auldsoul, you've be reading about Elijah haven't you.
steve
For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE
by Swamboozled 601 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Norm
I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me if I am posting old stuff,
but I can prove merely by help of the Bible and the Watchtower literature that Jerusalem
fell in 587 BCE. Of course they know full well in Brooklyn that 607 is nonsense, they really demonstrate it well in the way they "handle" the Bible texts below.
Read and learn:
----------------------- The Watchtower Society, always claim that if there's a disagreement between what they call Biblical
Chronology and secular chronology they take the side of the Bible.
This sounds very nice, but is it really so? First of all, to claim that there is disharmony between secular and Biblical chronology is false. It is creating a false dilemma. It is creating confusion in the mind of the unsuspecting Witness. In particular regarding the "neo Babylonian" chronology, where there is complete harmony between the relative chronology of the Bible and the absolute secular chronology.
In the real world the dividing lines are drawn between the well-documented secular and Biblical chronology, and the totally unfounded and unsupported Watchtower chronology.
I will now present facts about how far the Watchtower are willing to go, what they are ready to do, to make their precious fabricated chronology to appear "true". They have absolutely no scruples with changing Bible text's to save their unfounded speculation, which is based on the idea that the destruction of Jerusalem took place in 607 BCE.
Maybe the most serious examples of this we find in the book "Babylon the Great has Fallen" published in 1963. In this book the most incredible acrobatics are performed in order to preserve the precious
Watchtower chronology. Take a look at this:Zion Clashes with Babylon
It was at that time that the young Daniel and three special companions were taken exile to Babylon. In Daniel 1:1 he writes about it: "In the third year of the kingship of Jehoiakim the king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and proceeded to lay siege to it." Babylon the Great has fallen, 1963, page 136.
This text in Daniel 1:1 strikes a devastating blow to the Watchtower chronology, so therefore its meaning must be altered at all cost's. Take a look at this fantastic piece of reasoning that follows:"This was after King Jehoiakim had rebelled against the king of Babylon, after being a vassal for about three years. Hence the expression "in the third year of the kingship of Jehoiakim the king of Judah" means in the third year of Jehoiakim as a vassal king paying tribute to Babylon. Since his vassalage began after he reigned eight years in Jerusalem, this third year of his reign as Babylon's vassal would be the eleventh year of his entire reign at Jerusalem and would be due to end by the Jewish lunar calendar on Adar 29, 617 BCE., or March 19, 617 BCE." Babylon the Great has Fallen, 1963, page 136.
Here we can see the Watchtowers "loyalty" to the Bible when a simple text "MUST" mean something else than what it say's. Here Brooklyn had to tell the readers what Daniel, the poor bungler "really meant". He couldn't get anything right, after all he was just one of Jehovah's prophets and he was there at the time, so what did he know about Nebuchadnezzar and when he reigned?
Another fact we have to take into consideration it that when you have been appointed Jesus "slave" since 1919, you are entitled to alter the Bible as you see fit. Especially if it doesn't support your own chronology. But what is it about the Society's chronology that makes the alteration of Bible texts necessary? This becomes even more apparent when the "Babylon book" comes to the text in Daniel 2:1, which states:"And in the second year of the kingship of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams; and his spirit began to feel agitated, and his very sleep was made to be something beyond him."
Here Daniel states simple and clear that he was indeed present in Babylon in Nebuchadnezzar's second year of kingship. But this would of course ruin the Society's chronology completely, so therefore this Bible text HAS TO mean something else. According to the Watchtower chronology Nebuchadnezzar was crowned as king in 625, and Daniel wasn't taken into exile before 612, 8 years later. Therefore it becomes so important for the Watchtower that Daniel couldn't have been in Babylon when he himself say's he was. This Bible text therefore HAS TO mean something else then what is written there.
The Watchtower, when confronted with these two texts has a clear choice. Both of these texts clearly prove that their own chronology isn't in harmony with the Bible. What do they do? Are they true to the Bible and change their chronology? The facts show what choice the Watchtower Society made. The same choice they always do when it stands between the Bible and their own teachings. They choose their own teachings over the Bibles. Just look at what the Babylon book say:"Waiting in Exile for Babylon's Fall
How, then, shall we understand the statement in Daniel 2:1? It reads: "And in the second year of the kingship of Nebuchadnezzar,… However, the most reasonable and fitting suggestion is that this refers to the "second year" from a marked event, namely, from Nebuchadnezzar's destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C. Babylon the Great has Fallen, 1963, page 172.
Notice the phrase: "the most reasonable and fitting suggestion". The most "reasonable and fitting suggestion" for whom? Why does this Bible text need any "suggestions" at all? Where is the need for any explanations at all about the very simple fact that Daniel himself states that he himself was PRESENT in Babylon in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign? What makes such an operation at all necessary? Only because of the Watchtower Society's own chronology do they have to come up with a "reasonable and fitting" way of muddling the clear statements of the Bible. To whom is the Watchtower showing loyalty? Is it the Bible? When the prophet Daniel under “inspiration” say the he himself was present in Babylon during the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, the Watchtower trough some fantastic acrobatics of rewriting the Bible want us to believe that this was really in the twentieth year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign! Is this the Society idea of standing on the side of the Bible?
If we should take the Watchtower Society's far-fetched reasoning serious we would come into conflict with several other Bible texts. For example Jeremiah 25:1"The word that occurred to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the fourth year of Je•hoi'a•kim the son of Jo•si'ah, the king of Judah, that is, the first year of Neb•u•chad•rez'zar the king of Babylon;"
(That Daniel 1:1 say the "third year" , while Jeremiah say the fourth year, are due to the fact that Daniel
counted whole years of reign, but Jeremiah counts the accession year even though it wasn't a full year.
