Megathread: An explanation on why Racism has created historical errors

[LeePappas]

How do you prove there were 1183 ships?
What size were they?
What were they made from?
What was their means of propulsion?
You say Fred was incorrect yet you call gladius out as a liar.
Double standards if nothing else.
May I remind you of this little snippet you put in your welcome message.

The catalog of ships, you add. I read a source that claimed there were 1183 ships launched. I also read sources that stated it was 1186, and 1189. I never actually counted added Homer's figures myself, but Dionysius of Halicarnassus stated in Roman Antiquities, chapter 74 that:

"Porcius Cato does not give the time according to Greek reckoning, but being as careful as any writer in gathering the date of ancient history, he places its founding four hundred and thirty-two years after the Trojan war; and this p247 time, being compared with the Chronicles of Eratosthenes,200 corresponds to the first year of the seventh Olympiad."

When you confuse lunar years with tropical years, Rome was founded in 751 BC. 432 years earlier would be 1183 BC. I figured the source which stated Homer's count equals 1183 was correct. I will now count myself.

OK! I just counted Homer's figures for the number of ships and I got 1196.

1196 - 1183 = 13

13 was a number considered lucky by the Jews in Homer's time, I can show this by analyzing king David's reign. The Torah says he reigned 7 years over Judah and Israel, but when you date events using the reign of Saul, it was 13. They reversed the Roman's lucky 7, with their lucky 13. If you use their Torah lie of 7, you can't get a substantial portion of the Torah to be true, you have to use 13.

Ergo, Homer was a Jew.

There's no way Homer knew how many ships the Greeks sent, or what size they were, or what they were made of, or what their means of propulsion was. I don't know either. My guess is they were small ships, with oars and a sail for propulsion.

Finally, if you look back at the thread post #13, you will see that I did what was necessary to make Fred Espenak's eclipse footprint be accurate.

I will assume Fred Espenak's eclipse footprint is right. That means someone moved Pythaodorus' name from where it should be. So they moved it forward by three archons.
1565041.5 - 3*295.306=1564155.5

Or 429.549 BC.

That's June 14, 430 BC. Thucydides said spring, so March 21 it should be. I can make Fred and Thucydides truthful by reinterpreting the passage. When he says, "in the last but two" I will interpret that as the war began in the 8th month of the 10 month year. That means the war began on May 16, 430 BC. Thucydides called that the start of Spring.

 

[LeePappas]

These are the kind of posts I love. Like you, I suspect that there's some truth to Roman history, and that things have been misdated rather than totally fabricated. The etymologies for so many words will always be uncertain, but your speculation doesn't seem unreasonable (i.e. April and Ennius).

I'm curious, have you tried running some of these numbers in light of alternate chronologies? I can see you're working with the view that standard chronology is basically correct -- you know, that the period identified as the 1st century was about 2,000 ago. Alternative chronology can get very... strange, as you probably know, but Gunnar Heinsohn's revisionism of the 1st millennium AD is very compelling imo, despite its problems, and it doesn't simply throw ancient history out the window like other revisionist chronologies. Regardless, thanks for the posts, and for informing me about that astronomical software you're using

No, I haven't run these numbers in light of alternate chronologies, what do you mean by that? I have been working with the view that the standard chronology, attested to by Roman and Greek historians is correct. By chronology I presume you mean order of events. Julius Caesar preceded Augustus, Augustus preceded Tiberius, etc. Too many lies are impossible to pull off. I will look into Gunnar Heinsohn, I've never heard of him. Did he influence Theodore Mommsen I wonder?

And you're welcome. Any other questions, feel free to ask.

Addendum: Mommsen was born in the 19th century, Heinsohn in the 20th. I dated the first Pharaoh to around 2600 BC, which disagrees with Heinsohn's date of 1200 BC. Heinsohn is wrong there, because the Great flood took place in 1644 BC, I have Jewish, Greek, and Roman sources and much else to date that event to within a few months. The Exodus took place 421 lunar years after the great flood in 1305 BC, and it took place on Nisan 15, so you can get the precise Julian day number of the Exodus. Then just go back in time by 421 lunar years to date the flood.

 

[Gladius]

Then how do you explain the 1183 ships? Only a Jew would promulgate a 5 year lie, one for each book of the Pentatunch.

Ah, yes, a very common lie. Just the other day a Jew overcharged me 5 bucks, one for each of his holy books.

The Western rendering you refer to was made by people who know what I know about the actual 1188 years between the Great Flood and the founding of Rome and the Hebrew 5 year lie for that of 1183, and knowledge of the counting of the Omer.

Impressive. You must be some kind of prophet.

I would like to know when those Jewish texts you spoke of rendering his name as Hameiras were written. Keep in mind the Jews told many lies throughout recorded history.

Mishna, 1st-3rd century.

Anyway, let's summarize your post:
Due to calculative mistakes there was a 13 year difference, which wasn't a mistake but a Jewish lie, because 13 is a lucky Jewish number. Therefore Homer is Jewish because only he knew about it and Jews would leave such signs for Sherlocks like you to find out.

I have no time for this. Hope you enjoy talking to whoever can mentally sustain this. Cheers.

 

[LeePappas]

I have no time for this. Hope you enjoy talking to whoever can mentally sustain this. Cheers

I am sorry you feel that way about history. The way things really happened is mentally complex, maybe you shouldn't be at a history forum if you can't handle complex. And I know why they considered 13 lucky, I can explain it to you. It has to do with the 13th letter of their alphabet El. El is the Jewish word for God.

See my post #64 here

Objective Evidence for the God of Scripture?

And Gladius, I would add one more thing... I am not the originator of the lies. I am showing others how to find them. They are there, don't be fooled by them. So don't get mad at me.

 

[Deleted member 1432]

I have been working with the view that the standard chronology, attested to by Roman and Greek historians is correct.

Many members of this forum, myself included, would hold the opposite view to be the correct one, therefore rendering this thread and the other almost identical one, invalid to them. This is to be expected given that this forum is dedicated to alternative views of history rather than mainstream official ones.

 

[LeePappas]

Many members of this forum, myself included, would hold the opposite view to be the correct one, therefore rendering this thread and the other almost identical one, invalid to them. This is to be expected given that this forum is dedicated to alternative views of history rather than mainstream official ones.

You misunderstood my meaning of the word 'chronology'. I mean order of events. I tend not to mess with the accepted order of events, unless there is good reason to object to them. For instance I mean something like this:

2600 BC first Egyptian dynasty
1644 BC Great flood
1305 BC Exodus
934 BC foundation of Solomon's Temple laid
763 BC Carthage founded
721 BC fall of the house of Israel, start of Trojan war
713 BC end of Trojan war
711 BC April 21, Romulus conceived
710 BC February 2, Romulus born
707 BC Olympiad 1:1
685 BC April 1st Rome founded
586 BC Av 9 fall of the house of Judah
487 BC Roman Republic began
412 BC Octaeterian solunar calendar implemented
322 BC Alexander the Great died
265 BC Olympiad 128:3 First Punic war begins
242 BC first Punic war ends
221 BC second Punic war begins
205 BC second Punic war ends
149 BC third Punic war begins
144 BC third Punic war ends?
102 BC February 24 [Octaeterian] Julius Caesar born
59 BC Caesar's first consulship
44 BC start of Julian calendar, J. Caesar assassinated on March 25th
31 BC August 19 Battle of Actium
27 BC start of Roman Empire
4 BC August 4th Jesus Christ born
26 AD April 1 [Augustinian] Jesus Christ crucified
I pretty much know the order of events, by using various means at my disposal.

If you try to rearrange the order of the preceding events, you will be met with much historical resistance.

But I like this site precisely because of its willingness to challenge accepted historical dogma.

Regards

 

[Deleted member 1432]

You misunderstood my meaning of the word 'chronology'. I mean order of events.

Chronology

1. The science that deals with the determination of dates and the sequence of events.
2. The arrangement of events in time.
3. A chronological list or table.

More at Wordnik

If the events never took place then the order is totally irrelevant.

 

[LeePappas]

Chronology

1. The science that deals with the determination of dates and the sequence of events.
2. The arrangement of events in time.
3. A chronological list or table.

More at Wordnik

If the events never took place then the order is totally irrelevant.

Ok, so you did not misunderstand my use of the word chronology. And you are correct if some event never took place you can't put it in a chronological order. But there was a world of people living throughout recorded history, and it stands to reason that certain historians did write down what they knew first hand, or had heard, or had read. So I would ask you, do you believe Julius Caesar was assassinated, or do you know it, or do you think it never happened at all?

 

[Deleted member 1432]

But there was a world of people living throughout recorded history, and it stands to reason that certain historians did write down what they knew first hand, or had heard, or had read. So I would ask you, do you believe Julius Caesar was assassinated, or do you know it, or do you think it never happened at all?

And if these 'certain historians' were writing down what they wanted you to believe rather than what actually happened? Perhaps, as Gunnar Heinsohn has demonstrated, most of the events were duplicated from much later times and sent back to cover up the reality of the first millennium. I agree that some written accounts were produced by that 'world of people', but did any of them survive unmolested after the maelstrom of editing, manipulating and book-burning by the Abrahamic religions and other agents of mass control? If any of them did they are by now so unrecognisable that they are merely smiled upon as mythology or fairy tales.

If I answer your questions here in a simple comment, it will just be me giving my own bald opinion. Giving a 'Yes', 'No' or 'Maybe' is pretty much pointless. I have spent years researching and have also written many articles that cover the 'events' of the first millennium and the Dark Ages. In those articles I present reasoned arguments against the mainstream narrative and chronology by reinterpreting the events through the eyes of archaeology and non-mainstream sources. To present all of that here is impractical, therefore, I respectfully decline to give an un-reasoned response to your questions.

 

[LeePappas]

In the Roman Consul list, Lucius Valerius Potitus and Titus Manlius Capitolinus were consuls in the 117th year after the expulsion of the kings, so Dionysus lied there by two years. You discover this by actually counting the consuls, which I didn't do initially.

