by whereami 19 Replies latest watchtower bible
In very layman's terms can some help me why this date is important to the JW 607 theory? I'm trying to show my wife that the WTS is wrong on the 607 date. I told her that no respected scholar agrees with that date. She told me, "but they believe in 537".
Can some of you that are pro's at the 607 issue help me in really simple terms show her that regardless of 537 being recognized as true, it still doesn't prove 607. Thank you in advance.
SCHOLARS RECGNOZE 539 AS THE DATE BABYLON WAS OVERTAKEN BY THE MEDES & PERSIANS. WTS CLAIMS THAT 537 WAS WHEN THE ISRAELITES RETURNED TO JERUSALEM....THEY ARE PRETTY MUCH ALONE IN THIS CLAIM. HISTORIANS SHOW THEY RETURNED IN 538 OR 539. tHE WTS NEEDS 537...THEN THEY APPLY THE 70 YRS SPOKEN OF IN JEREMIAH TO ISRAEL ALONE- EVEN THOUGH THE CONTEXT SHOWS IT TO BE THE TIME FRAME WHERE BABYLON WILL HAVE DOMINANCE OVER THE WORLD. THEY SAY THIS BONDAGE FOR ISRAEL ENDED IN 537 WHEN THEY RETURNED HOME. THUS 537 AND 70 YRS TAKES YOU BACK TO 607 BCE. IT IS IRRELEVANT THOUGH- WHEN READING JEREMIAH IT STATES THAT THE DOMINATION OF BABYLON WOULD EFFECT THE ENTIRE GLOBE AND NAMES ALL THE NATIONS...
it's the 70 years... -537 - 70 = 607. but one wonders why they accept one date, but not the other...
Whereami
The simple answer is that the calculations for their most important doctrine has been proven wrong. And if something this important is wrong and they will not correct it in spite of all the evidence now uncovered then what else is wrong with their theology? Well the answer to that is nearly everything else is wrong as well. Very little of what the WT teaches can be called truth. Not just a little bit mind you but a massive amount of it is nothing but trash. And their doctrines and policies based upon such illogical thinking have killed many people and continue to kill and harm them to this day.
Joseph
If you have a WT CD search for the Babylonian kings from Nebuchanezzar to Nabonidus, noting the order of succession and the lengths of their reigns.
Better still, get her to do it for you.
Calculating from 539 to the beginning of Nebs reign is now easy, and it doesn't arrive at the 625 required by the WT to make 607 possible.
Ask her where the mistake is.
If you need help, see Allymom's K.I.S.S. thread http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/55372/1.ashx
Cheers
Chris
Thanks Black sheep. Went thru that other thread. Very informative.
Well JosephMalik, of the 'throw the baby out with the water' class, if most of what the JW's teach is trash then where does that leave the rest of the churches, who teach even worse trash with their trinity nonsense, completely unscriptural immortal soul bollox, and their hellfire crap. They are all teaching trash, the lot of them, but the JW's have got some big things right.
What? This thread isn't 60 pages long yet! What's wrong with this picture?
whereami
You are incorrect in claiming that no 'respected scholars accept 607 BCE for there are many scholars including the 'celebrated WT scholars who do in fact accept that date but have seen to it through the scholarly journal The Watchtower over many decades published the biblical-secular evidence for this date.
The recognition of the fact of 537 BCE for the Return of the Jews proves the validity of 607 BCE because of Jeremiah's 'seventy years' of Exile-Desolation-Servitude. The recognition of this fixed historic period demonstrates the overwhelming fact that 607 BCE is the only possible date. Other proposed dates such as 587 or 586 are impossible because such dates cannot account for the seventy years despite the many crazy interpretations of higher critics and apostates.
scholar JW
Dear Whereami,
Elsewhere posted this from a previous thread. I think it may help you:
Here is something originally on Quotes web site. It is now on Reexamine.org
http://www.reexamine.org/quotes/607bce-table.htm
This chart summarizes the Watch Tower Society quotes collected and presented elsewhere (http://Reexamine.Quotes/607bce.htm). Please refer to that page for verification of the kingly succession and regnal years presented below.
Remember: for BCE dates, going backwards in time means the numbers get bigger (i.e. counting backwards in time: 3 CE, 2 CE, 1 CE, 1 BCE, 2 BCE, 3 BCE, ... 539 BCE, 540 BCE, 541 BCE, etc.)
| Calendar Year | Nabonidus: 17 yrs | Labashi-Marduk: < 9 months | Neriglissar: 4 yrs | Evil-Merodach 2 yrs | Nebuchadnezzar II 43 yrs |
| 539 BCE | 17 | ||||
| 540 | 16 | ||||
| 541 | 15 | ||||
| 542 | 14 | ||||
| 543 | 13 | ||||
| 544 | 12 | ||||
| 545 | 11 | ||||
| 546 | 10 | ||||
| 547 | 9 | ||||
| 548 | 8 | ||||
| 549 | 7 | ||||
| 550 | 6 | ||||
| 551 | 5 | ||||
| 552 | 4 | ||||
| 553 | 3 | ||||
| 554 | 2 | ||||
| 555 | 1 | ||||
| 556 | 0 (accession year) | less than 9 months | 4 | ||
| 557 | 3 | ||||
| 558 | 2 | ||||
| 559 | 1 | ||||
| 560 | 0 (accession year) | 2 | |||
| 561 | 1 | ||||
| 562 | 0 (accession year) | 43 | |||
| 563 | 42 | ||||
| 564 | 41 | ||||
| 565 | 40 | ||||
| 566 | 39 | ||||
| 567 | 38 | ||||
| 568 | 37 | ||||
| 569 | 36 | ||||
| 570 | 35 | ||||
| 571 | 34 | ||||
| 572 | 33 | ||||
| 573 | 32 | ||||
| 574 | 31 | ||||
| 575 | 30 | ||||
| 576 | 29 | ||||
| 577 | 28 | ||||
| 578 | 27 | ||||
| 579 | 26 | ||||
| 580 | 25 | ||||
| 581 | 24 | ||||
| 582 | 23 | ||||
| 583 | 22 | ||||
| 584 | 21 | ||||
| 585 | 20 | ||||
| 586 | 19 | ||||
| 587 | 18 * | ||||
| 588 | 17 | ||||
| 589 | 16 | ||||
| 590 | 15 | ||||
| 591 | 14 | ||||
| 592 | 13 | ||||
| 592 | 12 | ||||
| 594 | 11 | ||||
| 595 | 10 | ||||
| 596 | 9 | ||||
| 597 | 8 | ||||
| 598 | 7 | ||||
| 599 | 6 | ||||
| 600 | 5 | ||||
| 601 | 4 | ||||
| 602 | 3 | ||||
| 603 | 2 | ||||
| 604 | 1 | ||||
| 605 BCE | 0 (accession year) |
* Watch Tower Society and "wordly scholars and historians" agree that Nebuchadnezzar II conquered Jerusalem during his 18th regnal year. Therefore, according to Watch Tower Society's chronology of the kings of Babylon and the lengths of their reigns, Nebuchadnezzar II conquered Jerusalem in the year 587 BCE (i.e. not 607 BCE).
