607 bce or 587 bce

by jw 94 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Hellrider

  Celebrated "Scholar jw":

  Hellrider

  Josephus supports 607 by the very fact that he supports the interpretation of the seventy years by celebrated WT scholars. Josephus also disagrees with the accepted Neo Babylonian chronology because he shows different regnal years for the Babylonian rulers so this weakens such chronology.

  He does? Show me where! I bet you can`t. But I can show you where Josephus lists a chronology that would set the return of the exiles to, oh I don`t know, somewhere in the 400s bc. This is because Josephus was way off when it came to Babylonian chronology, and his chronology doesn`t support the "WT chronology", on the contrary, it disagrees with both 607 and 587. From "Antiquities of the jews", book X, chapter 11:

  NOW when king Nebuchadnezzar had reigned forty-three years, he ended his life.

  But now, after the death of Nebuchadnezzar, Evil-Merodach his son succeeded in the kingdom, who immediately set Jeconiah at liberty, and esteemed him among his most intimate friends. He also gave him many presents, and made him honorable above the rest of the kings that were in Babylon; for his father had not kept his faith with Jeconiah, when he voluntarily delivered up himself to him, with his wives and children, and his whole kindred, for the sake of his country, that it might not be taken by siege, and utterly destroyed, as we said before. When Evil-Mcrodach was dead, after a reign of eighteen years, Niglissar his son took the government, and retained it forty years, and then ended his life; and after him the succession in the kingdom came to his son Labosordacus, who continued in it in all but nine months; and when he was dead, it came to Baltasar, who by the Babylonians was called Naboandelus; against him did Cyrus, the king of Persia, and Darius, the king of Media, make war; and when he was besieged in Babylon, there happened a wonderful and prodigious vision.

  How does this get us to a 70-year interpretation? Just these three kings reigns, according to Josephus for 101 years! Saying that Josephus "supports the 607-date" is ridicolous. Just because he doesn`t support the 587-date, that doesn`t mean that he supports neither the 607-date, nor the Societys interpretation of the "70 years of desolation". If 99.999% of all historians claim that Jerusalem was destroyed in either 586, 587 or 588, and one (self-proclaimed) historian says it happened in 607, the 607-guys date is not supported just because there is another guy that says it happened sometime in the, oh I don`t know 650s bc? (if we are to accept the 539-date as the end, and the lengths of reigns that Josephus gives). If you are unable to understand that, then you must be completely ignorant.

  Hellrider

  So what! All dates in any chronology are of necessity, derived dates. There is no fantastic irony in this unless you are completely ignorant. The fact of the matter is that we have a selected pivotal date from secular sources, 539 BCE. Thereupon, another derived date in harmony with secular and biblical evidence is calculated to be 537 BCE for the Return of the Jews from Exile. Counting back the exilic period of the biblical seventy years establishes the derived date of 607 BCE as the beginning of the Exile and the Fall of Jerusalem. This calculated and derived methodology is irrefutable.

  scholar JW

  Looool. You just don`t get it, do you. The 539-date is derived from a chronology that sets the destruction of Jerusalem to be around 586/587. If you insist on the 539 and 537-dates as "pivotal dates" without acepting the rest of the chronology that lead (!!!! do you understand? LEAD!!!) to the derived 539 and 537-dates, then you must give up claiming that the 539 and 537-dates are "pivotal dates" with a solid secular basis, and base also these dates on pure belief.
• 

  Jeffro

  You still have not explained your arbitrary choice of 587 when most scholars prefer 586. Why are you so diffident about this matter?

  Based on MJ's fairly comprehensive list of sources http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/107943/1877113/post.ashx#1877113, 587BC is indeed supported by many scholars. Based on that data, 210 out of 608 sources (about 35%) say 587BC. An additional 19 sources suggest either 586 or 587. About 59% say 586BC.

  My selection of 587BC is hardly arbitrary, since it is based purely on the biblical account; I am in complete agreement with 35%, and within a year of another 59%. Agreement with secular sources was not my main intent when I studied the issue in depth, and I did not have to manipulate my research at all in order to reach 587BC.

  But the fact remains that I am really not "so diffident" about this matter anyway.

  So let's consider your position. Your arbitrarily selected year, 607BC (based on the unevidenced arbitrary selection of 537BC), is supported by 0 out of 608 (that's 0%).

