Watchtower Gives Up Explaining 607 BCE Date!

by VM44 239 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Alleymom

  Hellrider wrote:
  
  

  No need to make any axcuse for Josephus, Josephus is in full agreement with modern chronology, and never wrote nor believed that the Temple was destroyed in 607, on the contrary, he believed, and rightly so, that it was destroyed around 587/586. Scholar just invented that crap. See my post above, where I show Josephus` statements on the issue.

  Hellrider ---

  With all of the cross discussion going on, you may have missed Scholar's message

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/98966/1706200/post.ashx#1706200

  where he says Josephus gives 18 years to Evil-Merodach. That is the point I was addressing. I wasn't talking about the 70 years or 50 years at all.

  Josephus is out of step with everyone when he says Evil-Merodach reigned 18 years and Neriglissar reigned 40 years. This is not in accordance with the regnal lengths given by modern scholars, which are based on the primary sources of the dated cuneiform tablets. Neither does it agree with the lengths given by other ancient historians or by the Jewish sources.

  Not even the "celebrated WT scholars" agree with these figures from Josephus, as Scholar knows full well.

  Here is a link to the relevant passage from Josephus:

  http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text/josephus/ant10.html

  Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews. Book X, Chapter 11.2.

  Regards,
  Marjorie
• 

  Hellrider

  Alleymom, i know, sorry about that. Yes, I know Josephus mentions 18 years for Evilmerodach in "Antiquities of the jews", book X. I have the link to his works from before. I was adressing Scholars "Josephus says 70 years"-claim, which he says agrees with the WTS`s view on things (although it does NOT - regardless of how long Josephus says Evilmerodach, the statements Josephus says about "70 yearsof desolation" is a completely different matter!), not the length of Evilmerodachs reign. In the heat of the discussion, I thought this was the dispute you were having with him, too. My apologies, I didn`t mean to confuse things.
• 

  Alleymom

  Scholar wrote:
  
  Marjorie
  
  True, but whatever the case Josephus was a competent historian of the history of Israel and nicley parallels biblical history of Israel. His testimony cannot be ignored because he was sympathetic to his people but if you prefer the testimony of pagan historians then that is your judgement. Celebrated WT scholars take Josephus seriously.
  scholar JW

  Neil ---

  #1 --- As we have discussed numerous times in the past, the regnal lengths are firmly established from dated contemporary cuneiform tablets, which are primary sources. The testimony of ancient historians is not needed to establish the king lists. It is untrue that I "prefer the testimony of pagan historians." That remark was beneath you, Neil.

  #2 -- You imply that you are relying on Josephus rather than the testimony of "pagan historians." But Josephus himself consulted "pagan historians" for information about the neo-Babylonian kings. He even names the "pagan historians" he used: Berossus, Megasthenes, Diocles, and Philostrates. This immediately precedes his statement about Evil-Merodach.

  http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/text/josephus/ant10.html (See Book X, Chapter 11, sections 1 and 2.)

  #3 >>> Celebrated WT scholars take Josephus seriously. <<<
  
  But they do not agree with him that Evil-Merodach reigned 18 years and Neriglissar reigned 40 years, do they? I have posted the WT references numerous times. The WT references I have quoted say that Evil-Merodach reigned 2 years and Neriglissar reigned 4 years.

  If you prefer to believe the testimony of Josephus rather than that of "celebrated WT scholars" that is up to you.

  Are you a baptized JW? Why do you continue to reject the clear statements of the WT regarding the regnal lengths of the neo-Babylonian kings? Why are you running ahead and engaging in independent thinking?

  Regards,
  Marjorie
• 

  Alleymom

  Alleymom, i know, sorry about that. Yes, I know Josephus mentions 18 years for Evilmerodach in "Antiquities of the jews", book X. I have the link to his works from before. I was adressing Scholars "Josephus says 70 years"-claim, which he says agrees with the WTS`s view on things (although it does NOT - regardless of how long Josephus says Evilmerodach, the statements Josephus says about "70 yearsof desolation" is a completely different matter!), not the length of Evilmerodachs reign. In the heat of the discussion, I thought this was the dispute you were having with him, too. My apologies, I didn`t mean to confuse things.

  Hellrider -- That's quite all right. Since this forum doesn't have threaded replies, it's easy to lose track of who is responding to whom on what point. I just wanted to clarify things. Regards,
  Marjorie
• 

  Hellrider

  Josephus is out of step with everyone when he says Evil-Merodach reigned 18 years and Neriglissar reigned 40 years

  LoL, yes. If we were to take Josephus seriously, and they reigned for that long, then we are talking about...around a "hundred and ten years of desolation and servitude". But again, I assume we are just going to rely on Josephus on the parts that suit the "celebrated WT scholars". Just like with the Bible.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Josephus only refers to the obscurity of the temple for fifty years on a single occasion whereas he repeatedly states that the desolation-servitude-captivity lasted seventy years and ran from Neb's destruction of the temple-city-land until the return under Cyrus which is from 607 intil 537. So, Josephus' presentation of history for this period agrees with that of celebrated WT scholars.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Alleymom

  Marjorie

  1. The primary documents conflict with the information provided by Josephus and conflict with biblical history.

  2. Josephus was interested in establishing a history for his people or race and he consulted widely and celebrated Wt scholars consult widely as well but the Bible serves as the primary source in establishing a chron ology.

  3. Josephus' presentation of the Babylonian kings is not a problem for us but a problem for those who rely on secular sources primarily rather than the Bible. Josephus simply highlights the problems. Whether certain kings reigned or for long does not affect our chronology as it is event based and not regnal based. The presentation of the Babylonian kings in the Wt publications simply represents current thinking within scholarship and should in the final analysis be viewed as tentative.

  scholar JW
• 

  Hellrider

  Scholar:

  Josephus only refers to the obscurity of the temple for fifty years on a single occasion whereas he repeatedly states that the desolation-servitude-captivity lasted seventy years and ran from Neb's destruction of the temple-city-land until the return under

  Where? Where does Josephus explicitly state that the 70 years refer to the period of time between the destruction of the Temple, and the return of the exiles? Book, chapter and page number, if you please. Unless you provide the quote, I will consider you a liar.
• 

  Narkissos

  The primary documents conflict with the information provided by Josephus and conflict with biblical history.

  
  

  
  Ding Dong!

  Shouldn't this ring a bell in a historian's mind?

  Well, actually it is:

  The primary documents conflict with part of the information provided by Josephus but coincide with the part where Josephus actually quotes (and endorses) his historical source (Berossus) and conflict with biblical history as expounded exclusively by the WTBTS Inc. -- but coincide with biblical history as understood by the overwhelming majority of Bible scholars.

  Ding Dong!
• 

  Rabbit

  Scholar, I am really not surprised at your not answering my simple questions. Why ? Because, your answers (if honest) would shake your clay feet of a foundation that you've based the "Truth" on.

  I know those trees are so thick, it's hard to see the forest. But, at least try.

  Your silence is deafening...

  Rabbit