by Spade 382 Replies latest watchtower bible
To Leo and VM44.
As you've seen, the WT was only verifying that the 7th month of 537 BCE began on October 5th (strictly speaking, the preceding sunset on October 4th, but whatever) - nothing more. Spade has obviously misunderstood.
I do not see why The Watchtower gave the specific page number reference.
Yeah, why break with tradition?
If anyone disagrees with the dates I am giving and which are based on the Bible let him bring other dates and show perfect plan of salvation God Yahweh has for the mankind. Time symmetry is one of the best way to show God's power and wisdom in His doings with mankind .It shows that God rules over mankind and time for mankind history is predetermined by time frames God had set forth.
Let's take the period 1914 AD - 1944 AD which is a period of 30 years that reflects God's name in our times in its numerical settings.
YHWH was 10,5,6,5th letter in Psalm 119 . Psalm 119 reflects the year 119 AD . The year 2004 AD is shown in my calculations to reflect the year 119 AD .
7 BC = 1879 AD , 2 BC = 1884 AD ..... 106 AD = 1991 AD , 119 AD = 2004 AD , 149 AD = 2034 AD . Note the time gaps between the dates are virtually the same .And the distance is 1885 years .
119 AD + 1885 years = 2004 AD .
It was in the year 2004 AD when the application of 22 Hebrew letters in Psalm 119 took place in establishing the endtime era.
1914 AD - 1944 AD = 30 years .This period is covered by God's name YHWH which must be now 11,6,7,6 to replace 10,5,6,5 .One unit is added to each number in 10,5,6,5.
Now we must find the important events in the period of 30 years that will reflect this new setting . 4 years were added to 26 which is a total of 10+5+6+5 = 26 .
There was an international economic crisis that lasted 4 years in 1929 AD - 1933 AD . So ,now it is easy to locate 10,5,6,5 in that period of 30 years:
1914 AD - 1919 AD - World War I which is 5 years , 1919 AD - 1929 AD - Peaceful period = 10 years ,
1933 AD - 1938 AD - Another peaceful period which is 5 years and now we have 6 years remaining from 10,5,6,5 .
1938 AD - 1944 AD - World War II which is 6 years .
Suppose the world war began in 1912 AD and ended in 1919 AD the whole setting would be messed up ! The war I had to begin in 1914 AD .Not earlier neither one year later in 1915 AD.
The Great Depression could not begin in 1927 AD or in 1934 AD . It had to begin in 1929 AD as God set up the time frame !
The world war could not begin in 1937 AD or in 1946 AD .It had to begin in 1938 AD ( or 1939 AD ) .It could end nor later than in 1945 AD .But w ecan think it ended in 1944 AD when the Big D-Day invasion took place and the hope for peace were 100% certain so we could think the war II ended in 1944 AD.
The world war I ended in 1918 AD but the peace treaty was signed in 1919 AD .So, we can assume that the world war I ended in 1919 AD.
The International crisis was in 1929 AD - 1932 AD but you can find the information too it ended in 1933 AD.The invasion of Sudeten land in 1938 AD could be seen as the begining of world war II and we add the Crystal Night in November that year when the sufferings of the Jews began in cruel way .
So,we have some events that we can navigate and get the right time periods assigned to that era that of 30 years.
And then we can tranfer these horrible time spans into later time of the spiritual tribulation :
1984 AD ... 6 years ..... 1990 AD ... 4 years ... 1994 AD ...... 5 years ...... 1999 AD .
6 years for 1938 AD - 1944 AD, 4 years for 1929 AD-1933 AD, 5 years for 1914 AD - 1919 AD .
1944 AD - 1984 AD = 40 years which like a period of testing .
Revelation 9.5 about 5 months can be placed in this period :
5 months = 150 days from Noah's Flood - Genesis 7 and 8 .
150 days = 40 days = 40 years - Ezekiel 4.6 : one day = one year.
So , we have 30 years : 1914 AD - 1944 AD + 40 years : 1944 AD - 1984 AD and 15 years for 1984 AD - 1999 AD .
30+40+15 = 85 years . 85-year period is typical of the last endtime era hour .
83 years were for : 36 AD + 83 years = 119 AD.
And for our times 85 years : 1914 AD - 1999 AD or 1920 - 2005 AD .
The dates the Watchtower gives in the publication "Babylon the Great Has Fallen " at the end of it are maverlous how in the world they could come up with such date alignment of their own ? ! The couldn' t do so unless they were directed by God of the Bible .
And now someone outside of their circles is able to prove these dates are the dates God Yahweh had set up !
2492 BC + 120 years .... 430 years + 430 years + 45 years + 430 years + 430 years + 120 years = 487 BC .
The alignement is such strong that it shows beyond any doubts God's Yahweh had hand on that .
And exactly "these unlearnt people of the Watchtower " got the biblical chronology so good !
They put 1034 BC,1027 BC ,607 BC. They have 1512 BC,1467 BC.And when we count the lenght of one generation using 14-generations from the exile into Babylon to the coming of Jesus - Matthew 1.17.
607 BC - 29 AD = 635 years - 5 years ( 7 BC - 2 BC ) = 630 years when divided by 14 we get = 45 years exactly ! And how they could know to place 45-year period between 1512 BC and 1476 BC ,not counting 40 years instead !?
Harold Camping has the date 1447 BC for Isreal leaving Egypt ( not 1513 BC ) and counts 40 years to 1407 BC .
The Watchtower counts 45 years from 1512 BC to 1467 BC , not from 1513 BC .How did they know to do that !
The chronological tables work in conjunction with other qualifying information. Everything is clearly outlined here;
http://onlytruegod.org/jwstrs/537vs539.htm
Some critics have suggested that Jehovah's Witnesses have concocted an unorthodox and dishonest explanation in asserting that the seventy years of desolation ended in 537 B.C.E. Is this claim substantiated?
No. At Ezra 1:1, reference is made to "the first year of Cyrus," not "the year Cyrus became king" (or accession year), so he was speaking of the first regnal year of Cyrus, which cuneiform documentation places in 538/537 B.C.E. Jewish historian Josephus corroborates by referring to "the first year of the reign of Cyrus."—Antiquities of the Jews, Book XI, Chapter I.
This point is generally agreed upon by historians. For instance, the Handbook of Bible Chronology by Jack Finegan (Princeton University Press, 1964), p. 170, states: Handbook of Bible Chronology by Jack Finegan (Princeton University Press, 1964), p. 170, states:
"The biblical references to the first year of Cyrus when he made the proclamation which allowed the Jewish exiles to return from Babylon to Jerusalem (II Ch 36:22f.; Ezr 1:1f.) are presumably stated in terms of his reign in Babylon since they deal with an event in that city. According to the cuneiform evidence and the Babylonian calendar, Babylon fell on Tashritu 16 = Oct 12, 539 B.C., and Cyrus entered the city two and one-half weeks later on Arahsamnu 3 = Oct 29. His Babylonian regnal years began, therefore, as shown in Table 77. Accordingly his first year, in which he made the proclamation, was 538/537 B.C."
TABLE 77. BABYLONIAN REGNAL YEARS OF CYRUS
AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS REIGN
Accession 539/538
Year 1 538/537
Year 2 537/536
The Watchtower of May 1, 1952, pp. 271-2 further observes:
"In late years several cuneiform tablets have been discovered pertaining to the fall of Babylon which peg both Biblical and secular historic dates. The one tablet known as the "Nabunaid Chronicle" gives the date for the fall of Babylon which specialists have ascertained as being October 12-13, 539 B.C., Julian Calendar, or October 6-7, 539 B.C., according to our present Gregorian Calendar. This tablet also says that Cyrus made his triumphant entry into Babylon 16 days after its fall to his army. Thus his accession year commenced in October, 539 B.C. However, in another cuneiform tablet called "Strassmaier, Cyrus No. 11" Cyrus’ first regnal year is mentioned and was determined to have begun March 17-18, 538 B.C., and to have concluded March 4-5, 537 B.C. It was in this first regnal year of Cyrus that he issued his decree to permit the Jews to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple. (Ezra 1:1) The decree may have been made in late 538 B.C. or before March 4-5, 537 B.C.
In either case this would have given sufficient time for the large party of 49,897 Jews to organize their expedition and to make their long four-month journey from Babylon to Jerusalem to get there by September 29-30, 537 B.C., the first of the seventh Jewish month, to build their altar to Jehovah as recorded at Ezra 3:1-3. Inasmuch as September 29-30, 537 B.C., officially ends the seventy years of desolation as recorded at 2 Chronicles 36:20, 21, so the beginning of the desolation of the land must have officially begun to be counted after September 21-22, 607 B.C., the first of the seventh Jewish month in 607 B.C., which is the beginning point for the counting of the 2,520 years."
Spade:
"Some critics have suggested that Jehovah's Witnesses have concocted an unorthodox and dishonest explanation in asserting that the seventy years of desolation ended in 537 B.C.E. Is this claim substantiated?"
First off, Spade, you have the burden of proof and you've done a poor job of it. Second, the arguments made in rebuttal throughout the 13 pages of this thread you started, have done just that. All you keep doing is cut and paste and going in circles.