Correction: I counted the consuls, and Lucius Valerius Potitus II and Titus Manlius Capitolinus were consuls in the 118th year after the expulsion of the kings, so Dionysius lied there by one year.

Olympiad 195, year 1= 1 BC, therefore
Olympiad 92, year 2=412 BC.
Now go back to the first consuls at Rome.
Correcting for Dionysius' 2-year lie, the first consuls of Rome took office on Unius 1, Olympiad 68 year 3. 92-68=24, there were four years per Olympiad, 24*4=96. So the first consuls of Rome took office 94 lunar years before Julian day number 1570570.5. The Roman kings ruled for 244 lunar years, according to Dionysius' sources. 94+244=338.

Dionysius knew he was writing in Olympiad 193 year 2, which was 7 BC. Hence
Olympiad 195:1=0 BC
Olympiad 92:1=412 BC
Olympiad 98:1=388 BC

Now go back to the first consuls at Rome.
According to Dionysius, 119 ALC = Olympiad 97:3.
But if he really did find the censor document then he knew:
118 ALC = Olympiad 98:1
so
1 ALC= Olympiad 68:4

Correcting for his lie, he found a Censor document dated 118 ALC, 2 years before Olympiad 98:1.
So he wanted others to correct him, and believe
118 ALC = Olympiad 97:3
and conclude falsely that
1 ALC = Olympiad 68:2.

Now Roman sources claimed the kings reigned for 244 years. Using their lie and his lie,

245 AUC=Olympiad 68:2
1 AUC = Olympiad 7:2
Which is one year too early.

The consul list was supposedly first published at the end of the second century BCE, according to this link:

Varronian Chronology - Livius

 

[LeePappas]

Ever since the Roman historian Marcus Terentius Varro dated 1 A Liberate Constituta to 509 BC, people have assumed Rome was founded 244 years earlier because they have no choice but to trust the veracity of ancient sources that the length of the reign of the Roman kings was 244 years. The accepted year for the founding date of Rome, attributed to Varro, is 753 BC.

244+509=753

That's Varro's equation.

According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, the Roman kings reigned 244 years. In this link:

https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Dionysius_of_Halicarnassus/1D*.html/

it states,

"74 1 As to the last settlement or founding of the city, or whatever we ought to call it, Timaeus of Sicily,196 following what principle I do not know, places it at the same time as the founding of Carthage, that is, in the thirty-eighth year before the first Olympiad;197 Lucius Cincius, a member of the senate, places it about the fourth year of the twelfth Olympiad,198 and Quintus Fabius in the first year of the eighth Olympiad.199 2 Porcius Cato does not give the time according to Greek reckoning, but being as careful as any writer in gathering the date of ancient history, he places its founding four hundred and thirty-two years after the Trojan war; and this p247 time, being compared with the Chronicles of Eratosthenes,200 corresponds to the first year of the seventh Olympiad.201 That the canons of Eratosthenes are sound I have shown in another treatise,202 where I have also shown how the Roman chronology is to be synchronized with that of the Greeks. 3 For I did not think it sufficient, like Polybius of Megalopolis,203 to say merely that I believe Rome was built in the second year of the seventh Olympiad,204 nor to let my belief rest without further examination upon the single tablet preserved by the high priests, the only one of its kind, but I determined to set forth the reasons that had appealed to me, so that all might examine them who so desired. 4 In that treatise, therefore, the detailed exposition is given; but in the course of the present work also the most essential of the conclusions there reached will be mentioned. The matter stands thus: It is generally agreed that the invasion of the Gauls,205 during which the city of Rome was taken, happened during the archonship of Pyrgion at Athens, in the first year of the ninety-eighth Olympiad.206 Now if the time before the taking of the city is reckoned back to Lucius Junius Brutus and Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus, the first consuls at Rome after the overthrow of the kings, it comprehends one hundred p249 and twenty years. 5 This is proved in many other ways, but particularly by the records of the censors, which receives in succession from the father and takes great care to transmit to posterity, like family rites; and there are many illustrious men of censorian families who preserve these records. In them I find that in the second year before the taking of the city there was a census of the Roman people, to which, as to the rest of them, there is affixed the date, as follows: "In the consulship of Lucius Valerius Potitus and Titus Manlius Capitolinus, in the one hundred and nineteenth year after the expulsion of the kings." 6 So that the Gallic invasion, which we find to have occurred in the second year after the census, happened when the hundred and twenty years were completed. If, now, this interval of time is found to consist of thirty Olympiads, it must be allowed that the first consuls to be chosen entered upon their magistracy in the first year of the sixty-eighth Olympiad, the same year that Isagoras was archon at Athens.207

75 1 And, again, if from the expulsion of the kings the time is reckoned back to Romulus, the first ruler of the city, it amounts to two hundred and forty-four years. This is known from the order in which the kings succeeded one another and the number of years each of them ruled. For Romulus, the founder p251 of Rome, reigned thirty-seven years, it is said, and after his death the city was a year without a king. 2 Then Numa Pompilius, who was chosen by the people, reigned forty-three years; after Numa, Tullus Hostilius thirty-two; and his successor, Ancus Marcius, twenty-four; after Marcius, Lucius Tarquinius, called Priscus, thirty-eight; Servius Tullius, who succeeded him, forty-four. And the slayer of Servius, Lucius Tarquinius, the tyrannical prince who, from his contempt of justice, was called Superbus, extended his reign to the twenty-fifth year. 3 As the reigns, therefore, of the kings amount to two hundred and forty-four years or sixty-one Olympiads, it follows necessarily that Romulus, the first ruler of the city, began his reign in the first year of the seventh Olympiad, when Charops at Athens was in the first year of his ten-year term as archon.208 For the count of the years requires this; and that each king reigned the number of years is shown in that treatise of mine to which I have referred."

Dionysius didn't believe they reigned for 244 years, he determined they reigned for 245 lunar years, as I will now show.

The Romans completely lied about the reign lengths of the kings. They worked their numbers out so that the kings ruled for 244 years to hide the founding date of Rome. In fact, Dionysius discovered they ruled for 245 lunar years. I know he discovered that, because he stated he concluded Rome was founded in Olympiad 7 year 1, when he knew it was founded in Olympiad 7 year 3, as I allude to in this post:

Rome was founded on Aprilius 1, 685 BC on the day of a solar eclipse.

In that post I point out that Dionysius told several lies. He did that to counteract the Roman lie that the Roman kings reigned for 244 years. I claim his logic, for his readers to figure out, was as follows:

• It doesn't make sense that Dionysius found a Censor document dated 2 years before the Gauls sacked Rome, for how could that document state it was 2 years BEFORE an event occurred. If Dionysius knew the consuls for 2 years BEFORE the Gauls sacked Rome then since the consul list had already been published he could have used the consul names 2 years after Lucius Valerius Potitus II and Titus Manlius Capitolinus, and referred to their names instead of talking about Potitus and Capitolinus.
• Instead, it makes sense that he found a Censor document dated the year the Gauls sacked Rome, because he went looking for the consuls for that specific year since he knew the Olympiad year it fell in, and found the names of Potitus and Capitolinus there.
• Then he lied, as anyone who counts the consuls up to Lucius Valerius Potitus and Titus Manlius Capitolinus can discover, by saying 119 ALC was the consulship of Potitus and Capitolinus, so why tell an ostensible lie?
• The reason he told that ostensible lie is, if you use 119 ALC = Olympiad 98:1 and 244 years for the reign length of the kings, then you would think 1 ALC = Olympiad 68:3, and 1 AUC=Olympiad 7:3. And Rome was really founded in Olympiad 7:3, as Dionysius knew somehow.

So he told his lies precisely because he knew that the Roman kings ruled for 245 years not 244.

My conclusion hinges on the fact that Dionysius knew:

118 ALC (Lucius Valerius Potitus II Titus Manlius Capitolinus) = Olympiad 98:1

Dionysius lied when he said,
"119 ALC = Olympiad 97:3".

His changing 118 to 119 changes the reign lengths of the kings from 244 to 245. That's my contention.

 

[LeePappas]

The information provided in Dionysius' Roman Antiquities is not only innocuous, it is contiguous. By contiguous, I mean that a lucid continuous story is told by the author. If the narrative was a pure fabrication, then it wouldn't be both lucid and continuous, it would be incoherent nonsense, therefore it would show signs of being a fabrication, and it doesn't. If you actually read it, then you will see it's authentic, for similar reasons that I have concluded that. Whoever wrote it was familiar with a great deal of history ancient in their time. They state correctly that the first Punic war happened in Olympiad 184, and this it did just barely. It began in March, April, or May of 265 BC based on the consuls in the first year of the war, combined with the fact that Olympiad 185, year 1 began in June of 265 BC. How could a fabrication be that precise?

Correction: Dionysius states the first Punic war began in the third year of the 128th Olympiad, which is, as I stated correctly, in March, April, or May of 265 BC. I had the Olympiad wrong. Olympiad 184:1 is when Julius Caesar was assassinated.

 

[Deleted member 1432]

Moderator note:

I have merged all of LeePappas’ content into one mega thread of sorts to keep things a bit cleaner. It may look a bit messy in terms of the posts and replies but hopefully people should understand what is going on here, especially if you’ve already read through the individual threads.
-Trismegistus

@trismegistus: So why leave the original individual posts in place as well? Seems like a recipe for utter confusion.

 

[LeePappas]

So who told first racial lie? How far back in time can we go? The answers to those questions lie in the clever etymology of the word 'lie' itself, and the understanding of history depends on understanding its etymology.

The etymology of the word 'lie' begins with the first sentence of Homer's Iliad.

μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος
οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,
πολλὰς δ᾽ ἰφθίμους ψυχὰς Ἄϊδι προΐαψεν
ἡρώων, αὐτοὺς δὲ ἑλώρια τεῦχε κύνεσσιν
5οἰωνοῖσί τε πᾶσι, Διὸς δ᾽ ἐτελείετο βουλή,
ἐξ οὗ δὴ τὰ πρῶτα διαστήτην ἐρίσαντε
Ἀτρεΐδης τε ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν καὶ δῖος Ἀχιλλεύς.

