607

by Zico 290 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  AuldSoul

  scholar,

  scholar: The seventy years of Tyre were similar to that of Jeremiah and that identity was of servitude. The prophecy of Isaiah merely supports Jeremiah and the other writers who all defined the seventy years as servitude, exile and desolation. The period ran from the fall in 607 until the return in 537 which harmonizes biblical history.

  Now you are directly contradicting the paragraph to which I refer. Was that your intention? I posted the entire subheading for you in this thread, did you read it?

  True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E.

  That is a direct quote from the book. Note, the fall of Babylonian dominion is not 537 BC and does not have any relationship whatsoever to the release of Jewish captives. The fall of Babylonian dominion was in 539 BC, as the publication admits quite frankly.

  Babylon's dominion was not over Jerusalem in 538 BC or 537 BC, so how could Jeremiah 25:12 have possibly been fulfilled in either of those years?

  AuldSoul
• 

  a Christian

  Scholar,

  You failed to answer my question, as I knew you would.

  I asked why you choose to establish the date of Jerusalem's destruction by starting your count of time with "the 7th year of Cambyses," as astronomically dated to the year 523/2 B.C. by Strm Kambys 400, rather than doing so by starting your count of time with "the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar," as astronomically dated to the year 568/7 B.C. by VAT 4956.

  VAT 4956 assigns a date of 568/7 BC to "the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar." The Bible indicates that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem in his 18th year as king of Babylon. (Jer. 52:29) So, in order to assign a date to Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year all we have to do is count back 19 years from 568/7 B.C. That brings us to 587/6 B.C. Simple!

  But to date Jerusalem's destruction using the JW method, starting our count of time with "the 7th year of Cambyses" as astronomically dated to the year 523/2 B.C. by Strm Kambys 400, is far from simple and requires us to employ several possibly mistaken assumptions.

  That being the case, the only reason anyone would choose to date Jerusalem's destruction starting their count of time using the astronomical dating found in Strm Kambys 400, while ignoring the astronomical dating contained in VAT 4956, would be if historians tell us that the astronomical dating found in Strm Kambys 400 is more reliable than the astronomical dating contained in VAT 4956. But again I ask you, do they?

  You know as well as I do that they do not. That being the case, since VAT 4956 allows us to date Jerusalem's destruction in a much simpler and more direct manner than does Strm Kambys 400, the only reason anyone would choose to date Jerusalem's destruction using the astronomical dating found in Strm Kambys 400, while rejecting the astronomical dating contained in VAT 4956, would be if they had some special reason to do so.

  In the case of the Watchtower Society we all know what that special reason is. Dating Jerusalem's destruction beginning their count of time using the astronomical dating found in Strm Kambys 400, and then adding to that dating a couple of highly questionable assumptions, allows Watchtower leaders to support their "607 B.C." date for Jerusalem's destruction. Something they must continue to do if they are to hold onto their power over the lives of Jehovah's Witnesses. For without that date all of the Watchtower Society's claims to God given authority crumble.

  "Scholar," by refusing to provide honest answers to my questions you have shown yourself once again to be a very dishonest man.
• 

  scholar

  A Christian

  It is you who fails to understand the issues at hand. Celebrated WT scholars have stated how the date of 607 is derived. It is derived not from some astromical date as you allege but from the date of 537 BCE which is establihed by means of accpted secular evidence which includes the astronomical evidence. The Bible clearly refers to a seventy years of exile-desolation and servitude calculated back from 537 gives 607 as the beginning of the seventy years commensurate with the Fall of Jerusalem.

  Astronomical and other evidence aids scholars in calculating the pivotal date of 539 for the Fall of Babylon which is essential for establishing 537 with years for the Persian rulers begiunning with Cyrus who issued the decree which caused the return of the Jewish exiles.

  Certainly, celebrated WT scholars could have chosen another methodology based upon the regnal years of Nebuchadenezzer with his destroying Jerusalem in his 18 th year but such a method invalidates the seventy years so such a method simply fails. As you correctly state that using such a method does not give a precise year as it could be 586 or 587. This is unsatisfactory so such a regnal based methodology is imprecise wheras a event based methodology gives the sincere Christian a precise date of 607 right to the very month.

