Posts by castthefirststone

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

@djeggnog:

I see you like to attach the propagandist label of apostate onto me. I really don't care what you call me. You see apostasy is in the eye of the beholder and one person's apostate is another's reformer. To illustrate: Stephen was stoned to death for apostasy and to the Pharisees: Jesus was the greatest apostate who ever lived. So go ahead call me what you will.

Back to your theories, let's get this straight, you say that Josephus is proof that 587 BC is an incorrect date for the destruction of Jerusalem by doing the following:

1. Rounding up 50 years to 70 years.
2. Rounding up 3 months to 12 months.
3. Rounding up Eiromos' 14th year to 15 years.
4. Then taking all the other numbers literal including the 13 years siege of Tyre.
5. Taking the "In the reign of king Ithobalos" as literally meaning "During the reign of king Ithobalos".
6. Ignoring the 7th year of Nebuchadnezzar.
7. No way of reconciling the rest of the 54 years and 3 months.

All these cognitive gymnastics and you conclude that the established fact of 587 BC is wrong. Yes, readjust your hearing aid and click repeat on your text to speech software: 587 BC is an established fact, not a theory. You are trying to disprove this fact with your theories and it's not working. On the other hand your 607 BC is a theoretical date for which you have no proof, whatsoever. Then you ask me what is wrong with me? That is really sweet. You say your theoretical interpretation of Josephus disproves an established fact and then you think we are too stupid to understand what you are saying. Perhaps you should take your findings to your local university and see what they say about your theories; I think we both know what will be the result of that.

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

For the benefit of any lurkers that find it hard to follow what djeggnog has written:

djeggnog posted in post 431 the following as "proof" that 607 BC is correct and 587 BC is not:

Josephus tells us, according to Phoenician records, that it was "in the reign of king Ithobalos" that "Naboukodrosoros [Nebuchadnezzar] besieged Tyre" over a period of "13 years." We can deduce from what Josephus writes that Baal ascended to the throne of Tyre in 577 BC, which was the first regnal year of Nebuchadnezzar's son, Evil-Merodach, as the king of Babylon. Here is what Josephus wrote according to John Barclay's translation of Against Apion, Book I, Chapters 21:
"The calculation of dates goes like this. In the reign of king Ithobalos, Naboukodrosoros besieged Tyre for 13 years. After him Baal reigned for 10 years. Thereafter judges were appointed: Ednibalos, son of Baslechos, was judge for 2 months, Chelbes, son of Abdaeos, for 10 months, Abbalos, the high-priest, for 3 months; Myttynos and Gerastartos, son of Abdelimos, were judges for 6 years, after whom Balatoros was king for 1 year. When he died they sent for Merbalos and summoned him from Babylon, and he reigned for 4 years; when he died they summoned his brother Eiromos, who reigned for 20 years. It was during his reign that Cyrus became ruler of the Persians. So the whole period is 54 years, with 3 months in addition; for it was in the seventh year of the reign of Naboukodrosoros that he began to besiege Tyre, and in the fourteenth year of the reign of Eiromos that Cyrus the Persian seized power."
Merbalos' brother, Eiromos, reigned for 20 years (553 BC - 533 BC); Merbalos reigned for four years (559 BC - 553 BC); Balatoros reigned for one year (560 BC - 559 BC); Myttynos and Gerastartos ruled as judges in Tyre for six years (566 BC - 560 BC); Abbalos ruled as a judge for three months and Chelbes ruled as a judge for ten months (567 BC - 566 BC); Ednibalos ruled for two months as a judge and Baal reigned as king for 10 years (577 BC - 567 BC).

According to the above he told us that Merbalos reigned for 4 years but 559-553 BC is 6 years. When I called his bluff he said it was a typing mistake. He made the same typos in 3 consecutive posts and later corrected what he called a "typo" in post 434 by adjusting the start of Eiromos reign to 555 BC. You are free to make up your own mind if 553 BC and 559-553 BC are typos as he asserts.

