We've reached his heart. God bless his soul!
The title of this forum should be changed to Judas' Witnesses.net to accurately reflect it's makeup.
by Theocratic Sedition 169 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
cedars
Wow, this is getting uncanny!! Maybe there's some holy spirit involved??! Welcome back anyway Theocratic Sedition. Take as much time as you need to digest everything.
james_woods, please pause the troll clock!!
Cedars
-
james_woods
Sorry, Cedars - but the troll clock is still running until non-troll status is positively proven.
-
elderelite
A good point palmie...... But really... If hes just going to throw a few barbs and then run its a waste of time.
So theosedition, hows about it? I am a txt book examplemof what you said. I sill serve as an elder.... Care to discuss why i no longer believe?
-
cedars
james_woods, in the interests of transparency, could you please clarify the criteria for establishing non-troll status? I have a feeling in my loins that Theocratic Sedition has forsaken the path to trolldom after his last post.
Cedars
-
james_woods
Wow, this is getting uncanny!! Maybe there's some holy spirit involved??!
The Troll Clock sometimes has that effect...
-
Londo111
Theocratic Sedition,
I love Jehovah and his Son and the Bible. I love Jehovah's Witnesses as individuals. Here, you will find a variety of people here from Atheists, agnostics, moderate Christians such as myself, fundamentalists, and people of other faiths. We are not unified, nor do we pretend to be. Nor is it the intent to provide a spiritual banquet here. There are a variety of posts here: good, bad, and ugly. Some is just fluff. However, there are a few key points most of us can agree upon after careful research.
In regard 607 BC...I will leave the archeological evidence out of it in this post, even though there are literally tons of evidence in that regard. The Bible itself does not support the teaching. See my notes below on the subject. Please explain your view of the Scriptures I'm sharing. If I am wrong, correct me.
###
According to what we've been taught, the 70 years ended in 537 BCE when the Jews returned to Jerusalem--2 years after 539 BCE, when Cyrus overtook Babylon. Therefore, if the 70 years period is for the destruction of Jerusalem and Exile at Babylon:
537 BCE - 70 years = 607 BCE.
Is this true Biblically?
Jeremiah 25:12, says "And it must occur that when seventy years have been fulfilled I shall call to account against the king of Babylon and against that nation,’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘their error, even against the land of the Chal·de´ans, and I will make it desolate wastes to time indefinite."
When was the king of Babylon called into account? Daniel 9:26-28 says, "ME´NE, God has numbered [the days of] your kingdom and has finished it. TE´KEL, you have been weighed in the balances and have been found deficient. PE´RES, your kingdom has been divided and given to the Medes and the Persians."
So the ending point of the 70 years is 539 BCE.
539 BCE - 70 years = 609 BCE
What happened in 609 BCE? "The Babylonians defeat the Assyrian army of Ashur-uballit II and capture Harran. Ashur-uballit, the last Assyrian king, disappears from history." So logically the 70 year period that Jeremiah foretells is the period of Babylon's Dominance of the region and the lands roundabout, from the time Assyria's last stronghold was captured, until Babylon fell to Cyrus.
In the NWT, Jeremiah 29:10 says: “For this is what Jehovah has said, ‘In accord with the fulfilling of seventy years at Babylon I shall turn my attention to YOU people, and I will establish toward YOU my good word in bringing YOU back to this place.’
However, other modern translations, like the ESV, says, “When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will visit you, and I will fulfill to you my promise and bring you back to this place."
Professor Ernst Jenni, a Hebrew scholar says, "The rendering in all modern commentaries and translations is “for Babel” (Babel as world power, not city or land); this is clear from the language as well as also from the context. By the “local meaning” a distinction is to be made between where? (in, at) and where to? (local directional “to, towards”). The basic meaning of l is with reference to, and with a following local specification it can be understood as local or local-directional only in certain adverbial expressions (e.g. Num. 11, 10 [Clines DCH IV, 481b] “at the entrance”, cf. Lamed pp. 256, 260, heading 8151)."
Therefore, the Jews did not serve AT Babylon 70 years, they were to be subservient and obedient to Babylon the world power (in essence there Superior Authority at the time) for 70 years.
Daniel 9:1 mentions the "desolations of Jerusalem" during the 70 years. During this time good king Josiah was killed, Egypt installed a puppet king, and then Babylon came and installed a puppet king, and when he rebelled, they installed another. Meanwhile the temple and city was looted. The surrounding land and crops were devastated by both Egyptian and Babylonian armies. There were at least 3 waves of deportation to Babylon. Finally, Babylon destroyed Jerusalem and the temple, after a two and a half year siege, and everyone went into Exile.
What is more, there is no Scriptural evidence that the Jews returned in 537 BC. Ezra 1:1 says, "And in the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia…" And Ezra 3:1 says, "When the seventh month arrived the sons of Israel were in [their] cities. And the people began to gather themselves as one man to Jerusalem."
From Ezra's timeline, a plain reading would indicate that the first regnal year would be Nissan 538 BC, and therefore, they returned by the 7 th month, Tishri 538 BC. Therefore, the return does NOT seem to have been 537 BC…there is no scripture that indicates this.
20 years after the exile, Zechariah and Haggai raised up to stir the people to rebuild the temple which is still in ruins. Haggai was written in 520 BCE and the first wave of Jews had returned 18 years earlier.
Haggai 2:3 says, "‘Who is there among YOU that is remaining over who saw this house in its former glory? And how are YOU people seeing it now? Is it not, in comparison with that, as nothing in YOUR eyes?’"