Translation: Of his anger sing O goddess, of Achilles son of Peleus illuminated, on a myriad of Achaens he brought pain, but many strong souls he sent to hell, heroes, and themselves all made prey swiftly to vultures, for so was the will of God fulfilled, from the day on which the son of Atreus king of men, and great Achilles first quarrelled with one another.

Homer wrote shortly after the 685 BC eclipse, so the lie in question is at least that ancient.

Look at how Achilles' name is pronounced in Greek:

Ἀχιλῆος (ah-hee-lie-us)

In that form the meaning of his name is hidden, but consider this ancient Greek word:

ἀρχῆ (ar-hee)= ancient, origin, beginning, first

If you insert the missing letter 'r' into Achilles name, it becomes filled with meaning.

Ἀρχιλῆος (ar-hee-lie-us)=ancient+lie+us

Once I performed the etymology on Achilles name, I began to wonder what the lie was, and who told it. Then I remembered the etymology of the Latin word for farmers.

Agricolae (ah-greco-lie) = a+Greek+lie

At this point I knew I was onto something ancient.

λῆ[Greek]=lae[Latin]=lie

The word has he same meaning and sound in all three languages, and Homer knew its meaning. He left out the letter 'r' deliberately. He left out the same letter in his word for Greeks:

Ἀχαιοῖς=Achaens
Achaens is meaningless, but inserting the missing letter 'r' you get:

Ἀρχαιοῖς = Archaens

The originators of the ancient first lie were the Greeks, and the Romans knew the Great Greek lie as attested by their word 'agricolae'.

Then I recalled the Hebrew word for mixed.

Arab[Hebrew]=mixed

I already knew

Om [Hebrew]=race

And had already figured out that 'ar' also meant race, giving 'arab' its modern meaning of mixed race.

Thus the lie in question was a racist lie. The only thing remaining was for me to determine what this ancient first Greek racist lie was. To answer that question I used my knowledge of the Greek alphabet. The 22nd letter of the Greek alphabet is the letter χ, pronounced hee, and therefore spelled χι. Returning to Achilles' name observe that the second syllable is hee.

Ἀρχιλῆος (ar-hee-lie-us)=ancient+lie+us

I knew the Greek alphabet was derived from the Hebrew alphabet, and it occurred to me that the lie involved the Greek letter χι and it's Hebrew equivalent cheit ח. The location of cheit in the Hebrew alphabet is the 8th letter, and the location of hee in the Greek alphabet is the 22nd letter. Therefore, the lie involved changing the original location of the Hebrew letter cheit in the archaic Hebrew alphabet, to position 22 in the Greek alphabet. Thus the lie was numerical, and as a mathematician I'm good with numbers. It wasn't long before an analysis of ancient alphabets revealed to me the lie. In my analysis of the Hebrew alphabet, I realized quickly that the original letter order told a story. I state the story in this post:

Objective Evidence for the God of Scripture?

There you see the original location of the letter cheit was the 4th letter. Thus the lie involved changing 4 to 22. Then I wondered what happened in year 422 after the flood. I already knew that the flood occurred in 1645 BC, 422 lunar years after flood was 1304 BC, but 422 was a lie told to the Jews by the Greeks they encountered during the Exodus. Thus the Exodus took place around 1304 BC. At this point in my reasoning I knew all I needed was corroborating evidence in the Torah, so I began to investigate.

Aside: As to how I determined when the flood occurred, that is a long story. It begins with something I read on page 73 of Hebrew Hieroglyphics by John Lamb. Here's the link:

Hebrew characters derived from hieroglyphics. The original pictures applied to the interpretation of various words and passages in the sacred writings, and especially of the history of the creation and fall of man : Lamb, John, 1789-1850 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

At the bottom of the page it states:

"According to this calculation, the period from the Deluge to the birth of Christ is 2,938 years."

The year the Octaeteris was implemented was 412 years earlier, so

412 BC= 2938-412=2526 ATF
where ATF stands for, "after the flood."

2526*295.3/365.25 + 412 = 2454 BC

But I wasn't sure John Lamb was right. Then I read something in Herodotus, that explained how Tyrrhenius set sail from Lydia in Asia Minor with a large group of Lydians due to a famine and founded a colony in Umbria in Italy. Then I shortened Tyrrhenius to Aeneas, and recalled Dionysius' statement that Rome was founded by the Trojan Aeneas 432 years after the Trojan war. I already knew the Trojan war ended in 713 BC, and 432 years before the founding date of Rome in 751 is 1183. Then I recalled Homer's 1183 ships, and reasoned TyrrAeneas left Lydia due to a famine caused by the flood, since the number 432 had nothing to do with the Trojan war. Then I noticed that 1188 lunar years before 685 BC, the actual year Rome was founded is around

1120044.5=1645.459 BC

then I realized that's way off from 2454 BC, my previous date for the flood. Then I reasoned that the Jews added a thousand to the flood year, so that

412 BC=1526 ATF.

If 1526 lunar years before 412 BC was around 1645 BC then I knew I had the flood year.

1526*295.3/365.25+412=1645.7

At that point I knew I was close, I just had to refine my calculation. I already knew that
Nisan 1, 2525 = 1570416.5.

1525 years earlier would be on Nisan 1

1570416.5-1525*295.306=1120074.5

In the Torah it states that the flood happened in the second month on the 17th. Thus the flood happened close to

1120074.5+29+16=1120119.5=1645.254 BC

But the Jews didn't initially know the year of the flood. At the time of the Exodus they were told of a great flood that happened 422 years earlier. So the flood happened either in late 1646 BC, or sometime in 1645 BC.

To make a long story short, I found the year of the Exodus from information in the Torah, and discovered the lie was saying 422 instead of 421, because the Jews were able to figure that out midstream.

 

[LeePappas]

THE DATE AND TIME OF THE EXODUS
In order to use the information in the Torah to date The Exodus it is necessary to know when the fall of the house of Judah was. Modern historians place it in 587 or 586 BC. It is possible to use information in Josephus and the Torah to eliminate the uncertainty in the year.

When Josephus wrote, the Jews had already been decimated by the Romans. So Josephus released information to posterity by revealing the secret of the 2625 days of Daniel, there was little reason to keep it secret any longer as the temple had been destroyed and the Jews had been expelled from Jerusalem.

According to the book Hebrew Hieroglyphics by John Lamb, 0 BC corresponds to 2938 years after the great flood, that is 0 BC= 2938 ATF.

The whole world switched from a 295.306 day per year lunar calendar to a 365 day per year solar calendar called the Octaeteris in 412 BC, on Julian day number 1570569.5, as I proved earlier in this thread here:

Megathread: An explanation on why Racism has created historical errors

2938-412=2526

So the whole world switched calendars in 2526 ATF. if you invert that number you get 2625 the prophecy of Daniel. So it appears that the Book of Daniel was written after 412 BC regardless of what the Torah says.

Bible Gateway passage: Daniel 12:11-12 - New International Version

There you will see the numbers 1290 and 1335.

1290+1335=2625

Now there's a clue in Josephus regarding the prophecy of Daniel.

Now here's the link to Josephus antiquities of the Jews.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2848/2848-h/2848-h.htm

The following passage is in book 12 chapter 7 article 6.

"For so it was, that the temple was made desolate by Antiochus, and so continued for three years. This desolation happened to the temple in the hundred forty and fifth year, on the twenty-fifth day of the month Apeliens, and on the hundred fifty and third olympiad: but it was dedicated anew, on the same day, the twenty-fifth of the month Apeliens, on the hundred and forty-eighth year, and on the hundred and fifty-fourth olympiad. And this desolation came to pass according to the prophecy of Daniel, which was given four hundred and eight years before; for he declared that the Macedonians would dissolve that worship [for some time]."

Olympiad 154, year 1 was 164 BC.

According to Josephus Daniel gave the prophecy 408 years earlier in 572 BC, but this is impossible since Daniel lived after 412 BC. Now it did not escape my notice that 572 BC is awfully closed to when the Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians.

2625 days= 7 years, 68 days.

572 + 7 = 579

Not far back enough.

Go back from January 1st 572 BC by twice 2625 days.

2625+2625=5250 days=14 years 136.5 days

January 1st, 586 BC - 136 days= August 18th, 587 BC

What is the Julian day number of August 18th 587 BC in Julian proleptic calendar?

To answer that question you need to know the Julian day number of day one of Julius Caesar's new calendar, which I found earlier in the thread.

1704977.5 = January 1st, 44 BC

Dates after that are in the Julian calendar, dates before that are in the Julian proleptic calendar.

584 BC was a leap year, 584 - 44 = 540 and 540 / 4 is 135.
Four tropical years in the Julian calendar consists of 1461 days. Therefore

1704977.5 - 135*1461=1507742.5=Jan 1, 584 BC

August 18th, 587 BC= 1506876.5

Now either that's when The siege began or when The siege ended, if Josephus gave us a clue.

That far back in history the Jews were using a 10-month lunar calendar. It was as follows:

CLASSICAL HEBREW CALENDAR
Nisan 29 days Sivan 30 days Tammuz 29 days Av 30 days Elul 29 days Tishri 30 days Heshvan 29 days Kislev 30 days Tevet 29 days Shabbat 30 days

In the Torah it states that the siege began on the 10th day of the 10th month.

Bible Gateway passage: 2 Kings 25:1-4 - New International Version

Shabbat 10, 587 BC = August 18th, 587 BC???

According to the passage The siege lasted 14 months.

Now the number was really 136.5 not 136. If I would have chose to go back 137 days it would be August 17th.

One year gets you to August 17th 586 BC. Two more lunar months consists of 59 days so that the siege ended on October 15th 586 BC Julian proleptic. This is the date of the Intergravissimas. The Gregorian calendar supposedly went into effect on October 15th 1582. Pope Gregory stipulated that the day after October 4th 1582 would be October 15th 1582 in order to restore the vernal equinox to where it was during the council of Nicea. The Intergravissimas never went into effect. The day after October 4th 1582 was October 5th 1582. It's a lie put forth by the Roman Catholic Church. When you pay attention to Julian day numbers you catch them in their lie.

