For those not sick to death of talking about this...607 BCE

by Swamboozled 601 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • hillary_step


    1. The 40 year desolation is not literal.

    2. Secular history of Egypt disproves it.

    3. The writers of the site believe the GB are divinely directed therefore the writer must be wrong.

    Do you consider those reasons to be 'legion' or even legitimate

    AlanF noted that though the issues with the site you linked were 'legion', he would stick to basics. Perhaps you should read his post a little more carefully. These basics are noted above.

    I would be more interested if you were to attend to these issues point by point, bearing in mind that you have also misrepresented point 3). Alan suggested that the author of the linked website started their research with a conclusion, and that this conclusion has been reached for them by the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. As a Jehovah's Witness it is impossible, despite the fact that the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses itself admits that it is prone to error, for you to accept that their conclusions are flawed. To do so would risk disfellowshipping and subsequent shunning. This does not incline a person to have confidence in your 'research', as you are unable to deal with issues on the basis of fact, but only with an understanding that the Bible is always correct, as are the GB. Try to understand that debating these issues requires that you deal with facts. For example, historical evidence exists that Eygpt did not have an 'uninhabited' period, or at the least that no evidence exists of an uninhabited period - how do you deal with this? You may of course follow the path that Joseph Rutherford your former leader noted, when he accepted that the Bible was actually filled with inconsitencies. This I might add, is one of the few things that he stated which is borne out by the facts.


  • Hellrider


    My response to you was the result of your comment to AlanF, in which you wrote:

    40 years does not really mean 40 years. It is symbolic. Desolated with no inhabitant doesn't really mean NO inhabitant.

    ...and by pointing out that even within the WTS-interpretation of the events, some slack has to be given to the term "desolation", because at no point was there NO inhabitants in Judah during the 70 years. So when you attack AlanF because he mentioned that the 40 years of desolation of Egypt could be interpreted "symbolically", then you are wrong, a symbolic interpreation is a possibility, and AlanFs argument was valid, even within the Societys (and, consequently, yours) standards. As for the 40 years, and whenever they were, I don`t care, and I don`t care whether they were literal or symbolic (which they well could have been, as I showed in the previous post). They could even well have been (literally or symbolically) when the Society says they were (or there about), but that doesn`t change the fact that the 70 years do NOT start with the destruction of Jerusalem, and there is nothing in the prophecies that indicate that they do, on the contrary. Jeremiah makes it clear that the 70 years are FOR Babylon (and Nebuchadnezzar, which has been elevated to be Gods servant), and not 70 years FOR Judah. The focus here is on Babylon. Actually, the Society has painted itself into a corner with this 607-crap, and they never had to. The 70 years probably DO begin somewhere around 609 (609 when the initial attacks begin, while Nebs father is still in charge) and end somtime around 539. That`s all ok with me, it`s even close enough to 607 to be acceptable, but 2520 days do not mean 2520 years anyway, so the Society is full of sh#t. And consequently, the 40 years of Egypt (within this line of thinking) means absolutely nothing for the whole idiotic 1914-doctrine. But nice layout and pictures on the website, though, I`ll give you that.

  • ellderwho
    That is when the angel of Jehovah asks God, “O Jehovah of armies, how long will you yourself not show mercy to Jerusalem and to the cities of Judah, whom you have denounced these seventy years?”
    Stop and think about this statement. Doesn't it seem odd that the angel would ask Jehovah “how long”, when the exact length of time had already been determined, namely 70 years?

    This is Third witness' explanation of the 70 years mentioned in Zech. Hey genius, whats that word in red bold letters? According to your reasonings the word should be those 70 years.

    Your answer is the 70 years had already happened. C'mon thats right out of the "Paradise restored to mankind book."

    You ask one to stop and think, isnt it odd the angel would ask Jehovah...? But totally ignore the premise of the question. Then you continue on and interpet what the angel really meant:

    The only possible reason to ask such a rhetorical question is because the 70 years had already ended.
  • thirdwitness

    Hilarystep, you must have copied what I wrote immediately because on the third point I edited it to say that he seems to insinuate ...... I did realize that he didn't come right out and say since the GB said it , it must be wrong.

  • thirdwitness

    Before you bring up the prosperous rule of Amasis according to Herodutus during this time of Egyptian history let me do it for you.