If the temple were destroyed in 607 BCE, how old would Haggai's audience be that they would remember the temple in its glory days? If the temple was destroyed in 587/586, how old would the audience be? It is more plausible that Haggai is referencing 70-somethings, not 90-somethings.
Zechariah 7:1-5: 'Furthermore, it came about that in the fourth year of Da·ri´us the king the word of Jehovah occurred to Zech·a·ri´ah, on the fourth [day] of the ninth month, [that is,] in Chis´lev. And Beth´el proceeded to send Shar·e´zer and Re´gem-mel´ech and his men to soften the face of Jehovah, saying to the priests who belonged to the house of Jehovah of armies, and to the prophets, even saying: “Shall I weep in the fifth month, practicing an abstinence, the way I have done these O how many years?” And the word of Jehovah of armies continued to occur to me, saying: “Say to all the people of the land and to the priests, ‘When YOU fasted and there was a wailing in the fifth [month] and in the seventh [month], and this for seventy years, did YOU really fast to me, even me?'
The fourth year of Darius is 518 BC.
518 BC - 70 years = 588 BC (which leads us in the middle of Babylon's final two and a half year siege from 589-587 BC.)
This 70 years is therefore not the same as the 70 years of Babylon's Dominance.
Again, to confirm this Zechariah 1.
Verses 7, 8: On the twenty-fourth day of the eleventh month, that is, the month She´bat, in the second year of Da·ri´us, the word of Jehovah occurred to Zech·a·ri´ah the son of Ber·e·chi´ah the son of Id´do the prophet, saying:“I saw [in] the night, and, look! a man riding on a red horse, and he was standing still among the myrtle trees that were in the deep place; and behind him there were horses red, bright red, and white.”
Therefore this is 520 BC.
Verses 11, 12: And they proceeded to answer the angel of Jehovah who was standing among the myrtle trees and to say: “We have walked about in the earth, and, look! the whole earth is sitting still and having no disturbance.” So the angel of Jehovah answered and said: “O Jehovah of armies, how long will you yourself not show mercy to Jerusalem and to the cities of Judah, whom you have denounced these seventy years?”
520 BC - 70 years = 590 BC (the year before Babylon's final two and a half year siege)
In harmony with this, in Against Apion I, 21, Josephus says, "This statement is both correct and in accordance with our books [that is, the Holy Scriptures]. For in the latter it is recorded that Nabochodonosor in the eighteenth year of his reign devastated our temple, that for fifty years it ceased to exist, that in the second year of Cyrus the foundations were laid, and lastly that in the second year of the reign of Darius it was completed."
Therefore, we find two competing interpretations of the 70 Years of Jeremiah.
(1) From 607 BC to 537 BC (held to be regarding the Jewish Exile at Babylon)
(2) From 609 BC to 539 BC (held to be regarding Babylon's period of Dominance)
To resolve between these interpretations, the question becomes: Which interpretation does the archeological and historical evidence support?
-
AnnOMaly
People on here have downloaded a couple books on Babylon and examined some scratches on rocks and now all of a sudden they're experts on ancient astrology. They think they can descredit the slave class' findings on when Jerusalem really got sacked. Get real.
Then edumacate us about where the arguments for 587 BCE are erroneous, Theocratic Sedition. Start a new thread. I'm all ears.
-
Londo111
Theo,
In regard to the secular evidence, on your point of the "couple books on Babylon and examined some scratches on rocks and now all of a sudden they're experts on ancient astrology."
Far from it…of course, some are indeed experts in this. However there are 17 lines of evidence that prove the case for 587BC in an overwhelming manner. Rather than engaging in an ad hominem argument in regard the people presenting it, why not address the evidence instead?
(1) Early historians, the Neo-Babylonian chronicles, and the Uruk kinglist
(2) Inscriptions Nabon. No.18 and Nabon. No. 8 (the Hillah stele)
(3) Nabon. H 1, B (the Adad-guppi’ stele)
(4) Economic-administrative and legal documents [numbering in the tens of thousands]
(5) Prosopographical evidence
(6) Chronological interlocking joints
(7) Synchronisms with the contemporary Egyptian chronology
(8) The Astronomical diary VAT 4956
(9) The astronomical diary B.M. 32312
(10) The Saturn tablet B.M. 76738+76813
(11) The lunar eclipse tablet LBAT 1417
(12) The lunar eclipse tablet LBAT 1419
(13) The lunar eclipse tablet LBAT 1420
(14) The lunar eclipse tablet LBAT 1421
(15) LBAT 1415
(16) Lunar eclipse Text no. 5 in Hunger, ADT V.
(17) Text no. 52 in Hunger, ADT V.
(18) Planetary tablet, SBTU IV 171The sky does not lie. For instance, in many of these astronomical texts, they provide a fingerprint pointing to one time period.
In regard what the "Slave" class has provided in their findings, I was shocked. The more I examined their case, the more it fell apart. Even if they are correct, why do they misquote scholars out of context? Why do certain references, when looked up, say the exact opposite of what they claim? Make the same examination. Look up all the references they use in context. Please explain to me what case they have in regard 607.
-
elderelite
Rotfl!!!!!!!!! Buying a few books and look at some scratches on rocks is actually more than the slave has done my dear fellow..... But perhaps you didnt know that
Even more ironic is that the last person the slave class sent to do research on that particular date, a member of the governing body, discovered the same truth some are sharing, that 607 was erroneous. You can read about it in a book her later wrote called "crisis of consious". Its a good read and since ots written by a member of the governing body it should be ok for you i would imagine....