Hello Scholar. I'm a JW too! I believe the Bible too. But...
It is quite simple really. As a scholar I full support and endorse the Bible chronology of the Society as only reliable and accurate chronology that is faithful to God's Word. The biblical seventy years is one definite historic period described by Jeremiah, Zechariah, Daniel and Ezra. These seventy years is a period of servitude-exile-desolation running from the Fall of Jerusalem in 607 BCE until the Return in 537 BCE. It is as simple as that.
You are a scholar, right? Well then I only need to tell you that Gedaliah did not die within 2 months of the fall of Jerusalem in the same year. He died the following year in the 7th month. It took time to get word out, it took time for him to become confident with the Babylonian intentions, and the Bible doesn't say exactly when he was appointed governor. The Bible describes those invited to harvest summer crops, including wine, which is a very early summer/late spring crop, as coming in gradually from the surrounding areas. It is logical, therefore, to think that this word went out prior to the actual beginning of those summer crops. So everything clearly points to the following year. Furthermore, there is a 2-year gap between when 70 years expire in the 2nd year of Darius and 70 years expire from mourning in the 7th month for Gedaliah. Meaning that the mourning for Gedaliah did not begin until two years after Jerusalem fell. Now that is consistent with the mourning beginning the year after Gedaliah died rather than two years after, thus confirming he died in year 20 instead of year 19.
Also realize that Josephus at Ant. 11.1.1 and elsewhere clearly begin the 70 years with the LAST DEPORTATION. Thus since you are so impressed or consistent with the WTS' take on this, note that Josephus specifically links the last deportation with those Jews remaining who had run down to Egypt! Where does the WTS claim these 23rd year deportees came from? They claim they must have been some who scattered when Gedaliah was killed and then were later rounded up. But the Bible doesn't say that. The Bible agrees with Josephus! That those who were deported in year 23 were the remaining ones from the sword who had ran down to Egypt! Thus you need to harmonize Jeremiah 44:14,28 with your statement above and claim that the land was desolate after the destruction of Jerusalem. There was a 23rd-year deportation! Further, the Bible says quite clearly those deported last were those "who escaped from the sword"...
" 20 Furthermore, he carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, and they came to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign; 21 to fulfill Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years."
This is specific. Who are "those remaining from the sword"? Just any Jews left? NO. They are specifically those left remaining from the sword of Nebuchadnezzar that were not killed in Egypt! Thus the Bible itself confirms what Josephus relates as traditional Jewish history, which is those of the last deportation in year 23 are those who were left remaining from the sword who had run down to Egypt. And the Bible clearly says this specific group would return to Judea, if only for a few months.
Therefore, SCHOLAR, please know and/or adjust your comment about the "desolation" beginning with the fall of Jerusalem per the WTS, because that contradicts not only Josephus, whom they thus misquote, but also the Bible itself. The devastation of the land and the empying of it of all the "nations" meaning those occuping the norther tribe area and the coastal towns like Ashkelon, were deported in year 23.
You are a SCHOLAR. Reflect further that this bitter "cup" of Nebuchadnezzar that many would drink would begin with Jerusalem. Jerusalem would drink first!
28 And it must occur that in case they refuse to take the cup out of your hand to drink, you must also say to them, ‘This is what Jehovah of armies has said: “Y OU will drink without fail. 29 For, look! it is upon the city upon which my name is called that I am starting off in bringing calamity, and should YOU yourselves in any way go free of punishment?”’
Therefore, in practical application, it would take time to deport all these nations from both the northern and southern kingdoms. But Jerusalem would be the first to drink the bitter cup. Thus Jerusalem would be destroyed first before the other nations. Even so, 70 years were specifically to be served by these nations. Thus it was not until the 23rd year that the final remnants of these kingdoms mentioned got deported. Everybody has to serve these 70 years while the land lie desolate. So indeed, this last 23rd-year campaign of Nebuchadnezzar is when he deported everyone out of the land finally, though some of those lands, like Jerusalem were already destroyed but with a few people left behind. Thus the "nations" that would serve 70 years along with "those remaining from the sword" is the fulfillment of this prophecy. This is NOT what JWs are teaching. They count the devastation of the land and the death of Gedaliah in the same year, without regard to the last deportation in year 23.
Would you mind acknowledging you were not aware of this or please provide an explanation? Here is a quote from the WTS on this.
