joey jojo
Yes it is scholar who keeps these threads active.
scholar
Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?
by Doug Mason 277 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
scholar
Sanchy
This is nothing but a bunch of hot air. Scholar, Daniel interpreted the dream clearly, period. The interpretation is written in the chapter. If you've not read it recently, please do so. There's nothing to suggest a second "greater" fulfillment. Nothing. To claim otherwise is in fact where your eisegesis begins. Think about it critically, it's not that hard to understand
-----
Indeed Daniel interpreted the dream and that interpretation benefits us today because it teaches about God's kingdom as part of salvation history. The fact that God's Kingdom is mentioned often takes us beyond the 6th century BCE as any proper exegesis would prove. Read vs, 25 and 34.
------
Are you truly claiming that because the two passages share the the word "times" it must mean that they are connected? This is complete and utter nonsense and amongst the most absurd and ridiculous excuses I've heard yet regarding the subject. I wonder how many other unconnected bible passages I can claim are connected using this logic?
====
Absolutely, further, these 'times' are connected to the city of Jerusalem which in both contexts represent kingship or rulership by God establishing an exegetical relationship.If you like I can refer you to what scholars have said on this matter as presented in Bible commentaries. By the way do you consult leading Bible commentaries on this subject as the said scholar does?
-----
Are your purposefully being this dense? Or are you just not understanding my argument? OF COURSE there is a literal application to Nebuchadnezzar. It's what I've been arguing this entire time. It's the ONLY interpretation that would result from an exegetical analysis, as per Daniel's own writing. So of course I believe that the "seven times" applies to him, as did Daniel.
You asked me if I thought the "times" meant years and I responded "likely", after which you came out with what seemed to be an argument against 7 literal years, which struck me as odd since your own religious leaders also teach that the term "times" means, in part, years. .
----
Scholar is not dense. A literal interpretation is possible although the expression seven years was not used but rather seven times which means something far more significant, exegetically speaking. So in the case of Neb it refers to literal years but in reference to God it applies to a much broader period of time.
-------
In short, Dan4 has two fulfillments, one in the case of Neb a literal application and in the case of God a much broader application of God's Kingdom as proven by Jesus' words in Luke 21:24.For this reason many expositors have thought similarly labelling this as the Gentile times ending in 1914 CE beginning in 607 BCE according to our wondrous bible Chronology.
scholar
-
Finkelstein
What scholar refuses to admit is that Jerusalem's final destruction occurred in 586 BCE not 607 which he uses solely based from mythological expression (fiction), the following desolation of the land was only approximately 48 years, not 70.
There is much information out there that clearly establishes 607 to be wrong.
Here is some .......
Siege of Jerusalem (597 BC)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to navigationJump to searchThis article is about the siege that occurred in 597 BC. It is not to be confused with the second siege by Nebuchadnezzar, see Siege of Jerusalem (587 BC).For other uses, see Siege of Jerusalem.Siege of Jerusalem Part of Jewish–Babylonian war (601–587 BC) Date c. 597 BC Location Jerusalem Result Babylon takes and despoils Jerusalem; Babylonian victory Belligerents Judah Neo-Babylonian Empire Commanders and leaders Jehoiakim
JeconiahNebuchadnezzar II Strength Much fewer Unknown Casualties and losses Many slain, others taken to captivity Unknown show - Carchemish
- Hamath
- Gaza
- 1st Siege of Jerusalem
- 2nd Siege of Jerusalem
The Siege of Jerusalem was a military campaign carried out by Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon in 597 BC. In 605 BC, he defeated Pharaoh Necho at the Battle of Carchemish, and subsequently invaded Judah. According to the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle, King Jehoiakim of Judah rebelled against Babylonian rule, but Nebuchadnezzar captured the city and installed Zedekiah as ruler.
Contents
Siege[edit]
To avoid the destruction of Jerusalem, King Jehoiakim of Judah, in his third year, changed allegiances from Egypt to Babylon. He paid tribute from the treasury in Jerusalem, some temple artifacts and some of the royal family and nobility as hostages.[1] In 601 BC, during the fourth year of his reign, Nebuchadnezzar unsuccessfully attempted to invade Egypt and was repulsed with heavy losses. The failure led to numerous rebellions among the states of the Levant which owed allegiance to Babylon, including Judah, where King Jehoiakim stopped paying tribute to Nebuchadnezzar[2] and took a pro-Egyptian position.
Nebuchadnezzar soon dealt with these rebellions. According to the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle,[3] he laid siege to Jerusalem, which eventually fell on 2 Adar (March 16) 597 BC. The Chronicle states:
In the seventh year [of Nebuchadnezzar, 598 BC] in the month Chislev [November/December] the king of Babylon assembled his army, and after he had invaded the land of Hatti (Syria/Palestine) he laid siege to the city of Judah. On the second day of the month of Adar [16 March] he conquered the city and took the king [Jeconiah] prisoner. He installed in his place a king [Zedekiah] of his own choice, and after he had received rich tribute, he sent forth to Babylon.[4]
Jehoiakim died during the siege, possibly on 22 Marcheshvan (December 10) 598 BC,[5] or during the months of Kislev,[6] or Tevet.[7] Nebuchadnezzar pillaged the city and its Temple, and the new king Jeconiah, who was either 8 or 18, and his court and other prominent citizens and craftsmen, and much of the Jewish population of Judah, numbering about 10,000 were deported to Babylon.[8] The deportation occurred prior to Nisan of 597 BC, and dates in the Book of Ezekiel are counted from that event.[9] A biblical text reports, "None remained except the poorest people of the land". Also, taken to Babylon were the treasures and furnishings of the Temple, including golden vessels dedicated by King Solomon.(2 Kings 24:13–14)
The events are described in the Nevi'im and Ketuvim sections of the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible, also known as the Old Testament). The first deportation is the start of the Jewish Diaspora (or exile). (2 Kings 24:10–16) Nebuchadnezzar installed Jeconiah's uncle, Zedekiah as puppet-king of Judah, and Jeconiah was compelled to remain in Babylon.[10] The start of Zedekiah's reign has been variously dated within a few weeks before,[11] or after[12][13] the start of Nisan 597 BC.
Chronological note[edit]
The Babylonian Chronicles, which were published by Donald Wiseman in 1956, establish that Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem the first time on 2 Adar (16 March) 597 BC.[14] Before Wiseman's publication, E. R. Thiele had determined from the biblical texts that Nebuchadnezzar's initial capture of Jerusalem occurred in the spring of 597 BC,[15] but other scholars, including William F. Albright, more frequently dated the event to 598 BC.[16]
-
Finkelstein
Some other important information regarding Jerusalem's final destruction ....
Dating Jeconiah's reign
The Babylonian Chronicles establish that Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem the first time on 2 Adar (16 March) 597 BCE.[16] Before Wiseman's publication of the Babylonian Chronicles in 1956, Thiele had determined from biblical texts that Nebuchadnezzar's initial capture of Jerusalem and its king Jeconiah occurred in the spring of 597 BCE, whereas Kenneth Strand points out that other scholars, including Albright, more frequently dated the event to 598 BCE.[17]:310, 317
Thiele's dates
Thiele said that the 25th anniversary of Jeconiah's captivity was April 25 (10 Nisan), 573 BCE, implying that he began the trip to Babylon on 10 Nisan 597, 24 years earlier. His reasoning in arriving at this exact date was based on Ezekiel 40:1, where Ezekiel, without naming the month, says it was the tenth day of the month, "on that very day." Since this fits with his idea that Jeconiah's (and Ezekiel's) trip to Babylon began a month later than the capturing of the city, thus allowing a new Nisan-based year to begin, Thiele took these words in Ezekiel as referring to the day in which the captivity or exile proper began. He therefore ended Jehoiachin's reign of three months and ten days on this date. The dates he gives for Jeconiah's reign are then: 21 Heshvan (9 December) 598 BCE to 10 Nisan (22 April) 597 BCE.[17]:187
Thiele's reasoning in this regard has been criticized by Rodger C. Young, who advocates the 587 date for the fall of Jerusalem.[18][19] Young argues that Thiele's arithmetic is inconsistent, and adds an alternative explanation of the phrase "on that very day" (be-etsem ha-yom ha-zeh) in Ezekiel 40:1. This phrase is used three times in Leviticus 23:28-30 to refer the Day of Atonement, always observed on the tenth of Tishri, and Ezekiel's writings in several places show familiarity with the Book of Leviticus.[19]:121, n. 7 A further argument in favor of this interpretation is that in the same verse, Ezekiel says it was Rosh Hashanah (New Year's Day) and also the tenth of the month, indicating the start of a Jubilee year, since only in a Jubilee year did the year begin on the tenth of Tishri, the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 25:9). The Talmud (tractate Arakin 12a,b) and the Seder Olam (chapter 11) also say that Ezekiel saw his vision at the beginning of a Jubilee year, the 17th, consistent with this interpretation of Ezekiel 40:1.
