Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

by Doug Mason 277 Replies latest watchtower bible

MeanMrMustard

Scholar is well pleased that you recognize the fluidity in the translation of so this gives one reason to think about the meaning of that verse.
All of my posts have been recognizing the exact opposite. You have a 16/17 year history on this site arguing in favor of the WT’s chronology. You aren’t a troll, unless you are playing at God-level. But heck, I can see why people think you are just trolling. For now, I’ll assume you have a heavy cult bias against “the devil’s dates”. I don’t know how else to explain this... and I definitely don’t know why you keep referring to yourself in the third person.
Furuli is helpful here because unlike COJ, he is an expert in those ancient languages so his research must be taken seriously.
You missed the point completely. Set COJ to the side for a moment. Go to biblegateway.com, type in Jeremiah 25:11 and ask the site to display ALL of their translations for comparison. Or click here: https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Jeremiah%2025:11
Every one of them divide the verse into two separate thoughts, with the “for seventy years” modifier attaching to Babylonian servitude of “these nations”, nothing else. Some go all the way and just make two sentences from the verse. It is not COJ we are talking about. It’s entire rooms full of Hebrew translators, all agreeing. Even the NWT committee renders this verse as two separate thoughts. You can’t attach “for seventy years” to the first part of the sentence. If you do it is grammatically incorrect. But Furuli, who isn’t biased at all, it’s that authority we should trust. Because maybe, since Furuli says so, we should conclude that pretty much every other translation committee/team doesn’t understand English. They all know the 70 years applies to Judah, but forked it up, each and every one of them, when composing their English version. But hey, a JW scholar with every reason to mislead, says that maybe, if you squint hard, hop up and down while drunk, on Thursdays, well you can kinda translate it the way we want - and look and the NEB!
Riiight.. and the possibility of you taking exceptions and making them the rule is just hot air. Suuurrre.
Verse 9 provides the context for what follows in that Judah was to be made desolate and along with other nations would be in servitude to Babylon. for 70 years.
Verse 9 explicitly expands it to other nations round about. So does verse 11. So does chapter 27, 28, and 29. Good forking lord.
You fail to understand the meaning of what I have said so please expalin for in the case of each separate nation when each period of servitude applied?
I’m assuming this didn’t come out right - another sheriff or rottingham incident? Do you want me to list the “nations round about” and specify the start and end dates for their participation in the 70 years? And if so, what good would that do?
Indeed it is plainly stated that Judah would be desolate for 70 years, that Judah would serve Babylon for 70 years and that the other nations would also serve Babylon for 70 years.
Ok. Ok.. I see what you are trying to do now. You are trying to move that modifier to the first part of the verse. It doesn’t work. You can’t do that unless you ignore grammar, or fall back on your logical fallacy.
Simple. Babylon remained as a political entity under a new King of Babylon under Persia and after 539 which was only its Fall it would experience a final judgement of being destroyed over time along with its kingship and land.
Pfft. Lol. It can’t remain a political entity. The physical city was still there, and people too. But nobody could serve Babylon anymore. Nations could serve Persia.
Ok cool. So if I walk into work tomorrow, go into the owner’s office, shoot him dead, bury him in some shallow grave out in the desert, no worries! He’s not REALLY dead. I mean the business continues just under new leadership. He only experiences real death once the business is run into the ground and closes its doors.
Sanchy

Scholar: Wrong again for the seven times cannot refer to seven times explicitly speaking and only by inference, tradition or interpretation.
If what you are saying is that the "seven times" cannot refer to seven literal years, then welcome aboard fellow apostate, since Watchtower teaches the opposite.
"In Nebuchadnezzar’s personal experience of the vision’s fulfillment the “seven times” were evidently seven years, during which he became mad, with symptoms like those of lycanthropy, abandoning his throne to eat grass like a beast in the field." it-1 pp. 575-577
Scholar: The word 'times' must necessarily take the reader or exegete beyond Neb's experience for otherwise the Hebrew word for 'years' would have been used in the four occurrences in Daniel 4.
As shown here, you apologists love connecting unconnected dots and finding hidden meanings in order to support your concocted narratives. None of this actually proves a second meaning to the dream, but in your mind.
But hey, if you are intellectually bankrup enough to excuse the Overlapping Generation teaching, then i understand how you can also be deluded enough to claim that the dream's elements have multiple meanings. Maybe instead of "secondary meaning" I'll call it the "overlapping fulfillment".
Scholar: God did in fact point out the fact that the dream would serve two fulfilments by the constant reference to His Kingdom or rulership which transcends all other past, present and future Kingdoms
This is non sequitur
johnamos

You will notice that the WT did not cite Jer. 25:12 in connection with this statement.

