How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications? (page 17)

peacefulpete

OK, forgive me if this has been already mentioned. This was posted some years ago:

Isaiah’s Prophecy – Light for all Mankind Volume I; page 253 paragraph 21:
Isaiah goes on to prophesy: “It must occur in that day that Tyre must be forgotten seventy years, the same as the days of one king.” (Isaiah 23:15a) Following the destruction of the mainland city by the Babylonians, the island-city of Tyre will “be forgotten.” True to the prophecy, for the duration of “one king” – the Babylonian Empire – the island-city of Tyre will not be an important financial power. Jehovah, through Jeremiah, includes Tyre among the nations that will be singled out to drink the wine of His rage. He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17,22,27) True the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination – when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble. What will then happen to Tyre?

The Society does NOT take the seventy years of judgment against Tyre as being literal. Their interpretation is that the seventy years applied to Tyre is FIGURATIVE – it stands “ROUGHLY” as the time of Babylon’s greatest domination.

Now as regards Tyre, no it never fell to Babylon.

Post from old thread:

There was no such city as "mainland Tyre". The nearby city on the Lebanese coast was instead called Hosah in the Bible and Osa and Ushu in Egyptian and Akkadian inscriptions. These were suburbs of Tyre but were not called Tyre; Ezekiel in fact called the mainland suburbs "Tyre's daughters" (Ezekiel 26:6, 8, "settlements on the mainland" in the NIV), not Tyre itself. Tyre was an island city and was described repeatedly as such by Ezekiel, who described it as "in the midst of the sea" (26:5), "powerful in the sea" (26:17), as having its borders "in the heart of the seas" (27:4), as being like a ship in the sea (27:27-34), and whose king declares himself as "surrounded by seas" (28:2).
The city that Ezekiel describes as razed and thrown into the sea was island Tyre, an event that would leave the island as bare as a shiny rock. This was not a mainland city and Ezekiel did not refer to Hosah as "Tyre" but as "her daughters on the mainland" (which were already destroyed in v. 8 before Nebuchadnezzar then besieges Tyre itself in v. 9-14).

That the Babylonian siege of Tyre was unsuccessful even Ezekiel (apparently in later reflection) reports: Ezekiel 29:18,19

18"Son of man, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon caused his army to serve a hard service against Tyre: every head was made bald and every shoulder was peeled; yet had he no wages, nor his army, from Tyre for the service that he had served against it. 19 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD: Behold, I will give the land of Egypt unto Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon; and he shall take her multitude, and take her spoil, and take her prey; and it shall be the wages for his army. 20 I have given him the land of Egypt for his labor for which he served against it, because they wrought for Me, saith the Lord GOD

BTW...It probably looked that Babylon would conquer Egypt and it did invade around the time Ezekiel said those words. But they failed. So Ezekiel is 0 for 2.

Disillusioned JW

In post on page16 of this topic thread where I quoted a Wikipedia article which used as a source the article called "What Happened to Tyre?" by Bible Reading Archeology, I had thought the source (without me reading its full web page) was a scientific publication, but it now appears to be a religious publication (which makes use of scientific information). I noticed that it has some inconsistencies in what it said about Tyre, including where it says the following. "The first part of the city was on the mainland and the second part was on an island just under a kilometre from the shoreline. ... Tyre became very wealthy and the island portion of the city over time became heavily fortified. The city on the mainland was the secondary part of the city and principally served to supply the island with water and supplies. One might think of the mainland portion of the city as being the “suburbs” while the island was the home of the wealthy and those of noble birth."

The inconsistencies in the article by Bible Reading Archeology raises questions in my mind of the accuracy of the article. It prefer to have a source which is of a science journal for the claims of the article, including the following. "Other cuneiform tablets show that at some point Tyre was in the hands of the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar. Finally, a cuneiform tablet at the British Museum shows that Nebuchadnezzar did indeed successfully engage the Egyptian forces." I wonder how accurate are the claims of those two quoted sentences.