Nebuchadnezzar was crowned as king the first of Nisan in 605, his first whole year was therefore 604 .)
When according to Jeremiah, Je•hoi'a•kim the king of Judah's fourth year (third whole year) was
Nebuchadnezzar's first year and when Daniel 1:1 say's that Nebuchadnezzar came and lay siege to
Jerusalem and took captives, among those Daniel according to verse 6:"Now there happened to be among them some of the sons of Judah, Daniel, Han•a•ni'ah, Mish'a•el and Az•a•ri'ah." Daniel 1:6.
Then we have the Bible stating that Daniel really was present in Babylon in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign! Not in his twentieth year as the Society will have us believe. Here we have got an excellent demonstration of the kind of respect the Watchtower has for the Bible.
The self appointed prophet in Brooklyn the great F&DS treats the Bible as they see fit. They own the "truth" and therefore they define what truth is. It seems to be their private property. But how about those texts that we have been touching upon here? Can a satisfactory explanation be found? Yes, if we want to explore the very solid documentation, which exist regarding the neo Babylonian chronology that is in harmony with the Biblical. According to this chronology Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem in 605 BCE, and took away among others Daniel and his 3 friends. If you investigate this chronology you don't have to massacre Daniel 1:1 and 2:1 to make it fit a completely constructed chronology because then Daniel really was present in Babylon in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign!
Considering that Nebuchadnezzar's first whole year of reign was 604, his 18th year of reign. (19th year, if counted from his accession year 605, like the Jew's did, cr. Jer. 52:12), would 587 BCE, be the year he destroyed Jerusalem , which is confirmed by both secular and Biblical chronology. Well, where in the Bible do you find it stated that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587, some may ask?
This isn't surprising. The overwhelming evidence that supports the year 587, are effectively kept away from rank and file Jehovah's Witnesses. Lets us look at some real good evidence, which is accidentally given, in the Watchtowers own literature, and where we again get a good demonstration of how little Brooklyn care about the Bible. We find this in the book "Paradise restored, from 1972, where the texts in Zechariah 1: 7-12 is discussed. According to verse 7, Zechariah had this vision in the second year of the reign of Darius. The book points to the fact that this was happening in 519 BCE. Let ‘s look at the Bible text:"And they proceeded to answer the angel of Jehovah who was standing among the myrtle trees and to say: "We have walked about in the earth, and, look! The whole earth is sitting still and having no disturbance." 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?" Zechariah 1:11-12.
As mentioned above, the Paradise Restored book dates this vision to the year 519 BCE. At that time
Jehovah had denounced Jerusalem and the cities of Judah for 70 years:"No wonder that, back there in 519 BCE, the angelic scouts reported the whole earth as without disturbance!" Paradise Restored. 1972, page 128.
So far, so good. But let us see what happens next. Is the Watchtower writer satisfied with the fact that in 519 B.C.E Jehovah had been denouncing, Jerusalem and the cities of Judah for 70 years? No way, this had to be explained away, and now it really gets pathetic:"Mercy to the Persecuted but Judgment to Persecutors
So did Jehovah's angel mean that those seventy years had not yet ended, or that they had just now ended? This could not historically be true." Paradise Restored. 1972, page 131.Believe it or not it gets worse, the book continues on page 132:
"... ,why would the angel, knowing what he did, speak as he did? Since he knew that the time period was definitely seventy years long, why would he say: "O Jehovah of armies, how long?" Paradise Restored. 1972, page 132.
Yes, why indeed? Why should this angel make such problems for the Society's precious chronology about the year 607? What Jehovah's angel said couldn't: "HISTORICALLY BE TRUE"!! Hey folks, an angel whose words are recorded in the Bible can’t be TRUE! Dear oh dear. No, how can we expect that any old angel should have a clue what he talks about? Why couldn't this troublesome angel keep his mouth shut and stop creating such embarrassment for the Society's chronology?
Well, what the angel said makes perfect sense and was in full harmony with history if you consider it in the light of the "secular/Biblical chronology". But as demonstrated here, truth and facts are without any interest whatsoever for the Watchtower Society. To them the continued existence of a totally unfounded chronology is far more important. Why is it of such outmost importance for the Watchtower to create the impression that this angel was talking trough his hat? Well, if you count 70 years from the year 519 BCE, you will end at the year 589 BCE, when the final siege of Jerusalem started, exactly as this terrible "secular" chronology states. And now this impertinent angel and consequently the Bible confirm that this is correct! But it doesn't stop here. When the "Paradise Restored" book attacks the texts at Zechariah 7: 1-5, they really take off. Here we get another sterling example of the Watchtowers "loyalty" to the Bible.
Here we get another clear date: "Darius fourth year". When his second year was 519 BCE, his fourth year must be 517 BCE, at this time the Jew's had "fasted" and "wailed" for "seventy years" according to verse 5:"Say to all the people of the land and to the priests, 'When YOU fasted and there was a wailing in the fifth [month] and in the seventh [month], and this for seventy years, did YOU really fast to me, even me?" Zechariah 7:5.
Interestingly enough the "Paradise Restored" book admits on page 235:"Fasting over God's Executed Judgments Improper
It was observed evidently on the tenth day of that month (Ab), in order to commemorate how on that day Nebuzaradan, the chief of Nebuchadnezzar's bodyguard, after two days of inspection, burned down the city of Jerusalem and its temple."
Paradise Restored 1972, page 235.