    And then note this:

    Encyclopaedia Britannica (1959, Vol. 8, p. 62) comments on Herodotus’ history of this period: “His statements prove not entirely reliable when they can be checked by the scanty native evidence.”

    The Bible Commentary by F. C. Cook, after noting that Herodotus even fails to mention Nebuchadnezzar’s attack on Egypt, says: “It is notorious that Herodotus, while he faithfully recorded all that he heard and saw in Egypt, was indebted for his information on past history to the Egyptian priests, whose tales he adopted with blind credulity. . . . The whole story [by Herodotus] of Apries [Hophra] and Amasis is mixed with so much that is inconsistent and legendary that we may very well hesitate to adopt it as authentic history. It is by no means strange that the priests should endeavour to disguise the national dishonour of having been subjected to a foreign yoke.” (Note B., p. 132)

    It is not surprising that Egyptian records do not contain any references to a 40 year desolation at that time just as they do not record the Hebrew's exodus from Egypt almost one thousand years earlier.

    As one investigator of the matter says: "To cover up the humiliating defeat at the hands of Babylon, the Egyptian priests later invented the story that Egypt was never more prosperous than during these 40 years! Yet archaeologically the period in Egypt is a total blank. A few remains have been attributed to this period -- a dated grave here and there. But they were only late reburials of those who died abroad in captivity and whose families could afford the expense.

    Historians have mistakenly taken the Egyptian priests at their word. They think they find supporting evidence in the rule of Pharaoh Amasis on the Isle of Cyprus. Without exception every ancient history text portrays Egypt militarily strong during this period. Amasis is acclaimed as the builder of an empire that included Cyprus, while Nebuchadnezzar was limited to the mainland. No one, it seems, has ever noticed that Amasis was sent into exile to Cyprus by Nebuchadnezzar's command!

    The only document to record the total destruction of Egypt was discovered in 1878. In that year a mutilated cuneiform cylinder was discovered, disclosing an event of Nebuchadnezzar's thirty-seventh year. It was purchased by the British Museum. The fragmentary remains are difficult to translate. The record is cast in the form of a plaintive prayer from Nebuchadnezzar to Merodach, god of Babylon.

    "My enemies thou usedst to destroy; thou causedst my heart to rejoice ... in those days thou madest my hands to capture; thou gavest me rest; ... thou causedst me to construct; my kingdom thou madest to increase ..."

    And this document says:
    "... the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, king tof Bab- ... Egypt to deliver a battle .... -sis of Egypt called up his army .... distant regions which are amidst the sea ... many ... who are in Egypt ... carrying weapons, horses and ... he called up to assist him" (Compare "Egypt and Babylon" by George Rawlinson, pages 90-91 with Pritchard's "Ancient Near Eastern Texts", page 30. The remainder of the cylinder is unintelligible."

    The 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar was 588-587. Amasis was sent into exile. Forty years later he returned to Egypt with his people and made an alliance with Babylon sometime after that.

  • rassillon

    thirdwitness, you answered

    It is asked: WHY then do you claim that this 40 years for Egypt must be fufilled during this time period. ; ;The answer is in the Bible. Ezekiel 30:10 Ezekiel 30:10 confirms that it is Nebuchadnezzar who is to remove all the people from that land. “I will also cause the crowd of Egypt to cease by the hand of Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon.” So the desolation had to occur before Neb's death.

    But Ezekiel states the following about Tyre.