]Some two months later, after the assassination of Gedaliah, the rest of the Jews left behind in Judah fled to Egypt, taking Jeremiah and Baruch along with them. (2Ki 25:8-12, 25, 26; Jer 43:5-7) Some of the Jews also may have fled to other nations round about. Probably from among these nations were the 745 captives, as household heads, exiled five years later when Nebuchadnezzar, as Jehovah’s symbolic club, dashed to pieces the nations bordering Judah. (Jer 51:20; 52:30) Josephus says that five years after the fall of Jerusalem, Nebuchadnezzar overran Ammon and Moab and then went on down and took vengeance on Egypt.—Jewish Antiquities, X, 181, 182 (ix, 7). (Insight book)
Note that they quote directly Josephus here who specifically says the Jews were deported from EGYPT. They avoid this direct reference and invent Jews who "may have fled" to other areas, that is, other than Judea, to explain the last deportation, at the same time specifically avoiding the reference that these were the ones "remaining from the sword" who were deported from Egypt! The height of deception. Why avoid the historical reference Josephus provides if they were in doubt about who were these last ones deported? At any rate, as noted above, they directly contradict the scriptures who clearly tell us who those who were laste deported were, who were those who "escaped from the sword" which is a reference to the last remaining ones of the Jews who were down in Egypt. This would thus include Jeremiah and Baruch! What do you think happened to them? Were they killed with the others? No. They were deported in year 23.
So yes, while the WTS is correct that there was a literal 70 years of sabbath rest, it did not begin until everyone was removed out of the land and that final complete removal did not occur until the last deportation, year 23.
Therefore, SCHOLAR, you have a choice. To go with the Bible or the Watchtower. They are in conflict. I know this is a hard choice. But if you side with the Watchtower, you will be turning your back on Jehovah and the Bible. The Watchtower is not the source of life but the Bible s. So is your loyalty to the BIBLE or to the WTS? You can't have both at this point. I'm sorry.
You are incorrect in saying that there was no king of Babylon at the time of the final edict of Babylon for Cyrus who conquered Babylon was acknowledged as 'King of Babylon and this role was maintained for a period according to secular history. Certainly, Jeremiah 27:6-7 simply describes that nations would serve the Babylonian dynasty and so it was that Judah for seventy years served not only Nebucchadnezzer but his son and grandson exactly as Jeremiah prophesied but this dynasty ended with the demise of Nabonidus and Belshazzar with the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE. This dynasty was replaced by a new King of Babylon with the conquerors of the Medes and Persians who were now the new rulers of Babylon during and after 539 BCE.
Again, SCHOLAR, you are not representing the Bible specifically here. The "nations" that were to serve Babylon exactly 70 years were those deported in year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar. Because the entire land, both northern and southern kingdoms had to be desolated, along with some never conquered surrounding cities like Ashkelon and Tyre, the Bible speaks of "these nations" serving the same 70 years as the last deported Jews from Egypt. So you are right, there is no conflict in the Bible about these 70 yeras, but you must understand exactly when these 70 years began. Not with the fall of Jerusalem, but later with the last deportations in year 23.
Your claim that 609 BCE marked the beginning of Babylon's sovereign rule is false as according to Bible chronology it is 625 BCE.
This, again, is incorrect. For one thing, as noted, 70 years earlier than the return from Babylon is year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar, the last deportation. So even if you used the incorrect secular date of 537 BCE to get 607 BCE, it would only mark year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar, not year 19. Thus Jerusalem would have fallen in year 611 BCE, year 19 of Nebuchadnezzar. The accession year of Nebuchadnezzar 19 years earlier thus would be 630 BCE and not 625 BCE as you state. But of course, the Bible and now new research including the VAT4956 double-dating to 511 BCE for year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar establish that the original dating for the return of the Jews was 455 BCE. The Bible begins the 70 weeks "when the word goes forth to rebuild Jerusalem." Cyrus was prophesied to rebuild both the city and the temple, so how do we get past that this is not fulfilled in the 1st of Cyrus? We don't! Martin Anstey saw it clear that 455 BCE [sic] should be the 1st of Cyrus, that is, that the return was exactly 483 years prior to the baptism of Christ! That means he identified in his "Romance of Bible Chronology" written in 1913 that there were 82 years too many in the Persian Period. Well, I investigated this and he was right. The Persian Period collapses immedately once you know Xerxes and Artaxerxes were the same king, which you can confirm archaeologically! Plus the Biblel indicates the very same thing. Xerxes just used the second name Artaxerxes, that's all. He later took advantage of the double name to claim he had died and another king, his son, was now ruling. It was clever Greco-Persian counterconspiracy politics. But the historians liked the revisions and maintained them and they thus remain uncorrected but also in conflict with the Bible's timeline. Now, however, the VAT4956 proves precisely that the 1st of Cyrus occurred in 455 BCE. So there is no "academic" room now to even remotely entertain the NB dates are correct. The most accurate dating that we get, which is from the VAT4956, though, does not conflict with the Bible's timeline but confirms it. 455 BCE is the true date for the 1st of Cyrus. The FAKE YEARS in the Persian Period are 1 for Kambyses, 30 for Darius I, 30 for Artaxerxes II, and since Xerxes and Artaxerxes were the same king, 21 years for Xerxes is combined with the rule of Artaxerxes I. That's a total of 82 years. No archaeologist will likely argue otherwise since Artaxerxes is buried between Darius I and Darius II, a clear indication they were the same king. Xerxes' tomb at Naqshi-Rustam is clearly newer and an afterthought after the fact.
