607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury 492 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  djeggnog

  @djeggnog wrote:

  In your opinion, do the dates I give here make sense?

  @AnnOMaly wrote:

  You want my opinion??? I was under the impression you couldn't give a rat's behind what I thought LOL.

  @djeggnog wrote:

  I don't want to make the truth any harder on you than it needs to be, @AnnOMaly. If you do not wish to respond with your opinion, then dodge; I can see you're good at it. It's clear to me that truth is not your forté, but, still, I want you to approximate, just as I did, when it was you believe according to Josephus the reign of Tyre's king Ithobal ended in view of the fact that Josephus indicates that it was "in the days of Ithobal" that Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyre. I want your opinion as to the veracity of the dates in the following paragraph, which I am quoting yet again from my previous message:

  "Merbalus' brother, Hirom, reigned for 20 years (559 BC - 539 BC); Merbalus reigned for four years (563 BC - 559 BC); Balatorus reigned for one year (564 BC - 563 BC); Mitgonus and Gerastratus ruled as judges in Tyre for six years (570 BC - 564 BC); Abbar ruled as a judge for three months and Chelbes ruled as a judge for ten months (571 BC - 570 BC); Ecnibalus ruled for two months as a judge and Baal reigned as king for 10 years (581 BC - 571 BC). This means that if Nebuchadnezzar had "besieged Tyre for thirteen years in the days of Ithobal," that Ithobal's reign began before Nebuchadnezzar's siege on Tyre began in 607 BC and that Ithobal continued to be king 13 years later in 594 BC. We are able to deduce that Baal ascended to the throne of Tyre in 581 BC, which is about the same time when Nebuchadnezzar's reign ended, and when Nebuchadnezzar's son, Evil-Merodach, ascended to the throne of Babylon in 581 BC. If by 581 BC Nebuchadnezzar's reigned totalled 43 years, then this means that his first regnal year was 624 BC, and in 625 BC when his father, Nabopolassar, died, this would have been Nebuchadnezzar's accession year."

  What do you think? I'm asking you what you think, which I'll regard as being your opinion. Do these dates make any sense to you?

  @AnnOMaly wrote:

  I stayed within the parameters you set down - that I should approximate the time Ithobaal's reign ended "according to Josephus." On the other hand, you used BC dates, which naturally Josephus did not use, and because you're using the wrong dates, it means you have to extend Ithobaal's reign beyond the end of the 13 year siege so that he reigns an extra 13 years, which Josephus didn't mention or factor in with his calculation. The siege ended, according to you in 594 BC, but Ithobaal's successor, Baal, ascended the throne in 581 BC --> 594 - 581 = 13.

  I wanted to parse what you said in this sentence, but instead decided, after I had reposted, as I do here, what it was I had asked you, that I would just mention just two (2) things: (1) Not only is it more likely than not that Josephus used the Hebrew calendar, he being Jewish and all, but it's also more likely than not that he didn't write what he does in Against Apion in English, which is why I suppose you rely upon Whiston's English translation of it. You didn't have to say this, but you want to come off as smart about this stuff, so I'm going to let you. (2) I asked you about the dates of the reigns of the Phoenician kings that I calculated in my post, asking you specifically to give me your honest opinion as to what you thought about them as far as what I wrote included the 13-year siege of Nebuchadnezzar on Tyre which occurred "in the days of Ithobal," as you know I did, but seeing how you sidestepped my question to make your focus these 13 years makes clear that you may want to be smart about this stuff, but what you don't want is to have an honest discussion with me:

  (@AnnOMaly:)

  NEITHER THE BC DATES NOR THE LENGTH OF ITHOBAAL'S REIGN NOR AN EXTRA 13 YEARS ADDED ON AFTER THE SIEGE ENDED CAN BE EXTRAPOLATED FROM JOSEPHUS.

  Ergo, your dates do not make sense in view of the above reasons. Got it now?

  Yes, I do. Thanks.

  You don't really know me, but based on this exchange between us, I feel I've come to know a little about you, @AnnOMaly: Whenever you do not wish to answer one of my questions, you will take shots at me, magnify my typos or clear misstatements, and not for my sake, but in order that others reading your posts (to me) might regard you as their champion over another one of Jehovah's Witnesses. All of that is fine for you do, for evasion and dodging isn't something I do or would feel comfortable doing.

