From the Insight volume 1 page 456
The first is that the observations made in Babylon may have contained errors. The Babylonian astronomers showed greatest concern for celestial events or phenomena occurring close to the horizon, at the rising or the setting of the moon or of the sun. However the horizon as viewed from Babylon is frequently obscured by sandstorms.
This is the best argument that the society could come up with and publish in its Insight book on chronology to debunk the idea that you could use astronomical records from Babylon to date certain events. Note what they come up with next and ask yourself has this argument got any more substance to it than the above...
An ancient astronomer (or a scribe) might state that a certain celestial event took place in the year that, according to our calendar, would be 465BCE, and his statement may prove correct when accurate computations are made to verify it. But he may also state that the year in which the celestial event took place (in 465BCE) was the 21st year of King Xerxes and be entirely wrong. Simply stated, accuracy in astronomy does not prove accuracy in history.
They are here saying that even though the astronomical evidence is irrefutable and today can be absolutely shown to have only happened on one single date the historical evidence that is attached to it, i.e the reign of a Babylonian king or a Persian king, the JWs believe to be incorrect. So the scribe who wrote about the astronomical event in detail so as to accurately record the event in several ways then put the wrong year of a reign of a king or put the wrong kings name down. This seems to be clutching at straws and is the only argument that they can come up with to debunk all the astronomical evidence to say that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587BCE.
What do the JWs say about the astronomical evidence itself?
Astronomical diaries have been found that give the position ( in relation to certain stars or constellations) of the moon at its first and last visibility on a specific day in Babylon, (for example, the moon was one cubit in front of the rear foot of the lion), along with the positions of certain of the planets at the same times.
Modern chronologers point out that such a combination of astronomical positions would not be duplicated again in thousands of years. These astronomical diaries contain references to the reigns of certain kings and appear to coincide with the figures given in Ptolomys canon.
While to some these might seem like incontrovertible evidence, there are factors greatly reducing its strength.
Here they admit that the astronomical evidence can only have occured on one day in a certain year and not have occured again for thousands of years. They also agree that the reigns of the kings agree with Ptolomys canon which leads to 587BCE as the date of the destruction of Jerusalem. The only arguments that according to them reduce the strength of the evidence are the arguments for the sandstorms on the horizon and the inadequate scribe where according to the JWs he may have inadvertantly put the wrong king down against the astronomical evidence.
Another argument they come up with is that the astronomical texts were copies made at a later date from the originals and so therefore, like the scribe, these ones would have put the wrong king down. The problem with this argument is that the astronomical evidence can be shown to be correct, that the positions of the planets along with the rising or setting of the sun and moon and any eclipses when all cross-referenced together actually did happen at a certain date in Babylonian history. So they cannot refute the astronomical evidence regardless of whether they believe it was a copy or not. The same is true even if there was a sandstorm on the horizon because the evidence is of more than just one line, ie. not just the sun and moon but the positions of the planets as well.
So, all they can fall back on is that the scribes or the copyists would have put in the wrong reign of the king. But how can this be when they took such effort to ensure the accuracy of the astronomical evidence? Other evidence to consider are the thousands of Babylonian business tablets, all linked to the reigns of the kings. If 607BCE was true where are the 20 years of missing tablets? There are tablets for every year from 587 to 539BCE but none for the missing 20 years.
I think this evidence shows that 587 is the correct date rather than 607. I could go into the fact that 1914 was the pivotal date for the JWs and they originally choses 606 as the date of the destruction of Jerusalem until they realised there was no year 0, and instead of changing 1914 they changed 606 to 607. So to the org. 1914 was more important than accurate history for the date of the destruction of Jerusalem.
If you take the principle of Okhams Razor where it says that all things being equal the simplest explanation is usually the correct one, looking at the missing 20 years and their weak arguments concerning astronomical evidence, you would have to say that the org. has got this one wrong. Their only motive for not changing it is that it is too hard for their members to accept any other date than 1914 and even in the face of the evidence it would hurt them too much to change 1914.
This was one of the things that did it for me, that even though there was overwhelming evidence against 607 they just will not change it. How can this be right? If God is not a God of lies but abhors the lie and if the JWs are His organisation then why does he continually allow them to follow 607 even though everyone knows it is incorrect?