Day 1 of Octaeteris= 1570569.5 = Novembrilius 1, 413 BC

In the new 12 months per year solunar calendar the New Year began in the month of Tishri as the following link suggests

Calendar, Jewish - Livius.

Rosh Hashanah rings in the New Year in the civil calendar Nisan is the first month in the ecclesiastical calendar. As you can see in the link Rosh Hashanah is celebrated in the month of Tishri. For that reason we have the following:

Tishri 1, 2526 ATF [neoclassical Hebrew]=1570569.5 = Novembrilius 1, 413 BC

But the Romans let October run 6 days longer than normal in 413 BC, so that the Jews must have had:

Tishri 1, 2525 ATF [classical Hebrew] = 1570563.5

We can find Nisan 1, 2525 easily:

1570563.5 - 29-30-29-30-29=1570416.5=Nisan 1, 2525

The proof that this is correct is in the Gospel of John chapter 21.

John 21:10 Jesus said to them, " bring some of the fish you have just caught." So Simon Peter climbed back into the boat and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn."

The 153rd day of classical Hebrew year 2525 was

1570416.5 + 153 = 1570569.5 =day 1 of the Octaeteris = day 1 of the neoclassical Hebrew year 2526 = Tishri 1, 2526 ATF [neoclassical Hebrew]

Tishri 1, 2525 and Tishri 1, 2526 differ by 6 days. The Jews incremented the year, at day 1 of the Octaeteris. Thus the year 2525 was only 153 days long.

Thus, the mystery of the 153 fish is explained.

We can now find the Hebrew calendar date of August 18th 587 BC, to see if it was really Shabbat 10.

1570416.5 = Nisan 1, 2525 ATF/413 BC

1506876.5 = August 18th 587 BC

1506875.5 = August 17th 587 BC

1570416.5 - 1506876.5 = 63540

63540/295.306=215.16

1570416.5 - 215*295.306=1506925.71

Therefore 1506925.5 = Nisan 1, 2310 ATF/586 BC.

1506925.5 - 1506875.5 = 50 days

Shabbat 1, 2309 ATF/587 BC = 1506895.5

Now to get to the date of the start of The siege of Jerusalem by the Babylonians we need to go back 20 more days. That takes us to:

1506875.5 = Tevet 10, 2309 ATF = August 17, 587 BC

Thus 2 Kings 25:1 should say the 10th day of the 9th month, not the 10th day of the 10th month.

In the Torah it has the word for the 'tenth' month as

Heh ayin shin yod resh yod (hasheeree)

In the Strong's concordance the words for 9th and 10th are:

Ninth 8671 = tav shin yod ayin yod (tashee-ee')

Tenth 6224 = ayin shin yod resh yod (asheeree')

As you can see, the word for tenth in 2 Kings 25:1 has an extra letter at the front, heh, that the word for tenth in the Strong's concordance does not have. Now the letter heh in Hebrew strongly resembles the letter tav. If you change the heh to a tav in hasheeree you get tasheeree which is almost the Hebrew word for ninth. Changing resh in tasheeree to ayin gives the spelling of ninth, and together the two letters played with spell Ra. Thus it appears the Jews played a game with the spelling of the word ninth, changing it to tenth. Therefore

1506875.5 = Tevet 10, 2309 ATF = August 17, 587 BC = Jerusalem besieged by the Babylonians

Consider Jeremiah 52:6

Bible Gateway passage: Jeremiah 52:6 - New International Version

The fourth month of the ten month lunar calendar of the Hebrews was Av. So according to the scriptures Jerusalem's walls were penetrated on Av 9, 2311 ATF.

Tisha Be' Av means "the 9th of Av," in modern Hebrew. It commemorates the destruction of the first Jewish temple in modern Judaism.

Tisha B'Av - Wikipedia

1506875.5+20+30+295+29+30+29+8=1507316.5=Av 9, 2311 ATF = the destruction of the first Jewish temple

Day 1 of the Julian calendar =1704977.5=Ianuarius 1, 44 BC

584-44=540, 540/4=135, 1704977.5-135*1461=1507742.5 = Ianuarius 1, 584 BC

Ianuarius 1, 585 BC = 1507377.5

1507377.5 - 1507316.5 = 61 days

31+30=61

Therefore

Av 9, 2311 ATF = Novembrilius 1, 586 BC [Julian proleptic]

The final question to be answered is what is this calendar date in Octaeterian proleptic?

1570569.5 = Novembrilius 1, 413 BC

1570569.5-29-30-29-30-29-30-29-30 = 1570333.5 = Unius 1, 413 BC

(586-413)*365.25/295.306=213.9755

1570333.5 - 214*295.306=1507138.016 = Unius 1, 587 BC

1507316.5 - 1507137.5 =179

30+29+30+29+30+29=177

179-177=2

Therefore

Av 9, 2311 ATF = 1507316.5 = Octobrilius 3, 586 BC [Octaeterian proleptic]= Novembrilius 1, 586 BC [Julian proleptic] = Jerusalem's walls breached by the Babylonians

Kings of the Southern Kingdom of Judah

17.4 Rehoboam Heshvan 1916 to Nisan 1934
2.9 Abijah to Shebat 30th 1936
41 Asa to Nisan 1978
25 Jehoshaphat to Nisan 2003
8 Jehoram to Shebat 2010
1 Ahaziah to Shebat 2011
6.1 Athaliah to Nisan 2018
39.9 Joash to Shebat 2057
29.3 amaziah to Tammuz 2087
52 azariah to Tammuz 2139
15.7 jotham to Shebat 2154
16 ahaz to Shebat 2170
29.4 Hezekiah to Av 2200
55 Manasseh to Av 2255
2 Amon to Av 2257
31 Josiah to Av 2288
.3 Jehoahaz to Heshvan 2288
11.2 Jehoiakim to Tevet 2299
.3 Jehoiachin to Sivan 2300
11.2 zedekiah to Av 9, 2311

Working backwards from when Jerusalem's walls were breached we see that Solomon died in 1916 ATF, in the fortieth year of his reign.

1st Kings 6:1 "in the 480th year after the Israelites came out of egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over israel, in the month of Siv, on the 2nd of the month, he began to build the Temple of the Lord."

Thus the foundation of the temple was laid 36 years before Solomon died or 1880 ATF.

Jewish Temple foundation laid Sivan 2, 1880 [classical Hebrew]

Note: Since I determined the Jews added a thousand years to the flood, it's improper to refer to the founding date of the temple as 1880 ATF, it's more accurate to refer to the year as 1880 [classical Hebrew] or 880 ATF.

We can thus get the Julian day number of the foundation of Solomon's Temple being laid.
It was shown earlier that
Nisan 1, 2525 = 1570416.5
Therefore
1570416.5 -(2525-1880)*295.306=1379944.5=Nisan 1, 1880 [CH]
1379944.5+29+1=1379974.5=Sivan 2, 880 ATF=933.810 BC=March 11, 934 BC

Aside: March 11th is where the Catholic Church claimed the 1582 vernal equinox fell, prompting Pope Gregory XIII to add 10 days to the calendar, to place the vernal equinox to where it was at the 325 AD council of Nicea. The natural inference is that someone within Italy had figured out when the foundation of Solomon's Temple was laid in ancient times, because that's just another lie. Therefore the year of the Intergravissimas was planned for in antiquity, to be a year when the vernal equinox fell on March 20th. They would claim it fell on March 21st that year, and the church would claim publicly that it slipped 10 days, implying it fell on March 11th that year.

We now have enough information to find out when the Exodus took place using the Torah

From the kings list the kings of Judah reigned for 2311-1916=395 lunar years. From the founding of the temple to the first king was 36 years, as the temple was begun in 4th Solomon and he reigned 40 years. Then according to 1st Kings 6:1 "in the 480th year after the Israelites came out of egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over israel, in the month of ziv, the second of the month, he began to build the Temple of the Lord."

Thus the amount of time from The Exodus to The Fall of the House of Judah was 480+36+395 = 911.

Av 9, 586 BC=1507316.5
1507316.5-911*295.306=1238292.5=1321.7

I was expecting that to be near 1304 BC.

Seder Olam Rabbah modern Jewish calendar English pdf free online

There you see the Seder Olam has:

155 years = Solomon dedicates temple to 23rd yr of Joash 18 yr. renovation of Temple

218 years = 23rd Joash renovation to Josiah 18th yr. renovation

From 18th Josiah to fall of the house of Judah there's an additional 13+11+1+11=36 years.

155+218+36=409

409+480=889

890 is the accepted number of years from the Exodus to the fall of the house of Judah.

7 was considered lucky by the Romans.
13 was considered lucky by the Jews.

7+7+7=21
911-21=890

Using 890 instead of 911 we get:

1507316.5-890*295.306=124494.5=1304.735 BC

Date of flood=1645.254 BC
Date of Exodus=1304.73 BC

(1645.254-1304.735)*365.25/295.306=421.17

Thus the Greeks should have said 421, but they lied to the Jews and said 422.

 

[LeePappas]

THE DETERMINATION OF THE VALUE OF 890 YEARS FROM THE EXODUS TO THE FALL OF THE HOUSE OF JUDAH

To derive the figure 890 lunar years from the Exodus to the fall of the house of Judah, you must connect the kings of Israel to the kings of Judah via the synchronisms in the book of Kings.

To connect the kings of Judah to the Kings of Israel you need the following passage from the Bible:

1st Kings 22:41 Jehoshaphat son of asa became king of Judah in the fourth year of Ahab king of Israel.

Earlier in the thread I stated 1st Jehoshaphat= Nisan 1978. Thus 4th Ahab =Nisan 1978, so 1st Ahab=Nisan 1975. Now Jeroboam was in Egypt when Rehoboam ascended to sovereignty in Heshvan 1916. Thus Jeroboam ascended to sovereignty in late 1916 or early 1917. Guess the start of his reign as Nisan 1917, giving time for the news to travel, and for him to travel. Thus the number of years between 1st Jeroboam and 1st Ahab = 1975-1917=58 years. Now here are the reign lengths of the kings of Israel from Jeroboam to Ahab:

Jeroboam 22 years

Nadab 2 years

Baasha 24 years

Elah 2 years

Zimri 7 days

Omri 12 years

Ahab 22 years

Thus from Jeroboam to Ahab there were
22+2+24+2+12=62 years.

