70 years = 607?

by allelsefails 421 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • AllTimeJeff
    AllTimeJeff

    (fake) Scholar

    You are neither a scholar, nor do you suffer from the burden of intellectual honesty.

    The evidence for 607 BCE is simply fact that 539 BCE fell in 539 BCE as attested by scholarship followed by the establishment of 537 BCE as the date for the Jewish Exiles under Cyrus as confirmed by Ezra and other archaeological evidence for the Decree of Cyrus in his first year. This Return ended the prophesied 70 year period of Exile-Desolation-Servitude in 607 BCE with the Destruction of Jerusalem in the 11th year of Zedekiak and the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzer. The facts concerning the 70 years are described by Ezra, Daniel, Jeremiah and Zechariah are attested by the testimony of Josephus. This is just a simple overview of the subject.

    Your response lacks one important element: A reference by scholars to Jersualems destructioin as 607. Counting backward 70 years because it fits a pre conceived dogma proves nothing. All this proves is that JW's like yourself count backwards 70 years from 537 BCE. We already knew thats how they got it. It doesn't make it correct. We need an independant starting point

    Josephus attested to the events described in the books of Ezra, Daniel, Jeremiah, and Zecheriah. Would you care to come up with a reference of his that gives 607 as the date of Jerusalems fall? Just one will do. Thanks.

    As you acknowledge scholars including the 'celebrated' WT scholars need to rely on Pivotal Dates or Absolute in order to do chronology but the selection of such dates varies from scholar to scholar. Our scholars have selected 539 BCE as the best choicemuch to the chagrin of apostates. The use of 539 BCE is based on a selected methodology which is the basis of any scheme of chronology but provides surety for the determination of 607 BCE.

    JW's as we are all aware are great at using their own lingo and being too impressed with it. In this case, archeologists and historians use the simple methodology of "When did this happen?" They do not suffer the severe impediment of religions and cults that must have a methodology that tries to fit square facts into round dogmatic holes.

    In this case, there is no need for a pivotal date, thanks to the astrological records of the Babylonians and Egyptians, which (real) scholars are able to translate into the Gregorian calander thanks to the reliable movements of the stars. Thats how JW's got 539 right.

    What makes them intellectually dishonest is that they accept 539 BCE because it fits their dogma, yet totally reject the very same materials they use for 539 when it points to 587 as the destruction of Jerusalem. Why? Because you can't get 1914 without 607 BCE.

    But that is a small commentary. Your methodology is based on superstion and religious dogma. I gave you this challenge, but I need just one reference you imply exists that states Jerusalem was destroyed at 607 BCE. The caveat is that the reference must be sourced from a non JW scholar and non JW reference. Thats all. Just one. Should be easy.

    Btw, this is from Wiki:

    Nebuchadnezzar engaged in several military campaigns designed to increase Babylonian influence in Syria and Judah. An attempted invasion of Egypt in 601 BC was met with setbacks, however, leading to numerous rebellions among the states of the Levant, including Judah. Nebuchadnezzar soon dealt with these rebellions, capturing Jerusalem in 597 BC and deposing King Jehoiakim, then in 587 BC due to rebellion, destroying both the city and the temple, and deporting many of the prominent citizens along with a sizable portion of the Jewish population of Judea to Babylon. [2] These events are described in the Prophets (Nevi'im) and Writings (Ketuvim), sections of the Hebrew Bible. After the destruction of Jerusalem, Nebuchadnezzar engaged in a thirteen year siege of Tyre (585-572 BC), which ended in a compromise, with the Tyrians accepting Babylonian authority.

  • AllTimeJeff
  • scholar
    scholar

    Mary

    Post 10696

    The Kingdom of God described in Daniel 4 could not be the Babylonian Kingdom because how could Daniel confess to something that he had already boasted about and his Kingdom was hardly an everlasting kingdom which was also he had to admit. Further, Neb himself referred to that kingdom as 'His kingdom; referring to the Most High God.

    You should take advice on the grammatical form of 'will be trampled' so as you can understand the precise verbal aspect of this construction.

    Scholar does not deal in crap for he leaves such dirty business to mindless apostates but concentrates on the healthful teaching of God's Word of Truth.

    The names of scholars who dicusss the eschatology of Luke are many but I refer you to Robert Maddox, Howard Marshall and C.H.Giblin for starters but I can most certainly expand this list if required.

    Your'e outa here so good riddance!

    scholar JW

  • AllTimeJeff
    AllTimeJeff

    Still waiting for that reference (fake) Scholar. I have given you two that anyone can look up on Jerusalem's destruction. You have given names to scholars. All I need is a quote from any of them. Can you come up with one quote? What if this one quote will save the life of a fence sitter, who might go back to the KH once and for all, thanks to your scholarship, and your desire to provide just one morsel of evidence?

    Or can you do no more then throw up a smoke screen of names of scholars so that you don't have to answer a question. Remember, I might be a scummy apostate to you, but for your interests, you know very well that there are fence sitting JW's reading this right now, and they might take you at your word that you know what you are talking about. You don't owe me a damn thing, I know. But you owe it to them. Otherwise, they might draw similar conclusions to the ones I have already drawn about you.

    Scholar does not deal in crap for he leaves such dirty business to mindless apostates but concentrates on the healthful teaching of God's Word of Truth.

    If you get your only evidence that Jerusalem fell in 607 from the WTBTS, then you deal with a ton of crap, which is why I asked for other references that you continue to insist exist, yet you somehow can't quote one?

