http://kristenfrihet.se/vtsvar/vtsvar2.pdf
I loved part 1 by Jonsson so this one should be great read as well.
When...JERUSALEM DESTROYED? PART TWO - c.o.Jonsson
by diamondiiz 17 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
AnnOMaly
Yay! Excellent stuff. A very thorough analysis, as usual. Thanks for the heads up diamondiiz.
-
Londo111
Awesome!
-
No Room For George
thanks for bumping, printing right now.
-
breakfast of champions
Just thinking about this! Thanks!
-
-
leavingwt
I enjoyed the Conclusion.
-
sd-7
It's particularly embarrassing that they'd bring up Awel-marduk, when he's specifically mentioned in the BIBLE as ruling right after Nebuchadnezzar. They're really counting on their audience being misinformed.
But that's a classic review. I just can't believe they even brought this subject up. Their approach clearly shows they were hoping to overwhelm their standard audience with details, until said audience gave up and said, "Okay, you're right!" Even when I was still on the inside, I wondered about the details behind their scholarly quotes. If I'd started looking into it I might've gone my own way long before I did.
Great, great review.
--sd-7
-
Larsinger58
Jonsson is not taken seriously by more experienced Bible chronologists in regards to the 70 years of servitude/desolation because it is not an issue of the nations serving for 70 years but those of the last deportation as noted by Josephus in Ant. 11.1.1. Josephus also notes regarding the reign of Evil-Merodach that he ruled for 18 years.
So the bottom line is that the Bible has to be compared with the Babylonian records vs. those of Josephus to see which reflects the Bible's timeline for the NB Period. Jonsson tries to harmonize the 70 years in the Bible with his choice of secular history by shifting the 70 years from the servitude of the last deportees to the nations conquered by Babylon, even though he comes short of a full 70 years and that would only apply to the very first nation conquered. So the problem with Jonsson is not facing the contradiction by Josephus and the Bible vs. the Babylonian records which were "copied" during the Persian Period and thus presumed to be revised.
First, though, here is how the Bible agrees with Josephus that the 70 years of servitude was that of those last deported in year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar. In that case, Jerusalem's fall would occur 4 years earlier in year 19 and thus there is an interval of 74 years from the fall of Jerusalem to the 1st of Cyrus. This is confirmed by Zechariah 1 where in year 2 of Darius the Mede, 70 years from the destruction of Jerusalem is noted to have occurred and the Jews are still in exile under Dariuis the Mede. But per Josephus, they should have been, with 4 more years remaining in exile before the 1st of Cyrus. Then Zechariah 7 shows that 70 years of mourning over Gedeliah expires in year 4 of Darius the Mede. That means Gedaliah was killed in year 20 and began to be mourned the following year in year 21. After Gedaliah was murdered, the remnant of Jews fled down to Egypt. They were told to return, which they did not. In consequence, Jehovah promised to send Nebuchadnezzar with a sword to kill off the majority of them, with just a few "remaining from the sword" who would return to Judea. (Jeremiah 44:14,28) Josephus confirms a campaign by Nebuchadnezzar II in year 23 which directly states Jews in Egypt were deported out of Egypt to Babylon. This harmonizes with the Bible which also notes that those last deported were those who had "escaped from the sword." So the last deportees in year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 52:30) were the last remnant of Jews who had ran down to Egypt, who were deported to Babylon that same year via a route through Judea.
So it would be another 2 years after the 4th of Darius the Mede before the Jews would be released when Cyrus took over the kingdom of Babylon. This also means that Darius the Mede was the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar II, and thus a legitimate Babylonian king. Further, king Nabonidus was still at large during this time and was not imprisoned until Cyrus came to the throne. Nabonidus was the king of Babylon in a co-rulership with Belshazzar, who was #2 in the kingdom. His cousin, Darius the Mede, simply replaced him in the #2 spot while Nabonidus who was at Borsippa was still considered the king of Babylon. Thus the Babylonian kingship did not end until Cyrus THE PERSIAN came to the throne. That is why the Bible is very specific to note that the end of the exiles would be "when the royalty of PERSIA begins to rule." (2 Chronicles 36:20) The Bible distinguishes Darius THE MEDE from Cyrus THE PERSIAN so that it is clear that the "royalty of Persia" is specific to when Cyrus begins to rule, rather than Darius the Mede, who would be considered part of the royalty of the Medes.