So what does the Society do now? Do they let this text stand? Do they calculate 70 years back from 517 BCE to the year 587 BCE:, when Jerusalem was burned? No of course not! Instead they dedicate several pages to explaining away and create a smokescreen for their loyal readers. Instead of taking into consideration the obvious harmony between the secular dates provided by themselves in the book and the Bible texts, they desperately cling to their pet 607 year, even if it means that the Jew's then had been fasting and wailing, not as the Bible said, for 70 years, but for 90 years!
This gives us an excellent lesson about how a speculative calculation, completely without any foundation whatsoever gets elevated to be a dogma. How it becomes an eternal "truth" that have to be defended at all costs. It is also an extremely good example of how efficient propaganda works. Just hammer on about 607, and 1914, and it becomes a "truth", which only "opposers" and "apostates" could dream of questioning. What an excellent example of how to con millions of people for years!
For all their boasting about being the “only ones” who really stick to the Bible, we se how far that goes when the Bible become bothersome for them.
Norm. -
effe
Well, how about this nicely re-written appendix G from the pro-607 site which 3W is promoting (it's not online yet):
There are many tactics apostates use to explain-away the 40 years for Egypt and the 70 years for Tyre. Here are some of them:
Contradict yourself
Nebuchadnezzar's desolation of Egypt took place when he brought more exiles to Babylon in his 23rd year not in his 37th year.
Apart from contradicting their own secular history, and the problem of Neb's siege of Tyre lasting many years, this attempt to explain the problem away contradicts the Bible.
Their argument demands that Egypt was desolated by Nebuchadnezzar, but still powerful enough (and inhabited) so that King Neb returned many years later and attacked it a second time. The Bible disagrees, and specifically says that there "will not pass through it the foot of earthling man" for a full 40 years. Obviously, their desperate attempt to explain away the problem is wrong. See our chart to see how this looks on a time-line.
Additionally, according to them Ezekiel said (talking of the future) that Egypt would be given to Babylon. Even though, according to this explanation, it already had been and was, in fact, desolated already.
Needless to say, its a poor patchwork and an obvious attempt to explain away a critical problem.
Use a logical fallacy
In another prophecy about Tyre Ezekiel said Tyre would never be rebuilt but it was, therefore since the Tyre prophecy is figurative then the Egypt prophecy must be figurative.
First of all, the 70 year prophecy for Tyre is not figurative. Ancient Tyre was never rebuilt. The prophecy in Ezekiel says:
"...they will certainly spoil your resources and plunder your sales goods, and tear down your walls, and your desirable houses they will pull down. And your stones and your woodwork and your dust they will place in the very midst of the water. And I will cause the turmoil of your singing to cease, and the very sound of your harps will be heard no more. And I will make you a shining, bare surface of a crag. A drying yard for dragnets is what you will become. Never will you be rebuilt; for I myself, Jehovah, have spoken".
This part of the prophecy was indeed fulfilled in in a very literal way in two stagess. First, King Neb attacked the city as Ezekiel predicted. Yet that was only the beginning of Tyre's downfall. The prophecy had its complete fulfillment when Alexander the Great pitched the mainland city into the sea to build a causeway to the island part of the city before defeating that. The ancient city and Kingdom of Tyre was never rebuilt, and indeed did become a fishing village "a drying yard for dragnets".
However, in the initial fulfillment of this prophecy Nebuchadnezzar attacked the city and it was indeed "forgotten" for 70 years as Jehovah revealed through the prophet Isaiah. These are all literal - not figurative - events.
Yet what does this have to do with Egypt? Nothing. It is faulty reasoning to say of two totally unrelated subjects without any connection, 'Since this is figurative then that must also be figurative.' Even if we assume that Ezekiel's Tyre prophecy is figurative, it must be shown that this is somehow connected to the Egypt prophecy and that it must also be figurative. There is no connection except that both prophecies were made by Ezekiel.
Is it reasonable to conclude that all prophecies in the Bible are figurative because Ezekiel's Tyre prophecy is figurative (when we know it was not)? Do we assume that all prophecies of Ezekiel are figurative because the Tyre prophecy is figurative? Or do we just pick-and-choose whatever prophecy or time-period in the Bible doesn't fit with secular chronology and declare "this is figurative"?
Apparently some people do. How convenient for 587 promoters that they are allowed to do that.
Make something up
Jehovah told Jonah to tell Nineveh that it would be overthrown but when Nineveh repented he did not carry it out so likewise Egypt.
The Bible goes into detail in the story of Jonah and explains exactly how the king of Nineveh and his subjects repented, thus Jehovah spared them. Do we have such details of Egypt's repentance anywhere in the Bible? Are we told how Pharoah and his crowd repented in sackcloth and ashes when they heard of their coming destruction? Surely such a huge act of repentance by one of the most notoriously pagan nations in history would have been recorded in the Bible as an example for all? Why was such an incredible event never mentioned in the Bible not even once? Even traditional Jewish history records no such event, nor do Jewish historians such as Josephus.
Furthermore, how about in the secular evidence? Do we have available the ancient fragments describing to us how Pharaoh and his crowd left his pagan gods and turned to the worship of Jehovah? Why it is difficult to even answer this point without laughing? Probably because it is nonsense concocted by a 587 promoter on an Internet message board.
Use a logical fallacy: Argument from ignorance
There is no secular evidence that gives any indication that Egypt was desolated during this time period.
Actually, there is. Although there is very little secular evidence about Egypt during this time, It is not surprising that the nation of Egypt itself would fail to record such a defeat. After all, they did not record the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt either. Does that mean the exodus never happened?
