Answer: The Babylonian captivity or Babylonian exile is the period in Jewish history during which a number of people from the ancient Kingdom of Judah were captives in Babylon, the capital of the Neo-Babylonian Empire.
After the Battle of Carchemish in 605 BCE, King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon besieged Jerusalem, resulting in tribute being paid by King Jehoiakim.[1] Jehoiakim refused to pay tribute in Nebuchadnezzar's fourth year, which led to another siege in Nebuchadnezzar's seventh year, culminating with the death of Jehoiakim and the exile to Babylonia of King Jeconiah, his court and many others; Jeconiah's successor Zedekiah and others were exiled in Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year; a later deportation occurred in Nebuchadnezzar's 23rd year. The dates, numbers of deportations, and numbers of deportees given in the biblical accounts vary.[2] These deportations are dated to 597 BCE for the first, with others dated at 587/586 BCE, and 582/581 BCE respectively.[3]
After the fall of Babylon to the Persian king Cyrus the Great in 539 BCE, exiled Judeans were permitted to return to Judah.[4][5] According to the biblical book of Ezra, construction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem began around 537 BCE. All these events are considered significant in Jewish history and culture, and had a far-reaching impact on the development of Judaism.
Archaeological studies have revealed that, although Jerusalem was utterly destroyed, other parts of Judah continued to be inhabited during the period of the exile. Most of the exiles did not return to their homeland, instead travelling westward and northward. Many settled in what is now northern Israel, Lebanon, and Syria. Some Iraqi, Iranian, and Georgian natives today trace their ancestry back to these exiles
Answer:
Supreme Court justices need a healthy respect for past precedents. But sometimes, precedent is so bad it simply has to be overturned.
The court did just that last month in the case of Knick v. Township of Scott. The court delivered a victory for champions of property rights by overturning a 1985 precedent that had blocked property rights cases from federal courts.
This overturning of an older decision sparked a vigorous public debate. Two Supreme Court justices staked out opposing positions: Elena Kagan warned against a rush to overturn precedents, while Clarence Thomas suggested older decisions that are in fact wrong should be changed.
We should welcome this debate because it highlights the judiciary’s duty to correct its own mistakes and to ensure that our constitutional rights are properly and fully protected.
Answer:
I dont know but you got this
Explanation:
Answer:
your dad staying and hurting you .