Jehovah's Witnesses. How long did Nabonidus reign?

Question

"After reigning but two years King Evil-Merodach was murdered by his brother-in-law Neriglissar. According to the inscriptions that have been found, this usurper of the throne spent most of his time in building operations and reigned four years. When he died, his son Labashi-Marduk, though not yet of age, succeeded him. He was a vicious boy, and within nine months he had his throat cut by an assassin. Nabonidus, who had served as Governor of Babylon and who had been Nebuchadnezzar's favorite son-in-law, now took the throne and had a fairly glorious reign till Babylon fell in 539 B.C."
Babylon the Great Has Fallen - God's Kingdom Rules p.184


According to the above Watchtower quote, if Nabonidus reigned for 36 years (as implied but not stated), then Jerusalem fell in 607bc. If he reigned for 17 years, then Jerusalem fell in 586bc.

How long did he reign?


"Nabonidus "Last supreme monarch of the Babylonian Empire; father of Belshazzar. On the basis of cuneiform texts he is believed to have ruled some 17 years (556-539 B.C.E.). He was given to literature, art, and religion."
Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 2 p.457

"And in the fifth month on the seventh [day] of the month, that is to say, the nineteenth year of King Neb·u·chad·nez´zar the king of Babylon, Neb·u´zar·ad´an the chief of the bodyguard, the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. 9 And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah and the king's house and all the houses of Jerusalem; and the house of every great man he burned with fire."
2 Kings 25:8-9

"Other investigators say this: "The Nabunaid Chronicle . . . states that Sippar fell to Persian forces VII/14/17 [Footnotes]"VII/14/17": The 7th Hebrew month Tishri, 14th day, 17th year of Nabonidus' reign. (Oct. 10, 539), that Babylon fell VII/16/17 (Oct. 12), and that Cyrus entered Babylon VIII/3/17 (Oct. 29). This fixes the end of Nabunaid's reign and the beginning of the reign of Cyrus."
Watchtower 1968 August 15 p. 491

Answer 1

No longer a Jehovah's Witness. The link below disproves the chronology used by Jehovah's Witnesses to establish Jerusalem being destroyed in 607 B.C. Nabonidas reigned for 17 years. The link shows how far out they are. Here is part of the relevant bit:



"Turn to every encyclopaedia or archaeological text on the subject and you will find that Jerusalem fell between 586 and 587 B.C. The Watchtower uses 607 B.C. by claiming all historical evidence we have on the subject is wrong. Yet to make such a claim opens a paradox - if archaeology is unreliable for 587 B.C., and this same information is being used to determine 607 B.C., then 607 must be equally unreliable.



There are numerous ways used to determine that Jerusalem fell in 587 B.C. This includes Ptolemy's Canon, the Nabonidus Chronicle, Harran, Hillah stele and synchronization with Egyptian chronology. The Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology, page 274 states "Archaeological evidence for the destruction of the kingdom in 586 B.C. comes from Jerusalem, Lachish, Tell Beit Mirsim, and other sites." Tens of thousands of detailed economic-administrative and legal documents have been unearthed outlining daily, monthly and yearly occurrences during the reign of the Babylonian kings."



Scroll down to the relevant section in the link below for more information:

Answer 2

The book babylon the great was published in 1963 and you left out the fact that that statement was a direct quote from the Encyclopedia Americana Vol 2; page 441 not our own interpretation



Insight on the Scriptures (more recently published) information is the same as what you will find on Wikipedia. Interestingly more information (since the 1963 publication sited above) has come available, for instance:

Paul-Alain Beaulieu is a Canadian Assyriologist, a Professor of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations at the University of Toronto. He subsequently translated the The Nabonidus Cylinder and was the author of the book The Reign of Nabonidus, King of Babylon, 556–539 B.C. (Ph.D. thesis, Yale University, 1989, and Yale Near Eastern researches 10, Yale University Press, 1989, ISBN 9780300043143)..... More on wikipedia



The Watchtower quote is only a partial piece of information which says "other investigators say this". We are not the other investigators, just quoting a fair assessment of different literary works. If you actually weren't just looking at Jehovah's witness hate site who twist information to discredit us, you may have seen the rest of the information that says:—Brown University Studies, Vol. XIX, Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.—A.D. 75, Parker and Dubberstein, 1956, p. 13. Recognized authorities of today accept 539 B.C.E. without any question as the year Babylon was overthrown by Cyrus the Great. In addition to the above quotations the following gives a small sampling from books of history representing a cross section of both general reference works and elementary textbooks. These brief quotations also show that this is not a date recently suggested, but one thoroughly investigated and generally accepted for the past sixty years. END QUOTE



