25.03.2016 Views

The Gentile Times Reconsidered Chronology Christ

An historical and biblical refutation of 1914, a favorite year of Jehovah's Witnesses and other Bible Students. By Carl Olof Jonsson.

An historical and biblical refutation of 1914, a favorite year of Jehovah's Witnesses and other Bible Students. By Carl Olof Jonsson.

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Furuli’s Second Book 487<br />

Earth’s Rotation (Cambridge, 1997). <strong>The</strong> program used, therefore, maintains high accuracy far<br />

into the past, which is not true of many other modern astronomy programs.<br />

About a year before Furuli’s book had been published in the autumn of 2007 I had<br />

examined his claim (which he had published officially in advance) and found that none of<br />

the lunar positions fit the year 588/587 BCE. I shared the first half of my results with some<br />

of my correspondents. I did not know at that time that Furuli not only moves the 37 th year<br />

of Nebuchadnezzar 20 years back to 588/587 BCE, but that he also moves the 37 th year<br />

about one extra month forward in the Julian calendar, which actually makes it fall too late in<br />

that year. <strong>The</strong> reason for this is the following:<br />

On the obverse, line 17, VAT 4956 states that on day 15 of month III (Simanu) there was a<br />

“lunar eclipse that was omitted.” <strong>The</strong> phrase refers to an eclipse that had been calculated in<br />

advance to be invisible from the Babylonian horizon.<br />

On page 126 Furuli explains that he has used this eclipse record as the “point of departure”<br />

for mapping “the regnal years, the intercalary months, and the beginning of each month in<br />

the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II, both from the point of view that 568/67 and 588/87<br />

B.C.E. represent his year 37.”<br />

In the traditional date for the 37 th year of Nebuchadnezzar, this eclipse can easily be<br />

identified with the eclipse of July 4, 568 (Julian calendar). Thus the Babylonian date, the 15 th<br />

of month III, corresponds to July 4, 568 BCE. From that date we may count backward to<br />

the 1st of month III, which must have been June 20/21 (sunset to sunset), 568. As the<br />

tablet further shows that the preceding Month II (Ayyaru) had 29 days and Month I<br />

(Nisannu) 30 days, it is easy to figure out that the 1 st of Ayyaru fell on May 22/23, 568, and<br />

the 1 st of Nisannu (i.e., the 1 st day of year 37) on April 22/23, 568 BCE.<br />

On moving back 20 years to 588/87 BCE – the 37 th year of Nebuchadnezzar in Furuli’s<br />

alternative “Oslo <strong>Chronology</strong>” – we find that in this year, too, there was a lunar eclipse that<br />

could not be seen from the Babylonian horizon. It took place on July 15, 588 BCE.<br />

According to Furuli this is the eclipse that VAT 4956 dates to the 15 th of month III<br />

(Simanu). Reckoning backwards from July 15, Furuli dates the 1 st of month III to June 30,<br />

588; the 1 st of month II (Ayyaru) to June 1, 588, and the 1 st of month I (Nisannu) to May 1.<br />

(In his discussions and/or calculations he is inconsistently alternating between May 1, May<br />

2, and May 3).<br />

<strong>The</strong>re are a number of problems with Furuli’s dates. <strong>The</strong> first one is that the first day of the<br />

Babylonian year, Nisannu 1, never began as late as in May! As shown by the tables on pages<br />

27-47 in R. A. Parker & W. H. Dubberstein’s Babylonian <strong>Chronology</strong> (Brown University Press,<br />

1956), the 1 st of Nisannu never once in the 700-year period covered (626 BCE – CE 75)<br />

began as late as in May. <strong>The</strong> same holds true of the subsequent months: the 1 st of Ayyaru<br />

never began as late as on June 1, and the 1 st of Simanu never began as late as on June 30.<br />

For this reason alone the lunar eclipse that VAT 4956 dates to the 15 th of month III cannot<br />

be that of July 15, 588 BCE! This eclipse must have fallen in the middle of month IV in the<br />

Babylonian calendar. Furuli’s “point of departure” for his “Oslo <strong>Chronology</strong>,” therefore, is<br />

quite clearly wrong.<br />

Very interestingly, the lunar eclipse of July 15, 588 BCE was recorded by the Babylonians on<br />

another cuneiform tablet, BM 38462, No. 1420 in A. Sachs’ LBAT catalogue, and No. 6 in<br />

H. Hunger’s Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia (ADT), Vol. V (Wien, 2001).<br />

I discussed this tablet on pages 180-182 of my book, <strong>The</strong> <strong>Gentile</strong> <strong>Times</strong> <strong>Reconsidered</strong> (3 rd ed.<br />

1998, 4 th ed. 2004). <strong>The</strong> chronological strength of this tablet is just as decisive as that of<br />

VAT 4956. It contains annual lunar eclipse reports dating from the 1 st to at least the 29 th<br />

regnal year of Nebuchadnezzar (604/603 – 576/575 BCE). <strong>The</strong> preserved parts of the tablet<br />

contain as many as 37 records of eclipses, 22 of which were predicted, 14 observed, and one<br />

that is uncertain.<br />

<strong>The</strong> entry containing the record of the July 15, 588 BCE eclipse (obverse, lines 16-18) is<br />

dated to year 17, not year 37, of Nebuchadnezzar! This entry reports two lunar eclipses in this

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!