70 years = 607?

by allelsefails 421 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  isaacaustin

  pseudos source that he says makes plain the 527 date:

  here is the applicable paragraphs..as you can see, assertions...and qualifying terms such as likely...fables then spun off of this possilbe date

  Cyrus’

  DecreefortheReturnoftheExiles. By his decreeing the end of the Jewish exile, Cyrus fulfilled his commission as Jehovah’s ‘anointed shepherd’ for Israel. (2Ch 36:22, 23; Ezr 1:1-4) The proclamation was made "in the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia," meaning his first year as ruler toward conquered Babylon. The Bible record at Daniel 9:1 refers to "the first year of Darius," and this may have intervened between the fall of Babylon and "the first year of Cyrus" over Babylon. If it did, this would mean that the writer was perhaps viewing Cyrus’ first year as having begun late in the year 538 B.C.E. However, if Darius’ rule over Babylon were to be viewed as that of a viceroy, so that his reign ran concurrent with that of Cyrus, Babylonian custom would place Cyrus’ first regnal year as running from Nisan of 538 to Nisan of 537 B.C.E.

  In view of the Bible record, Cyrus’ decree freeing the Jews to return to Jerusalem likely was made late in the year 538 or early in 537 B.C.E. This would allow time for the Jewish exiles to prepare to move out of Babylon and make the long trek to Judah and Jerusalem ( a trip that could take about four months according to Ezr 7:9) and yet be settled "in their cities" in Judah by "the seventh month" (Tishri) of the year

  537 B.C.E. (Ezr 3:1, 6)

  This possiblility followed up by this WT fiction:

  This marked the end of the prophesied 70 years of Judah’s desolation that began in the same month, Tishri, of 607 B.C.E.—2Ki 25:22-26; 2Ch 36:20, 21.
• 

  BarefootServant

  Ah, thank you Isaac for posting the original source of the lie.

  "Babylonian custom would place Cyrus’ first regnal year as running from Nisan of 538 to Nisan of 537 B.C.E."

  That much we agree, Cyrus' first regnal year was 538 (by which I assume his de-facto rulership may have started earlier).

  "In view of the Bible record, Cyrus’ decree freeing the Jews to return to Jerusalem likely was made late in the year 538 or early in 537 B.C.E. This would allow time for the Jewish exiles to prepare to move out of Babylon and make the long trek to Judah and Jerusalem (a trip that could take about four months according to Ezr 7:9) and yet be settled "in their cities" in Judah by "the seventh month" (Tishri)"

  Look at that! For no particular reason, the decree was likely made late in 538 BCE. I wonder why they should say this. Surely not because if the decree was made early in 538 BCE it would be much more logical that the exiles returned in that same year?

  And it says if the decree was not made late in 538 BCE, it was likely made early in 537 BCE. But didn't Scholar say there really, really, wasn't enough time for the exiles to get back to Jerusalem by the seventh month of the same year of the decree? Obviously, there suddenly becomes plenty of time for the exiles to return the same year if the year of the decree is 537 BCE. If only these celebrated scholars had known of Scholar's work, they'd have realised that actually the only possible date for Cyrus' decree was late in the year 538 BCE.

  So four months journey, sounds about right. So if, as is obviously far more likely, Cyrus' decree was made before or around March or April of 538 BCE, then according to the WT's own reference work that leaves plenty of time for them to get back to Jerusaslem by October 538 BCE.

  The clever part of this is, the lie is buried deep in the documentation and easy to miss. A little word, 'likely', is all it takes to deceive.

  BFS
• 

  isaacaustin

  Thanks barefootservant. Good points.

  Pseudo, can you do me a favor? After you prove to me 607BCE, and validate 1914 as the end of the genitle times can you then direct me to the 5-yr prophecy to take me to 1919? Thanks so much.
• 

  isaacaustin

  Thanks barefootservant. Good points.

  Pseudo, can you do me a favor? After you prove to me 607BCE, and validate 1914 as the end of the genitle times can you then direct me to the 5-yr prophecy to take me to 1919? Thanks so much.
• 

  isaacaustin

  so this is all built on the Wt claiming (with no support) the decree was issued to late for the return to be in 538BCE
• 

  BarefootServant

  so this is all built on the Wt claiming (with no support) the decree was issued too late for the return to be in 538BCE

  Absolutely brilliant, isn't it? You've got to hand it to those unknown celebrated scholars, they sure know how to knit a good story so they can pull the wool over your eyes.
• 

  AnnOMaly

  Built on conjecture. Even the Zondervan NIV chart adds a '?' after 537 - it says, "537(?) Return under Sheshbazzar Ezr 1:11."

