i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
scholar:
For the reason that you have been influenced by COJ and your timeline does not accord with WT chronology.
I did get around to reading COJ's book around 2015, many years after I had established the timeline for the period. The fact that my timeline shows WT chronology to be erroneous is largely the point, and the fact that it is consistent with secular historians and other honest individuals is only because it is correct.
i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
'scholar':
You introduced Stern so if there is a contradiction in his statements then that is not my problem.
There is no contradiction in Stern's statements. Most of the towns were destroyed, and the towns that were destroyed were not resettled throughout the exilic period. Some other towns were not destroyed and remained populated. If you imagine the statements to be contradictory, you quite definitely have a problem.
You need to focus on the fact that the judgement of Babylon only occurred after 70 years was fulfilled and that was not at its Fall in 539 BCE any other interpretation is fanciful. Also, the verse clearly indicated that the land of Babylon would also be desolated which did not happen in with the Fall.
Complete nonsense. The claim that Babylon was 'called to account' in some manner in 537 BCE is plainly stupid, and the land of Babylon wasn't desolated in 537 either, further invalidating your claim. Daniel 5:26-31 (written later but consistent with how the Jews regarded the period) quite clearly refers to the end of Babylon's days and being called to account when it was conquered in 539.
i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
scholar:
Why ask me such a question when you are such an expert so you must have an answer. The answer is simple. By the time Neb received his first dream in 606 BCE or thereabouts based on Dan 2:1, Daniel had already been in Babylon for at least 11 years having completed his three years of training becoming unlike yourself, a very wise man. As to whether he was known to Neb during that period of training and thereafter I do not know as I unlike you I am unfamiliar with the protocols of the Babylonian Court system.
Obviously Nebuchadnezzar didn't really know Daniel because Daniel is a fictitious character invented later as a trope for analogues to the Maccabean period. But aside from that, in the context of the story, Daniel was specifically appointed by Nebuchadnezzar as the chief of all things superstitious (Daniel 1:19-21; compare Daniel 5:11), so your attempted excuse for dodging even more flaws in Watch Tower chronology by suggesting that 'maybe Nebuchadnezzar didn't know him at any time' is plainly wrong.
i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
scholar:
Your timeline covers the Divided Monarchy and is part of Bible Chronology which should not be ignored as COJ does and WT scholars have always provided such a timeline.
Why are we talking about COJ all of a sudden? Watch Tower's timeline for the period is very very wrong as can be seen here (PDF).
The Decision Tables as a Methodology are from Rodger Young's research which in itself is incredulous, proving nothing in resolving the 586/587 dilemma, in short, such analysis is gibberish.
Nope. I've done decision table analysis on various aspects through the Divided Monarchy, independent of Young's research. Claiming it is not a valid method or that it something unique to Young just further demonstrates that you are inept at applying or understanding logic.
i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
scholar:
No: I am very familiar with Stern and I copied and pasted that quote quite deliberately in anticipation of your reply. So, what we now have two quotes from Stern that appear to be contradictory which is simply part of the ongoing debate between archaeologists regarding the subject 'the Myth of the Empty Land' so the problem is with Stern not with WT scholars so better to stick to what God's Word says about the state of Judah during the Exile, Don't you think?
This is seriously the level of delusion and dishonesty we're dealing with...
Unfortunately, 'scholar' is a lost cause, but other readers of the forum can see through his nonsense.
i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
pseudo-scholar:
Did the Israelites remain captive in Babylon for 70 years as the Bible foretold? Note the comments of a leading Israeli archaeologist, Ephraim Stern. “From 604 B.C.E. to 538 B.C.E.—there is a complete gap in evidence suggesting occupation. In all that time, not a single town destroyed by the Babylonians was resettled.” The so-called gap in which there was no occupation or resettling of conquered territory corresponds closely to Israel’s exile in Babylon from 607 to 537 B.C.E.—2 Chronicles 36:20, 21.
haha. Yes, quote the bit that Watch Tower quotes (you plagiarised the whole paragraph from Awake!, June 2012, page 14), but leave out what Stern follows with:
I do not mean to imply that the country was uninhabited during the period between the Babylonian destruction and the Persian period. There were undoubtedly some settlements, but the population was very small. Many towns and villages were either completely or partly destroyed. The rest were barely functioning. International trade virtually ceased. Only two regions appear to have been spared this fate—the northern part of Judah (the region of Benjamin) and probably the land of Ammon, although the latter region awaits further investigation.You're so dishonest. Also, 604 to 538 exactly corresponds to Nebuchadnezzar's demand for tribute in early 604 until the Jews' return in 538.
i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
Question for 'scholar': if, as Watch Tower says, Daniel was brought to Babylon in 618 BCE and 3 years later was found by Nebuchadnezzar to be 10 times wiser than everyone else and given a position serving before the king, why was Daniel completely unknown to Nebuchadnezzar in 606 BCE when called to interpret a dream?
(Answer: Watch Tower Society chronology is nuts. In the story*, Daniel is brought to Babylon in Nebuchadnezzar's first year and interprets the dream the following year during the training period, and then at the end of training all of the trainees are brought before Nebuchadnezzar for final assessment.)
* Note: though the book of Daniel was written later and is not historical, the relative years of reign are provided in the story.
i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
Your timeline is faulty as its interpretation of the 70 years is misp[laced and further WT scholars have already produced a more accurate timeline. Scholars have different timelines for the Divided Monarchy and there is no consensus for this period of history within current scholarship so your comment that your timeline is in agreement with the best scholars is simply bunkum.
We're talking about the Neo-Babylonian period, not the entire Divided Monarchy. Nice try at muddying the waters. But yes, even in the broader period, where there is disagreement among scholars, my timeline (with years for Judah and Israel based only on the Bible along with Decision Table analysis where needed) is within the bounds of the various years advanced by scholars unlike Watch Tower Society gibberish which is broadly recognised as fringe nonsense.
You can talk in circles all you like, but your 'interpretation' (really just going along with Watch Tower) of Babylon's 70 years is plainly irrational.
i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
scholar:
The historical evidence is that Judah remained desolate for exactly 70 years and began with the Fall with Nerbuchadnezzer ending with the Return under Cyrus nicely confirmed by the historian Josephus in several places.
Nope. Wrong again. Not only are you obviously wrong about the duration of the exile (as distinct from Babylon's 70 years of power from 609 to 539), but parts of Judea remained populated through the exilic period (Ephraim Stern).
Additionally, though Josephus erroneously gives 70 years in one location, he correctly gives 50 in others, and also indicates a 182.5 year period "from the captivity of the ten tribes to the first year of Cyrus" that is not compatible with Watch Tower Society chronology.
i hope this is in the right area.
i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.
for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.
scholar:
I would rather base my Chronology on the Bible rather than theories and opinions of men.
🤣 You doggedly agree with a bunch of old men in New York. I have already provided a timeline of the period based only on the Bible, which just happens to agree with the best scholars on the matter (including scholars recommended by pseudo-scholar on this very thread) .
