Just when I start losing interest in a thread, some newbie comes along and raises the stakes. Beautiful. Welcome to the forum, Castthefirststone!
607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)
by Witness My Fury 492 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
No Room For George
-
thetrueone
Castthefirststone , 20571 and djeggnog are going to say nothing but word from word out the WT. articles.
they are programed or brainwashed if you will by their Watchtower indoctrination.
A little incite on their so called method 1 -
Zedekiah was made king of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar II in 597 BC at the age of twenty-one. The kingdom was at that time tributary to Nebuchadnezzar II. Despite the strong remonstrances of Jeremiah, Baruch ben Neriah and his other family and advisors, as well as the example of Jehoiakim, he revolted against Babylon, and entered into an alliance with PharaohHophra of Egypt. Nebuchadnezzar responded by invading Judah. ( 2 Kings 25:1 ). Nebuchadnezzar began a siege of Jerusalem in January 589 BC. During this siege, which lasted about thirty months, "every worst woe befell the city, which drank the cup of God's fury to the dregs". ( 2 Kings 25:3 ; Lamentations 4:4 , 5 , 9 )
In the eleventh year of his reign, Nebuchadnezzar succeeded in capturing Jerusalem. Zedekiah and his followers attempted to escape, making their way out of the city, but were captured on the plains of Jericho, and were taken to Riblah.
There, after seeing his sons put to death, his own eyes were put out, and, being loaded with chains, he was carried captive to Babylon ( 2 Kings 25:1-7 ; 2 Chronicles 36:12 ; Jeremiah 32:4,-5 ; 34:2-3 ; 39:1-7 ; 52:4-11 ; Ezekiel 2:12 ), where he remained a prisoner until he died.
After the fall of Jerusalem, Nebuzaradan was sent to destroy it. The city was plundered and razed to the ground. Solomon's Temple was destroyed. Only a small number of vinedressers and husbandmen were permitted to remain in the land. ( Jeremiah 52:16 )
The Babylonian Chronicles give 2 Adar (16 March), 597 BC, as the date that Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem, thus putting an end to the reign of Jehoaichin. [ 3 ] Zedekiah's installation as king by Nebuchadnezzar can therefore be firmly dated to the early spring of 597 BC. Historically there has been considerable controversy over the date when Jerusalem was captured the second time and Zedekiah's reign came to an end. There is no dispute about the month: it was the summer month of Tammuz (Jeremiah 52:6). The problem has been to determine the year. It was noted above that Albright preferred 587 BC and Thiele advocated 586 BC, and this division among scholars has persisted until the present time. If Zedekiah's years are by accession counting, whereby the year he came to the throne was considered his "zero" year and his first full year in office, 597/596, was counted as year one, Zedekiah's eleventh year, the year the city fell, would be 587/586. Since Judean regnal years were measured from Tishri in the fall, this would place the end of his reign and the capture of the city in the summer of 586 BC. Accession counting was the rule for most, but not all, of the kings of Judah, whereas "non-accession" counting was the rule for most, but not all, of the kings of Israel. [ 2 ] [ 4 ]
The publication of the Babylonian Chronicles in 1956, however, gave evidence that the years of Zedekiah were measured in a non-accession sense. This reckoning makes year 598/597 BC, the year Zedekiah was installed by Nebuchadnezzar according to Judah's Tishri-based calendar, to be year "one," so that the fall of Jerusalem in his eleventh year would have been in year 588/587 BC, i.e. in the summer of 587 BC. The Bablyonian Chronicles allow the fairly precise dating of the capture of Jehoiachin and the start of Zedekiah's reign, and they also give the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar's successor Amel-Marduk (Evil Merodach) as 562/561 BC, which was the 37th year of Jehoiachin's captivity according to 2 Kings 25:27. These Babylonian records related to Jehoiachin's reign are consistent with the fall of the city in 587 but not in 586, as explained in the Jehoiachin/Jeconiah article, thus vindicating Albright's date. Nevertheless, scholars who assume that Zedekiah's reign should be calculated by accession reckoning will continue to adhere to the 586 date, and so the infobox contains this as an alternative.