I also previously asked you the following question:
"Never mind the fact that everything predicted for 1914, by the Studies in the Scriptures, was stood on its head. Since you say it fulfills Bible prophecy, then tell us what significance does this prophecy have for the next 100 years? 200 years?"
"And please don't tell me that this system of things" will not last that long, because nothing in the re-conditioned Watchtower prophecy (It's eternally elastic "generation".) gives a time frame from 1914 to Armageddon. Therefore, any statement you make about the end being near will be your own understanding and not the Bible's"
Villabolo
Some critics have suggested that Jehovah's Witnesses have concocted an unorthodox and dishonest explanation in asserting that the seventy years of desolation ended in 537 B.C.E. Is this claim substantiated?
It's impossible. You couldn't be more wrong.
http://144000.110mb.com/607/i-4.html#H
The seventy years could not have ended when the exiles returned to Judah in 537 B.C.E. because there existed no king of Babylon to serve for two years between 537 B.C.E. and 539 B.C.E., after Persia began its reign in 539 B.C.E.
If there was no longer a king of Babylon once the reign of Persia began, how could the exiles serve him for two more years until they returned to their homeland? It would not be possible. The Jehovah's Witnesses counter that Cyrus the king of Persia was the king of Babylon during those last two years between 539 B.C.E. and 537 B.C.E. so they were still captives serving a king of Babylon, Cyrus. They also claim that at first Cyrus did not alter the policy of the Babylonian Dynasty and therefore the nations continued to serve ‘the king of Babylon’ (thus dipping into the Dominant Babylonian Empire theory for convenience' sake), and that a contemporary clay inscription quotes Cyrus as referring to himself as king of Babylon. Their argument is reproduced here:
Until their release in 537 B.C.E, for the entire duration that the Jewish exiles were held captive in Babylon, it could rightly be said that they were serving the king of Babylon. This is expanded upon in paragraph 10 of an article entitled “The ‘Cup’ That All Nations Must Drink at God’s Hand” that appeared in the September 15, 1979 issue of The Watchtower, p. 24:“ It is true that he [Cyrus] conquered Gentile Babylon in 539 B.C.E., or about two years before the“ seventy years” of desolation of the land of Judah ran out. He proclaimed himself “king of Babylon” and at first did not alter the policy of the Babylonian dynasty of King Nebuchadnezzar.Thus the nations subjugated by Nebuchadnezzar continued to serve “the king of Babylon” 70 years.”
Are Jehovah’s Witnesses justified in making this claim? Yes, for the Bible tells us that after Cyrus II conquered Babylon, Darius the Mede became “king over the kingdom of the Chaldeans,” (Daniel 5:31, 9:1) and shortly thereafter, Cyrus established his kingship over all of Babylon, even being referred to as “Cyrus the king of Babylon” at Ezra 5:13. A contemporary inscription on a clay barrel confirms the accuracy of the Biblical account: “ All the inhabitants of Babylon as well as the entire country of Sumer and Akkad, princes and governors (included), bowed to him (Cyrus) and kissed his feet, jubilant that he (had received) the kingship . . . I am Cyrus, king of the world, great king, legitimate king, king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad.”—Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, James B. Pritchard, p.316.
Four questions present themselves: a) what year was Cyrus crowned king of Babylon, b) if he was crowned king of Babylon before the Jews returned to Judah why was he referred to as king of Persia during this time, and afterwards, c) if he was not crowned king of Babylon immediately in 539 B.C.E. when Babylon fell but at a later date, allowing for a gap in time, could the exiles legitimately be said to have served him during that gap which would shorten the seventy year time span, and d) even if Cyrus was crowned king of Babylon before the Jews returned, did he change the empire's policy and free the Jews so that they were not serving as captive slaves to Cyrus even before they began the long journey home?
First, while it is true that at Ezra 5:13 Cyrus was referred to as king of Babylon, it should be noted that it was not the Jews who referred to Cyrus as the king of Babylon, but the Jews' enemies who were attemping to thwart the rebuilding effort who paraphrased the Jewish response. Their enemies claimed the Jews referred to Cyrus as king of Babylon, which is heresay. The Jewish defense was restated in a letter from the Jews' enemies Tattenai, the governor beyond the river, to King Darius years after their return. The letter was written long after the exiles returned while the task of re-building was underway. It does not provide any evidence that Cyrus was king of Babylon from October 539 B.C.E. to 537 B.C.E. See generally chapter 5 of the book of Ezra.
