This whole 607BCE debate is quite ridiculous. Even IF, and that is a HUGE IF, the WT were right about 607BCE as the date for the destruction of Jerusalem, so what? It does not prove 1914. The convoluted mental gymnastic required for that requires a hughe leap of logic at every phase. You start off by taking a verse that clearly states it was fulfilled in nebuchadnezzar and insist on a second fulfillment. You then jump to an array of unrelated verses and string them together...insisting that the 7 times passing over Neb related to the Luke account of the nations being trampled...then jumping to Revelation and equating the 3 and 1/2 times mentioned there to half the 7 times spoken of in Daniel. All of this with a foundation of a date proven wrong over and over here.
Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals
by Ethos 529 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
punkofnice
issacaustin - XLNT reply
Even if 607BCE were correct by some incredible fluke, there's still a heckuva lot of JW doctrine and practice that is utter cobblers!
-
DATA-DOG
Ummm... I am not the sharpest tool in the shed. I am the guy you want at your back in a fight, not the guy you want to do your taxes. That being said, I thought that 1914 was originally fixed as an absolute indisputable fact, " God's date " if you will, based on Pyramidology? Prior to that it was 1884 or something like that. There is whole string of people trying to figure out a date. They have all been wrong. However well meaning they may have been they were all told that " : "It does not belong to YOU to get knowledge of the times or seasons which the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction; ". ACTS 1:7
Those were Christ's words, not mine. The original false premiss seems to be that ignorant humans believe that they can know something that is beyond them. After that it is just an endless stream of trying to justify the fact that they ignored Christ. This would make Ethos' entire argument pointless from the start because he is trying to justify prior mistakes made by prior generations based on prior false premises. Also, please read The Gentile Times Reconsidered. Just reading the list of all the actual predictions made ( that failed ) is eye-opening in itself. Again, these people could have been well meaning. Really Ethos, I don't care that humans make mistakes. The issue is when you persecute others for not believing your particular theory. Imagine the absurdity of DF'ing someone because 5 years ago they felt and expressed publicly that they did not believ the FDS was appointed 1900 years ago. Would they recieve a pardon? My daughter understands that information exists in 3 forms.
1) Proven = True
2) False = Lie or falsehood
3) Unknown = yet to shown as either true or false
Who has the authority to persucute another when the information belongs in either category 2 or 3? Yet that is what happens to any who disagree with current understanding. That is neither honest or just.
-
Finkelstein
It should be obvious to honest hearted people that C T Russell pulled whatever he thought he could to draw attention to his literature
of which he produced and published. Lets get that perfectly clear and acknowledged.
He was a professional salesman by character and personality and that was still apparent when he ventured in religious Charlatanism.
Even prior to 1914 ever coming around he stated that Christ's earthly presence came in 1874 and that in 1914 the Gentile times had ended
which then Christ was to start retuning the earth to a promised earthly paradise.
To show how much literature he published concerning this particular time, take note of all the books he published before his death in 1916.
Studies in the Scriptures
Russell devoted nearly a tenth of his fortune, along with contributed funds, in publishing and distributing Food for Thinking Christians in 1881. In the same year followed The Tabernacle and its Teachings and Tabernacle Shadows of the Better Sacrifices. In 1886, after reportedly not making back most of the money spent publishing these three titles, he began publication of what was intended to be a seven-volume series. The volumes were collectively called Millennial Dawn, later renamed Studies in the Scriptures to clarify that they were not novels. Russell published six volumes in the series:
- The Plan of the Ages – later renamed The Divine Plan of the Ages (1886)
- The Time is at Hand (1889)
- Thy Kingdom Come (1891)
- The Day of Vengeance – later renamed The Battle of Armageddon (1897)
- The At-one-ment Between God and Men (1899)
- The New Creation (1904)
The delayed publication of the seventh volume became a source of great anticipation and mystery among Bible Students. Following Russell's death in 1916, a seventh volume entitled The Finished Mystery was published in 1917, which was advertised as his "posthumous work". This seventh volume was a detailed interpretation of the Book of Revelation , but also included interpretations of Ezekiel and the Song of Solomon . Immediate controversy surrounded both its publication and content, and it soon became known that much of the contents were written and compiled by two of Russell's associates, Clayton J. Woodworth and George H. Fisher , and edited by Joseph Rutherford , by then the new president of the Watch Tower Society.
Photo Drama of Creation
Russell directed the production of a worldwide roadshow presentation entitled The Photo-Drama of Creation, an innovative eight-hour religious film in four parts, incorporating sound, moving film, and color slides. It was the first major screenplay to synchronize sound with moving film. Production began as early as 1912, and the Drama was introduced in 1914 by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. [49] [50] A book by the same name was also published. The project's expenses put the organization under some financial pressures; the full cost was estimated at about US$300,000 (current value $6,960,000). [51] [52] [53]
Theology and teachings
Following his analytical examination of the Bible, Russell and other Bible Students came to believe that Christian creeds and traditions were harmful errors, believing they had restored Christianity to the purity held in the first century. Such views and conclusions were viewed as heresy by many Church leaders and scholars in his day. Russell agreed with other Protestants on the primacy of the Bible, and justification by faith alone, but thought that errors had been introduced in interpretation. Russell agreed with many 19th century Protestants, including Millerites , in the concept of a Great Apostasy that began in the first century AD. He also agreed with many other contemporary Protestants in belief in the imminent Second Coming of Christ, and Armageddon . Some of the areas in which his Scriptural interpretations differed from those of Catholics, and many Protestants, include the following:
- Hell . He maintained that there was a heavenly resurrection of 144,000 righteous, as well as a "great multitude", but believed that the remainder of mankind slept in death, awaiting an earthly resurrection.
- The Trinity . Russell believed in the divinity of Christ, but differed from orthodoxy by teaching Jesus had received that divinity as a gift from the Father, after dying on the cross. He also taught that the Holy Spirit is not a person, but the manifestation of God's power.
- Christ's Second Coming . Russell believed that Christ had returned invisibly in 1874, and that he had been ruling from the heavens since that date. He predicted that a period known as the " Gentile Times " would end in 1914, and that Christ would take power of Earth's affairs at that time. He interpreted the outbreak of World War I as the beginning of Armageddon , which he viewed to be both a gradual deterioration of civilized society, and a climactic multi-national attack on a restored Israel accompanied by worldwide anarchy.
- Pyramidology . Following views first taught by Christian writers such as John Taylor , Charles Piazzi Smyth and Joseph Seiss , he believed the Great Pyramid of Giza was built by the Hebrews (associated to the Hyksos ) under God’s direction, but to be understood only in our day. He adopted and used Seiss's phrase referring to it as "the Bible in stone". He believed that certain biblical texts, including Isaiah 19:19–20 and others, prophesied a future understanding of the Great Pyramid and adopted the view that the various ascending and descending passages represented the fall of man, the provision of the Mosaic Law , the death of Christ, the exultation of the saints in heaven, etc. Calculations were made using the pattern of an inch per year. Dates such as 1874, 1914, and 1948 were purported to have been found through the study of this monument. [54]
- Christian Zionism . Expanding upon an idea suggested by Nelson Barbour, Russell taught as early as 1879 that God's favor had been restored to Jews as the result of a prophetic "double" which had ended in 1878 (favor from Jacob to Jesus, then disfavor from Jesus until 1878). In 1910, he conducted a meeting at the New York Hippodrome Theatre, with thousands of Jews attending. Jews and Christians alike were shocked by his teaching that Jews should not convert to Christianity. Russell believed that the land of Palestine belonged exclusively to the Jewish race, that God was now calling them back to their land, and that they would be the center of earthly leadership under God's Kingdom. Early in Russell's ministry, he speculated that the Jews would possibly flock to Palestine and form their own nation by the year 1910. Shortly before his death, he utilized the Jewish press to stress that 1914 prophetically marked the time when Gentile nations no longer had earthly authority with the result that all Jews were, from that time onward, permitted and guided by God to gather to Palestine and boldly reclaim the land for themselves.
-
isaacaustin
thanks punkofnice. For argument sake, let's say the archaeologist discovered that 587/586 were wrong. What would happen? Nothing. They would scratch their heads and return to the drawing board. Nothing would be lost, nothing crucial hinges on this.
If the WT were wrong about 607BCE then what? Then their whole chronology leading to 1914 collapses. Then Jesus did not turn his attention to earthly affairs in 1914 and begin examining all professed Chrisitian religions. He did not choose the International Bible Students as his people...and the org has preached for 100 years.
-
notjustyet
And if that was not enough to force a face palm, then check this thread on another site.
I did not want to cut and past without Fugues permission but he covers something veddy interesting regarding where you will want to discuss next.
Even if it it were 606/607 (remember, no zero year so had to switch that mistake also)
2,520 lunar years? Solar years? Lunisolar years? Huh???
http://www.jehovahswitnessrecovery.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9809
NJY
-
Londo111
I just caught up reading this thread. I’ll try to respond as the workday permits, but it has been a hectic day so far. I didn’t know my presence was mandatory. LOL. It would be nice for those on both sides not to make it personal or question the motives for holding the viewpoint, but rather present the argument on the viewpoints themselves. Of course, I do reserve the right to critique the Society where they have been lacking, for to me, it is a faceless cooperation and I feel they have not been honest.
