Insight Book LIES - then tells the TRUTH!

by BoogerMan 167 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Jeffro

  ‘scholar’:

  Will do. Could you give me a reference list of recommended textx relating to this subject for scholar is hungry for knowledge.

  Quit with the tedious cop out. You have internet anccess and you claim to be a ‘scholar’.
• 

  KalebOutWest

  Scholar:

  KalebOutWest
  I gave you many lines of evidence.
  --
  That is not what I asked. What I ask from you is simply ONE line of evidence that disproves 607 BCE.
  scholar JW

  In other words, Scholar''s reply:

  "I refuse to answer on the grounds that I want ONE line of evidence. You provided evidence, as I requested, but it was MANY LINES of evidence that you gave instead. This therefore FREES ME FROM THE OBLIGATION OF ANSWERING ANY FURTHER."

  This is what believing in 607 BCE does to people.
• 

  KalebOutWest

  Scholar:

  What does believing in 607 BCE mean to you?

  Does it provide you with pleasure to share what you know about this with others?

  Do you thiink Jehovah God is pleased with your behavior in the way you reply to me in your posts?

  What do you feel about me as a person when you write your responses to me? Is God pleased with you in your choice of words?

  Is there room for improvement in your attitude toward me and others when you engage us here?

  Did you have God's holy spirit when you wrote all these posts to all of us or have you sinned at any point? Explain.

  These are the answers I really want but do not believe you have the courage or ability to supply.
• 

  Jeffro

  🤦‍♂️

  it’s too real. 🤣

  ‘scholar’ persistently demonstrates that JWs don’t actually care about truth at all.
• 

  KalebOutWest

  Jeffro:

  it’s too real. 🤣
  ‘scholar’ persistently demonstrates that JWs don’t actually care about truth at all.

  I read the replies to you and you read the replies to me--they are cop outs, and insulting little phrases in between.

  We are dealing with someone who is not merely refusing to think critically, but be respectful toward their religious community by being a horrible representation of what it should be like to deal with someone who supposedly believes in "life-saving truth."

  There's an entirely new Watchtower publication teaching JWs to LOVE PEOPLE--and for a claimed "JW scholar," this particular scholar has no study in that particular publication or in the loving of persons.

  Totally hurtful, insulting, disgusting, dishonest, and unloving, just to mention a few problems with Scholar's approach.
• 

  scholar

  aqwaes12345

  Response 1

  The 605 vs 609 BCE cannot be construed to be of a minor difference for it undermines the integrity of secular chronology and its history. WT critics are very dogmatic that our beginning of the 70 years is wrong but they cannot give a definite beginning of the 70 years. Further, as you outline, there are many interpretations of the 70 years, each one differs to the other so you cannot be dogmatic that the JW interpretation is wrong.

  Your claim that the 70 years ended in 539 BCE with the Fall of Babylon is wrong as it disagrees with Ezra in his 2 Chron 36:22 where he ends the 70 years with the Cyrus' first year.

  Further, your scholarship faces a major problem with the 586 or 587 Bce as to what precise year Jerusalem fell. So, you cannot define the precise year when the 70 years began nor can you define exactly the year of Jerusalem's fall.

  Respose 2

  A careful reading, even a casual reading, proves that the 70 years pertain to Judah and only in part refers to Babylon's dominance by means of the expression serve the king of Babylon.

  You fail to recognize the distinction contextually between vs. 11 and 12, with the former is a judgment against Judah and the latter being a judgment against Babylon, which is clearly shown in a recent commentary on Jeremiah -Word Biblical Commentary, Vol.26, pp.361, 367.

  Jer. 29:10 clearly is addressed to those future Exiles in Babylon that they would remain in exile for 70 years under Babylon's domination hence 'for Babylon' which indicates relation or 'at Babylon' indicating location.

  The 70 years can only be viewed as a definite historic period of three elements:

  Period of servitude to Babylon

  Period of Exile at Bbabylon

  Period when the land of Judah lay desolate and depopulated.

  The 70 began with a definite event, namely the Fall of Jerusalem under the reigns of Zedekiah and Neb and ended with Cyrus; thus, the 70 years is bookended with a precis historical beginning and a precise historical end without scholarly fuzziness.

  Response 3.

  The 70 years could not have ended with the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE because the Jews were still captive to Babylon for it was not until the jews were released by means of Cyrus' Decree that they returned home in 537 BCE and all of this was confirmed by Josephus.

  2 Chron. 36: clearly shows that the 70 years ended when the kingdom of Persia began to reign which was in fact Cyrus' first year after Babylon fell in 539 BCE with the ist year of Cyrus who gave the Decree. The text reads, "In the first year of King Cyrus of Persia in order that Jehovah's word spoken by Jeremiah would be fulfilled" and that word mentioned in vs.21 makes no mention of Babylon or its fall but refers to the desolate land paying off its sabbaths.

  In summary, the idea that 70 years represents solely Babylon domination is false and a blatant lie.

  Response 4.

  Josephus makes several references to the 70 years, and his description mirrors the biblical description of the 70 years as one of exile-servitude and desolation. He makes mention of fifty years but in this context, he is simply quoting the words of Berossus. Nothing to see here for the reader can makes his or her own judgement.

  Response 5.

  There is no overwhelming evidence that refutes 607 nor is their overwhelming convergence of evidence for 586 or 587 for much of this can easily be used in support of 607 BCE albeit with a little 'fine tuning'..

  Not one of the examples you present make any mention of the 70 years so these documents have little value for Chronology except for reasons of culture.

  Regarding archaeology, these scholars prefer 586 rather than 587 and have evidence that Judah experienced destruction - a catastrophe is how one scholar described what happened in Judah during the late neo-Babylonian period.

  The said scholar undertook a short course in biblical archaeology under the auspices of the Tel Aviv University and the textbook for this course was The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem by Obed Lipschits, 2995, Eisenbrauns. I suggest you do this course and read the textbook.

  Response 6.

  VAT 4956 has been subject to investigation and it is shown that the lunar and planetary observations for Neb's 37 the year are a better fit for 588 BCE rather than 586 BCE traditionally viewed. If this is correct then this would indeed validate 607 for the Fall of Jerusalem in Neb's reign.

