For DJEggnog - The Darius Alwayshere was referring to is the same Darius as talked about on Page 584 of your very own Insight Volume 1 under Darius and the correct WTS dates given for the reconstruction of the Temple are 520 to 515 BCE - For once WTS had the dates right - he was not talking about Darius the Mede - get a grip man - quit speed skimming the material and thinking you have all the answers. Humility goes a long long ways - WTS removes it from their people - they have become stiff-necked just like the old Israelites because they think they have a "exclusive" on the Great God of the Universe, Jehovah.
607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)
by Witness My Fury 492 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Farkel
Ann has it all in order.
If 607 falls, then 1914 falls and then 1918 and 1919 falls. That means the WT Printing Corporation was NEVER chosen by Jehovah to be His mouthpiece.
Their bullshit falls, but then again they always were full of bullshit: they change their notions about things as regularly as people take baths, but THEY speak for Jehovah!
Jehovah never changes his stuff, but the WTS changes their stuff nearly every week, yet THEY speak for Him!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Farkel
-
djeggnog
@saltyoldlady:
The Darius Alwayshere was referring to is the same Darius as talked about on Page 584 of your very own Insight Volume 1 under Darius and the correct WTS dates given for the reconstruction of the Temple are 520 to 515 BCE
We are not here discussing anything that might be contained in the Insight volumes. We are here discussing the Bible. I don't use Watchtower publications as a crutch as many of Jehovah's Witnesses tend to do; if you or @Alwayshere should feel a need to reference the Insight volumes in anything you might say to me, I'm ok with that, but I have no need to know this. My interest in this thread in what the Bible says on this particular topic.
For once WTS had the dates right - he was not talking about Darius the Mede - get a grip man - quit speed skimming the material and thinking you have all the answers.
My reason for distinguishing Darius the Mede from Darius the king is to establish the dates when each man lived to show that it is an impossibility that Darius the king was king when Nebuchadnezzar "burned the Temple" in Jerusalem and went on to appoint Gedaliah as governor in Judah, which occurred in 607 BC and not in 587 BC, for Darius the Mede became king 70 years later in 539 BC. And while @Alwayshere suggested that the Jews "were weeping because King Neb. had burned the Temple and killed the man, King Neb. made Governor," I pointed out that the thrust of Zechariah's question had to do with the reason the Jews were wailing during their previous 70 years of captivity in Babylon, that their fasting wasn't for Jehovah at all, but for themselves.
More importantly, there aren't 70 years between 587 BC and 539 BC, so @Alwayshere decided that because there are 70 years between 587 BC and 518 BC that the year in which the 70 years came to an end was 518 BC. I realize that you didn't understand that what I was really doing is establishing the timeline for this 70-year period, did you? Please read on.
According to 2 Kings 25:27, the reign of Evil-Merodach as king of Babylon began during the 37th year of the exile of Jehoiachin, "in the year of his becoming king," which means that if Jehoichin's exile began in 617 BC, then the 37th year of his exile would have been 581 BC, the same year when Nebuchadnezzar died. However, if the 70-year period started six years earlier in 587 BC, as @Alwayshere stated, then to count 70 years from 587 BC means that we would have to totally erase Cyrus the king of Persia, who died in 530 BC, and Darius the Mede, who Daniel 5:31 indicates was "about sixty-two years old" when he "received the kingdom," from history!
Humility goes a long long ways - WTS removes it from their people - they have become stiff-necked just like the old Israelites because they think they have a "exclusive" on the Great God of the Universe, Jehovah.
In the future, if you do not understand anything contained in any of my posts, you can just post a message and ask me what I'm saying, because you clearly read my post without understanding what I had stated in it. You want to attack the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society for the things I am saying to you, but I didn't write the Insight volumes, so you should save such attacks for those that did write these volumes instead of throwing darts at me because of your pathological hatred for Jehovah's Witnesses and the Society.
For whatever reason, you referred to the Insight volumes, but I made no reference to them at all, only referring to the Bible. I'm mildly interested in seeing if you can take your own advice and demonstrate your humility by apologizing to me for suggesting that I was actually discussing Darius the Mede instead of Darius the king, when what I was really doing was establishing the timelines for the 70 year period for when Darius the Mede was alive and when Darius the king was alive pursuant to recorded history.
@djeggnog
-
OBVES
607 BC is the date God Yahweh wants us to use in decoding the endtime era .
Even if it was 2893 BC doesn't matter ! What matters is what dates God Yahweh wants us to use and impute them to some events .
Imagine you are in the army where secret codes are used to hide an important information. Table X may mean granade .
If the Flood of Noah took really place in 4990 BC as Harold Camping proves ( http://www.familyradio.com ). God wants his true servants to use the date 2372 BC for the Flood as a secret code .
2372 breaks into two parts : 23 and 72 . 72 - 23 = 49 .