Because this offers an alternative explanation to Thiele's interpretation of Ezekiel 40:1, and because Thiele's chronology for Jeconiah is incompatible with the records of the Babylonian Chronicle, the infobox below dates the end of Jeconiah's reign to 2 Adar (16 March) 597 BCE, the date of the first capture of Jerusalem as given in the Babylonian records. Thiele's dates for Jeconiah, however, and his date of 586 BCE for the fall of Jerusalem, continue to hold considerable weight with the scholarly community.[20][21]
However, no such complication[clarification needed] is necessary since the tenth of Tishri 574 BCE is precisely as stated in Ezekiel 40:1, both in the fourteenth year of the Temple's destruction in 587 BCE and the twenty-fifth year of Jeconiah's exile in 597 BCE.[22]
Gershon Galil also attempted to reconcile a 586 date for the fall of Jerusalem with the data for Jeconiah’s exile. Like Thiele, he assumed that the years of exile should be measured from Nisan, but for a different reason. Galil hypothesized that Israel’s calendar was one month ahead of that of Babylon because Babylon had inserted an intercalary month and Israel had not yet done so.[23] This would make Adar (the twelfth month) in the Babylonian records correspond to Nisan (the first month) in Judean counting. But this hypothesis, like Thiele's, runs into difficulty with Ezekiel 40:1, since the 25th year of captivity would begin in Nisan of 573 and the fall of Jerusalem, 14 years earlier, would be in 587, not the 586 that Galil and Thiele advocate. There is further conflict with the Babylonian data, because the 37th year of captivity, the year in which Jeconiah was released from prison, would be the year starting in Nisan of 561 BCE, not Nisan of 562 BCE as given in the Babylonian Chronicle. Recognizing these conflicts, Galil admits (p. 377) that his date for the fall of Jerusalem (586 BCE) is inconsistent with the precise data given in the Bible and the Babylonian Chronicle.
Dating the fall of Jerusalem using Jeconiah's dating
The reign of Jeconiah is considered important in establishing the chronology of events in the early sixth century BCE in the Middle East. This includes resolving the date of the fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar. According to Jeremiah 52:6, the city wall was breached in the summer month of Tammuz in the eleventh year of Zedekiah.
Historians, however, have been divided on whether the year was 587 or 586 BCE. A 1990 study listed eleven scholars who preferred 587 and eleven who preferred 586.[24] The Babylonian records of the second capture of Jerusalem have not been found, and scholars looking at the chronology of the period must rely on the Biblical texts, as correlated with extant Babylonian records from before and after the event. In this regard, the Biblical texts regarding Jeconiah are especially important, because the time of his reign in Jerusalem was fixed by Donald Wiseman's 1956 publication, and this is consistent with his thirty-seventh year of captivity overlapping the accession year of Amel-Marduk, as mentioned above.
Ezekiel's treatment of Jeconiah's dates are a starting point for determining the date of the fall of Jerusalem. He dated his writings according to the years of captivity he shared with Jeconiah, and he mentions several events related to the fall of Jerusalem in those writings. In Ezekiel 40:1, Ezekiel dates his vision to the 25th year of the exile and fourteen years after the city fell. If Ezekiel and the author of 2 Kings 25:27 were both using Tishri-based years, the 25th year would be 574/573 BCE and the fall of the city, 14 years earlier, would be in 588/587—i.e., in the summer of 587 BCE. This is consistent with other texts in Ezekiel related to the fall of the city. Ezekiel 33:21 relates that a refugee arrived in Babylon and reported the fall of Jerusalem in the twelfth year, tenth month of "our exile." Measuring from the first year of exile, 598/597, this was January of 586 BCE, incompatible with Jerusalem falling in the summer of 586 BCE, but consistent with its fall in the summer of 587 BCE. The other side holds that since Jeconiah surrendered in March 597, January 586 is less than eleven years later and therefore can not be considered in the twelfth year of the exile.
