607

by Zico 290 Replies latest jw friends

scholar

Leolaia
Response to post 6973
No problem. The text which in context is with the the fact that Judah would be a desolated place for seventy years during this historic period of exile, desolation and servitude, the foreign nations would similarly experience that same domination by Babylon ie. being made to serve the king of Babylon seventy years. History, secular or biblical does not give precise chronologies for those respective nations of their servitude but with Judah it iwas different because her servitude lasted exactly seventy years from the Fall in 607 until the Return in 537 BCE.
scholar JW
scholar

Alan F
At least Leolaia does not share your low opinon of me and I think does not regard me as a moron for at least she asks me a question. Also, you are very much interested in my attention to your questions regarding 537/538 contoversy. Remember, it was scholar and only scholar that first answered your questions regarding Jeremiah 25:12 which from your own account baffled the late Albert Schroeder. Also, it is scholar whoc first introduced Applegate's paper to this board which provides a rebuttal to the Jonsson garbage regarding the seventy years.
scholar JW
scholar

helppls
If your husband is such a beautiful person then you should follow his lead and listen and learn from him.
I am more than happy to address your sincere and humble questions regarding such a complex and confusing subject of chronology which is not for the fainthearted but the strong.
Celebrated WT scholar for decades have shown the impossibility of Jerusalem's destruction in 587 or the preferred date of 586 BCE. This is because such chronology which is based solely on secular evidence ignores the biblical seventy years. Such ignorance created a gap of some twenty years between biblical and secular chronology, God or man's chronology. Which one will you prefer?
The biblical and secular evidence proves that Jews did return in 517 but in 537 BCE although some advocate 538 BCE. This means that from 537 BCE we count back the full seventy years which establishes very nicely, ever so nicely the year of 607 BCE.
Scholars and the testimony of Ezra does not allow for 517 as the year for the Return because the seventy years ended the exile, servitude and desolation which could be achieved by the fact of a return back home and the eventual establishing true worship with a rebuilt temple. I hope this is simple enough and my advice is for you to learn more and study hard the Bible and the wonderful publications of the faithful and discreet slave.
scholar JW
KW13

8 "Therefore this is what Jehovah of armies has said, ‘"For the reason that YOU did not obey my words, 9 here I am sending and I will take all the families of the north," is the utterance of Jehovah, "even [sending] to Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land and against its inhabitants and against all these nations round about; and I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of astonishment and something to whistle at and places devastated to time indefinite. 10 And I will destroy out of them the sound of exultation and the sound of rejoicing, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the hand mill and the light of the lamp. 11 And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years."’
12
"‘And it must occur that when seventy years have been fulfilled I shall call to account against the king of Babylon and against that nation,’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘their error, even against the land of the Chal·de´ans, and I will make it desolate wastes to time indefinite.
- NWT.
Now that makes it clear, that is 539. And it must occur that when seventy years have been fulfilled I shall call to account against the king of Babylon and against that nation.
Who else was called to account? No one.
------------
Then i mentioned to you this.
Scholar. i am sure you'll agree there is a difference between quoting a source and changing what it says.
i am not gonna look here again, if you wanna bring anything to my attention just pm me.
The insight book Volume 2,
[Picture
on page 326]
Babylonian chronicle that tells of Nebuchadnezzar’s capturing Jerusalem, seizing the king, and appointing one of his own choice; 617 B.C.E.
-------------
That tablet is in the British Musuem.
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/index.html
Search 597 after clicking Continue with Compass. note how the British musuem and the Society have different ideas completely about what that tablet says.
Lady Liberty

Excuse me Scholar,
But once again, you are mistaken!! The whole reason why I even went to all the trouble to get ahold of Graysons book in the first place is because I saw that the Society was quoting from this Author and he APPEARED to support 607. This made me curious. So I went to the long wait to get the book. Upon finding what it REALLY said I was upset that deception was the goal of the Society!! Had the Author truely accepted 607 as his expert finding, I would want to know how he came to such a conclusion, and would weigh it with all the other facts. I have told you before and I will tell you again, that I am ONLY interested in the facts! And for over a year I tried everything I could to find one solid peice of evidence to SUPPORT 607!! And that was while I was still a active JW!! So, had I really found support for this date afterall?? NO, I had not! I only could conclude this after examining the book!! Unlike you, I am examining ALL the facts, not just one sided. Only then, can you say you have made a honest examination of your faith. Until then, you are only parroting what the Society has taught you. Afterall, you cannot deny, if you have the truth, it will withstand ANY questioning! And a honest examination will be only faith strengthening! Personally, all I want is the TRUTH! If what you had to offer, made any sence, or had any factual backing, then it would be clear it was the truth. But since non of what you offer makes sence, nor will you respond to even the most simplistic of reasoning like Alan F.commented on, such as my own that I have proposed to you, then why should anyone listen to what you have to say? It is becoming quite clear, that the only reason you spend time here is to COUNT your time!! You already said in previous postings that you could care less if anyone listened to you?? Then your motives are clear! Those here, and those who lurk here want FACTS Scholar!! That other example of deception from Harpers Bible Dictionary I spoke of will prove my point! And that copy will hopefully be posted tonight, as I have to scan it at work, first before posting it here. I have not forgotten, nor am I avoiding you.
Lady Liberty
scholar

