Need help disproving 607BCE

by 2pink 160 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  isaacaustin

  correct pseudoscholar, and the one you regurgitate to us from the WT is a flwed one.
• 

  scholar

  PSacremento

  Post 1861

  609 BCE is not universally accepted as the end of the Assyrian Empire, it is accepted only by some scholars and apostates. Check it out!

  607 BCE is based on the Bible and secular evidence, it is also strengthened by the fact that it is a prophetic date, no such claim can be made for the other 'false 'dates. The only thing that is thrown out of whack are the false assumptions of NB chronology whereby there is at least a twenty year gap.

  You are somewhat puzzled by the fact that there is the same evidence for 539 BCE as for 587 BCE. Why are you puzzled? Perhaps you fail to understand something. If what you say is correct then why is not 587 regarded by scholars as an Absolute Date as with 539 BCE? That is a question for all the smarts on this board?

  The answer to your last question is Methodology.

  scholar JW
• 

  isaacaustin

  The so-called 20 year gap is only a discrepancy for you Scholar, as there are 20 years missing from the length of the treigns of the kings of babylon. Your good buddy Josephus himself told of the 50 years that Israel was desolated.
  But again, there is absolutely nothing prophetic about this date, as Mary and others showed you in the past.

  Precision of date is of vital importance to you 'scholar', since you follow WT vomit. It has to be right or their whole 7 Gentile Times doctrine collapses. To the rest of the world who realize it is simply a date is history the precision of a date is interesting, but not of crucial import as it is to the WT.
• 

  scholar

  AnnOMaly

  Post 1153

  Another pasting I think O Alas! Pray tell Why is it the case that there are so many hands on the 'brush', would not one suffice?

  scholar JW
• 

  seek2find

  Hi, I have'nt had time to read all the post here, but I wanted to quickly say that The Bible account at zechariah 1:12 and also 7:5 were real good proof for me. Both mention a 70 year period. If you look in the back of the NWT to the table that explains the books of the bible and the time period they cover you will see that Zechariah covered a time period of only 2 years 518-520 BCE. If you take 518 and add 70 years you get 588, which is only 1 year off from the 587 date that most history books and Bible commentaries use. The one year off could just be a rounding difference.

  I'm sure someone who's good at aguring the point could shoot this down and probally will, in the end though, there has to be good reasons why the 586-587 date is so commonoly agreed upon and I don't think it's a conspiricy as some would have us believe. 1914 is a myth and a false religious teaching from a false religion. Good luck in your quest. seek2find
• 

  isaacaustin

  'scholar' you have never one a debate here, or anywhere. LOL You have been knocked down- I think you need to go get your head checked out. Perhaps it is injured and out of reality??? Because only your head thinks that you have proved you indefensible position.
• 

  scholar

  isaacaustin

  Post 4221

  I replied to almost every argument that Alan F made and if I did not then list them. If you truly believe that Alan F defeated me then please show those points and my replies. The fact is that Alan F tried everything to silence me and failed at every turn. He had some questions that no one could answer so scholar came to the rescue. These debates are on public record so it is up to others to make their own personal evaluations but please remove the bias and be a little honest with the facts and give due credit where it is due.

  scholar JW
• 

  isaacaustin

  fake-scholar, you are right they are all here and many have seen them. You can go review them if you like. AlaF presented you with facts and you simply gave your rubbish- blindly applying the 70 years to Jeru, ignoring/spinning evidence presented proving otherwise.

  You didn't rescue a thing or prove anything except 607 to be ridiculous.
• 

  isaacaustin

  PSac- regarding the fall of Assyria and rise of babylon...Assyrias fall came over a period of a couple of years and ended in 609BCE at the death of Josiah. There are different views on this of course.
• 

  Doug Mason

  SCHOLAR: "why is not 587 regarded by scholars as an Absolute Date as with 539 BCE?"

  DOUG: 539 BCE is NOT regarded as an Absolute Date. There are other dates in the period that ARE Absolute Dates. The date for the Fall of Babylon is calculated from those real Absolute Dates and then using the neo-Babylonian chronology that the WTS does not accept. The WTS shifted the date from 538 or 536 BCE with the publication of Parker and Dubberstein in 1942.