607 bce or 587 bce

by jw 94 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  scholar

  Auld Soul

  1. Daniel 9:2 suggests to the reader that at the time of Daniel writing this prayer that the seventy years was still in progress and that its end was near. He realized on the basis of Jeremiah that the seventy years could not have ended with the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE because the period had not then yet been fulfilled. Daniel 5:26 and the marginal reference was addressed by me in your list of questions. Go back and read it again!

  2. Ezra wrote under inspiration and in his reference to Jeremiah was by means of direct quotation indicating that he believed in full what Jeremiah had prophesied. Do you?

  3. The angel in conversation with Zechariah attested that the seventy years was a past event but recognized that the mournings and fastings were still continuing. The translation of the chapter by the NWT is clear in itself and there is no ambiguity. Those denunciations of the seventy years had already expired for what is of present concern was to do with the temple being rebuilt.

  There is ample harmony and coherence between Jeremiah, Ezra, Daniel and Zechariah concerning the seventy years for the simple fact that in the case of the first three writers, they all quoted Jeremiah.

  The irrefutable date of 607 BCE is entirely significant for Christians, Bible Students, Scholars alike because that date began the Gentile Times ending in 1914 when The Lord Jesus Christ began ruling as King. Praise be the Lord!

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  No it is not a lie as you stupidly and dogmatically state. The fact is that even the Jonsson hypothesis recognized in a partial way that the seventy years was a period of servitude, exile and desolation of the land from the Fall of the Temple and Jerusalem until the Return under Cyrus.

  Jonsson simply colates existing data from scholars, and simply indicates that professional scholars do not support the Society's dogma. No-one agrees with the Society's rediculous chronology because there is absolutely no evidence for it.

  Celebrated WT scholars by means of the WT publications have always use the regnal data of not only Nebuchadnezzer but the last king of Judah, Zedekiah. Such regnal data supports the historicity of the biblical chronology determining the precise and unambiguous year for the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 BCE. The missing twenty years arises when one bases a chronology upon poor regnal data such as the Neo-Babylonian period and then ends up in the poo.Consequently, a uncertain date of 586, 587, 588 and 589 BCE are the results of this hopeless methodology.

  The dates that the Society applies to Zedekiah are meaningless, because the Society calculates those dates based on its own flawed chronology. The Society has no evidence for either 537 or 607, therefore there is neither precision nor unambiguousness. The superfluous 20 years only arises using the Society's flawed timeline, and does not actually exist, as demonstrated by the many independent lines of evidence that all converge and agree completely with the fall of Jerusalem occuring in 587. No dates given by the Society prior to 539 agree with any real scholars because they are irreconcilably discordant with the facts.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Post 935

  Jonsson makes a fool of himself because he is no scholar and allows his anti Witness bias sully his views on chronology. The Bible provides all of the evidence we need ,thank you very much.

  If you think the dates applied to Zechariah's prophecy are meaningless then you should try to read the proposed mumbo-jumbo offered by Jonsson who has that many dates it scares the mathematician. The dates 537 and 607 BCE are precise right down to the month which is something despite all of your secular evidence cannot give right down to the month. You are the one who is a fuzzy-wuzzy, not I. The twenty year gap exist when conflicting chronologies are compared and that is that. You can have all of the so-called lines of evidence but if these disagree with the Bible then these only amount to mere flights of fancy and theorizing. Your chosen date for the Fall of Jerusalem con flicts with the majority of scholars who say 586 so you have a big problem of credibility.

  My humble advice to you is that you spend your time researching this dilemna and definitely establish what year was it, 586 or 587 and then you are in sound position to be critical of sacred chronology as developed by celebrated WT scholars over many centuries.

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  If you think the dates applied to Zechariah's prophecy are meaningless then you should try to read the proposed mumbo-jumbo offered by Jonsson who has that many dates it scares the mathematician. The dates 537 and 607 BCE are precise right down to the month which is something despite all of your secular evidence cannot give right down to the month. You are the one who is a fuzzy-wuzzy, not I. The twenty year gap exist when conflicting chronologies are compared and that is that. You can have all of the so-called lines of evidence but if these disagree with the Bible then these only amount to mere flights of fancy and theorizing. Your chosen date for the Fall of Jerusalem con flicts with the majority of scholars who say 586 so you have a big problem of credibility.

  Anyone can pick an arbitrary date that agrees with their own end-time prophecy, and then claim that that backwardly derived date is 'precise', but it is meaningless, because there is no evidence to back up that supposedly 'precise' date. All of the lines of evidence do not conflict with the bible at all, as I have previously demonstrated at length. It is only the Society's interpretation of the scriptures that introduces the erroneous 20-year gap. I have harmonised the chronology accurately, with no disagreement between the scriptures and the secular evidence. You attempt to say I have no credibility, though I am in agreement with many scholars on 587, and within a year of the rest of them as well; yet you have only the Society's flawed dogma, which has absolutely no credibility, and is recognised by absolutely no scholars outside of the JW smokescreen.
• 

  Hellrider

  Hellrider

  No it is not a lie as you stupidly and dogmatically state. The fact is that even the Jonsson hypothesis recognized in a partial way that the seventy years was a period of servitude, exile and desolation of the land from the Fall of the Temple and Jerusalem until the Return under Cyrus.

  What I claimed to be a lie, was your claim that "Josephus supports the 607-date". Which is, to anyone that can read, an obvious lie. You can read book 10 of Antiquities of the jews here:

  http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-10.htm

  ...and you won`t find much there that supports the WTBTS-view on this, ha ha. Josephus doesn`t support neither the Societys view, nor the view of modern historians, probably because he didn`t have access to all the information that is available today. Josephus says Evil-Merodach reigned 18 years, Neriglissar 40 years. Including Nebuchadnezzars 42 years, that gies us...well, at least 100 years. That`s a little more than 70 years, and it certainly doesn`t support the Societys views on...anything, and Scholar knows this very well. So when you say that it does, you lie! To purposely say something that one knows is untrue, is to lie. And you know this.

