by mentallyfree31 74 Replies latest watchtower bible
How come it took the Jews so long to get back to Judea ? Did the 'bus break down ? Or is 537BCE plucked out of the air because it is 70 years from 607BCE ?
I think the latter, of course, the 70 year thing has been shown on here to be in error too, see Ultimate Reality's threads.
Isn't the time from the fall of Jerusalem to the completion of the second temple in the 6th year of Darius (Ezra 6:15; Zech. 7:5) 70 years (586 BCE to 516 BCE)?
Doesn't this solve the Daniel 9:2 "desolation of Jerusalem" = 70 years issue?
It's a long old subject Ding, I only vaguely remember what the conclusions were on the various threads about it.
The point was I believe, that Jerusalem was not spoken about in scripture as being desolate for 70 years,and indeed was not left un-inhabited for that long, so you cannot count back from 537BCE and get back to 607BCE. You do not have a seventy year period to play with.
No way does 607BCE feature in "Bible" history or "Bible" chronology, it is a year that fitted the Millerite end-time calculation that Russell plagiarised, look up any reputable source, and it is the one year around that time that NOTHING HAPPENED !
Isn't the time from the fall of Jerusalem to the completion of the second temple in the 6th year of Darius (Ezra 6:15; Zech. 7:5) 70 years (586 BCE to 516 BCE)?
Near as darn it. The temple was completed right at the end of Darius' 6th year - March (Adar), 515 BCE.
Doesn't this solve the Daniel 9:2 "desolation of Jerusalem" = 70 years issue?
Not quite. Daniel was checking Jeremiah's prophecy and his prophecy was all about the nations serving Babylon for 70 years. Neb. first invaded the land in 605 and 604, and over the next 66 or 65 years (to 539), with successive campaigns (n.b. Daniel said 'devastations' or 'desolations'), devastated and depopulated Jerusalem and its surrounding country.
Oh and the 607 or 606 date that was banded about by adventists and similar number-crunchers - it was understood to correspond to about the BEGINNING of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. Russell dug his heals in and said (paraphrasing), 'No, there's an 18 year discrepancy because the Bible talks of a 70 year desolation without an inhabitant, so counting from 536 (then understood to be Cyrus' 1st regnal year over Babylon), 606 gives us the year of Jerusalem's destruction, i.e. Nebuchadnezzar's 18th regnal year. It all fits, see?'