  Now mathematically (and I know you probably won't understand), when dividing a large number by a small number, the result becomes larger as the small number decreases, and as the small number approaches zero, the result becomes infinitely large. I am in agreement with 35% of sources, and you are in agreement with 0%. So comparing my result to yours - 35 divided by 0 - produces an undefined result, indicating that my result is infinitely superior to yours. The numbers don't lie.
• 

  Jeffro

  So what! All dates in any chronology are of necessity, derived dates. There is no fantastic irony in this unless you are completely ignorant. The fact of the matter is that we have a selected pivotal date from secular sources, 539 BCE. Thereupon, another derived date in harmony with secular and biblical evidence is calculated to be 537 BCE for the Return of the Jews from Exile. Counting back the exilic period of the biblical seventy years establishes the derived date of 607 BCE as the beginning of the Exile and the Fall of Jerusalem. This calculated and derived methodology is irrefutable.

  Of course, 537 isn't "calculated" at all. According to Insight (vol 1 pg 458), " it is very probable that the decree was made by the winter of 538 B.C.E. or toward the spring of 537 B.C.E", Insight (vol 1 pg 568, " Cyrus’ decree freeing the Jews to return to Jerusalem likely was made late in the year 538 or early in 537 B.C.E" ... That's their 'calculation'! That is called 'speculating'.

  And then in a downright obvious instance of circular reasoning (and speculation) there is Insight (vol 1 pg 800), " Cyrus’ decree must have been issued late in 538 B.C.E. or early in 537 ... The desolation had to last until the 70th year ended ... Likely it was issued in the early spring of 537 B.C.E." Again, there is no evidence as to when Cyrus' first year actually was, but it is assumed that the year must have been 537 because of the assumption that the 70 year period begain in 607, which is of course derived from 537.

  Of course, Josephus' account compared with Ezra's account makes 537 impossible for the return of the Jews, so the Society's speculation is irrelevant, and it had to have occurred in 538.
• 

  Jeffro

  DANIEL 9:2 has the significant expression: "for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem" which clearly shows the continuative aspect of the seventy years at the time of Daniel who expected its end shortly.

  In 539, Daniel discerned that the 70 years had ended, and was therefore naturally anticipating the return of the Jews which he knew would happen after Babylon's 70 years had ended.

  Ezra wrote under inspiration and I offer to you the words of the Apostle Paul a celebrated WT scholar who confirmed such inspiration in 2 Timothy 3:16.

  This is of course quite irrelevant as the 'scriptures' were not canonized at that time, and there were many writings which Paul would have considered "inspired" which were not included in that canonization, and would be rejected by the Society as uninspired.

  That is correct and you catch on so fast. Zechariah's seventy years were past when Zechariah was visited by the angel. The now returned exiles had not misunderstood Jeremiah because they understood those seventy years were consequently a period of denunciation because of their disobedience, thus the seventy years applied not to Babylon but to the unfaithful Jews who were denounced during that period of seventy years.

  Wrong, wrong, wrongedy, wrong wrong. Zechariah was discussing a different 70 years, with a different purpose, and they were still continuing. They ran from 587 to 517, and are not the same period referred to by Daniel or Jeremiah. Refer to previous posts.

  Daniel had access to Jeremiah's scrolls and was familiar with all that he had written for "he discerened by the books" which goes much further than day-dreaming or wishful thinking.

  He had access to Jeremiah's scrolls, so he would clearly understand the significance of the events of 539, which obviously ended Babylon's 70 years. There could therefore have been no doubt that he knew that period had ended.
• 

  AuldSoul

  DANIEL 9:2 has the significant expression: "for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem" which clearly shows the continuative aspect of the seventy years at the time of Daniel who expected its end shortly.

  He was referring to the time set by Jeremiah in Jeremiah 25, 27, and 29 (there were no chapter and verse numbers at the time). Jeremiah 25:12 shows that the 70 years applied to Babylon and its king. More than anyone else, Daniel (one of the first exiles) was in a position to know when the 70 years began. Since it was he through whom God interpretted the writing on the wall (Daniel 5:26) he was also in a position to know when the 70 years ended.

  There is no such inference of a continuative aspect in the words you highlighted. He refers to "the number of years" from the perspective of Jeremiah. He is referring to a period of time in a neutral way, as a thing—neither past, present, or future.

  For instance, if I refer to "the days of Noah" there is nothing in the text to indicate whether I am referring to something present, future, or past. You would require other information to discern whether I believe those days have passed already, whether they are still upon us, or whether they are yet future. Fortunately, Daniel told us where to look for more information (hint: he didn't suggest we look to Ezra's writings).

  Ezra wrote under inspiration and I offer to you the words of the Apostle Paul a celebrated WT scholar who confirmed such inspiration in 2 Timothy 3:16.

  Hee-hee! Woo-boy, you believe the (apostate) Protestants correctly determined which books of the Bible were directly authored by God? And you further believe that the expression in 2 Timothy 3:16 means that there is inerreancy in the Bible? And due to this, you credit Ezra's cursory explanation of the 70 years of Jeremiah more strongly than you credit Jeremiah's own explanation? Wow! You are deluded.