-
cantleave
My brain doesn't allow me to read anything with that many scriptural citiations!
-
cantleave
Double Post!!!!!!!
-
-
castthefirststone
@thetrueone: Thank you for posting the Wikipedia article on Zedekiah. I am not sure it gives much insight into method 1 of 20571pnt428571 as it actually disproves all the methods of getting to 607. Using Zedekiah's reign has been discussed on this forum from the beginning and neither 20571pnt428571 nor djeggnog could give sufficient evidence to explain it away. They used verbose explanations (to deter people from reading the thread) and logical fallacies (to confuse the uniformed) but it didn't work.
From my perspective there seems to be nothing new to be offered to the 607 BCE debate by djeggnog. It's only a debate because JW's and a few others still cling to this date. I think 20571pnt428571 just post random nonsense to add to the confusion and I intend to ignore his posts from now on. They are trying their best to confuse the hell out of everyone with copy and paste posts and random articles that have been published by theorists that are not willing to supply proof for their wild assertions. I call them wild assertions because they go against all authoritative sources on the matter, without any shred of verifiable evidence other than misquotes and misapplications.
They accuse everyone else for not having enough evidence for their chronologies but they have none, zero, no evidence for their theories and by pointing fingers they take the focus away from their theories. They only focus on some of the shortfalls of others and then say that proves we are right. This is the reason why I asked djeggnog to give a summary of his theory with verifiable evidence on how he got to his theory of 607. I also asked him to give all the reasons why 607 is so important in Bible prophecy, seeing that he/she keeps denying that it is intrinsically linked to 1914.
I don't think that I will get any response because no evidence exists and no honest answer exists to the 607 Bible prophecy question.
-
MeanMrMustard
@castthefirststone:
I assume you have read "The Gentile Times Reconsidered" by Carl Olof Jonsson?
MeanMrMustard
-
djeggnog
@castthefirststone:
This is my first post on this forum and I lurked here for some time. I can't honestly say that I buy into JW doctrine anymore but the 607 doctrine still intrigues me.
This may be a waste of your time to read this response to your inquiry if your motivation for asking me this question is that you are intrigued by the question around which this thread has revolved.
In my opinion you have not answered any of Ann's or any of the other posters' questions regarding your wild assumptions on how you get to the 607 date. You keep latching onto irrelevant arguments and opinions and then writes verbose explanations on these, ignoring the fact that are right in front of you.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, right or wrong, whatever it might be, but I believe I have responded to the questions of many, including those put forward by the OP (@WMF) and @AnnOMaly, and I did so without making any "wild assumptions." If you believe my arguments and opinions are irrelevant, then nothing I have written here in response will likely matter to you.
Now if you are really as well intentioned as you profess to be, please provide a summary with verifiable proof of how you get to 607 BCE. Not paragraph after paragraph of this nonsense.
The only "verifiable proof" I will provide in response to the request you make for a summary of how I arrive at the year 607 BC is citations from the Bible and a quote from Josephus' Against Apion.
Also add to this, your explanation why 607 BCE has any significance in Bible prophecy and why you spend so much time trying to defend it. Seeing that you say it's only the year that the temple was destroyed. You will probably say that you have a keen interest in archaeology and that's why you feel so strongly about 607 but can you really give that answer when everyone can see from your posts that this is not the case?