  Therefor it is impossible by means of any astromicaldethod or data to fix a positive or secure date for th destruction of Jeruslem because it cannot account for the seventy years. So, you have to decide what is more important, Jeremiah's seventy years or a couple of astronomical tablets . I and other sincere and genuine Christian scholars prefer God's word over and above what some clay tablet is interpreted to mean.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Auld Soul

  It is apparent that you have not understood what I have said and what is stated in the Isaiah commentary. The seventy years of Tyre wasa period of domination to Babylon just as Jeremiah's seventy years was also of dominationm under Babylon. These two but different periods share a common feature that is servitude to Babylon but they differ as to chronology and in the fact that Jerermiah's seventy years were also a period of desolation and exile.

  scholar JW
• 

  barry

  In the tree vision of Daniel four the time period mentioned is seven times which is seven years no problem there.

  The year day principle states and i dont beleive the year day principle is a valid biblical datum. "?You would be hard pressed to get a year day from numbers ezekiel or from daniel 9. In fact commentaries on the bible say that the year day principle is not necessary to explain daniel 9

  Can we also agree that the word day is not mentioned in the tree vision in daniel 4.

  The fact is time only extends to the cross.
• 

  nicolaou

  A Christian

  It is you who fails to understand the issues at hand.

  Auld Soul

  It is apparent that you have not understood

  Yeah, everyone but you eh scholar? I'm not sure I'll ever waste another keystroke on you.
• 

  AuldSoul

  The seventy years of Tyre wasa period of domination to Babylon just as Jeremiah's seventy years was also of dominationm under Babylon.

  (1) When you read Jeremiah 25:22 how do you arrive at the "understanding" (i.e. interpretation) that the 70 years of Jeremiah are not identical to the 70 years of Isaiah?

  (2) How do you account for the 70 years of Jeremiah being used a proof text in that paragraph with no explanation of two different 70 year periods?

  (3) In what way was Cyrus or Medo-Persia called to account in 537 BC, and why would Jeremiah 25:12 apply to that king and that nation when they had not dominated anyone during that 70 years?

  (4) Why did WT scholars link Daniel 5:26 directly to Isaiah 13:11; Jeremiah 25:12; 27:7; 50:1; 51:11 in the marginal references?

  (5) Why does Isaiah 13:1 also link directly to Jeremiah 25:12 in the marginal references of the NWT, when the verse specifies that this is a pronouncement against Babylon?

  Please, try really hard to answer the questions I asked.
• 

  M.J.

  Certainly, celebrated WT scholars could have chosen another methodology based upon the regnal years of Nebuchadenezzer with his destroying Jerusalem in his 18 th year but such a method invalidates the seventy years so such a method simply fails.

  Please explain why it invalidates the 70 years? Just count FORWARD 70 years from 587 and the return from exile will be in 517, according to "Celebrated WT scholars'" version of the 70 years. Why not go with 517 for the return from exile? Please explain why not?
• 

  Bryan

  scholar:

  There is overwhelming secular evidence for 607 as the date for the Fall of Jerusalem despite the pitiful efforts to the contrary by the Jonsson hypothesis, apostates and higher critics. In a careful examination of all of the secular evidence points rather to 607 than 586, 587, 588 and 589. The secular evidence has a shortfall of twenty years so it does not quite make it but the biblical seventy years of exile, servitude and desolation closes the gap nicely and brings scholarship correctly to 607.

  Recent scholarship on the seventy years undermines the Jonsson nonsense which uses the minority opinion of 587 as opposed to the majority opinion of 586, such scholarship does not agree with the apostate claims that the seventy years was of servitude alone from 609/605 until 539 BCE.

  Celebrated WT scholars for centuries have long pointed to 607 beginning the Gentile Times proven by the facts of modern history and prophecy to have ended in 1914. In short, the correct understanding of the seventy years, secular evidence as found with Neo-Babylonian chronology despite a 20 year shortfall and the fulfillment of the Gentile Times provide three lines of evidence in support of 607 BCE.

  scholar JW

  scholar says alot, but proves nothing!

  Bryan

  Have You Seen My Mother
• 

  startingover

  Just curious,

  Has anyone here been influenced to believe 607 is correct by what schiolar has said? IMO, if anything he has convinced more people that it's wrong.