However the Babylonians did record this defeat upon Egypt. The evidence shows that just two years after the final part of the prophecy against Egypt an attack was made by Neb against Egypt. The Babylonian chronicle known as BM 33041 says: "In the thirty-seventh year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of the country of Babylon, he went to Mitzraim (Egypt) to make war. Amasis, king of Egypt, collected [his army], and marched and spread abroad..."
Fortunately for 587 proponents the rest of the chronicle is badly damaged and the extent of the defeat of Egypt cannot be read. It would certainly be interesting to read if historians had available the entire inscription. There is a good possibility that we would have the further proof. However, the part of the chronicle that can be deciphered is enough to prove that a campaign by Neb against Egypt did take place right on time just after Ezekiel prophesied it. Just a coincidence? Hardly. Ezekiel's prophecy was fulfilled right on time.
Logical fallacy: If I don't know how it can be done, then it can't be done
There is no way that Babylon could have displaced millions of Egytians.
On the contrary, this is what Babylon was known to do. They had experience at displacing entire nations. This even happened to Judah where millions were killed and displaced by Babylon. The surrounding nations also suffered this fate.
Yes, there is proof positive that Babylon could and did exile entire nations from their homeland. On top of this, the all powerful Jehovah prophesied it and could make it so. What a straw grasping argument that goes against Jehovah's power and the actual nature of Nebuchadnezzar to exile people from their land!
My argument isn't wrong, the evidence is wrong!
Ezekiel was a false prophet and neither the Tyre prophecy nor the Egypt prophecy came true.
This argument is made by the ones that realize that if Ezekiel's prophecy is accurate then 587 is wrong. So rather than being dishonest and pretending that the Bible supports 587 they come right out and tell you that the Bible is wrong on this.
One well known leading opposer of 607 named Allan boldly declared: "Ezekiel demonstrably falsely prophesied about the ultimate rebuilding of Tyre, and all of his other prophecies are called into question...The simple fact is that Ezekiel prophesied falsely, and therefore his words cannot be taken as gospel." In making such an admission he admits that he is well aware that the Bible does not support 587 at all and can only support 607.
Make something up #2
Jehovah called off the desolation of Egypt because Nebuchadnezzar went too far in his harsh treatment of Judah thus God decided not to give Neb the spoils of Egypt.
How can this be the case? The final part of Ezekiel's prophecy was given about 17 years after Neb desolated Jerusalem, the 27th year of Ezekiel's exile. Therefore Jehovah had already seen and and for a fact knew exactly the treatment that Neb had measured out to Judah when he made the prophecy.
Do we imagine that Jehovah had temporary amnesia and thus prophesied that Neb would desolate Egypt and get much booty? Then Jehovah's memory returned so that he said, 'Nevermind. I just remembered what Neb did to my people in presumptuously going beyond what I wanted him to do. Scratch that last prophecy about Egypt's desolation.' The implications are ridiculous.
Besides, why did the prophets forget to mention this change-of-heart? Why is it not mentioned in the Bible even once? Why is the prophecy of 40 years recorded, but not the fact it didn't happen?
Furthermore, is it not awfully convenient to concoct these "explanations" to explain away whatever it is that contradicts your argument? How dishonest to say "oh, yeah the Bible did say that would happen, but it disagrees with my beliefs, therefore it mustn't have actually happened for some reason", and then go forth to make up that reason in your head and present it as fact.
if one is going to believe such things, why bother even reading what the Bible says at all, why not just make it all up and believe whatever you want?
Contradict yourself
40 years is not literal. 40 is symbolic of many years.
If that is the case then the Bible should provide examples of 40 year or day prophecies that turned out to be symbolic and not literally 40 years or days. And then there should be some viable reason, some proof that the symbolism should be applied in the case of Egypt's desolation. What do we find?
Some defenders of 587 have tried to use the 40 years the Israelites wandered in the wilderness, the raining of 40 days and 40 nights at the time of the flood, Jesus' 40 days in the wilderness, and so forth as proof that 40 can be symbolic of many. That's right - all these events covered 40 years or 40 days literally, not figuratively!
By using these examples they have done nothing more than disprove their own argument of a figurative 40 year desolation. There is not a single Bible precedent for assigning the 40 year desolation of Egypt as figurative. Doing that is literally without merit. On the contrary, every single 40-day or 40-year period in the Bible is shown to be literal. Amazing!
It seems that some people are so obsessed with discrediting Jehovah's Witnesses that they would sooner make the unreasonable and unscriptural arguments presented above than admit to clear logic and scripture. These persons stubbornly refuse to admit that secular chronology is wrong, and that the Bible is right. For anyone who believes the Bible, the year of 607 BCE is the only possible date for the destruction of Jerusalem - unless you want to entertain the "explanations" above, of course.
Amazing how somebody can get his assed whooped all over the place without giving honest answers to the "whoopers" and then claim victory on the subject and then present the whole discussion as above...
Provided for your entertainment en reading pleasure...