I don't have any "keen interest in archaeology," so I wouldn't say this, but I already did explain the significance of 607 BC in a recent message, the highlights of which is as follows:
I have faith that Zedekiah's removal as a representative of God's typical kingdom here on earth marked the time when theocratic rule ceased to exist on earth, which event gives further significance to the year 607 BC, since 607 BC marks the year when the "seven times" of Daniel's prophecy began. (Daniel 4:25) My faith doesn't require Solomon's temple to have been destroyed by Babylon in 607 BC, but I believe the temple was destroyed during the "fifth month" (2 Kings 25:8) in Ab, 607 BC, and that Gedaliah was assassinated during the "seventh month" (2 Kings 25:25) in Tishri, 607 BC, in which year God's prophecy regarding the desolation of the land of Judah for a 70-year period "until the land had paid off its sabbaths" went into effect. (2 Chronicles 36:21) My faith has come to be greatly strengthened by the things I have come to learn from Jehovah's Witnesses as to the significance of 607 BC as it relates to the "seven times."
It is really not necessary for you or anyone to know the significance of 607 BC or believe what 607 BC means as it relates to theocratic rule. The only thing that one must believe is that Jehovah is the true God and that, by our exercising faith in the blood of his son, Jesus Christ, we will realize the benefits of his ransom sacrifice, namely, everlasting life.
I don't feel any need to prove that the 70 years foretold by Jeremiah were fulfilled in 537 BC, since I am convinced by faith that this 70-year period began in 607 BC, but I have no doubt that you are here seeking proof that Solomon's temple was destroyed in 607 BC during Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year (18th regnal year), which, again, is my belief. In responding to your question, I cannot ignore that what I believe -- what Jehovah's Witnesses believe -- is in conflict with many of the beliefs held by some here, to the effect that it was after some 18 years of Babylonian domination that began during Nebuchadnezzar's accession year of 605 BC that the Solomon's temple suffered destruction by the Babylonians in 587 BC during Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year. I'm going to probably be withdrawing from this thread soon, but the following is my response to your question.
The Bible itself indicates that it was during Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year that Solomon's temple was destroyed (Jeremiah 52:29), or during his 19th year if his accession year were included (Jeremiah 52:12; 2 Kings 25:8), so the issue revolves not so much around when Nebuchadnezzar's accession year occurred or even when his 19th year occurred, but when the 70-year period of desolation that Jeremiah foretold for the land of Judah began.
During the first year of Cyrus' rulership, which historically would have been in the year 539 BC, Daniel indicates how he discerned the fulfillment of "the devastations of Jerusalem," according to Jeremiah's prophecy, had amounted to "seventy years." (Daniel 9:1, 2) Because it was by "the seventh month" of 537 BC, the Jews had repatriated the land of Judah so that they were back "in their cities," the 70-year period of desolation would have begun in 607 BC, which, according to the Bible, Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year. (Ezra 3:1; Jeremiah 52:12)
Now it's true that secular records as to the dates for Nebuchadnezzar's reign are not in agreement with the Bible's, for if Nebuchadnezzar ruled for 43 years, as secular records assign to the length of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, then 25 years after his 19th year, Nebuchadnezzar's reign would have ended in 582 BC, and the first regnal year of his son, Evil-Merodach, as king of Babylon would have begun in 581 BC.
But if Nebuchadnezzar's accession year was 606 BC as secular history asserts, then his 19th year would have been in 587 BC, and his death would have occurred some 25 years after his 19th year in 562 BC, and the first regnal year of his son would have begun in 561 BC, so that Evil-Merodach's first regnal year would have occurred 20 years later than it does in the Bible.
Josephus tells us, according to Phoenician records, that it was "in the reign of king Ithobalos" that "Naboukodrosoros [Nebuchadnezzar] besieged Tyre" over a period of "13 years." We can deduce from what Josephus writes that Baal ascended to the throne of Tyre in 577 BC, which was the first regnal year of Nebuchadnezzar's son, Evil-Merodach, as the king of Babylon. Here is what Josephus wrote according to John Barclay's translation of Against Apion, Book I, Chapters 21:
"The calculation of dates goes like this. In the reign of king Ithobalos, Naboukodrosoros besieged Tyre for 13 years. After him Baal reigned for 10 years. Thereafter judges were appointed: Ednibalos, son of Baslechos, was judge for 2 months, Chelbes, son of Abdaeos, for 10 months, Abbalos, the high-priest, for 3 months; Myttynos and Gerastartos, son of Abdelimos, were judges for 6 years, after whom Balatoros was king for 1 year. When he died they sent for Merbalos and summoned him from Babylon, and he reigned for 4 years; when he died they summoned his brother Eiromos, who reigned for 20 years. It was during his reign that Cyrus became ruler of the Persians. So the whole period is 54 years, with 3 months in addition; for it was in the seventh year of the reign of Naboukodrosoros that he began to besiege Tyre, and in the fourteenth year of the reign of Eiromos that Cyrus the Persian seized power."
Merbalos' brother, Eiromos, reigned for 20 years (553 BC - 533 BC); Merbalos reigned for four years (559 BC - 553 BC); Balatoros reigned for one year (560 BC - 559 BC); Myttynos and Gerastartos ruled as judges in Tyre for six years (566 BC - 560 BC); Abbalos ruled as a judge for three months and Chelbes ruled as a judge for ten months (567 BC - 566 BC); Ednibalos ruled for two months as a judge and Baal reigned as king for 10 years (577 BC - 567 BC).
What this means is that if Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyre for 13 years "in the reign of Ithobalos," then Ithobalos' reign would have begun before Nebuchadnezzar's siege on Tyre began in 607 BC and Ithobalos continued to be king of Tyre some 13 years later in 594 BC until Baal's reign began in 577 BC, which means that Ithobalos survived Nebuchadnezzar's death in 581 BC. But what Josephus mentions that I missed when I had reviewed this portion of Chapter 21 of Against Apion in the past is that Cyrus the Persian had seized power "in the fourteenth year of Eiromos." Since Eiromos' 14th year would correspond to 539 BC, the year when Cyrus deposed Babylon, this would mean that Eiromos reigned for another six years after Cyrus' rise to power in 539 BC until 533 BC.
But if Nebuchadnezzar died in 562 BC as secular history asserts, then when the siege on Tyre ended in 574 BC, some 13 years after it began in 587 BC, Baal's ten-year reign would had begun, which contradicts the Phoenician timeline with indicates that it was during the reign of Ithobalos that Nebuchadnezzar's 13-year siege against Tyre took place. If Baal's reign as king of Tyre began in 577 BC after the reign of Ithobalos ended, then Nebuchadnezzar's 13-year siege ended during Baal's reign, which cannot be the case for such a conclusion would be in conflict with Josephus' recitation of Phoenician secular history (as quoted above).
Instead, the Bible supports Phoenician secular history as recounted by Josephus in Chapter 21 of Against Apion, which indicates that (1) Nebuchadnezzar besieged Tyre during Ithobalos' reign, and (2) Ithobalos reign ended before Baal's ten-year reign began in 577 BC. This conclusion can be reconciled with the belief that Nebuchadnezzar died in 582 BC at which time his son, Evil-Merodach, succeeded to his father's throne as king of Babylon, and that Evil-Merodach's first regnal year began in 581 BC.
@djeggnog
-
-
castthefirststone
@MeanMrMustard: I have not read "The Gentile Times Reconsidered" but I intend to do so as I obviously need more information around this.
@djeggnog: Thank you for posting a reply. Not being disrespectful but you have not added anything new to the debate other than a rehash of your interpretation of the Bible and your interpretation of what the historian Josephus wrote about Phoenician records. You also admitted that 607 BCE is significant in Bible prophecy when you wrote:
I have faith that Zedekiah's removal as a representative of God's typical kingdom here on earth marked the time when theocratic rule ceased to exist on earth, which event gives further significance to the year 607 BC, since 607 BC marks the year when the"seven times" of Daniel's prophecy began. (Daniel 4:25)
By the way, this is not a question of faith, as you assert, but it is a question of honesty.
I believe that if this is the best argument that you, 20571pnt428571, et. al can come up with, then the only conclusion a reasonable person can make is that the assertion that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE is a complete fabrication.