Secondly, as a matter of fact Cyrus is referred to as king of Persia six times in verses preceding Ezra 5:13; four instances covering the time period before the exiles departed Babylon (Ezra 1:1, 2, 8), and twice in connection with the Jews’ attempts at rebuilding the temple at Ezra 4:3,5. Before the Jews returned, and even after they returned, they considered Cyrus king of Persia.
Third, the Jehovah's Witnesses find support for their theory that the Jews served Cyrus the king of Babylon from 539 B.C.E. to 537 B.C.E. by reference to the above highlighted undated ‘contemporary’ cuneiform inscription on a clay barrel. As it turns out, this clay barrel is no ordinary clay barrel. It is considered to be the first charter of human rights and a very important historical artifact. In addition, it is the document, or charter, by which captives of the Babylonian Empire were freed, including the Jews. And that date, was the first day of spring 538 B.C.E., a mere 6 months or less after Babylon fell:
"The charter of Cyrus the Great, a baked-clay Aryan language (Old Persian) cuneiform cylinder, was discovered in 1878 in excavation of the site of Babylon. In it, Cyrus the Great described his human treatment of the inhabitants of Babylonia after its conquest by the Iranians.The document has been hailed as the first charter of human rights, and in 1971 the United Nations was published translation of it in all the official U.N. languages. "May Ahura Mazda protect this land, this nation, from rancor, from foes, from falsehood, and from drought". Selected from the book "The Eternal Land".
This is a confirmation that the Charter of freedom of Humankind issued by Cyrus the Great on his coronation day in Babylon could be considered superior to the Human Rights Manifesto issued by the French revolutionaries in their first national assembly. The Human Rights Manifesto looks very interesting in its kind regarding the expressions and composition, but the Charter of Freedom issued twenty three centuries before that by the Iranian monarch sounds more spiritual.
Comparing the Human Rights Manifesto of the French National Assembly and the Charter approved by the United Nations with the Charter of Freedom of Cyrus, the latter appears more valuable considering its age, explicitness, and rejection of the superstitions of the ancient world.
Cyrus the Great entered the city of Babylon in 539 BCE, and after the winter, on the first day of spring, he was officially crowned: My numerous troops moved about undisturbed in the midst of Babylon. I did not allow anyone to terrorise the land of Sumer and Akkad. I kept in view the needs of Babylon and all its sanctuaries to promote their well being. The citizens of Babylon ................. I lifted their unbecoming yoke. Their dilapidated dwellings I restored. I put an end to their misfortunes.
The description of the coronation of Cyrus is the most elaborate one in the world written by the Greek philosopher, politician, and historian Xenephon (Cyropaedia of Xenophon, The Life of Cyrus The Great).
On the day of coronation, Cyrus read the Charter of Freedom out after he put on the crown with his hand in Marduk Temple.
Uncertain and the full text of the Charter was unavailable until an inscription was found during the excavation works in the old city of Ur in Mesopotamia. After the translation of the words, it was found out that the document was the same Charter. It is now kept in the British Museum and it is no exaggeration to say that it is one of the most precious historical records of the world.
In the Charter, after introducing himself and mentioning the names of his father, first, second, and third ancestors, Cyrus says that he is the monarch of Iran, Babylon, and the four continents:
I am Kourosh (Cyrus), King of the world, great king, mighty king, king of Babylon, king of the land of Sumer and Akkad, king of the four quarters, son of Camboujiyah (Cambyases), great king, king of Anshân, grandson of Kourosh (Cyrus), great king, king of Anshân, descendant of Chaish-Pesh (Teispes), great king, king of Anshân, progeny of an unending royal line, whose rule Bel and Nabu cherish, whose kingship they desire for their hearts, pleasure. When I well -disposed, entered Babylon, I set up a seat of domination in the royal palace amidst jubilation and rejoicing. Marduk the great god, caused the big-hearted inhabitations of Babylon to .................. me, I sought daily to worship him.He continues:
At my deeds Marduk, the great lord, rejoiced and to me, Kourosh (Cyrus), the king who worshipped him, and to Camboujiyah (Cambyases), my son, the offspring of (my) loins, and to all my troops he graciously gave his blessing, and in good sprit before him we glorified exceedingly his high divinity. All the kings who sat in throne rooms, throughout the four quarters, from the Upper to the Lower Sea, those who dwelt in ..................., all the kings of the West Country, who dwelt in tents, brought me their heavy tribute and kissed my feet in Babylon. From ... to the cities of Ashur, Susa, Agade and Eshnuna, the cities of Zamban, Meurnu, Der as far as the region of the land of Gutium, the holy cities beyond the Tigris whose sanctuaries had been in ruins over a long period, the gods whose abode is in the midst of them, I returned to their places and housed them in lasting abodes.I gathered together all their inhabitations and restored (to them) their dwellings. The gods of Sumer and Akkad whom Nabounids had, to the anger of the lord of the gods, brought into Babylon. I, at the bidding of Marduk, the great lord, made to dwell in peace in their habitations, delightful abodes.