62-58=4

The only way to account for the 4 year difference is to realize Israel used the non-accession method of dating reginal years. Under that method, when a king died in the middle of a year, the period from his death to the start of the following year was called the first year of the new king's reign. Under the blanket assumption that this method was used throughout the time the kingdom lasted there is only one possible scenario.


Kings of the Northern Kingdom of Israel

Nisan 1917-Nisan 1918 1st Jeroboam
Nisan 1938-kislev 1938 22nd Jeroboam
Kislev 1938-nisan 1938 1st Nadab
Nisan 1939-kislev 1939 2nd Nadab
Kislev 1939-nisan 1940 1st Baasha
Nisan 1962-kislev 1962 24th Baasha
Kislev 1962-nisan 1963 1st Elah
Nisan 1963- Kislev 1963 2nd Elah
Kislev 1963 .02 Zimri
Nisan 1963-kislev 1967 Tibni
Kislev 1963-Nisan 1964 1st Omri
Nisan 1974-kislev1974 12th Omri
Kislev 1974-nisan 1975 1st Ahab
Nisan 1995-kislev 1995 22nd Ahab
Kislev 1995-nisan 1996 1st Ahaziah
Nisan 1996-kislev 1996 2nd Ahaziah
Kislev 1996-nisan 1997 1st Jehoram/Joram
Nisan 2007-kislev.2007 12th Jehoram
Kislev 2007-nisan 2008 1st Jehu
Nisan 2034-kislev 2034 28th Jehu
Kislev 2034-nisan 2035 1st Jehoahaz
Nisan 2050-kislev 2050 17th Jehoahaz
Kislev 2050-nisan 2051 1st Jehoash
Nisan 2065-kislev 2065 16th Jehoash
Kislev 2065- Nisan 2066 1st Jeroboam
Nisan 2105-kislev 2105 41st Jeroboam
Kislev 2105- Av 2105 1st Zechariah
Av 2106-elul 2106 1st Shallum
Elul 2106-nisan 2107 1st Menachem
Nisan 2115-kislev 2115 10th Menachem
Kislev 2115-nisan 2116 1st Pekahiah
Nisan 2116-kislev 2116 2nd Pekahiah
Kislev 2116-Nisan 2117 1st Pekah
Nisan 2135-kislev 2135 20th Pekah
Kislev 2135-nisan 2136 1st Hoshea
Nisan 2143-shebat 2143 9th Hoshea

Note: Nowhere in the Bible does it state Tibni's reign; you have to deduce it.

The Fall of the House of Israel happened no later than Shebat 2143. When was that in Julian proleptic?

Nisan 1, 2525=1570416.5
Nisan 1, 2144=?

1570416.5-(2525-2144)*295.306=1457904.5=720.448= July 21, 721 BC.

Therefore Shebat 2143 fell in 721 BC which is the same year the Trojan war began. The natural inference is the same army moved from conquering Israel to attacking the Trojans.

2 Kings 15:1 "In the 27th year of jeroboam king of israel, azariah son of amaziah King of Judah began to reign."

2091 is 27th year of jeroboam according to the list of the kings of Israel, however according to the kings of Judah list the first year of the reign of amaziah was 2058.

Therefore 2 Kings 15:1 is a lie, but it was told to conceal the fact that the Jews knew Olympiad one year one was 777.

If you believe that the years of the reigns of the Kings of Israel are tropical years instead of lunar years and you move back from 721 BC to first Jeroboam you arrive at:

721+9+20+2+10+1+41 = 804 BC

Then 27th Jeroboam is 804 - 27 = 777.

Because there was a zero BC, Olympiad 1:1= 777 MC. MC is the designation I use for mixed calendar, because it is a mixture of lunar years and solar years. As of the time The Book of Kings was written, the Jews had already figured out that the Romans set Olympiad one year one to 777, and began a countdown to 0 . The proof of this is 2 Kings 15:1.

Here are the reigns of the kings of Judah again:

Kings of the Southern Kingdom of Judah

17.4 Rehoboam Heshvan 1916 to Nisan 1934
2.9 Abijah to Shebat 30th 1936
41 Asa to Nisan 1978
25 Jehoshaphat to Nisan 2003
8 Jehoram to Shebat 2010
1 Ahaziah to Shebat 2011
6.1 Athaliah to Nisan 2018
39.9 Joash to Shebat 2057
29.3 amaziah to Tammuz 2087
52 azariah to Tammuz 2139
15.7 jotham to Shebat 2154
16 ahaz to Shebat 2170
29.4 Hezekiah to Av 2200
55 Manasseh to Av 2255
2 Amon to Av 2257
31 Josiah to Av 2288
.3 Jehoahaz to Heshvan 2288
11.2 Jehoiakim to Tevet 2299
.3 Jehoiachin to Sivan 2300
11.2 zedekiah to Av 9, 2311

Now I will show that all passages in first Kings relating synchronisms between the Kings of Judah and the Kings of Israel are true, if the Kings of Judah had an accession year. When a king of Judah died in the middle of the year, the period from his death to the end of the year was the accession year of the new king, and his first year began on Nisan 1 of the new year.

1st Kings

1st Kings 15:1 "And in the 18th year of King jeroboam the son of nebat, Abijam reigned over judah. He reigned 3 years in jerusalem."

1st Jeroboam=1917
18th Jeroboam=1934
Accession Abijam=1934.
1 Kings 15:1 is true.

1 Kings 15:9 "In the 20th year of jeroboam king of israel, asa became king of judah."

20th Jeroboam=1936
Accession Asa=Shebat 1936
1 Kings 18:9 is true.

1 Kings 15:25 "Nadab son of jeroboam became king of Israel in the second year of asa king of judah, and he reigned over Israel two years."

2nd Asa=1938
1st Nadab=1938
1 Kings 15:25 is true.

1 Kings 15:28 "Baasha killed Nadab in the third year of Asa king of Judah, and succeeded him as king."

3rd Asa=1939
1st Baasha=1939
1 Kings 15:28 is true.

1 Kings 16:8 "In the 26th year of Asa king of judah, Elah son of Baasha became king of israel, and he reigned in tirzah two years."

26th Asa=1962
1st Elah =1962
1 Kings 16:8 is true.

1 Kings 16:10 "Zimri came in, struck him down, and killed him, in the 27th year of Asa king of judah."

1 Kings 16:15 "In the 27th year of Asa king of Judah, zimri reigned 7 Days in tirzah."

1st Zimri=1963

1 Kings 16:10 is true.

1 Kings 16:23 "In the 31st year of Asa king of judah, Omri became king of israel, and he reigned 12 years, six of them in tirzah."

31st Asa=1967
1st Omri=1963
1 Kings 16:23 is false.

However, Omri became king immediately in 1963.

1 Kings 15:16 "When the Israelites in the camp heard zimri had plotted against the king and murdered him they proclaimed Omri, the commander of the army, king over Israel that very day in the camp."

Therefore, the 12-year reign of Omri begins immediately after zimri seized power, in 1963.

1 Kings 16:21 "Then the people of Israel were split into two factions, half supported Tibni son of gilnath for king, and the other half supported Omri. But Omri's followers prove stronger than those of Tibni son of gilnath. So Tibni died and Omri became [sole] king [in the 31st year of Asa].

Thus I deduce that Tibni reigned 31-27=4 years.

Therefore 1 Kings 16:23 is true, not false, as I previously stated.

1 Kings 16:29 "In the 38th year of Asa king of judah, Ahab son of Omri became king of israel, and he reigned in Samaria 22 years."

38th Asa=1974
1st Ahab=1974
1 Kings 16:29 is true.

1 Kings 22:41 "Jehoshaphat son of Asa became king of Judah in the fourth year of Ahab king of israel."

Accession Jehoshaphat=Nisan 1978
4th Ahab=1977
1 Kings 16:29 is false.

However I knew long ago, there's a clue in the name of Jehoshaphat. Change his name to JehoSHABAT. This is permissible since the 'ph' sound is similar to the 'v' sound, and the letter BEYT in Hebrew was sometimes pronounced 'v'.

Now make the reign of Jehoshaphat start on Shabat 30th 1977, making 1 Kings 16:29 true instead of false.

1 Kings 22:51 "Ahaziah son of Ahab became king of Israel in Samaria in the 17th year of Jehoshaphat king of judah, and he reigned over Israel two years."

17th Jehoshaphat=1995
Accession Ahaziah=1995

Thus 1 Kings 22:51 is true.

Thus all synchronisms in 1st Kings are true, if the Kings of Judah had an accession year, unlike the kings of Israel.

The synchronisms in 2nd Kings make use of the trick of 2 Kings 15:1 which makes 1st Azariah=777 BC. To make the synchronisms in 2nd Kings true, you have to use BC years rather than Hebrew years. That means we need an alternative to 1916/1917, for the first year of Rehoboam and Jeroboam. The whole point of book of 2nd Kings is to make use of BC dates, and treat lunar years as tropical years.

In my post #2 I stated:

"I can show, by my analysis of the Hebrew Kings, that the Hebrews had figured out that the numbers 222, 555, and 777 were being used by the Romans to inflict harm on them. The Romans in turn had figured out that the Jews used 412+555=967 BC for the public date of the foundation of Solomon's Temple, and (934-932 BC) privately."

Rehoboam ascended to sovereignty in 40th Solomon. The temple's foundation was begun in 4th Solomon. Using 967 BC for the foundation of Solomon's Temple being laid we have: Rehoboam king of Judah ascending to sovereignty in 967-36=931 BC. Therefore we have:

Rehoboam 931-914 BC
Abijam 914-911
Asa 911-870
Jehoshaphat 870-845

2 Kings 3:1 "Joram son of Ahab became king of Israel in Samaria in the 18th year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and he reigned 12 years."

