Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 150 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • scholar
    scholar

    Jeffro

    hahaha đŸ€Ł poor 'scholar' insists that the 70 years 'must' begin "not earlier" than 607 BCE because it is 70 years before the year they say the Jews 'must' have returned from exile, which they dogmatically say 'must' have been in 537 because it is 70 years after 607 ♻. (The correct year is 538 BCE as indicated by Ezra and Josephus, but at 'best' - from the JW perspective - it cannot in any case be definitely stated that they returned in 537.) Of course, the Bible never mentions an "exile of 70 years", and irrefutably says Babylon's 70 years ended when Babylon's king was 'called to account', which definitely happened in 539 BCE. But even if the Bible did say there were an exile of 70 years (which wouldn't make sense as a period starting at an unspecified future time in the context of Jeremiah 29, set in 594 BCE or 614 in JW years), they still wouldn't have anything beyond circular reasoning for their insistence on 607-537. Additionally, the only way 70 years would make any sense as 'years of exile' to the Jews already in Babylon would be for it to refer to the start of their exile in early 597 BCE (617 in JW chronology), which would mean they would expect to return home in 547 BCE (JW years). Little wonder that JW literature never mentions the year for the setting of Jeremiah chapter 29 (though two issues of The Watchtower, from way back in 1964 and 1979, connect '614 BCE' with chapter 28).

    ---

    HA HA. The simple fact of the matter is that there was a Jewish Exile of 70 years duration ending in 537BCE or according to scholars roundabout that time so counting backwards one arrives at a date of 607 BCE not 586 or 587BCE. Thus the historical fact of the Jewish Exile of 70 years even if you wish to end it at 539 BCE still does not give you 586 or 587 BCE. Big Pwoblem here.

    scholar JW

  • scholar
    scholar

    Mean Mr Mustard

    It's not that Jerimiah was or was not "all about" the Exile. He talks about it. But he doesn't equate it to the 70 years.

    -

    False. Ezra and Daniel when referring to the Exile quote Jeremiah's prophecy of the 70 years thus proving that Jeremiah linked the Exile with the 70 years.

    ---

    The consequences of the exile is irrelevant to this topic. But again, above, you equate the exile with the servitude. The servitude started long before the exile, and its the servitude that lasted 70 years.

    ---

    That is because the 70 years was the Exile, a period of servitude during which the Land was desolate. Certainly, the Jews came into servitude to Neb 10 years prior to the Fall which event began the 70 years as attested by Daniel, Ezra and Josephus.

    ---

    No, it's literally the opposite.

    --

    False for you have it arse about

    scholar JW

    ---


  • Jeffro
    Jeffro

    scholar:

    The simple fact of the matter is that there was a Jewish Exile of 70 years duration

    Entirely false, and unsupported by the Bible despite your claims to respect it as a source. The Bible indicates Babylon’s dominance of 70 years which definitely ended in 539 BCE, which therefore began in 609 BCE, which is when Babylon conquered Assyria and became the ‘world power’. The Bible further indicates that most of the Jews were exiled 11 years prior to Jerusalem’s destruction and others were exiled 5 years later, and that some Jews returned to rebuild the temple in 538 BCE. According to the Bible, most of the Jews were in exile for 59 years, some were in exile for 49 years, and others were in exile for 44 years. The Bible DOES NOT MENTION ‘70 years of exile’, for which I have provided biblical support at links already provided. But feel free to provide evidence to the contrary instead of just making assertions. đŸ€Ł

  • Vidqun
    Vidqun

    Scholar, the Israelites seventy years of servitude include 3 sieges, 5 deportations, and eventually the destruction of Jerusalem. Nebuchadnezzar had a lot of patience with the Jews, but eventually his patience would run out. The Biblical record compares well with the Babylonian Chronicles.

    Pharoah Necho’s campaign in northern Syria coincides with the brief reign of Jehoahaz, who was deposed on Necho’s return shortly after 1 Tishri (late Sept) 609, at which time Jehoiakim’s accession begins. First year of Jehoiakim, Tishri 608 (Sept–Oct) to Elul 607 (Aug–Sept). Third year of Jehoiakim, Tishri 606 (Sept–Oct) to last of Elul, 605 (Oct 6). This is the twenty-first year of Nabopolasar and the accession year of Nebuchadrezzar. Battle of Carchemish, late May to early June 605; Nabopolasar’s death Aug 15/16, 605. Nebuchadrezzar’s coronation Sept 7, 605. The accession year of Nebuchadrezzar = the third year of Jehoiakim. First (regnal) year of Nebuchadrezzar = the fourth year of Jehoiakim.

    Jehoiakim, son of Josiah, was king of Judah (Dan. 1:1). Zedekiah was the last king. How likely is it that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem in 607 BCE, before his victory over the Egyptians in 605 BCE? He wasn’t even king yet. His father died in 605 BCE. From there figure in 3 sieges and 5 deportations. Only in his nineteenth year did he burn the temple and destroy Jerusalem. 587/586 BCE is a much better option for the destruction of Jerusalem.

    The above can be proved from the Scriptures. See also A. R. Green (1982). “The Chronology of the Last Days of Judah: Two Apparent Discrepancies.” Journal of Biblical Literature, 101, pp. 71, 72. I have additional references for those that are interested.

  • Jeffro
    Jeffro

    Vidqun:

    Jehoiakim, son of Josiah, was king of Judah (Dan. 1:1). Zedekiah was the last king. How likely is it that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem in 607 BCE, before his victory over the Egyptians in 605 BCE? He wasn’t even king yet. His father died in 605 BCE.

    Your assessment of the early Neo-Babylonian period is correct, but JWs insert 20 years into the Neo-Babylonian period after Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, pushing back the years assigned to his reign. So it’s not as simple as querying Nebuchadnezzar’s conquest of Jerusalem ‘before’ his victory at Carchemish. What we, and all of scholarship for the period, know was 605 BCE, historical revisionists like ‘scholar’ and other JWs call 625 BCE.

    The Watch Tower Society vacillates between ignoring the problem - not attempting to defend 607 for decades - and occasional dishonest attempts to defend their view (like in 1981 when they said VAT 4956 was defective and unreliable, or 2011 when they said VAT 4956 completely supports their view). The fact is that the JW position is indefensible, so after JW apologists’ paltry attempts (such as their easily refuted claims about VAT 4956) at justifying their doctrine fail, they just fall back to the unbiblical mantra of ‘70 years of exile’. They don’t really care about the actual facts because of the powerful delusion connected to their end-times beliefs.

  • Fadeaway1962
    Fadeaway1962

    https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/was-king-solomons-temple-a-real-place.

    Are we still talking about Solomon's temple of which there is little or no evidence of its existence and the two individuals David and Solomon of whom like the temple there is little or no historical evidence outside the Bible of there existence .

  • Jeffro
    Jeffro

    Fadeaway1962:

    Are we still talking about Solomon's temple of which there is little or no evidence of its existence and the two individuals David and Solomon of whom like the temple there is little or no historical evidence outside the Bible of there existence.

    Indeed. Jerusalem was little more than a tribal city-state at ‘Solomon’s’ time. Aside from the fact that the biblical proportions given for Solomon’s temple are physically impossible, the temple that was destroyed by the Babylonians was more likely built during Josiah’s reign.

  • Vidqun
    Vidqun

    Jeffro, my argument, and that of many others, is that Biblical chronology and secular chronology correspond. Why would Babylonian scribes or the scribes after them falsify the tablets?

  • Jeffro
    Jeffro

    Vidqun:

    Jeffro, my argument, and that many others, is that Biblical chronology and secular chronology correspond. Why would Babylonian scribes or the scribes after them falsify the tablets?

    Sorry if I was unclear. Neo-Babylonian records agree completely with the Bible for the period in question. It is only the JW chronology that inserts 20 years into the Neo-Babylonian period. But JWs shift back all the events of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, not just the destruction of Jerusalem (and they also distort the order of events during Nebuchadnezzar's first 7 years, and place the stories in Daniel* in the wrong years).
    * Daniel wasn't an actual historical figure, but the periods given in the stories are compatible with the Neo-Babylonian period.

  • johnamos

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit