607BCE or 587/586BCE explained

by truth about the last days 62 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  AlanF

  Barbour used what he considered to be the best dates for two events that became key in Russell's chronology in order to arrive at 606 B.C. for the destruction of Jerusalem: 536 B.C. for the fall of Babylon, and 536 B.C. for the return of the Jews to Judah. Following the lead of certain earlier prophetic speculators, he just added the 70 years spoken of by Jeremiah to 536 and got 606. Of course, this was completely wrong.

  We now know that the above-mentioned events happened in 539 and 538 B.C. respectively. While many historical commentators were convinced that the dates Barbour used were correct, a good many others used other dates, including the ones accepted today.

  It's pretty amazing that Barbour and Russell managed to misunderstand something as fundamental to historical dating as the lack of a "zero year" between 1 B.C. and 1 A.D. It's even more amazing that JWs today don't see this as a serious blow to the Watchtower Society's longstanding claim that Russell was "divinely directed" in presenting his chronology.

  About 1904, Russell seems to have, for the first time, seriously taken note of the zero year problem. He changed a number of his expectations regarding 1914, so that by about 1910 he had speculated that 1915 might be the "correct" year for the end of the Gentile times. Around that time, one of his lieutenants, P. S. L. Johnson (the one who Rutherford kicked out of Bethel in 1917), pointed out that, to retain 1914 as the magic date, the date for Jerusalem's destruction should be moved back to 607 B.C. However, Russell never did anything with this information. That this was known to studious Bible Students is easily proved: Morton Edgar, in his 2nd volume of Great Pyramid Passages (1913), listed 607 as the date of the destruction; the 1917 WTS book The Finished Mystery also listed the 607 date. Rutherford, apparently not wanting to upset the apple cart, did nothing about any of these problems.

  It was in 1943 that Fred Franz finally began to deal with many of the chronological problems left over from Russell's time. It took him another dozen years to sort things out to the state the Watchtower chronology is in today. Many dates were changed: 606 went to 607; the date of 536 for Babylon's fall went to 538 and then 539; the date of 536 for the return of the Jews went to 537.

  In the middle of the 1943 book The Truth Shall Make You Free, Franz changed the date for the start of the Gentile times from 606 to 607 B.C. He did this by telling a lie: he changed the date by exactly one year, but implied in his explanation that the change was only a few months. However, he left the date of Jerusalem's destruction at 606 B.C. This presented a problem: according to Franz, the Gentile times began about 10 months before Jerusalem was destroyed. This was "fixed" in the next year's book, The Kingdom Is At Hand. It presented a chronological chart showing -- without any explanation -- Jerusalem's destruction as being in 607 B.C. Franz included a footnote that told another flat-out lie: the footnote claimed that the reason for the date change was to be found in the 1943 book. But there was no such explanation in the book, and it's easily shown that the last mentions of Jerusalem's destruction in the book pegged it as 606 B.C.

  For a lengthy and detailed look at this whole matter, see the article "The Evolution of 606 to 607 B.C.E. in Watchtower Chronology" at this link: http://www.geocities.com/osarsif/606.htm . There are several other shorter articles with obvious titles at that website.

  AlanF
• 

  geevee

  Thanks AlanF for the information. Very interesting.
  I dont want to be my age, so from now on.....I think I'll change it. No one will wonder at all, oh I see you're 21 I see according to this letter you have written. That'll be fine. 21 it is. I might even change our anniversary, the wife and family wont care.......
• 

  scholar

  truth about the last days

  Your simple theory that the seventy years ran from 586 BCE until the sixth year of Darius the Great in 516 BCE is impossible for the simple reason that the seventy years of Jeremiah had already terminated with the Return of the Jewish exiles from Babylon to Judah in 537 BCE. That seventy years was a period of exile, desolation and servitude which had already been completely fulfilled according to the testimony of Ezra.

  Scholars do not know and cannot determine the year for the Fall of Jerusalem because there is much debate over the precise year whether it was 589, 588, 587 or the most popular 586 BCE. Celebrated WT scholars over many centuries have determined biblically that 607 BCE is the only possible calender year in harmony with biblical and secular evidence.

  scholar JW
• 

  stillajwexelder

  Celebrated WT scholars over many centuries have determined biblically that 607 BCE is the only possible calender year in harmony with biblical and secular evidence.