His whole argument is flawed of course as he takes one paragraph out of Josephus and then chooses which information to use and which to discard, giving no proof (other than crazy arguments) for his assertions.

He takes the reign of the kings literally, but discards the 50 years that the temple laid desolate saying it's symbolic. He also discards the 54 years but only uses the 3 months "in addition" to add that to Eirosmos 14th year. The 3 months is taken completely out of context but he gives no reason how the 3 months relate to Eirosmos. He also ignores Eirosmos 14th year and rather takes it as Eirosmos' 16th year to get to 577 BC for the beginning of Baal's reign. He does all this to cover up his obvious (my opinion) lying or mistakes as he puts it. He also chooses to ignore the 7th year of Naboukodrosoros (Nebuchadnezzar) when according to Josephus Nebu started the 13 year siege on Tyre in his 7th year.

The issue really is: Can Josephus be used to disprove conventional chronology, when you have to rely on the same conventional chronology to get to the start of Cyrus' rule? You can make up your own mind from the above explanation if he is using the material available to him honestly.

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

@djeggnog it's ironic that you ask me what is wrong with me. What is wrong with you?

You call me an apostate, but what makes me an apostate? Posting on this site? What does that say about you? I suppose you are correct, I am an apostate, an apostate against falseness and lies that you keep spewing. Dictating must be lamest excuse I have ever heard. How do you dictate a wrong number?

I asked you about the 54 years and three months and how it connects to the reigns of the Phonecian kings because you brought it up. You use the three months of the 54 years to add 2 years to Eiromos' reign. Perhaps you should get a narrator to read back your posts to you as it seems that you can't remember what you posted. Back to Josephus, the fourteenth year of Eiromos is when Cyrus took the kingdom. Josephus doesn't say in his 16th year and then add three months to his 16th year. Nothing you say can remove those facts, it is not an interpretation, it is explicitly stated as such. As I said before you trying to confuse the issue with Cyrus' regnal year doesn't work as it makes the starting point of the 13 years of Eiromos one year away from your precious 577 BC.

577 BC is also wrong because you can't stretch Eiromos' reign in the context of Josephus. Josephus clearly states that he only reigned 20 years. This is the same problem you have with stretching Nabonidus/Belshazzar reign. You have absolutely no proof for either assumptions, yet you brazenly continue to try to proof your theories by spewing fallacies.

I didn't join this forum to debate anything. I joined as I wanted to see if there was anyone that can defend the theory that 607 BC is the correct date and the established 587 BC is incorrect. You seem to be the only person willing to engage on this issue and the rest of the accusers that make up the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses are not willing to defend their position regarding this. You have failed to do so and use deceit to try to prove your theories.

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

@djeggnog

With all the typos that you make, I suggest you change your keyboard as it seems faulty. It is difficult enough to read everything you post but compound that with your typing mistakes, it makes it almost impossible to follow your logic.

I want to know, if you knew you made a mistake and later corrected it, why didn't you inform us, like an honest person does? You rather opted to try to slip it past the forum and then blame it on typing mistakes. You made at least three typing mistakes when you tried to explain your Tyre chronology. My opinion is that it isn't typing mistakes but rather deviously trying to draw conclusions that makes no sense.

As far as your "corrected" Chronology, here are my observations:

1. You add 3 months to Eiromos. This is nonsense as Josephus is clear on how long he reigned. The 3 months comes from Abbalos reign, not Eiromos. Please also add to this explaination how 54 years and 3 months are attributed to the reign of the Phoenician kings.

2. You try to confuse the issue with regnal year of Cyrus. Josephus mentions Cyrus from the Chaldeans perspective and contrasts it to the Phoenicians history. Cyrus took over the kingdom from the Chaldeans in 539 BC, which you are in agreement with. I don't see how the regnal year allows you to add another year to Eiromos' reign. If you use the regnal year of Cyrus, it takes you futher away from your precious 577 BC that you cling to. It certainly doesn't allow you to add anything to Eiromos. You also round up 14.25 years up to 15 years adding 0.75 years to the reign, when Josephus mentions nothing of the kind. All of your reasoning are devious methods to try to confuse the unknowing reader. Go read Proverbs 3:32, you hypocrite!

3. Please provide proof for your statement that Nebuchadnezzar was dead when Baal was reigning. I am not interested in an arithmetic lesson, provide proof that Nebuchadnezzar's reign ended in 582 BC (562 BC is the generally accepted date, by the way) or provide proof that Nebuchadnezzar was dead when Baal was reigning. Neither of these statements are correct and two incorrect assumptions doesn't proof anything.

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

I would just like to thank everyone that has taken the time to post on this thread. Thank you WitnessMyFury for starting this thread and thank you Ann for your tireless efforts to point out djeggnog's errors and false statements. Each and everyone that has posted on this thread has helped me better understand the accusation that conventional Babylonian chronology is incorrect. The onus is not on the conventional historians to proof 607 BC incorrect but the onus is on the accusers to proof that 587 BC is incorrect. This is something they are not willing to engage in, and then you get deluded individuals like djeggnog trying their luck.

I enjoyed the comic relief, provided by some, as it helped to take the edge off from sometimes reading through what I can only describe as pointless drivel, so I thank everyone for contributing. I even would like to thank djeggnog and 20571pnt428571 for contributing, as their contribution has driven the final nail into the coffin of their 607 BC theory.

@Ann: Thank you for posting the information on H.J. Katzenstein. I am not a historic expert by any stretch of the imagination and you have helped me greatly to understand some of the specifics. Even when you made a mistake you were humble enough to admit it, without excuses, and this by itself speaks volumes against djeggnog.

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

@djeggnog

I wasn't going to post here again but I have changed my mind. As many have eluded here, it seems that you can't count and that you change your opinion of a date on a whim. You boast about your memory and how intelligent you are which only attracts more ridicule and this you thrive on: as it distracts from the facts.

Back to your facts; you presented us this timeline based on your calculations:

Post 431 and 433 of djeggnog:

"Like this (you might want to use a date calculator):

Eiromos (20 years) = 553 BC - 533 BC

Merbalos (four years) = 559 BC - 553 BC

Balatoros = 560 BC - 559 BC

Myttynos and Gerastartos (six years) = 566 BC - 560 BC

Abbalos (three months) /

Chelbes (ten months) = 567 BC - 566 BC)

Ednibalos (two months) = 567 BC

Baal (10 years) = 577 BC - 567 BC"

You tried to fool us by adding two years to Merbalos' reign as 559 - 553 = 6 and not 4. Josephus tells us that Merbalos reigned for 4 years not 6.

You probably realised your error and then fraudulently changed Eiromos' reign to end at 535 BC in Post 434 of djeggnog:

Eiromos (20 years) = 555 BC - 535 BC

Merbalos (four years) = 559 BC - 555 BC

Balatoros (one year) = 560 BC - 559 BC

Myttynos and Gerastartos (six years) = 566 BC - 560 BC

Abbalos (three months) /

Chelbes (ten months) = 567 BC - 566 BC

Ednibalos (two months) = 567 BC

Baal (10 years) = 577 BC - 567 BC

In an earlier post you said that Eiromos started his reign in 533 BC when you stated:

"But what Josephus mentions that I missed when I had reviewed this portion of Chapter 21 of Against Apion in the past is that Cyrus the Persian had seized power "in the fourteenth year of Eiromos." Since Eiromos' 14th year would correspond to 539 BC, the year when Cyrus deposed Babylon, this would mean that Eiromos reigned for another six years after Cyrus' rise to power in 539 BC until 533 BC."

Why did you change it to 535 (going 2 years back), when you clearly stated it started in 533 BC? You were trying to prove that Baal started his reign in 577 BC as this suited your needs. You made a mistake and then tried to correct it, by being dishonest.

