1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
JD,
Go to my web site and see my material on the neo-Babylonian chronology.
http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/babylonian_captivity.html
Yahoo is closing Geocities down and I am slowly in the process of finding an alternate location.
The WTS is wrong at every significant step along the way, including 537 BCE.
Doug
1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
JD,
I am saying that Chronicles and Ezra should not be mentioned in the same breath. Each had its own origin, separated in time and by community.
Ezra does not mention "70 years" anywhere; but because of their own religious objectives, the Chroniclers drew from Leviticus. Ezra did not. Maybe I am being pedantic, but these are separate documents and need to be addressed separately.
Regarding subheadings, I suggest you give it a try personally. If you go to my web site (open for a few more days only) you will find my email address and we could chat that way.
http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/contact_me.html
Doug
1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
JD,
"The Jews' enemies who were attemping to thwart the rebuilding effort" were the Jews and other people who had been left in Judah while these exiles and their descendants were in exile.
The people who had been left behind were the "People of the Land", as opposed to Judah's intelligentsia and upper echelon who had been taken into exile. The People of the Land had several reasons for not wanting these Returnees to reimpose their authority, and hence were strongly opposed to their presence. Some of those who remained behind had benefitted from the absence of those landlords.
Remember, the only written record of events that we have comes from the biased viewpoint of the Returnees. Indeed, it is likely that few of the People of the Land were literate and probably none was able to create a reasoned written presentation. In Scripture, you will see arguments about the attempted imposition of the written record over their oral traditions. In the end, the new invention of writing won.
Doug
1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
JD,
Your material would be more easily digested if you provided subheadings at strategic points.
They help the reader understand the development of your presentation, the reader will know what they are about to read and its purpose, and they provide a point where the reader can rest and gather their thoughts.
Doug
1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
JD,
The passages at Ezra 1:1-4 and 2 Chronicles 36:21-23 need to be decoupled.
They were written at a different time by very different communities probably separated by some 200 years. The latter community (the Chroniclers) had a deliberate religious motive that impacted the content of their record.
Doug
1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
Scholar, I am referring to your post #1774.
Scholar, tell me where any Bible specifically says this:
“The Bible is quite specific that the seventy years ended at the beginning of Tishri, 537 BCE.”
-----------------------
I agree with you that:
“Their Return which time is not stated either in the Bible or secular history.”
-----------------------
Scholar, you say: “The Babylon book I would have thought is quite specific about these matters”.
I am only interested in proof, not in bald assertions from the Babylon book.
-----------------------
Thank you for:
“Your reconstruction by means of those four points is correct.”
-----------------------
Scholar, your following statement does not prove the dates 607 or 537:
“The timing and celebration of the festal months in the year 607 and 537 BCE which would have been more important as Jehovah God was concerned so the seventy years began right on time, ended right on time spanning the complete period of seventy years in harmony with the cycle of sabbaths.”
-----------------------
You say: “Ezra 3:1 does not need to have some sort of official sanction from a secular authority to narrate the significance of the festal month for that month.”
Scholar, I am seeking an explicit endorsement from the Scripture, not from a secular source.Nowhere does Ezra say anything about “seventy years”, including at 3:1.
-----------------------
You say: “Tishri began with a New Moon which informed the Jews that this sacred month had begun.”
Scholar, each month began with a New Moon.
Read the first six verses of Ezra 3 and see the sequence they provide:
When the seventh month came and the Israelites had settled in their towns, the people assembled as one man in Jerusalem. Then Jeshua … and his associates began to build the altar of the God of Israel to sacrifice burnt offerings on it, in accordance with what is written in the Law of Moses the man of God.
Despite their fear of the peoples around them, they built the altar on its foundation and sacrificed burnt offerings on it to the LORD , both the morning and evening sacrifices.
Then in accordance with what is written, they celebrated the Feast of Tabernacles with the required number of burnt offerings prescribed for each day.
After that, they presented the regular burnt offerings, the New Moon sacrifices and the sacrifices for all the appointed sacred feasts of the LORD , as well as those brought as freewill offerings to the LORD .
On the first day of the seventh month they began to offer burnt offerings to the LORD , though the foundation of the LORD'S temple had not yet been laid.
You will see that the passage is not specific as to when they offered the first burnt offerings, and that after these they celebrated Tabernacles, which started in the middle of the month, for several days, and then they went on to the regular offerings, New Moon sacrifices, and so on.
The Returnees feared “the the peoples around them”. These “peoples” were the farmers who had lived in Judah while these Exiles had been in Chaldea/Babylon. These Exiles were the descendants of the elite, the power brokers, the royal household, the religious masters, the nation’s intelligentsia, and they posed a threat to the common people who had been left behind in Judah during the Exile.