-
Finkelstein
1914 A.D., 607 B.C., 586 B.C. and the Jehovah's Witnesses.
An absolutely critical date for the Jehovah's Witnesses is 1914 AD. It is the date when, according to the Jehovah's Witnesses, the time of the Gentiles ended (Watchtower, 5/1/93, page 11) and "Jesus-the heavenly warrior Michael-became King of God's heavenly Kingdom," (Watchtower 11/1/93, page 23). To arrive at this date, the Witnesses take the account in Daniel 4 and apply a 360 day year for each of the seven "times" for a total of 2520 years. They add this date to 607 B.C., their date for the fall of Jerusalem under Nebuchadnezzar, and arrive at 1914 A.D., the date when Jesus supposedly returned invisibly in the heavens (The Truth Shall Make You Free, p. 300), the "appointed time of the nations" ended (The Time is at Hand, page 79), and the beginning of the end of the world commenced (Watchtower 11/15/50, page 438). Please consider the following quote.
"This marked time began in the year 1914 (A.D.). In that important year the 'appointed times of the nations,' 2,520 years long, ran out. If we measure back that many years from 1914 we come to the ancient date of 607 B.C. That year was marked for the overthrow of the earthly "throne of Jehovah" and for the destruction of the throne city of Jerusalem and its sanctuary and for the total desolation of the land of the kingdom of Judah." (From the Book, "Your Will," 1958, pp. 309-310, Watchtower CD, emphasis added).
Therefore, the date 607 BC becomes the critical date in question. Was 607 BC the date when Jerusalem fell? No, it wasn't. No Bible scholar and no archaeological scholar holds to that date. The correct date is 586 B.C., not 607 B.C. Therefore, the Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong about 1914 and everything else they attach to that date based on their prophet misunderstanding. Let's verify further that 607 B.C. is the date used by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society before we establish the counter evidence.
- "The true prophet Jeremiah, not the false prophets, was vindicated when Jerusalem was razed by Babylonian soldiers in 607 B.C.E., the temple destroyed, and the populace either killed or dragged away captive to distant Babylon. The pitiful few that were left in the land fled into Egypt.- Jeremiah 39:6-9 ; 43:4-7 ," (Watchtower 2/1/92, page 4).
- "In 607 B.C.E., Israel was taken into captivity for 70 years," (Watchtower 4/15/92, page 10).
- "Samaria fell to the Assyrians in 740 B.C.E., and Jerusalem and its temple were destroyed by the Babylonians in 607 B.C.E," (Watchtower, 11/1/92, page 13).
- "The Babylonians came in 607 B.C.E. and stripped Jerusalem bare. Her people and her wealth were carried off to Babylon. The city was destroyed, the temple was burned, and the land was left desolate.- 2 Chronicles 36:17-21 ," (Watchtower 10/15/88, page 16).
Following are citations verifying that the correct date for the fall of Jerusalem was not 607 B.C, but 586 B.C.
- According to Encyclopedia.com, the Babylonian captivity, is defined as "the period from the fall of Jerusalem (586 B.C.) to the reconstruction in Palestine of a new Jewish state (after 538 B.C.)."
- "You will recall that the Babylonians, under Nebuchadnezzar, after twice laying siege to Jerusalem, finally captured it in 586 B.C.E. Nebuchadnezzar's army then pillaged the city, destroying the Temple and sending the inhabitants off to exile in Babylonia. ("Biblical Archaeological Review, Biblical Archaelogical Review).
- "...Nebuchadnezzar promptly invaded his unhappy country and besieged Jerusalem for a year and a half. In 587 Jerusalem fell and numbers of its inhabitants were carried away captive to Babylonia..." (Unger, Merrill, F., Unger's Bible Dictionary, Moody Press, Chicago, 1966, page 782).
- Notice that the year 587 is offered instead of 586. There is sometimes a difference of opinion as to which year is the exact one. Nevertheless, it is obvious that 607 B.C. is not even close.
- "586, Jerusalem destroyed and burned ( Jer. 52:13b .); people taken captive (52:28-30). (The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1982, page 1016)
It is quite clear that the Jehovah's Witness organization is wrong about the 607 B.C. date upon which they place so much of their end times theology. If they are wrong about such a basic event and have not changed their error to match historical fact, how can they be trusted to represent biblical truth? They cannot.
