Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep 763 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Augustin

  Narkissos,

  I am sure the GB knows what Furuli is doing; and I am sure he would have been told to "wait for Jehovah" if the GB thinks he is on the wrong track, after all. Perhaps the GB is hoping that he will be able to fabricate some support for the strange doctrine of 607 BCE? If not, the Society will eventually be forced to change the doctrine. Wen? I really don’t know.

  I don't know why the Danish version has "for" Babylon in Jer 29:10; probably because they who made the translation also made use of the Hebrew "Vorlage", not only the 'original' NWT. My guess would be that they who made the new Swedish version consulted the Danish version as well. And here they found "for" ('for'), not "i" ('at', cf. German "in", English "in"). The problem, of course, is that these translations make it difficult, actually impossible, to maintain the strange doctrine of 607 BCE

  Best,

  Augustin
• 

  ozziepost

  the WTS has a huge problem here. The GB knows this as I can evidence from my own conversation with a member of the GB about this issue some years ago

  Oh yes! Perhaps this is where the WTS is most vulnerable, it's "achilles heel", so to speak. If 607 falls, then so does all that sets the Dubs apart. Down comes the doctrines just like a pack of cards, from 1914 to time of the end, to remnant, to great crowd and on and on.
• 

  Jeffro

  I will pre-empt raising the issue of the sabbaths in 2 Chronicles with the following:
  The original texts from which the Bible is translated do not contain punctuation, which must be added by translators according to the context. Bearing this in mind, a rendering of verses 20 to 22 that is consistent with Jeremiah’s prophecy, might be: “Furthermore, he carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, (and they came to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign, to fulfil Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah), until the land had paid off its Sabbaths; all the days of lying desolated it kept Sabbath. To fulfil seventy years, in the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia, that Jehovah’s word by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished...” This rendering properly and logically relates both the 70 years, and their end (‘until the royalty of Persia began to reign’), to Jeremiah’s initial prophecy mentioning the 70 years, and relegates the paying off of the Sabbaths to a period of unspecified duration starting from Jerusalem’s destruction in 587BC.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  You choose to ignore the stark reality that the seventy years is subject to much dispute amongst scholars and although your interpretation which coincides with the Jonsson hypothesis is claimed by you to be 'biblical', it simply an interpretation. The date of 609 for the beginning of the seventy years is utterly crazy and stupid because the seventy years was commensurate with desolation and devastation of the land which only occurred when Jerusalem fell in 607.

  To say that 70 plus 539 equals 609 is utterly meaningless and has nothing at all to do with the seventy years of desolation, exile and servitude from the fall in 607 to the return in 537. The period of vassalage is misunderstood by scholars and other critics and is based upon a false understanding of Daniel 1:1 and Jeremiah 25:1 which demonstrates that the history of this period is understood accurately.

  The chronology produced by WT scholars is in full accord with the biblical facts and the historical and secular evidence as it elevates the Bible over the perverse theories of poxataes and critics.

  If your methodology is so sound then how is then that these same scholars which do not support WT views are unable to agree on a consistent system of dating. You cannot blame the biblical data because you have already produced a personal chronology in close agreement with ours regarding the Divided Monarchy

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  You choose to ignore the stark reality that the seventy years is subject to much dispute amongst scholars

  I have not ignored anything. Whether scholars dispute anything is not relevant to my interpretation as it is taken directly from the bible. The fact that my model co-incides with the findings of many scholars attests to its accuracy, and did not require any collusion or juggling of facts. To say that my model is wrong simply because scholars debate the issue, would also say that the Society's is also wrong.

  and although your interpretation which coincides with the Jonsson hypothesis is claimed by you to be 'biblical', it simply an interpretation.

  So is the 'Society hypothesis'

  The date of 609 for the beginning of the seventy years is utterly crazy and stupid because the seventy years was commensurate with desolation and devastation of the land which only occurred when Jerusalem fell in 607.

  "Utterly crazy and stupid"?? Not a very scholarly approach to debating a proposed thought.
  Where does the bible say, without any possible alternative interpretation, that Jerusalem was completely desolate for 70 years?

  To say that 70 plus 539 equals 609 is utterly meaningless and has nothing at all to do with the seventy years of desolation, exile and servitude from the fall in 607 to the return in 537.

  "'And it must occur that when seventy years have been fulfilled I shall call to account against the king of Babylon and against that nation"

  The period of vassalage is misunderstood by scholars and other critics and is based upon a false understanding of Daniel 1:1 and Jeremiah 25:1 which demonstrates that the history of this period is understood accurately.

  I have provided the simple correct explanation of the supposed conflict, which simply lies in Daniel's use of the accession year system and therefore the years he states are one less. There is no significance in the bible given to Jehoiakim becoming a vassal to Nebuchadnezzar insofar as the beginning of any period.

  The chronology produced by WT scholars is in full accord with the biblical facts

  Jeremiah 25:12, Daniel 5:26-31

  and the historical and secular evidence as it elevates the Bible over the perverse theories of poxataes and critics.

  poxataes? Anyway... the 'Society hypothesis' does not agree with the dating of any "historical and secular evidence" prior to and including the first year of Evil-Merodach.