Thiele held to a 586 BCE date for the capture of Jerusalem and the end of Zedekiah's reign. Recognizing to some extent the importance of Ezekiel's measuring time by the years of captivity of Jeconiah, and in particular the reference to the 25th year of that captivity in Ezekiel 40:1, he wrote,
Although the Babylonian tablets dealing with the final fall and destruction of Jerusalem have not been found, it should be noticed that the testimony of Ezekiel 40:1 is definitive in regard to the year 586. Since Ezekiel had his vision of the temple on the twenty-fifth anniversary of his and Jehoiachin's captivity (28 April 573), and since this was the fourteenth year after Jerusalem's fall, the city must have fallen eleven years after the captivity. Eleven years after 597 is 586.[8]:191
In order to justify his 586 date, Thiele had assumed that the years of captivity for Jeconiah must be calendar years starting in Nisan, in contrast to the Tishri-based years that he used everywhere else for the kings of Judah. He also assumed that Jeconiah's captivity or exile was not to be measured from Adar of 597 BCE, the month Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem and its king according to the Babylonian Chronicle, but in the next month, Nisan, when Thiele assumed Jeconiah began the trip to Babylon. Granting these assumptions, the first year of captivity would be the year starting in Nisan of 597 BCE. The twenty-fifth year of captivity would start in Nisan of 573 BCE, (573/572) twenty-four years later. Years of captivity must be measured in this non-accession sense (the year in which the captivity started was considered year one of the captivity), otherwise the 37th year of captivity, the year in which Jeconiah was released from prison, would start on Nisan 1 of 560 BCE (597 − 37), two years after the accession year of Amel-Marduk, according to the dating of his accession year that can be fixed with exactitude by the Babylonian Chronicle. Thiele then noted that Ezekiel 40:1 says that this 25th year of captivity was 14 years after the city fell. Fourteen years before 573/572 is 587/586, and since Thiele is assuming Nisan years for the captivity, this period ended the day before Nisan 1 of 586. But this is three months and nine days before Thiele's date for the fall of the city on 9 Tammuz 586 BCE. Even Thiele's assumption that the years of captivity were measured from Nisan does not reconcile Ezekiel's chronology for the captivity of Jeconiah with a 586 date, and the calculation given above that uses the customary Tishri-based years yields the summer of 587, consistent with all other texts in Ezekiel related to Jeconiah's captivity.
Another text in Ezekiel offers a clue to why there has been such a conflict over the date of Jerusalem's fall in the first place. Ezekiel 24:1–2 (NIV) records the following:
In the ninth year, in the tenth month on the tenth day, the word of the Lord came to me: "Son of man, record this date, this very date, because the king of Babylon has laid siege to Jerusalem this very day."
Assuming that dating here is according to the years of exile of Jeconiah, as elsewhere in Ezekiel, the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem began on January 27, 589 BCE.[25] This can be compared to a similar passage in 2 Kings 25:1 (NIV):
So in the ninth year of Zedekiah's reign, on the tenth day of the tenth month, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon marched against Jerusalem with his whole army. He encamped outside the city and built siege works all around it.
The ninth year, tenth month, tenth day in Ezekiel is identical to the period in 2 Kings. In Ezekiel, the years are everywhere else measured according to Jeconiah's captivity, which must be taken in a non-accession sense, so that the beginning of the siege was eight actual years after the beginning of the captivity. The comparison with 2 Kings 25:1 would indicate that Zedekiah's years in 2 Kings were also by non-accession reckoning. His eleventh year, the year in which Jerusalem fell, would then be 588/587 BCE, in agreement with all texts in Ezekiel and elsewhere that are congruent with that date.
