A Dub Explains 607...

brinjen

I left a comment on this video three weeks ago, a very good video titled JWs, Ex-JW "Apostates," and Faith! by a Youtuber called Shazoolo...

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=btVaJRQc2OA#anQrgT3pxPc

I asked if anyone could explain the 607 b.c.e. theory. Got an email alerting me to a response just now...

The evidence for the date 607 bce is in the Bible itself. It is historically extrabiblically established with no doubt that in Oct 6/7 539bce Cyrus defeated Nabonidus and took Babylon and 2 years later in 537bce released the Jews to their homeland. Jeremiah assigns 70 years to the Jews captivity under Babylon.(Jer.25:9-11) Do the math(537 + 70 years = 607bce) and the BIBLE shows clearly the date had to be 607bce. Prefering secular calculations to Biblical is a grave error. Do your Research.

Just for fun, how would you respond?

stillajwexelder

CIRCULAR REASONING - the bible says 70 years so it must be 70 years

AnnOMaly

You've highlighted the contradiction in red already, brinjen.

How about: "Without 'secular calculations' there wouldn't be any point of reference to make any 'biblical calculations.' And the same means to 'historically extrabiblically establish' 539 also 'historically extrabiblically establishes' 587. Do your research."

Mr. Majestic

More important. The guy in the video. OK then girls….Is he hot or not………..?????

still_in74

CIRCULAR REASONING - the bible says 70 years so it must be 70 years

actually the bible says they "kept sabbath for 70 years" Could this be interpreted as not a literal 70 years? The Israelites had failed to keep Sabbath and now the land was resting. Did the Isrealites not keep any Sabbath for almost 500 years?at 52 sabbaths per year it would take 491 years of missing the 52 saturdays per year to make up 70 years of steady sabbath.
Or was this referring to 70 years of missed sabbaths? 70x52=3640 \ 365= 10 years but what about a sabbath year? so make it 11 years they are out of jerusalem You see, if the WTS could find a way to make these 70 years of sabbaths equal a number of years they need then they could. and they WOULD! Russell got it wrong but its too late now. They cant go back otherwise they would. they would twist the definition of years and sabbaths here to come up with a number that fit their eisegisis

brinjen

How about: "Without 'secular calculations' there wouldn't be any point of reference to make any 'biblical calculations.' And the same means to 'historically extrabiblically establish' 539 also 'historically extrabiblically establishes' 587. Do your research."

Precisely! Don't use secular calculations when that's what this person is doing in the first place.

done4good

Prefering secular calculations to Biblical is a grave error

A typical jw ad hominem. Why is it a "grave error" to prefer secular calculations, to unproven biblical events? Is 539 somehow a better attested to date than 587? If 587 is wrong, how do you know the secular calculations used to end at 539 are not also wrong?

Very weak reasoning here.

j

TD

These are some questions I would ask back

Just for fun...

....with no doubt that in Oct 6/7 539bce Cyrus defeated Nabonidus and took Babylon

Yes, but how do archaeologists and historians arrive at the 539 date?

Do you accept the data and methods that they use?

Do you even know what these are?

..and 2 years later in 537bce released the Jews to their homeland.

Is this speculation?

How do you know this?

VM44

Jeremiah 25:11 from the NWT

"And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.”’

The scripture this person quotes DOES NOT SAY the jewish people will be in captivity for 70 years. rather, it says ALL THESE NATIONS WILL HAVE TO SERVE THE KING OF BABYLON FOR 70 YEARS!

...and that is EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED!

Secular history and the Bible AGREE.

Do the Jehovah's Witnesses even read the scriptures that they quote to prove the 607BCE year?

The JWs should be embarrassed to use this type of reasoning.

BreakingAway

Well, we know that the REAL way the Society came up with 607 was just counting backwards from 1914.The thing is, 1914 is now pretty much a moot point anyway with the changing of the generation doctrine.So what are they really try to prove ? Christ's presence is "invisible" and only JWs can see it.I wonder if they borrowed Joseph Smith's totally blinged out diamond lens secret decoder glasses ?

A Dub Explains 607...

Share this