  Such analysis by Dr. Rolf Furuli a linguist in Semitics and used several astro programs was able to determine the following:

  13 sets of lunar observations matched 588 BCE and not 586 BCE

  15 sets of planetary observations were backward calculations made to fit 586 for Neb's 37 the year

  Regarding the solstice, there remains the possibility that an intercalary month was inserted to fit the observations and the fact that solstices were not observed but calculated as stated by experts in ancient astronomy such as O. Neugebauer, A Sachs and R. Newton.

  WT researchers carried out an independent assessment of Furuli's research and were able to verify his claim that the 37 the of Neb should be properly assigned not to 568 BCE but 588 BCE

  Regarding BM 32312, Furuli has shown that there are three possible interpretations, one of which is that observations were not made in 652/51 but were retro fitted to conform to a astrolger's belief. Naughty fellow!!!

  Response 7.

  The fact is that Neb's vacancy is not part of Babylonian history which raises questions about the reliability of Neo-Babylonian chronology. If the records are incomplete or inaccurate, then how then can any chronology be trusted?

  The fact is that the Bible describes an important event during Neb's reign which was a vacancy of at least 7 years that is unaccounted for in Babylonian chronology and its history. One should adhere to the Bible as more reliable source rather than depending on poor or inadequate secular history especially when dealing with events in biblical history.

  Response 8.

  I have read Coj's GTR, I have several of his editions, I have an autographed copy of his Third edition, I know his website and I have corresponded with him and spoken to him by telephone.

  I repeat the major flaw in his research is that he does not address the issue of the Jewish Exile as he does not believe it with regard to the 70 years.

  Response 9.

  The doctrine or teaching of the Gentile Times is well established from the Bible and confirmed by modern history.It is based on a flawless chronology and in agreement with both ancient and modern history. it is bookended with the catastrophic events in the ancient world, namely the Fall of Jerusalem in 607 BCE and the catastrophic Great War in 1914 CE The doctrine is simple to explain and understand and is based on the interpretation that Dan 4 had both dual fulfilment proved both in terms of linguistics, history,and theology.

  Response 10

  You have failed to provide a ONE single line of evidence that refutes 607 BCE Rather than relying on 6 lines of opinion which can easily converted to an alternative viewpoint - namely in support of 607 BCE You should be able to provide ONE line of evidence that falsifies 607 BCE other wise all that you have is smoke and mirrors.

  A magicians's trick is all that you have based on a deception namely that the 70 years was solely a period of Babylonish domination. What utter rubbish!!!!!!

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  ‘scholar’:

  Regarding the solstice, there remains the possibility that an intercalary month was inserted to fit the observations and the fact that solstices were not observed but calculated as stated by experts in ancient astronomy such as O. Neugebauer, A Sachs and R. Newton.

  🤣😂🤣😂😂🤣😂🤣😂

  An imaginary intercalary month can’t save you from an impossible solstice date that is about 10 days out in the Watch Tower Society’s broken interpretation. 🤦‍♂️

  And I and others have previously dealt with all your other tedious apologetics too, including your straight out lies about the lunar observations.
• 

  aqwsed12345

  @scholar

  You have presented ten responses defending 607 BCE as the year ancient Jerusalem was destroyed by Babylon. Below, each argument (Responses 1–10) is addressed in order with rebuttals. Historical, archaeological, biblical, and astronomical evidence consistently shows that the Watchtower Society’s 607 BCE date is untenable, and that Jerusalem actually fell in 586/587 BCE. Each point is examined in detail, demonstrating the flaws in the JW interpretation.

  Response 1: Secular Chronology and the “605 vs 609” Debate

  JW Claim: Secular historians are unsure whether Babylon’s 70-year period of dominance began in 609 BCE or 605 BCE. This alleged uncertainty is used to argue that the entire secular chronology (and the 587 BCE destruction date) is unreliable.

  Rebuttal: The debate over 605 vs 609 BCE concerns a minor question of when Babylon’s domination began, not the date of Jerusalem’s fall. Scholarly discussion of whether the 70 years of Babylonian supremacy started with the battle of Harran in 609 BCE or the battle of Carchemish in 605 BCE reflects normal historical inquiry over a 4-year difference – it does not call into question the well-established date of Jerusalem’s destruction. In fact, no reputable historian places Jerusalem’s fall outside 586 or 587 BCE. Multiple independent lines of evidence – including Babylonian chronicles, business records, ancient historians, astronomical tablets, and later Greek and Persian sources – converge on 587 BCE for Jerusalem’s destruction. By contrast, the JW position (607 BCE) requires inserting a full 20 extra years into the chronology, a discrepancy far beyond any normal scholarly debate. Such a 20-year distortion is historically impossible given the wealth of evidence that aligns with 587 BCE. In short, minor scholarly debates on Babylon’s rise (609 vs 605) do not invalidate the broad consensus: Jerusalem fell in 586/587 BCE, and the JW date of 607 BCE stands completely outside this consensus.

  Response 2: Jeremiah 25 & 29 – Context of the 70 Years

  JW Claim: “Jeremiah 25:11 and 29:10 refer exclusively to Judah’s exile/desolation lasting 70 years.” In this view, the “70 years” is interpreted as the period of Jerusalem (and Judah) lying desolate, supposedly from 607 BCE until the Jews’ return in 537 BCE.

  Rebuttal: This argument ignores the explicit wording and context of Jeremiah’s prophecy. In Jeremiah 25:11, the prophet says: “This whole land will be a desolation and an astonishment, and these nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” Notice “these nations” – Jeremiah includes not only Judah, but the surrounding nations, under Babylonian domination for 70 years. The 70 years in context refer to Babylon’s period of regional supremacy, during which Judah and others would be subjugated. This period began when Babylon definitively defeated Assyria/Egypt (c. 609–605 BCE) and ended when Babylon itself fell in 539 BCE.

