JWTruth.orgRecurso documentado de comparação
Ask JWTruth Pesquisar
Português (Brasil)

Esta página em

Somente em inglês

Todos os idiomas

Cronologia e 607 AEC · Claim record

A Parte Dois argumenta que as crônicas babilônicas cobrem apenas cerca de 35 dos aproximadamente 88 anos do período neobabilônico e que por isso não podem estabelecer uma cronologia contínua.

Claim ID claim-chronology-chronicles-gapsConcerns 1 de novembro de 2011Explicação da organização
Explicação da organização · 1 de novembro de 2011 Verificado

A Parte Dois argumenta que as crônicas babilônicas cobrem apenas cerca de 35 dos aproximadamente 88 anos do período neobabilônico e que por isso não podem estabelecer uma cronologia contínua. The Watchtower, 1 de novembro de 2011Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 1, 1988

Mostrar as provas (2 fontes)
Publicação primária das Testemunhas de Jeová Verificado

The Watchtower, “When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?—Part Two”

1 de novembro de 2011 · p.23 · pars. 12-15 and box · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania

“There are gaps in the history recorded in the Babylonian chronicles. … Logically, then, the question arises, How reliable are deductions based on such an incomplete record?”

The accompanying box, “THE BABYLONIAN CHRONICLES—A HISTORY WITH GAPS”, states: “The Babylonian chronicles provide an account for only 35 years of the Neo-Babylonian period, traditionally presumed to span some 88 years.” The text quotes R. H. Sack that historians must probe “secondary sources . . . in the hope of determining what actually happened.”

Fonte oficial

Nota de procedência e verificação

Nota de confiança. Full document fetched from the Watchtower Online Library on 19 September 2026 and read in full; the quotation, the paragraph and the page were confirmed against the article text and its embedded page markers (span class=“pageNum”).

Consultado em. 19 de setembro de 2026 · Identificador da fonte. src-chr-o-w-2011-1101-chronicles

Publicação primária das Testemunhas de Jeová Verificado

Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 1, “Chronology”

1988 · pp.453-454 · under “Babylonian Chronology” · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania

“In view of all these factors it is certainly not wise to insist that the traditional figures for the reigns of the Neo-Babylonian kings be received as definite.”

The argument is that the Babylonian Chronicle tablets are later copies — citing D. J. Wiseman that one portion is “a copy made in the twenty-second year of Darius … from an older and damaged text”, and that the Neo-Babylonian Chronicle texts are in a script that “does not of itself allow any precise dating”. The same section notes that “For the final 32 years of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, there are no historical records of the chronicle type except a fragmentary inscription of a campaign against Egypt in Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year.”

Fonte oficial

Nota de procedência e verificação

Nota de confiança. Full article fetched from the Watchtower Online Library on 19 September 2026; the quotation and the page were confirmed against the text and its embedded page markers. Insight on the Scriptures is undated on the Online Library; the 1988 publication year is the work’s own imprint date.

Consultado em. 19 de setembro de 2026 · Identificador da fonte. src-chr-o-it1-chronology-neo-babylonian

Página da afirmação Corrigir ou atualizar

A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/pt-br/evidence/claim-chronology-chronicles-gaps/. Every source above opens the original document or the best available copy. If you believe the wording, date or context is wrong, report an error.