Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos 529 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  TD

  Ethos,

  You and Jeffro both made the hasty generalization that because I am a JW, that I hang on the Governing Body's scriptural elucidations for every doctrine, when that is simply not the case.

  That's simply not true. I explained at length that the intent of my questions was an honest interest in where you as an individual are coming from. Even were that not the case, the error in formal logic known as a hasty generalization is an inductive use of deductive reasoning (And therefore a fallacy) where what is true of the sample is assumed to be true of the whole. Assuming that a doctrinal stance true of JW's as a whole is likely true of an individual member thereof as well is a legitimate use of deduction because the conclusion is of a lesser generality than the starting premises. Still, that doesn't necessarily get you to a correct conclusion, which again is why I asked questions.

  Then you both proceeded to point out obviously questionable fallacies in my statement (if I indeed agreed with the Gentile Times doctrine), as a way (not necessarily you but Jeffro) to show a short of doctrinal hypocrisy on my behalf. All of the responses to my quoted statement were then appropriatedly cognominated "strawmen" as they were attempts to deprecate my previous statement regarding proper Biblical exegesis.

  ???

  I sympathize with the difficulty in carrying on ten conversations at once, but that's no excuse for attributing more to an individual than what they actually have said. I have made zero assertions about the integrity of your reasoning so far. I made an 'If' statement that you were (And are) free to agree or disagree with. I still don't know for sure if you believe that concepts like the 360 day 'prophetic year', weeks of years, etc. span the barriers we've both acknowledged. Do you?

  Empirical evidence of the signs Jesus foretold in Matthew 24 as well as the prophetic timeline delineated in Revelation. Other scriptural passages that refer to the refinement of God's people during the time of the end (Daniel 12 to mention just one) as well. All establish 1914 separately.

  Thank you Ethos. I hope you can sympathize with my position as well. As a non-JW, the number of a priori assumptions here frankly makes my head spin and expressions like, "God's people during the time of the end" come across as semi-delusional. I hope that's not offensive. I don't mean it that way.
• 

  Ethos

  The mention of only 3 individuals proves nothing at all. There's no reason why Nebuchadnezzar couldn't be called king from an earlier time for practical purposes. According to secular history there were 5 kings from Nebuchadnezzar to Nabonidus (who also isn't mentioned at all in the Bible), and that's not counting Belshazzar (who the Bible calls a king when he was actually a prince) or the extra imaginary kings to fill the 20-year gap in the spurious JW chronology. In any case, Jeremiah 25:11 only says the nations would serve "the king of Babylon" rather than Nebuchadnezzar.

  LOL. Hilarious how this didn't address the issue at all. Let's look at Jeremiah 27:6 again "And now I myself have given all these lands into the hand of Neb·u·chad·nez′zar the king of Babylon, my servant; and even the wild beasts of the field I have given him to serve him. 7 And all the nations must serve even him and his son and his grandson until the time even of his own land comes, and many nations and great kings must exploit him as a servant.’

  I wasn't aware that you could give someone something they already inherit by royal descendency. Nebuchadnezzar would have inherited the nations and the land and all those things, simply because he was Nebuchadnezzar! The 609 chronology literally flats flat on its head here.

  The statement they must serve even him and his son and his grandson is simply saying that all those who ascend Neb's throne must also be served by the nations. Using the term "son" to refer to successive kings is not uncommon as the Assyrians did this and the word used here is also translated "descendant" or "relative". In either case, the all important starting point of this all important 70-year prophecy is never, ever mentioned in the Bible, not even once. Why is there so much emphasis on Nebuchadnezzar, but never the person who is crucial in the starting point of the entire prophecy? Jeffro also tries to say the Bible calls Belshazzar a king when he was actually prince as if that argument holds any weight. As if that can somehow excuse the all important pivotal starting point of the 70 year prophecy being nameless. As if the two are related in anyway whatsoever and as if Belshazzar didn't perform kingly duties on behalf of Nabonidus. As if Daniel's lack of mentioning a king can be equivocated with that of Jeremiah's. Those are all poor equivocation fallacies.

  The Bible (according to you) describes the end of the 70 year period with Nabonidus and Belshazzar, but it fails to mention the starting point. Why Jeffro?

  Why not disregard all the scriptures mentioning of the Israelite King's regnal years since it's just so 'normal' for all important kings to be absolutely missing from the written record?

  This scripture alone, in it's plain words, proves 609 to be false, but alas, I will await the response of Jeffro and see what he comes up with this time.

  TD: I really enjoy conversations with you. Although you are an ex JW (?) I don't get a sense of bias or prejudice from you. I appreciate that.

  Londo: You still need to show us when death and suffering and tears, all things that Revelation says were done away with on the new earth, came to an end. You also need to show us how Jesus parousia and coming already happened, but all the other kingdoms haven't been done away with. And also Revelation 11:16 "“We thank you, Jehovah God, the Almighty, the One who is and who was, because you have taken your great power and begun ruling as king." Whether you believe it should say Jehovah or Jesus, still you have a problem. How does Jehovah/Jesus begin ruling as king in Revelation (AFTER 33 CE) since you say he begun ruling in 33 CE?
• 

  Pterist

  Ethos ...*** It's been pointed out to you already that, under WT chronology and interpretation of Jer. 29:10, the vast majority of the exiles will be "at Babylon" 80 years rather than 70.****

  So, I'm in exile, And I recieve a letter from Jeremiah to settle down, build, have a family, and I look down the page to ?...

  This is what the Lord says: “When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my good promise to bring you back to this place. 11 For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord , “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. 12 Then you will call on me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. 13 You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart. 14 I will be found by you,” declares the Lord , “and will bring you backfrom captivity. [b] I will gather you from all the nations and places where I have banished you,” declares the Lord , “and will bring you back to the place from which I carried you into exile.”......so like 70 years for Babylon

  But that's NOT all I'm then told what will happen to Zedekiah and the group still in Jerusalm as follows -

  15 You may say, “The Lord has raised up prophets for us in Babylon,” 16 but this is what the Lord says about the king who sits on David’s throne and all the people who remain in this city, your fellow citizens who did not go with you into exile— 17 yes, this is what the Lord Almighty says: “I will send the sword, famine and plague against them and I will make them like figs that are so bad they cannot be eaten. 18 I will pursue them with the sword, famine and plague and will make them abhorrent to all the kingdoms of the earth, a curse [c] and an object of horror, of scorn and reproach, among all the nations where I drive them. 19 For they have not listened to my words,” declares the Lord , “words that I sent to them again and again by my servants the prophets. And you exiles have not listened either,” declares the Lord .

  20 Therefore, hear the word of the Lord , all you exiles whom I have sent away from Jerusalem to Babylon. 21 This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says about Ahab son of Kolaiah and Zedekiah son of Maaseiah, who are prophesying lies to you in my name: “I will deliver them into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and he will put them to death before your very eyes. 22 Because of them, all the exiles from Judah who are in Babylon will use this curse: ‘May the Lord treat you like Zedekiah and Ahab, whom the king of Babylon burned in the fire.’ 23 For they have done outrageous things in Israel; they have committed adultery with their neighbors’ wives, and in my name they have uttered lies—which I did not authorize. I know it and am a witness to it,” declares the Lord .

  Wow it does not look to promising for these guys! I guess Jeremiah 24 is definitely for them ...they ain't coming back with us, and I wait for Babylons demise !
• 

  Londo111

  How do you know the 1000 years are literal? For instance, nobody interprets the wild beast as a literal animal. Revelation was presented in signs about things that were to “shortly take place.” Daniel was sealed up to the time of the end, Revelation was not for the time was at hand.

  There are many viewpoints that fall under preterism…there is also partial preterism. If we let Matthew and the synoptic accounts in Mark and Luke interpret the Olivet discourse, we find that the Christ’s parousia and the end of the age is integrally tied to the destruction of Jerusalem.

  Acts 2:16-21 shows the last days had begun and Peter showed that Pentecost was the fulfillment of this. They were expecting the "coming of the day of the Lord", the same one discussed in the Olivet discourse.

  By the prayer at Acts 4:25-28, we see that the early Christians believed that Psalm 2 was being fulfilled in their day. Therefore, Psalm 2:6 “ “I, even I, have installed my king u pon Zion, my holy mountain” shows that Jesus already was installed as King, not at any later date. Hebrews 10:12-13 refers to Psalm 110, showing this had already begun fulfillment.