  I believe Jehovah is the true God and I believe he sent his son, Jesus Christ, to save sinners, of which I am definitely one of them. I have faith that we are living in the last days of this system of things and that, unless I should meet with some horrible car accident or contract some fatal disease just short of the outbreak of the great tribulation, that I will likely be one of those that the apostle John saw in a vision 'coming out of the great tribulation' wearing white robes and waving palm branches in acknowledgment of the salvation that I will then realize, which resulted from the ransom sacrifice made by earth's new king, Jesus Christ. (Revelation 7:9, 10, 13-15) I believe all of these things are true and so this is my faith.

  Now you can believe what you want about what things you have read in the Bible and I don't fault you for any of your conclusions. I don't pretend that I can be the master of anyone else's faith, and I don't pretend to be the master of your faith, @AnnOMaly. I've been here in this thread sharing with you what things I believe from my read and study of the Bible, and why I believe all of these things to be the truth is all, and I don't judge you for having come to a different opinion than I about them. We must all of us prove to ourselves that what the Bible says about these 70 years is true, and even if my date calculations should be totally wrong, I believe that the land of Judah lay desolate for 70 years to which Josephus attests in Against Apion. I brought up Josephus because he was a non-Christian Jew that had no motive to make things up about the 70-year exile of the Jews. Josephus wasn't arguing the specific years of the exile in what he wrote, but he was merely pointing out that how Chaldean and Phoenician histories written by others support the fact of the 70-year exile.

  You know well that Jehovah's Witnesses believe that this 70-year period began during Nebuchadnezzar's 18th regnal year (19th if we include his accession year) because the Bible so indicates, but many of us go further than this in calculating that this period had to have begun in the year 607 BC, which is actually the source of this controversy between you and I in this thread. If we are wrong about 607 BC and it turns out that it was in 608 BC or 609 BC, we can live with being wrong, but we do know that Cyrus deposed Babylon in 539 BC, and if this 70-year period should end in 539 BC, and not in 537 BC, we would end up at 609 BC, but our faith -- my faith -- isn't based on whether Jerusalem was destroyed in 609 BC, 608 BC or 607 BC, but in the truth of God's prophetic word, that what he foretold did, in fact, come true just as he said it would. (Isaiah 55:10, 11)

  As I said, I am someone that believes that what the Bible says is true, but you seem to be of the belief that if there are things that Jehovah's Witnesses believe with which you do not and cannot agree that we should care that your opinion differs from ours, but why can't we disagree? You might believe something occurred in 587 BC and we might believe this same thing occurred in 607 BC, but we could both we wrong about the year, and so what? Just because I believe something that you don't or won't doesn't prevent you in any way from believing what it is you wish to believe, right? Why do you feel the need to attack my character just because I have a different opinion than yours?

  Anyway, I'm going to probably be withdrawing from this thread since it has become unprofitable to the lurkers, which is my real reason for joining it in the first place. You and others like @WMF, @Farkel and @cantleave, to name a few, will no doubt continue to lob insults at me in many other threads on here, because this is what "you guys" do, but anyone reading this particular thread can tell that this thread can become a launching pad for attacks against Jehovah's Witnesses.

  @djeggnog
• 

  Essan

  DJ, you are being absolutely eviscerated - and not for the first time. It's gratifying to watch.

  Ann, magnificent job. DJ needs to be thoroughly engaged and his deceitful tactics exposed every so often. Then he tends to run away and lay low for a while, only coming back when he thinks everyone has forgotten what happened. It's like a periodic exorcism for this forum, it seems.
• 

  jonathan dough

  Eggnogg: There is nothing evident in Scripture about anyone inhabiting the land of Judah during the period of time it lay desolate. Prove this.

  Why are your raising this point again? As Ann pointed out, you already conceded this before.

  AnnOmalley: It was proved. You agreed, remember? When jonathan dough said:

  "You are very much mistaken in this regard also, and Anne is absolutely correct. There were in fact inhabitants in all that land that the JWs argue was 100 percent uninhabited."

