Jeffro
post 845
If there is a bias then what about the bias contained in the Jonsson hypothesis published as the Gentile Times Reconsidered?
The Bible cannot always be easily reconciled with secular history so one is faced with a choice as to whether the bible takes precedence over secular history.
Chorbah has several meanings and does mean complete destruction or devastation and did not Jeremiah describe the land as 'being withoy inhabiatant' which indicates complete depopulation.
Daniel's observation in 9:2 clearly indicate the fact that Judah was already lying in a desolated state and would remain so until the ened of the fore-ordained period of seventy years.
The taking of some captives into exile by Nebuchadnezzer including Daniel did not then begin the seventy years but simply meant that a vassalage was in place with Jehoiachin who replaced Jehoiakim. Later, a rebellion brought Nebuchadnezzer against Jerusalem with Zedekiah reigning, the city was destroyed, exiles taken to Babylon commencing the seventy years in 607 BCE.
The timing of matters is correct with Daniel taken captive during the third year of Jehoiakim's vassalage and not his third regnal year as mistaknely viewed by apostates.
Certainly, the invasion of Nebuchadnezzer was a 'calamity for Judah as described in Jeremiah 25 and during this period other foreign nations would also serve the king of Babylon as foretold by the p;rophets.
Jerusalem remained inhabited up until the last and major exile begiining 607 bce and remained depopulated until the Exiles returned to Judah in 537 BCE.
2 Chronicles 36:19 describes the destruction of the Temple followed by the deportation of the land and its subsequent desolation for seventy years.
Daniel 5 describing the imminent Fall of Babylon has no exegetical connection with Jeremiah 25;12 which describes the eventual desolation of Babylon.
The so-called vassallage theory is well grounded in biblical history, Jewish tradition and the use of the Hebrew 'malkut' used in Daniel 1:1.
Jeremiah 28;14 is simply suggestive of a impending disaster which wouls befall Judah at the hands of Nebuchadnezzer, this disaster would be the exile, serving Babylon and the desolating of the land all for seventy years.
The seventy years only commence with the dethronement of the last King of Judah, Zedekiah in 607 BCE
Other commentators agree that in the case of Nebuchadnezzer's second year was of his kingship in relation to his conquest of Judah and not his second regnal year.
The article in now contradicts the specific seventy years for Tyre as compared to Judah;s seventy years as explained in the Isaiah commentary.
It correctly the desolation of Egypt which is ignored by secular history and its omission falsifies all secular chronology.
The seventy years described by Zechariah refer to that past historical period when Judah was in exile to Babylon, serving Babylon whilst the land was desolated thuis ending upon their return in 537 BCE.
The article accepts the establishment of the neutral date of 539BCE from secular evidence but because of a specific methodology uses biblical evidence alone from this point thus arriving at the irrefutable date of 607 BCE.
The dating of 537 is not speculative but in harmony with all biblical and secular evidence as attested by all scholars and is in harmony with Josephus.
Thiele was at least honest about the matter of chronology but was somewhat embarrassed by his public admissions but that does not change his public statements much to his chagrin.
Ezekiel 33 certainly does not indicate that were inhabitants in the land after 607 as within a couple of months after the city was destroyed, the land was empty.
There is no need to offer and alternative Neo-Babylonian chronology because the date is in complete or unreliable, if that position is altered by new research then celebrated WT scholars will be pleased to devise a new constructed scheme.
Jeremiah 29:10 is translated accurately by the NWT and refers to all of thosed exiles living in Babylon up until their release.
Josephus is quite specific that there was a period of seventy years of exile, desolation and servitude for Judah and Jerusalem from the Fall until the Return under Cyrus.
There are no other views other than that of celebrated WT scholars that provides a consistent, holistic account of the seventy years base d upon the Bible.
The alleged period from 609 to 539 BCE is bunkum and does not accord with secular history as the beginning is too fuzzy.
Jeremiah is most emphatic that that land would be without and an inhabitant for seventy years.
As usual apostates cannot refute the overwhelming evidence that 607 BCE is the only possible date for the Fall of Jerusalem. This is also demonstrated by the fact that Jeffrfo did provide precise reference for his supposed 'cryitique'.
scholar JW
