When I told my mom about 607 she told me to look it up in the Jewish encyclopeodia... she was certain that the nation that had actually experienced the historical events would have an accurate account. Well, I looked it up and sure enough, no mention at all of 607. Everything pointed to 587. Oops!
Hubby is Researching 607...
by cognac 183 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Farkel
"scholar" will not be able to come up with ANY secular facts that could point to 607 BC. Even the WTS has admitted in print that there is zero secular evidence to confirm that date. So they excuse it away, by saying that's because no secular evidence has been found "so far." Well, DOH! There are at least 50,000 extant documents, including ordinary business documents from the period that confirm 586/587, NOT 607. Ordinary business documents are valuable evidence because business people didn't have any religious ax to grind in their day-to-day business activities.
cognac,
Have you obtained a copy of the book "The Gentile Tiles Reconsidered", by Carl Olaf Jonnson? It is a rather thick book that is crammed with tons of information showing how 607 BC could not possibly be the start of the gentile times.
Farkel
-
Chalam
Personally I think all the false dates and doctrinal flip flops are good indicators that something is up.
However, if I were a JW, I think the WT doctrine of them being my mediator, not Jesus would set off major alarm bells.
All the best,
Stephen
-
scholar
cognac
Post 2107
There are a number of things that must be said in relation to the subject of the date 607's accuracy and superiority over the other dates proposed for the Fall of Jerusalem.
1. The date 607 BCE is a precise calculation for the Fall whereas other dates are imprecise i.e no precise date is agreed. Serious scholars propose 586, apostaes and other WT critics propose 587. So, where we are definite on the matter right to the very month the others are 'fuzzy' on this matter.
2, The date 607 BCE is based on the historical record of the Bible, utilizes regnal data from secular chronologies and other secular historians such as Josephus.
3. The date 607 BCE exposes the twenty year gap in Neo-Babylonian chronology as recently proved in the research by Rolf Furuli in his two volume published work on Neo-Babylonian, Persian, Assyrian Chronology.
4. The date 607 BCE validates the Bible as a book of prophecy in connection with the Gentile Times ending in 1914 CE beginning the installation of God's Kingdom in our time.
5. The date 607 BCE restores and focuses attention on the fulfillment of prophecy in connection with Judah, Jerusalem and its Temple.
6. The date 607 BCE validates the historicity of the 'seventy years' which in contrast has been 'buried' by secular chronologies.
7. The date 607 BCE exposes the imperfection of Neo-Babyloian chronology and history/
8. The date 607 BCE has a simple methodology as to its computation and is firmly based on several lines of evidence:
The Decree of Cyrus and the Return of the Jews in 537 BCE
Seventy years of desolation, servitude to Babylonian rule, exile in Babylon all confirmed by Josephus
Destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzer in his 18th regnal year and in Zedekiah's 11 th regnal year
These three facts are described in the Bible, confirmed by secular evidence and Josephus agrees with this triangulation of biblical and historical data
9. The date 607 BCE utilizes a universally agreed absolute date by scholars that is the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE whereas other conflicting secular chronologies have no universal absolute date for their computation.
10. The date 607 BCE is based on a simple methodology which is an 'event-based' methodology in contast to other secular chronologies which are 'regnal-based creating numerous technical problems of calendation.
The above list is by no means exhaustive but illustrates the superioity of 607 BCE over all of the other proposed dates of which there are many. Now sit back and watch the 'feathers fly' as the apostates 'beat' themselves over the brilliant scholarship of the 'celebrated WT scholars' whose humble research glorifies Jehovah and His Word and is greatly appreciated by 'scholar'.
scholar JW
-
AllTimeJeff
Cognac
Good luck finding the references to Scholar's assertions. He keeps them up a certain orifice.... Which is where he also pulls them out of....
-
bohm
scholar: which current, non-jw professional scholars are you talking about? are there any at all?
-
Georgiegirl
Why Bohm! You know - Rolf Furuli, the unbiased, secular, non-JW so no axe to grind, no prophecy to make fit and no pre-conceived ideas!!!
Oh. Wait.......;)
-
scholar
Albert Einstein
Post 291
I hope the following reply helps you:
The only secular historian that supports 607 BCE in a indirect sense is that of the ancient Jewish historian Josephus whose presentation of the seventy years is identical to that of the cedlebrated WT scholars. Rolf Furuli is a modern scholar whose published research on chronology and ancient history supports 607 BCE. However, there is also no modern historian who knows the precise year for the Fall of Jerusalem because they all vacillate between 587 or 586 BCE.
One recently published work on chronology supports 607 BCE and that is Rolf Furuli's volumes on Ancient Chronologies.
A Babylonian list of rulers and their reigns is fraught with problems so and agreement as to details is impossible but there are many reference works that have various proposals for your attention.
scholar JW
-
bohm
"well, some say 586, some 587. only one say 607, so that must be true!"
-
AnnOMaly
3. The date 607 BCE exposes the twenty year gap in Neo-Babylonian chronology as recently proved in the research by Rolf Furuli in his two volume published work on Neo-Babylonian, Persian, Assyrian Chronology.
It has not been proved in any way, shape or form. Anyone who misunderstands his sources, attributes opinions to them that they never had, inconsistently uses different methodologies in examining the astronomical tablets, misses out important evidence, thinks the new moon crescent could be seen at any time of the day, takes lunar and stellar positions in the daytime when the tablet clearly says they were taken at night-time, gets so many positions wrong anyway, etc., etc., etc., etc., HAS PROVED SQUAT!