    (Ezekiel 26:7-14) 7

    "For this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah has said, ‘Here I am bringing against Tyre Neb·u·chad·rez´zar the king of Babylon from the north, a king of kings, with horses and war chariots and cavalrymen and a congregation, even a multitudinous people. 8 Your dependent towns in the field he will kill even with the sword, and he must make against you a siege wall and throw up against you a siege rampart and raise up against you a large shield; 9 and the strike of his attack engine he will direct against your walls, and your towers he will pull down, with his swords. 10 Owing to the heaving mass of his horses their dust will cover you. Owing to the sound of cavalryman and wheel and war chariot your walls will rock, when he comes in through your gates, as in the cases of entering into a city opened by breaches. 11 With the hoofs of his horses he will trample down all your streets. Your people he will kill even with the sword, and to the earth your own pillars of strength will go down. 12 And they will certainly spoil your resources and plunder your sales goods, and tear down your walls, and your desirable houses they will pull down. And your stones and your woodwork and your dust they will place in the very midst of the water.’ 13 "‘And I will cause the turmoil of your singing to cease, and the very sound of your harps will be heard no more. 14 And I will make you a shining, bare surface of a crag. A drying yard for dragnets is what you will become. Never will you be rebuilt; for I myself, Jehovah, have spoken,’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah. So I ask yet again, If it is ok for Tyre's prophecy to be ultimatly fufilled later than this period WHY is the same not ok for Egypt? You can't apply one rule for one and a different one for another just to suit your needs or desires. Please answer. -r

  • hillary_step


    You can't apply one rule for one and a different one for another just to suit your needs or desires.

    That is exactly what you can do, and must do, if you begin your research with a conclusion as do Jehovah's Witnesses.

    This is why discussing these issues with JW apologists has limited immediate value. The reason we engage in such discussions is to help the many JW's who secretly read this site to see beyond the theological and historically stilted little world they are inhabit.


  • AlanF

    thirdwitness wrote:

    : So Alan F and others, your defense is this:

    : Ezekiel was wrong when he said that Egypt would be desolated for 40 years without an inhabitant in the land by Nebuachadnezzar. We know it was never fulfilled and was an inaccurate prophecy because secular history records no such 40 year desolation of Egypt therefore it has to be wrong.

    Essentially, yes. However, you left out the most important point: the reason WHY this prophecy must not be take literally: Ezekiel demonstrably falsely prophesied about the ultimate rebuilding of Tyre, and all of his other prophecies are called into question.

    Because you failed to acknowledge the fact that Ezekiel prophesied falsely, the rest of your statements are mere attempts to misrepresent the issue and misdirect your readers.

    Readers will note that, up to this point in your silly rant, you failed to address the basic problem. While you say something about it in a later post (which I deal with), that doesn't help your case here.

    : It surely couldn't be secular historians that are incorrect. So it must be Ezekiel and thus Jehovah who have mispoken. So who is putting who above the Bible's recorded words? It seems some even have decided they should denounce the Bible rather than admit JWs are right.

    Merely pointing out the fact that the Bible was wrong in making a prophecy is not denouncing it. It is just pointing out a fact. If you don't like the facts, tough luck. You're in good company with a lot of other Fundamentalists.

    : How much did you say you were selling the Brooklyn Bridge for again?

    LOL! Anyone who can say that Ezekiel was a true prophet, despite his demonstrably false prophecy, is the one selling the Brooklyn Bridge.

    : If you don't have an answer there is nothing wrong with admitting that you can't explain it.

    I've given you a rock-solid answer. Your pretending that it doesn't exist doesn't make it not exist.

    : Could it be that JWs are right after all? No, we mustn't admit that. We must come up with unreasonable explanations to discredit them at all cost.

    Unreasonable explanations? The simple fact is that Ezekiel prophesied falsely, and therefore his words cannot be taken as gospel.

    : 40 years does not really mean 40 years. It is symbolic. Desolated with no inhabitant doesn't really mean NO inhabitant.

    Right. No more than Genesis 1 can be taken literally, because the facts of geology show that it can't.

    : And as for your argument about Tyre you are merely shifting the argument to something else.

    LOL! If I predicted in 2004 that the Watchtower Society would self-destruct in 2005 and that I would be selling the Brooklyn Bridge to thirdwitness in 2006, would you be preparing to buy the bridge right now?

    : Are you arguing that the Bible is wrong and that Tyre proves that?

    Your powers of understanding are very good on that point.

    : And since the Tyre prophecy is wrong then the Egypt prophecy is wrong?

    No. I clearly stated my point: Since the Tyre prophecy was wrong, the Egypt prophecy must be interpreted in light of the facts of history. And history proves that the Egypt prophecy was wrong.

    : Why not take it a step further and say that if these prophecies are wrong then other Bible prophecies are no doubt wrong and thus the Bible is nothing but a man made book of some true prophecies but some false prophecies so it really cannot be depended on at all.

    Why not indeed? For that is exactly what I'm saying.