1891 AD + 72 years = 1963 AD ... 1988 AD + 23 years = 2011 AD . 2011 AD - 1891 AD = 120 years .
1891 AD + 72 years + 49 years + 23 years = 2034 AD .
2034 AD - 120 years = 1914 AD - 23 years = 1891 AD .
Using the endtime code given by God of the Bible to the International Bible Students in the date 2372 BC we decode two endtime 120-year periods :
1891 AD + 120 years = 2011 AD and 1914 AD + 120 years = 2034 AD .
http://www.focusonthebible2011.com .
The same principles apply to the date 607 BC even if the actual date might have been 688 BC or any other date .
The 607 BC hides " 7 times " as 607 can be transformed into 6x7=42 and 42 implies " 7 times " .
7 weeks as 7 times 7 days / years = 49 years .In this eqauation " 7 times " must mean 42 years as " 7 times" + 7 years = 49 years.
We look for the dates in our times which are the endtimes and apply 42 years properly.
1878 AD + 42 years = 1920 AD . 1992 AD + 42 years = 2034 AD .
1992 AD - 42 years =1950 AD . 1920 AD + 42 years = 1962 AD.
These dates overlap : 1950 AD - 1962 AD = 12 years becomes as 24 years .
42 years when reversed mean 24 years or 12 years .
That is why we have :
1878 AD - 1920 AD - 1950 AD - 1962 AD - 1992 AD - 2034 AD .
42 years + 30 years + 12 years + 30 years + 42 years .
30 years + 12 years = 42 years . 12 years + 30 years = 42 years .
42 years + " shadow 42 years " + " shadow 42 years + 42 years
1878 AD - 2034 AD - the endtime era using 607 BC in a decoded state.
-
Witness My Fury
Eggnog, care to "explain" Daniel 2:1 then? Also where do you get 35 years for Nabonidus and belshazzar from exactly?
OBVES get lost please we dont need voodoo numerology here
-
Dutch-scientist
In 620BC Necho was not yet king/farao of Egypt.
-
AnnOMaly
Hi WMF
That being said Daniel 2:1 puts the kybosh on that. Anyone read the WTS laughable explanation of this in the Daniel book p46 paras 1,2? It is sadly pathetic.
Exactly. If the year Dan. 1:1, 2 gives is reinterpreted to mean J'kim's 11th year, and Daniel and his friends were taken that same year, then Dan. 2:1 has to be reinterpreted too, so that Neb's 2nd year becomes Neb's 20th year or his '2nd year of world rulership' - a nonsense.
And there is no reason to think that, out of all the other regnal year numbers the book of Daniel uses to date events and where we take them as they are, that these particular two regnal year numbers alone have a special sense attached to them or where they are calculated differently to the rest.
djeggnog:
Nabonidus and Belshazzar, coregents, from 575/574 BC for 35 years
Really? I would LOVE to see how you've established that length of reign. Can you show me?
No, I don't agree that I left anything hanging. Not your real question, I know, but I'm going to need you to go back and read what it was I had written precisely twice in response to this very question you are here asking me for a third time ...
You response went all around the houses to avoid giving a straight answer.
... [here we go] ... Pharaoh Necho made Eliakim king over Judah in place of his brother ... [blah blah, usual stuff to divert attention from a straight answer] ... in Nebuchadnezzar's fifth regnal year as king, Nebuchadnezzar made Jehoiakim his vassal king.
This means that four years later in 620 BC, which would be the eighth year of Jehoiakim's reign, Jehoiakim became a vassal king for Babylon just as he had been for Egypt before the Pharaoh capitulation to Nebuchadnezzar. (2 Kings 24:1) ... [blah, blah, extraneous info that has nothing to do with what I asked]
There you go again - off on your well-rehearsed mantra. I'll try again.
Do you agree that 2 Ki. 24:1 does not tell us in which year Jehoiakim became vassal to Nebuchadnezzar? A simple yes or no will suffice this time.
[Ann formerly] Incidentally, have you checked the cross-references to 2 Chron. 36:21 yet and seen where Leviticus fits in?
[djeggnog] No.
It'll be a good idea to do so before you refer to that Scripture again.
No, you haven't shown me any such thing.
LOL, of course I have ... and then some. But I guess there's no reasoning with illogical minds.
[Ann formerly] Daniel mentions 'kingship' and you read 'vassalage.'
[djeggnog] Yes, I am able to comprehend with reference to Nebuchadnezzar the words, "Jehoiakim became his servant for three years," as referring to a vassalage, since Jehoiakim had not been deposed as the king of Judah, but 2 Kings 24:1 clearly refers to Nebuchadnezzar as "the king of Babylon" ...
Excuse me. We're not talking about the wording of 2 Ki. 24:1 now, so this is irrelevant.