  Scholar this is not true as you well know and is n print in Celebrated WT publications - for many years the ytaught 606 BCE
• 

  undercover

  Celebrated WT scholars over many centuries have determined biblically that 607 BCE is the only possible calender year in harmony with biblical and secular evidence.

  
  

  
  Why do I bother...

  but, anyway....

  Names of "celebrated WT scholars" please.

  Stilla's got a point too. If 607 is the only possible year then why did early WT "scholars", namely Russell and Rutherford (now these guys were celebrated) publish 606 as the year of destruction?

  Celebrate! Celebrate! Dance to the music....
• 

  Jeffro

  Your simple theory that the seventy years ran from 586 BCE until the sixth year of Darius the Great in 516 BCE is impossible for the simple reason that the seventy years of Jeremiah had already terminated with the Return of the Jewish exiles from Babylon to Judah in 537 BCE. That seventy years was a period of exile, desolation and servitude which had already been completely fulfilled according to the testimony of Ezra.

  A comparison of the biblical account of the Jews' return and temple rebuilding with Josephus' indication that the temple rebuilding was in Cyrus' second year makes it impossible for the Jews to have returned in 537BC. The temple rebuilding began in 537, and the Jews returned in Tishri of the previous year.

  Scholars do not know and cannot determine the year for the Fall of Jerusalem because there is much debate over the precise year whether it was 589, 588, 587 or the most popular 586 BCE. Celebrated WT scholars over many centuries have determined biblically that 607 BCE is the only possible calender year in harmony with biblical and secular evidence.

  Your supposed WT 'scholars' haven't even existed for "centuries", and for some of that time they said it was 606 to make their contrived end-times agenda fit, until they figured out there wasn't a zero year (duh). There is still absolutely no secular evidence to support 607, and there are several flaws with the Witnesses' supposed 'biblical' application.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  There is nothing in Ezra or Josephus that makes impossible the dating of the Return by Tishri in 537 BCE as observed by Ezra 3:1. The date 538 BCE is not generally supported for this event by scholarship and is not even properly proved by the Jonsson hypothesis. The return of the Jewish exiles in 537 BE means that the foundation of the Temple was finished in 536 BCE as also noted by Jospehus who noted that the foundation was laid in the second year of Cyrus.

  The matter of the zero year is a problem of methodology which was not recognized by scholarship until the middle of the last century, it developed from 19th century expositors not recognizing the difference between historical and astronomical dating methods.

  The calculation of both 607 and 537 are sound both biblically and secularly whereas you have no definite dates for the Fall or the Return.

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  There is nothing in Ezra or Josephus that makes impossible the dating of the Return by Tishri in 537 BCE as observed by Ezra 3:1. The date 538 BCE is not generally supported for this event by scholarship and is not even properly proved by the Jonsson hypothesis. The return of the Jewish exiles in 537 BE means that the foundation of the Temple was finished in 536 BCE as also noted by Jospehus who noted that the foundation was laid in the second year of Cyrus.

  Just because you don't want there to be evidence doesn't make it go away. As AlanF pointed out earlier, 536 was Cyrus' third year, not his second. At best 537 for the return is speculative, and at worst it is a lie. This hardly gives you the definite dates that you so proudly claim, even though your entire application of the 70 years is wrong.

  The matter of the zero year is a problem of methodology which was not recognized by scholarship until the middle of the last century, it developed from 19th century expositors not recognizing the difference between historical and astronomical dating methods.

  Still misusing the word "methodology" I see. "Middle of last century"? You may want to check your calendar. I think they knew about the zero year before the 1950s.

  The calculation of both 607 and 537 are sound both biblically and secularly whereas you have no definite dates for the Fall or the Return.

  You keep saying this kind of thing as if it were true, but you never actually provide true evidence, or properly refute the evidence that proves you to be wrong.
• 

  meems101

  does the WTBTS have historians?
• 

  VM44

  The Relative chronology for the neo-babylonian chronology is established beyond all doubt by the Egibi Business records.

  It is interesting to note that the Egibi records were known since the time of Russell, but The Watchtower had not mentioned them by name in any of their publications.

  The Egibi records consist of contracts made during the time period of the kings, and so the duration of the reigns for each king can be determined accurately.

  The Watchtower has been intellectually dishonest for over 120 years by not considering these records.

  --VM44