Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos 529 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Christ Alone

  Ethos, you avoided my main question (as usual) in order to quote something else.

  If the WT reversed it's stance about 607 tomorrow, would you fight just as hard to push their "new" understanding?

  The fact is, you did not come up with this chronology on your own. You have read what the WT has to say about it and are arguing based on that. And I wasn't using a bandwagon fallacy. When every other scholar, historian, and archaeologist states that it is impossible that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607, then that has it's own weight. WHY do they ALL reject 607? It's not a matter of believing because others believe (which you yourself are doing in regards to the WT). It is asking, "Why have they all rejected this date?"

  I would find it interesting if you would say that you would hold to 607, even IF the WT rejected the date. Or that you would change your stance if they rejected it. At least we would have some intellectual honesty here.
• 

  BroMac

  i've read the whole 22pages, i already had my mind made up on this subject.

  during my own research over the last 12mths I read all the info on jehovahsjudgements.co.uk/607 , you know the one that looks like an old scroll.

  I wouldn't be surprised if Ethos/Recovery had input in the content of that site. same style of arguments. unable to see any other opinion but their own because otherwise, it means this religion is built on a false date, that is now a propogated lie, as many have genuinely written to the society to see if they are aware of this error, where they learn later that they do in fact know about 586/7 being the correct date and 607 is just so wrong, as can be seen from this thread.

  but to hell with that.

  we are the FDS/GB - Listen Obey Be Blessed

  they say they take the scriptures over problematic and changing secular scholars, when in fact a direct reading of the whole subject shows they interpreted it wrong. instead of using history to help there understanding, what the JW's have done is just make it fit, poorly. it's stupid.

  Battle of Carchemish for example, the book that is used for the Congregation Bible Study™ is 'God's Word For Us Through Jeremiah' pg24 par 17 says:

  "In 625B.C.E., the Babylonians and Egyptians fought a decisive battle at Carchemish.... King Nebuchadnezzer vanquished Pharaoh Necho's forces ending Egyptian power in the region. (Jer. 46:2)"

  King Neb in Carchemish 625? It was 605. He was not a King yet. Why no mention of the Assyrians?

  for any Lurkers viewing this thead, here is a 'Non-Appostate' way of checking any history or just anything in general.. i mean anything.. not just religion

  http://lmgtfy.com/?q=battle+of+carchemish+when
• 

  Witness My Fury

  Because they has to write in an extra 20 years of history to make 607 fit, so all the other history was moved back by 20 years, ...simples (I know you know this LOL)

  Then they have to fudge the length of the reigns of the kings in order to fit, like DJeggnog trying to bluff that it was 37 years instead of 17 for Nabonidus.

  You can construct anything on paper, but if the facts on the ground don't support it all it is is wishful thinking.
• 

  Witness My Fury

  I'm almost eager to see what rubbish can be conjured up for Daniel 1:1,2 now.
• 

  sd-7

  Ah, so Ethos did respond to my question--was it on page 10 of this thread?

  Problem is, you still didn't explain how it was possible for exiles who were exiled years before Jerusalem was destroyed could be told that they were going to be in Babylon for 70 years, assuming 607 is correct. For them, the exile started before Jerusalem was destroyed, regardless of what date you happen to believe it was destroyed. The prophecy wasn't, wait a few years and then 70 years after that, you'll come home. It was, nope, you won't be back anytime soon, despite what you were told by that other guy. At the end of 70 years (at/for Babylon), you'll come back. The context of chapter 28 doesn't help your argument, as it proves nothing about the timing of the statements made in chapter 29. Chapter 29 states the timing itself, it opens very clearly as saying: (1) Zedekiah's still in power, so thus we know Jerusalem hasn't been destroyed yet. (2) The exiles to whom Jeremiah is writing were taken during Jehoiachin's reign. And they're in Babylon. Before Jerusalem's destruction. Thus the timing is solidly fixed as BEFORE JERUSALEM WAS DESTROYED. That's the inescapable fact here. The context of the 'seventy years' in Jer. 29:10 has to be connected to the timing of the message's delivery, and the timing is clearly stated in Jeremiah 29:1. And that timing is BEFORE JERUSALEM WAS DESTROYED.

  So are you saying that the exiles who were already in exile in Babylon before 607 were in fact not in exile until the year 607? I think if you can say that, then there's really no point in continuing the debate. That sentence would destroy any computer in 'Star Trek' instantly. Just say 'yes' or 'no' to that, and go from there.

  --sd-7
• 

  Black Sheep

  1. misconstrues and distorts what posters have said,

  2. attributes to posters statements that are his own invention,

  3. quote-mines without understanding the authors' intent or how they properly apply the 70 years,

  4. avoids providing quality evidence for his position,

  5. ignores questions and arguments that counter his assertions,

  6. repeatedly shouts about having scholarly support for certain positions when it's already been demonstrated over and over that he doesn't have,

  7. imagines himself to have debunked the opposition, vindicating the WTS chronology.

  I wonder if he's my Dad?
• 

  Londo111

  I know he isn’t mine. My father would simply say, “Who really is the Faithful Slave?” End of discussion.
• 

  BroMac

  So are you saying that the exiles who were already in exile in Babylon before 607 were in fact not in exile until the year 607 ? I think if you can say that, then there's really no point in continuing the debate. That sentence would destroy any computer in 'Star Trek' instantly. Just say 'yes' or 'no' to that, and go from there.

  SD-7 - i'm having that one
• 

  Ethos

  I am elated to be labeled an idiot, a jackass, a troll, a bafoon, a poor debator and any other name you can conjure up, if it means I am in agreement with these Hebrew scholars and their exegesis of what is implied by servitude in Jeremiah 25:11. Either you agree with Jeffro and AnnoMaly and Carl Jonnson or you can agree with the world's most renowed scholars and what they say about servitude and even specifically Jeremiah 25:11!

  The meaning "to serve" (i.e. as a slave) is indicated in general contexts in Gen. 14:4; 1 Samuel 1:11; 17:9; 1 Kings 4:21; Jer 25:11; 27:6ff." - Expository Dictionary of Bible Words (Word Studies for Key English Bible Words Based on the Hebrew and Greek Texts, 2005)

  1 labour, work, do work: absolute Exodus 20:9 = Exodus 34:21 = Deuteronomy 5:13 (4th word); Exodus 5:18 (E) Ecclesiastes 5:11; with accusative of thing, till the ground Genesis 2:5; Genesis 3:23; Genesis 4:2,12 (J), 2 Samuel 9:10; Isaiah 30:24; Jeremiah 27:11." - (Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, entry H5647)

  (abad, 5647), “to serve, cultivate, enslave, work.” God told Abraham that his descendants would “serve” the people of a strange land 400 years (Gen.15:13), meaning, as in the NIV, “to be enslaved by.” (exact wording used in reference to Judah serving the king of Babylon for 70 years) - (Vines Expository Bible Dictionary, p. 353)

  "Primary definition of forcing into labor (cf. Ex. 1:13); compel (s. one) to (do sthg) [cf. 2 Ch. 34:33); -take into,keep in servitude, slavery [cf. Exodus 6:8]; make (s. one) do work (cf. Ez. 29:18)" - (A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, p. 262)

  "And God's punishment of his people in their exile to Babylon is to last seventy years." (2 Chr 36:21; Jer. 25:11-12; 29:10) - (Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words)

  "For the first time, Jeremiah shared the secret that the captivity in Babylon would last seventy years. God sent Israel into Babylonian exile for seventy years in order to give the land the rest it needed. (cf. Jer 25:8-11; 29:19) (The Wiersbe Bible Commentary: The Complete Old Testament, p. 1239; p.243)

  "Moreover, the Babylonian captivity of the people was considered cruel slavery (Jer. 25:11; 27:7)." - (The Historical Encyclopedia of World Slavery, p. 537)

  Interesting it references Jeremiah 27:7 which says: "And all the nations must serve even him and his son and his grandson until the time even of his own land comes.." which again shows us what the context dictated that the word 'serve' meant captivity or slavery.

  "As we have seen, the developed tradition of Jeremiah, well beyond the prophet himself, has fixed the time of deportation for Jerusalem at seventy years, after which there will be a restoration (see Jeremiah 25:11-12; 29:10)." - (The Theology of the Book of Jeremiah, p. 183)

  "Jeremiah's prophecy (Jer. 25:11-12) had revealed God's plan for the nation only up to the end of the 70-year Babylonian captivity." - (The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, p. 1361)

  "The confession grows out of Daniel's convinction that Jeremiah's prediction of a seventy-year exile (Jer 25:11-12; 29:10) will come true." - (Old Testament Theology, p. 506)

  "His function is to explain what is going on, and in many cases he does this with reference to motifs in earlier prophetic books: the seventy years of exile (Jer. 25:11; 29:10)." (HarperCollins Bible Commentary: Revised Edition p. 487)

  "Jeremiah elsewhere mentions an exile of seventy years (Jer. 25:10, 11; 29:10)." - (College Press NIV Commentary: Jeremiah and Lamentations, p. 227)

  "A famous passage in this regard is Jeremiah's twice-repeated prediction that the exile of the Judeans would last seventy years." (Jer 25:11; 29:10) - (Exile: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Conceptions, p. 89)

  "Note also the applying of the sabbatical year to the prophesying of an exile of 70 years (2 Ch 36:21; Jer. 25:11)." - (The Encyclopedia of Christianity, Volume 4, p. 789)

  "On two occassions, Jeremiah had predicted that the captivity would last 70 years. (Jer 25:11; 27:10; cf. Dan. 9:2)." - (The Tyndale Bible Dictionary, p. 1325)

  "Both versions present the same perspective of a fixed period of seventy years in the Exile." - (Exile and Suffering: A Textual Comparison, p. 107)

  "Daniel's study of the books (OT scrolls) focused on the years prophecied for the captivity by Jeremiah in Jeremiah 25:11, 12 and Jeremiah 29:10. Cf. 2 Chronicles 36:21 where it is indicated that the seventy years of exile were intended to restore Sabbath rests." - (The MacArthur Bible Commentary)

  "The promise of a return from exile in seventy years (29:10-11)." - (Eedman's Commentary on the Bible, p. 587)

  Do you agree with Jeffro and AnnoMaly that the context does not indicate that the word used for servitude in Jeremiah meant slavery or do you agree with this arsenal of scholars and experts whose combined credentials immeasurably exceed that of everyone on this forum? You decide.
• 

  Knowsnothing

  If the WT reversed it's stance about 607 tomorrow, would you fight just as hard to push their "new" understanding? - Christ Alone

  I think an equally valid question is what if they revised their stance on anything? The JWs have already swallowed up the FDS=GB hook, line, and sinker.