Need help disproving 607BCE (page 6)

PSacramento

QUote:

PSacremento

Post 1854

You cannot the debate online so you need to sunscribe to the journal for access.

scholar JW

Reply:

Oh, I see, thanks.

Precisely, that is my point for nothing of significance occurred in that year that would constitute a marker for the begiining of the seventy years for at that time Judah was subservient to Egypt.

scholar JW

PSacramento

Scholar,

609 marked the fall of the ASsyrian empire and the beginning of the Babylonian empire, are you saying that is NOT a significant event?

scholar

PSacremento

Post 1855

I will ask scholar himself about the third person business.

You are correct that the 70 years chronology is about interpretation and that is a simple fact that scholar himself first brought to the attention to the community on this forum including such ones as Alan F. In fact, scholar has long stated that Chronology is about Methodology and Interpretation.

You are also correct in saying that the seventy years is about servitude but it is not servitude alone for the Bible writers discussed the seventy years also in terms of desolation and exile thus the period is one of servitude-desolation-exile. This again has been scholar's formula presented on this forum for the benefit of the wider community.

The end of the Babylonian Empire is confirmed by secular evidence as 539 BCE which is endorsed by scholarship and it is because of this acceptance and endoresement by scholars has been providentially selected by the celebrated WT scholars as a most worthy foundation for Bible chronology leading to the careful determination of 607 BCE for the Fall. This one fact alone proves the validity of the 607 BCE date as opposed to other 'wishy-washy', 'mamby-pamby' dates.

scholar JW

scholar

PSacremento

Post 1860

The date 609 BCE for the end of the Assyrian Power is a matter of some conjecture by scholars because no date for this has been universally accepted. Therefore, such a date is useless for determing the beginning of a definite fixed period of history such as the 'seventy years'. Even Carl Jonsson was uncertain about whether 609 or 605 BCE should be employed because most scholars favour 605 BCE for its beginning but if it ended in 539 BCE according to popular opinion then you would have sixty-six years rather than the biblical 'seventy'. That is one problem. The other problem is that if you end the seventy years at 539 BCE then ou arrive at 609 BCE but that years is too 'fuuzy' to begin a an historic period of seventyh years especially when at that time Babylon as a World Power was in its embryonic stage.

That is why 607BCE is a superior date because it uses notable events and dates at either end which are confiremed by secular and biblical history, the other dates such as 587 or 586 BCE are 'mired' in problems everywhere.

scholar JW

Son of Man

17 All the generations, then, from Abraham until David were fourteen generations, and from David until the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon until the Christ fourteen generations.

Most historical records base the fall of Jerusalem around 587-588 B.C.E. which is different from 607 B.C.E. A group called The "Bible Students" seperated themselves from the W.T.S. over a disagreement in the time period. They stated that the W.T.S. was 20 years off from what historical records proved.

http://www.heraldmag.org/2004_history/04history_7.htm

Try this on for size:

Abraham to David 588 years =14 Generations

David to Deportation 588 years = 14 Generations

Deportation to Christ 588 years = 14 Generations

There are 90 Generations from Abraham to the year 2016 which is 3780 years

So 42 Generations from Abraham to Christ using 42 years for One Generation, which is around the birth period of a female.

"Although 51 is the median age for most healthy women to reach a cessation in their menstrual cycle, many women begin having subtle symptoms in the early 40's. The facts are that hormones begin to drop at this time in a woman's life which accounts for irregular cycles throughout the 40+ years."

Birth Pangs of distress, Birth of the Kingdom, etc etc. If you notice in the bible most time periods are based upon giving birth, or nine months, 42 months, etc. etc. So time periods can be relative to these numbers.

t.f.d.s.

Leolaia

If they truly were lovers of truth then why are they now so silent when people need them?

LOLOL...Sorry I must've missed the bat signal.

Son of Man

LOLOL...Sorry I must've missed the bat signal.

lol......it was shining bright last night you might have missed, no wait, that was the Munsters.....oops

garyneal

scholar

Post 1791

2pink

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but there is no evidence either biblical or secular that has disproved the validity of 607 BCE. I have been studying this subject for nearly forty years and have read all published attempts to dissprove 607 BCE only to find that on a critical analysis none of these attempts have succeeded. The most recent attempt has been by Carl Jonsson who has acquired a reputation of being a competent chronologist has claimed in his most recent work that there are at least seventeen lines of evidence that disprove 607 BCE. However, competent biblical scholars have shown that such a claim is fanciful and is not supported by either the biblical or secular evidence.

This does not mean that 607 BCE or any other date is not capable of being falsified but at this point in time there is simply no evidence that disproves the validity of 607 BCE for the Fall of Jerusalem.

scholar JW

It appears here that you are looking for proof of a negative. Nothing seems to disprove 607 B.C.E., so you will keep believing that 607 B.C.E. must be correct. Thank you for your logical analysis and showing me that people will just simply believe what they want to believe.

Let me put in some more examples of this way of thinking:

No one has proven that Jesus did not come to power and began ruling invisibly in 1914 C.E., therefore Jesus must have come to power and began ruling invisibly.
No one has proven that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society and its Faithful and Discreet Slave are not the ones appointed by Jesus to care for His sheep in 1919 C.E.. Therefore, Jesus must have approved of the Faithful and Discreet Slave and the WTS in 1919 C.E..
No one has proven that the WTS and the Jehovah's Witnesses do not have the truth. Therefore, the Society and the Jehovah's Witnesses must have the truth.

I can see now that I will never be able to reach a diehard JW with the truth about the 'truth.' The spiritual blindness is really strong indeed.

Perhaps you can explain to me why the 1914 teaching as it is taught today wasn't taught in this way prior to the 1920's. Perhaps you can explain to me how come Jesus approved of some of the bizarre teachings of its found CT Russell.

But I guess I already know your answer, "New Light." Keep believing, keep believing....

bennyk

In actuality, it is not necessary to disprove 607 in order to disprove 1914.

The Watch Tower Society has already disproved 1914 in its own published mat eri als.

Suppose that A.D. 1915 should pass with the

world's affairs all serene and with evidence that the

"very elect" had not all been "changed" and without

the restoration of natural Israel to favor under the

New Covenant. (Rom. 11:12,15.) What then?

Would not that prove our chronology wrong? Yes,

surely! And would not that prove a keen

disappointment? Indeed it would! It would work

irreparable wreck to the Parallel dispensations

and Israel's Double, and to the Jubilee calculations,

and to the prophecy of the 2300 days of Daniel, and

to the epoch called "Gentile Times," ...

(Watch Tower, Dec. 15, 1913 Reprints p. 5368)

And what would this 'irreparable wreck to the epoch called "Gentile Times"' mean? Why does the Watch Tower Society so desperately defend their erroneous chronology?

It is not necessary to show how if a change of 19

years were made in the chronology the time from

Jacob to Jesus would become shortened from 1815

to 1826 years, and the entire system of dates based

on the "Jewish parallels" would collapse; how the

jubilee system dates would fall out of place from its

present symmetry: how the 2520-year parallels

would disappear; how the entire system of dates

would be scattered; how there could he no

foundation for faith in the resulting chronological

jumble; and how there could be no sound reason for

believing in the presence of the Lord, the place and

work of Pastor Russell, the end of the age, the

harvest work, or in any of the literature published by

the Society.

(Watch Tower, June 15, 1922 p. 187)

Need help disproving 607BCE

Share this