The Bible shows that Jehovah enables his servants to understand his purpose in a progressive manner. (Prov. 4:18; John 16:12) Thus, the prophets who were divinely inspired to write portions of the Bible did not understand the meaning of everything that they wrote. (Dan. 12:8, 9; 1 Pet. 1:10-12) The apostles of Jesus Christ realized that there was much they did not understand in their time. (Acts 1:6, 7; 1 Cor. 13:9-12) The Bible shows that there would be a great increase in knowledge of the truth during “the time of the end.” (Dan. 12:4) Increased knowledge often requires adjustments in one’s thinking. Jehovah’s Witnesses are willing humbly to make such adjustments.



Perhaps you could write to the people who actually wrote these reference works to tell them. Here is a list for your reference:

Encyclopedia Britannica, 1946, Vol. 2, p. 852 bid., Vol. 6, p. 930.

The Encyclopedia Americana, 1956, Vol. III, p. 9.

Yale Oriental Series ‧ Researches ‧ Vol. XV, 1929, Nabonidus and Belshazzar, Dougherty, p. 46.

The World Book Encyclopedia, 1966, Vol. 2, p. 10; Ibid., p. 13; Ibid, p. 193.

Ancient History, Hutton Webster, 1913, p. 64.

The Story of the Ancient Nations, W. L. Westermann, 1912, p. 73.

History of the Hebrews, F. K. Sanders, 1914, p. 230.

The Biblical Period, W. F. Albright, Reprinted from The Jews; Their History, Culture and Religion, edited by Louis Finkelstein, 1955, p. 49.

The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary, 1965, p. 193; see also pages 93, 104, 198, 569.

World History at a Glance, Reither, 1942, pp. 28, 29.

The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 1962, p. 335.

The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopœdia and Scriptural Dictionary, Fallows, 1913, Vol.1,p. 207.

A New Standard Bible Dictionary, 1926, p. 91.

The Universal Bible Dictionary Peloubet, 1912, p. 69.

Answer 3

Well I continue to exist the coast. I received baptized in 1974. Sure there have been men and women announcing that it used to be feasible. I recall pondering that I didn't believe it could occur, readily considering that it is going to come "as a thief within the night time". I don't recall listening to some thing from the platform or written down in literature. I do recall it used to be a time (correct after the peace/love motion) whilst men and women had been looking for solutions. If you even concentrate to the songs again then, they had been very constructive that there could ultimately be peace! Of path, what number of speeches have politicians and clergy alike stated 'peace and safety'. Anyway, again to that point interval; I used to be one in every of approximately 14 men and women that got here into the reality, in most cases via a pair witnesses. It used to be an fascinating time. I recall men and women leaving again then considering that they had been dissatisfied that 1975 wasn't what "they" was hoping it could be. BUT, it wasn't that many and in most cases anticipated whilst it occurred. It is solely one more time that Jehovah has wiped clean out the congregations. It occurred then and maintains to occur. 1974 & 1975 had been very gigantic instances in historical past. So, not anything to be dissatisfied approximately. Let's face it; if a man or woman is serving Jehovah for only a "DATE" they do NOT have natural intent. They have a divided-middle. Not every person within the institution is there for the correct causes. An fascinating side from final week's Watchtower research: thirteen The cry "Peace and safety" will probably be simply one more demon-encouraged lie; but, it is going to no longer idiot Jehovah's servants. "You don't seem to be in darkness," wrote Paul, "in order that that day must overtake you because it could thieves, for you're all sons of sunshine and sons of day." (one million Thess. five:four,five) So allow us to keep within the mild, a long way clear of the darkness of Satan's international. Peter wrote; "Beloved ones, having this enhance expertise, be in your shield you could no longer be led away with them (fake lecturers inside the Christian congregation) I will give up there. The apostasy begins inside the congregation. This is why we NEED to be on shield. Especially due to the fact that the time interval we at the moment are dwelling.

Answer 4

Last supreme monarch of the Babylonian Empire; father of Belshazzar. On the basis of cuneiform texts he is believed to have ruled some 17 years (556-539 B.C.E.). He was given to literature, art, and religion.

In his own inscriptions Nabonidus claims to be of noble descent. A tablet found near ancient Haran gives evidence that Nabonidus’ mother or grandmother was a devotee of the moon-god Sin. (Ancient Near Eastern Texts, edited by J. Pritchard, 1974, pp. 311, 312) As king, Nabonidus showed great devotion to the worship of the moon-god, both at Haran and at Ur, where this god occupied a dominant position.

Cuneiform tablets of the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar (Nisan 617-Nisan 616 B.C.E.) list a certain Nabu-na’id as the one “who is over the city,” and some historians believe this is the same Nabonidus who later became king. However, this would mean that Nabonidus was a very young man when placed in such administrative position and would make him extremely aged at the fall of Babylon, some 77 years later (539 B.C.E.).

Discussing events in the 20th year of Nebuchadnezzar (Nisan 605-Nisan 604 B.C.E.), the Greek historian Herodotus (I, 74) describes a treaty negotiated between the Lydians and the Medes by one “Labynetus the Babylonian” as mediator. (I, 74) Labynetus is considered to be Herodotus’ way of writing Nabonidus’ name. Later, Herodotus [I, 188] refers to Cyrus the Persian as fighting against the son of Labynetus and Nitocris.



It may be noted that the phrase “Seventeenth year” does not appear on the tablet, that portion of the text being damaged. This phrase is inserted by the translators because they believe that Nabonidus’ 17th regnal year was his last. So they assume that the fall of Babylon came in that year of his reign and that, if the tablet were not damaged, those words would appear in the space now damaged. Even if Nabonidus’ reign was of greater length than is generally supposed, this would not change the accepted date of 539 B.C.E. as the year of Babylon’s fall, for there are other sources pointing to that year. This factor, however, does lessen to some extent the value of the Nabonidus Chronicle.

While the year is missing, the month and day of the city’s fall, nevertheless, are on the remaining text. Using these, secular chronologers calculate the 16th day of Tashritu (Tishri) as falling on October 11, Julian calendar, and October 5, Gregorian calendar, in the year 539 B.C.E. Since this date is an accepted one, there being no evidence to the contrary, it is usable as a pivotal date in coordinating secular history with Bible history.—See CHRONOLOGY.

Interestingly, the Chronicle says concerning the night of Babylon’s fall: “The army of Cyrus entered Babylon without battle.” This likely means without a general conflict and agrees with the prophecy of Jeremiah that ‘the mighty men of Babylon would cease to fight.’—Jer 51:30.

Also of interest are the evident references to Belshazzar in the Chronicle. Although Belshazzar is not specifically named, in the light of later portions of the Chronicle (col. II, lines 5, 10, 19, 23), column 1, line 8, is construed by Sidney Smith, in his Babylonian Historical Texts: Relating to the Capture and Downfall of Babylon (London, 1924, p. 100), as showing that Nabonidus entrusted kingship to Belshazzar, making him coregent. Repeatedly the Chronicle states that the ‘crown prince was in Akkad [Babylonia]’ while Nabonidus himself was at Tema (in Arabia). However, the fact that Belshazzar is not mentioned by name nor is his death referred to in the Nabonidus Chronicle in no way brings into question the accuracy of the inspired book of Daniel, where the name Belshazzar appears eight times and his death concludes the graphic account of Babylon’s overthrow narrated in chapter 5. Quite to the contrary, cuneiform experts admit that the Nabonidus Chronicle is extremely brief, and in addition, as shown above, they are of the opinion that it was written to defame Nabonidus, not to give a detailed history. Indeed, as R. P. Dougherty says in his work Nabonidus and Belshazzar (p. 200): “The Scriptural account may be interpreted as excelling because it employs the name Belshazzar.”—Italics ours.

Although column 4 of the Chronicle is badly broken, scholars have concluded from what remains that the subject was a later siege of Babylon by some usurper. The first such siege of Babylon that followed Cyrus is thought to have been the uprising of Nebuchadnezzar III, who claimed to be a son of Nabonidus, Nidintu-Bel. He was defeated in the accession year of Darius I late in 522 B.C.E.

Answer 5

To be short and sweet...the Witnesses have been proved wrong in their 607BC..if you want to do proper research on these events i suggest you put the insight books down and go to a library