    : I know you would not be arguing that because that would surely make you an apostate and I'm sure you are not an apostate, are you?

    Because I believe that the Bible is a manmade and quite fallible work, I suppose you could apply the label "apostate" to me since I do not believe in the existence in the God of the Bible. But it's a silly notion because I'm also an apostate with regard to all other Gods. And so are you. Everyone on earth is an apostate, and so the term is meaningless.

    : I believe if you did a little research you would find that the ancient ruins of Tyre still sit over there in Tyre and that those ruins have not been rebuilt.

    This is among the most stupid arguments I've ever seen.

    : "Of the original Tyre known to Solomon and the prophets of Israel, not a vestige remains except in its rock-cut sepulchres on the mountain sides, and in foundation walls . . .

    : Alexander made her a bare rock and threw debris into the water to make the causeway; fishermen now spread nets over the site (there is a city of Tyre today, but it is located down the coast from the original Tyre); the old city of Tyre has never been rebuilt, even though a great freshwater spring is located at the site, providing 10,000,000 gallons of water daily. It is still an excellent site today but has never been rebuilt, although many have tried.

    You obviously have no idea what you're talking about, but are relying on the demonstrably stupid and false claims made by the Watchtower Society about this. Part of ancient Tyre was on an island about a third of a mile off the coast where the rest of the city was. In the intervening millennia a sandbar has filled in the gap, so the location is now a peninsula. Today, the entire area -- island city, sandbar and coastal city -- is filled by modern Tyre (also called Sur or Sour). This is easy to verify. Get hold of "Google Earth" and look at the coordinates 33:16:12 N by 35:12:10 E. That puts you smack on the sandbar, which is filled with houses. Pretty cool, no?

    : The very fact that it was prophecied at Ezek 26:5 that A drying yard for dragnets is what she will become in the midst of the sea.’ shows that it would have people there and that it would not be totally abandoned. But the ancient city still lies in ruins.

    All ancient cities are completely in ruins, so this argument is completely stupid. Once ancient buildings crumble into ruins, by definition they cannot be rebuilt, because the stones from which they were built are now sand and gravel. And by definition, a city built on an ancient location and known by the same name has been rebuilt. To claim different is to make a ridiculous claim.

    Jerusalem was completely destroyed several times. Are you going to claim that Jerusalem has never been rebuilt?

    : So in summation here is the argument made by some.

    : 607 is wrong because the Bible is not reliable on chronology. Since the bible is wrong JWs are wrong.

    This is yet another total misrepresentation of the arguments. 607 is wrong because history shows it's wrong. The JW view on chronology is not the Bible's view on chronology; many posters on this forum and elsewhere have proved that. 607 is wrong because both the Bible and history show that it's wrong.

    Your argument is the typical strawman we expect from JW defenders.

    : Well, you got me there. If the Bible is not going to be accepted as accurate then JWs cannot prove or disprove any doctrines. 607, trinity, hellfire, God's name, the kingdom, Jesus as God's son and the way to salvation. We might as well discard it all.

    Strawman arguments make for strawman conclusions.

    : Alanf said: The problems with the website's argument are legion. I will only cover the basics in this post.

    :: First, the website's author assumes that the 40-year desolation prophecy by Ezekiel was to have and actually did have a literal fulfillment. But the Bible contains many examples of claims and prophecies that might appear to have a literal interpretation, but which, in the light of uncontrovertible facts, can only be interpreted as symbolic in some sense. I give two examples below, the second of which completely destroys the website's claim.

    :: Second, it ignores the demonstrable fact that the testimony of several independent ancient historical sources proves that Egypt's history was continuously documented through the entire period in question. I'll go into this in detail in a subsequent post. It really isn't necessary for the disproof of the JW defender website's claim, though.

    :: Because the website is written by Jehovah's Witnesses who obviously feel that the JW Governing Body is "divinely directed", and therefore that Watchtower publications carry a weight of authority virtually equal to that of the Bible itself, in this series of posts I'll use such publications as an authority when I deem fit. I'll also quote scriptures from the Watchtower Society's New World Translation unless otherwise specified.

    : By claiming that the problems are 'legion' he tries to pretend that there are so many problems with the 40 year desolation prophecy that it is easily overturned. But notice the 'legions' of problems he presents.

