607 bce or 587 bce

by jw 94 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  scholar

  Auld Soul

  Indeed !Daniel was referring to Jeremiah's predictions about the seventy years that these applied not to Babylon as you claim but for Judah. Jeremiah 25;12 inroduces the time element 'fulfilling of the seventy years' of Judah whenc e Babylon would receive her judgement of desolation. I agree with you Daniel knew both the beginning and the end of the seventy years and I would add that so too, Jeremiah.

  I disagree with you that there is a neutral aspect regarding the devastations of Jerusalem having no past-present or future aspect. The paper by Applegate on an exegesis of this verse indicates that there is a continuative aspect from the time of Daniel's prayer. I propose that such aspect is proven by the expression 'fulfilling'.

  In regard to Zechariah you agree with me and thos e celebrated WT scholars that the seventy years were a past period which differes from the Jonsson/apostate view. Welcome aboard.

  Jeremiah clearly indicated that Jerusalem and Judah were to be devastated in order for the land to keep its sabbaths. Covenant and sabbath theology makes this a matter of fact. Jeremiah 27:16 shows at the time of Jeremiah uttering that prophecy there was apossibility that Jehoivah's judgement could be reduced by an exile alone but they ignored Jeremiah's pleadings and brought upon them a much heavier burden that is the complete desolation of the land for seventy years.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Post 943

  Correct, Daniel discerned that Babylon fell in 539 and was encouraged by the imminent release of the exiles with a two years at 537. Well Done!

  Paul's canonization of scripture would equal that of modern day canonization of 66 books making up the Holy Scriptures, all inspired of God.

  Zechariah was discussing the seventy years of Jeremiah and that is proven by the context of both separate chapters where reference is made to past experience of ensalvement and exile in Babylon.

  Daniel unlike yourself knew exactly the chronology of that one seventy year period as foretold by Jeremiah ending in 537 BCE with the Return of the exiles home.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Post 942

  So what is your data for 538 BCE as the date for the Return. Perhaps you could list the steps involved in determining that year rather than 537 BCE and perhaps you could enlist the aid of Alan F. Let us compare your speculation and circular reasoning with the comments in the Insight volume.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Post 941

  Well there we have it only one out of three scholars accepts 587 with the majority of scholars accepting 586. Why then do you arbitrarily select 587 rather than 586?

  I am rather happy to be amongst those scholars who fit into the 0% category accepting 607.

  scholar JW
• 

  Narkissos

  Remember you heard this first from the said scholar that the seventy years are the foundation for the latter 'seventy weeks of years' prophecy. The reasons why this is the case is as follows:

  1. Both are prophetic in nature, the latter is given in answer to the prayer about the former.

  2. The literary structure of the narrative that is ch.9.

  3. The prophecy of verses 24-27 begins with a time element instead of ending with it as is more common with other Danielic prophecies.

  4. Common use of the number 70

  5. Both are multiples of seven

  6. Furthermore, when the symbolic units of the seventy weeks are interpreted according to the literal units of the 70 years, a relationship is produced which parallels the relationship between the jubilee period and sabbactical year period.

  7. Such relationship was recognized also by the Qumran community

  Good, but you forgot a detail: they actually have the same starting point (at least in the author's mind), since the 70 weeks (of years) are an expansion of Jeremiah's 70 years -- a "new light" on the 70 years if I dare say. The revelation to Daniel being, as it were, "not 70 years, but 70 x 7 years". This (which is apparent in Daniel 9) becomes quite problematic if you postulate a different starting point for the 70 weeks somewhere in the 5th century (that is, long after the 70 years had ended by all standards), as the WT (here following older Christian interpreters) does, for the sake of having this period ending in Jesus' time. No wonder the WT doesn't emphasise the parallelism.

  Btw, why do you think is the first week (7 x 7 = 49 years) singled out in Daniel?
• 

  Farkel

  scholar (hahahahahahahahahaha!) candidly admits it is a fool:

  "I am rather happy to be amongst those scholars who fit into the 0% category accepting 607."

  You are in good company. Psycho wards are filled with your ilk. You would fit in properly with the flat-earth society and other idiots. Of course, we all know you are a helplessly foolish troll who gets its rocks off being the village moron.

  And more importantly, you have not made one SINGLE argument over a thread I started in July of 2004:

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/74549/1.ashx

  Refute the WATCHTOWER CHRONOLOGY that I presented in that thread which also shows INCONCLUSIVELY that the date in question was NOT 607 BC, but 586/587 BC. (The minor discrepency is due to one idiot Babylonian king getting whacked after 9 months and we don't know that exact month, nor do we know what month each King took office)

  Farkel
• 

  scholar

  Narkissos

  These two periods do not have the same starting point at all and no such commonality is given in the ninth chapter of Daniel even in the author's mind because these events are separated by history in relation to their judgement, repentance and their return. There is no problematic at all in saying that the later seventy weeks of years commenced in the fifth century becuse the focus at that point was on the rebuilding of Jerusalem.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Farkel

  You are a joke for you now seriously expect people to believe in the sloppy 586/587 date which according to you is based on the idiotic king that got whacked. It seems that getting whacked did not stop there but the apostates and secular scholars are also getting whacked by the celebrated WT scholars.

  scholar JW
• 

  Hellrider

  Farkel:

  That`s what celebral scholar jw usually does; When someone posts something he can`t argue against, he just ignores it. He can`t argue against my last argument either, so he just ignores it (celebral scholar jw claims that Josephus supports the Societys interpretation of the 70 years. I then showed him a quote from Josephus in which the chronology of Josephus sets the reigns of just 3 of the 5 kings, to have lasted for over a hundred years combined, and this means that Josephus couldn`t possibly believe that the 70 years refer to a period with a destroyed Jerusalem and Temple). But celebral scholar jw just ignores it, of course.
• 

  Dansk

  Talk about flogging a dead horse. Sheesh!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  Alleymom put all this to bed ages ago, along with AlanF and others. Please go here for the best insight into the truth of 607BCE:

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/55372/1.ashx

  Also, here is a wonderful website put together by an exJW who once also believed in the 607BCE date but after doing research trying to substantiate the date found that it is nothing but Watchtower lies! http://www.607v587.com/

  Ian