... and at Daniel 1:1, Jehoiakim is said to be "in the third year" of his kingship as "the king of Judah," and I do realize now, with my having pointed this out to you already, that the meaning of these words may be a little bit above your pay grade, @AnnOMaly (this is meant as a joke and not as an ad hominem), because you just don't get it.
Sure. I don't get how you can redefine '3rd year of kingship' to '11th year of kingship' or '3rd year of vassalage.' To redefine it in such a way contorts the Scripture out of shape and creates contradictions (one or two of which I've already put to you).
Look: Think of Herod Antipas who made fun of Jesus after Pilate sent Jesus to him for a preliminary hearing to see if he could determine whether Jesus had committed a crime, who was (Luke 23:8-11) Herod Antipas was made king (tetrarch) by Augustus, so that he became the district ruler of Galilee and Perea, but the real king of Rome and all of its provinces, including Judah, was Caesar, so that Herod Antipas' kingship was, in reality, a vassalage, just as Jehoiakim's kingship was, in reality, a vassalage, for Nebuchadnezzar was the real king of Babylon.
Don't be obtuse. I agree that J'kim was a vassal king. He became a vassal king when Necho put him on the Judean throne and made him king of Judah. He continued to be a vassal king when Neb kicked Necho's butt and made J'kim a Babylonian vassal instead. All the while - no matter whose servant he was - he was still king of Judah. In the 3rd year of his being king of Judah, Daniel says, the king of Babylon besieged Jerusalem. It's totally absurd to then extract the conclusion that 'actually Daniel counted Jehoiakim as being king of Judah ONLY from when he became vassal to Babylon'!
As for the rest of your reply to me, thanks for the jollies. You're so like our celebrated Neil McF. when he's been pushed onto the ropes :-D Wonderful!
Re: djeggnog's reply to my reply to WMF
You're twisting the fact that 624 BC was Nebuchadnezzar's first regnal year -- not his fourth regnal year -- corresponded to Jehoiakim's "fourth year" as king of Judah (Jeremiah 46:2) ... Nebuchadnezzar didn't have any "nasty, bloody battle" with Egypt during "4th year" that would correspond to Jehoiakim's "7th year after his 3 years of servitude," as you slyly thought you could inject into this thread with anyone noticing. I don't know if @Wit ness My Fury caught this, but I caught you, @AnnOMaly!
You really are a klutz. Again, you've not been paying attention.
1) I deliberately avoided using BC year dates,
2) I specified that I was using the Jer. 52:28 and Dan. 1:1 methods of counting years (you've researched the different ways regnal years are counted in the Bible, I trust?).
Therefore, your above allegation is nonsense.
By the way, FYI the link to the relevant Babylonian Chronicle which describes events in Neb's 4th year does work.
-- 620 BC -- was Jehoiakim's eighth year as king of Judah. This was the first of three times when Jerusalem was besieged by Babylon.
Unanswered question:
Was J'kim's vassalage to Babylon the result of a friendly social visit on the part of Neb? Did J'kim generously decide to hand over substantial portions of his country's wealth to Babylon because he was that kind of guy? If not, what were the circumstances of J'kim becoming Babylon's servant before the alleged 'first siege' of 620?
Come on, eggie. Dazzle me with your spirit-guided insights.
-
Dutch-scientist
Getting tired for JW who cannot read and cannot count.
If you are pushed to be dump your entire life as JW and you need to wear WTS glasses all the time you will go not to paradise.
-
PSacramento
There are no date sin the bible, there are events and events that are "dated" via other events or withing the reign of certain kings, but ther are NO dates mentione din the bible.
Any date we have, like 597BC, comes from secular sources and not just 1 or 2 but multiple lines of evidence, as such the bibel must conform to those dates, not the other way around.
The bible does NOT say when ANY king became king, nowhere will you find in th ebible the date for Nebachdrezzers ascencion nor will you find the date for his first battle or the fall of Jerusalem.
You will however, based on archealogy, astronomy and historical chronology, find evidence for those dates and since the bible does not mention those dats at all, the bible chronology must be in line what those dates, not the other way around.
-
Witness My Fury
I know that PSacramento, I was just looking for a bible based method of disproving 607 theory as JWs will be more likely to pay attention to the information than from other sources...
The argument of biblical chronology vs secular chronology is a false premise as you have said.
The vassalship of Jehoiakim is distracting this thread anyway and has no effect on the 607 vs 587 outcomes, I pursued that point because I thought I had it correct, but do not any more.
Eggnog (or any other 607ites):
Explain Daniel 2:1.
Explain your insertion of 35 years for Nabonidus (sources).
539 is the fixed date we all work with, so it should be a simple matter of some chronology...LOL
Yes I know this has been done to death, but there's lots of newbies here lately and I doubt many will trawl thru all the old threads on it so it's worth rehashing every now and again I think. Plus I happen to think this is the most fundamental point in disproving any authority the WTS claim once and for all.