Dear JW Scholar,
I enjoy and appreciate our discussion. I find it stimulating and an opportunity for rigorous examination of my research. I have not produced anything new. I wrote such material over 40 years ago, during the 1960s. Our discussion helps me to identify whether anything new has arisen that the WTS has drawn on that supports its contention. The question should not be “is it new”, but rather “is it true”.
I am pleased that you understand “accession-year reckoning” and the Nisan and Tishri calendars.
I agree with you that there is an “omission of facts that are vital in completing a full account of the Return”. And that is my point too. The insufficiency of the information is confirmed with the two facts that you say the Bible provides. These facts are not enough to give us the actual year that the Jews returned:
You write: “The Decree was issued in the 'first year of Cyrus' -Ezra 1:1. … This 'first regnal year' according to Jack Finegan in his Handbook Of Bible Chronology,1964, p.170 was 538/537 BCE which ran from Nisan 538 to Nisan 537 BCE.”
Although Finegan says that Cyrus’ “first year” was 538/537, the WTS “scholars” are adamant that Darius had a sole rule that reached a “second year” before Cyrus came to the throne. They say the Decree was not issued during Darius’ “first year”. The statements made by these WTS “scholars” push Cyrus’ first year of rule over Babylon further into the future, diminishing and even eliminating the likelihood that the Jews returned in 537 BCE.
Are you now saying that Jack Finegan should be believed above the WTS’s “experts”? On his page 87, Finegan says that Nebuchadnezzar’s “first year” began on Nisan 1 604 BC. Or do we just select the bits that suit us?
As you wrote, Finegan says on page 170 of his book, “Accordingly, (Cyrus’) first year (over the Babylonians), in which he made his proclamation, was 538/537 BC”. But in that paragraph Finegan does not say, as you did, that it ran from Nisan. On his previous page, Finegan mentions that the year could run from Nisan or from Tishri.
Ezra recorded Cyrus’ Decree, and he used the Tishri (Sept/Oct) calendar (see Finegan, pages 90-91, remembering that the Jews treated Ezra and Nehemiah as one book). When the Tishri reckoning is followed, this pushes Cyrus’ first year even further into the future.
In which part of his “first year” did Cyrus issue his Decree? How do you know? If it was right at the end, the list of preparations required for the 50,000 people to take a 4-month trek could not be carried out in time for them to return in 537 BCE.
-------------------
You write: “The Jews had returned home and were resettled by the seventh month Tishri according to Ezra 3:1 but we are not told whether this occurred in Cyrus' first or second year.”
I thought you were saying that we know that the Jews returned in 537 BCE. Now you agree with me that we do not know exactly when they returned.
-------------------
Let us build on that list of facts you prepared.
0. Cyrus begins his “first year”. If we go by secular Babylonian reckoning, it started on Nisan (March) 1, 538 BCE. If we go by Ezra’s Biblical reckoning, it started on Tishri (Oct) 1 538 BCE. But if Darius had a sole year before Cyrus assumed kingship of Babylon (as the WTS says), Cyrus might have started his first year in either March 536 or October 536. The WTS is adamant that Darius had a first year and the Decree was not issued then.
1. The proclamation and promulgation of the Decree throughout the kingdom. We do not know in which part of the year Cyrus issued his Decree. It might have been at the very start or it might have been at the end, or some time in between. No solid ground here.
2. Temple contributions to be arranged. Time required for the audit, collection and securing of the sacred items.
3. Preparations for the journey. It is not known when they started their preparations. Conditions would be too difficult during the cold and wet Winter for much preparatory work to be done then.
4. Length of journey from Babylon to Jerusalem. A long, hot and arduous 4 month trek by 50,000 men, women, children, animals and belongings.
-------------------
Then you throw in a Furphy (Aussie expression for a tall story). I am bewildered when, after providing no evidence, no facts, no support, you write: “Whether the reign of Cyrus was commensurate [concurrent?] with that of Darius or followed after his reign it is easily seen that the Jews would have returned by Tishri of 537”
I did not ask for a “would have returned”, I am looking for a “definitely proven to have returned”. You are doing nothing more than looking for room that could hold a predetermined conclusion. That’s not genuine study. Despite the WTS-speak of “it is easily seen”, I contend that it is not.
-------------------
You continue: “If the first full year of Cyrus ran from Nisan [March] 1, 537 BCE to the end of Adar [March] 536 BCE.”
I did not ask for an “if”, I want definite proof. And then I want to know the date during year running from March 537 to March 536 that the Decree was made. And then I want to know that the Jews had time to fully prepare, even if the Decree were issued on Nisan 1, 537 BCE.
You can “hope” they were already prepared, but is that ground solid enough to build a foundation on? No, it is not, most definitely not.
-------------------
Prove what is true. Prove there is compelling, independent evidence that the Jews returned during the year 537 BCE, and I will accept it. That is the nature of true and honest research. I have not seen such evidence. I for one, would like to see it. No doubt so might the WTS. Or maybe not?
Doug
-------------------
For anyone else reading this, the issue at stake is identifying the year that the Jews returned to Jerusalem, following Cyrus’ Decree during the “first year” of his rule over Babylon. The date of the Jews’ return is absolutely critical for the WTS, since they calculate their 607 BCE date for the Destruction of Jerusalem from the date that they say the Jews returned. I say it has not been proven by anyone that the Jews returned in 537 BCE.