So in conclusion, what CO Jonsson presents misses the mark of addressing the realities of this 70-year situation, which are that:
1. The 70 years are served by the last deportees deported in year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar II out of Babylon via Judea.
2. That Darius the Mede ruled for a full six years per the Bible, during which time the Jews were still in exile.
3. That Josephus specifically links the prophecy of Jeremiah with the seventy years of servitude by the last deportees, which means even if Jonsson came up with a 70-year Babylonian kingdom, it would be a mere coincidence.
4. The revisionism of this period is apparent also in Josephus where in Antiquities he assigns an 18-year rule to Evil-Merodach vs. only 2 years per current popular history, but also per his own work "Against Apion." Whether Josephus himself noted in his later work that Evil-Merodach ruled for just 2 years or whether that was a later revision by others probably can't be determined, but the comparison of the two works clearly shows the contradiction.
In conclusion, the Bible and Josephus claim the NB Period is some 26 years longer than the "copied"Persian documents do. The 70 years of servitude by the last deportees has nothing to do with Babylonian rule over the first nation it conquered, which I believe doesn't even amount to 70 years (605-539=66), a point Jonsson has to hem-haw around by saying the 70 years were only symbolic anyway. So Jonsson is just one joke on top of another here and is totally dismissed.
But his straw man arguments sound great and the gullible and ill-informed just gobble it up and praise it like the sheeple in the WTS gobble up and praise "new light" coming from the Watchtower, which is just new darkness.
LS
-
Larsinger58
Don't let this side line argument fool you. Both COJ and the WTS are on the same side of false history, supporting 539 BCE as the fall of Babylon. JWs falsely claim the 70 years were served by those deported the year Babylon fell down to the 1st of Cyrus. Josephus, however, dates these 70 years from the last deportation in year 23 of NebII out of Egypt, which is also when the Bible dates the last deportation as well, identifying those deported as those "escaping from the sword", which is a reference to the remnant from Egypt.
So you have two false prophets trying to authenticate the false revised timeline that dates the fall of Babylon in 539 BCE. The Bible's dating for the fall of Babylon is 462 BCE, which begins the 6-year rule of Darius the Mede the following year in 561 BCE down to the 1st of Cyrus in 455 BCE. Darius the Mede was the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar II and thus a legitimate Babylonian king. Thus even though Belshazzar was killed, the Neo-Babylonian kingdom continued via Darius the Mede and Nabonidus, who was the primary king of Babylon in a co-rulership with his son, Belshazzar. Only when Cyrus takes over the entire kingdom of the Medes and Persians and thus becomes king of Babylon does the Neo-Babylonian kingdom end. It is thus not in the 1st year of Darius the Mede that the Jews were released, but not until his 6-year rule was over and Cyrus begins to rule that the Jews are released in 455 BCE.
But for COJ, that is a side debate. That's because he brought the world's attention to the VAT4956, which contains two "errors" for 568 BCE, year 37 of NebII. Those "errors" though, in Lines 3 and 14, turn out to match the year 511 BCE, the year the Bible dates year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar II when the 1st of Cyrus falls in 455 BCE. The SK400, as well, can be used to date "year 7" of Nebuchadnezzar II to 541 BCE, giving you the same chronology for NebII as does the VAT4956. So it turns out both diaries, the VAT4956 and the SK400, were designed to hide the true, original timeline for the rule of NebII that was distorted by 57 years by Persian revisionism. The VAT4956 and SK400 were created after the revisions were made by the end of the reign of Artaxerxes II by Xenophon; they are not contemporary astronomical texts. The VAT4956 does use original observations in texts from 568 BCE, the revised date for year 37 of NebII, but also includes observations from year 511 BCE, the original year 37 of NebII. Thus the VAT4956 not only confirms 568 BCE as a revised date for year 37 of NebII, it confirms the original year 37 in 511 BCE, which matches the Bible's dating. That is, if 455 BCE is year 1 of Cyrus, then 70 years earlier dates the last deportation to 525 BCE When year 23 falls in 525 BCE, year 7 falls in 541 BCE and year 37 falls in 511 BCE, as reflected in these "safety text" documents, desgned to "hide in plain sight" the true chronology. The Bible's dataing thus becomes a sideline issue when these critical texts reflect a second chronology.
LS