  Furthermore, Jeremiah 29:10 clarifies God’s promise: “When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my good promise to bring you back to this place.” (NIV). The phrase “for Babylon” indicates the 70 years are counted as Babylon’s tenure as the dominant power History confirms Babylon fell in 539 BCE, and shortly thereafter (538 BCE) Cyrus issued the decree allowing Jews to return. Indeed, the first returnees were back in Judah by 537 BCE, just as Jeremiah’s prophecy implied – after Babylon’s 70-year period ended. The JW interpretation, which isolates the 70 years to only Judah’s exile and pushes the start to 607 BCE, contradicts the biblical text. It ignores that Jeremiah spoke of multiple nations serving Babylon, and it conflicts with historical fact (Babylon’s empire lasted about 70 years, 609–539 BCE). In summary, Jeremiah’s prophecy is about Babylon’s empire and Judah’s servitude during that time, not a 70-year total desolation of Judah starting in 607 BCE. The biblical context and historical timing (539 BCE end of Babylon) harmonize perfectly with a 586/587 BCE fall of Jerusalem, not 607.

  Response 3: Timing of Babylon’s Judgment (Jeremiah 25:12)

  JW Claim: “Babylon’s punishment only began after the Jews returned in 537 BCE.” JWs argue that Jeremiah 25:12 – which says Babylon would be punished after 70 years – means Babylon’s judgment was delayed until 537 BCE, when the exile ended, thus requiring Jerusalem’s destruction to be 607 BCE (70 years earlier).

  Rebuttal: This claim confuses Babylon’s political fall with later events. Jeremiah 25:12 states: “But when the seventy years are completed, I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation…” The punishment for Babylon began when its 70 years of dominance ended. Historically, this occurred in 539 BCE, when Cyrus the Persian conquered Babylon, toppling its king and empire. That exactly fulfilled Jeremiah’s words: Babylon’s political power was broken “when seventy years [of empire] were completed.” The Jews’ return to Judah in 538–537 BCE was a consequence of Babylon’s fall, not an event that delayed Babylon’s punishment. The JW argument incorrectly shifts Babylon’s judgment 2 years later without evidence, conflating the timeline. In reality, Babylon’s “70 years” ended in 539 BCE with its defeat, and Cyrus’s decree freeing the exiles came shortly thereafter (538 BCE). Babylon’s downfall in 539 BCE is the prophesied judgment – immediately after those 70 years – as confirmed by both Scripture and historical record. There was no need to wait until 537 BCE for Babylon to be “punished,” since its empire was already gone by then. Thus, this JW claim has the sequence backwards: the end of the 70 years (Babylon’s fall) enabled the Jews’ return, rather than the return marking Babylon’s fall. Jeremiah 25:12 fits the 539 BCE fall of Babylon perfectly, leaving no biblical basis to insist on a 607 BCE Jerusalem destruction.

  Response 4: Evidence from Josephus, Archaeology, and Astronomy

  JW Claim: “Josephus, archaeology, and astronomy indirectly support 607 BCE.” It is asserted that these sources either align with a 70-year exile or can be interpreted to favor the Watchtower’s 607 BCE chronology.

  Rebuttal: In reality, historical and scientific evidence overwhelmingly supports 586/587 BCE as the year of Jerusalem’s destruction, and directly contradicts the 607 BCE date. Consider the following evidence:

  • Flavius Josephus (1st-century historian): Josephus explicitly records that Jerusalem’s temple was destroyed in Nebuchadnezzar’s 18th regnal year (Flavius Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, Book 10 - Tufts University). This matches the Biblical account (Jerusalem fell in Nebuchadnezzar’s 18th year by Babylonian reckoning, 19th year by Judean reckoning). By secular chronology, Nebuchadnezzar’s 18th year corresponds to 587 BCE. Thus, Josephus effectively places the destruction around 587 BCE, not 607. (While Josephus elsewhere mentions “70 years” of exile, he is simply reflecting the biblical 70-year prophecy, which, as shown, doesn’t require a 607 date. He never puts the fall as early as 607.)
  • Archaeology: The archaeological record in Judah unambiguously points to a major destruction circa 586/587 BCE. Excavations at Jerusalem (e.g. the Lachish Letters, destruction layers in the City of David and surrounds) and other Judean sites show burn layers, debris, arrowheads, and Babylonian-era artifacts dating to the late-7th century BCE – consistent with Nebuchadnezzar’s campaign (Evidence of the 587/586 BCE Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem found in Mount Zion excavation - Inside UNC Charlotte). Notably, archaeologists identify only one massive Babylonian destruction in this period, around 587 BCE (Evidence of the 587/586 BCE Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem found in Mount Zion excavation - Inside UNC Charlotte). There is no evidence of a separate destruction in 607 BCE, and indeed no credible archaeologist advocates shifting the date by two decades. The Watchtower’s 607 BCE date would require erasing or relocating a well-attested destruction stratum; such a move finds no support in peer-reviewed archaeology. All material evidence – pottery typology, carbon dating, siege weapon remains, Babylonian arrowheads, etc. – aligns with the early 6th-century BCE (late 580s) conquest of Jerusalem (Evidence of the 587/586 BCE Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem found in Mount Zion excavation - Inside UNC Charlotte), corroborating the 586/587 BCE timeline.
  • Astronomy (Babylonian Astronomical Tablets): Cuneiform tablets from Babylon provide precise astronomical data that anchor Nebuchadnezzar’s reign to absolute dates. The most famous is VAT 4956, an astronomical diary recording planetary and lunar positions in Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year. Modern scholars (and even the Watchtower’s own publications) acknowledge that the observations on VAT 4956 exactly match 568/567 BCE as Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year. If Year 37 = 568 BCE, then Year 18 = 587 BCE (since 37 – 19 = 18, and 568 + 19 = 587). This aligns perfectly with the accepted date of Jerusalem’s fall. JW apologists have tried to re-interpret VAT 4956 to fit 588 BCE as year 37, but professional astronomers have thoroughly refuted those attempts as impossible. No published academic work supports the 588 BCE reading. Additionally, the Babylonian Chronicle BM 21946 (the “Jerusalem Chronicle”) documents Nebuchadnezzar’s early campaigns, including the siege of Jerusalem in his 7th year (598–597 BCE), consistent with standard chronology. All astronomical and historical records place Nebuchadnezzar’s reign and Jerusalem’s destruction exactly where secular history says – with no room for an extra 20 years.

  In summary, Josephus, archaeology, and astronomy all point to 586/587 BCE, not 607 BCE. Far from supporting the JW date, these lines of evidence flatly contradict it. The claim that they “indirectly” support 607 is false – they directly support the mainstream chronology. In fact, no independent evidence has ever been discovered that corroborates 607 BCE, whereas many lines of evidence decisively support 586/587. The Watchtower’s chronology stands alone, unsupported by the historical record.