-----------------------
I very strongly disagree with you on your following statement. I would be very angry if someone misquoted me so that I was made to appear to support a position I do not hold. You might not mind if someone did that to you, but I am not so magnanimous.
“There is nothing wrong in a selective quoting of a source for that is the prerogative of the writer.”
-----------------------
There is something very wrong with misusing other sources. I would not doubt that anyone can be celebrated as a true scholar if they did that. Otherwise they are simply seeking support of a predetermined conclusion, and that’s not scholarship.
“There is again nothing wrong with the use of other secular writers in order to construct chronology or history and this is what the celebrated WT scholars do.”
-----------------------
Doug
1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
Scholar,
Page 364 of the “Babylon” book quotes only the final sentence in the following quote from the 11th edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica.
Three separate occasions are mentioned (Jeremiah 52:28-30). The first was in the time of Jehoiachin in 597 BCE, when the temple of Jerusalem was partially despoiled, and a number of the leading citizens were removed. After eleven years (in the reign of Zedekiah) a fresh rising of the Judaeans occurred; the city was razed to the ground, and a further deportation ensued. Finally, five years later, Jeremiah records a third captivity. After the overthrow of Babylonia by the Persians, Cyrus gave the Jews permission to return to their native land (537 BCE), and more than forty thousand are said to have availed themselves of the privilege. (emphasis added)
This means that Franz accepted part of the Britannica article as authoritative, but hid the rest because it did not fit his prejudice.
In another citation from the Encyclopedia at page 364 of BF, it dates of the return as “537-536 BC”. Not a ringing endorsement for 537. The sentence in article in the Encyclopedia reads thus:
“The period of history covered by the books of Ezra and Nehemiah extends from the return of the exiles under Zerubbabel in 537-536 B.C. to Nehemiah's second visit to Jerusalem in 432 B.C.”
When you read the citation in BF, you will notice that Franz finishes the sentence early at the word “Jerusalem”. The full article of the Britannica cited by Franz is available at: http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Books_of_Ezra_and_Nehemiah which includes the statement:
The chronicler's account of the destruction of Jerusalem, the seventy years' interval and the return of 42,360 of the exiles represent a special view of the history of the period. The totals, as also the detailed figures, in Ezr., Neh. and i Esdr. v. vary considerably; the number is extremely large (contrast Jer. lii. 30); it includes the common people (contrast 2 Kings xxiv. 14, xxv. 12), and ignores the fact that Judah was not depopulated, that the Jews were carried off to other places besides Babylon and that many remained behind in Babylon. According to this view, Judah and Jerusalem were practically deserted until the return.
(I removed some Scriptural references for purposes of clarity. Emphases added.)
The citation from Price, Sellers and Carlson says “about 538 or 537 BC”. Franz says this relates to Cyrus’ decree. It may well do but I have not been able to verify or deny that. In any case, the word “about” is not a ringing endorsement. Franz cites a second time from that book: “537-536 Hebrew exiles return”, which not a ringing proof for October 537.
Doug
1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
Scholar,
Thank you for putting me on to those pages in the “Babylon” book. Analysis of these pages shows me why I could not determine whether the WTS ends the “70 years” with the repopulation of Judah or when the Returnees worshiped at the site of the Temple. The reason for my confusion is now clear.
This is my reconstruction of Franz’s argument. If I am wrong, please spell out my mistakes.
1. Jerusalem was destroyed in the fifth month of a year.
2. Two months later, Judah was left without a single inhabitant, following the departure to Egypt of Gedeliah’s assailants and their cohorts. This moment marked the start of the 70 years.
3. The land was repopulated a few months less than 70 years later, when the people settled into their respective towns. This repopulating and settling into their towns did not mark the end of the 70 years.
4. In the seventh month, the people worshiped at the site of the Temple. It was at this event that the end of the “70 years” was formally declared.
This means that the “70 Years” could not commence until the land was cleared of people and domestic animals, yet the period did not finish when people returned and resettled in their towns. Quiet some inconsistency there.
The returning exiles travelled to their respective towns with sufficient time to unpack and be settled in before they went to Jerusalem to meet in the 7th month (Tishri/October) at the temple site.
Apart from lacking symmetry, Franz’s arrangement meant that residents and their animals were absent from Judah for a few months short of 70 years. So Franz had to make the 70 Years end at the meeting in Jerusalem. That meeting of course is not the counter to its destruction, since the city and the temple were still in ruins, desolated.