So, as I said, no excuse at this point for not going strictly by the Bible and dating the 1st of Cyrus in 455 BCE. We know WHY the chronology was changed. It is not a mystery. And it is because of these changes that the secular and Bilblical timelines for the NB Period are out of sync. That's because to partially make up for the extra 30 years added to the reign of Darius I, the Persians removed 26 years from the NB Period, making it too short now to accommodate the 70 years of rest for the land. So again, it's not that we don't know when, why and how the timeline was changed; nor is it that there is no surviving references to the original chronology. We have the VAT4956!
The Society has published much on chronology and so it is simply a matter reading such material to fully understand matters and that includes the seventy years.
scholar JW
I have read this and my comments are above. While it is admirable that the WTS claims to go by the Bible and will side with the Bible in a conflict, they fail to fully represent the Bible's true chronology. They made one critical error. Presuming 539 BCE was a reliable historical date. Fact is the entire timeline was changed, altering both the absolute and relative dating for the NB and Persian Periods. But even when using 537 BCE for the return from Babylon, they contradict scriopture when they date 607 BCE to the fall of Jerusalem when the 70 years clearly only began with the last deportation, year 23. So I have read the WTS' history and find them in conflict with the Bible.
You must also, since there is no choice here. If you don't, then where will your credibility be as far as claiming to believe the Bible?
The scripture you and the WTS have to deal with is Ezra 6:14,15. It shows the accession year of "Artaxerxes" occurring in year 6 of Darius. It shows that Artaxerxes was the last king to participate in the building of the temple. When you ignore this, you have to invent a lie that Artaxerxes didn't finish the temple even though the Bible clearly says he did.
14 And the older men of the Jews were building and making progress under the prophesying of Hag´gai the prophet and Zech·a·ri´ah the grandson of Id´do, and they built and finished [it] due to the order of the God of Israel and due to the order of Cyrus and Da·ri´us and Ar·ta·xerx´es the king of Persia. 15 And they completed this house by the third day of the lunar month A´dar, that is, in the sixth year of the reign of Da·ri´us the king.
Do you know what the WTS says about Artaxerxes listed here? They clearly know he couldn't have completed the temple if Darius I ruled for another 30 years. So they come up with a lame excuse, just like the last generation excuse they are promoting now, that this must have been a reference to his providing some materials later to the temple long after this! That is, they contradict the Bible in saying that the king who finished the temple was Artaxerxes! This also makes no sense because they also believe that Xerxes followed Darius on the throne. In fact, the Bible is simply referring to Xerxes as "Artaxerxes" because that was his alternative name. We actually have at least one extant document that refers to "Arses who is also known as Artaxerxes"...
Unfortunately comparison with the dating formulae of the Astronomical Diaries does not help very much. In these formulae the name of the father of the reigning king is never mentioned. The formula used here is: PN ša PN2 (LUGAL) MU-šú na-bu-ú, “PN, who is called king PN2.” See for example AD I, p. 152, no. -346, left edge: MU 12.KAM m Ú-ma-kuš šá m Ár-tak-šat-su LUGAL MU-šú na-bu-ú, “year 12 of Ochos, who is called king Artaxerxes (III)”; MU 38.KAM m Ár-šú LUGAL šá m Ár-tak-šat-su LUGAL MU-šú [na-bu-ú], “year 38 of king Arses, who is called king Artaxerxes (II)” (AD I, p. 136, no. -366 B lower edge; on tablet A left edge the title LUGAL, “king,” added to both names, has been omitted in both cases); m Ú-ma-kuš šá m Da-a-ri-muš MU-šú SA 4 , “Ochos, who is called Darius (II)” (AD I, p. 66, no. -391 B obv. 1). http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/bchp-arses/arses_2.html
So again, the WTS must LIE and twist the scriptures when it is quite clear what the scrioptures are saying, and YOU, SCHOLAR, are going along with those lies. It is further worse now because maybe the WTS didn't understand how all this worked out. but now they must. All is understood once you know that Xerxes and Artaxerxes were the same king.
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/xerxeshand.html (Xerxes hand position)
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/nehemiah.html (Nehemiah at Persepolis)
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/dariusxerxespalace.JPG (Xerxes at Palace of Darius)
Now. You will either hold out with the WTS until they demise or it becomes clear the current NB timeline is defective, or you will side with the Bible now and understand the truth. If you wait until the WTS and the world or more or less forced to deal with the revisions, then it might be too late, since to hold onto the false secular chronology (based on 539 BCE) means you must reject the Bible now. And that may cost you dearly. You have a CHANCE to truly show you believe the Bible first as a reference, including when the Watchtower fails to represent the truth. If you ignore the Bible it means you are WORSHIPPING the WTS and Jehovah considers it a form of idolatry.
Hard choices if you are enamored by the WTS. Easy chocie if you love the Bible!
JC
