Jeremiah and the 70 years. Jewish exile or Babylonian rule?

by digderidoo 103 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • digderidoo
    digderidoo
    It is imposible to reconcile 586/587 BCE with the biblical 'seventy years because the only date that works is 607 BCE for the Fall of Jerusalem. Scholars have for many decades tried to harmonize the data but without any success.

    It would appear to me that the data has been harmonised with success.

    Apostates such as Carl Jonsson attempted a similar effort in his Gentile Times Reconsidered but failed misereably. It seems that A@G did not pay attention to this subjects whilst at Gilead because he too has simply repeated old and empty arguments.

    I find that using the argument that people are apostates or repeating old and emtpy arguments is an empty argument itself.

    Celebrated WT scholars over the last three centuries proved beyond doubt that the seventy years was a period of exile. desolation and serviude running from the Fall in 607 BCE until the Return in 537 BCE as also attested by all of the OT and Josephus.

    They haven't "proved beyond doubt", this is my point. It seems to me that WT scholars start with the presupposed conclusion that 607 is the date then look for the evidence to support it. Credible research should look for the evidence first, then draw the conclusion, rather than the other way around.

    The theory that A@G and Jonsson proposes that the seventy years was a period of Babylonian domination is simply false and cannot be sustained from scripture for no single scripture or those collected texts can in any way support this singular proposal. All of the 'seventy-year' texts agree that that period was of exile-desolation and servitude. The seventy years did not belong to Babylon but to Judah alone with Babylon being simply the means by which matters were fulfilled as Jeremiah prophesied.

    Jeremiah 25:11 speaks of "these nations", not one nation. How would you answer that?

    Paul

  • hamilcarr
    hamilcarr

    There's too little proof for 537 BCE.

  • Mary
    Mary
    scholar said: Scholars have for many decades tried to harmonize the data but without any success. Apostates such as Carl Jonsson attempted a similar effort in his Gentile Times Reconsidered but failed misereably.

    Riiiight. As with your pathetic tirade with the thread on "this generation", your bullshit statements have absolutely no support or even reason to them scholar.

    What a wanker.

  • Awakened07
    Awakened07

    Awakened 07,

    All i can say is that it does for me. When i was a JW i used to love explaining the 1914 prophecy and showing how the maths worked out. It was one of those things i used to use to "prove" to other people that this is the "truth". I was a few years out when i came across this descrepency, for me it was always the one thing that stopped me going to a meeting all those years. I have always been a person that can look at both sides of an argument, unless there is a 100% reasoning leaning on one side.

    Because i have always felt this way, although i may not agree with WT explanations of other criticisms, i have always seen their point of view. The 607 v 587/6 debate for me if it can be proved one way or the other IS the defining thing that will either keep me away or make me go to a meeting.

    Paul

    Well - I can respect that you feel that way, I guess, with that background to it. But it seems nonsensical to me. It seems you've got it ass-backwards. What you're saying (as I hear it) is that it's OK for them to be 99% wrong, as long as this one particular 'prophecy' can somehow be streamlined to fit 1914, when (fortunately for them) a world war broke out. Or you simply don't see any problems in all the other discrepancies in the first place.

    One thing I forgot to mention in my last post, was their stance on being 'appointed by Jesus in1919'. He apparently 'cleaned house' in 1918 and subsequently chose them in 1919. But, as has been pointed out before, they celebrated Christmas and a whole lot of other things went on that they'd be disfellowshipped for had they believed the same today.

    But most importantly in that regard: They taught that Jesus had come invisibly in 1874 for years after 1919, when they were 'chosen'. [See this link - they did so at least until 1935, btw; that's as far as I bothered to check] You'd think Jesus himself would have fixed that little doosy as soon as He had chosen them, and not let them have an erroneous view of the date He returned, for years afterwards? That combined with all the other 'false beliefs' at the time; did Jesus simply not care at all? Why did He teach them that what He himself had said a couple of thousand years ago about "this generation" meant a generation from 1914, then flip-flop on it for decades to come, then finally (so far!) completely throw all that out the window this year and 'say' "Ooops - I really actually meant the anointed as a group - sorry folks".

    They are the frickin' "God's only channel on earth today"!! Come on now! Is it just not important for God/Jesus? They just don't care at all if people have false beliefs for decades and perhaps their entire lives? Don't give a s**t? Don't have the power to steer them quickly in the right direction?

    -If you have the 2007 Watchtower publications CD-ROM, do a search for 1919, and the fourth link from the top of the search should be "Commissioned to speak in the Divine Name", from 1971. There, you can find this quote (paragraph 24):

    Why, though, are all these facts of history brought to our attention? It is to show the fulfillment of prophecy. Jehovah has found and commissioned his modern-day "Ezekiel." It is a composite Ezekiel. It is composed of those dedicated, baptized proclaimers of God’s kingdom, who have been anointed with His spirit for their work. (Isaiah 61:1-3) It is manifest that in the year 1919 the invisible heavenly organization of Jehovah, like the celestial chariot seen in Ezekiel’s vision, rolled up and stopped, not before Christendom’s advocates of the League of Nations, but before the anointed proclaimers of the heavenly kingdom of God in the hands of Jesus Christ.From atop this celestial chariotlike organization Jehovah commissioned this dedicated, baptized, anointed class of servants to speak to all the nations in His name. Thus, like Ezekiel, they became Jehovah’s witnesses. It was most fitting that, after twelve years of worldwide activity as such, they embraced the distinguishing name Jehovah’s witnesses, in the summer of 1931, and that in connection with the publishing of the book Vindication.

    They are, according to themselves, "the modern day Ezekiel". Was Ezekiel, according to JWs and other Christians, ever wrong as a prophet? Famous for spreading false teachings over many years?

    Please don't see this as an attack on you; I may "sound" mad at you above, but I'm just annoyed that they've been able to con so many with such drivel for so long. And as if that's not enough, people thereafter go to other con men and are fooled by likewise inane drivel. Gah.

  • BarefootServant
    BarefootServant

    Scholar said:

    "the Return in 537 BCE as also attested by all of the OT and Josephus."

    Really? As far as I know the OT does not attest to 537 BCE in any way, it's just a made-up date. All the OT tells us is that the Jews returned sometime after the secularly established date of 539 BCE. As far as I can tell 607 was the date C T Russell wanted from the bible in order to match up with his pyramid inches (something now considered demonic) to get to the year 1914 as the date of armageddon, and 607-70=537. But in the interest of finding at least some corroboration for the 537 date I'd be interested to hear how Josephus supports it, perhaps you could supply the attestation.

  • hamilcarr
    hamilcarr
    "the Return in 537 BCE as also attested by all of the OT and Josephus."

    The bible contains no dates whatsoever. All dates used are human conjectures.

  • BarefootServant
    BarefootServant

    "The bible contains no dates whatsoever. All dates used are human conjectures."

    The bible gives us relative dates, these are perfectly good if you can agree an absolute date to relate them to, and most seem to agree that 539 is such a date. But there is no scriptual two year offset from 539 that allows a dogmatic assertion that 537 is the exact date that the Jews returned to Israel.

  • hamilcarr
    hamilcarr
    The bible gives us relative dates, these are perfectly good if you can agree an absolute date to relate them to, and most seem to agree that 539 is such a date. But there is no scriptual two year offset from 539 that allows a dogmatic assertion that 537 is the exact date that the Jews returned to Israel.

    If we could agree, they would be as perfect as absolute dates, but we simply can't agree.

    Anyone asserting that 539 or 537 are irrefutably correct turns human conjectures into dogma.

  • BarefootServant
    BarefootServant

    Hamilcarr,

    No one is saying 539 BCE is irrefutably correct, just as well attested as it gets historically. Compare to the crucial date (for JWs) of 537 BCE, which as far as I can tell is completely unattested.

  • scholar
    scholar

    digderidoo

    Post 849

    The data has not been harmonized otherwise scholars would by now have a consistent interpretation of the seventy years. Also, the data is so confusing that scholars cannot agree as to whether the Fall occurred in 586 or 587 BCE. There is a consistent twenty year gap and this problem has not been solved by scholars.

    The position of apostates is well known because they prefer the opinions of higher critics and blindly follow chronology developed by SDA's, they offer nothing new because of their failure to listen to Bible prophecy.

    Celebrated WT scholars have most cerainly proved beyond any shadow of doubt that 607 BCE was the calender year for the Fall and the beginning of the Gentile Times ending in 1914 CE all because they have payed close attention to that definite historic period of seventy years.

    Jer.25:11 simply refers to the simple fact that along with Judah who served Babylon for more than seventy years with other nations who also were brought into Babylon's servitude. Jeremiah specifically referred to a specific seventy year of Jewish exile of all of the nation whilst the entire land was desolate. So, there is no conflict with verse 11 which simply proves that for seventy years Judah would be punished along with other nations.

    scholar JW

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit