No problem.
Ezekiel 29:12 - Prophecy of the Desolation of Egypt for 40 years
by VM44 104 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Leolaia
The things you say are backed by sound scholarship but the answer is no: the archeology you make reference to, doesn't change the truth about what's in Ezekiel 29:12 and the Watchtower Society's literary output on the prophecy of the desolation of Egypt for 40 years. They made an honest endeavour in reaching these conclusions.
No, the Society doesn't care what the actual history of 6th century BC Egypt was. Neither do you. If Ezekiel said it was going to be depopulated and desolated for 40 years, then that's good enough for you — it doesn't matter what the facts of history are; they are automatically presumed to be wrong. That's an a priori bias. Sound scholarship looks at the evidence impartially and arrives at conclusions through deduction, whereas your approach (and the Society's approach) is to discredit or handwave whatever evidence there is. That is not an "honest endeavor" in reaching conclusions about what really happened in Egypt during Amasis' reign.
In actual fact, there has been very little "literary output" by the Society on this matter. The only article or mention I can find about the historical evidence of the reign of Amasis is in a 1970 QFR (which was incorporated word-for-word in the Aid book and the Insight book) that raised the question: "Ezekiel 29:1-16 indicates that Egypt would be desolate for forty years. Did that actually take place?" The answer to his question is established simply by saying that the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel said so. Then the article goes on to attempt to discredit the evidence that Amasis did indeed reign without interruption:
*** w70 10/1 p. 608 Questions from Readers ***
While some commentaries refer to the reign of Amasis (Ahmose) II, the successor of Hophra, as prosperous, they do so on the testimony of Herodotus, who visited Egypt over a hundred years later. But the Encyclopœdia Britannica (1959, Vol. 8, p. 62) comments on Herodotus’ history of this period: “His statements prove not entirely reliable when they can be checked by the scanty native evidence.”
Also, the Bible commentary of F. C. Cook notes that Herodotus “was indebted for his information on past history to the Egyptian priests, whose tales he adopted with blind credulity. . . . The whole story [by Herodotus] of Apries [Hophra] and Amasis is mixed with so much that is inconsistent and legendary that we may very well hesitate to adopt it as authentic history. It is by no means strange that the priests should endeavour to disguise the national dishonour of having been subjected to a foreign yoke."
Hence, while the secular history of Egypt provides no positive evidence of the prophecy’s fulfillment, we may be confident of the accuracy of the Bible record. There indeed was a forty-year period of desolation as Jehovah had clearly foretold. This may have come when Nebuchadnezzar conquered Egypt following his desolating of Judah and Jerusalem.While this discussion may be impressive to you (indeed you too were making the same arguments about Herodotus), it is a total evasion. It presents a strawman by falsely making Herodotus the sole basis of knowledge about Amasis' reign. With the unreliable Herodotus knocked down, it can proceed with the claim that the 40-year depopulation and desolation of Egypt happened, as nothing else precludes it. The truth is that Herodotus is not needed at all to establish the fact that Amasis reigned continuously in Egypt long past the time of Nebuchadnezzar, with no depopulation of the land and destruction of the cities. That basic fact is proven by many documents from the reign of Amasis itself that establish over and over and over that no such event occurred in Amasis' reign. Discrediting Herodotus does nothing to impugn the factuality of these sources, most of which are not interested at all in reporting history but are legal documents about what was the here-and-now. The article's conclusion that "the secular history of Egypt provides no positive evidence of the prophecy’s fulfillment" is a second evasion. Rather, the secular history of Egypt provides positive evidence of the prophecy's non-fulfillment. It just isn't the case that the evidence of Amasis' reign leaves room for a 40-year hiatus; there is overwhelming evidence again and again that no interruption happened. Why doesn't the Society mention the existence of these first-rate sources? Why do they only mention Herodotus who wrote a century later? This article is a classic example of proceeding from a priori conclusions without examining or even representing the evidence impartially.
-
bohm
Alice, if you come here to have a serious conversation, and a person put hours into painstaking researching a subject and give you a very concrete list of facts, i think its quite rude to answer with a question on some totally unrelated stuff you found on the internet.
If you want to defend the WTS and the chronology they present, then by all means do so! If you dont feel you can do it because you are not competent to do so, or because there are questions you cannot answer (notice that what Leolaia found are facts not speculations) because some part of it may be wrong, then dont be afraid to admit there i a gap in your own knowledge/arguments or those of the WTS. we wont think you as a fool. But for the love of God, dont just close your eyes and change the subject, its just dumb.
-
alice.in.wonderland
Leolaia, the Bible contains a harmonious theme and Biblical chronology synchronizes with this theme.
Rbi8 p. 8 Introduction
There are more than 125,000 marginal (cross) references in this edition. These citations demonstrate that there is at least a second witness to almost every Biblical matter. A careful comparison of the marginal references and an examination of the accompanying footnotes will reveal the interlocking harmony of the 66 Bible books, proving that they comprise one book, inspired by God.
Why should it be less than likely that imperfect ancient human relics and remnants can distort this theme? The reliance on this type of reasoning to establish truth, accepting historical data that distorts Bible truth, is actually more fallible than depending on the evolutionary fossil record for evidence against the Genesis account. At least fossils can be subjected to scientific scrutiny whereas ancient human renderings can only be taken verbatim by blind faith. I can present numerous accounts of historical documents that are fictional. It would be nice to hear your version of the harmonious theme contained in the Bible if Jehovah's Witnesses have it all wrong. -
DaCheech
i had fun watchting the history channel proving sodom and gomorrah a fraud
-
PSacramento
Well said Bohm, very well said.
