Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE? (page 48)

toreador

So was the land completely uninhabited or not?

Some parts of Judah became uninhabited, especially important cities and towns. This is not unusual; throughout the Bronze and Iron Ages, sites not infrequently became abandoned for a generation or two (or longer) following devastation and war, as archaeological evidence shows. This is what Ephraim Stern shows in the case of Judah in the sixth century BC; the evidence is striking that in many cities and towns, there is an abrupt break between destruction levels dating to Nebuchadnezzer's campaigns and levels dating to the Persian period. However, if this evidence is to be accepted (as Rolf Furuli has done in his recent tome, p. 91), it is dishonest to omit the caveat that Stern has pointed out that there were places in Judah that remained inhabited throughout the exilic period. The evidence is unambiguous of cultural continuity in the land of Benjamin (cf. Lipschits, Blenkinsopp), and it is inconceivable that the Babylonians who acquired the land had no interest in exploiting the land for its natural resources and did not themselves enter it for 50 years....

Jeffro

So was the land completely uninhabited or not?

All or part of Judah was uninhabited for a period of time. However the 70 years does not refer to a period of time for which Judah was completely uninhabited.

EvilForce

Things back then didn't move quite as fast. It took them 70 years to develop the new gentrification rehab-warehouse loft condo project. The Judah Heights project.

TheListener

I have nothing profound to add I just wanted to be included on the longest thread in history.

I researched and concluded that the 607 date was wrong by myself, for myself long before I knew who Johnson was or that he had written a book.

I've read his book and found even more reason to disbelieve the 607 date.

At first when I bagan rejecting the 607 date I thought we should start the 2,520 years at 587/6 and get a new end of the gentile times date. I never thought to question the link between the 70 years and 1914 beyond the 607 date being incorrect, It was here and Johnson that helped me focus on other things like the day for a year 'scriptural rule' crap.

There is a poster on another discussion/debate board that goes by the following names: AdamN, DrivesLikeJehu, DLJ. That is the only person I've seen reasonably discuss the 607 date with any credibility. Not enough to convince me (or probably any of you) but at least the person gives it a sincere and educated try -unlike our scholar pretendus (hehe that's funny). I would love to see that poster actually debate some of our posters in a cage match. - 2 GO IN 1 COMES OUT. You know Thunderdome!

AlanF

You make a good point, TheListener. It's quite possible to debate the evidence for and against 607 in a reasonable manner with a JW defender. The problem for them is that all JW defenders come smack up against the reality that the Bible itself proves the date wrong (they have no problem admitting that secular evidence is 100% against it). They either have no answers at all, or they invent Furuli-like excuses, for problems such as have been discussed in this thread. In my experience -- with the sole exception of scholar pretendus -- JW defenders in an open forum either drop out without admitting of any problems, or begin the process of dropping out of the JWs. The one just goes back to braindead cult-think; the other begins thinking himself out of the JW cult. Of course, in closed forums intended only for JWs, if the heat gets too high, the JWs boot the purveyor of the unpleasant information off the board, deciding that anyone who presents such information must be an apostate.

AlanF

scholar

AlanF

The Bible evidence is completely against the secular dates 586/587 because such secular evidence ignores the clear statements of Scripture that the land would be desolate, without an inhabitant for seventy years. Secular evidence supports the basic facts and methodology for the calculation of 607 for if it was otherwise then such a calculation would be impossible. You cannot see these facts because you are a member of the brain-dead Jonsson cult which is a prominent part of the evil slave class.

scholar JW

scholar

Leolaia

Now you can see the wisdom in the view of WT scholars that there was a period of desolation of the land for seventy years as it is only now being seriously considered as a genuine historical position by current scholars. Ephraim Stern is forced to admit to an abruption in that late Judean period and more scholars will turn around and be forced to conclude that Judah was in fact empty for seventy years as the Bible clearly and demomonstrably shows.

scholar JW

AlanF

Like I said, scholar pretendus, repetition for emphasis may get you a long way in your Kingdom Hall, but not in scholarly circles.

Unless you deal with the actual scriptures you claim support your position -- namely, post them on this thread, and show why they support your claims -- you have no hope of convincing anyone besides yourself. That's because of your a priori committment to swallowing everything spewed from Mommy's teats. We all know perfectly well that if Mommy told you tomorrow to drop 607 and accept 587 you'd do it in a heartbeat. Such is the power of cult-think.

AlanF

Narkissos

The Bible evidence is completely against the secular dates 586/587 because such secular evidence ignores the clear statements of Scripture that the land would be desolate, without an inhabitant for seventy years. Secular evidence supports the basic facts and methodology for the calculation of 607 for if it was otherwise then such a calculation would be impossible. You cannot see these facts because you are a member of the brain-dead Jonsson cult which is a prominent part of the evil slave class.

Now you can see the wisdom in the view of WT scholars that there was a period of desolation of the land for seventy years as it is only now being seriously considered as a genuine historical position by current scholars. Ephraim Stern is forced to admit to an abruption in that late Judean period and more scholars will turn around and be forced to conclude that Judah was in fact empty for seventy years as the Bible clearly and demomonstrably shows.

And don't worry, all the extant positive, material, archaeological evidence to the contrary will no doubt miraculously vanish.

Sweet dreams scholar.

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

Share this