    You seem to have a real reading comprehension problem. While I said that the website's argument's problems are legion, I also said that I will only cover the basics here. Having demonstrated that the basics, or meat, of the website's argument are wrong, everything else is moot.

    : Basically they are:

    : 1. The 40 year desolation is not literal.

    : 2. Secular history of Egypt disproves it.

    So far so good.

    : 3. The writers of the site believe the GB are divinely directed therefore he at least seems to insinuate that the writer must be wrong.

    There is no such insinuation. I merely reminded readers that it is Jehovah's Witnesses who believe that the GB are divinely directed, and therefore I would use their writings as an authority when I see fit. Try reading it again:

    Because the website is written by Jehovah's Witnesses who obviously feel that the JW Governing Body is "divinely directed", and therefore that Watchtower publications carry a weight of authority virtually equal to that of the Bible itself, in this series of posts I'll use such publications as an authority when I deem fit. I'll also quote scriptures from the Watchtower Society's New World Translation unless otherwise specified.

    : Do you consider those reasons to be 'legion'

    Of course not, because they're the basics, as I said.

    : or even legitimate?

    Of course, because they're factual. That they're factual you cannot gainsay. Your only argument so far has been the ridiculous claim that ancient Tyre does not exist. Duh.

    : To summarize he says, The 40 year desolation is wrong because secular historians say it is wrong


    : and because the WT says it is right.


    : I submit that 587 proponents have the 'legion' of problems and those problems are found in the Bible.

    Wrong. The 587 date has no real problems. The problem for JWs is that they cannot distinguish between what the Bible says and what the Watchtower Society says it says.

    : Before you bring up the prosperous rule of Amasis according to Herodutus during this time of Egyptian history let me do it for you.

    I'm well aware of the Watchtower material you borrowed from. It changes nothing.

    You're well aware that you cannot wiggle away from the simple fact that Ezekiel's prophecy about the ultimate fate of Tyre was false, and therefore that everything else he prophesied is called into question. All you can do is drag red herrings across the screens of readers, hoping that they'll be like JWs who fall victim to the Society's red herrings. Well, I've got news for you. On this forum, people have gotten away from the mentality of being a stupid sheep.


  • scholar


    Congratulations. You have made an excellent and brilliant defence of our illustrious and brilliant Bible chronology and the apostates with the foolish and deceptive claims made by Carl Jonsson have been shown as pandering to higher critics who doubt the truth of the Bible, Such deceitful men would rather believe the lie over the clear and historic fact of the seventy years wisely and carefully noticed by the celebrated WT scholars over many centuries.

    I enjoyed the use of the charts explaining in a simple and clear manner why WT biblical chronoilogy is far more accurate and faithful to Jehovah's inspired Word than the secular based Neo-Babylonian chronology. I do not know whether Brother Rolf Furuli is aware of your website and its presentation as I have just recently informed him of Jonsson's website in which he presents a critique of Furuli's recent book.

    It is nice to see that you have demolished the arguments of Alan F regarding Tyre and it is nice to have support from other people who are well qualified in matters of chronology. Keep us the good work as we defend Jehovah's teachings on 607, the seven times and its ending in 1914.

    scholar JW

  • thirdwitness

    Thanks, Scholar, I have an endless arsenal of information that cannot be overcome and that is the WT publications that explain the Bible.

    Anyone who wants to google Tyre will find that the information is not just contained in the WT publications however. For example:

    "LeStrange quotes that the city was in ruins right until then, in 1321 A.D. and even to this day the ruins of Tyre can be seen.

    Nothing but a small fishing village remains and the fishermen spread their nets their to dry or to fix. The once great city of Tyre is gone. Old Tyre was never rebuilt after its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar; and there are now no traces left to mark its site. Now its harbours are choked with sand, precluding all hope of future restoration. "Not one entire house is left, and only a few fishermen take shelter in the vaults" (Maundrell). The new city, when visited by Maundrell, Bruce, and other travellers, was literally "a place for fishers to dry their nets on".

    Now Tyre "cannot be found" or rather that which was the ancient city is no longer there. Instead, on the island of Tyre you will find a small fishing village that bears the name Súr."

Share this