The "Seventy Years" explained

by Doug Mason 72 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  AuldSoul

  Drew,

  I agree.

  But, conversely, disprove 607 BC as a possible date for the destruction of Jerusalem and you simultaneously disprove all the claims attched to that date by the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses.

  What I don't understand is the comfortable way JWs assume they are right about the timing of Jerusalem's fall and further assume that everyone else has to have a precise date as an alternate in order to claim 607 is not correct. Tens of thousands of ancient, contemporary documents utterly remove all possiblity of Jerusalem falling in 607 BC. That is not an exagerration. Thousands upon thousands. And yet, still the average JWs put up a much bolder defense against these documents than the Watchtower Society has ever attempted.

  The reason should be clear to any JW. The WTS doesn't dispute the huge body of contemporary archeological evidence because they know they cannot actually support their 607 BC date. They leave it to armchair scholars like ... well, like scholar, to dispute these documents.

  That corporation is spineless and cowardly.

  —AuldSoul
• 

  drew sagan

  But, conversely, disprove 607 BC as a possible date for the destruction of Jerusalem and you simultaneously disprove all the claims attched to that date by the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses.

  Not if there is new light.
  
  There is one major beef I have with any of the 607 supporters that usually get into long winded battles over Biblical chronology and that is they never give us an honest presentation of what their purposes are.
  
  To me it is a pure expose on their character. They only wish to engage the issue as long as they can give off the false image that they are some unbiased 3rd part not associated with anybody just trying to 'find truth'. They hope that such a person could appear in the world and give support to their theories but since no such person exists they become that person to the best of their ability
  
  Nobody would put up this much of a fight over a subject they didn't have at least some kind of feelings for or defining purpose attached to it. To pretend this is all just historical analysis is hogwash.
• 

  ellderwho

  A soul: What I don't understand is the comfortable way JWs assume they are right about the timing of Jerusalem's fall and further assume that everyone else has to have a precise date as an alternate in order to claim 607 is not correct.

  Indeed, is there some great conspiracy against the Witness chronology. This is Neils greatest hurdle. Kings list.
  He will never, never submit a workable list. Not that one doesnt exist, but his own "celebrated" ones cant even produce one from there own literature.

  Anything further is just smoke&mirror or just plain ole Bullsh*t.
• 

  JCanon

  The 607 and 587BCE dating, both based on the erroneous 539BCE date for the fall of Babylon is over because of one simple text. The VAT4956, which was designed to hide the original chronology. It's quite ingenius. I selected a time when the moon was passing by the most measureable trek in the zodiac, when it passes closely out of Leo into Virgo. Two references were given that match the original chrnology of 511BCE.

  That means everybody who is still thinking the 587 or 607BCE dating is valid is simply out of touch or in denial. And all the people and archaeologists and scholars who debate back and forth and don't realize Xenophon changed the Greek history. Don't they know that if the Greek Period crumbles, which is the weakest link, then all the other dates fall as well. But it's hard to convince people whose eyes are closed, so I just like messin' with their minds a little by telling them things they really don't want to hear like that Aristotle and Socrates were lovers. When the chronology was revised and the history of Socrates was moved back in time he ends up dying 15 years before Aristotle was born. So to pull off this conspiracy, Aristotle, Plato and Xenophon had to be involved. Thing is, they didn't likely do this without getting paid. So the fame of Aristotle and Plato may be simply by default. We know them because they are the revisionists of the Greco-Persian Period. Did you know that Aristotle quotes from Socrates over 80 times in his works? A man he never met? A man allegedly dead 15 years before Aristotle was born?

  Yea sure, dream on. There is so much evidence now proving what even the original chronology is, we don't care if the scholars have it wrong. They can stay wrong as long as it pleases them.

  JCanon
• 

  Jeffro

  'scholar':

  Welcome back. Hope you had a pleasant vacation.

  If you were paying attention, you would have noted that I said I was still in Europe at the time of my previous post. But thanks anyway.

  Now to chronology business. Your claim that the seventy years "factually established as the definite and complete end of the Assyrina Empire " IN 609 BCE is a delusion being the product of the Jonsson nonsense. Scholars cannot agree with 1, Which year was the definite end of the Assyrian Power and 2. Which year was the definite beginning for the seventy years.

  Scholars agree that Assyria came to a complete end in 609, when Haran was destroyed, at which point it was indesputable that Babylon was the new world power. The fact that most scholars regard Assyria's suffered a significant but not total defeat in 612 does not change that fact. It is evident that Babylon's power over the nations ended in 539BC, so if you trust the bible as you claim, then that forces the beginning of the 70 years of nations serving Babylon to be 609, so it should not matter to you what the scholars say.