  Celebrated WT scholars by means of the WT publications have always use the regnal data of not only Nebuchadnezzer but the last king of Judah, Zedekiah

  LoL, of course they have, why shouldn`t they, as they have tampered with that regnal list too! Using one corrupted list to support another doesn`t get us any closer to the truth, believe me.

  Anyway, discussing this with you, is ridicolous. And some of the people on this forum who knows most about this issue, have been over this with you before, particularly in this thread:

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/96152/1.ashx
• 

  AuldSoul

  "scholar",

  Daniel 9:2 — in the first year of his reigning I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years.

  Go ahead and show me the place in this verse that indicates whether the 70 years had passed or whether they were still in them. Highlight it for me. I can't find it. I need you help on this.

  2. Ezra wrote under inspiration and in his reference to Jeremiah was by means of direct quotation indicating that he believed in full what Jeremiah had prophesied.

  Direct me to the verse where Ezra claimed inspiration for his writings, or claims to be speaking Jehovah's words in his explanation of Jeremiah.

  3. The angel in conversation with Zechariah attested that the seventy years was a past event but recognized that the mournings and fastings were still continuing.

  Exactly as Daniel's prayer in chapter 9 reveals. The 70 years had passed which means they were over. The Jews misunderstood Jeremiah and applied the 70 years to their denigration, when the 70 years actually applied (as Jeremiah specifically stated in Jeremiah 25:12) to Babylon and to its king.

  By the by, Daniel did not quote Jeremiah regarding the 70 years. He wrote that he was thinking on Jeremiah, contemplating what Jeremiah had written. If you believe otherwise, show me where he quoted Jeremiah regarding the 70 years. Jeremiah did not quote Jeremiah, he was Jeremiah. The angel that spoke to Zechariah did not quote Jeremiah, but plainly put the 70 years in the past tense (already ended) during the second year of Darius.

  The only one who offered an "explanation" and the only one who quoted Jeremiah was Ezra, and his "explanation" (1) is directly contrary to Jeremiah's own writings, (2) infers that the angel of Jehovah was asking an ignorant question in Zechariah's vision, and (3) makes one wonder why Daniel was so obviously discontent with how long it was taking for the Jews to get some relief from foreign oppression.

  Oddly, Ezra is also the only one who does not claim a divine source for any of his writings and does not claim to be granted any divine insights or understanding. Gee, I wonder which of the four got it wrong. If I am wrong about Ezra, show me.

  AuldSoul
• 

  rassillon

  You know what I don't get,

  If ALL the other secular sources for dating in the Neo-Babylonian period are so in error, the HOW can anyone feel comfortable with the secular resources which identify 539 as Babylon's fall?

  Here is my take on it, you live in miami florida and you have a friend in New York, New York (bethel even). Your friend sends you a letter and in the letter says that New York is 1200 miles from Miami. Then you buy a book of maps and pick the page with Miami on it but throwing away all the other pages because they show it is 1294 miles instead. You accept that one page as accurate but not the rest.

  scholar - I have read a lot of your posts, especially because I was looking for proof for my own belief in the 607 teaching. I can honestly say that it was many of your stupid arguments and failure to honestly address the information presented to you that had a large impact on my rejection of 607. You either have something to gain, are a plant by the WT, are retarded, or are just a plain dumb f**k. Take this how you want, I really don't care. I will not get involved in a flame war between us simply because you are not worth it. I have said my peace and I will let you have the last word if you so choose.

  peace out
• 

  Hellrider

  Rassilon:

  If ALL the other secular sources for dating in the Neo-Babylonian period are so in error, the HOW can anyone feel comfortable with the secular resources which identify 539 as Babylon's fall?

  You are absolutely right! And here is the fantastic irony of it all, which makes the WTBTS and the JWs look like the biggest no-mathematical-skill-idiots in the world: The 539 (and 537)-date is a derived date! It is derived from other events in the secular chronology (!!!),of the events that happened around the year 600 bc! And what does that mean? It means that the WTBTS have used the chronology that says that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 to establish the dates 537 and 539 (which they, in their endless ignorance refer to as "pivotal dates") - to establish a chronology (which isn`t even a chronology) that says that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bc! It`s like saying that "if I have a set of numbers, 1 - 20, and then count from 3 to 15, I will have added 13 numbers. And then I can count back, oh, say 18 numbers, and still get back to 3...). And this is what is funny about the 697-thing. It`s not like other themes in the literalist JW-view of the Bible. About dinosaur-bones or C-14-dating, all of those things can be said to be "Gods way of testing our faith by planting what seems to be evidence of evolution" (or whatever). The fun thing about 607 is that it is a mathematical and logical impossibility!
• 

  juni

  I'd rather be in my backyard swing watching the birds shit on everything in sight than worrying about 607 or 587.

  I'll join you Ken on your swing!!

  JEDI JUNI
• 

  Lady Liberty

  
  Scholar,

  GIVE IT UP!!! You claim to have the truth, yet you refuse to answer the most simplest of questions! No one is interested in your circular reasoning! We all have heard plenty of that from the publications! Your "celebrated" Watchtower scholars as you so like to elevate them, have instructed you OVER and OVER again not to be on sites like this! I wonder what the "celebrated" scholars would think of your participation here?? Why don't you go knock on doors like everyone else is instructed to do to count your time! Because it is quite obvious that is ALL you are doing!

  Lady Liberty