  Response 5: Nebuchadnezzar’s “Missing Years” Myth

  JW Claim: “What about Nebuchadnezzar’s ‘missing years’ of madness? Could his reign have had an unrecorded gap?” This argument hints that the Bible’s account of Nebuchadnezzar’s period of madness (Daniel 4) might mean several years of his reign were not recorded in Babylonian history, perhaps creating a 7-year or even 20-year discrepancy that could support the 607 timeline.

  Rebuttal: There are no “missing years” in Nebuchadnezzar’s reign – not in the Bible and not in Babylonian records. The book of Daniel does describe Nebuchadnezzar temporarily losing his sanity (often interpreted as seven years of madness), but importantly, Daniel never suggests that Nebuchadnezzar ceased to be king or that his kingdom timeline paused (Daniel 4:36 says his kingdom was restored “and still more greatness was added”). Babylonian historical sources show continuous year-by-year documentation of Nebuchadnezzar’s 43-year reign (605–562 BCE) with no gaps. Thousands of dated economic tablets, administrative documents, and royal inscriptions exist from Nebuchadnezzar’s rule; these are dated by the reigning year of the king and they span every year up through his 43rd year. If Nebuchadnezzar had been absent from power for a lengthy period (whether 7 years or 20 years), we would see a break or co-regency in these dated records – but we do not. In fact, business tablets are dated in an unbroken sequence from Nebuchadnezzar’s first year through his 43rd, followed immediately by his son Amel-Marduk’s first year. There is zero historical hint of any gap or “missing” period that could accommodate extra years.

  The JW idea of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign having unexplained extra years is entirely baseless – it is not drawn from any ancient source, but invented to patch the 20-year hole in the JW chronology. Even if Daniel’s account of madness is taken literally as seven years, those years were part of Nebuchadnezzar’s 43-year reign (not additional to it). Babylonian chroniclers continued to date documents by Nebuchadnezzar’s regnal years during that time, indicating the kingdom still recognized him as king. In short, Nebuchadnezzar’s reign length is firmly established by both biblical and secular data, and it does not accommodate an extra 20 years. The claim of “missing years” is a myth with no supporting evidence.

  Response 6: Carl Olof Jonsson’s Work and the Exile

  JW Claim: “Carl Olof Jonsson’s Gentile Times Reconsidered (GTR) book is flawed – he supposedly ignored the issue of Judah’s exile and the 70 years, undermining his conclusions.” The implication is that Jonsson (a former JW who wrote a seminal critique of the 607 chronology) didn’t address the Biblical exile period, therefore his analysis is incomplete or biased.

  Rebuttal: This characterization of Jonsson’s work is incorrect. In Gentile Times Reconsidered, Jonsson extensively examines the 70-year period of Babylonian domination, the exile, and the desolation of Judah in great detail. Far from “ignoring” the exile, he integrates the biblical data with historical evidence to demonstrate they are compatible with the 587 BCE date. Jonsson shows that the 70 years are best understood as the period of Babylonian supremacy (as per Jeremiah 25 and 29), during which Judah and surrounding nations were subjugated. He discusses the duration of the exile of the Jews in Babylon and the condition of Judah’s land during those decades, citing Scripture (e.g. 2 Chronicles 36:20–23, Daniel 9:2) and historical sources. Jonsson’s analysis concludes that the Jews’ exile in Babylon lasted approximately 50 years (from the first deportation in 597 BCE or the final destruction in 586 BCE, to the return in 538–537 BCE), and that this fits within a broader 70-year period of Babylonian rule (609–539 BCE) as described by Jeremiah. He did not “ignore” the exile; on the contrary, he addressed it head-on and demonstrated that the biblical requirements (land resting, exile duration, 70-year prophecy) harmonize with the historical timeline

  The JW criticism of Jonsson here likely stems not from any actual omission in his work, but from discomfort with his well-documented conclusions. Jonsson painstakingly compiled evidence from ancient tablets, historical chronologies, and scriptural exegesis to refute the 607 BCE date. Dismissing his scholarship by claiming he “ignored” key issues is a straw man argument. Unless one actually engages with the data he presented, such a claim only reveals a lack of familiarity with his research or a deliberate misrepresentation of it. In reality, Jonsson’s work remains one of the most thorough treatments of the subject, and his conclusions supporting 586/587 BCE have stood up to scrutiny, whereas the Watchtower’s 607 BCE has not.

  Response 7: The 537 BCE Return and Counting 70 Years

  JW Claim: “The Jews returned to Jerusalem in 537 BCE. Counting back 70 years from 537 BCE gives 607 BCE exactly – proof that Jerusalem fell in 607.” JWs assert that since they accept 537 BCE as the year the exiles returned (after Cyrus’s decree), subtracting the prophesied 70 years yields 607 BCE for the destruction, confirming their timeline.

  Rebuttal: Simply counting 70 years backward from 537 BCE is an artificial calculation that does not match the actual historical and biblical timeline. First, it’s important to note that the Bible does not explicitly say the Jews returned in 537 BCE – this date is inferred from secular history combined with biblical hints. What the Bible does state is that Cyrus’s decree freeing the Jews occurred in Cyrus’s first year (Ezra 1:1–3), and 2 Chronicles 36:22–23 emphasizes this was “to fulfill the word of the LORD by Jeremiah” at the end of 70 years (2 Chronicles 36:20-23 NIV - He carried into exile to Babylon the - Bible Gateway). Cyrus’s first regnal year over Babylon began in late 538 BCE (after he conquered Babylon in October 539). The Jews could depart Babylon by 538 and resettle by 537 BCE, which JWs acknowledge. However, nothing in Scripture insists on pegging the exact end of 70 years to the moment the Jews stepped back into Jerusalem in 537. Rather, the biblical texts tie the end of the 70 years to Babylon’s fall and the rise of the Persian Empire (i.e. 539–538 BCE) (2 Chronicles 36:20-23 NIV - He carried into exile to Babylon the - Bible Gateway).