Franz addressed his problem by saying the period ended when its end was officially declared when they met at the temple site:
Since the desolation had begun in the seventh month [with the departure of Gedeliah’s murderers and cohorts into Egypt], the desolation of the land ought to end officially in that same month; and Ezra 3:1 officially declares that it ended in that month. (Babylon, page 372, emphases mine)
So let’s read the record of the “official declaration” in Ezra.
When the seventh month came and the Israelites had settled in their towns, the people assembled as one man in Jerusalem. (Ezra 3:1, NIV)
The record at Ezra 3:1 does not sound like an official declaration. The expression “when the seventh month came” shows that some time had passed since they had arrived and settled down. Besides, the word "seventy" never appears in Ezra.
What did they do after they assembled? Let’s read on.
Then Jeshua son of Jozadak and his fellow priests and Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel and his associates began to build the altar of the God of Israel to sacrifice burnt offerings on it, in accordance with what is written in the Law of Moses the man of God. Despite their fear of the peoples around them, they built the altar on its foundation and sacrificed burnt offerings on it to the LORD, both the morning and evening sacrifices. Then in accordance with what is written, they celebrated the Feast of Tabernacles with the required number of burnt offerings prescribed for each day. (Ezra 3:2-4, NIV)
No mention of an official declaration that this month marked the end point of the 70 years. Rather, they had a busy bee building an altar and then sacrificing the offerings required in the Law of Moses. Then they celebrated Tabernacles (Booths) which commences in the middle of the month and runs for several days.
How can it be said that the desolations of Jerusalem’s sanctuary were declared to have ended when there was no declaration? Or that people assembling at a ruin is an official declaration?
This meeting at the ruined temple was not the answer to Daniel’s prayer (Dan 9:2).
The returnees were in fear of the residents of Judah who had not been sent into exile.
While reading these pages of the “Babylon” book, I was interested to see Franz resorting to selective quotations; it’s a pity for him that the 11th edition of the Britannica, which he claimed to cite, is freely available on the www, so we can see that not only did he quote just part of an article, he also quoted part of a sentence.
It’s also interesting to see his reliance on Parker and Dubberstein for his dates, and his total dependence on secular sources for the date 539 BCE. And to once more see his complete incompetence at trying to work out the first year of Cyrus.
Doug
1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
It is interesting to note that the Jewish web site
http://www.jewishgen.org/databases/GivenNames/ancient.htm
calls him PRINCE Zerubbabel. The dates given by this Jewish site for the period are also interesting.
1. does the wts date the end the 70 years as soon as the babylonian exiles returned to the land, or when they started the building of the altar?.
(ezra 2:68 makes it clear that the returnees arrived early enough for the exiles to be settled in their own towns (verse 70) well before they started to build the altar in the seventh month of an unidentified year (3:1)).. .
2. why were the returnees frightened of the people around them when they started to build the altar (ezra 3:3)?
Ann,
I don't know if you have read the book, but here is an appropriate excerpt from page 157 of "How the Bible Became a Book", by William M Schniedewind:
The prophet Ezekiel was apparently, along with Jehioachin, among those exiled in 597 bce (cf. Ezek 1:2; 2 Kgs 24:16). Unfortunately for Ezekiel, he was not taken to Babylon to live in the royal palace like Jehoiachin and the royal family. Ezekiel was settled along with the other exiles in a work camp along the Chebar canal, just north of Babylon. The Book of Ezekiel shares many things with Jeremiah. Most importantly, Ezekiel acknowledges the legitimacy of Jehoiachin as the king of Judah. In keeping with this, from its beginning the book is dated according to the ruling years of Jehoiachin rather than of Zedekiah (Ezekiel 1:2).
Some have suggested that Ezekiel may have held out hope that the imprisoned king would one day return to rule. But such date formulas are part of the editorial structure; thus, they reflect the views of the editors, that is, the exiled Judean royal family in Babylon - views of their own legitimacy.
Within the Book of Ezekiel, the prophet's ministry is dated primarily between 593 and 585 bce – that is, after the first exile (in 597 BCE) but before the third exile (in 581 BCE). Like his contemporary, Jeremiah, Ezekiel counsels acqui escence to the Babylonians (12:1-15; 17:1-22; 21:18-32). The exile was inevitable. Moreover, the royal regent in Jerusalem, Zedekiah, is reviled by Ezekiel as "the vile, wicked prince of Israel" (Ezek 21:25).
Ezekiel also apparently blames the exile on the sins of Manasseh (as we observed with Jeremiah and the conclusion to the Book of Kings), although the point is made less directly. All this points us again to the exiled Judean royal family's role in editing and preserving literature that (1) supported their royal claims, (2) absolved Jehoiachin from direct blame for the Babylonian exiles, and (3) counseled submission to the Babylonians.
(“How the Bible Became a Book”, William M Schniedewind, page 157)