  I don’t believe the Kingdom is part of this world, the physical. The paradigm is different, that is true. And you are right--this is a discussion for another topic. The main point reason for bringing this up is that 1914 could not be when Jesus was made King, because he was already installed as King in 30 or 33. 1914 could not be when the Last Days began, because the Last Days began around 30 AD.
• 

  Pterist

  Ethos Notice ......but this is what the Lord says about the king who sits on David’s throne and all the people who remain in this city, your fellow citizens who did not go with you into exile,.... they disobeyed, they do not go into the JEWISH exile, and subsequently read the rest.

  One again show me ONE scripture that show that the 70 years is 70 years of exile for Zedekiah's group to be returned .

  Early Christians accept the exile started with the kingly line been exiled. Matthew 1:11-13
• 

  Pterist

  I just love this curse from Jehovah ...... May the Lord treat you like Zedekiah and Ahab, whom the king of Babylon burned in the fire. Jeremiah 29:32.....no restoration after 70 years for these guys, sorry Ethos ! You may want to move onto YOUR new light explanations of 1914
• 

  Pterist

  Regardless, wheather its 70 years for Babylon or 70 years of exile, what is perfectly clear from scripture alone is that its NOT 70 years of exile Exclusively for Zedekiah's group.

  The letter from Jehovah via Jeremiah @ chapter 29 to the OBEDIENT exiles ALREADY EXILED IN BABYLON has a BLESSINGS and a CURSE.

  The blessing is to those already exiled ( Daniel's and Jechoniah's groups) and a CURSE is to the UNLAWFUL King Zedekiah sitting on Gods throne and to his disobedient subjects that would NOT join the blessed exiles in Babylon. They were to be destroyed and some exiled throughout the NATIONS NEVER to return.

  Lesson for the WTS, don't assume to sit on Gods throne. Lesson for Ethos ...I leave that in my Kings hands.

  Shalom
• 

  Jeffro

  which are really just a rehash of Carl Jonnson and AlanF yet again

  Funny how I apparently managed to 're-hash' material several years ago from other people I'd never heard of at the time.

  when it so happened that our city was desolate during the interval of seventy years

  Ethos apparently does not understand the meaning of the word "during". Refer to previous 'cold weather' analogy (My post 2929 on page 6).

  As you see there is sufficient secular evidence and thus the claim that 'there is no basis to connect the servitude with the Jewish exile'

  This tedious argument is actually a circular reference. It is true that some historians have been confused about the application of the 70 years. Ethos ignores the fact that it is the ambiguity of the Bible (when the relevant passages are not viewed together in context) which had led various historians to make mistakes about the application of the 70 years. (However, in his later writings, Josephus gets the details correct.)

  This is exactly what many scholars have discerned from the context and thus translated Jeremiah 29:10 accordingly:
  [a handful of translations, 3 of which are the King James]

  Aside from the fact that he appeals to translations that make no sense when the passage is viewed in context, the great majority of translations do not support his favoured translation. The following translations say "for Babylon" except as otherwise stated. This is not an exhaustive list.

  • American Standard
  • Amplified
  • Basic English
  • Complete Jewish (“Bavel’s seventy years are over”)
  • Contemporary English (“After Babylonia has been the strongest nation for seventy years”)
  • Darby
  • English Standard
  • God’s Word (“Babylon’s 70 years are over”)
  • Good News (“Babylonia’s seventy years are over”)
  • Green’s Literal
  • Hebrew Names
  • Holman Christian Standard
  • Modern King James
  • New American Standard
  • New Century (“Babylon will be powerful for seventy years”)
  • New International
  • New Life
  • New Revised Standard
  • Revised Standard
  • The Message (“Babylon’s seventy years are up”)
  • Today’s New International
  • Weymouth New International
  • World English
  • Young’s Literal (“the fullness of Babylon – seventy years”)

  I don't require Jerusalem's destruction to prove 1914. This slippery slope fallacy continues to be asseverated repeatedly as if I've declared that this is how I arrive at the conclusion of 1914.

  Even if this were not a lie, it still would not be a slippery slope fallacy.

  Empirical evidence of the signs Jesus foretold in Matthew 24 as well as the prophetic timeline delineated in Revelation. Other scriptural passages that refer to the refinement of God's people during the time of the end (Daniel 12 to mention just one) as well. All establish 1914 separately.