Lady Liberty
It is you who are mistaken because you have been easily deceived by apostate propaganda and have already made up your mind about the status of 607. That is your choice but your choice is reckless and stupid. The date 607 is rock solid and Grayson's reference proves the matter in spite of the insertion of modern dates consistent with biblical chronology.
scholar JW/
ellderwho

The date 607 is rock solid and Grayson's reference proves the matter in spite of the insertion of modern dates consistent with biblical
ellderwho

in spite of the insertion of modern dates

Why would the Towers use [ ] maybe the same reason they used them in Collosians. All [other] things. To try and infer something that is not there.
If Im quoted on these boards would the person quotes me insert [] to further help the reader understand what I really meant?
You qwack me up Neil, btw ever come up with that list?
Lady Liberty

Scholar,
What part of my "story" do you not understand?? I am telling you that for months and months I TRIED to find proof for 607!! The reason, like I told you BEFORE was NOT to argue this point on any forum, but it was to "save" my parents from "apostate" thinking!! Not ONE Elder could give me any proof, or could refute the data I kept finding! It scared me to death! The more I researched the more I found! I am sorry but the British Museum, and all the Encyclopedias I could get my hands are NOT from Apostates! But these sources all pointed to a different date than what the Society teaches! I wanted to know WHY!! And as a truth seeker, I prayed for Jehovah to help me find the truth about this matter no matter what it may be. The more I researched this date of 607 the more that I found nothing to support! Further more, because I have asked the Elders why things don't match up, and they have NO answers, I have been given a label of "apostacy". Not only Us, but my Sister and her husband asked their Elders, and her best friends asked theirs. Guess what? We ALL have that label now! In fact, my sisters best friend would not believe us, so she decided to go to her Elders. She quickly found them turning on her and her husband! And yep you guessed it they too now have an Apostate label! Just for asking!! Something is wrong with the fact that in the organization you CANNOT have questions. And if you dare, you had better take as a answer whatever is given you no matter if it doesn't make sence and contradicts "truth"! For me personally, I should be able to examine thoroughly my faith! For with these doubts, how do I have conviction!!!??? Because of this one date not being supported by ANY facts, only Watchtower doctorine, it opens pandoras box! It is only natural to feel the need to question EVERYTHING! Once a person ALLOWS themselves the right to examine their faith with their blinders off, and particularily reads CONTEXT, the picture becomes real clear what is going on! The mere fact that you refuse to answer any of my questions that I have posed to you, once again is confirmation of my findings! The Bible says to "make sure of ALL things". Therefore, I AM NOT an APOSTATE! You may want to readup on Apostacy, before you say I have been decieved by Apostate propaganda! I have not left my love for Jehovah God, nor his son! It is because of this love that I am driven to find out the truth on this matter and other matters that are now in question! Believe you me, I have been NEITHER reckless, or stupid in investigating what it is I am teaching others! Continuing to ignore the FACTS, and to teach a lie, like you are proposing I do IS however, reckless AND stupid! ! In whose mind is the date 607 ROCK SOLID?? YOURS?? THE SOCIETYS?? Yes, a whole 4 paragraphs of EVIDENCE????? By your saying Graysons references PROVE the matter in spite of dates only further points out that you are not sincere about truth! Didn't you just get through telling me that you could not get that book?? So how is it you could make such a claim? If you truely do have the "truth", then why can't you answer any of our most simple questions we have posed?? Again, you ignore this question!! WHY?? What do you fear answering my questions??? You simply reply with sarcasim and circular reasoning.
L.L.
Undecided

What difference does it make anyway, now that they have abandoned the generation of 1914 as any importance to us ones alive now. Millions now living have died, the year 1925, 1975 and many others are just a bunch of crap. People are realizing that those old men in Brooklyn are not inspired, or directed by any spirit except their own arogrance and self importance. If they were to be the kings and priest we are to live under in a new world I wouldn't want to be there anyway.
Ken P.

607

Share this