Therefore
1st Joram=852 BC

2 Kings 8:16 "In the 5th year of Joram son of Ahab king of israel, when Jehoshaphat was king of judah, Jehoram son of Jehoshaphat began his reign as king of Judah. He was 32 years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem 8 years."

5th Joram = 848 BC = 1st Jehoram

Since Jehoshaphat's reign ended in 845 BC, there was a 3 year coregency between Jehoshaphat and Jehoram.

Note: In a coregency there is no accession year for the new king.

Jehoram 848-841

2 Kings 8:25 "In the 12th year of Joram son of Ahab king of israel, ahaziah son of jehoram King of Judah began to reign. Ahaziah was 22 years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem one year."

Now we need the kings of Israel up to Ahaziah to figure out when 1st Ahaziah was. Assume Jeroboam ascended to sovereignty in 930 BC, several months after Rehoboam ascended to sovereignty.

Kings of Israel

Jeroboam 930-909
Nadab 909-908
Baasha 908-885
Elah 885-884
Zimri 884
Tibni 884-840
Omri 884-873
Ahab 873-852
Ahaziah 852-851
Joram 851-840
Jehu 840-813
Jehoahaz 813-797
Jehoash 797-782
Jeroboam II 782-740
Zechariah 740-739.5
Menahem 739.5-730

12th Joram=840 BC=Accession Ahaziah

Now his reign only lasted 1 year, so it ended either in 840 or 839 BC. Assume he died in 840 BC.

Ahaziah 840 BC

Joash son of Ahaziah became king at age 7, and from the time he was a year old until he became king, Athaliah reigned.

Athaliah 840-834 BC

2 Kings 13:1 "In the 23rd year of Joash son of ahaziah King of judah, Jehoahaz son of jehu became king of Israel and Samaria and he reigned 17 years."

23rd Joash = 1st Jehoahaz=813
So
Accession Joash=836
A problem is now evident.

Accession Joash = 834 BC, and
Accession Joash = 836 BC.

Both problems can be fixed simultaneously, by assuming Joash did not have an accession year, and Jeroboam ascended to sovereignty in 931 BC. Thus

1st Joram=852 BC
12th Joram = 841=Accession Ahaziah

Assume he died in 841 BC, and Athaliah reigned 6 years.

Athaliah 841-835 BC
Joash 835-796 BC

However, Jeroboam ascended to sovereignty the year after Rehoboam ascended to sovereignty. Thus it's impossible to simultaneously satisfy 2 Kings 8:25 and 2 Kings 13:1.

My solution is to say Ahaziah died in 840 BC, consistent with 1st Jeroboam= 930 BC, and 2 Kings 8:25, and that Athaliah reigned 6 years, so that Joash ascended to sovereignty in 834 BC.

Ahaziah 840 BC
Athaliah 840-834
Joash 834-?

As regards 2 Kings 13:1, it's false where it states
23rd Joash = 1st Jehoahaz=813, because even with no accession year for Joash we have 1st Joash = 835 BC.

Even though it's false, it was put in the Torah to indicate that Joash did NOT have an accession year. Thus his reign ended in 795 BC.

Joash 834-795 BC

2 Kings 14:1 "In the second year of Jehoash son of Jehoahaz king of israel, Amaziah son of joash King of Judah began to reign."

Amaziah didn't have an accession year, because Joash's reign ended in 795 BC, and 2nd Jehoash=796 BC, so there was a 1 year coregency between Joash and Amaziah, and there is no accession year if there's a coregency.

Amaziah 796-768 BC

Now use the 2 Kings 15:1 trick that 1st Azariah=777 BC, to conclude there was a 777-768=9 year coregency between Amaziah and his son Azariah.

Assume Azariah didn't have an accession year.

Azariah 777-726

2 Kings 14:23 "in the 15th year of amaziah the son of joash the king of judah, jeroboam the son of Jehoash the king of Israel reigned in Samaria 41 years."

15th Amaziah=782 BC = 1st Jeroboam II

Jeroboam II 782-742 BC

2 Kings 15:8 "In the 38th year of Azariah king of judah, Zachariah son of jeroboam became king of Israel and samaria, and he reigned 6 months."

38th Azariah=740 BC

Jeroboam's reign ended in 742 BC, so there's a 2-year discrepancy. There is a way to fix it, let the reign of Jeroboam be from 781.5 BC to 740 BC.

781.5-740=41.5

Thus his reign started in 782 BC, lasted 41.5 years, and ended in 740 BC as required.

Zechariah 740-739.5

2 Kings 15:17 "In the 39th year of azariah king of judah, Menahem son of Gadi became king of israel, and reigned in Samaria 10 years."

39th Azariah=739 BC=1st Menahem

Menahem 739-730 BC

2 Kings 15:23 "In the 50th year of azariah king of judah, Pekahiah son of menahem became king of Israel in Samaria, and he reigned two years."

50th Azariah=727 BC = 1st Pekahiah

Pekahiah 727-726 BC

Note: 2 Kings 15:23 presents a problem. Either Menahem reigned 13 years, not 10, OR Pekahiah became king in 47th Azariah. Thus the numbers 13 and 47 were special to the Jews.

2 Kings 15:27 "In the 52nd year of Azariah king of judah, Pekah son of Ramaliah became king of Israel and samaria, and he reigned 20 years."

52nd Azariah=726 BC

Pekah 726-707 BC

2nd Kings 15:32 "In the second year of Pekah son of Ramaliah King of israel, jotham son of Uzziah king of Judah began to reign."

Azariah reigned 52 years, so the last year of his reign was his 52nd year which was 726 BC. Therefore by 2 Kings 15:32 Jotham's 1st year was 725 BC, so there was no Azariah -Jotham coregency, and in fact there was a one-year interregnum.

2 Kings 15:30 "And Hoshea son of Elah conspired a conspiracy against Pekah the son of Ramaliah, and struck him, and killed him, and reigned in his place, in the 20th year of jotham son of Uzziah (Azariah).

Therefore, if 2 Kings 15:30 is true, Jotham reigned at least 20 years. If he reigned exactly 20 years and didn't have an accession year, then we get

Jotham 725-706 BC

2 Kings 16:1 "In the 17th year of Pekah son of ramaliah, Ahaz son of jotham King of Judah began to reign."

1st Pekah=726 BC
17 Pekah=710 BC=1st Ahaz

Thus there was a 710-706=4 year coregency between Jotham and Ahaz.

2nd Kings 17:1 "In the 12th year of Ahaz king of judah, Hoshea son of Elah became king of Israel in Samaria, and he reigned 9 years.

1st Ahaz = 710 BC
12 Ahaz = 699 BC = 1st Hoshea

2 Kings 18:1 "In the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of israel, Hezekiah son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign."

1st Hoshea=699 BC
3rd Hoshea=697 BC=1st Hezekiah=14th Ahaz

2 Kings 16:2 "Ahaz was 20 years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem 16 years."

If Ahaz reigned 16 years and had no accession year, then

Ahaz 710-695 BC

But he had an accession year, thus

Ahaz 710-694 BC

Thus there was a 696-694=3 year coregency between Ahaz and Hezekiah.

How do I know Ahaz had an accession year?

710= Accession Ahaz

If he had an accession year then
710-16=694=16th Ahaz

Now presume all of the kings from Ahaz to Zedekiah had accession years, when was the last year of zedekiah?

694-29-55-2-31-11-11=555 BC

There's a special number.

But we already know that the last year of Zedekiah was 586 BC.

586-555=31

Now recall that 27th Jeroboam wasn't really 1st Azariah, so

31-27=4

And that's the exact error introduced by assuming Jotham reigned for 20 years, when it's expressly stated he reigned for 16. So this calculation proceeded under the assumption that Ahaz, and all subsequent kings of Judah had accession years. Therefore Ahaz had an accession year, so

Ahaz 710-694

So there was indeed a 697-694=3 year coregency between Ahaz and Hezekiah.

COREGENCIES
3 year coregency between Jehoshaphat and Jehoram.
1 year coregency between Joash and Amaziah.
9 year coregency between Amaziah and Azariah.
4 year coregency between Jotham and Ahaz.
3 year coregency between Ahaz and Hezekiah.

3+1+9+4+3=20 years of coregencies.

2nd Kings 15:32 "In the second year of Pekah son of Ramaliah King of israel, jotham son of Uzziah began to reign. He was 25 years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem 16 years."

This contradicts 2 Kings 15:30 which states jotham reigned at least 20 years. Using 16 years for the reign of Jotham, the kings of Judah reigned for a total of
17+3+41+25+8+1+6+40+29+52+16+16+29+55+2+31+3 months+ 11+3 months+11=393 years, 6 months

MINUS
the coregencies, so

393 years 6 months - 20 years=373 years 6 months.

Now in reality they were lunar years, so the amount of time from Accession Rehoboam to the fall of the house of Judah was 373.6 lunar years, when the book of 2nd Kings is demystified. And from the founding of Solomon's Temple to the fall of the house of Judah is 36+373.6=409.6 lunar years.

1st Kings 6:1 "in the 480th year after the Israelites came out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over israel, in the month of Siv, on the second of the month, he began to build the Temple of the Lord.

Therefore the amount of time from the Exodus to the fall of the House of Judah was 480+409.6=889.6 lunar years, which was to be demonstrated.

Q.E.D.

 

[LeePappas]

Since I already proved, using the 2625 days of Daniel prophecy, that Jerusalem fell on Av 9, 2311=March 11, 586 BC=1507316.5, we can now find the exact Julian day number of The Exodus.

1507316.5 - 889.6 * 295.306 =1244612.5=1304.410 BC

Therefore The Exodus took place on Nisan 15, 1305 BC which should be around that Julian day number .

1570416.5= Nisan 1, 2525=Nisan 1, 413 BC

2525-1421=1104

1570416.5-1104*295.306=1244398.676= Nisan 1, 1421

Nisan 15 that year was on Julian day number

1244398.5+14=1244412.5

Using the information in second Kings we got
1244612.5 for the Exodus, and Nisan 15, 1421 is EXACTLY 200 days earlier on Julian day number 1244412.5.

