70 years and Zechariah

by ackack 16 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  scholar

  Narkissos

  The plain reading of Zechariah 1:12 is that the seventy years was a past experience of judgement and desolation brought now to the immediate attention of Zechariah with the reassurance that the temple which had lain waste for seventy years would be rebuilt. That is what is plain and obvious to all.This understanding of matters is supported by WBC Micah-Malachi, Vol 32 by Ralph Smith,1984. Smith states "In Zech 1:12 and 7:5 it refers to the period of Jerusalem's destruction." on page 191.

  Interestingly as you have raised the matter of the black stone of Essarhaddon, scholar Lipinski's conclusion was that "the seventy years was a period of divine anger against a city or sanctuary." (Smith, 1984, p,191)

  scholar JW
• 

  lawrence

  Narkissos - yes, totally circular reasoning, worse than a Bethel circle jerk.

  Scholar - where have you been? Baptizing the 1 recruit each Circuit Assembly? Take the summer off, and read 'Dharma Bums' by Jack Kerouac.
• 

  lawrence

  Narkissos - yes, totally circular reasoning, worse than a Bethel circle jerk.

  Scholar - where have you been? Baptizing the 1 recruit each Circuit Assembly? Take the summer off, and read 'Dharma Bums' by Jack Kerouac.
• 

  Narkissos

  scholar,

  Your misquotings do not fool anyone except yourself -- and I'm not sure they are even that successful.

  Of course "In Zech 1:12 and 7:5 it refers to the period of Jerusalem's destruction" since Jerusalem's destruction was the start of the 70 years... leading to Zechariah's time, almost 20 years after the first return from exile.

  If Edouard Lipinskí points out that "the seventy years was a period of divine anger against a city or sanctuary," he also acknowledges that the different uses of this topos in the Hebrew Bible cannot be understood as a plain chronological indication.

  None of the scholars you misquote would regard the 70 years in Zechariah as a literal period which had ended years before Zechariah's time, as you do. I and others have thoroughly shown that the text cannot mean such a thing in the thread I linked to above (and I won't go into it again).
• 

  ackack

  Its interesting the use of 70 years in the bible as a sort of generic period of denunciation. Its surprising the NT writers didn't pick up on it and re-apply it, especially the writer of Matthew who loved those sorts of nutty things.

  ackack
• 

  scholar

  Narkissos

  It appears from your refusal to consider what scholars actually about the seventy years exposes you stupidity and ignorance. If you bothered to consider the reference I gave you would not have been hasty in accusing me of misquoting. Zechariah's seventy years began with the Fall and ended at the Exile when the Jews had returtned home in 537 BCE and no other interpretation can remove that basic fact.

  Scholars do in fact give credence to the view that Zechariah's seventy years was a literal period ending long before the time of Zechariah's visions. Other scholars continue the time up until Zechaiah's prophesying but this theory fails because it is not sound chronologically as Jonsson illustrates.

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  'scholar' said:

  The plain reading of Zechariah 1:12 is that the seventy years was a past experience of judgement and desolation brought now to the immediate attention of Zechariah with the reassurance that the temple which had lain waste for seventy years would be rebuilt.

  So let's have a look at the plain reading of the verse:

  So the angel of Jehovah answered and said: “O Jehovah of armies, how long will you yourself not show mercy to Jerusalem and to the cities of Judah, whom you have denounced these seventy years?

  The plain reading of the English word "these" is in reference to things which are present (though 'this' could also be used in referring to the group of years as a single period); referring to a time period in such a way suggests that the speaker is either in the midst of the time period, or right at the end of the period. Since the question "how long" is one asked in frustration of the present circumstances rather than asking to enumerate the period it strengthens the position that 1) the period refers to the present, and 2) the period is still causing frustration, and is therefore not yet completed. The logical conclusion is then, that the 70 years being discussed ran from the temple's destruction in 587 until 517, during which 'indignation was shown' (Hebrew za`am - translated 'denounced' in the verse) toward the still uncompleted temple.

  In addition, the angel is responding after it is indicated that "the whole earth is sitting still and having no disturbance" (verse 11), and after, goes on to say that "the nations ... are at ease" (verse 15). This further indicates that the surrounding nations were no longer under Babylon's subjection for the period discussed, further indicating that the period is not referring to the period of Babylonian subjugation.