The simplest explanation of 607 BCE

by Doug Mason 116 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  scholar

  emptywords

  Post 516

  I take your point but I do not share your concern. It is only apostates and our critics who make much of our 'date setting' and the failure of some of our prophetic speculations. They fail to give us credit for those dates that have proven to be reliable and accurate such as 607, 537BCE, 1914 and 1975 CE. Chronology has always been a subject of intense interest for earnest Bible Students as it is the bedrock for the fulfillment of prophecy and the framework for the presentation of history, in the pursuit of such noble objectives it is reasonable to expect a margin of error but over time adjustments are truly appropriate and necessary. I am proud of our heritage and our effort to present eschatology in such a manner as to inspire faith in God's prophetic Word to the betterment and enlightenment of 'sheeplike' ones hungering for truth.

  scholar JW
• 

  timmycat

  Scholar JW

  It's good to see that you hold truth to you're heart.
• 

  emptywords

  Scholar

  I agree with you, I think that faith in Jehovahs word far excedes anything that Satan can dish up to stumble those that love Jehovah. Thanks.
• 

  Jeffro

  'scholar':

  It is only apostates and our critics who make much of our 'date setting' and the failure of some of our prophetic speculations.

  Ignoring the inaccurate and inappropriate usage of the word 'apostate' for a moment, it is redundant to say that only critics make anything of the WTS's failed interpretations. But aside from that, most people in the world don't even know about your small fringe religions's crackpot ideas, so of course broader scholarship couldn't be bothered with such drivel.

  They fail to give us credit for those dates that have proven to be reliable and accurate such as 607, 537BCE, 1914 and 1975 CE.

  Not one of those dates have had any indication of being either "proven" or "reliable". Nothing dramatic happened on any of those occasions that was supposed to have. And before you prattle on about WWI in 1914, there was supposed to be a fulfilment with "great suddenness" in October of 1914, which never happened.

  Chronology has always been a subject of intense interest for earnest Bible Students as it is the bedrock for the fulfillment of prophecy and the framework for the presentation of history, in the pursuit of such noble objectives it is reasonable to expect a margin of error but over time adjustments are truly appropriate and necessary.

  "Margin of error". LOL. There's a difference between 'margin of error' and 'wrong'.

  I am proud of our heritage and our effort to present eschatology in such a manner as to inspire faith in God's prophetic Word to the betterment and enlightenment of 'sheeplike' ones hungering for truth.

  Just like you would have proudly reiterated the drivel about 606 before they worked out there was no year 0. You are a pawn. Poor 'scholar'.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Post 1562

  So, the 'good news' of the Bible is a crackpot idea and now drivel. Such a comment about fundamental Bible teachings says more about you and your beliefs. Of course, the Apostle Peter warned about those who would ridicule the truth and indeed such ridicule is a mere proof that what we believe and preach is the True Religion.

  All of those dates are Bible-based and therefore are proven biblically and prophetically. The facts of ancient and modern history also proves their validity. The events of 1914 were indeed sudden because the Great War broke upon the world in the matter of a single gunshot, it does not get m,ore sudden than that.

  All chronology has a margin of error including chronologies that are based upon radiometric methods. Neo-Babylonian chronology has an 'error' of at least twenty years and so our biblically chronology has needed to be 'fine-tuned' or adjusted over the many decades. This is simply the nature of the beast. When a chronology disagrees with the Bible such as the NB-Jonsson-apostate model then not onlly is it wrong but it is dumb.

  Better it is to have a margin of error of one year and then correct it thus pioneering the way for all of Christendom's chronologists then to adhere to disproven and discredited margin of error of twenty years found in NB chronology.

  scholar JW
• 

  Lady Liberty

  Scholar,

  You said:

  It is only apostates and our critics who make much of our 'date setting' and the failure of some of our prophetic speculations. They fail to give us credit for those dates that have proven to be reliable and accurate such as 607, 537BCE, 1914 and 1975 CE. Chronology has always been a subject of intense interest for earnest Bible Students as it is the bedrock for the fulfillment of prophecy and the framework for the presentation of history, in the pursuit of such noble objectives it is reasonable to expect a margin of error but over time adjustments are truly appropriate and necessary.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlHbz5G4UTM

  Perhaps you should take a few minutes and refresh your "watchtower history" and the accuracy of the dates sited. Youtube has a excellent clip on the history of the organization. (see the above clip) I am sure you will find it most interesting.

  You cannot be serious when you speak of dates proven reliable such as 607, 537, 1914 & 1975 can you?!? I will get to 607 in a minute, but lets just take a look at what the self proclaimed "faithful slave" was claiming and not only that but was claiming he was being directed by Christ Jesus himself. It is nothing to be proud of, rather it is a shameful reminder of the past failed predictions.

  They taught that 1799 was the time of the end, that 1874 was Christ's invisible return, and that 1914 was the end of the world! They were NOT predicting a war!! You can easily read about these teachings over and over again if you were to read any of the Studies of the Scriptures, as this was authored by Russell and according to him no one could understand the Bible without these books! And according to him reading the Bible alone could lead only to spiritual darkness. Infact, in the Divine Plan of the Ages book he taught that the Pyramid of Geza was God's Stone Witness, and that the measurements of the inside of the pyramid confirmed that 1914 was to be the end of the world. Most Jehovahs Witnesses have no idea this was taught. Guess what happened next...1914 came and went. Yes, war started in 1914, but war was not what was being predicted, it was the end of the world that was being predicted. And of course, the end did not come. So then the faithful slave pushed back the dates some more..