The Bible lets us know the year was 1421, and not 1422.

Matthew 20:1-2 "For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to have workers for his vineyard. He agreed to pay them a denarius for the day and sent them into his vineyard."

Thus a denarius was about a day's wage.

The location of this passage is 20 + 1 = 21 or 20 + 2 = 22, indicating that Matthew knew the Greeks lied and said 422 instead of 421. This passage combined with John 6:7 leads to the figure 200 days as being significant to some Hebrew calculation pertaining to the 422/421 LIE.

John 6:5-7 "Then Jesus lifted up his eyes and seeing that a great crowd is coming to him, he said to Philip, "From where may we buy loaves that these may eat?" But he said this to test him, for he knew what he was about to do. Philip answered him, "Loaves for 200 denarii are not enough for them that each of them may receive a little."

Combining the information in Matthew 20:2 and John 6:7 we get:

200 denarii * 1 day per denarius = 200 days

This implies my calculation was performed by Hebrew scholars before the time of Christ, because it involves the six-month figure from the reign of the Kings Jehoahaz 3 months and Jehoiachin 3 months and the 200 days from the gospels of Matthew and John, which was clearly a known value to the Rabbis, as of the time of the writing of the Gospels.

Here is a link explaining the importance of the number 200 in the bible:

200: The Importance of Numbers in the Bible

If this is true, then the Jews knew how to multiply long before 0 BC, because they knew the value 200 while the Torah was being written.

The fact is, they would also have needed to know the value of 1 synodic month to 4 decimals, because accuracy to three isn't good enough. I can prove this easily.

1507316.5 - 889.6 * 295.3=1244617.62

1244617.5-1244412.5=205

The Jews knew the correct value was 200, not 205, therefore they knew the value of one synodic month to 4 decimals. That this is true makes a good deal of sense. Passover was always on Nisan 14, so when the full moon was no longer on Nisan 17,. they knew they had a 1 day problem in the value of 295.3 days per lunar year, or 29.53 days per synodic month.

When in history did the full moon first fall on Nisan 18?

By answering this question we can estimate when the Jews knew the value of one synodic month to 4 decimals.

Lunation 0=2423407.01389=new moon Dec. 18, 1922

1 synodic month=29.530588 days

Full moon December 1922=2423392.248596

(2423392.2486-1244412.5)/29.530588=39924.01874

Hence the full moon of the Exodus was on

2423392.248586-39924*29.530588=1244413.053

Hence we shouldn't be looking for when it fell on Nisan 18th, we should be looking for when it fell on Nisan 16th.

29.530588-29.53=.0000588 days error per month.

1 day error= X months* .000588 days error per month

X=1700 months=170 lunar years

However the Jews didn't stabilize the full moon until it fell.on Nisan 17th. Thus I think the correct calculation is

2 days error= X*.000588
X=3401 months= 340 lunar years

340 lunar years=275 tropical years

1305 BC - 275 years =1030 BC

That's close to when the temple of Solomon was built.

Let me hazard a guess that 934 BC is when the Jews stabilized the full moon.

1305 - X = 934

X=371 tropical years=459 lunar years

4590*.000588=2.698 days

Thus the full moon moved about 3 days from where it fell in 1305 BC by 934 BC when King Solomon stabilized it. That was thus when the Jews knew the value of one synodic month was about 29.5306 days.

PROOF
Full moon December 1922=2423392.2486
1 synodic month=29.53088 days

Q: When was the full moon in the month of Nisan, 1880?
Nisan 1,1880=?
Nisan 1, 2525=1570416.5
2526-1880=645
1570416.5-645*295.30588=1379944.13
2423392.2486-1379944.13=1043448.119
1043448.119/29.530588=35334.485

2423392.2486-35335*29.530588=1379928.922
1379928.922+29.5306=1379958.362 = Nisan 1880=1379958.449 Jerusalem time

Q: When was the new moon of Sivan 1880?
1379958.449+29.53/2=1379973.214

My suspicion was in 934 BC, a new Moon fell on Sivan 2, and they realized their value of one synodic month needed to be increased from 29.53 to 29.5306. The reason for my suspicion is that I think the story that the foundation of Solomon's Temple being laid on Sivan 2, 1880 was really to hide calendrical information.

1379958.449-1666*29.530588=1330769.489

Full moon Elul 1713 =1330760.489 Jerusalem time
Full moon Nisan 1880=1379958.449 Jerusalem time

Inference: The Jews had a way to estimate the time of the full moon in Nisan 1880 and Elul 1713, since both were around midnight.

Etymology: Al Barak [Turkish]=blood moon

So Al[Turkish]=Ul [Hebrew]=moon

Elul= El+Ul=god+moon

Suspicion: God under the purple cap would know the Elul 1713 full moon was at midnight.

Prior to 934 BC the Jews used 29.53 days per synodic month. They had a 1 day error accumulate by 934 BC, as I will now show.

1330760.489+1666*29.53=1379957.469

1379958.449-1379957.469=.979 days

Thus the full moon of Nisan 1880 occurred a day after the expected date. That means the synodic month is somewhat greater than 29.53 days. But how much?

Full moon Exodus=Nisan 15, 1421=1244413.150 Jerusalem time

1330760.489-1244413.15=86347.339

86348 days from Nisan 15, 1421 to Elul X, 1713

86348 days/29.53 days per month=2924.0582 months=
292 years 4 months 1.7 days

X= Nisan 15+ (15+14+2)=17

Elul 17, 1713=Full moon 1330760.489 Jerusalem time

Q: When was the calendar date of the full moon of the previous month?
A:
1330760.489-29.53=1330730.95

1330730.5= Elul 17, 1713 - 29.5 = Nisan 16th

So the full moon fell on Nisan 16th in the month of Nisan 1713 in the actual Hebrew calendar.

Q: What was the calendar date of the full moon of Nisan 1880?

A: 1880-1713=167 years = 1670 months

1670 months*.000588 days error per month=.98196 days

So in Nisan 934 BC the full full Moon fell on Nisan 17th. That was the year the wise King Solomon stabilized the full moon in the calendar, since that was the year they knew one synodic month is approximately equal to 29.5306 days.

Q: When was the new moon in the month of Sivan 1880?
A:
Nisan 17 + 29/2 days

Full moon Nisan 17, 1880 = 1379958.449 Jerusalem time
New moon Sivan 1880=13709973.214 which was Julian day number 13709972.5

72-58= 14 days

Nisan 17+14 days= Sivan 2, 1880 the supposed day the foundation of Solomon's Temple was laid. It was none other than the Jewish calendar day of the Sivan 1880 new moon.

Etymology:
Solomon שלמן shin+lamed+mem+nun

Mun [Egyptian]=moon
Solomon=Shalom+mun =hello+moon

The proof my analysis is correct is hidden in Solomon's name. Hello+moon means new moon.

Note: if you look up Solomon's name in the Strong's concordance it is שלמה. The Jews lied publicly about the last letter of his name, preferring to say his name was pronounced Shlomoh. They knew non-Jews knew mun [Egyptian]=moon, and were hiding their calendrical knowledge from the world.

The conclusion is that 934 BC was the specific year that the Jews knew one synodic month is approximately 29.5306 days, and therefore the year they finally stabilized the full moon in the calendar, with the full moon of Nisan 1880 falling on Nisan 17th, which is where it still was in the time of Christ a thousand years later.

 

[LeePappas]

When was the new moon of Sivan 1880?
1379958.449+29.53/2=1379973.214

My suspicion was in 934 BC, a new Moon fell on Sivan 2, and they realized their value of one synodic month needed to be increased from 29.53 to 29.5306. The reason for my suspicion is that I think the story that the foundation of Solomon's Temple being laid on Sivan 2, 1880 was really to hide calendrical information.

1379958.449-1666*29.530588=1330769.489

Full moon Elul 1713 =1330760.489 Jerusalem time
Full moon Nisan 1880=1379958.449 Jerusalem time

Inference: The Jews had a way to estimate the time of the full moon in Nisan 1880 and Elul 1713, since both were around midnight.

In my calculation I assumed the value of one synodic month is 29.530588 days, but I can solve for the value of one synodic month by assuming instead that the full moon of Av 1713 was exactly at noon Jerusalem time. From this assumption it follows that the Jews reordered the month names to hide calendrical information.

Full moon Av 1713 Jerusalem time= 1330731.0000 [exact]=1330730.903 UTC

Full moon December 1922 = 2423392.25

(2423392.25-1330730.903)/37001 = 29.530589 days = 1 synodic month = 29 days 12 hr 44 min 3 sec

Note: This agrees with NASA's Fred Espenak's value for one synodic month.

Therefore they didn't estimate the full moon of Elul 1713 to be at midnight, they estimated the full moon of the previous month to be at noon. And the original month name of that month was Elul not Av. Then later on they moved the month name of Elul to hide their discovery of the exact time of the Elul Full moon. My guess at their Original Calendar is:

1. Kislev (Kish)
2. Tevet (David)
3. Shebat (Queen of Sheba)
4. Nisan (Solomon)
5. Sivan (Jeroboam)
6. Tammuz (Nadab)
7. Elul (Elah)
8. Ashvan (Baasha)
9 Tishrei (Nine+king)
10. Av (RabAv= many+tens)

Then sometime after 934 BC, they restructured the names to:

1. Kislev
2. Tevet
3. Shebat
4. Nisan
5. Sivan
6. Tammuz
7. Av
8. Elul
9 Tishrei
10. Heshvan

You may wonder how Nisan the first month can also be the fourth month. When you shift the month names by three, Nisan is 4, and Elul is 7, and in my analysis of the kings I discovered the number 47 held some special significance to the Jews. This significance pertains to how God under the purple cap must know that the Full moon in Elul 1713, was exactly at noon Jerusalem time. Thus the number 47 connects to their belief that God, the forthcoming Messiah, would be Jewish.

After having said all this, I need to change my assumption that the Elul 1713 Full moon was exactly at noon Jerusalem time, because

THE REASON NASA DOESN'T HAVE THE APRIL 1, 685 BC ECLIPSE VISIBLE IN ROME IS BECAUSE THEY ARE USING THE WRONG VALUE OF THE SYNODIC MONTH.

