[poll id=”18″]
You may also like
Warning: This short post is the definition of pedantic. I am going to quibble with the use of the word “sovereign” as applied to God by many Reformed theologians. It is not surprising that exploring the topic of suffering and grace has led me to consider […]
Share this:
This is an entry in the “Acrostic Contemplations” and began as a sermon for the Second Sunday in Lent (February 25, 2024). […]
Share this:
UPDATE: With a few respondents, all negative, I am going to go ahead and remove Tech5. I do still encourage techeads to […]
Share this:
Fortunately Santa managed to extricate himself from the plane (see the right) and made it to our house with ease. I hope […]
6 thoughts on “Poll: You tell me, was it 587 BCE or 586 BCE?”
I love that your question about this on Twitter a couple of days back is ranking higher than a Wikipedia page!
http://skitch.com/samharrelson/bdtsp/586-or-587-bce-google-search
Oh, and 587.
Now THAT is the measure of success! Thanks for posting this Sam:
By the way, this discussion from the b-Hebrew list that comes up in the Google search is actually pretty good.
So… the question is… to believe Wikipedia (587 BCE) or the Jewish Virtual Library (586 BCE)? When I entered your question in Google search, it gave me http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Temple.html as the first ranked page.
Coincidentally that follows the scholarship in that older works say 586 (Telushkin as cited by JVL) and more recent scholarship that uses 587 (Wiki).
All of my student handouts say 587/586 BCE. Don’t even get me started about Solomon’s date.