In that 81 WT they did not cite 25:12 but in the following they do by citing 25:8-17, which obviously includes verse 12. They also agree with historians/secular chronology as to what and when the 70 years are.
[Isaiah’s Prophecy 1 p. 253-254 par. 21 – He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27) True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble.]
[Jeremiah 25:’12 “‘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,
[10-1-11 WT - Instead of saying 70 years “at Babylon,” many translations read “for Babylon.” (NIV) Some historians therefore claim that this 70-year period applies to the Babylonian Empire. According to secular chronology, the Babylonians dominated the land of ancient Judah and Jerusalem for some 70 years, from about 609 B.C.E. until 539 B.C.E. when the capital city of Babylon was captured.]
scholar

johnamos
n that 81 WT they did not cite 25:12 but in the following they do by citing 25:8-17, which obviously includes verse 12. They also agree with historians/secular chronology as to what and when the 70 years are.
===
That WT article cited by you does not make any mention of Jer.25;8-17 and the paragraph that you quote simply describes the fact that Babylon was to punished by God and this occurred in 539 BCE but this event was not what was foretold in Jer. 25:12. Further your last statement is not correct because most our view of the ending of the 70 years differs from most historians.
-----
[Isaiah’s Prophecy 1 p. 253-254 par. 21 – He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27) True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble.]
-----
We agree that the 70 years also represents a period of Babylonia's greatest domination in relation to Judah as Judah was for that period in SERVITUDE and in EXILE in Babylon which ran from the Fall of Jerusalem until the return under Cyrus. Thus Jer. 25:12 is not addressed to Judah but to Babylon and describes how as the same of Judah who became desolated, Babylon would be punished or called to account similarly after the 70 years had ended which was at the return in 537 BCE.
-------
[10-1-11 WT - Instead of saying 70 years “at Babylon,” many translations read “for Babylon.” (NIV) Some historians therefore claim that this 70-year period applies to the Babylonian Empire. According to secular chronology, the Babylonians dominated the land of ancient Judah and Jerusalem for some 70 years, from about 609 B.C.E. until 539 B.C.E. when the capital city of Babylon was captured.]
----
The rendering 'at' or 'for' Babylon does nor alter the fact that the Jews were in Babylon in Exile for 70 years and in servitude to Babylon for that same period of time. The 70 years is only applicable to Babylon in its relation to the captive nation of Judah as foretold by Jeremiah the prophet. It is impossible to begin the 70 years from 609 BCE as a historical beginning because nothing of any historical or biblical significance occurred in that year. That is why Jonsson canvassed the idea that 605 rather than 609 as a possible candidate.
scholar
scholar