According to NASA, in 1842 AD there was a solar eclipse on December 31st, at 19:04:24 JD 2394201.295.

https://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/5MCSEmap/1801-1900/1842-12-31.gif

Let me simply reduce the value of one synodic month by 1 second.

1 synodic month=29.530576 days= 29 days 12 hours 44 minutes 1.8 seconds

Now this difference of 1 second wouldn't significantly affect their time of the 1842 eclipse. We can now solve for the time of the April 1st 685 BC eclipse.

(2394201.295 - E)/29.530576= 31267

Solving for E reveals that E=1470868.775

And I already proved earlier that Julian day number is Aprilius 1st, 685 BC.

Now one more condition is met, namely that day earth was in the same orbital position as it was on the day of the December 31, 1842 eclipse. To see this solve for T in the following equation:

(2394201.295-1470868.775)/T=2528

T=365.24229

Since 1 tropical year is 365.2422 days, this analysis is convincing evidence that there was indeed an eclipse on April 1st 685 BC, and NASA missed the 685 BC eclipse because they used the wrong value of one synodic month.

I can now solve for the time of the Elul 1713 Full moon, and it will be around noon Jerusalem time.

(2423392.25 - X)/37001 = 29.530576

X=1330731.407 UTC = 1330731.504 = Elul 1713 full moon 12:06 PM Jerusalem time

Before jumping to conclusions, let me check that the eclipse happened after sunrise in Rome under these assumptions.

1470868.775 = January 8, 685 BC [Julian proleptic]

Sunrise in Rome on January 8th is at 7:38 AM.

1470868.775 UTC = 1470868.809 Rome time = 7:24:58 AM.

I can tweak the numbers to force the time of greatest eclipse to be at 8:00 AM Rome time.

1470868.8 UTC =1470868.834 Rome time = 8:01 AM

(2394201.295 - 1470868.8)/S= 31267

S=29.530575

(2394201.295-1470868.8)/T=2528

T=365.24228

(2423392.25 - X)/37001 = 29.530575

X=1330731.444 UTC = 1330731.542 = Elul 1713 full moon 1:00 PM Jerusalem time

This time for the Elul 1713 full moon is about an hour too much. So I think the eclipse in Rome didn't take place at the time of Greatest eclipse, it took place at around 8:00 AM Rome time, and the eclipse max was at 7:24:58 Rome time.

The earth rotated by 35 minutes or 8.75°, from the Greatest eclipse to Rome's longitude of 12.5° E. Thus the longitude of Greatest eclipse was 12.5+8.75= 21.25° E.

 

[LeePappas]

I spent the day thinking about the April 1st 685 BC eclipse, and realized an eclipse that happened at sunrise would be too low on the horizon to see, and everyone saw it. So instead I estimate the eclipse at 10:00 AM Rome time, Julian day number 1470868.916. I think that's reliable. Solar elevation in Rome at 10:00 AM on January 1st is 18°, see this link

NOAA Solar Position Calculator

Then I thought about the December 31, 1842 eclipse. There was an identical eclipse 19 years later on January 1, 1862, and yet another 19 years after that in 1881. Then in 1884 Greenwich was chosen to be the prime meridian. That's near to those eclipse dates.

Then, on a whim, I speculated that all three eclipses were visible from Greenwich. That means the time of the 1842 eclipse was 2394201.0000 not what Fred Espenak has of 2394201.295. Then I performed a napkin calculation. I worked through a set of simultaneous linear equations to get

1470868.82 = time of 685 BC greatest eclipse

2394201 - 1470868.82 =2528T
T=365.2421598

Actual tropical year 365.242198
365.242198-365.2421598=.0000382 dy/yr

.000382 day/yr*24hr/day*15°/hr=.013752°/yr

But how many years are we talking about?
1863+685=2528 yrs

.013752°/yr*2528yr=34.765°

So that must be where, relative to the prime meridian, that the greatest eclipse happened in 685 BC.

Rome's longitude = 12.5 E.

34.765-12.5=22.265°=.061847 days

UTC time of 685 BC eclipse at Rome's longitude= 1470868.82+.061847=1470868.882 UTC

Rome is 49 minutes east of the prime meridian.
1470868.882+49/(24*60)=1470868.916 Rome time = 9:59:02 AM April 1st 685 BC Rome time.

 

[LeePappas]

Some of the passages in the Bible pertaining to the Kings are true while others are false, but a numerical pattern emerges.

Southern Kingdom of Judah

17.4 Rehoboam Heshvan 1916 to Nisan 1934
2.9 Abijah to Shebat 30th 1936
41 Asa to Nisan 1978
25 Jehoshaphat to Nisan 2003
8 Jehoram to Shebat 2010
1 Ahaziah to Shebat 2011
6.1 Athaliah to Nisan 2018
39.9 Joash to Shebat 2057
29.3 amaziah to Tammuz 2087
52 azariah to Tammuz 2139
15.7 jotham to Shebat 2154
16 ahaz to Shebat 2170
29.4 Hezekiah to Av 2200
55 Manasseh to Av 2255
2 Amon to Av 2257
31 Josiah to Av 2288
.3 Jehoahaz to Heshvan 2288
11.2 Jehoiakim to Tevet 2299
.3 Jehoiachin to Sivan 2300
11.2 zedekiah to Av 9, 2311

The following Kings list differs from what I had earlier in the thread, inasmuch as Zimri's 7 days cross the end of the year.

Northern Kingdom of Israel

Nisan 1917-Nisan 1918 1st Jeroboam
Nisan 1938-kislev 1938 22nd Jeroboam
Kislev 1938-nisan 1938 1st Nadab
Nisan 1939-kislev 1939 2nd Nadab
Kislev 1939-nisan 1940 1st Baasha
Nisan 1962-kislev 1962 24th Baasha
Kislev 1962-nisan 1963 1st Elah
Nisan 1963-shebat 1963 2nd Elah
Shebat 1963-nisan 1964 .02 Zimri
Nissn 1964-kislev 1964 1st Tibni
Kislev 1964-nisan 1965 1st Omri
Nisan 1975-kislev1975 12th Omri
Kislev 1975-nisan 1976 1st Ahab
Nisan 1996-kislev 1996 22nd Ahab
Kislev 1996-nisan 1997 1st Ahaziah
Nisan 1997-kislev 1997 2nd Ahaziah
Kislev 1997-nisan 1998 1st Jehoram/Joram
Nisan 2008-kislev.2008 12th Jehoram
Kislev 2008-nisan 2009 1st Jehu
Nisan 2035-kislev 2035 28th Jehu
Kislev 2035-nisan 2036 1st Jehoahaz
Nisan 2051-kislev 2051 17th Jehoahaz
Kislev 2051-nisan 2052 1st Jehoash
Nisan 2066-kislev 2066 16th Jehoash
Kislev 2066 - Nisan 2067 1st Jeroboam
Nisan 2106-kislev 2106 41st Jeroboam
Kislev 2106- Av 2107 1st Zechariah
Av 2107-elul 2107 1st Shallum
Elul 2107-nisan 2108 1st Menachem
Nisan 2116-kislev 2116 10th Menachem
Kislev 2116-nisan 2117 1st Pekahiah
Nisan 2117-kislev 2117 2nd Pekahiah
Kislev 2117-nisan Nisan 2118 1st Pekah
Nisan 2136-kislev 2136 20th Pekah
Kislev 2136-nisan 2137 1st Hoshea
Nisan 2144-kislev 2144 9th Hoshea

Now the pattern emerges from consideration of the false passages.

1st Kings 15:1 true 1934
1st Kings 15:9 true 1936
1st Kings 15:25 true 1938
1st Kings 15:28 true 1939
1st Kings 16:8 true 1962
1st Kings 16:23 false 1964 and 1967 ∆=2
1st Kings 16:15 true 1963
1 Kings 16:29 false 1974 and 1975. ∆=1
1st Kings 22:41 true 1978
1st Kings 22:51 false 1994 and 1996. ∆=2
2nd Kings 3:1 false 1995 and 1997. ∆=2
2 Kings 8:16 false 2001 and 2003. ∆=2
2 Kings 8:25 false 2008 and 2011. ∆=3
2nd Kings 13:1 false 2035 and 2040. ∆=5
2 Kings 14:1 false 2052 and 2057. ∆=5
2 Kings 14:23 false 2066 and 2071. ∆=5
2 Kings 15:1 false. 777 trick
2 Kings 15:8 false 2106 and 2124. ∆=18
2 Kings 15:17 false 2125 and 2107. ∆=18
2 Kings 15:23 false 2137 and 2116. ∆=21
2 Kings 15:27 false 2139 and 2117. ∆=22
2 Kings 15:30 false 2159 and 2136. ∆=23
2 Kings 15:32 false 2119 and 2139. ∆=20
2 Kings 16:1 false 2133 and 2154. ∆=21
2 Kings 17:1 false 2166 and 2136. ∆=30
2 Kings 18:1 false 2138 and 2170. ∆=32

18+18+21+22+23+20+21+30+32 = 205

Carthage, home of the Hebrews, was attacked when the second Punic war began in 222 BC, and 205 BC was the end of the second Punic war. The Romans were trying to lie about both dates.

The Exodus took place in 421 ATF. Ancient Greeks tried to lie to the Jews and tell them they arrived in Israel in 422 ATF. They stored their lie by moving the fourth letter of the Hebrew alphabet to the 22nd letter of their alphabet. Apparently the Jews didn't fall for it.

There were 3 kings of Rome with the last name Tarquinius, the Romans tried to lie and say there were just two.

The 2nd king of Rome, Romulus, the 5th king of Rome Luckyus Tarquinius Priscus, and the 7th king of Rome Luckyus Tarquinius Superbus. The fifth and the 7th Kings of Rome were descendants of Romulus.

222

555

777

I have completely explained the mysterious numbers of the Hebrew Kings, a task that archaeologist Edwin R. Thiele attempted.