Some who maintain the 586 date therefore maintain that in this one instance, Ezekiel, without explicitly saying so, switched to the regnal years of Zedekiah, although Ezekiel apparently regarded Jeconiah as the rightful ruler and never names Zedekiah in his writing. Another view is that a later copyist, aware of the 2 Kings passage, modified it and inserted it into the text of Ezekiel. In his study of all biblical texts related to the Babylonian capture of Jerusalem, Young concludes that these conjectures are not necessary, and that all texts related to the fall of Jerusalem in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, 2 Kings, and 2 Chronicles are internally consistent and consistent with the fall of the city in Tammuz of 587 BCE.[26]
-
scholar
Finkelstein
What the said scholar knows is that Jerusalem fell in 607 BCE and not 586 or 587 BCE for the latter two years are impossible. In all of the information, you have just posted one solitary fact stands out and that is that there is no mention of the 70 years of Jeremiah which falsifies all of that information. So sad! Too bad!
scholar
-
Phizzy
I did warn earlier in this Thread, do not feed the Troll !!
"Scholar" is not interested in what the Bible writers really said. His/Her ? only interest is to establish some kind of sense for the mess that is the JW interpretation of the Bible. Facts and Evidence, as usual, and even less the research of real Scholars, mean nothing to "Scholar".
Again, do not waste your time on trying to convince someone who has no interest in Truth.
-
Finkelstein
Your right Phizzy, the heart condition of JWS is one that made up of lies and deceptions.
Thats why they are anti-Christs/ false Prophets, even warned about in the bible.
They have essentially vowed themselves to crooked lying charlatans and that's where their dedication sits.
So sad too bad, they have the spirit of Satan within them.
-
Sanchy
Scholar wrote: "The fact that God's Kingdom is mentioned often takes us beyond the 6th century BCE as any proper exegesis would prove. Read vs, 25 and 34"
You are either bankrupt of all honesty, or you have no idea what "exegesis" means. That a certain term wakes up certain assumptions in you does not change the content of the passage. The tree, the stump and all of the dream's elements are applied to the King. There is no fugurative application to the dream, except through eisegesis.
Scholar wrote: "Absolutely, further, these 'times' are connected to the city of Jerusalem which in both contexts represent kingship or rulership by God establishing an exegetical relationship"Here we see a clear example of the sport JWs love playing, gymnastics of the mind. You get a gold medal Scholar
Scholar wrote: "A literal interpretation is possible although the expression seven years was not used but rather seven times which means something far more significant, exegetically speaking. So in the case of Neb it refers to literal years but in reference to God it applies to a much broader period of time"
...the phrase "but in the reference to God it applies to a much broader period of time" is your eisegesis
Scholar wrote: "In short, Dan4 has two fulfillments, one in the case of Neb a literal application and in the case of God a much broader application of God's Kingdom as proven by Jesus' words in Luke 21:24"
Here we see another example of your eisegesis, whether you understand what that means or not.
-
Finkelstein
This 607 doctrine is just but one reason why the WTS is a bastion of corruption, apostasy and lies.
Arguing over someone's theoretical delusions is not of interest to me and shouldn't be for anyone seeking to retain a healthy mental state.
Scholar is a prime example of the mental corruption people suffer who have been indoctrinated by the corrupt Watchtower Corporation and its enforced mental slavery designed to uphold the organization as it exists.
The WTS/JWS is a fear mongering apocalyptic publishing cult indentured to theological apostasy and it looks like its going to try to sustain itself from that established ideology.
Power and money is always going to be an alluring concept for men to bask themselves in, as organized religion is a recognized vehicle toward that.
Scholar if just a victim who was drawn into this organization by other people who were just simply victims themselves .
-
MeanMrMustard
Finkelstein
What the said scholar knows is that Jerusalem fell in 607 BCE and not 586 or 587 BCE for the latter two years are impossible. In all of the information, you have just posted one solitary fact stands out and that is that there is no mention of the 70 years of Jeremiah which falsifies all of that information. So sad! Too bad!
scholar
@Any Lurker or questioning JW: Read Carl Jonsson’s book “The Gentile Times Reconsidered”.
I haven’t wasted much time on this topic in years because of that book. It’s just flat out the best and most thorough dissection of this topic.
However jo jo took the same course earlier in the thread that Jonsson takes in his book - the prophecy originated with Jeremiah, and the language is simple and easy to understand. Seventy years “for” Babylon. And the seventy years would end before the King of Babylon was held to account - establishing a clear order of events that can’t be reconciled with WT chronology - directly from Biblical sources.
The way scholar speaks... he (or she) does seem like a troll.