  All that you present is simply opinion, a rehash of the Jonsson hypothesis.

  The fact is that what I have said is compatible with the bible and mainstream scholarship. Whether it's compatible with you, or with Jonsson, I really don't care.

  Jeremiah 25:12 begins a pronouncement of judgement against Babylon which began after Judah's punishment, banishment or exile after the seventy years ended in the definitive year of 537 BCE.

  Your statement, when compared with the verse in question, is blatantly flawed, with not even the simplest application of logic, and certainly nothing approaching scholarship. It is an indisputable fact that Babylon's king was called to account in 539, and the writing was literally "on the wall" at the exact time that Babylon's days had been numbered and come to an end, at that exact time; there was no such 'calling to account' in 537 whatsoever, so there is absolutely no valid justification for suggesting that the 70 years ended after 539, which precludes them from applying to the exile, because the exiles returned in 538. Added to that, the bible never mentions '70 years of exile' at all.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Post 1555

  Scholars have not got a clue as to what date would properly mark the 'end' or 'complete end' of the Assyrian World Power as shown by surveying reference works so your use of a 'fuzzy' beginning of the seventy years is unwise and foolish. The dates of 605 or 609 BCE are useless in this regard.

  Your opinion is incompatible with the Bible and is not up to fate with current scholarship because you would not know what scholarship is about because you do not research but simply give your interpretation of the Bible.

  My comment on Jeremiah 25:12 is what the text plainly says and is supported by leading commentaries which have that same observation.. The 'calling to account' is explained by Jeremiah is Babylon's destruction and not her fall as you claim which began only after the seventy years was fulfilled which was in 537 BCE.

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  Scholars have not got a clue as to what date would properly mark the 'end' or 'complete end' of the Assyrian World Power as shown by surveying reference works so your use of a 'fuzzy' beginning of the seventy years is unwise and foolish. The dates of 605 or 609 BCE are useless in this regard.

  As previously stated, it matters not whether all scholars agree on 609, because you claim belief in the bible, and it is the bible that forces the beginning of the 70 year period to begin in 609.

  Your opinion is incompatible with the Bible and is not up to fate with current scholarship because you would not know what scholarship is about because you do not research but simply give your interpretation of the Bible.

  Ad hominim drivel ignored.

  My comment on Jeremiah 25:12 is what the text plainly says and is supported by leading commentaries which have that same observation.. The 'calling to account' is explained by Jeremiah is Babylon's destruction and not her fall as you claim which began only after the seventy years was fulfilled which was in 537 BCE.

  It says that not just the nation but also its king was called to account after 70 years. That event was explicitly identified as being in 539.
• 

  Jeffro

  The seventy years was a period of not only servitude to Babylon but also an exile in Babylon during which time their homeland was desolate for a fixed period of seventy years. Babylon fell in 539 BCE to a new power under Cyrus who soon after in 537 BCE officially ended their exile or servitude with the return of the Jews in 537 BCE. This is confirmed by the simple fact that during the reign of Darius in his 'first year' that Danile discerned that the seventy years had not then ended after the fact of Babylon's Fall in 539 BCE. There is no exegesis that escapes the simple fact of Daniel 9:1.2 that the seventy years was soon yet to end tied also to the fact that the land was a devastated place.

  Wrong. The bible does not say anywhere at all that the 70 years were of exile. Daniel says nothing about whether the 70 years had ended, but only that he discerned what would happen after they had ended. It meant that by the end of the 70 years, Jerusalem's devastation was complete. That does not mean that it would immediately be repopulated as soon as that period had ended, though it is understandable that Daniel might be upset over his people and their land.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Post 1556

  The Bible nowhere says that the seventy years began in 609 BCE or the event that you ascribe to that date.

  The historical judgement described by Jeremiah was not here fall in 539 BCE but her destruction which happened only after the fulfilling of the seventy years besides Daniel confirmed that the seventy years had not then finished at the time of Darius whose reign began after the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Post 1557

  The Bible most definitely describes the seventy years as exilic. Jeremiah 29:10 was written to the captives in Babylon. Jeremiah25:11 states that the Jews had to serve Babylon for seventy years and read the whole book of Lamentations describes their exile in Babylon and the restoration.The seventy years was also a period servitude and desolation as confiremed by the testimony of Josephus.

  scholar JW