was the entire land of Judea devastated? or were there peoples still living there, was the 70 years just about the ruling of babylon? Verses the ruling of assyria? come on who cares, the WTBTS doesn't know what the hell they are talking about, which shouldn't surprise anyone.
Were the WT thinking of abandoning the 607 B.C.E date back in 2000?
by nicolaou 21 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Witness My Fury
The quote as already pointed out above is talking about Tyres 70 year devastation prophecy. But it does show the irony as they are happy to come to a rounded approx figure for Tyres 70 years prophecy, but sure as hell not for Jerusalem!!
-
dozy
There must be the odd writer who is prepared to do research out of the narrow confines of JW studies ( a sort of Ed Dunlap / Ray Franz lite) who occasionally is allowed to correct the WTBTS (for example , see the recent WT article which admits that 1st century Christains didn't really go around with a ministry bag of scrolls , "placing" them with all & sundry). Now & again , their comments slip through , perhaps unnoticed. I don't doubt that there are some on the Writing committee who must know that 607 is untrue , but it would be suicide for them to stick their heads above the parapet.
-
Aussie Oz
I think they throw random stuff out there to gauge rank and file opinion.
If something slips by them, then maybe they file that one away for later...and then be able to pass off some new change as not new at all...refer such and such WT 10 years ago or something...?
oz
-
Larsinger58
Yes, it is true. The WTS knows by now that 607 BCE cannot be true, but they are unable to change it. Thus they are in torment they can't correct some things without showing that Jehovah has abandoned them as his "channel of communication." They have risen up to claim they are inspired prophets and this would show clearly they were not. The result would be loss of confidence in the FDS god they have created and they want to continue to maintain the worship of the sheeple.
Bottom line is that the 70 years of exile were fulfilled by those last deported in year 23, when some remnant of people must have also been deported from Tyre after it had been conquered apparently in the 20th of Nebuchadnezzar II, per Josephus (i.e. he says a 13-year siege began in year 7).
So even if you use 537 BCE for the date of the return, 607 BCE would date year 23, the year of the last deportation and not the fall of Jerusalem. To make that critical adjustment they would have to date the fall of Jerusalem in 512 BCE, the date which would correspond to year 18 of Nebuchadnezzar II. That would mean the three things associated with 1914 would shift back to 1909. Of course no world war broke out in 1909 so the relative fulfillment of what they claim happened in 1914, that is, Satan being kicked out of heaven and down to the earth and causing WWI in the process is lost on 1909 compared to 1914. So they can't change it and probably feel they just will ignore it and let Jehovah correct it in his own time. Of course, he already has. 1914 is a bogus date. Period. And they are false prophets without Jehovah's support any more.
-
miseryloveselders
bttt
-
nicolaou
Remember this section is discussing the seventy years in relation to Tyre not the other seventy years on which Watchtower chronology hangs.
Hi Slimboy, correct me if I'm wrong but don't the WT include this reference to Tyre as part of the 70 years referred to in Jeremiah? This is what they said in that paragraph;
Jehovah, through Jeremiah, includes Tyre among the nations that will be singled out to drink the wine of His rage. He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27)
Now, I don't care whether the historical concensus is with them or not, the point is that this particular definition of the 70 years is a reasonable one and definitely worth pointing out to any JW that may be curious on these questions.
-
sd-7
No. The only reason they use this line of reasoning is because they are talking about Tyre. Only when talking about Jerusalem do they feel a need to be very precise about the 70 year period. If they were talking about Jerusalem, they would've been careful to specifically state 607 B.C.E. If they felt any reason to undo 607, they would likely prepare an entire article discussing the subject. But I seriously doubt that will happen for at least another 100 years if they last that long.
--sd-7
-
Larsinger58
Nicolau: The problem here is that the Bible clearly says that Jerusalem would be the first to drink of this cup. That implies the other nations would later drink aftrer Jerusalem. Unless we interpret this to mean within the same year, then you have a discrepancy over the 70 years of desolation of Jerusalem matching the same 70 years of the nations.
Further, as I quoted, the WTS links the last deportation in year 23 as being whe the last nations were deported to Babylon, but that would mean a period less than a specific 70 years.
Of course, Josephus and the Bible both say that the remnant of those "remaining from the sword" who were down in Egypt, which would include ones like Jeremiah and Baruch, were to return to Judea. This last campaign was in year 23 so Jeremiah and Baruch were deported that year to Babylon but did return to Judea, if only for a short while. So the 70 years of complete desolation and exile would be that of those nations and those few Jews who were deported in year 23. This allows Jerusalem to drink first and the other nations later down to year 23.
But in order to link the 70 years to 607 BCE and the fall of Jerusalem, the WTS has to ignore and twist scriptures and make it seem the scriptures were not fulfilled. I'm sure they know this, but 1914 is too much of an absolute for them to see past anything that might challenge or change it. The result is that they are a false prophet and they know it. So Jehovah has abandoned them.
So that's the problem. You can't have Jerusalem being desolated from the year it was destroyed spending exactly 70 years if the nations were to drink after her and also spend 70 years. Thus the 70 years for both the nations and Jerusalem and the Jews are linked to the year 23 final deporation of those from Egypt, something the WTS is loathe to have figured out by their members since it completely discounts the 1914 doctrine.
-
nicolaou
Lars, that is a line of reasoning I used on my Mum about ten years ago.
If all 'these nations' were to 'serve the King of Babylon for seventy years' then they would all need to have been conquered at the same time because even the WT concede that the domination of Babylon only lasted 70 years.
Ridiculous . .