Greetz,
Effe -
rassillon
Norm, That is some great information. Thanks for posting. I have only relativly recently really understood the deception by the WTB&TS. I am not nearly as versed in it as some but it seems everything I research just reaffirms that the WTB&TS has lied to me. Big Thanks to AlanF, Leolaia, Auld Soul, Norm, and all the rest of you who should understand that you are really doing a great service in presenting this information. Not forcing anyone to believe you but letting FACTS stand on their own merit. I would give all you guys a big hug if I could. I would also like to thank scholar and thirdwitness because of your refusal to debate, discuss, whatever you want to call it, in a fair and reasonable manner like the above mentioned people, you have proved that you are not interested in truth but in pushing your own agenda. My favorite bible character was Phineas, because he stood for truth and tolorated no rivalry to Jah. You abviously don't feel that way because you would have the faith and character to stand against anyone who apposed truth, thus ultimatly Jehovah. There is no falsehood with Jehovah. Scholar and Thridwitness you two betray your true intentions and that is to support, NOT JEHOVAH, but the Watchtower, NO MATTER WHAT. You have the same mentality as a suicide bomber. Peace be with all of you, and please Alan, Leo, etal... Please Please don't fade away from this subculture, you are needed! I am sure some of us chil-rens will grow up and fight side by side with you but it is allways fun to watch yet another Jahesbola Witness get ripped another A**Hole by you guys. -r ding ding ding - The Winners in this corner, AlanF, Leolaia, Jeffro..... Hey Hey, can someone pick thirdwitness and scholar up off the mat? They are bleeding everywhere.
-
AlanF
Thanks for posting that crap from thirdwitless, Effe. It shows clearly how dishonest JW defenders have to be to support overtly nonsensical Watchtower teachings.On virtually every point of contention, thirdwitless misrepresents the arguments. He has no choice, because to represent them fairly, he would have to admit that his claims are demonstrably false. What's particularly sad, for someone who defends a religion that prides itself on its Godly honesty, is that thirdwitless has been corrected about these misrepresentations many times. If there is a God of truth, it would be interesting watching people like him trying to defend themselves in front of Him. Thirdwitless' style of argumentation is much like that of Flat-Earth defenders trying to defend their abject nonsense. The same goes for Young-Earth Creationists trying to defend their literal interpretation of Genesis. They simply misrepresent the facts, and ignore everything that they can't find a way to misrepresent.
Take a look at that complete idiot, 'scholar'. With respect to defending the Society's 537 date, he actually claims that the evidence against it must be false because the Watchtower Society dates Cyrus' 1st year to either 538/7 or 537/6 B.C. This, even though I've walked him through various WTS publications that clearly state that it was 538/7. And the moron hasn't the wherewithal to see that if the WTS's date is not what it says, then the all-important 539 date for Babylon's fall is wrong. Or that if 537/6 is right, and the Jews returned in 537, that the argument Jeffro and I have presented -- that the Jews returned to Judah in the same calendar year that Cyrus issued his decree freeing the Jews -- is correct. 'Scholar', like most other JW defenders, is simply incapable of connecting the dots, of seeing how all the information is connected, and that by trashing bits of information so as to defend a specific point, they trash a lot of their other claims. But this deliberate blindness is what defines a cult.
AlanF
-
belbab
The Times of Jeremiah
I have followed the various threads of the 607/587 question from the beginning but it seemed I could never catch up to the fast flowing stream of pro and con information that was and is being put forward. After much consideration I have arrived at point that I should say something that has not been elaborated about the times of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar.
Most of the posts have been directed to the time table of events, the years and months, the length of reigns of kings, the times of battles etc.
I wish to focus my comments on the events themselves, not the when, but what the written accounts say happened or were to happen. This will hopefully clarify some of the muddiness that may exist in the minds of some readers of these posts. Of course, if some choose to continue to grope and grovel as muddy bottom feeders, let them enjoy the dark depths of their domain.
Lately there has been discussion about prophecy, whether some have “failed”. Others claim that if God says it through some prophet then what is said is written in stone and cannot be deviated one iota.
If you wish to further your understanding how prophecy works, read chapter 26 of Leviticus, chapters 28 to 32 of Deuteronomy. There you find that if people follow the commandments they will experience blessings. If they deviate, it is curses. When they deviate and arrive at the realization that they missed the boat, and turn around and change, the blessings will return.
Leoliea gave an excellent example of Jonah preaching the destruction of Nineveh at the end of forty days. It was interpreted, if I remember correctly, that Jonah’s prophecy failed. My thoughts are that, in a sense, that Nineveh was destroyed. Wicked Nineveh ceased to exist, was figuratively destroyed, a new more righteous Nineveh came into existence even before the forty days were over.
Writing from memory (references later if requested) I wish to highlight the recorded events whether recorded in archeology or the Scriptures.
Nebuchadnezzar, near the beginning of his reign controlled an army of cavalrymen and many soldiers. Whether he was king while his father was back at the ranch is superfluous, he was head of an army and as such he was king. He defeated the Assyrian/ Egyptian armies at Carchamesh . After this Judah and the surrounding nations were wide open for an invasion of his cavalry.
Habakkuk 1:6-11 ( NASB) gives a description of his cavalry and the invasion of the land of Judah.
"For behold, I am raising up the Chaldeans, That fierce and impetuous people Who march throughout the earth To seize dwelling places which are not theirs.
"They are dreaded and feared; Their justice and authority originate with themselves.
"Their horses are swifter than leopards And keener than wolves in the evening. Their horsemen come galloping, Their horsemen come from afar; They fly like an eagle swooping {down} to devour.
"All of them come for violence. Their horde of faces {moves} forward. They collect captives like sand.
"They mock at kings And rulers are a laughing matter to them. They laugh at every fortress And heap up rubble to capture it.
"Then they will sweep through {like} the wind and pass on. But they will be held guilty, They whose strength is their god."Neb’s war strategy was to swiftly use his cavalry. There was nothing in those days that was faster than cavalry. No messenger on foot could advance faster than cavalry to warn of their arrival in advance. They sweep through like the wind, and pass on. They leave behind a devasted empty land.
How did he feed his army and horses? Judah and surrounds was sheep country. Sheep graze the grass closely to the ground and horses have difficulty grazing on short grass. His army would invade all the land, vineyards, farms, fields for forage and supplies to support his army and horses. His strategy was to take possession of the land first. He used the sword against all “settlers” in the countryside. Many were slain in the field, the lucky ones fled, to where?
They fled to the thickets of the Jordan, where horses couldn’t go. They fled on foot to high rocky ground where the unshod hooves of horses would be damaged. Into the fortified cities, which were few in number, most of the cities were un-walled easily accessible to his army. Only Jerusalem and Lachish and one other, I believe were heavily defended with watchtowers and walls and gates.Jer 4: 27,29 NASB: For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.
The whole city shall flee for the noise of the horsemen and bowmen; they shall go into thickets, and climb up upon the rocks: every city [shall be] forsaken, and not a man dwell therein.
Jer 6:25 NASB Do not go out into the field And do not walk on the road, For the enemy has a sword, Terror is on every side.Jer. 8:13,14, 16 NASB “If I go out to the country, Behold, those slain with the sword! Or if I enter the city, Behold, diseases of famine! I will surely consume them, saith the LORD: [there shall be] no grapes on the vine, nor figs on the fig tree, and the leaf shall fade; and [the things that] I have given them shall pass away from them.
Why do we sit still? assemble yourselves, and let us enter into the defenced cities, and let us be silent there: for the LORD our God hath put us to silence, and given us water of gall to drink, because we have sinned against the LORD.
From Dan is heard the snorting of his horses; At the sound of the neighing of his stallions The whole land quakes; For they come and devour the land and its fullness, The city and its inhabitants.What about the defenced cities?
Jer. 14:18 NASB: 'If I go out to the country, Behold, those slain with the sword! Or if I enter the city, Behold, diseases of famine! The land has become without inhabitant. The inhabitants of the cities have been devoured.They are good as dead. Only if they go over to the Chaldeans can they preserve their lives. The seventy years of servitude, desolation, exile have commenced. Babylon has swallowed up the land and has much of the population imprisoned in the cities.
At what date did the above invasion take place, you may ask? You decide, but while you are deciding ask yourself what is the motive for asking for the date.
To be continued, more to come, : Next, what does without inhabitant mean?
belbab
-
Alwayshere
Society says Jehoiakim begin to rule in 628 and Zedekiah in 617. You can not get 607 using these dates. They both ruled 11years. add 22 to 628 =606. If you figure 628-627 as 1 year down to 617 is 11 years and figure 617-616 as 1 year down to 606 is 11 years. Society also says Nebuchadnezzar begin to rule in 624 and the Bible says at 2Kings 25:8-9 it was the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar that jerusalem was desolated. 624 -19=606. History says 605 was Nebuchadnezzar's first year so his ascension would have been 606.Counting 605 as 1 year down to 587 is his 19th year. History and the Bible agree. Society agrees with no one but their self.
-
hillary_step
Alan,
On virtually every point of contention, thirdwitless misrepresents the arguments.
I think you are being too kind to ThirdWitness, who is a bold-faced liar.
One well known leading opposer of 607 named Allan boldly declared: "Ezekiel demonstrably falsely prophesied about the ultimate rebuilding of Tyre, and all of his other prophecies are called into question...The simple fact is that Ezekiel prophesied falsely, and therefore his words cannot be taken as gospel." In making such an admission he admits that he is well aware that the Bible does not support 587 at all and can only support 607.
An example of his lying for all JW 'lurkers' to see. I would suggest that they report him to the elders for dishonesty but of course when defending the WTS, dishonesty is not just accpeted, but actively encouraged.
HS
-
Leolaia
Contradict yourself Nebuchadnezzar's desolation of Egypt took place when he brought more exiles to Babylon in his 23rd year not in his 37th year.
Who here other than yourself is saying that historically "Nebuchadnezzar's desolation of Egypt took place"? The only thing I said approaching this is that only the original oracle dating to Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year mentions a 40-year desolation of Egypt, and there is no implicit delay either, whereas the later oracles dating to the 37th year do not mention this 40-year period of desolation.
Use a logical fallacy
In another prophecy about Tyre Ezekiel said Tyre would never be rebuilt but it was, therefore since the Tyre prophecy is figurative then the Egypt prophecy must be figurative.
This is a dishonest reduction of AlanF's argument. He did not infer that it "must" be figurative. He gave a disjunction: it can "either" be figurative OR something else. He did not say that it is necessarily figurative, but that it is a POSSIBILITY which you refuse to admit (since you say that it "must" be historical). Rather, the logical fallacy you are exhibiting is a hasty generalization (i.e. your caricature of his argument leaves out part of it and thus unfairly represents it).
Your interpretation of Ezekiel 26 also imposes two separate siege events on the text when it assumes only one and names only one (i.e. Nebuchadnezzar), and the plundering that you want to attribute to Alexander the Great is alluded to in Ezekiel 29 as something that Nebuchadnezzar was supposed to do but could not accomplish. Your basis of splitting up the oracle into two described events (namely, the number reference in verbal inflections) has no linguistic support and ignores the narrative structure and I have already shown to you that Nebuchadnezzar's army contained the armies of "many nations" and that Ezekiel elsewhere referred to Nebuchadnezzar's army as plural "nations". Thus the interpretation that Ezekiel 26 refers to two invasions by two different attackers is eisegetical, not exegetical.
Make something up
Jehovah told Jonah to tell Nineveh that it would be overthrown but when Nineveh repented he did not carry it out so likewise Egypt.
This is not making anything up at all but pointing out a clear logical flaw in your argument. You give us a false dilemma....that (A) either the 40 years is historical and secular sources are wrong, or (B) that the 40 years is unhistorical and Jehovah was wrong/the Bible is wrong/etc., and you use this dilemma to argue that since Jehovah is better than secular sources, (A) must be correct. I demonstrated to you that this is a false dilemma because the Bible is filled with examples that show that just because a prediction is made doesn't necessarily mean that it will come to pass and thus be useable as a historical datum. In fact, I show that the prophecies are more WARNINGS than PREDICTIONS.
You follow that up with an argument from silence: "Surely such a huge act of repentance by one of the most notoriously pagan nations in history would have been recorded in the Bible as an example for all? Why was such an incredible event never mentioned in the Bible not even once?" Arguements from silence are inherently weak. Why should the Bible contain everything that every happened that is of pious significance? The repentance of the Assyrians is just as incredible yet this is not mentioned at all in the review of Jonah's career in 1 Kings. Why did it fail to mention such an awesome event? Because either the author did not know it or did not think to include it.
Moreover your argument exhibits another hasty generalization. You assume that Yahweh may decide not to destroy a city ONLY if there is repentance involved, as in the case of Jonah...as if this is a necesary condition. You fail to appreciate that God may be moved to "compassion" for other reasons, for he is "a gracious and compassionate God, slow to anger and abounding in love, a God who relents from sending calamity" (Jonah 4:2). Hence, God felt compassion and resolved not to send another Flood to destroy humanity, tho "their inclination is evil from childhood," because of Noah's subsequent sacrifice and not because anyone who died in the Flood had repented of their deeds (Genesis 8:21-22). Similarly, God retracted his declaration to wipe out the Israelites not because they had repented (in fact, they continued to sin) but because Moses had prayed for them on their behalf (Exodus 32:10-14). The prophet Daniel also prays on behalf of the Jews in Daniel 9 which is a prerequisite of their redemption from exile as stated in Leviticus 26. I gave many other examples in my earlier posts. The lesson in Genesis 18:16-33 also is that God will relent even if a few repent. Thus, there are a whole host of other possibilities other than the forced one you give of "a whole nation repenting". Other biblical examples include someone praying for that nation on its behalf or even a few Egyptians repenting of their deeds. Whatever the reason, the logic of Jonah 4:2 and Jeremiah 18 show that prophecies are WARNINGS and are not necessarily fulfilled as history.
Use a logical fallacy: Argument from ignorance
There is no secular evidence that gives any indication that Egypt was desolated during this time period.
False, false, false!!! HOW MANY TIMES do I have to tell you that this is not a matter of an argument from silence? I have shown you that there is much POSITIVE evidence that a 40-year period of desolution and diaspora of Egyptians did not occur. I must have said this about four or five times already but still you do not understand this.
Logical fallacy: If I don't know how it can be done, then it can't be done
There is no way that Babylon could have displaced millions of Egytians.
It is NOT a logical fallacy to inquire the likelihood that something could have occurred. So not only is there POSITIVE evidence that it did not occur, but it is also inherently unlikely. Your argumentation can be compared to someone saying that no one really died on the Titanic. Such a person would say that "It is an argument from ignorance to say that there is no evidence that everyone survived", as if we only lack the data that show that these people went on to live full and productive lives. There is also much POSITIVE evidence that people died (e.g. bodies recovered, witness accounts, funerals, etc.), as well as the unlikelihood that such a disaster could occur in icy seas with no deaths...particularly with passengers in the water for many hours. Would it be illogical to cite the unlikelihood of such a claim as evidence against it? Of course not.
On the contrary, this is what Babylon was known to do. They had experience at displacing entire nations. This even happened to Judah where millions were killed and displaced by Babylon. The surrounding nations also suffered this fate.
Egypt is a MUCH larger country than Judah or Philistia. Moreover, there is much POSITIVE evidence that Judah was not uninhabited for the duration of the exile and that the Babylonians used it to exploit its resources. Furthermore, Babylon had its failures such as the spectacular one involving Tyre which could not be captured after a long, costly siege spanning many years. The Babylonian army was not an invincible war machine and you cannot assume on the basis of earlier victories that the campagin against Egypt was successful, let alone resulting in the complete and utter destruction of the country as described in Ezekiel.
-
thirdwitness
It has been claimed by some that thirdwitness in his summation of this thread has misrepresented the arguments made against the 40 year desolation of Egypt. For example, AlanF boldly states: On virtually every point of contention, thirdwitless misrepresents the arguments. He has no choice, because to represent them fairly, he would have to admit that his claims are demonstrably false. What's particularly sad, for someone who defends a religion that prides itself on its Godly honesty, is that thirdwitless has been corrected about these misrepresentations many times.
Is this true? Can it be factually proven by rereading this thread that thirdwitness has not misrepresented the arguments made? Yes it can. It can be shown without a doubt that the masters of deception are the apostates who make false claims to deceive any who might be reading this. Lurkers and readers, now please take note of their outright deception. We will take my summation one point at a time. Did I misrepresent their arguments?
Nebuchadnezzar's desolation of Egypt took place when he brought more exiles to Babylon in his 23rd year not in his 37th year.
This was an argument made previously by Ros at H20 (http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=311102&CategoryID=2967&startcat=401&ThreadID=2430261). Ros said: still disagree with your conclusion that Ezekiel's prophecy was fulfilled in the 27th year. He is pretty explicit that is was in the 12th year of exile or very shortly thereafter. The Jews who disobeyed Jeremiah's and Isaiah's warnings were to be punished, and they fled about a year after Jerusalem was destroyed (587 BC). Either way, there are more than 40 years til the fall of Babylon.
In another prophecy about Tyre Ezekiel said Tyre would never be rebuilt but it was, therefore since the Tyre prophecy is figurative then the Egypt prophecy must be figurative.