Fisherman

In short, the Jewish of the Babylonian Exile specifically of 70 years duration

That’s what I conclude.

Fisherman

Zion was dispossessed of Jews

In other words, Zion was not taken away from the Jews, the Jews were taken away from Zion and were possessed by Babylon for 70 years.

peacefulpete

😂 ok I guess we will just again forget Gedaliah.

Disillusioned JW

According to the Bible after governor Gedaliah (a capable, good, and kind Jewish man, who disbelieved reports that a particular man intended to murder him) of Judah got murdered by a fellow Jew (the very one whom he was warned about), the remaining Jews in Judah then became very scared and thus fled to Egypt (though Jeremiah had urged Jews not to flee to Egypt. According to the Bible, previously some of the Jews who had fled from Judah to other countries, returned to Judah after Gedaliah had invited Jews to return and to grow crops, and had told me them they would be safe.

2 Kings 25:22 (1970 NWT) says the following. "As for the people left behind in the land of Judah, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had left behind, he now appointed over them Gedaliah ...." By the way, that gives a positive biblical meaning to the phrase "left behind". This shows that according to the Bible, that Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had wanted some Jewish people to remain in Judah, instead of being exiled to Babylon.

Read verses 23-24 and note what they say Gedaliah said to the Jewish people who had returned to Judah (while Gedaliah was still in power).

Disillusioned JW

2 Kings 25:11 (1970 and 1984 NWT) although saying that all of the people who "were left behind in the city" of Jerusalem (see verses 9-11 for the identification of the city) were taken into exile, verse 12 (1970 and 1984 NWT) says the following. "And some of the lowly people of the land the chief of the bodyguard let remain as vinedressers and compulsory laborers." Furthermore, notice that according to 2 Kings 25:24 (1970 and 1984 NWT) Gedaliah told the Jewish people "Do not be afraid of [being] servants to the Chaldeans. Dwell in the land and serve the king of Babylon, and it will go well with you." By "land" he meant Judah. Notice also that they were told that their servitude to Babylon would be in "the land", and thus in Judah. As I stated (with documentation) in an earlier post in this topic thread, archaeological findings show that some people remained in Judah during the exile. The verses mentioned above also support my claim that when emperors conquer lands to expand their territory they want some of the native people to remain in their native lands and to work in their lands, while being subjects of the emperor.

According to 2 Kings 25:22-26, it wasn't until 11 Jews later murdered Gedaliah and also the Jews and "Chaldeans" who were with him at Mizpah, that all of the remaining Jews of the land of Judah fled to Egypt (those were not taken into exile by the Babylonians). According to the account, it would have been very different if thosee murders hadn't happened. According to the account, if those murders (done by Jews) hadn't happened, many Jews, including even the surviving "chiefs of the military forces" could have remained in Judah without fear of becoming killed, or being sent to Babylon, or becoming mistreated by the Babylonians ("Chaldeans").

Disillusioned JW

Notice that the verse immediately prior to 2 Kings 25:22 (which mentions that some people were "left behind in the land of Judah"), namely verse 21, says "... Thus Judah went into exile from off the soil." (1970 and 1984 NWT). Thus, according to 2 Kings chapter 25, after the exile took place (after the destruction of Jerusalem) there were still Jews left in Judah until after the start of the "seventh month" when those remaining eventually fled to Egypt.

Fisherman

Thus Judah went into exile from off the soil.

Thank you for factoring that in.

This is a friendly and kind discussion but Sun Tzu applies:

“Thus those skilled in the art of the bait bring the opponent to the battlefield instead of being brought there by him.” Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Like Scholar and myself have been saying all along, the context of the Bible supports 70 desolation.

Disillusioned JW

Clarification: In my prior post where I said "... after the exile took place ..." I meant it in the sense of "... after the completion of the removal of people into exile took place ...."

How to debunk the 1914 calculus ONLY using JW publications?

Share this