aqwsed12345
Claim 1.
This argument is logically flawed. Scholarly disagreement over whether the Babylonian domination began precisely in 609 or 605 BCE does not indicate ignorance or uncertainty about the destruction date of Jerusalem itself. All credible historical and archaeological evidence conclusively establishes 586/587 BCE as the destruction date of Jerusalem, with extensive documentation through Babylonian Chronicles, astronomical tablets (VAT 4956), archaeological excavation layers, and corroborative Persian, Egyptian, and Greek records.
The JW assertion that disagreement on whether the Babylonian domination started in 609 or 605 BCE invalidates scholarly chronology entirely is untenable. Such minor disagreement (within a 3–4 year range) in no way supports a 607 BCE destruction date, a claim completely lacking historical, archaeological, and astronomical support. The Watchtower’s date (607 BCE) is not "biblical certainty"; it is a doctrinal invention contradicted by every credible historical record.
-
Disagree. The dates 605 and 609 BCE are used by scholars to begin the 70 years which is very relevant for any scheme of Chronology which covers this late period of the Judean Monarchy prior to its end. Such confusion stands in contrast to that of 607 BCE which is a definite date for the 70 years.
--
Claim 2.
Jeremiah 25:11 explicitly includes "these nations" in the 70-year prophecy, which indicates regional Babylonian supremacy, not just Judah’s exile. The JW argument artificially isolates Judah, ignoring explicit biblical references to the wider region.
Jeremiah 29:10 indeed foretells a return after 70 years are completed, precisely upon Babylon’s defeat (539 BCE), not two years later (537 BCE). Cyrus’s decree, historically confirmed by the Cyrus Cylinder, occurred shortly after Babylon's fall in 538 BCE, fulfilling Jeremiah's prophecy. The JW insistence on a 537 BCE fulfillment ignores historical data, arbitrarily imposing an unnecessary two-year gap between Babylon’s fall and the end of the 70 years.
--
Both texts in Jeremiah are descriptive of the events prior to the 70 years during and after the 70 years and pertain to Judah and its inhabitants in Jerusalem by means and under Babylon's supremacy over the region.
--
Claim 3.
This argument confuses Babylon’s immediate fall and political judgment (539 BCE) with later physical desolation of the city, which took centuries. Jeremiah 25:12 states explicitly that punishment begins after the 70 years end, referring clearly to Babylon's political fall. Babylon ceased being sovereign precisely in 539 BCE, fulfilling the immediate judgment. Physical destruction occurred progressively much later under Persian and Greek rule, not linked explicitly to the 70-year prophecy’s termination date.
The JW argument mistakenly conflates Babylon’s immediate political fall with its later physical desolation, misinterpreting biblical prophecy.
--
This is simply your interpretation. Jeremiah clearly states after the 70 years were fulfilled Babylon would receive its judgement by means of destruction.and commenced after the jews returned in 537 BCE.
--
Claim 4.
Josephus indirectly supports 607 by his description and timing of the 70 years.
Archaeology finds evidence that Judah was desolate during the Neo-Babylonian period and supports 586 rather than 587 so you have two problems here.
Astronomy by means of recent published research on VAT 4956 validates 607 BE
Claim 5
Babylonian administrative and historical texts demonstrate uninterrupted governmental continuity during Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. No ancient source indicates Nebuchadnezzar lost the throne, nor do historical records support a chronological gap. Daniel 4 describes temporary mental incapacity, not removal from kingship. JW claims of a seven-year chronological gap are historically baseless inventions intended solely to justify their faulty chronology
--
If your statement is correct then where are Neb's missing years of his reign? Daniel describes in quite specific terms what happened to Neb so need to whitewash that piece of history.
--
Claim 5
his claim is blatantly incorrect. Carl Olof Jonsson, in "The Gentile Times Reconsidered," thoroughly addresses Judah’s exile, servitude, and land desolation within his analysis of the 70 years. He explicitly demonstrates the prophecy concerns Babylonian dominance, incorporating Judah’s exile. JW arguments misrepresent COJ’s comprehensive scholarly research.
--
Show me where in his GTR that he discusses the Exile which was the 70 years.
Claim 7
Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BCE, immediately freeing captives in 538 BCE (Cyrus Cylinder). Counting back exactly 70 years correctly places the start of Babylonian dominance around 609 BCE, not 607 BCE. The JW claim arbitrarily inserts two extra years without historical support, relying entirely on doctrinal preference rather than documented events. This is a deliberate miscalculation to align with JW prophetic speculations about 1914.
--
False. The Jews returned from the Exile in 537 BCE and if you count back 70 years you get 607 BCE which ended the Exile commensurate with the Fall of Jerusalem
--
Claim 8
Jeremiah 52 explicitly lists multiple deportations: Nebuchadnezzar’s 7th year (597 BCE), 18th year (586 BCE), and 23rd year (582 BCE). Multiple deportations after 607 BCE destroy JW arguments, showing the land was not completely desolated in 607 BCE. Rather, these deportations confirm a prolonged Babylonian campaign consistent only with the scholarly 586/587 BCE destruction date. The JW argument inadvertently refutes itself by citing this evidence.
- True. multiple deportations characteristic of the Exile during which were conducted within neb's reign. These facts show the reality of the Exile of 70 years.
---
Claim 9
The date 609 BCE is explicitly derived from historically attested events (Assyrian defeat at Harran, Egyptian actions, and Nabopolassar’s campaigns) confirmed in multiple Babylonian chronicles (ABC3, ABC4, ABC5). These dates are well-attested, not arbitrary insertions. JW’s claim of “interpolation” is entirely unfounded historically and represents a misunderstanding of ancient Near Eastern chronological research.
-- The arbitrary date of 609 is simply opinion
Claim 10
The JW’s entire Gentile Times calculation depends wholly upon the false 607 BCE destruction date. Since 607 BCE is conclusively disproven historically, archaeologically, and astronomically, the JW 1914 doctrine also collapses. Astronomical and historical records categorically contradict 607 BCE, demonstrating the JW prophetic calculation as incorrect and baseless.
--
The date of 607 along with our teaching of the Gentile Times has withstood the test of time and scholarship and has been thoroughly vindicated by modern history and biblical scholarship.
Conclusion
You can summarize all that you like but here is a challenge for you and your cronies. Please provide ONE line of evidence that disproves 607 BCE for the Fall of Jerusalem. Remember not 17 as per COJ in his GTR but simply ONE. Got it?
scholar JW