Rassillion said: The prophecy about Tyre did not get fufilled during this time period. In fact the Insight book indicates it did not until several hundred years later.
WHY then do you claim that this 40 years for Egypt must be fufilled during this time period.AlanF concurs: The reason is that every possible way cannot contravene the simple fact that a literal fulfillment of a crucial part of the prophecy about Tyre failed, and that once that is established, all bets about the "40 year prophecy" for Egypt are off. And AlanF says: Now, if there exists in a Bible book an unambiguous prophecy whose fulfillment ("the city will never be rebuilt") can be directly observed today to be false (the city exists as a vibrant community), then other prophecies in that book that are contradicted by solid historical data are extremely likely to be false, or they were never intended to be fulfilled literally. Ezekiel's "40 year prophecy" is a case in point.... You're well aware that you cannot wiggle away from the simple fact that Ezekiel's prophecy about the ultimate fate of Tyre was false, and therefore that everything else he prophesied is called into question.
Jeffro: He is pointing to the fact that there is no reason to take the 40 years as a literal period applied specifically to Egypt, just as there is no reason to take Tyre's 70 years as a literal period applied specifically to Tyre.Jehovah told Jonah to tell Nineveh that it would be overthrown but when Ninevah repented he did not carry it out so likewise Egypt.Leo said: Neither does a presumption of biblical inerrency necessitate that prophetic warnings must always be fulfilled (the book of Jonah is a case in point).
Leo then said: Your unsophisticated attitude towards ancient prophecy is such that because Jonah said that Jehovah would destroy Ninevah back in the 9th century BC, then Jehovah must've really done it. That would be parallel to your insistance that Jehovah must've desolated Egypt for 40 years just because he said he would. There is no secular evidence that gives any indication that Egypt was desolated during this time period.
Jayhawk said: Where is the Babylon Empire's cronicling it happening? I mean to be so powerful to wipe out another nation for 40 years deserves bragging rights!Where is there proof in Egypt that it happened?
Hellrider: Except for the fact that history shows us that this never happened
Leo: Yet there is no trace anywhere that such an event had in fact occurred as Ezekiel had warned. ... What evidence is there of their exile in whatever land they were assigned to?auldsoul: ANY statement of fulfillment of Ezekiel 29-32 is pure conjecture without something else to back it up. A single witness cannot prove a thing, can it? There is no way that Babylon could have displaced millions of Egytians.
Leo: And if several million Egyptians were relocated, where did they go?
Additionally on page 7 VM144 relates the population of Egypt and the large land mass that Egypt inhabited inferring that it could not have happened literally.
qcmbr: Third - that prophecy was never fulfilled..Egypt wasn't desolate for 40 years. If it was how on earth was it in a position at the end of it to suddenly be able to rasie and army and be considered for a military alliance.
Jayhawk: Why would a whole nation be left without people for 40 years? Why did it take that long for Egypt to recover?Further, what could be so devistating that it would take 40 years to rebuild?Ezekiel was a false prophet and neither the Tyre prophecy nor the Egypt prophecy came true.
Jayhawk: The Bible says Tyre would never be rebuilt. It was.The Bible says Egypt would be inhabitable for 40 years. No proof other than the Bible says so.Why are these subjects being discussed in a 607 thread? Because the Bible is inaccurate. What else can it be wrong on?
Allan boldly declared: Ezekiel demonstrably falsely prophesied about the ultimate rebuilding of Tyre, and all of his other prophecies are called into question...The simple fact is that Ezekiel prophesied falsely, and therefore his words cannot be taken as gospel.
Jehovah called off the desolation of Egypt because Nebuchadnezzar went too far in his harsh treatment of Judah thus God decided not to give Neb the spoils of Egypt.
Jeffro: The bible indicates that Jehovah would allow Nebuchadnezzar to conquer Egypt for helping to bring the foretold judgement against Jerusalem.However, Nebuchadnezzar went too far. Zechariah 1:15 indicates Jehovah's indignation towards the nations because, although Jehovah used them to bring judgement against Jerusalem, he was only indignant "to a little extent", though the nations "helped toward calamity", causing more destruction than was necessary. ...So, because Nebuchadnezzar acted beyond what was required in the judgement of Jerusalem, it is perfectly valid that he was not permitted to have as thorough a conquest of Egypt as implied at Ezekiel 29:12.
40 years is not literal. 40 is symbolic of many years.
AlanF quoting another source: The number forty is neither a round number (Hitzig) nor a very long time (Ewald), but is a symbolical term denoting a period appointed by God for punishment and penitence (see the comm. on ch. iv. 6), which is not to be understood in a chronological sense, or capable of being calculated.Outlaw: 3rd Witness,It rained on Noah`s ark for 40 days and 40 nights...Mose`s was in the mountains for 40 days...Jesus was in the wilderness for 40 day`s...How did the number 40 get so lucky in the BIBLE?Was this as high as anybody could count in ancient times?Maybe it was the only number invented at the time?..In ancient eastern literature the number 40 means:"Many,Many."
Now after reviewing exactly what the enemies of 607 have said I ask you: Have I misrepresented their arguments against the 40 year desolation of Egypt. As you see I have positively shown the proof for each argument as stated by the posters on this thread. Any honest person can see that I have not even remotely misrepresented the arguments made by the defenders of 587. It is clear who is trying to misrepresent who. Lets use the words that AlanF used about thirdwitness and apply it to who it should be applied to: The apostates have no choice, because to represent them fairly, they would have to admit that their claims are demonstrably false.Now the question that honest persons who really are seeking truth should be asking is:
Who really are the masters of deception?