are pretty strong):
The length of reigns of Babylonian Kings
-- There are various kings lists, some of which can be called into question.
-- Berossus, the Royal Canon
-- There are literally thousands of documents from the Neo-Babylonian era. These documents ususally have the year, month, day of the king when the document was composed. Since there are so many of them for every year, month, day of each king, they can serve as a check to other kings lists. Besides that, you would think there would be at least one business document out of the tens of thousands that would mention a new king's name - if it existed. These provide a picture so detailed, we know that the Babylonian king Labashi-Marduk reigned for only 2-3 months.
-- Business document or other documents with chronological interlocking joints. That is, some documents contain events/dates that overlap two kings reigns, thereby showing the succession from one king to another.
Chronology of other cultures
-- When a chronology of another culture, like Egypt, is developed independently of Neo-Babylonian culture - and then mentions the same events recorded in Neo-Babylonian history, a link can be formed between the histories of the two cultures. This serves as yet another accuracy check.
Absolute dating
-- The Babylonians were astrologers. They wrote down positions of planets and lunar eclipses and then dated them to king and year of the king. Some of the astronomical diaries record simultaneous events (for example, a lunar eclipse along with the positions of all the planets observable to the naked eye) that aren't repeated for thousands of years. Since we have a more advanced knowledge of the movements of the planets, we can rewind time and see when these rare planetary/lunar events would occur. This provides an absolute date to the events described. Since the king, and the year of the king is mentioned on these diaries, it puts an absolute date on the time period.
Here is real kicker: ALL of the lines of evidence above - ALL of it backs up 587 as the date of Jerusalem's fall (even fuzzy evidence like Berossus and the Royal Canon)
Because it is so much evidence, I would REALLY, REALLY like the Bible to agree with it. If not, then I would be put in a hard spot, having so much physical evidence on one hand, but the Bible on the other. However, if we read Jeremiah 25 and 29 as referencing servitude of many nations, and the servitude would last 70 years (which is what the sentence says grammatically) - and the fact that the Hebrew in Daniel seems to relate only the endings of the desolations with the end of the 70 years, then everything matches.
----- Original Message ----
From: K Randolph <kwrandolph at gmail.com>
To: b-hebrew <b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 8:08:53 PM
Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] repost of full question
Dirk:
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 8:00 AM, Dirk Frulla <fiveacorns at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks for responding!
>
> …
>
> Let's come at it another way. This is another dimension to it that is
> confusing to me. When Daniel wrote chapter 9, the Jews were still in
> Jerusalem. They had not been released yet - that's the whole reason for his
> prayer in chapter 9. Daniel has just witnessed the end of the Babylonian
> empire in chapter 5. If you go back to Jeremiah chapter 25, read verse 12,
> and then go back to Jeremiah 29 and read the verses after verse 10, there
> was an order that was to be followed - a clear sequence of events.
>
> FIRST the 70 years would end
> THEN Babylon would be called to account
> THEN the Jews would return to God - with repentence, fasting, etc.
> THEN the Jews would return to their land
> At the time Daniel wrote the prayer recored in chapter 9, the Jews were on
> step #3 - remember Babylon was called to account in ch. 5. It is interesting
> that Daniel set out to do exactly what came next on the list of event -
> repent and pray to God. The Jews were on step #3, NOT step 4. That would
> come a few years later when they got back to their land. Until then, it
> would remain desolated. But look, step #1 was the 70 years ending. So the 70
> years ended at least 2-3 years before the desolations did. How can they be
> the same period?
>
> See what I mean?
>
> No, I don't see what you mean. These steps are not necessarily
consecutive.
> …
> When the word is included, it brings the readers attention to the end of
> the desolations corresponding to the end of the 70 years. Now THAT matches
> the order set forth in Jeremiah.
>
> Just a side note. The seventy years could be a round. However, it is not
> necessary. If you take Jeremiah at face value - as 70 years of servitude for
> "these nations" to the "king of Babylon", then you can start with the full
> conquering of the Assyrian empire in 609 BC.... 609-539 = 70 years
> exactly.
>
> Thanks!
>
> You shouldn't put too much weight on those dates. Historians pretend
certitude that they don't really have. Part of the problem is that ancient
records were not as accurate as we would want them to be: for example, Cyrus
the Great, in order to establish his legitimacy as the ruler of the
Medo-Persian empire left out any mention of Darius the Mede, for whom he was
a general. Ancient history is full of such examples. Furthermore, a king may
have a given name, a royal name, and maybe another name or two to use for
special occasions, which makes lining up all the details even harder.
Then there are other questions, as a result, the history of that period is a
real mess. But the historians give no indications that the records may be
questionable, at best. The most trustworthy surviving record is that of the
Bible, which indicates 70 years of exile and destroyed temple. I agree with
HH that that's what the text indicates.
Karl W. Randolph.
_______________________________________________
b-hebrew mailing list
b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
More information about the b-hebrew
mailing list