Jerusalem was not Destroyed in 607 B.C.E. New Web Site

by jdough 9 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • jdough

    Hello: There is a new web site devoted to the false claim by Jehovah's Witnesses that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C.E. Please feel free to link to the site.

  • icocer

    Thanks, Ill look it over after work. Who made this site by the way?

  • jdough

    I did. Hope you are able to bring it up. It was a response to their latest defense of 607 called 'Setting the Record Straight' and I would love some feedback to see if I'm on the right path. I spent a lot of time on it.

  • yesidid

    Thank you. I can see a lot of time has been spent and what I have seen looks great. Will finish reading later.

    Thanks again.


  • greendawn

    Good site I don't know why the R&F dubs believe in the 607 date when they know just about everyone else believes in 587. Surely this total consensus of historians, archaeologists and scholars shows they are on the wrong side. But of course they have based concepts crucial to their org on that date so they strongly resist any contrary arguments. They can't afford to change it, if 1914 is wrong everything collapses.

  • Jeffro

    The article isn't too bad.

    It fails to definitively indicate that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587, still allowing for 586, which is not compatible with the scriptures. (2 Kings 32:1 refers to the siege beginning in Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year, which was 588 BC. Jeremiah 52:12-14 places the destruction of the temple on or shortly after the 10th day of the 5th month (corelating to the beginning of August) of 587 BC, being the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. Nebuchadnezzar's reign began in 605 BC (Jeremiah did not use the accession-year system), making his 19th year 587 BC, NOT 586.)

    It doesn't go into much detail about how 607 leads to 1914, or that the events that happened in 1914 were not the events that were prophesied to occur in October of that year.

    It incorrectly accepts that the Jews returned in 537, whereas they actually returned in 538 and began rebuilding the temple in 537. (Josephus indicates that the temple foundations were laid in Cyrus’ second year (Against Apion, Book I, chapter 21), and Ezra 3:8 places that event in the 2nd month (Iyyar), corresponding with May of 537BC. Ezra 3:1 says that the Jews were “in their cities” in the 7th month (Tishri) of the year before, corresponding with October of 538BC.)

    Pretty good though.

    More info here and here and here.

  • moggy lover
    moggy lover

    I hav read your stuff. I thought it was very good, comprehensive, and yet not too complex to miss the point.

    The WTS, using nimble ambiguity and misplaced rhetoric, has produced a dogmatic assertion that satisfies neither scripture nor the abundance of factual evidence. Several of its auxillaries like the "Jim Space" of the WT approved site merely serve as an echo, not a voice, to this position.

    Arguments on both sides of this issue can be at once impenetrable as well as prolix, but despite its complexity, I feel your site has avoided both conditions.

    I can only encourage you to further your research and write more articles. We need all the information that we can get, and people like you, willing to stick their necks out, are our biggest assets.

    The only problem is not with the article itself, but the site. The geocities board does not allow one to save this information to a computer. But that has nothing to do with the well researched subject matter you have produced.

    Keep it up, and looking for more


  • Doug Mason
    Doug Mason

    Yes, I agree that your material related to this critical period has been well researched and well presented.

    I have made a PDF file off your site so that I may read it at my leisure.

    You might be interested in a couple of items on my site

    You will have to follow the prompts to get to my page on the neo-Babylonian chronology.

    You might be interested in the pages I provide from the book "The Bible Unearthed" which disputes that the land was depopulated.

    You might also be interested in my thoughts on dating the Jews' return. In my Paper "Seventy Years of Servitude", I argue that using the criteria set by the WTS, it is not possible for the Jews to have returned before 536 BCE. I wrote that paper years (decades) ago, so their position on the details might have been "adjusted". You will see my thoughts on pages 23 to 28.


  • jdough
  • jdough

    thank you. I placed the site here also for bookmarking.

Share this