Scholar pretendus said to Alleymom:
: I wiil now address the issue of the period of mourning and then will comment on the poztates seventy year confusion.
There is no confusion among "poztates" about this. It's extremely simple: the 70 years spoken of by Jeremiah was a period of Babylonian supremacy starting in 609 B.C. and ending in 539 B.C. Zechariah 7 speaks of a 70-year period (perhaps approximate; but counting inclusively, nearly exact, just like the Jews counted inclusively when figuring the lengths of kings' reigns using the non-accession-year system) of mourning and fasting that lasted from 587 B.C. through 518 B.C. Zechariah 1 speaks of a 70-year period of denunciation and indignation by Jehovah against Jerusalem and Judah that lasted until 519 B.C. when the words recorded in Zechariah 1 were spoken. Counted from Jerusalem's destruction in 587, this was about 68 years, and counted from the beginning of the siege of Jerusalem in 589, this was almost exactly 70 years. Since the texts give no indication of whether these three periods were approximate or exact, it is unjustified to dogmatically claim that they were exact, because many periods spoken of in the Bible as lasting X years can be demonstrated to be only approximately X years.
I want to point out the precise reason that the Watchtower Society and its apologists want to equate the three above-mentioned periods: if they are three separate periods, then the text of Zechariah directly demonstrates that the Society's claim that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C. is false, because the time from 607 to 519/518 is nearly 90 years, not the 70 spoken of in the texts.
: The two texts in Zechariah refer to a period of seventy years.
No, they refer to two periods, one a period of denunciation and indignation by Jehovah against the cities of Judah, and the other a period during which the Jews fasted and mourned because of the destruction of their homeland.
: The first example clearly refers to a past epochal period because of its association with elements characteristic of that period according to Jeremiah.
This is a typically unjustified bald claim by a typical JW apologist. What is the evidence for it? Why, nothing more than it must be true, or the Watchtower's "chronology" will collapse!
Watchtower apologists are masters of such special pleading.
: The second example of the period has the additional element unlike the first, of annual fasting and mournings.
Not an additional element -- a completely different element. The text concerning the 70 years says nothing whatsoever about a time of denunciation and indignation. Claims about context implicitly including such are just more special pleading.
: The annual events coomenced with the Fall and were celebrated annually from that time right up to the time of Zechariah's prophecy. This latter period would be 90 years
A good example of a Watchtower apologist contradicting the Bible when the Bible contradicts Watchtower doctrine. The text of Zech. 7:1-5 explicitly states that the period was 70 years.
: and the former was seventy years both commencing from the Fall.
Approximately, anyway. Claiming that they both commenced exactly with the "Fall" is purely an assumption.
: with a period of exile-desolation-servitude-denunciation-mourning
Yet more unjustified assumption and special pleading. This requires the equating of periods that are demonstrably not all precisely equal to 70 years, and periods that the biblical texts explicitly describe as different since the events in those time periods are different.
: until the Return
But scholar pretendus already admitted that the period of mourning spoken of in Zech 7 ended in 518 B.C. He is once again contradicting himself.
: whereupon exile-desolation-servitude-denunciation ceased.
We see that scholar pretendus left "mourning" out here. He is obviously trying to cover his ass, which shows that he knows enough to deliberately leave out critical information. Thus, he is deliberately misrepresenting the Bible itself, and yet again demonstrating that he is a pathological liar.
: So seventy years was fulfilled in 537 with the Jews back home and still with an unfinished temple but a period of mouning continued right up to 518.
Which the Bible directly states was 70 years, but scholar pretendus claims was 90. LOL!
: In proof of the fact that these seventy years was a past event
A typically fuzzy and stupid bit of reasoning here. Scholar pretendus has already claimed that the period of mourning was 90 years, yet here he is saying it's 70!
: and could not have been a present event is the simple fact that we have a seventy years A at the 2nd Darius and seventy years B at the 4th year of Darius.
What a stupid bit of argumentation! If I say that John was born in 1930 and died in 2000, and that Fred was born in 1935 and died in 2005, and that John and Fred were 70 years old, does that mean that I'm saying that John are Fred were the same person? That's what scholar pretendus is doing here.
: Now, does this mean we have two separate periods
Of course. The Bible directly states that.
: or are they the same and if there are two periods then how can they be tagged? in other words, how can they be described?
Scholar pretendus' next bit of argumentation is breathtakingly stupid. He invents "confusion" in Jonsson's exposition, and proceeds to argue that this "confusion" somehow proves the Bible wrong.
: The Jonsson hypothesis is somewhat fuzzy and clearly confused on this point of chronology.
Not at all. This is simply inventing another straw man. Jonsson is extremely clear on this, as I will show.
This demonstrates another deliberate misrepresentation by a pathologically lying JW apologist.
: I refer you to GTR, 1998, 3rd edn, pp 224-229:
: Jonsson gives the folowing dates for Zechariah 1:12;
: 587---519 = 68 years
: 589---519 = 70 years
Scholar pretendus is lying by omission here. Jonsson is doing the usual scholarly thing by refusing to be dogmatic about things not directly stated in the text under consideration. Here is what Jonsson actually says about this (p. 226):
Counted from 587 B.C.E. the indignation had now, in 519, lasted for nearly seventy years, or sixty-eight years to be exact. And if counted from the beginning of the siege on January 27, 589 B.C.E. (2 Kings 25:1; Ezekiel 24:1-2; Jeremiah 52:4), the indignation had lasted for almost exactly seventy years on February 15, 519. But just two months earlier the work on the foundation of the temple had been finished. (Haggai 2:18) From that time onward Jehovah began to remove his indignation: "From this day I shall bestow blessing." -- Haggai 2:19, NW.
It seems clear, therefore, that the seventy years mentioned in this text do not refer to the prophecy of Jeremiah, but simply to the time that had elapsed by 519 B.C.E. since the siege and destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 589-587 B.C.E.
: Zechariah 7:5
: 587---518/17= 69 years+4 mths = 69 years +2 mths.
Another deliberate misrepresentation. Jonsson explicitly states that 518 was the seventieth year since 587. This is counting inclusively. Concerning Zech. 7:1-5, Jonsson writes (pp. 226-8):
Again, the event recorded in this passage is exactly dated, to "the fourth year of Darius . . . on the fourth [day] of the ninth month." (Zech 7:1) This date corresponds to December 7, 518 B.C.E. (Julian calendar).
. . .
For how long had the Jews been fasting in these months in memory of the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple and assassination of Gedaliah? For "seventy years,' according to Zechariah 7:5. The year 518/17 was the seventieth year since 587 B.C.E.!
When someone has to resort to such deliberate misrepresentation to try to prove a point, you know that they know that they're lying.
Next comes another deliberate misrepresentation. Jonsson clearly expounded on two separate and approximate 70-year periods. Yet here we find scholar pretendus claiming that he equated the periods:
: Therefore, the range is from 589---517= 72 years
Wrong. Jonsson gave ranges for the two periods as follows:
Zech 1: 589-587 to 519 B.C.
Zech 5: 587 to 518 B.C.
The desire to grasp at straws shows itself in scholar pretendus' using 517 as the end of the range. Jonsson said nothing about any date in 517 B.C. being the end of a 70-year period. As shown in the above quotation, he pegged the statements in Zech. 5 to December 7, 518 B.C. and by his notation "518/17" merely indicated that the Jewish year in which that date occurred subsumed parts of 518 and 517 B.C. -- an indication completely obvious to anyone with knowledge of Jewish dating methods.
: However, the picture becomes further confused
No, only scholar pretendus' desired picture is confused, because that is his straw man.
Next we find scholar pretendus setting forth yet another straw man:
: because on page 229 it is now not two periods but one period beginning from the earliest 589 down till the latest 515 which gives a maximum span of 74 years.
Here is what Jonsson actually writes (pp. 228-9):
From a close examination of the texts dealing with the seventy years, certain facts have been established that cannot be ignored in any attempt to find an application of the seventy-year period that is in harmony with both the Bible and historical facts:
(1) The seventy years refer to many nations, not Judah only: Jeremiah 25:11.
(2) The seventy years refer to a period of servitude for these nations, that is, vassalage to Babylon: Jeremiah 25:11.
(3) The seventy years refer to the period of Babylonian supremacy, "seventy years for Babylon": Jeremiah 29:10.
(4) The seventy years were accomplished when the Babylonian king and his nation were punished, that is, in 539 B.C.E.: Jeremiah 25:12.
(5) The seventy years of servitude began many years before the destruction of Jerusalem: Jeremiah chapters 27, 28, and 35; Daniel 1:1-4; 2:1; 2 Kings 24:1-7; the Babylonian chronicles, and Berossus.
(6) Zechariah 1:7-12 and 7:1-5 are not references to Jeremiah's prophecy, but refer to the period from the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in the years 589-587 to the rebuilding of the temple in the years 520-515 B.C.E.
Obviously, Jonsson is not here suddenly equating the two 70-year periods about which he just finished an exposition demonstrating why they are different. He is merely describing them as taking place in the general time frame beginning with "the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in the years 589-587" and running down to the general time frame of "the rebuilding of the temple in the years 520-515 B.C.E.". Using my above analogy about John and Fred, this is like saying that they lived and died from the 1930s through the 2000s.
Again the desire to grasp at any and all straws traps scholar pretendus in a circle of lies and misrepresentations. This allows him to come to ridiculous conclusions like the following:
: Of course, with such a number of variable dates, numerous permutations are indeed possible and this is the tragic consequence of treating the seventy years as a present event at the time of Zechariah because such a stupid interpretation makes any chronology impossible as the above schema demonstrates. The seventy years is no lonher 'seventy ' but anything from a possible 68 years ranging to a possible 72 years. Therfore, according to the Jonsson hypothesis it can no longer be 70 literal yeras but simply a 'round number'. So when you try to argue for a present-time seventy years you are really arguing for a mythical period of time as a round number.
The myth is really the entire corpus of Watchower chronology. Jonsson hits the nail on the head as to why the Society so desperately misrepresents the Bible and ancient history (p. 229 of GTR3):
The application given by the Watch Tower Society to the seventy-year prophecy, that it refers to Judah only, and to the period of complete desolation of the land, "without an inhabitant," following the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, is seen to be in direct conflict with each of the above established Biblical and historical facts.
An application that is in clear conflict with both the Bible and such historical facts cannot have anything to do with reality. In a serious discussion of possible applications of the seventy years, this alternative is the first which must be rejected. It is held to by the Watch Tower Society, not because it can be supported by the Bible and historical facts, but because it is a necessary prerequisite for their calculation of the supposed 2,520 years of Gentile times, 607 B.C.E. - 1914 C.E.
If their application of the seventy years is dropped, the Gentile times calculation leading to 1914 C.E. immediately proves false, together with all the prophetic claims and speculations that are tied to it.
AlanF