    God's word has no dates or calenders, although it does seem to have a never ending stream of apologists with nothing to offer but apologies for no evidence to present.

    The names of scholars who discuss the eschatology of Luke are many but I refer you to Robert Maddox, Howard Marshall and C.H.Giblin for starters but I can most certainly expand this list if required.

    You don't need more names to hide behind, just one quote is all. Thats it. The quote where you say they point to 607 BCE as the destruction of Jerusalem. That quote will expand the list quite nicely, thank you!

  • scholar
    scholar

    AllTimeJeff

    Post 1549

    There is no need for any endorsement by scholars or a scholar to support the validity of 607 BCE for it is a fact that scholars have to date no uniform date for the Fall as some say 588, 587 or 586 BCE so there is some fluidity in this matter. The counting backwards is a legitimate method of doing chronology which is in harmony with tabulated events and dates after all chronology is a scheme after all so events are placed in the stream of time so as one can in either direction.

    Josephus sets out the history of matters and this supports the historicity of the Bible in connection with the events of the seventy years between the Fall and the Return so it does provide an independent witness of our interpretation of matters.

    Chronologists of all persuasions select their own methodology and we have selected ours which provides a chronology consistent with all of the data both secular and biblical. There is no room for cultishness in pursuit of accurate knowledge for we leave that to apostates.

    Real scholars even those who rely on the records of Neo-Babylonian chronologies must use Pivotal Dates in order to assign dates to those regnal of king lists. Pivotal or Absolute Dates goes with the terrritory.

    It is methodology alone which permits the 'celebrated' WT scholars to select 539 BCE rather than other dates so it comes down to a arbitrary choice of which they are entitled to do.

    You give me a challenge but I offer you one. You prove to me as to what precise year Jerusalem fell.

    It is no good quoting from Wiki because I can cite numerous scholars who say it was 586 BCE and not 587 BCE for the Fall so you have a big problem.

    scholar JW

  • scholar
    scholar

    AllTime Jeff

    Post 1556

    You have not given me anything, where are the two references? If you want quotes or sources then I recommend you read the two volume work on chronology by Rolf Furuli for starters. However, the best and most reliable work on chronology is the Bible itself so Read the Bible!

    You are right in acknowledging the presence of 'fence sitters' and it is for them that I post on this forum.

    The evidence for 607 BCE not only comes from the WTS but they derive their interpretation from the Bible and that is the ultimate source and the most reliable one at that and I am more than happy with that salient fact.

    The three scholars were not mentioned in relation to 607 BCE and as far as I know they do not support that date , I source them because they have published research on Luke and Lukan eschatology which is very much related in my opinion to the matter of the Gentile Times.

    scholar JW

  • isaacaustin
    isaacaustin

    pseduscholar said:

    AllTimeJeff

    Post 1549

    There is no need for any endorsement by scholars or a scholar to support the validity of 607 BCE for it is a fact that scholars have to date no uniform date for the Fall as some say 588, 587 or 586 BCE so there is some fluidity in this matter.

    My reply: The fact that there is some debate as to whether Jeru was destroy in 586 or 587 supports 607BCE??? How about the fact that all the evidence points to 586/7 with a diffference due to whether it used ascension year dating? duh. How about the fact that nothing points to 607BCE....nothing points to 537BCE.

  • Mary
    Mary

    LOL......I meant I was outta here for the night----not for good, so dream on.

    So pseudo-scholar, would you care to list a reference from any of the scholars you listed that support your claim that Luke 21 is referring to what happened in Daniel chapter 4? Since you claim you have a university degree, (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you didn't actually get it out of a Cracker Jack box), you should know that your claims need to be referenced. So please provide me with some concrete proof that any non-Dub scholar supports the idea that Daniel chapter 4 is linked to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE.

    Your reputation----or what's left of it----is riding on this. And as AllTimeJeff has pointed out, there are many JW lurkers on here who want to see if you can actually provide some proof of your claims, so let's see it.

  • Mary
    Mary

    One more thing 'scholar'----you still have not commented on the scripture in Genesis. Since the phrase "seven times" was used with regards to Cain, by your reasoning, those 'seven times' must mean 2,520 years.

    Is that correct?

  • AllTimeJeff
    AllTimeJeff
    The evidence for 607 BCE not only comes from the WTS but they derive their interpretation from the Bible and that is the ultimate source and the most reliable one at that and I am more than happy with that salient fact.

    Actually, thats not true. They derive their dates from the astrological records of the Babylonians and Egyptians. This is because there are no dates in the bible at all. This is commented on in the AID book. You are wrong sir. Can you point out one date in the bible?

    Because there are no dates, the WTBTS picks one date from these astrological records when it is convenient (539 BCE) and discards the other that is two pages back (587/586) for Jerusalem's fall.

    Scholar, I know you are here for the fence sitters. You are trying to give as much information to them as you can to stop them from researching further, in the hopes that these ones will go back to the GB and simply take their word for it, when it is an out and out lie.

    Again, even JW's must get dates from these astrological records of the ancient civilizations of the time, because everything is listed as "in the 4th year of Solomon", etc. The only thing the bible helps on with dates is when these other sources mention Israel and Judah with their kings by name. Otherwise, it would be impossible to match up.

    I appreciate what you are trying to do (fake) scholar, but again, you work for an intellectually dishonest group. Rather then be honest with yourself, you have thrown your lot in with them as well. Sad.

    Again, I am still waiting for a quote, not a book of the month club recommendation.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit