Desolation of Jerusalem

by Alwayshere 240 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Jeffro

  You misread Jeremiah in your conclusion that the king of Babylon was called to account in 537 becaue it was only after the seventy years had been fulfilled which was 537 that after that event, judgement began to executed agaimst Bablon which is described in detail in 25:12-14.

  So you are saying that in 539 when a magic hand wrote on the wall what Daniel interpreted as saying that Babylon's days were numbered, that it had been weighed in the balances, and that the kingdom was to given to foreigners, followed later that night by the death of the last Babylonian king and capture by the Medo-Persians, that this was something other than the judgement referred to by Jeremiah? Either you have extremely limited reading comprehension or you are simply brainwashed.
• 

  Desino

  Well said Jeffro, very little reading comprehension. WT scholar could neither read about the archaelogical evidences I showed in the begining of this thread.
• 

  Spectrum

  Alwayshere,
  Are you serious about that there was a tablet dating jerusalems destruction to 587bc? I've never heard of it. If that's true then it closes the issue.
• 

  Alwayshere

  Spectrum, Yes I am serious. I must have read it in the book "Crisis of Conscience" because I looked through all my notes and can't find it. My daughter-in-law has the book right now but I will check and see if thats where I read it. Any way the WTS accepts 539 for the fall of Babylon and this date is on a cuneiform tablet and in their Vol. 2 Insight on the scriptures on page 326 last paragraph they admit 607 differs from what is available on cuneiform tablets. Why accept one date found on a cuneiform table and not another? Very simple, it is because the organization is built on the 1914 doctrine which was a lie from the beginning. They have to have 607 for 1914 so they will never admit 607 is wrong. They just throw 607 out in front of you but never refer you to any evidence as to where they got it.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Reply to post 705

  I am not denying that Babylon did not receive judgement as foretold imminently by Daniel and foretold by Jeremiah. It is a indisputable fact that 539 meant the Fall of Babylon both as a city and World Power. But we are talking about something different and that is the seventy years and its context which was clearly described in Jeremiah 25. From verses 12 onwards Jeemiah foretold the destruction of Babylon. a similar fate to that of Judah which also be experienced by all the nations including Babylon. This specific oracle of devastation only began after the seventy years were fulfilled which was 537 and in the straits of the times all of those nations, their cities all dissappeared into the sands of history and that is what Jeremiah foretold.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Spectrum and Alwayshere

  The clay tablet that is used to calculate the Fall of Jerusalem is called VAT 4956 and is simply an astronomical diary, a copy made during the Seleucied Era of the third century BCE. It purports to have observations made during the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzer datable to 568 BCE. From this it is assumed that Nebuchadnezzer's 18th year which was the year of his conquest of Jerusalem must have been 586/587 BCE.

  The information in this tablet require interpretation and there is much disagreement about its intrinsic value for the purposes of chronology buy regardless of its value or otherwise the data as currentlu understood or presented conflicts with a direct reading of Scripture which affirms the seventy year period and its relationship to Nebuchadnezzer which places that jhistoric event some twenty years earlier in 607 BCE.

  In short, we have History- contemporary biblical history vs non-contemporary astronomical diary. Which one would you prefer? Celebrated WT scholars hold to the former rather than the latter.

  scholar JW
• 

  Spectrum

  Scholar,
  "In short, we have History- contemporary biblical history vs non-contemporary astronomical diary."
  We know that a lot of the scriptural events were not written in at the time of the events. Really how contemporary is contemporary?
• 

  Alwayshere

  Scholar, try reading Jeremiah 25 : 9 through 12. These 3 verses go together. Verse 9, God calls Nebuchadrezzar "his servent" and verse 11 does not say Jerusalem will be desolated 70 years but says "the land will be a devastated place and "these nations" will serve the King of Babylon. Verse 12 says "after the 70 years have been fullfilled I will call to account against the King of Babylon and that nation." So plain anyone who wants the truth can see the 70 years is not 70 years of deslation but 70 years of service to the King of Babylon. I don't expect you to believe this because you are not allowed to believe the Bible when it contridicts the WTS's beliefs. and I also am not going to mess with you any more on this subject. You [like the organization] are nothing but a fraud.
• 

  Alwayshere

  Spectrum, Go to search and type "vat 4956" than click on "Refutation of appendix in Let your Kingdom come.
• 

  Spectrum

  Always,
  thanks for that. It was an interesting read. The gist of it is that GB is relying on an error to account for the 20 years whilst ignoring the existing evidence which points to 586/7bc.