Question about 607/587

by drewcoul 40 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  AnnOMaly

  Archaeology for the period in question can coincide with a more literal understanding of the Scriptures.

  Please read these articles to find out how one scholar does it:

  http://www.auss.info/auss_publication_file.php?pub_id=755&journal=1&type=pdf

  http://www.auss.info/auss_publication_file.php?pub_id=762&journal=1&type=pdf

  From the second article, p. 299

  5. Conclusion

  This article and its predecessor have entailed a search for a better understanding of the seventy-year prophecy in Jeremiah. The evidence, I believe, demonstrates first of all that literal interpretation of the seventy years is not incompatible with an understanding of either the relevant biblical texts (Jer 25:11-12, Jer 29:10, 2 Chr 36:20b-21, and Dan 9:2 ) or the historical data. In the first article I showed that these biblical texts do not necessitate a symbolic application of the seventy years and that at the same time they allow for a primary reference to Babylon. In the present article I have set forth evidence suggesting that the defeat (or, withdrawal) of Assur-uballit I1 of Assyria and the Assyrian-Egyptian forces at Haran at the hands of the Babylonians constitutes a viable event for the terminus a quo of the seventy years in the summer of 609 B.C. This correlates well with a terminus ad quem for those seventy years in 539 B.C.
• 

  Larsinger58
• 

  Larsinger58
• 

  AnnOMaly

  ^ LOL - darned, meddling Illuminati erasing your posts!
• 

  Larsinger58
• 

  leavingwt

  Larsinger: Internet Explorer version 9 does not work with this site. Please use Firefox or Chrome.
• 

  lepavoux

  It dos'nt matter about 607 BC or 587 BC, why not? Because Daniel 4 had no 2nd fulfillment of the choped down tree,it was all made up by people who lived before Charles Russell, therefore there is no 2520 years, no 1914, no 1919, no"1914 Overlapping Generation.

  Therefore all of you Jehovah's Witnesses who are reading these posts need to THINK and to search for what the real truth is -- it's there for you if you really want to fined it.
• 

  lepavoux

  It dos'nt matter about 607 BC or 587 BC, why not? Because Daniel 4 had no 2nd fulfillment of the choped down tree,it was all made up by people who lived before Charles Russell, therefore there is no 2520 years, no 1914, no 1919, no"1914 Overlapping Generation.

  Therefore all of you Jehovah's Witnesses who are reading these posts need to THINK and to search for what the real truth is -- it's there for you if you really want to fined it.
• 

  Doug Mason

  The WTS do not start their Seventy Years with the destruction of Jerusalem. That is a distraction. The WTS start the Seventy Years with the exodus of Jews into Egypt, following the murder of Governor Gedaliah. This is the event that they date at 607 BCE.

  The WTS completely ignores the fact that the Bible does not say these Jews went into Egypt in the same year that Jerusalem was destroyed. Indeed, it is impossible for all of the events that took place during the period from Jerusalem’s destruction until those Jews went into Egypt to have been completed within 2 months. It is more probable the Jews entered Egypt 4 years after Jerusalem was destroyed, linking that uprising against Gedaliah to Nebuchadnezzar returning and taking more captives from the land during his 23rd year.

  While it focuses on the 539 BCE date for the Fall of Babylon, the WTS’s critical date is 537 BCE for the assembling of the first Exiles at the temple site at Jerusalem. There is no Biblical or other information to prove this date is correct. For that reason, scholars provide alternate dates, but no one really knows. It’s a subjective guess.

  Likewise with 1914 CE. The WTS makes a lot of noise and fuss about its views on 1914 CE but the critical date for them is 1919 CE when, according to the WTS, God anointed them as his sole voice upon earth, the true representative of God’s kingdom, his government. That, once again, is a purely a subjective opinion.

  Doug.
• 

  wobble

  Thanks Doug for your succinct summary of the WT's woeful position on all this, it comes down to what most of their doctrine does, they just made it up with no justification from scripture or history.