You compounded this mistake by this statement in post 434 of djeggnog:

"Eiromos' 20-year reign spanned the years, 553 BC-533 BC, during which period Cyrus had become "ruler of the Persians." Since Eiromos reigned as king for four years after Cyrus had deposed Babylon in 539 BC, we can take the difference of 16 years (Eiromos), 4 years (Merbalos), 1 year (Balatoros), 6 years (Myttynos and Gerastartos), 1 year (Ednibalos, Chelbes and Abbalos), and 10 years (Baal), which total 38 years, and when we subtract 38 years from 539 BC [-539 + (-38)], we arrive at 577 BC."

Eiromos reigned for at least 6 years after Cyrus had become "ruler of the Persians". Cyrus became the ruler in the 14th year of Eiromos and not his 16th year. I suggest you go read Josephus again.

Here is a corrected timeline, using the 14th year of Eiromos:

Cyrus 539 BCE + 13 (13 as he was reigning for 13 and 539 was his 14th year) of Eiromos = 552 BCE

Eiromos (20 years) 552 BC - 532 BC

Merbalos (4 years) = 556 BC - 552 BC

Balatoros (1 year) = 557 BC - 556 BC

Myttynos and Gerastartos (6 years) = 563 BC - 557 BC

Abbalos (3 months) = 563 BC

Chelbes (10 months) = 564 BC - 563 BC

Ednibalos (2 months) = 564 BC

Baal (10 years) = 574 BC - 564 BC

Ithobalos (Reign unknown from Josephus, but at least 13 years) = At least 587 BC - 574 BC

Your "other" method:

-539-13(Eiromos)-4(Merbalos)-1(Balatoros)-6(Myttynos and Gerastartos)-1(Abbalos and Chelbes and Ednibalos)-10(Baal) = -574 So its 574 BC or 575 BC if you stretch Eiromos reign a bit and deduct 14 years. NOT 577 BC = NOT A FACT!!!

As you can see the above timeline proves nothing and disproves nothing. You try to add an additional 2 years and then state that this disproves conventional chronology but I fail to see what it disproves. You are making extraordinary claims, where is your proof?

You then continue with circumlocutious statements that tells Ann she has lost the debate but in actual fact you have proven absolutely nothing! Josephus doesn't prove or disprove any chronology (and you know it), unless you want to discuss the 7th year of Nebuchadnezzar, according to Josephus. I know it won't serve your needs either as it won't fit into your chronology theories and might only discredit the translations of Josephus somewhat. If Josephus is the only proof you have, then you have lost this debate a long time ago, which is why you feel the need to retract from this thread.

Fact1: Baal didn't start his reign in 577 BC as djeggnog stated, as this will contradict Josephus.

Fact2: Even if Baal somehow started his reign in 577 BC (if one uses flawed djeggnog logic), this still proves absolutely NOTHING!!!

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

@MeanMrMustard: I have not read "The Gentile Times Reconsidered" but I intend to do so as I obviously need more information around this.

@djeggnog: Thank you for posting a reply. Not being disrespectful but you have not added anything new to the debate other than a rehash of your interpretation of the Bible and your interpretation of what the historian Josephus wrote about Phoenician records. You also admitted that 607 BCE is significant in Bible prophecy when you wrote:

I have faith that Zedekiah's removal as a representative of God's typical kingdom here on earth marked the time when theocratic rule ceased to exist on earth, which event gives further significance to the year 607 BC, since 607 BC marks the year when the"seven times" of Daniel's prophecy began. (Daniel 4:25)

By the way, this is not a question of faith, as you assert, but it is a question of honesty.

I believe that if this is the best argument that you, 20571pnt428571, et. al can come up with, then the only conclusion a reasonable person can make is that the assertion that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE is a complete fabrication.

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

@thetrueone: Thank you for posting the Wikipedia article on Zedekiah. I am not sure it gives much insight into method 1 of 20571pnt428571 as it actually disproves all the methods of getting to 607. Using Zedekiah's reign has been discussed on this forum from the beginning and neither 20571pnt428571 nor djeggnog could give sufficient evidence to explain it away. They used verbose explanations (to deter people from reading the thread) and logical fallacies (to confuse the uniformed) but it didn't work.

From my perspective there seems to be nothing new to be offered to the 607 BCE debate by djeggnog. It's only a debate because JW's and a few others still cling to this date. I think 20571pnt428571 just post random nonsense to add to the confusion and I intend to ignore his posts from now on. They are trying their best to confuse the hell out of everyone with copy and paste posts and random articles that have been published by theorists that are not willing to supply proof for their wild assertions. I call them wild assertions because they go against all authoritative sources on the matter, without any shred of verifiable evidence other than misquotes and misapplications.

They accuse everyone else for not having enough evidence for their chronologies but they have none, zero, no evidence for their theories and by pointing fingers they take the focus away from their theories. They only focus on some of the shortfalls of others and then say that proves we are right. This is the reason why I asked djeggnog to give a summary of his theory with verifiable evidence on how he got to his theory of 607. I also asked him to give all the reasons why 607 is so important in Bible prophecy, seeing that he/she keeps denying that it is intrinsically linked to 1914.

I don't think that I will get any response because no evidence exists and no honest answer exists to the 607 Bible prophecy question.

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

Thank you for the welcome Witness My Fury and AnnOMaly. I don't need any medals as I am just trying to figure this out but thanks for the gesture nonetheless.

@20571pnt428571, I opened the Pastor Russell blog site and saw the Chart of Ages. Are you suggesting that I revert back to the Chart of Ages to get to 607 BCE? Thank you for providing a summary, but it is not sufficient and adds nothing new to what was already discussed and proved to be incorrect.

Method 1 states 607 BCE as a fact but the question was to prove this date as a fact. I didn't ask to state 607 as a fact and then use some basic arithmetic and further assumptions to get to 1914.

Method 2 uses the 70 years prophecy and the assumption that 537 is the end date of the 70 years. This is speculation that I am not interested in anymore, as AnnOMaly and WMF have shown DJEggNog, numerous times, that you can't just read "seventy years" in isolation but read it in context with other scriptures, including Jer 25:11, 2 Chron 36:21, Lev 26:34 and the rest of the Bible. 537 + 70 is not good enough, I am afraid, and if this is your best argument then you need provide more information how you reconcile the rest of the Bible and archaeological evidence to this theory.

Method 3 brings in more assumptions and theories about when Jesus was baptized and when Artaxerxes reigned and mashes that into one big theory without any proof. Provide proof and not just theories.

I am not interested in someone's blog or the WBTS website. Provide me evidence of all the theories you have stated and perhaps I will believe you. You state things like "we believe", who are the "we"? It seems to me that the "we" are theorists with no interest in providing evidence for their wild and inconsistent statements.

I think I will wait for DJEggnog to respond as your post has not even scratched the surface.

492

607 wrong using ONLY the bible (and some common sense)

by Witness My Fury in

if this has been covered before i apologise in advance.

using only the bible and a bit of common sense.. ok, here goes:.

do the "seventy years" count from jerusalems destruction or not?

castthefirststone

@djeggnog

This is my first post on this forum and I lurked here for some time. I can't honestly say that I buy into JW doctrine anymore but the 607 doctrine still intrigues me.

In my opinion you have not answered any of Ann's or any of the other posters' questions regarding your wild assumptions on how you get to the 607 date. You keep latching onto irrelevant arguments and opinions and then writes verbose explanations on these, ignoring the fact that are right in front of you.

Now if you are really as well intentioned as you profess to be, please provide a summary with verifiable proof of how you get to 607 BCE. Not paragraph after paragraph of this nonsense.

Also add to this, your explanation why 607 BCE has any significance in Bible prophecy and why you spend so much time trying to defend it. Seeing that you say it's only the year that the temple was destroyed. You will probably say that you have a keen interest in archaeology and that's why you feel so strongly about 607 but can you really give that answer when everyone can see from your posts that this is not the case?