-
AnnOMaly
Leolaia quoted the 1970 QFR. The latest comment from the WTS is this:
w07 8/1 p. 8 Highlights From the Book of Ezekiel-II
Scriptural Questions Answered:
29:8-12-When was Egypt desolated for 40 years? After the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E., the remnant of Judah fled to Egypt despite the prophet Jeremiah's warning. (Jeremiah 24:1, 8-10; 42:7-22) That did not prove to be an escape for them because Nebuchadnezzar came up against Egypt and conquered it. The 40-year desolation of Egypt may have followed that conquest. While secular history provides no evidence of this desolation, we can be confident that it took place because Jehovah is the Fulfiller of prophecy.-Isaiah 55:11.
In this article the WTS say the 40 year desolation MAY have taken place after Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of Egypt - they are not pushing it. All they are saying is, the desolation had to have happened sometime, somehow. Of course, the only secular record available confirming Nebuchadnezzar's campaign against Amasis is so damaged that the outcome is unknown. The idea that Nebuchadnezzar successfully conquered Egypt is merely an assumption.
However, certain JW apologists take it several steps further and make assumptions and speculations about how Ezekiel's prophecy was fulfilled into bald assertions that don't hold water either scripturally or historically.
Regarding the WTS' use of the F.C. Cook quote in the 1970 article - it's important to realize that Cook had no problem with the reign of Amasis and the chronology/dating of the Saite period. On the very page before the WT's quote, Cook lists the dates of Saite pharaohs' reigns and then says,
"These dates, established on sure and independent grounds, accord with Scripture history." - Commentary, Vol. VI, Note A, p.131.
Unfortunately, the WT writer didn't allow the reader to appreciate that when Cook talks about Herodotus' unreliability, he was specifically referring to the circumstances behind Hophra's downfall and death, and Amasis' accession to the throne which, he noted, was not the way Ezekiel predicted. But he didn't dispute that Amasis overthrew Hophra or the time it happened.
Not only that but on the same page as the WT's quote (Note B, p. 132), Cook acknowledges the discrepancy between the 40 year desolation prophecy and the prosperity of Egypt under Amasis' reign - not only testified to by Herodotus, he says, but also by the wealth of monuments dated to Amasis' reign! Cook therefore has to widen the scope when looking for a fulfillment - and he does, as you can see from the footnote comments on verses 10-12 on p. 372-373 at http://www.ccel.org/ccel/cook_fc/provez.i.vii.xxix.html * It's worth a look.
* This Commentary is a different edition to the one I quoted from and referred to above, but some comments have been carried over into the footnotes of this linked edition.
-
PSacramento
Leolaia, the Bible contains a harmonious theme and Biblical chronology synchronizes with this theme.
That can only be verified by secular evidence, since the bible has no chronology ( dates), those dates must be established via secular evidence.
A careful comparison of the marginal references and an examination of the accompanying footnotes will reveal the interlocking harmony of the 66 Bible books, proving that they comprise one book, inspired by God.
And written and copied by Man, to which the WT has mentioned many times that Man has altered the bible ( See Name of God and the use of Lord as just two examples).
Why should it be less than likely that imperfect ancient human relics and remnants can distort this theme? The reliance on this type of reasoning to establish truth, accepting historical data that distorts Bible truth, is actually more fallible than depending on the evolutionary fossil record for evidence against the Genesis account. At least fossils can be subjected to scientific scrutiny whereas ancient human renderings can only be taken verbatim by blind faith. I can present numerous accounts of historical documents that are fictional. It would be nice to hear your version of the harmonious theme contained in the Bible if Jehovah's Witnesses have it all wrong.
Most establised secual info and dates is established via VARIOUS lines of evidence, not just one or two, if thatis NOT good enough than that casts into doubt the Bible far more than it does secular evidence.
The bible and secular evidence go very well together mostly and harmonize well, mostly, if one doesn't interpret things to meet an aggenda and reconciles the Bible, which has no dates, with secular evidence, which has dates, and not the other way around.
-
AnnOMaly
Here are scans of F.C. Cook's Note B so you can see the WT quote in context. (Thanks go to AlanF for providing the scans.)
http://img695.imageshack.us/f/cookexekielp131.jpg/
-
AnnOMaly
Alice
One nice little point for you from p.31 of the new 'Jeremiah' book you'll get at this year's DC.
"The last event that Jeremiah recorded - the release from prison of Jehoiachin at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar's successor, Evil-merodach - is dated 580 B.C.E. (Jer. 52:31-34) By this time, Jeremiah must have been about 90 years old. We have no reliable information concerning the end of his life. It is likely that he lived out his final years in Egypt and died faithful there after some 67 years in special service to Jehovah."
If Jeremiah 'likely' lived out his final years in Egypt and the last event he wrote about was dated to Nebuchadnezzar's successor Evil-Merodach, then Egypt 'likely' couldn't have been depopulated 'without an inhabitant' for 40 years! LOL.
Any comments you'd like to give on this one, Alice?