  You assented,

  "Ok." (post #401, p. 12)

  You want us to prove it again? Don't you bother to read any of this material? Sure, we'll prove it one more time, and you can agree one more time.

  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?

  http://144000.110mb.com/607/i-5.html#I
• 

  AnnOMaly

  djeggnog:

  (1) Not only is it more likely than not that Josephus used the Hebrew calendar, he being Jewish and all, but it's also more likely than not that he didn't write what he does in Against Apion in English, ...

  Well duh!

  And Josephus STILL doesn't attach BC dates or Hebrew months to the Tyrian kings, so your point is?

  ... which is why I suppose you rely upon Whiston's English translation of it.

  It's fascinating to see how bent out of shape your perception of reality is. You first quoted from Whiston's translation of Against Apion and you first commented on Nabopolassar's 29 years which, in fact, also came from Whiston's translation! You were blissfully unaware of whose translation YOU were referencing until I pointed it out, providing some useful information about why this discrepancy existed. Now, because you have an over-inflated, grossly distorted view of your own knowledge and skills, you cannot allow yourself to learn anything new from anyone else - particularly from those (and there are quite a few of us too) who know a whole lot more about this subject than you do - so instead you have to transfer your own ignorance and inadequacies onto the other person, thereby keeping your own fantasies about yourself intact. Fascinating - it really is.

  (2) I asked you about the dates of the reigns of the Phoenician kings that I calculated in my post, asking you specifically to give me your honest opinion as to what you thought about them as far as what I wrote included the 13-year siege of Nebuchadnezzar on Tyre which occurred "in the days of Ithobal," as you know I did, but seeing how you sidestepped my question to make your focus these 13 years makes clear that you may want to be smart about this stuff, but what you don't want is to have an honest discussion with me

  LOL. There you go again. I answered your question very precisely. By using your preferred BC dates, you ended up having to insert another 13 years to the Tyrian time-line which didn't match Josephus' figures, nor Berossus' time-line, nor the 50 year period Josephus said the Temple was 'laid desolate' and in a 'state of obscurity.' Again, you're transposing your own oversight (or deception?) onto me.

  ... even if my date calculations should be totally wrong, I believe that the land of Judah lay desolate for 70 years to which Josephus attests in Against Apion.

  ... while thus ignoring the other statements where he attests otherwise.

  The rest of your post reiterates your default position (to hone it right down and paraphrase) "Let's not allow the facts get in the way of my beliefs" and "I just can't understand why posters have been so hostile to me when I've only been voicing my opinions in a nice, friendly manner."

  I'll tell you something, eggie, and I think others will back me up here, I'm generally polite and amenable in online discussions. But there's something about knuckleheaded, supercilious, big girls' blouses that prompts me to bare my teeth, and credit to you, you rate very highly as one of them :-)

  I'm going to probably be withdrawing from this thread

  Hm. We'll see. Even if you did, you'll grace us with your eminent presence again elsewhere, no doubt ;-)
• 

  Witness My Fury

  Still doesn't get it does he. Nice change of personality on display there too no doubt for the benefit of the JW lurkers hoping that he comes off as "the victim" here and garners simpathy. (if you are a lurker, he's been quite unpleasant about you on here btw).

  He's also very deliberately downplaying the significance of the year 607 making it sound as though it's no big deal and so what if it's a year or two out, again hoping to swing the lurkers and distract.

  So lets just set this straight again then:

  607 is intrinsically linked to 1914 as the supposed start and end years of the 7 times of Daniel = 2520 years. So much so that when it was realised that there was no year 0 between BCE and AD years they shifted the previously published date for the fall of Jerusalem back from 606 to 607 so as to KEEP 1914!!. (duh)

  1914 is directly linked to the claims of authourity of the Governing Body as being chosen by Christ in 1918 / 1919 as his sole channel on earth.

  Take this "fact" away and they have no authority and are in fact false prophets claiming false authority.

  Mr Eggnog is skilled in the dark arts of bluff and bluster and a healthy dollop of subterfuge too.