May all the gods whom I have placed within their sanctuaries address a daily prayer in my favour before Bel and Nabu, that my days may be long, and may they say to Marduk my lord, "May Kourosh (Cyrus) the King, who reveres thee, and Camboujiyah (Cambyases) his son ..."
And:
Now that I put the crown of kingdom of Iran, Babylon, and the nations of the four directions on the head with the help of (Ahura) Mazda, I announce that I will respect the traditions, customs and religions of the nations of my empire and never let any of my governors and subordinates look down on or insult them until I am alive. From now on, till (Ahura) Mazda grants me the kingdom favor, I will impose my monarchy on no nation. Each is free to accept it , and if any one of them rejects it , I never resolve on war to reign. Until I am the king of Iran, Babylon, and the nations of the four directions, I never let anyone oppress any others, and if it occurs , I will take his or her right back and penalize the oppressor.And until I am the monarch, I will never let anyone take possession of movable and landed properties of the others by force or without compensation. Until I am alive, I prevent unpaid, forced labor. To day, I announce that everyone is free to choose a religion. People are free to live in all regions and take up a job provided that they never violate other's rights.
No one could be penalized for his or her relatives' faults. I prevent slavery and my governors and subordinates are obliged to prohibit exchanging men and women as slaves within their own ruling domains. Such a traditions should be exterminated the world over.
I implore to (Ahura) Mazda to make me succeed in fulfilling my obligations to the nations of Iran (Persia), Babylon, and the ones of the four directions." (www.IranChamber.com).
So, even though the "contemporary" barrel may have been undated, within it one finds key dates and policy changes which completely undermine the the Jehovah's Witnesses' understanding. The most glaring oversight by Jehovah's Witnesses is the date Cyrus was crowned king of Babylon, the first day of spring 538 B.C.E., roughly six months or less after Babylon fell to the Persians. So, for those six months there was no "king of Babylon" for the Jews to serve and their servitude amounts to around 69 1/2 years, not seventy. And if he was crowned a year later, in the spring of 537 B.C.E., as the Jehovah's Witnesses imply, that amounts to a year and a half gap of the Jews not serving any king of Babylon.
Yet, even if Cyrus was crowned king of Babylon, from the first day of spring 538 B.C.E. he set the Jews and all the other Babylonian captives free. He imposed his monarchy (kingship) on no people unless they wished it, which the Jews did not. He outlawed unpaid forced labor (slavery), people were free to live in all regions, and displaced inhabitants were restored to their dwellings. The Jehovah's Witnesses' lack of basic understanding of this is incredulous. A little common sense, coupled with this "clay barrel" go a long way. Were the Jews still captive slaves after Cyrus set them free? No. Were they still captive slaves until they actually picked up their things and started walking home? Of course not. The Jews were not captive servants to any king of Babylon once Persia ruled. Again, the Jehovah's Witnesses come up short of seventy years.
Fourth, the Jehovah's Witnesses further argue, as stated above, that Cyrus proclaimed himself king of Babylon and at first did not alter the policy of the Babylonian dynasty or Nebuchadnezzar and therefore the Jews continued to serve the king of Babylon seventy years. The problem of course is that the authors of the Watchtower magazine failed to cite any authority for their self-serving statement that “at first [Cyrus] did not alter the policy ….” That statement is false, they offer no proof, and as just shown, Cyrus' Charter of Freedom above disproves any such notion. Cyrus did, in fact, alter the policy and set the Jews free early in his reign, within six months of his numerous years of ruling Babylon. There could not be a more profound policy change affecting the captive Jews, and other captives, than this.
Fifth, citing no verifiable authority they attempt to avoid this dilemma by asserting that the official decree freeing the exiled captives occurred in late 538 B.C.E. or early 537 B.C.E. in a last-ditch effort to push the date of captivity as close to 537 B.C.E. as possible. However, as shown above, it has been solidly established by archeologists and historians the world over that Cyrus’ decree was issued in 538 B.C.E.
Sixth, even assuming for the sake of argument that the roughly 50,000 exiles set free by Cyrus were not technically free until they began walking home after lengthy preparations, the Jehovah's Witnesses' Return theory still falls four months short of seventy years because that is how long it took them to complete the journey according to The Watchtower of May 1, 1952, pp. 271-2:
In either case this would have given sufficient time for the large party of 49,897 Jews to organize their expedition and to make their long four-month journey from Babylon to Jerusalem to get there by September 29-30, 537 B.C., the first of the seventh Jewish month, to build their altar to Jehovah as recorded at Ezra 3:1-3. Inasmuch as September 29-30, 537 B.C., officially ends the seventy years of desolation as recorded at 2 Chronicles 36:20, 21, so the beginning of the desolation of the land must have officially begun to be counted after September 21-22, 607 B.C., the first of the seventh Jewish month in 607 B.C., which is the beginning point for the counting of the 2,520 years.
Setting the Record Straight at pp. 4-5 is in accord with this position and clarifies that the seventy years was exactly seventy years to the month.
At 2 Kings 25:25, 26, the Bible reports that by the seventh month even those left behind, “all the people, from small to great,” fled to Egypt, leaving the land completely desolate, “ without an inhabitant.” As this factor was necessary for fulfillment (Isaiah 6:11, 12; Jeremiah 4:23, 25; 4:27,
29; 6:7, 8; 9:11; 24:8, 10), Jehovah’s Witnesses recognize that the seventy years of desolation could not officially begin to be counted until after the first of the seventh Jewish month.
Ezra 1:1 shows that it was “in the first year of Cyrus, the king of Persia,” or 538/7 B.C.E., that Cyrus issued the decree releasing the Jews from captivity.
The Bible notes that the Jews arrived back in their homeland by the seventh month, Tishri, which would be September 29-30, 537 B.C.E. (Ezra 3:1-3). From this date, Jehovah’s Witnesses count back seventy years to 607 B.C.E. as the year for Jerusalem’s destruction. Thus, the “ devastations of Jerusalem, [namely], seventy years,” spoken of by Daniel the prophet, were exactly seventy years in duration, running from the seventh month of 607 B.C.E. to the seventh month of 537 B.C.E.
Accordingly, if the Jews' seventy-year period of captivity ran exactly seventy years from the seventh month of 607 B.C.E. to the seventh month of 537 B.C.E., but they were set free and were not captive during the four months it took them to travel home, their seventy-year Return theory fails because they were captive for only sixty-nine years and eight months. They could not have ‘served’ the king of Babylon, even if it was Cyrus, for the full seventy years.
Seventh, the entire argument that Cyrus the Persian, the anointed of Jehovah, who rescued the Jews and freed them was on equal footing with the previous Babylonian kings who slaughtered, captured and enslaved the Jews in the first place contradicts a literal reading of Jehovah’s prophecy to all the nations which was very sweeping in scope. Which of these nations of Jeremiah 25:11 were to serve the king of Babylon seventy years? According to Jeremiah 25:26 they included “... all the kings of the Medes ... all the kings of the north who are near and far away, one after the other, and all the [other] kingdoms of the earth that are on the surface of the ground; ….” This includes Persia and the Medes who conquered Babylon. As such the Jehovah's Witnesses' theory would result in an incompatible irony - during the last two years of the Jews' seventy-year Return theory the kings of Persia and the Medes would have had to serve itself.
Ultimately, the Jehovah's Witnesses' arguments supporting their Return theory - that the seventy years ended when the exiles returned to their homeland - are moot and irrelevant because as established above and in accordance with clear, unambiguous Scripture, the seventy years of servitude applied to all nations dominated by the Babylonian Empire, and that dominance, and the nations’ corresponding servitude to the kings(s) of Babylon ended in October 539 B.C.E. when Babylon fell.
The seventy-year prophecy ended while the Jews were in Babylon and only later did they return home. There is no viable Return theory. And because there is no Return theory, because it is an unscriptural and impossible concept to implement due to its many failures and inconsistencies the Jehovah's Witnesses incorrectly render Jeremiah 29:10 ‘at Babylon,’ rather than ‘for Babylon’. But the latter is what Jehovah through the mouth of Jeremiah intended.
10 “For this is what Jehovah has said, ‘In accord with the fulfilling of seventy years for Babylon I shall turn my attention to YOU people, and I will establish toward YOU my good word in bringing YOU back to this place.'"
Again, Spade, this is impossible. They have to prove the land was in a completely devastated, uninhabited condition for exactly 70 years. They fail on dozens of levels.
http://144000.110mb.com/607/i-5.html#J
The phrase "and all this land must become a devasted place, an object of astonishment" at Jeremiah 25:11 does not mean a) the land Judah, and Jerusalem, would exist without a single inhabitant, b) for a period of exactly 70 years, c) beginning with Jerusalem's destruction.
Jeremiah 25:11 in its entirety in the Jehovah’s Witnesses' New World Translation Bible reads “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.” You can stare at that sentence all day long and it still will not say that Judah and Jerusalem would exist in that state without a single inhabitant or that its devastated condition would last exactly seventy years beginning with Jerusalem’s destruction and not before. It just doesn’t say that, yet the Jehovah’s Witnesses have grafted these embellishments onto its meaning.
The two parts of Jeremiah 25:11, devastation and servitude, are distinct concepts even though they share common origins; both stem from Jehovah’s punishment of Judah and all the nations by the hand, or sword, of Babylon. The devastation deals with the physical state or condition of a geographic region, one nation, Judah and its cities. Servitude, on the other hand, relates to the human condition of people of many nations, including Judah, and their subservient relationship to political authority, Babylon.
Through a process of arbitrarily mixing and matching verses, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have attempted to change the “devastation” aspect of the prophecy to mean that beginning at the destruction of Jerusalem, and not before, Judah and its cities would become a) a devastated place, b) without a single inhabitant, c) for exactly seventy years. Scripture proves otherwise.
J. The devastated condition of Judah does not mean it existed in that state without a single inhabitant.
The Hebrew word for ‘devastated’ or ‘devastations’ is chorbah. The Hebrew and Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament by Dr. James Strong (1890) defines ‘chorbah’ as: “a place laid waste, ruin, wasted, desolation.” And while it is agreed that the degree of devastation, or chorbah, was severe, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, according to Setting the Record Straight at p. 15, contend that Judah, and by extension Jerusalem, “would be devastated so as to be without an inhabitant,” and that the concept of Judah’s devastation, or chorbah, of Jeremiah 25:11 did not apply to its condition at any time before its destruction.
In support they quote Jeremiah 6:7-8, 9:11, 4:23, 25, 4:27, 29b, 24:8, 10, Isaiah 6:11, 12 and Jeremiah 44:2,6., all of which correctly state that Jerusalem and/or Judah would exist without an inhabitant, or something similar. But nowhere in those verses does it say the uninhabited state would last seventy years. More importantly, they omit key verses which prove that Judah and Jerusalem were in fact inhabited during that time, and that chorbah does not by definition mean a devastated place that cannot be inhabited, or that the era preceding Jerusalem’s destruction was not in a devastated condition.
First, in quoting the original prophecy handed down by Moses the Watchtower Society omitted Leviticus 26:32 which refutes their argument.
After describing the conquest of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, 2 Chronicles 36:20, 21 states: “Furthermore, he carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, and they came
to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign; to fulfill Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years.””—Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 1, p. 463.
The reference to the land paying off its sabbaths is a direct reference to Leviticus 26:32-35 which also should have been brought to the readers' attention.
32 And I, for my part, will lay the land desolate, and YOUR enemies who are dwelling in it will simply stare in amazement over it. 33 And YOU I shall scatter among the nations, and I will unsheathe a sword after YOU; and YOUR land must become a desolation, and YOUR cities will become a desolate ruin.
34 “‘At that time the land will pay off its sabbaths all the days of its lying desolated, while YOU are in the land of YOUR enemies. At that time the land will keep sabbath, as it must repay its sabbaths. 35 All the days of its lying desolated it will keep sabbath, for the reason that it did not keep sabbath during YOUR sabbaths when YOU were dwelling upon it.
Verse 32 teaches us that people, in this case Judah’s enemies, would dwell in the land during its devastated condition. In biblical times this often occurred as a natural consequence. Devastated places (chorbah) can be inhabited, and were.
Secondly, Daniel himself considered Jerusalem to be inhabited even though it was in a devastated state, or chorbah. In the first year of Darius, right after Babylon fell to the Persians and Medes, Daniel understood the meaning of Jeremiah’s original prophecy at Jeremiah 25:11 to mean that the Jewish nightmare had come to an end with Babylon’s fall after seventy years of world domination. In accord with Jeremiah 29:12, he then engaged in prayer to Jehovah (while in Babylon and before the exiles returned to Judah) and it is in this prayer that Daniel refers to devastated Jerusalem as being inhabited.
7 To you, O Jehovah, there belongs the righteousness, but to us the shame of face as at this day, to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to all those of Israel, those nearby and those far away in all the lands to which you dispersed them because of their unfaithfulness with which they acted against you.
Third, in the book of the exiled prophet Ezekiel he reiterated Jehovah’s word which stated that the devastated places were inhabited.
23 And the word of Jehovah began to occur to me, saying: 24 “Son of man, the inhabitants of these devastated places are saying even concerning the soil of Israel, ‘Abraham happened to be just one and yet he took possession of the land. And we are many; to us the land has been given as something to possess.’
Even if, as the Jehovah’s Witnesses argue, these devastated areas did not become completely uninhabited until the remaining remnant of Judah fled to Egypt a while after Jerusalem’s destruction, that’s not the point. The point is, Jehovah himself referred to devastated Judah as being inhabited at that time.
Fourth, in his twenty-third year Nebuchadnezzar took 745 Jews into exile - that is, five years after Jerusalem’s destruction. The Jehovah’s Witnesses argue they may have come from one of the surrounding nations and could not have come from Judah, as it was uninhabited. However, it is more reasonable to conclude they came from Judah and very likely were of those Jews who fled to Egypt after Jerusalem was destroyed, and then fled back to Judah after Nebuchadnezzar razed Egypt and devoted most of the original contingent of Jews to the sword, pestilence and famine.
Briefly, after Jerusalem and Judah were destroyed, Nebuchadnezzar appointed Gedaliah as governor over the remaining inhabitants of the land who were warned by Jehovah not to flee to Egypt but remain in Judah. (Thus, Judah was inhabited after its destruction.) In time Ishmael killed Gedaliah and took Jewish captives from Mizpah to the sons of Ammon. They were subsequently rescued, returned to Judah, and despite warnings of dire consequences if they did, fled to Egypt under the mistaken belief that they would be safe from the Babylonian army (see Jeremiah chapters 40-44). Included in the fleeing remnant were other dispersed Jews who had returned to Judah, picked summer fruit, and then ran off to Egypt as well.
And there will come to be no escapee or survivor for the remnant of Judah who are entering in to reside there as aliens, in the land of Egypt, even to return to the land of Judah to which they are lifting up their soul[ful desire] to return in order to dwell; for they will not return except some escaped ones. (Jeremiah 44:14)
"And as for the ones escaping from the sword, they will return from the land of Egypt to the land of Judah few in number ...." (Jeremiah 44:28)
Since these escaped ones were being hunted down and chased by the sword it is highly unlikely they waited to return seventy years later at the advanced age of 80 or 90 after Cyrus issued his famous decree allowing the Jews to return home. So, even though devastated, a ruin, a waste etc., Judah was inhabited after its destruction. There is no sound scriptural reason for implying that the devastated place of Jeremiah 25:11 was without inhabitant.
Sixth, given the foregoing scriptural certainty, the phrase “a desolate waste, without inhabitant” or similar variant, was never meant to be taken literally. Yet even if it were meant to be taken literally the uninhabited condition could only have been for an initial period of time because Judah was re-inhabited after all. This phrase is therefore hyperbole, an intended exaggeration in order to make a point, such as “I waited for you an eternity.” The Bible is filled with Jehovah’s exaggerated statements in order to make a point of emphasis which is what “without inhabitant” is.
This hyperbolic statement does not mean, however, that it did not refer to Judah’s condition after Jerusalem’s destruction. It did. Stated another way, the phrase or notion that Judah would become a “devastated place, without inhabitant” or similar variant most surely in most instances refers to Judah after Jerusalem’s total annihilation. But that’s not the issue. The issue is whether the Jehovah’s Witnesses have a legitimate basis for inserting “without inhabitant” for “seventy years” into the “devastation” part or aspect of Jeremiah 25:11. They must do so in order to stretch Jerusalem’s destruction back to 607 B.C.E., and discount any countervailing argument that the devastation began before Jerusalem’s final destruction. If Jerusalem was in a devastated condition years before its ultimate demise, the Jehovah’s Witnesses' theory fails.
Accordingly, in order to prevail, the Jehovah’s Witnesses must a) legitimately inject “without an inhabitant” into the phrase “and all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment” at Jeremiah 25:11, and b) they must establish that the devastated uninhabited condition lasted seventy years exactly, beginning with Jerusalem’s destruction, and not before. Neither task is scripturally feasible. To reiterate the question, was the foretold devastation of Jeremiah 25:11 limited to the most extreme condition that ensued following Jerusalem’s destruction or did it include the less extreme but significant devastation that Nebuchadnezzar wreaked on Judah during the preceding years he razed the country?
"If there was no longer a king of Babylon once the reign of Persia began, how could the exiles serve him for two more years until they returned to their homeland? It would not be possible."
Cyrus II of Persia became the King of Babylon after the accession year upon his conquest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Kings_of_Babylon
Spade, where did you learn about onlytruegod.org?? Is this your site?
Jonathan Dough handing out scriptural smackdowns and taking names too.
I seem to remember Alice/Spade/Rachel/Consfearacy discounting Wikipedia as a reliable source when someone else used it to prove something in another thread.......