  If your methodology is so sound then how is then that these same scholars which do not support WT views are unable to agree on a consistent system of dating.

  Many scholars choose not to base their dating on the bible as I have done, and arrive at different dates for some events. Also some secular authorities driven by pride may arrive at different dates simply to have something published.

  You cannot blame the biblical data because you have already produced a personal chronology in close agreement with ours regarding the Divided Monarchy

  It's not about 'blame'. My data for the divided kingdom is based solely on the bible, and fits secular chronology very well. I am not responsible for whether or not secular authorities choose to use the bible as their source, and I do not have to defend their choices.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  The Socoety's chronology is also based upon biblical texts that describe the seventy years as aperiod of desolation. exile, servitude for there are no seventy years that refer to serving of Babylon for seventy years but rather that the land and people would be desolate or devastations. In short, the seventy yeras are a period specified of desolation and devastation which by implication requires servitude and exile. Many other texts foretell these other elements of exile and servitude nut not those specific seventy year texts.

  The very fact that your listing of the Divided Monarchy which is said by you to be modelled biblically and is similar to our biblical model should demonstrate that we too have constructed chronology on the biblical evidence which providesa solid basis for 607.

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  there are no seventy years that refer to serving of Babylon for seventy years

  Jeremiah chapter 25:
  
  
  
  all the families of the north,” is the utterance of Jehovah, “even [sending] to Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land and against its inhabitants and against all these nations round about; and I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of astonishment and something to whistle at and places devastated to time indefinite. 10 And I will destroy out of them the sound of exultation and the sound of rejoicing, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the hand mill and the light of the lamp. 11 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.”’
  12 “‘And it must occur that when seventy years have been fulfilled I shall call to account against the king of Babylon and against that nation,’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘their error, even against the land of the Chal·de´ans, and I will make it desolate wastes to time indefinite. 13 And I will bring in upon that land all my words that I have spoken against it, even all that is written in this book that Jeremiah has prophesied against all the nations. 14 For even they themselves, many nations and great kings, have exploited them as servants; and I will repay them according to their activity and according to the work of their hands.’”
  15 For this is what Jehovah the God of Israel said to me: “Take this cup of the wine of rage out of my hand, and you must make all the nations to whom I am sending you drink it. 16 And they must drink and shake back and forth and act like crazed men because of the sword that I am sending among them.”
  17 And I proceeded to take the cup out of the hand of Jehovah and to make all the nations drink to whom Jehovah had sent me: 18 namely, Jerusalem and the cities of Judah and her kings, her princes, to make them a devastated place, an object of astonishment, something to whistle at and a malediction, just as at this day; 19 Phar´aoh the king of Egypt and his servants and his princes and all his people; 20 and all the mixed company, and all the kings of the land of Uz, and all the kings of the land of the Phi·lis´tines and Ash´ke·lon and Ga´za and Ek´ron and the remnant of Ash´dod; 21 E´dom and Mo´ab and the sons of Am´mon; 22 and all the kings of Tyre and all the kings of Si´don and the kings of the island that is in the region of the sea; 23 and De´dan and Te´ma and Buz and all those with hair clipped at the temples; 24 and all the kings of the Arabs and all the kings of the mixed company who are residing in the wilderness; 25 and all the kings of Zim´ri and all the kings of E´lam and all the kings of the Medes; 26 and all the kings of the north who are near and far away, one after the other, and all the [other] kingdoms of the earth that are on the surface of the ground; and the king of She´shach himself will drink after them.
• 

  Jeffro

  The very fact that your listing of the Divided Monarchy which is said by you to be modelled biblically and is similar to our biblical model should demonstrate that we too have constructed chronology on the biblical evidence which providesa solid basis for 607.

  The similarity between the two models is due to the length of the reigns of the Jewish kings being taken from the bible.
  The 'Society hypothesis' differs from my model where it deviates away from the bible. It does this by ignoring Jeremiah chapter 25; by stating that the entire 70 years referred to the entire exile contradicting their explanation of the 70 years for Tyre; by ignoring the fact that the word 'chorbah' does not necessitate complete depopulation; and by glossing over the Hebrew word for 'desolated' at 2 Chronicles ('shamem'-appalled [because the temple was ruined]), which does not mean devoid of people.
• 

  Leolaia

  About shmm, this is the same word that occurs in Daniel to refer to the despoiling of the Temple by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who placed a heathen altar for Baal-Shamem (Zeus Olympios) on the altar for daily sacrifice. Partly, this is due to punning on the name of the Syro-Phoenician god, but it is also due to the sense of defiling and appaling. See also 1 Maccabees 1:39, referring to the same thing (and influenced by Daniel), which states that "the sanctuary became desolate as a desert"
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Sorry, the context of Jeremiah 25: 9-11 is about the deolation of the land becoming a devastated place, an object of astonishment for seventy years. In order for this to occur the people of tha land would also suffer punishment as exiles in servitude to Babylon. Tjis pasage proves that the seventy years has as its primary focus desolation of the land with the people exiled in servitude for that same paeriod of seventy years.

  The focus of all of the seventy years is not servitude to Babylon but the desolation of Judah and the exiles of the Jewish population serving Babylon. This is the only possible coherent interpretation of these passages.

  scholar JW