For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled 601 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Swamboozled
    Swamboozled

    JUst got this link sent to me by my sister in law and I just keeping staring at it trying to decide where to start. I know that arguing with a JW is like throwing miracle wheat in the wind...but I want a comeback!!! Can anyone help!!!! http://www.2001translation.com/587_or_607.htm

  • WTFBBQPWNT
    WTFBBQPWNT

    There is no comeback for it. It's true. Jehovah's Witnesses have a lot of things wrong, but the date of Jerusalem's destruction (or beginning of it's desolation by Medo-Persia) is not one of them.

  • AlanF
    AlanF

    The nonsense on the site is easy enough to debunk in principle, but it takes a great deal of time to go through it item by item. Since much of the debunking information is already available in Carl Jonsson's The Gentile Time Reconsidered, as well as a great number of scattered references, and the JWs who put the site together are deliberately ignoring it, it's obvious that they woudn't be affected by a debunking article. Nevertheless, it would be nice to have one available.

    AlanF

  • thirdwitness
    thirdwitness

    http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/607/default.html

    Here is a better site that proves 607 beyond a doubt. The one you post was the beginnings of the essay before it was completed. NO ONE has ever been able to come up with an explanation, especially for the 40 year desolation of Egypt.

  • AlanF
    AlanF


    thirdwitness said:

    : NO ONE has ever been able to come up with an explanation, especially for the 40 year desolation of Egypt.

    Yeah, they have. Just because moronic JW defenders ignore the disproofs of the site's claims doesn't mean the claims haven't been thoroughly disproved.

    I wouldn't be surprised if you think that our resident long-term JW-chronology defender, a poster who mislabels himself 'scholar', presents good arguments. Part of the problem with presenting debunkings of such nonsense is that the JWs who present the nonsense never get on a forum with a level playing field. Anyone who is found to be quite knowledgeable about such matters is quickly labeled an "apostate" and booted off JW-oriented forums. And JW defenders never get on forums where they're not in control, having found over the years that they inevitably get their asses kicked by knowledgable critics. Here's a challenge for you, thirdwitness: You pick one topic from the site you linked to, and argue the case on this forum. You'll get a run for your money. But I don't think you, or any other JW-defender, is up to the challenge.

    AlanF

  • Room 215
    Room 215

    What's usually overlooked in the 607 vs 587 debate is that setting this date is only Chapter One of the WT's ``Gentile Times" fairy tale. From that we must proceed to Chapter Two, which purports to sort out how the grass-eating despot Nebuchadnezzar seven-times period of insanity prefigures the rightful rule of the Theocracy; and how a year must be counted for every one of those days he spent foraging for weeds on his hands and knees.

  • SirNose586
    SirNose586

    Here's your comeback. And here's another.

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Alanf,

    Here's a challenge for you, thirdwitness: You pick one topic from the site you linked to, and argue the case on this forum. You'll get a run for your money.

    You may be right, but are you disfellowshipped?

    HS

  • DanTheMan
    DanTheMan

    My eyes glaze over whenever I see 607 vs. 587 threads - I don't know the details and frankly I don't care. What I do know is that the *only* people who believe 607 are ones who have much more than just an academic interest in the date. Which is reason enough to be *highly* skeptical.

    So, to Scholar and whoever else, I guess if you're right then you'll have the pleasure of watching the birds pick our bones dry after Jesus-Michael's angelic hordes kill us all...which is gonna happen real soon now.... Won't that be great?

  • Honesty
    Honesty

    The following is a complete list of the 11th Dynasty Chaldean rulers and the length of their reigns.

    Watchtower Society publications are in complete agreement with the names and the length of reign of these rulers:

    Nabu-apla-usur(Nabopolassar) 626 - 8/15/605 BCE = 21 years

    Nabu-kudurri-usur(NebuchadrezzarII) 605 - 10/562 BCE = 43 years

    Amel-Marduk (Evil-merodach) 562 - 560 BCE = 2 years

    Nergal-šar-usur (Nergal-sharezer) 560 - 556 BCE = 4 years

    Labaši-Marduk 556 BCE = 9 months

    Nabu-na'id (Nabonidus) 556 - 539 BCE = 17 years

    From the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus II of Persia during Nabonidus' reign in 539 BCE until Amel-Marduk was murdered in 560 BCE is 28 years which brings us to the year 567 BCE (actual regnal years are 24 plus 4 years for each ruler's ascension year).

    According to 2 Kings 25:8-10, Nebucharezzar destroyed the Jewish temple in the 19th year of his reign which brings us to the year 587 BCE (19 regnal years plus the year of his ascension totals 20 years).


    Sources:

    Insight on the Scriptures (volume 1 page 425)

    Chaldea

    Particularly was this domination manifest during the seventh and sixth centuries B.C.E. when Nabopolassar, a native of Chaldea, and his successors, Nebuchadnezzar II, Evil-merodach (Awil-Marduk), Neriglissar, Labashi-Marduk, Nabonidus, and Belshazzar, ruled the Third World Power, Babylon.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    WT 1/1/65 (page 29 paragraph 3)

    The Rejoicing of the Wicked Is Short-lived

    BABYLON’S LAST DYNASTY OF SEMITE KINGS

    Evil-merodach reigned two years and was murdered by his brother-in-law Neriglissar, who reigned for four years, which time he spent mainly in building operations. His underage son Labashi-Marduk, a vicious boy, succeeded him, and was assassinated within nine months. Nabonidus, who had served as governor of Babylon and who had been Nebuchadnezzar’s favorite
    son-in-law, took the throne and had a fairly glorious reign until Babylon fell in 539 B.C.E.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Insight on the Scriptures (volume 2 page 480)

    NEBUCHADNEZZAR

    (Neb·u·chad·nez´zar), Nebuchadrezzar (Neb·u·chad·rez´zar) [from Akkadian, meaning “O Nebo, Protect the Heir!”].
    Second ruler of the Neo-Babylonian Empire; son of Nabopolassar and father of Awil-Marduk (Evil-merodach), who succeeded him to the throne. Nebuchadnezzar ruled as king for 43 years
    (624-582 B.C.E.)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2 Kings 25:8-10

    And in the fifth month on the seventh [day] of the month, that is to say, the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnez´zar the king of Babylon, Nebu´zarad´an the chief of the bodyguard, the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah and the king’s house and all the houses of Jerusalem; and the house of every great man
    he burned with fire. And the walls of Jerusalem, all around, the entire military force of Chal·de´ans that were with the chief of the bodyguard pulled down.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit