The sound basis for 607 for the fall of Jerusalem

by cecil 3 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  cecil

  In the main-forum thread "Jerusalem Destroyed in 607 BCE?"
  * http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=14392&site=3
  Purehearts question

  I read Justhumans response on one of the threads, and he mentioned that Jeruselum was not destroyed in 607 BCE. I would like to have more information on this.

  was answered by scholar:

  Pureheart
  There is a sound basis for 607 for the Fall of Jerusalem according to secular history and biblical exegesis. the dates of 586/587 have also their merits, but do not harmonize with an appropriate world view of the biblical narrative. Such dates do not have any prophetic significance in comparison to 607 which marks the beginning of the Gentile Times ending in 1914.
  scholar,BA MA [Studies in Religion] USyd.

  To scholar: I'd like to hear more about the "sound basis for 607 for the fall of Jerusalem" and why "the dates 586/587 ... do not harmonize with an appropriate world view of the biblical narrative". I have taken my question to the Beliefs, Doctrine & Practices-forum as well.

  cecil
• 

  gibsite

  I had exactly the same question as you have Pureheart and was told exactly the same conflicting rubbish as you are getting. I found that the answer depended entirely on the religious persuasion of the person telling the story. Jehovahs Witness and Jews just happen to be the ones with a vested interest in the matter but most other people could not care less about the date of the fall of Jerusalem. For this reason I set out to investigate the matter for myself from the bottom up.

  I eventually came to a conclusion that I certainly wasn't expecting. For this reason I would not want to discuss my findings openly but if you would like to e-mail me Pureheart I can give you all the web contacts that I used to get an undisputed answer to this question. I suggest this because some of the contacts would not thank me for advertising their e-mail addresses.

  The work required is interesting and informative and all the specialist technical knowledge required is available free on the web or through contacts qualified in some particular non-religious field or other.

  The conclusions will be accurate and factual, scientifically based and in no way reliant upon someones opinion or interpretation of the Bible. Furthermore the conclusions will be arrived at by you yourself without your being prodded or poked in any particular direction by somebody with an agenda.

  I hope you take up the offer and when you have discovered the answer for yourself perhaps you would like to share the knowledge here.
• 

  Larsguy

  This 607BCE vs 587BCE is an old discussion. However, you asked about why the Bible and this secular chronology does not match well. Here are the key points I had to focus on during my research.

  1. Josephus in Ant. 11.1.1 clearly dates a 70-year desolation period beginning a "servitude" of the poor people who were deported during the last deportation in the 23rd year of Nebuchadnezzar. This is a critical reference since Josephus' view on this would reflect his interpretation of the Biblical reference here. In fact, he mentions this is how Jeremiah's prophecy was fulfilled. Here's the quote:

  [Q]ANT 11.1.1
  IN the first year of the reign of Cyrus 1 which was the seventieth from the day that our people were removed out of their own land into Babylon, God commiserated the captivity and calamity of these poor people, according as he had foretold to them by Jeremiah the prophet, before the destruction of the city, that after they had served Nebuchadnezzar and his posterity, and after they had undergone that servitude seventy years, he would restore them again to the land of their fathers, and they should build their temple, and enjoy their ancient prosperity.[/Q]

  Mind you, this is not a Biblical quote, but is consistent with Scripture if you begin the 70-year "sabbath rest" period with the last deportation in the 23rd of Nebuchadnezzar which the scriptures definitely support.

  But at this point your inquiry ends because there is no way possible to reconcile this since secular history's dating of the fall of Jerusalem in 587BCE and the 1st of Cyrus around 538BCE does not allow enough time for 70 years to elaspe after the 23rd year of Nebuchadnezzar.

  Therefore, all the arguments are whether or not to accept the Judeo-Biblical dating for this period which involves an extended Neo-Babylonian period beyond that of secular historians.

  That's the BASIC problem, even though many argue on side tangents. But the bottom line is that the Jews do ascribe a 70-year desolation period after the 23rd year of Nebuchadnezzar and that cannot be accmmodated by current secular chronology.

  607BCE is a variation on many of the arguments regarding this period of time, with the witnesses using 2 Chronicles 36 as a definite reference to a 70-year period of time for the "land to keep pay back it's sabbath" and they add this 70 years to 537BCE, the date they have settled on for the return of the Jews from Babylon. The extended 70 years post destruction of Jerusalem is the primary contradiction as far as 607BCE vs 587BCE.

  LG
• 

  tracysdad

  gibsite, I'm interested in the info you have. If you would, my email is [email protected].