Yes, actually, I BELIEVE that the 607 date is correct.
Why?
Help with another 607 vs 587 question............
by thraxer68 106 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Titus
Best post of this thread.
PSac, thank you for that. I truly believe it what I said.
Why?
I think you were answered!
That question was answered strictly to your satisfaction!
I am not gonna repeat!
-
notverylikely
I think you were answered!
That question was answered strictly to your satisfaction!
I am not gonna repeat!
Clearly it wasn't since I am asking. You thought wrong.
-
Titus
I am not gonna repeat!
I'll just tell you exactly and you will see it in writing.
It is all in print.
You know the Bible says "Do not go beyond the things that are written."?
I don't go beyond the things that are written.
-
thetrueone
Something that never gets mentioned in these debates involving 607 BCE. is where in the bible does it say or spoken by Christ that he will
set a calculable date for his return given to the FDS ?
It is logically unscriptural to make a calculable date, in other words going beyond what is written in the bible.
Does the WTS publishing company have the right over and above the rest of mankind in this regard ?
Where is the imperative of scriptural truth in this matter ?
-
notverylikely
I don't go beyond the things that are written.
The bible never says 607, so if you beleive that, then yes you do.
-
garyneal
I don't go beyond the things that are written.
You would have to since the Bible makes no mention of dates and the best evidence we have all point to 586/7.
-
garyneal
scholar
Post 1890
We can keep this going on and on and on and on....
You say there is nothing fuzzy about the 537 B.C.E. date but if you accept 539 B.C.E. and the Bible's chronology for what happened after Babylon's capture then you would have to agree that 537 is not even correct. Garyneal kind of gathered that from a straight reading of the text in reference to 539 B.C.E. and Black Sheep confirmed it by posting AlanF's challenge.
The King of Babylon was punished in 539 BCE but Jeremiah also foretold in that same text that Babylonia would be made desolate and that did not happen in 539 BCE.
You're arguing in circles now, scholar. I made this same point earlier in our exchange and you stated the following:
In reference to your second question regarding verses 12-14 these words refer to Babylon the city, its ruler and the land of Chaldea. This propnecy relates to the fate of this nation both ot its immediate Fall in 539 BCE and its eventual devastation in the straits of times. The prophecy began its fulfillment after 539 BCE or to be more technically correct after 537 BCE when the seventy years had been fulfilled.
So which one is it?
-
scholar
garyneal
Post 1443
Not so. By accepting 539 BCE and using the biblical data then one can easily determine that 537 BCE is the only realistic date for the Return and this is also agreed by most scholars. Garyneal, Balck Sheep and Alan F had various theories but nothing that was stated by them undermined the certainty of 537 BCE.
I do not argue in circles for it it is unnecessary for me to do so. To be precise it is the latter because Jeremiah specifically stated that the judgement on Babylon only began after the seventy years whnich was 537 BCE but the spirit of Jerrmiah's prophec y was that Babylon would be punished and its Fall in 539 BCE was certainly punishment.
scholar JW
-
Titus
NVL and TTO,
I was joking with these words in the last two posts! If you don't realize that, I can't help you!
Peace out!