The evidence is overwhelming even if some choose to ignore the evidence.
The Gentile Times Reconsidered
by Spade 382 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
Leolaia
-
pirata
The evidence is overwhelming even if some choose to ignore the evidence.
The evidence for 607 is interpretation of the 70 years. That's it. The only other evidence offered is an attempt to discredit secular evidence pointing to 587 BCE. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The evidence for 587 is interpretation of the 70 years AND secular history.
I must say though that I admire your tenacity. I had not thought about the "nations" as applying to the ten-tribe kingdom before you brought it up here.
If you choose to go this route simply to disprove the divine prophecy, the prophecy in still has direct application to Jerusalem as foretold in Daniel 9:1-2:
In the first year of Da·ri′us the son of A·has·u·e′rus of the seed of the Medes, who had been made king over the kingdom of the Chal·de′ans; in the first year of his reigning I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years. Daniel 9:1-2I'm not trying to disprove the prophecy. I am discussing an interpretation of the prophecy that jives with secular evidence. The prophecy in Daniel, which refers directly to Jeremiah's prophecy, should be understood in the light of what Jeremiah's prophecy says, that it applies to the servitude of Judah (Jerusalem) AND the "surrounding nations". As far as I can tell, Daniel refers to the aspect of the prophecy that he is most interested in, which is Jerusalem. Taken in isolation I would agree with you, but considering what the reference, Jeremiah's recorded prophecy, says I can't. I'm not saying this because I want to hang on to all shreds of evidence in order to prove the witnesses wrong. When I first started researching this topic I WANTED 607 BCE to be right, at least to put my mind at ease. After looking at the arguments on both sides I couldn't justify 607 as being more correct than 587.
PS. correction to my previous post:
When this prophecy was uttered the ten-tribe kingdom no longer existed. According to secular records the 10-tribe kingdom was destroyed in 720BC (or according to the WT Chronology it was destroyed in 740 BC). By the time Jeremiah uttered his prophecy the ten-tribe kingdom had ceased to exist as a nation.
-
MeanMrMustard
@Spade.
You wrote:
No, it is not. Facts about the Bible give reason to hold it in higher esteem when coming to conclusions about the related history.
This is not a situation where we are trapped on the horns of a dilemma, having to choose between the Bible and secular history. Let me repeat that because it bears repeating - this is not "The Bible vs. Secular History" - this is not "Which one is correct, the Bible or secular history?" Why? Because the Bible and secular history, with all the lines of evidence pointing to 587 BC as the fall of Jerusalem, agree 100%. Read this paragraph again until it sinks in.
What ex-JWs, who have looked into the situation, have found that 1) there is a mountain of evidence supporting 587 BC as the fall of Jerusalem, and not one shred of evidence supporting 607 BC as the fall of Jerusalem, and 2) the Bible does not stand against this evidence; rather it agrees with it. Again, I will repeat, because I feel that the repetition might be what finally gets you to think about the words you are reading: There is no disagreement between the Bible and secular history regarding the fall of Jerusalem and the date in which this event occurred! It is only when you insist, a-priori, that there was a 70 year desolation of the land of Judah, without an inhabitant, that you get forced into the WT's illogical and grammar-ignoring line of reasoning. Again, it is the WT's doctrine that is incompatible with secular history and the Bible, but the Bible and secular history are in agreement.
The “seven times,” in Daniel 4:25 which Jesus called “the appointed times of the nations” from 607 B.C.E. along with a multitude of other scriptures point to the 20th century for the restoration of Jehovah's visible organization
The "seven times" mean nothing unless 607 is the true date for the fall of Jerusalem. Read your very own statement above. You are calculating *FROM* 607. What I'm saying is that your starting point is incorrect. That is why I said your statements are irrelevant and that you should keep your eye on the ball. They mean nothing unless 607 is the true date for the fall of Jerusalem, and since 607 is not the correct date for that event, the WT's calculation can't even go farther than its first step. Incidentally, all the other steps are logically erroneous too, but that's another matter. 607 is incorrect. The 1914 doctrine dies there, completely.
You can call it strictly a matter of Watchtower interpretation if you choose, but after Carl Jonson's interpretation a person is left completely clueless as to when Jehovah will intervene and act on behalf of human society.
This is getting better with each post. Why do you (and the WT) feel that you must know when "Jehovah will intervene" (ie Armageddon) when Jehovah himself, in His Word, the Bible, the book you are claiming to follow, stated clearly that you are not to know the day, hour, or season of the event?
And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.”’ Jeremiah 25:11 The reason “these nations” was used in Jeremiah 25:11 is because the nation of Israel divided in 997 B.C.E. The Northern Kingdom was taken by Assyria and the Southern Kingdom by Babylon. Although Nebuchadnezzar held supreme rulership during Jerusalem's destruction, not every nation and surrounding region could have become a devastated place and taken into captivity. The context clearly indicates the prophecy was primarily against the tribe of Judah: “From the thirteenth year of Josiah the son of A′mon, the king of Judah, and down to this day, these twenty-three years the word of Jehovah has occurred to me, and I kept speaking to you people, rising up early and speaking, but you did not listen. Jeremiah 25:3
No, read the verses in context. It doesn't matter that it was "primarily" against Judah. Of course it was! God didn't send a prophet to warn Babylon, he sent a prophet to warn his people. DUH!
In course of "primarily" warming Judah, God outlined the conditions of the prophecy, and thes conditions included many nations, not just Israel and Judah, being in servitude (not desolate) for seventy years.
Here are the verses in context. Notice the bold portions:
Therefore this is what Jehovah of armies has said, ‘“For the reason that YOU did not obey my words, 9 here I am sending and I will take all the families of the north,” is the utterance of Jehovah, “even [sending] to Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land and against its inhabitants and against all these nations round about; and I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of astonishment and something to whistle at and places devastated to time indefinite. 10 And I will destroy out of them the sound of exultation and the sound of rejoicing, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the hand mill and the light of the lamp. 11 And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.”’
Notice it mentions the families of the north, and then it states that Babylon will come against "this land" and "all the nations round about". So we have the north mentioned, Judah mentioned ("this land"), and "all the nations round about.". If there is still any doubt in your mind, Jeremiah was kind enough to start explicitly listing the nations included in this prophecy starting in verse 18. Again, there are many (plural) nations involved in the seventy years, they are explicitly listed starting in verse 18, and "these nations" will serve the king of Babylon seventy years. It's seventy years of servitude of many nations. Not seventy years of desolation. Please read the scriptures and respect context and grammar.
MeanMrMustard
-
miseryloveselders
Well put Mr.MeanMustard. I don't think there's really a simpler way to put it. There's really nothing to debate at that point. The nations being in servitude for seventy years coincides with history via the Battle of Carchemish, and it coincides with the bible as well as you so eloquently laid it all for Spade. Tis a shame the WT is too stubborn to acknowledge they had it wrong all these years.
-
SweetBabyCheezits
Alice: This just means I'm glad I'm not you.
Luke 18:11 (NWT) - The Pharisee stood and began to pray these things to himself, ‘O God, I thank you I am not as the rest of men, extortioners, unrighteous, adulterers, or even as this tax collector.
-
OUTLAW
The evidence is overwhelming even if some choose to ignore the evidence.....Spade/AliceinWatchtowerLand
The LACK of evidence is overwhelming.There is no evidence..None..
Leo`s dog is laughing..
My dog is laughing..And
This chicken can`t believe your dumber than him..
........................
...OUTLAW -
shamus100
Are you arguing with psychosis again?
Youtube Charlie Sheen - and put a watchtower troll there. That is all. ;)
-
PSacramento
Anyone that has read the book and read the MULTIPLE lines of evidence against the 607BC date, can cleary see how evident it is that the WT screwd the pooch on this so badly that there is no way around it other than to close the eyes, plug the ears and sing "la,la,la, la, la..."
As for a date, let the WORD of God make it clear to all:
Matthew
36 “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, h but only the Father.
Mark:
32 “But about that day or hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
Luke:
20 Once Jesus g was asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God was coming, and he answered, “The kingdom of God is not coming with things that can be observed; 21 nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There it is!’ For, in fact, the kingdom of God is among h you.”
And finally acts:
7 He replied, “It is not for you to know the times or periods that the Father has set by his own authority.
-
-
Spade
Here you go Spade.
Be the hero.
Grow a pair.
Take on Allymom's challenge (the same as Farkel's challenge) and show us all the mistake in a tabulated form, complete with references.
586/587 the K.I.S.S. approach --- no VAT4956, Ptolemy, Josephus needed
The challenge from Alleymom is quite simple. She stated “Just go by the actual kings, whose names and regnal lengths are known from tens of thousands of cuneiform tablets from many different towns and villages all over southern Mesopotamia.”
I would have to see these tens of thousands of cuneiform tablets for myself.
Ancient history cannot be proven, because there are no living informants. And any attempt to make a chronological scheme of the kings of ancient nations is tentative. Chronological tablets do not represent the final word of the matter.
I've stated more than once that other sources can be used to understand where we are in the stream of time in relation to God's Kingdom. For example, look at what's happened since 1914 when Satan and his demons were ousted from heaven. Society has been degenerating ever since. I take a very different approach to evidence for God than most people here. Evidence for God is not just based on scripture and/or world events.