  Except it doesn't. All elements of the supposed 'sign' of Matthew 24 (which refers to events in the first century anyway) have been shown time and time again to have happened before and after 1914. Special pleading at its finest - except the even more elastic claims about the 'prophetic timeline' in Revelation, the interpretation of which hasn't even remained constant in JW land. Still denying that JWs must link all these various scriptures to try to 'paint their picture' of 1914, he still claims that each can point to 1914 seperately. This remains to be demonstrated in any objective fashion. What is established is that the 'selection' of 'God's people' in 'the time of the end' requires circular reasoning to support itself. The sad fact is that 607 is based on nothing but 1914. When they realised there was no year 0, the Watch Tower Society didn't move events attributed to 1914, they changed their date for the return of the Jews from 536 (wrong) to 537 (also wrong).

  JW's are well aware that there were people exiled longer than 70 years since there were exiles prior to Jerusalem's destruction. Nothing of substance here.

  He continues to ignore that actual context of Jeremiah 29. Refer to previous 'visitor' analogy (my post 2801 on page 4).
• 

  Jeffro

  Ah... more irrational questions from Ethos...

  The Bible (according to you) describes the end of the 70 year period with Nabonidus and Belshazzar, but it fails to mention the starting point. Why Jeffro?

  Now we're resorting to argument from silence... ho-hum... There could be any number of reasons why the starting point wasn't mentioned. The most likely is that because Jeremiah referred to the period in "the fourth year of Jehoiakim" (605BCE) (Jeremiah counts accession years), he didn't need to state the starting point because his audience already knew when the period had started. It would have been common knowledge (to his audience, i.e. the king and other officials) when Babylon had conquered Assyria's final capital city and become the dominant world power (609BCE), which was the same year king Josiah was killed.

  Also, I quite clearly stated that the Bible does not mention Nabonidus at all, and that the Bible instead calls Belshazzar "king" while he was really only a prince. According to Ethos and JWs in general, this is apparently okay and not at all the same as referring to Nebuchadnezzar as "king" while he was really only a prince.

  I wasn't aware that you could give someone something they already inherit by royal descendency.

  Compare Daniel 2:37.

  Why not disregard all the scriptures mentioning of the Israelite King's regnal years since it's just so 'normal' for all important kings to be absolutely missing from the written record?

  Red herring. Jeremiah did not purport to write a chronicle of Babylonian kings.
• 

  Londo111

  Death is done away with. As Jesus said at John 11:26, “Everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die.” By means of Christ, death is done away with. Even now, God can dwell with us, and being released from the old covenant of Law and works into a new covenant of Grace, faith, and love we can be healed spiritually, emotionally, mentally.

  As Hebrews 11:16 says even about those before Christ, “Instead, they were longing for a better country—a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared a city for them.” There is a better Kingdom that we await, a heavenly one. That is our destiny. At that time, we will laugh about these debates about 607.

  The promise of “new heavens and new earth” was first found in Isaiah and directed toward to returnees in 538 BC. The language of Isaiah was spiritual, metaphorical, figurative. The returnees came back to new skies and new land, a renewed realm in which to serve God. This same Old Testament metaphor is employed by the apostle Peter and in Revelation.

  In 70 AD, the “old heaven and earth” passed away, just as they did in 587/586 BC. In Revelation 11, we see John measuring the temple and that Jerusalem would be trampled for 42 months…and it was from 66 to 70. When the city where the Lord was crucified was destroyed, then comes the prayer of the 24 elders. God has always reigned, but this is viewed as a special display of his Kingship. What is interesting is that Josephus reports spectacular signs during this time similar to what is found at Revelation 11.

  Just as God has always been King, therefore Christ has been king since either 30 or 33.

  Daniel 2 does show the timeframe for the Kingdom: Babylon (Gold), Media-Persia (Silver), Greece (Copper), Rome (Iron). Then comes the feet of iron and clay, which I believe came with the death of the Wild Beast (666 or Nero) and thus the Roman empire was thrown into chaos in 68/69 during the Year of the Four Emperors. It is in the “days of those kings”, the iron/clay feet of a fractured Rome, that the Kingdom does away with the kings of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream image.

  Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world”. Therefore, if we look to the physical realm, we are looking for the wrong place.

  Pterist might have to correct me on some of these points. I’m still learning things and piecing them together. Nonetheless, this is a long tangent from 607.

  To bring it around again, at Matthew 28:18, Jesus says, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” If he has ALL authority, what more authority can he be given at a future date? Philippians 2:9 says, "Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name.” If he was exalted to the highest place…how could he can an even HIGHER place at a future date? If he is given the name above all names, how can anyone give him a higher name? If he has all authority, the highest position and name, then he has been King indeed.

  Have a good weekend everyone!