MeanMrMustard
All of my posts have been recognizing the exact opposite. You have a 16/17 year history on this site arguing in favor of the WT’s chronology. You aren’t a troll, unless you are playing at God-level. But heck, I can see why people think you are just trolling. For now, I’ll assume you have a heavy cult bias against “the devil’s dates”. I don’t know how else to explain this... and I definitely don’t know why you keep referring to yourself in the third person
==
Indeed scholar has a long history on this site arguing in support of WT Chronology so he has experience in debating this subject especially 607 BCE thus as you have observed, scholar is no troll.
-----
You missed the point completely. Set COJ to the side for a moment. Go to biblegateway.com, type in Jeremiah 25:11 and ask the site to display ALL of their translations for comparison. Or click here: https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Jeremiah%2025:11
Every one of them divide the verse into two separate thoughts, with the “for seventy years” modifier attaching to Babylonian servitude of “these nations”, nothing else. Some go all the way and just make two sentences from the verse. It is not COJ we are talking about. It’s entire rooms full of Hebrew translators, all agreeing. Even the NWT committee renders this verse as two separate thoughts. You can’t attach “for seventy years” to the first part of the sentence. If you do it is grammatically incorrect. But Furuli, who isn’t biased at all, it’s that authority we should trust. Because maybe, since Furuli says so, we should conclude that pretty much every other translation committee/team doesn’t understand English. They all know the 70 years applies to Judah, but forked it up, each and every one of them, when composing their English version. But hey, a JW scholar with every reason to mislead, says that maybe, if you squint hard, hop up and down while drunk, on Thursdays, well you can kinda translate it the way we want - and look and the NEB!
----
The simple fact is that is open to differing translations Jer.25:11 as shown by comparing how the verse appears in different Bibles but the key elements remain namely that Judah was to become desolate for seventy years and would serve Babylon for that same period as would all the other nations thus this text defines the seventy years as a period of desolation of Judah and a period of servitude along with the nations to serving Babylon.
-----
Verse 9 explicitly expands it to other nations roundabout. So does verse 11. So does chapter 27, 28, and 29. Good forking lord.
----
Verse 9 describes Judah along with the other nations becoming desolate by means of Neb but the entire context beginning from vs. 1 applies specifically to Judah and then from vs 12 attention is focussed on Babylon followed in turn the rest of the now identified surrounding nations.
----
I’m assuming this didn’t come out right - another sheriff or rottingham incident? Do you want me to list the “nations round about” and specify the start and end dates for their participation in the 70 years? And if so, what good would that do?
----
Yes, indeed for if you are going to construct a valid argument then you should list those nations with their respective histories in terms of a Chronology just as one can do with Judah.
----
Ok. Ok.. I see what you are trying to do now. You are trying to move that modifier to the first part of the verse. It doesn’t work. You can’t do that unless you ignore grammar, or fall back on your logical fallacy
-----
Opinions differ as to the location of the modifier but for scholar it does not matter because the facts of the matter come out the same or with the same result. tossing up the ingredients in the salad does not change the salad to use a simple analogy.
---
Pfft. Lol. It can’t remain a political entity. The physical city was still there, and people too. But nobody could serve Babylon anymore. Nations could serve Persia
----
Babylon remained a political entity even after its Fall in 539 BCE which was not its destruction or desolation as foretold by Jeremiah in 25:12. The city continued as usual but under a new Kingship, the Medo-Persian World power now in its ascendancy. The servitude to Babylon until she released her captives in 537 BCE thus ending the Exile and servitude to Babylon.
scholar
scholar

Sanchy
If what you are saying is that the "seven times" cannot refer to seven literal years, then welcome aboard fellow apostate, since Watchtower teaches the opposite
---
Nope for scholar accepts the WT's interpretation that the 'seven times' also applies to a literal seven years of Neb's humiliation a shown by the OG, Josephus and early Jewish commentators.
----
As shown here, you apologists love connecting unconnected dots and finding hidden meanings in order to support your concocted narratives. None of this actually proves a second meaning to the dream, but in your mind.
But hey, if you are intellectually bankrup enough to excuse the Overlapping Generation teaching, then i understand how you can also be deluded enough to claim that the dream's elements have multiple meanings. Maybe instead of "secondary meaning" I'll call it the "overlapping fulfillme
------
The meaning behind the tree dream is readily apparent to the reader because of the use of 'times' and the frequent use of the terms for kingdom and rulership located throughout the narrative and confirmed by exegesis. No need to look under the bed for something hidden so just read the text in its entirety.
scholar
Sanchy

Scholar: Nope for scholar accepts the WT's interpretation that the 'seven times' also applies to a literal seven years of Neb's humiliation a shown by the OG, Josephus and early Jewish commentators.
Ok, good. As you have now admitted, the "seven times" can indeed mean seven literal years, as I have been saying all along.
Even so, regardless of whether it were years, months or any other amount of time, the seven times had one application and that is to King Neb, as per Daniel himself. No mention of a second "greater" meaning is given, as your bosses at Watchtower claim.
Scholar: The meaning behind the tree dream is readily apparent to the reader because of the use of 'times' and the frequent use of the terms for kingdom and rulership located throughout the narrative and confirmed by exegesis
You really struggle with the definition of "exegesis" and "eisegesis". Please, check the wikipedia article on the subject, it's actually surprisingly thorough, and it will prevent you from further embarrassment.
I'd add that the only thing "readily apparent" to the reader of Dan 4 would be the interpretation Daniel gave to the dream himself, for this is the only interpretation given within that chapter. Your injected secondary meaning (overlapping fulfillment lol) where you claim that the Tree from the dream actually means God's Rulership (a side note: it is absurd to have God share the same symbol as a Pagan King) and that the "seven times" actually means 2,250 years and that you then magically end up at 1914, is NOT "readily apparent" to any reader, except those that bring the bias with them (eisegesis).
It is for this reason that no one that reads the Bible would come to such conclusions. It is for this reason that Bobcat has a completely different interpretation of the dream than the one you have.
Daniel 4 is where Watchtower's failed 1914 chronology completely collapses and anyone can see so for themselves by simply opening up their bibles and reading the chapter.
johnamos

That WT article cited by you does not make any mention of Jer.25;8-17
I said the 81 did not but I said the FOLLOWING does, meaning the Isaiah’s Prophecy book...and it indeed cites Jer.25: 8 through 17, 22 and 27, that means that verse 12 is being cited as well.
With that said, lets look at the exact Scriptures the WTS cited there and compare it with their commentary.
Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27
8 “Therefore this is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘“Because you would not obey my words, 9 I am sending for all the families of the north,”+ declares Jehovah, “sending for King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar* of Babylon, my servant,+ and I will bring them against this land+ and against its inhabitants and against all these surrounding nations.+ I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of horror and something to whistle at and a perpetual ruin. 10 I will put an end to the sound of exultation and the sound of rejoicing from them,+ the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride,+ the sound of the hand mill and the light of the lamp. 11 And all this land will be reduced to ruins and will become an object of horror, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years.”’+ 12 “‘But when 70 years have been fulfilled,+ I will call to account* the king of Babylon and that nation for their error,’+ declares Jehovah, ‘and I will make the land of the Chal·deʹans a desolate wasteland for all time.+ 13 I will bring on that land all my words that I have spoken against it, all that is written in this book that Jeremiah has prophesied against all the nations. 14 For many nations and great kings+ will make slaves of them,+ and I will repay them according to their deeds and the work of their own hands.’”+ 15 For this is what Jehovah the God of Israel said to me: “Take this cup of the wine of wrath out of my hand, and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it. 16 And they will drink and stagger and act like madmen because of the sword that I am sending among them.”+ 17 So I took the cup out of the hand of Jehovah and made all the nations to whom Jehovah sent me drink:+
[Isaiah’s Prophecy 1 p. 253-254 par. 21 –
He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27) ...
...the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—…
...at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble.]

It is impossible to begin the 70 years from 609 BCE as a historical beginning because nothing of any historical or biblical significance occurred in that year.
YES something historical did happen in 609. That is when Babylon defeated Assyria making Babylon the 3rd world power, until is came to its end in 539. (70 years)
Because the WTS adds 20 years they say Babylon defeated Assyria in 629,* but to except that nonsense you would have to understand that that would mean that Babylon was the 3rd world power for 90 years (629-539) instead of 70 years (609-539)...so how do you explain the fact that verse 11 says that nations would only have to serve for 70 years and then verse 12 makes clear that when THOSE 70 years had been fulfilled that Babylon would be destroyed/called to account, which happen in 539.
* [Insight Vol 1 The fall of the empire - According to the same chronicle, in the 14th year of Nabopolassar (632 B.C.E.), Ashur-uballit II attempted to continue Assyrian rule from Haran as his capital city. This chronicle states, under the 17th year of Nabopolassar (629 B.C.E.): “In the month Duʼuzu, Ashur-uballit, king of Assyria, (and) a large [army of] E[gy]pt [who had come to his aid] crossed the river (Euphrates) and [marched on] to conquer Harran.” (Ancient Near Eastern Texts, p. 305; brackets and parentheses theirs.) Actually, Ashur-uballit was trying to reconquer it after having been driven out. This record is in harmony with the account relative to the activity of Pharaoh Nechoh recorded at 2 Kings 23:29, which activity resulted in the death of King Josiah of Judah (c. 629 B.C.E.). This text states that “Pharaoh Nechoh the king of Egypt came up to the king of Assyria by the river Euphrates”—evidently to help him. “The king of Assyria” to whom Nechoh came may well have been Ashur-uballit II. Their campaign against Haran did not succeed. The Assyrian Empire had ended.]
https://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=320101&partId=1&searchText=21901&page=1
bennyk

Meanwhile... -- in a thread regarding the year in which Jerusalem fell --
"scholar" still hasn't figured out that the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign (destruction of Jerusalem [Jer. 52:12]) comes after the first year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign (605 BC, according to the article "scholar" cited).
(Short and sweet.)
Finkelstein

When Rutherford took over the WTS he dismissed Pyramidology but still wanted something to assert a theology of Christ return because it would something advantageous to sell and promote though literature proliferation.

Did Jeruselm fall in 587 or 586 BCE?

Share this