  My point regarding Zechariah must have missed you entirely. The angel does not indicate anything regarding the timing or application of the 70 years except that they had passed. He does note that during the 70 years they were denounced, which Jeremiah acknowledges would be the case by making yokes for the nations against which denunciation was occurring prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. He himself took on the yoke for Judah, and made this odd pronouncement to Zedekiah:

  Jeremiah 27:12-14 — Even to Zed·e·ki'ah the king of Judah I spoke according to all these words, saying: “Bring YOUR necks under the yoke of the king of Babylon and serve him and his people and keep on living. 13 Why should you yourself and your people die by the sword, by the famine and by the pestilence according to what Jehovah has spoken to the nation that does not serve the king of Babylon? 14 And do not listen to the words of the prophets that are saying to YOU men, ‘YOU will not serve the king of Babylon,’ because falsehood is what they are prophesying to YOU.
  15 “‘For I have not sent them,’ is the utterance of Jehovah, ‘but they are prophesying in my name falsely, to the end that I shall disperse YOU, and YOU will have to perish, YOU men and the prophets that are prophesying to YOU.’”
  16 And to the priests and to all this people I spoke, saying: “This is what Jehovah has said, ‘Do not listen to the words of YOUR prophets that are prophesying to YOU, saying: “Look! The utensils of the house of Jehovah are being brought back from Babylon soon now!” For falsehood is what they are prophesying to YOU. 17 Do not listen to them. Serve the king of Babylon and keep on living. Why should this city become a devastated place? 18 But if they are prophets and if the word of Jehovah does exist with them, let them, please, beseech Jehovah of armies, that the utensils that are remaining over in the house of Jehovah and the house of the king of Judah and in Jerusalem may not come into Babylon.’

  Jerusalem did not need to become devastated in order for the prophecy of Jeremiah 25 to be fulfilled. Jeremiah himself said so. Speaking as Jehovah's prophet. For me, that trumps a scribe's opinion (recorded many years later) any day of the week. But, you obviously wish to see only those parts of Scripture which confirm your prior conclusions.

  AuldSoul
• 

  Leolaia

  In 539, Daniel discerned that the 70 years had ended, and was therefore naturally anticipating the return of the Jews which he knew would happen after Babylon's 70 years had ended.

  But then the interpreting angel explains that the 70 years are really 70 weeks of years (cf. Leviticus 26:18), allowing for a much greater period of time for the desolations of Jerusalem and the iniquity of the people to come to an end. This period is meant to include the more recent desolations by Antiochus Epiphanes and apostasy of the people (cf. Daniel 11:30-31, 1 Maccabees 1:29-33), which were construed as coming shortly before the end of the 70 weeks (Daniel 9:27).
• 

  scholar

  Leolaia

  Correct, Daniel in his introduction to his lengthy prayer which comprises the entire chapter makes historical refernce to the current seventy year period. During this prayer to Jehovah God, Daniel refers often to the current state of Jerusalem and Judah as a desolated place. At the end of the prayer, Daniel is comforted by encouraging words from the angel Gabriel who reassured him that Jerusalem and her temple would be rebuit during a period of 'seventy weeks'.This means that the seventy years are the foundation of a much larger prophetic seventy weeks of years leading to the foretold Messiah.

  This period would encompass all of Jewish history from 455 BCE until the Messiah arrived in the early part of the 1st century CE a grand total of 490 years.

  scholar JW
• 

  Narkissos

  This means that the seventy years are the foundation of a much larger prophetic seventy weeks of years leading to the foretold Messiah.

  Very interesting, I don't remember the WT saying this.

  Pray tell, how are the seventy years a "foundation" for the seventy weeks? How exactly are they related?
• 

  scholar

  Narkissos

  Remember you heard this first from the said scholar that the seventy years are the foundation for the latter 'seventy weeks of years' prophecy. The reasons why this is the case is as follows:

  1. Both are prophetic in nature, the latter is given in answer to the prayer about the former.

  2. The literary structure of the narrative that is ch.9.

  3. The prophecy of verses 24-27 begins with a time element instead of ending with it as is more common with other Danielic prophecies.

  4. Common use of the number 70

  5. Both are multiples of seven

  6. Furthermore, when the symbolic units of the seventy weeks are interpreted according to the literal units of the 70 years, a relationship is produced which parallels the relationship between the jubilee period and sabbactical year period.

  7. Such relationship was recognized also by the Qumran community

  scholar JW

  2.
• 

  MuadDib

  There you have it, folks. Profound analytical commentary worthy of consideration in even the most hallowed halls of research and knowledge. "Both are multiples of seven" - you can't make this shit up, man. Thank heaven we have such powerful intellects as scholar's to reveal these sacred mysteries to the heathens with their "academic credentials" and "actual knowledge of the subject at hand."