  The date was pushed forward to 1915to be the end of the world, then 1918 was to be the end of the world ..surely Armegedon was just around the corner. I hardly see marginal error! Be honest they were guessing then, and they were guessing in 1975, and continue to guess! Not one date the organization has prophesied about has ever come true! Not ONE! Infact, I challenge you to tell us all one date they predicted that was actually accurate.

  I will address 607 in another post.

  L.L.
• 

  stillajwexelder

  The simplest explanation of 607 BCE is this. The WTS are the faithful and discreet slave. We say Jerusalem was destroyed in 607BCE. Accept it. Plain and simple
• 

  Lady Liberty

  Scholar,

  Continued....

  You said:

  WT chronology produced by 'celebrated WT scholars is far from doomed. Rather, it is the demonic and absurd secular chronologies that support 586/587 BCE that are doomed because these chronologies misrepresent God's Word and are full of deceit. What is more important unlike wiley poztates is that loyalty and integrity are important qualiies of the True Religion which completely escapes those who love the lie rather than the truth.

  Prove the deciept! Show us an example!! I will however be happy to show you Watchtower Deciept which I posted a while ago on another thread. How can you explain this away Scholar?? Who is decieving who???!!??

  (Note: Since the Society holds to the 607 date as Jerusalems destruction, it throws off every other date in the Watchtower history by 20 years. Take a look at any date before or after that period and compare it to Archeological findings, and the Watchtowers date is always off by 20 years! See the example below.)

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/111283/1.ashx

  I just made this chart for my brother-in-law using the Bible as well as the book entitled Assyrian & Babylonian Chronicles by A.K. Grayson printed in 1975. Grayson is a world renound expert used to decipher the Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles for the British Museum. I checked out this book from the local library. Although they had to send away to a College University for it. A interesting note: the Society uses this very book in the Insight Vol.2 under Nebuchadnezzar to support their dates. When I got this book, it was for the purpose of checking their dates and quotes of this author. As you will see by this chart, they have misquoted him to serve their own deceitful purpose! I included scriptures that support the chronicles. Like I said, I made this for my brother-in-law, but thought someone out there might be able to use it.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/111407/1.ashx

  (Note: page 2 of the above thread has the actual scans from the books...PROOF of Watchtower Deciept!)

  These copies show the out and out deception on the part of the organization. Once again, we find proof of them misquoting different scholars in order for the organization to appear to have credentials for proof of their date system. If I never checked their date out and never had any reason to doubt them, then I would have never have seen the deception. Hope someone will benefit from these as much as we have.

  See scanned copy of Insight Book page 480, which reads :

  In this his accession year he returned to Hattu, and "in the month Shebat [January-February, 624 B.C.E.] he took the vast booty of Hattu to Babylon." (AssyrianandBabylonianChronicles, by A. K. Grayson, 1975, p. 100)

  Now look at the actual scanned page from this very book I checked out from the library. Page 100 Notice there is NO date!! Look closer at the Insight Book Scan. In brackets they insert the date 624 B.C.E. inside the quotation marks. Clearly anyone reading this would never question that the date 624 B.C.E. was actually the date given by this renouned scholar.

  Then, lets look at scanned page 19 from this same book. Notice what date A.K. Grayson DOES give: 605 B.C.E. NOT 624 B.C.E.!!! Interesting that the Society has to alter the Battle of Carchemishs dates because they have changed the date of the destruction of Jerusalem.

  I posted the scanned copy of page 19. Under Chronicle 5 notice what A. K. Grayson states is Nabopolassars 21st year. It says 605! Now look in Jeremiah 52:12, it says the destuction of Jerusalem took place in Nebuchadnezzars 19th reignal year. The Society teaches 607 was the year for Jerusalems destruction, and they teach it was Nebuchadnezzars 19th reignal year. O.K.....How is A.K. Grayson supporting 607 if he states that Nabopolassars 21st year was in 605?? Please now tell me A.K. Grayson is NOT in agreement with 586/587??

  You can request the book for your library to see for yourself! I will get more scans from the office for you like you requested.

  L.L.
• 

  scholar

  Lady Liberty

  Post 1980

  You ask me to prove the deceit of those who advocate secular chronologies based upon discredited NB chronology. For starters, such chronology does not account either in its history or tabulation of the regnal years for the Neo-Babylonian kings any evidenc eof the biblical 'seventy years'. Yet, I would propose that those seventy years are the most crucial event for the Neo-Babylonian period. Why the absence both in the chronology and the history? The Biblical record gives historical information of that period including those incursions by key rulers of the NB period.

  The biblical 'seventy years' disproves so-called infallible NB chronology by the twenty year gap at least and if Josephus is given credence then the period is further drastically altered.

  Your chart and the use of Grayson's material proves nothing because you have simply presented matters in accordance with your own interpretation. Celebrated WT scholars have used Grayson's research and will continue to do so in full knowledge that Grayson's approach may vary from the 'celebrated'. They have inserted data by means of parenthesis and they have alerted the reader to the reference source so that accords with academic convention.

  I believe you are making a 'mountain out of a molehill'.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Lady Liberty

  Post 1979

  I am very serious about the integrity of those nominated dates and I am fully aware of our history and the matter of 'prophetic speculation' which is part and parcel of wonderful Christian heritage much to the chagrin of apostates.

  Whatever the proclaimed hopes for 1914 were and the fact that such hopes did not materialize, that year marked the end of the Gentile Times and that was understood decades before the event. Many earnest Bible Students also saw the significance of 1914 which has become not only enshrined in eschatology but also in modern history.

  I await with keen anticipation your majestic analysis of 607 BCE.

  scholar JW