  Historically, if Babylon fell in 539 BCE and Cyrus’s decree came in 538 BCE, then the 70 years are already complete by 538. Counting 70 years back from 538 BCE (the key turning point) brings us to about 608/609 BCE, which is precisely when Babylon’s rise began (the final defeat of Assyria at Harran in 609 BCE). This aligns perfectly with Jeremiah’s prophecy without any manipulation. The Watchtower’s chronology, by contrast, inserts a two-year delay for which there is no evidence: they assert the 70 years didn’t end until 537 BCE (for a round-number 70-year exile from 607). Yet the Bible’s own chronology in 2 Chronicles 36:20-23 implies the land’s 70-year rest ended when Cyrus became king (i.e. by his first year) (2 Chronicles 36:20-23 NIV - He carried into exile to Babylon the - Bible Gateway). There is no historical or scriptural reason to demand that exactly 70 years elapsed between Jerusalem’s destruction and the return of the exiles – that is a Watchtower assumption, not a biblical statement. The Bible simply says 70 years of Babylonian domination would pass “for Babylon”, after which Babylon falls and the Jews return (Jer. 29:10). That is precisely what happened between ~609 BCE and 539–538 BCE.

  In short, the 607-to-537 count is contrived. It starts from an assumed end point (537) and works backward, ignoring that the actual prophesied period ended in 539 with Babylon’s fall. When one starts at the correct end point – Babylon’s collapse – 70 years earlier lands in the Daniel describes Nebuchadnezzar’s madness as lasting “seven times,” often interpreted as seven years, but the original Aramaic text (Daniel 4) and some scholars suggest it could mean a complete period (not necessarily literal years). Even if seven years, those were part of his reign, not additional years after year 43.s late 7th century BCE (≈609), not 607. The bottom line: using 537 BCE as the fixed end point is arbitrary. The biblical and historical end point is 539/538 BCE, and that yields a completely different start date (about 609 BCE) which fits secular history much better. The neat “exactly 70 years” counting back from 537 is a circular proof that assumes what it’s trying to prove. Real history does not accommodate this two-year shift, so the JW chronology inserts it purely to uphold doctrine.

  Response 8: Multiple Deportations and the Myth of a 70-Year Desolation

  JW Claim: “Jeremiah mentions multiple deportations (in 597 BCE, 586 BCE, 582 BCE, etc.), proving that the exile lasted 70 years in total.” The argument suggests that because exiles were taken at different times, one might stretch the period to cover 70 years of Jewish captivity (perhaps from an earliest deportation to the final return), and that this somehow supports a 607 BCE destruction and a 70-year complete desolation of the land.

  Rebuttal: The mention of multiple deportations in Jeremiah and Kings actually undermines the idea of a total, 70-year desolation starting in 607 BCE. Here’s why: If Jerusalem and Judah truly became completely empty and desolate in 607 BCE, one would expect that to be a single, final event – with no one left to deport afterward. However, the Bible itself records that even after the main destruction of Jerusalem (in 586/587 BCE historically), people remained in the land. The Babylonians appointed Gedaliah as governor over those who stayed behind, and a significant population was still in Judah until Gedaliah’s assassination (Jeremiah 40–41). In 582 BCE (Nebuchadnezzar’s 23rd year), after quelling remaining unrest, the Babylonians took a final group of 745 Judeans into exile (Jeremiah 52:24 - 52:30 - Legacy Standard Bible). Jeremiah 52:28-30 lists the deportations: ~3,023 Jews in the 7th year (597 BCE, Jehoiachin’s exile), 832 people in Nebuchadnezzar’s 18th year (586 BCE, destruction of Jerusalem), and 745 people in his 23rd year (582 BCE) (Jeremiah 52:24 - 52:30 - Legacy Standard Bible). Total: 4,600 people exiled over that period. This record makes it clear that Judah was not emptied all at once in 607 BCE – rather, the complete exile was a process over nearly 20 years (597 to 582 BCE).

  What do these data tell us? They fit the conventional timeline: Jerusalem’s initial surrender and first exile of nobles was 597 BCE; the city’s destruction and major depopulation was 586 BCE; a final mop-up exile occurred in 582 BCE. At that point “Judah went into exile from its land” fully (Jeremiah 52:24 - 52:30 - Legacy Standard Bible). Thereafter, the land truly lay desolate, until the exiles returned about 45 years later (538–537 BCE). There is no 70-year absolute desolation indicated. Instead, the land was progressively depopulated and then lay fallow for roughly 50 years (not 70). JWs, by insisting on a 607 BCE destruction to get 70 years of desolation, must ignore that the Bible itself says a sizeable population was still in Judah after 607 (down to 582 BCE). In other words, Jeremiah’s multiple deportations flatly contradict the idea that Judah was completely desolate starting in 607. They actually reinforce the historical reality that Jerusalem’s destruction occurred around 586/587 BCE and that the exile was a complex event, not a single date that can be neatly pegged to 607.

  In summary, the deportations were multiple events that align with a 587 BCE destruction followed by further removals, and they do not support a 607 timeline. The prophecy of “70 years” is satisfied by 70 years of Babylonian rule, not 70 years of an empty Judah. By misapplying that prophecy to a supposed 70-year desolation, the JW argument ends up contradicting the very biblical record of what happened after Jerusalem’s fall. The evidence shows some Jews were still being exiled 25 years after 607 BCE – an untenable scenario if 607 were truly the start of a 70-year complete exile.

  Response 9: The Year 609 BCE in Historical Records

  JW Claim: “609 BCE is just an arbitrary date modern scholars invented.” The suggestion is that secular historians “inserted” 609 BCE to make their chronology work, implying that it’s not a real, documented date like 607 BCE supposedly is.

  Rebuttal: The year 609 BCE is firmly rooted in ancient historical records, not an arbitrary modern invention. Multiple cuneiform documents from Babylonia chronicle the events of that year in detail. For example, the Babylonian Chronicle of Nabopolassar (also known as ABC 3, published by scholar A.K. Grayson) covers the years 616–609 BCE and describes the final campaigns against the Assyrian Empire (BABYLONIAN CHRONICLES – Encyclopaedia Iranica). In 609 BCE specifically, it records the Babylonian and Median forces besieging Harran, the last stronghold of Assyrian remnants, and the involvement of the Egyptian army under Pharaoh Necho II. These chronicles (often referred to in academic literature as ABC 3, 4, 5, etc.) are contemporary clay tablets that give year-by-year accounts of Babylonian kings. They explicitly date events to Nebuchadnezzar’s predecessors and to Nebuchadnezzar’s own reign using the Babylonian calendar – there’s nothing “modern” or “interpolated” about these dates. For instance, Assyria’s final defeat and the shifting of Near Eastern power is recorded around 609 BCE, marking the true beginning of Babylon’s uncontested rule.

  Far from being an “arbitrary” modern construct, 609 BCE emerges from a synthesis of many ancient sources: Babylonian chronicles, Egyptian records (Pharaoh Necho’s campaign is recorded in the Bible as well, at 2 Kings 23:29), and later historians’ accounts (e.g. Berossus). The reason 609 BCE is important is that it marks the end of Assyrian dominance and the rise of Babylon – aligning with the prophecy that “these nations will serve the king of Babylon 70 years.” Counting from 609 BCE (when Babylon’s king effectively became “the one to serve”) to 539 BCE (Babylon’s fall) gives 70 years. Scholars did not invent 609; they derived it from the evidence. On the other hand, 607 BCE is not recorded in any ancient text as the year Jerusalem fell – it’s arrived at only by JW interpretation. Every ancient source that touches on the timing (Babylonian chronicles, Biblical texts, Josephus, Babylonian king lists, etc.) indicates a timeline consistent with 587 BCE for Jerusalem’s destruction and acknowledges events in 609 BCE (Assyria’s fall) as a key reference point. Thus, the claim that 609 is an “arbitrary interpolation” ignores the wealth of historical documentation from that era. It is 607 BCE, rather, that stands isolated from the data.

  In summary, 609 BCE is a well-attested historical year marking Babylon’s ascent, whereas 607 BCE is a contrived date unsupported by direct evidence. Any argument that scholars simply “invented” 609 to undermine 607 is a reversal of reality: historians work from ancient evidence, and that evidence simply does not support a 607 BCE destruction.

  Response 10: Scholarly Consensus vs. the Gentile Times Doctrine

  JW Claim: “Our 607 BCE chronology and the related ‘Gentile Times’ doctrine (leading to 1914 CE) withstand all scholarly criticism.” In other words, JWs assert that no matter what historians, archaeologists, or astronomers say, their interpretation is sound and even supported by some scholarship, and that their calculation of 2520 years from 607 BCE to 1914 CE (the Gentile Times) is on solid ground.

  Rebuttal: This claim does not hold up under scrutiny. In reality, no competent historian, archaeologist, or astronomer accepts 607 BCE as the date for Jerusalem’s fall. The consensus that the city fell in 586 or 587 BCE is nearly universal, backed by a mountain of evidence from various disciplines. Over the past century, the Watchtower Society’s 607 BCE date has been repeatedly examined and found wanting by experts – not out of bias against JWs, but because the evidence for the late 7th-century destruction is overwhelming. Key historical records (Babylonian chronicles, king lists, business tablets) and scientific data (astronomical observations like VAT 4956, eclipse records, etc.) all align together. To accept 607 BCE, one must propose that all these independent sources are wrong by the same 20-year margin – an extraordinarily implausible scenario. JWs have attempted to defend 607 by selectively quoting out-of-context statements and by proposing unusual interpretations (for example, claiming scribal errors on astronomical tablets or appealing to biblical prophecy as override). However, those defenses have not convinced the scholarly community, nor have they produced any positive evidence for 607.

  The “Gentile Times” doctrine, which hinges on 607 BCE, further underscores what’s at stake. This doctrine interprets the “seven times” of Daniel 4 as 7 prophetic years (360 days each) = 2520 years, running from Jerusalem’s fall to the start of Christ’s kingdom rule. Using 607 BCE as the start, JWs arrive at 1914 CE for the end of the Gentile Times. But if the starting date is wrong, the entire calculation collapses. Historians and biblical scholars outside the JW community do not support this 2520-year calculation – it’s unique to Adventist and JW tradition. In fact, the “Gentile Times” as 2520 years is not a concept found in scholarly exegesis; it was introduced by 19th-century Bible speculators and later adopted by JWs. Therefore, when 607 BCE is proven wrong, the 1914 doctrine loses its foundation. And 607 BCE has been disproven by converging evidence: Babylonian documents, biblical chronological details, and scientific dating all point to 587 BCE. As a result, 1914 becomes a date with no biblical chronological backing (even if one still respects 1914 for historical reasons, it cannot be arrived at via “seven times” from 607).

  In summary, the JW chronology has not withstood scholarly criticism – it has been overwhelmed by it. The scholarly consensus (including devout Christian historians) places Jerusalem’s destruction in 586/587 BCE. There isn’t a single piece of actual evidence that requires 607 BCE, whereas there are numerous lines of evidence that flatly contradict it. Since the Watchtower’s 1914 prophecy is solely dependent on 607, the collapse of 607 BCE as a credible date means the Gentile Times doctrine is built on sand. It is telling that no peer-reviewed historical journal and no standard reference work on ancient history validates the 607 BCE date – it survives only in insular publications. True scholarship invites verification and critique; by that standard, the JW 607/1914 framework fails, as it cannot be reconciled with established historical facts.

  One Line of Evidence that Disproves 607 BCE

  Finally, you challenge: “Provide one line of evidence disproving 607 BCE.” The implication is that critics have no single clear proof against 607. In reality, there are multiple powerful lines of evidence, but one in particular is often singled out by historians for its precision:

  Astronomical Tablet VAT 4956: This cuneiform tablet is a diary of astronomical observations from Babylon. It specifically logs the positions of the moon and planets in the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar II. Modern analysis (confirmed by scholars like Sachs and Hunger) shows the recorded sky alignments correspond exactly to the year 568/567 BCE. For example, it notes specific lunar phases near certain stars and conjunctions of planets on particular dates – calculations show these phenomena occurred in 568 BCE. If Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year was 568 BCE, then counting backward: his 18th year was 587 BCE. This is simple arithmetic and does not depend on any hypothesis – it’s an observational fact recorded by ancient astronomers. The date 587 BCE for Jerusalem’s fall follows directly. Thus, VAT 4956 alone conclusively disproves 607 BCE. If JWs were correct, Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year would have to be 588 BCE (19 years earlier), but the sky in 588 BCE did not match the tablet – it’s not even close on many critical observations, meaning the tablet cannot be referring to 588. The 568 BCE match is essentially one-in-a-million in its precision, leaving no doubt about the chronology.

  All major scholars and institutions (e.g., Otto Neugebauer, Abraham Sachs, Hermann Hunger) agree that the astronomical data on VAT 4956 corresponds only to the year 568/567 BCE. This is confirmed by:

  1. Lunar Eclipse: The eclipse described on the tablet occurred on July 4, 568 BCE (Julian calendar). While a superficial match for a similar eclipse exists in 588 BCE (July 15), this single similarity does not suffice to date the entire tablet.
  2. Full Dataset Match: All 13 sets of lunar positions and 15 planetary positions align uniquely with the year 568/567 BCE. These data points include conjunctions, angular separations, and appearances, which are extraordinarily specific and not repeatable on a 20-year cycle due to lunar-solar planetary variances.

  The Watchtower has claimed, notably in their Watchtower 2011 article and in their timeline arguments, that many of the lunar positions fit 588 BCE better than 568. However, as shown in Jacob Halsey’s letter (March 3, 2018)—which was sent directly to the Watch Tower Society and later published—we find the opposite.

  Halsey used Starry Night Pro Plus astronomy software with accurate Babylonian coordinates to test the tablet’s observations. His findings include:

  • Obv. 3 (Nisanu 9, May 10/11): While the angular separation numerically appears close in 588 BCE, the moon is visibly behind β Virginis, not in front as the tablet says. The claim of an “exact match” fails under visual verification.
  • Obv. 14 (Simanu 5, July 4): Supposed “excellent match” in 588 BCE fails since the moon is 5–6 degrees behind the star, not 1 cubit (2.2°) above/below. This fails both textually and observationally.
  • Obv. 15 (Simanu 8, July 7): Angular separation in 588 BCE is nearly twice the described amount; moon is in front, not below the star as the tablet says.
  • Rev. 5 (Šabātu 1, Feb. 21/22): Moon isn’t even visible on this date in 588 BCE, invalidating the claim that a new month began or that an appearance was seen in Pisces.
  • Rev. 14/15 (Addaru 7, Mar. 29/30): While α Leonis is 28° from the moon, it is behind, not below. The claimed “fold” (halo) does not align with the constellation positions, making this an extremely weak candidate.

  Conclusion: Even the best “matches” from the 588 BCE attempt contradict the descriptions in the tablet. Scholars like Sachs and Hunger already addressed minor discrepancies in 568 BCE as likely scribal approximations. That is far more plausible than rewriting the entire chronology.

  Jehovah’s Witnesses argue that since a lunar eclipse also occurred in 588 BCE, it could be the one mentioned. However, lunar eclipses alone are insufficient for dating, and lunar positions (based on the moon’s complex orbital path) do not repeat in a clean 20-year cycle.Additionally, planetary positions (like Jupiter’s and Saturn’s) are even more irregular and inconsistent across decades. 13 lunar + 15 planetary + 8 solar-moon intervals matching 568 and not 588 completely disqualifies the 588 claim.

  The Watchtower’s claim that 607 BCE is supported by VAT 4956 collapses under scrutiny:

  • It cherry-picks a single eclipse while ignoring contradictory data.
  • It relies on falsified “better matches”, which astronomers have disproven.
  • It inserts theological necessity (to maintain the 1914 doctrine) into scientific data.

  As noted in the Halsey letter, multiple observations from 588 BCE do not match the stated lunar or angular data. This aligns with professional evaluations by Sachs, Hunger, and even conservative evangelical scholars who accept 586/587 BCE as the fall of Jerusalem.

  Why does this matter so much to JWs? Because if Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year was in 568 BCE, then his 18th year (when Jerusalem fell) was 587 BCE, not 607. And that destroys the keystone of Watchtower chronology—the start of the “Gentile Times” and the arrival at 1914.

  Thus, Watchtower defenders have tried to:

  • Insert “missing 7 years” into Nebuchadnezzar’s reign (without evidence).
  • Deny the accuracy of secular chronologies (Ptolemy, Berossus, BM tablets).
  • Reinterpret astronomical data contrary to observable science.

  This is just one example. We could also point to the Babylonian Chronicle BM 21946, which directly dates Nebuchadnezzar’s 7th year to 598 BCE (and his 8th to 597 BCE when he captured Jerusalem the first time) – again confirming the conventional timeline. Or the Uruk King List and Ptolemy’s Canon, ancient sources that list the lengths of Babylonian kings’ reigns, which align perfectly with Nebuchadnezzar reigning 43 years from 605–562 BCE (leaving no room for an extra 20 years). But since only “one line” was asked for, VAT 4956 serves as that definitive line of evidence. It is a single artifact that single-handedly fixes Nebuchadnezzar’s reign and debunks the 607 BCE claim. To date, no JW publication or apologist has been able to refute the actual data on VAT 4956 – at best, they claim a few points of the text could be scribal errors or ambiguities, but even with generous allowances, the overall alignment with 568 BCE is undeniable, and alternative dates (like 588) fail. In scholarly circles, VAT 4956 is considered ironclad proof of the established chronology.

  So, contrary to the claim that critics “cannot produce one line of evidence,” we have produced one – and indeed there are many more. The challenge has been met: VAT 4956 (and the entire corpus of Babylonian astronomical diaries) stands as a clear, empirical falsification of the 607 BCE date.

  Conclusion

  In reviewing each of the JW’s ten arguments, we find that they rely on misreading scripture, ignoring historical context, selective use of sources, and unsupported conjectures. By contrast, the rebuttals above have presented solid evidence at every turn – biblical, historical, archaeological, and astronomical – all of which consistently point to Jerusalem’s destruction occurring around 586/587 BCE. This conclusion is not drawn from a secular bias or “worldly wisdom,” but from respect for facts: the Bible’s own contextual clues, the records of contemporaries (like the Babylonians), and the analysis of later historians and scientists.

  The Watchtower Society’s insistence on 607 BCE, in service of its 1914 Gentile Times doctrine, has unfortunately led sincere people to defend an indefensible date. As shown, multiple lines of evidence decisively disprove 607 BCE. It is not a matter of “lacking one line of evidence” – we have an abundance of evidence, and even one of those lines (the astronomical data, for example) is enough on its own to unravel the 607 claim. When all the evidence is weighed, the 20-year gap required by the JW chronology finds no support.

  In a respectful dialogue, we must follow the evidence wherever it leads. Here it leads to the conclusion that the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem occurred in 587 BCE (some say 586 depending on calendrical details), and that the “70 years” in prophecy are best understood in context as a period of Babylonian dominance and Jewish exile ending with Babylon’s fall in 539 BCE. All critical evidence aligns with this understanding. The Watchtower interpretation, however well-intentioned, is shown to be flawed and historically untenable.

  Ultimately, truth should be the goal. The facts presented are clear: Jerusalem was not destroyed in 607 BCE, and claiming otherwise means dismissing a vast body of scholarly work and physical evidence. It is hoped that this point-by-point rebuttal helps set the record straight and encourages a re-examination of the 607 BCE doctrine in the light of Scripture and documented history. The strength of the truth is that it can face the evidence without fear – and in this case, the evidence against 607 BCE is overwhelming, while the evidence for 586/587 BCE is robust, uncontradicted, and endorsed by essentially all experts in the field.
• 

  Jeffro

  Such analysis by Dr. Rolf Furuli a linguist in Semitics and used several astro programs was able to determine the following:

  Furuli. 🤦‍♂️

  13 sets of lunar observations matched 588 BCE and not 586 BCE

  Poor 'scholar' seems to forget that I have personally checked all the observations. And it's 568 BCE doofus. Let's review the lunar observations for 588 BCE... even if we ignore the planetary observations, it's not good.

  

  15 sets of planetary observations were backward calculations made to fit 586 for Neb's 37 the year

  586 again?? Anyway... this is an assertion based on wishful thinking, not a determination based on evidence. Back in reality, all the planetary observations match 568 BCE perfectly, which is why 'scholar' and other Watch Tower Society shills are so keen to dismiss them.
• 

  Duran

  Response 9. The doctrine or teaching of the Gentile Times is well established from the Bible and confirmed by modern history. It is based on a flawless chronology and in agreement with both ancient and modern history. it is bookended with the catastrophic events in the ancient world, namely the Fall of Jerusalem in 607 BCE and the catastrophic Great War in 1914 CE The doctrine is simple to explain and understand and is based on the interpretation that Dan 4 had both dual fulfilment proved both in terms of linguistics, history,and theology.

  This claim is that Neb's dream had a second fulfillment resulting in 2,520 years. And 607 marks the beginning of those years with the nation's trampling Jerusalem with the end of Zed as king. And 1914 ending that trampling period for Jerusalem by the nations, due to Jesus becoming king in that year. Because it is said that Jesus became king of God's kingdom in 1914 at the end of those 2,520 years (so-called gentile times), this is when/why WTS says Rev 11:15 was fulfilled with the 7th trumpet.

  [w02 11/1 - In 1914 the prophetic words of Revelation 11:15 were fulfilled: The seventh angel blew his trumpet. And there were loud voices in heaven, saying: “The kingdom of the world did become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever.”]

  The problem with the WTS teaching that the gentile times are a period of 2,520 that Jerusalem is trampled on by the nations, starting in Oct 607 and ending in Oct 1914, is that Rev 11:2 speaks of a 3 1/2-year period during the 6th trumpet/2nd woe, that Jerusalem is to be trampled on by the nations, which the WTS claims took place Oct 1914 to April 1918.

  Because of claiming Rev 11:2 took place in 1914-1918 and knowing that that was part of the 2nd woe, and the 3rd woe/7th trumpet could not come until AFTER the trampling of 42 months ended in 1918, they moved the fulfilment date for Rev 11:15 for Jesus' time for becoming king and the kingdom beginning, they moved it to 1918 after the 3 1/2 years of trampling ended. (Also to note is that the period of 607 to 1914 is not the 2nd woe that takes place during the 6th trumpet. The 7th trumpet/3rd woe can only come after the 6th trumpet/2nd woe ends, which these 42 months are part of. Rev)

  [w51 7/15 - At this eventful time the seventh angel blows his trumpet, that is, after the 1,260 days ended in 1918. Then it is that these wonders can come to pass. “And the seventh angel blew his trumpet. And loud voices occurred in heaven saying: ‘The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king for ever and ever.’]

  ______________

  WTS teaches:

  start Oct 607>(2,520 years trampling by nations)>end Oct1914 = Rev 11:15 was fulfilled. 02WT

  start Oct 1914>(3 1/2 years trampling by nations)>end April 1918 = Rev 11:15 was fulfilled. 51WT

  Total of 2,523 years and 6 months of continuous trampling on by the nations. (607 to 1918)

  _________

  Scholar, based on that, do you believe Rev 11:15 was fulfilled in Oct 1914 after the 2,520 years of trampling ended or April 1918 after the 1,260 days of trampling ended???

  If you go with Rev 11:15 occurring in 1914, then you will have to acknowledge that Rev 11:2, 42- months/2nd woe, could not have taken place Oct 1914 to April 1918, because the 42-months/2nd woe has to end first before the 3rd woe/7th trumpet can come. This is according to what the Scriptures state and what the 51WT correctly showed. This means that the 42 months have to occur prior to Oct 1914, occur during the time before the 2,520 years end.

  IDK what sounds more ridiculous, to say that a time of 2,520 years given to the nations to trample Jerusalem and then when that time is said to end (Oct 1914) then an additional 3 and 1/2 years of the nation's trampling, starts right as one time was said to end, so not really ending being trampled on in 1914 but end being trampled in 1918 instead.

  Or to say that during the time the nations are given to trample (2,520 years) that during those years (607-1914) that another trampling will occur for 3 and 1/2 years in 1911 to 1914, ending at the same time as the 2,520 years. I suppose a double trampling?

  ________________

  You could just realize that your WTS is full of BS and that none of that makes sense. No 607/587/1914/1918/7 times, etc.

  The correct understanding is the 'appointed times of the nations' (gentile times) are 42 months/the 2nd woe and are future when the 8th king is given authority. That is the time of the GT and Jesus comes AFTER that time and that is when Rev 11:15/3rd woe is fulfilled.

  Still future:

  Trumpets 1-5

  Trumpet 6

  Trumpet 7 (last trumpet)