  And as was said already, the building of the altar appears to have been done in the 7th month in the first year of Cyrus (538), before a change of year was recorded at Ezra 3:8.
• 

  isaacaustin

  Pseudoscholar, I will ask you for the 6th time to please, please name these 'celebrated WT scholars' so we can give them all due credit.
• 

  Leolaia

  BTW, the echoes are Daniel in Luke 21:24 are slighter than the allusions to other scriptures. In fact, this verse is a Lukan modification of the passage about the "abomination of desolation" (= Mark 13:14) which replaces the Danielic reference (as made explicitly in the Matthean version) with a specific application, i.e. the situation of Jerusalem surrounded by encamped armies. The notion of Jerusalem being trampled on by the nations for a predetermined period of time is a Danielic one (specifically relating to ch. 7-9), but the wording more closely resembles other scriptures that were probably drawn on more directly.

  Tobit 14:5-6 LXX: "God will have mercy on them and he will bring them back into the land, and they will build the house, not like the former one, until (heós) the appointed times of the age (kairoi tou aiónos) will be fulfilled (pléróthósin). Then after this they will return from their captivities, and they will build Jerusalem honorably. And the house of God will be built in it as a glorious building for all the generations of the age, just as the prophets said concerning it. Then all the nations (panta ta ethné) will turn back truly to fear the Lord God".

  Zechariah 12:2-3 LXX: "In Judea, there will be a siege against Jerusalem. And it shall be on that day I will make Jerusalem a trampled stone (lithon katapatoumenon) for all the nations (pasi tois ethnesi); everyone who tramples (katapatón) it when mocking shall mock. And all the nations of the earth (panta ta ethné tés gés) shall be gathered against it".

  Romans 11:25: "Israel has experienced a hardening in part until (akhris ou) the fullness (pléróma) of the nations (ethnón) has come in".

  Luke 21:24: "They shall fall by the mouth of the sword, and shall be led captive to all the nations (ta ethné panta), and Jerusalem shall be trampled down (patoumené) by the nations (hupo ethnón), until (akhris ou) the appointed times of the nations (kairoi ethnón) will be fulfilled (pléróthósin).

  The link to Romans seems to be more a matter of similar diction, rather than involving a similar eschatological concept, so I do not think it necessarily lay before the author's mind, but the passages from Tobit and Zechariah are quite close. When combined with the reference to the Gentile fourth kingdom "trampling" others for a period of "times" in Daniel 7 LXX and with the reference to Jerusalem being desolated during a set period of "times" in Daniel 9 LXX (with the interpretation of the "abomination of desolation" in ch. 9 being connected with the situation of Jerusalem "encamped by armies", cf. also the siege mentioned in Zechariah 12:2-3), you get pretty much what is in Luke 21:24.

  BTW, the situation described in the Tobit passage is not the return from Babylonian exile, other than the first sentence. First God "brings them back into the land," i.e. the return from Babylonian captivity, and then "they will build the house, not like the former one," this is a reference to the rebuilding of the Temple but not to its former glory (Tobit was written prior to the later Herodian rebuilding of the Temple). The reference to the Jews returning to their captivities and building Jerusalem honorably is thus eschatological, having in view a more glorious Third Temple with all the diaspora returning to Jerusalem and with all the nations turning to God in worship (as it is in Zechariah). This is the eschatological event that would not happen "until the appointed times of the age will be fulfilled". The scenario in Zechariah 12-14 is one of Jerusalem being surrounded by encamped armies and then God will give power to the leaders of Jerusalem so they will consume all the surrounding peoples with Jerusalem left intact (v. 6), with God destroying the surrounding nations (v. 9), and then "the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles" (14:16). This gives some insight into the motivations and beliefs of the Jews who fought against the Romans in AD 66-70 and why they felt they would be victorious; they believed that the war with the Gentile armies fulfills scripture and they have the reassurance that God would wipe out the armies miraculously. Luke alludes to these same scriptures but gives a very different application; the Jews should flee for their lives and not stay behind to fight, for Jerusalem and its temple would indeed be destroyed (cf. Luke 21:5-6).
• 

  bennyk

  "scholar" writes:

  When you have a prophecy or when you begin to prophecy then you can start talking about what others have done.

  Actually, Deut. 18:20-22 requires no such thing.

  Neither does Jesus at Matt. 7:15-20.

  Neither does the Apostle John at 1 John 4:1.