  Examples: His mention of the fact that Ann needed Whistons English translation of Josephus seems to give the impression he is reading direct from the Hebrew. He isnt and cant. Earlier he vaguely gave the impression he could be a CO in passing. These little tricks are just that, tricks and many more besides. We aren't fished in, make sure you aren't too.
• 

  OBVES

  God rules the time ! The date 607 BC is irrefutable whatever other proofs you may find . God has his organization on earth that represents Him and He is dealing with His servants there and make them to come to things you being an outsider will not come to.

  Great truths are encypted in that date 607 BC which serves a secret code to decode the endtimes .Read my posts I am giving ample proofs it is so.

  In 607 is hidden " 7 times "( 6x7=42 ) . " 7 times" cover various periods that we should use to decode the biblical chronology.

  "7 times " = 2520 years or 420 years ,or years and some more .We can replace 42 years with 2520 years.

  From 607 BC when we add 2520 years we come to the year 1914 AD .

  Then we can work more on 607 we can have 60 ... 7 which translates into 60 + 7 = 67 . The Bible must have 66 books at least and Jesus as God's Word is number 1 ( 1 ) . So ,we have 1+66 or 66+1.

  Learn from my posts how I came up with the era : 1878 AD - 2012 AD.

  1+66 + 66 + 1 = 1878 AD ... 1879 AD ... 1945 AD ... 2011 AD ... 2012 AD .

  http://www.focusonthebible2011.com
• 

  Witness My Fury

  OBVES I know you must hear this a lot from a LOT of different people, but I will say it one more time for you .... OBVES YOU NEED HELP.

  Seriously go find a therapist and see what they make of you, it could be the start of something wonderful...
• 

  OBVES

  Please stop being furious before it is too late or you will be madly furious when September 29,2011 AD rolls in .The dates I am giving are very solid .

  http://www.focusonthebible2011.com
• 

  cofty

  OBVES to be the website of the man who claims to have unique insights into date of Jebus' return it's a bit basic don't you think?
• 

  OBVES

  Did you follow the advice given on my website and go to the alt.bible ( a google group ) and locate my one post and then retrieve many other posts or even on this forum you can read and ponder them asking God for guidance . It won't happen overnight I believe you must take a time and spend many hours by examining my posts .

  I knew about solar eclipse on Augus 11,1999 AD and the lunar eclipse on January 21,2000 AD were the signs of the end and just days ago I better realized how important those two dates are i God's timing of the endtime era . It happened more than 11 years after ! So,you may not understand the consequences of my coming to such and such date.You must get out of your way to get to the core of these calculations .What methods are being used and how they explain the various dates we can get .

  How in the world could come out with such an idea that 607 BC can be transformed into 60+7 and 67 is 66 + 1 .This could only happen by God's guidance .

  And exactly 1+66 and 66 + 1 fit into these two time patterns :

  1877 AD - 1878 AD - 1944 AD - 1945 AD - 2011 AD and 1878 AD -1879 AD - 1945 AD - 2011 AD - 2012 AD .

  If anyone tries to refute the year 607 BC they are trying to thwart God's endtime plans . This date is 1000% sure to be taken !

  Going upward on time ladder we get :

  607 BC .... 1037 BC .... 1467 BC ..... 1512 BC ... 1942 BC .... 2372 BC .... 2492 BC.

  430 years 430 years 45 years 430 years 430 years 120 years

  These are important periods if we know 2492 BC we can know when Jesus should come onto the scene :

  2492 BC + " 7 times " as 2520 years = 29 AD and count 120 years to get 149 AD.

  120 years + 430 years + 430 years + 45 years + 430 years + 430 years = 1885 years .

  29 AD + 1885 years = 1914 AD . 149 AD + 1885 years = 2034 AD .

  You have a 120-year period here to consider for Jesus' return and the end of the present evil world order including all false religions.

  1914 AD - 2034 AD .

  Since the year 1984 AD has a clue to decode the endtimes and mankind's chronology we can be sure that these dates must be taken into account : 607 BC , 587 BC ,537 BC ,517 BC .

  And the corresponding dates to these are in our times the following dates : 1914 AD,1934 AD,1984 AD,2004 AD 1000% sure !