The fact is that they can not change their date of 1914 because they have so much invested in it. They are forced to retain their 607 BC date even though it is in obvious error. To admit they were wrong is to undermine the whole credibility and truth of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. This they cannot do because they are more dedicated to their organization than they are to the truth.
-
TD
The Handbook of Bible Chronology, page 170 states: "The biblical references to the first year of Cyrus when he made the proclamation which allowed the Jewish exiles to return from Babylon to Jerusalem are presumably stated in terms of his reign in Babylon since they deal with an event in that city. His Babylonian regnal years began. . . .accordingly in his first year, in which he made the proclamation, 538/537 B.C."
The Catholic Encyclopedia states: "In October, 538 B.C., Babylon opened its gates to the Persian army, and a few weeks later the great conqueror of Babylonia, Cyrus, made his triumphal entry into the fallen city. One of the official acts of the new ruler in Babylon was to give to the exiled Jews full liberty to return to Judah.."
Would it be consistent to accept the dates in the captioned quotes above if one rejects the data and methods with which they are arrived at?
I think explaining what secular dates you accept and why you accept them would be helpful.
-
AnnOMaly
Responding to the Response to Premise 1.
How does arguing 'Cyrus was king of Babylon therefore the Jews continued to serve Babylon after the Persians conquered it' help you with the 70 years question? You see, even after the exiles returned, they were still in servitude, but to to the Persian kingdom. They had to pay tribute to Persia and the Persian king could order them about, as this letter from the inhabitants of the Samaritan kingdom and its reply indicate.
Ezra 4:11-22 . . ."To Ar·ta·xerx′es the king your servants, the men beyond the River: And now 12 let it become known to the king that the Jews who came up here from you to us have come to Jerusalem. They are building the rebellious and bad city, and they proceed to finish the walls and to repair the foundations. 13 Now let it become known to the king that, if this city should be rebuilt and its walls be finished, neither tax nor tribute nor toll will they give, and it will cause loss to the treasuries of the kings. 14 Now inasmuch as we do eat the salt of the palace, and it is not proper for us to see the denuding of the king, on this account we have sent and made [it] known to the king, 15 that there may be an investigation of the book of records of your ancestors. Then you will find in the book of records and learn that that city is a city rebellious and causing loss to kings and jurisdictional districts, and within it there were movers of revolt from the days of old. For this reason that city has been laid waste. 16 We are making known to the king that, if that city should be rebuilt and its walls be finished, you also will certainly have no share beyond the River."
17 The king sent word to Re′hum the chief government official and Shim′shai the scribe and the rest of their colleagues who were dwelling in Sa·mar′i·a and the rest beyond the River:
"Greetings! And now 18 the official document that YOU have sent us has been distinctly read before me. 19 So an order has been put through by me, and they have investigated and found that that city has from the days of old been one rising up against kings and one in which rebellion and revolt have been carried on. 20 And there proved to be strong kings over Jerusalem and governing all beyond the River, and tax, tribute and toll were being given to them. 21 Now PUT an order through for these able-bodied men to stop, that that city may not be rebuilt until the order is put through by me. 22 So be careful that there be no negligence about acting in this regard, that the harm may not increase to the injury of kings."
And still, in Nehemiah's day:
Nehemiah 9:36, 37 . . .Look! We are today slaves; and as for the land that you gave to our forefathers to eat its fruitage and its good things, look! we are slaves upon it, 37 and its produce is abounding for the kings that you have put over us because of our sins, and over our bodies they are ruling and over our domestic animals, according to their liking, and we are in great distress.
Artaxerxes was king of Persia and included being king of Babylon and beyond into Palestine. So again, how does the fact that Persian king Cyrus also ruled Babylon in any way support your argument about when you think the 70 years servitude to Babylon ended?
Responding to the Response to Premise 2
I can't follow the (il)logic of this one.
1. How can Nebuchadnezzar have been 'called to account' when he was DEAD?
2. The sense of Jer. 51's OTT warnings: Nebuchadnezzar was the first neo-Babylonian king to start oppressing God's people, but subsequent kings continued after him. Therefore, Babylon and whoever was reigning were going to be punished (Jer. 25:12).
3. The temple was raided of its utensils 3 times - in Jehoiakim's 3rd regnal year, when Jehoiachin and several thousands were taken into exile, and when Jerusalem and the temple were finally destroyed (Dan. 1:1,2; 2 Kings 24:12,13; 25:13-17).
4. Nabonidus and Belshazzar lost possession of the temple utensils when Cyrus took Babylon. The utensils therefore became Persian property in 539 BCE.
How does anything in your response prove your point about when you think the 70 years of servitude ended?
You haven't provided one solid rebuttal yet. Are you going to try harder with your 'Response to Premise 3'?
