Need help disproving 607BCE

by 2pink 160 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • scholar


    Post 644

    Your post is meaningless. The seventy years could not count from 609 BCE because Judah and Babylon were not in any relationship, political, militarial, economic or otherwise. The seventy years could not have ended in 539 BCE for the simple reason is that the Jews were still exiled in Babylon so the only thing that works for you is in the subject of arithmetic: 609-70=539.

    scholar JW

  • Doug Mason
    Doug Mason

    SCHOLAR: Zechariah's 'seventy years' ended with the return of the Jews under Zerubbabel in 537 BCE.
    ZECHARIAH: In the second year of Darius … you have been angry with these seventy years?” (Zech 1:7, 12). In the fourth year of King Darius … for so many years? … for the past seventy years. (Zech 7:1, 3, 5, NIV)

    SCHOLAR: Judah's punishment ended after seventy years with the Return from Exile in 537 BCE.
    DOUG: There is no statement in Scripture that says the 70 Years ended when Jews returned. And the WTS does not end the Seventy Years with the Return, but several months later when people met at the Temple site.

    SCHOLAR: [Babylon's Fall is] astronomically fixed as a sound basis of acceptance.
    DOUG: What astronomical record? Since when has the WTS accepted astronomical evidence?

    SCHOLAR: [Jerusalem] could also represent not only its people but the country in which it was located namely Judah and so what befell the city also affected the people and the territory of Judah.
    DOUG: This ignores the tensions between the urban residents and the country farmers. And are you really saying that it only needed Jerusalem to be devoid of people, because what happened to the city was representative of the whole land?

    SCHOLAR: It is foolish to equate the date and event of the Fall of Jerusalem with the event and date for the Fall of Babylon.
    DOUG: Why is it foolish? The date for Babylon’s Fall and the date for Jerusalem’s fall are calculated from the same data.

    SCHOLAR: You let me know whether it is 586 or 587 BCE and I will see what I can do for you.
    DOUG: Firstly, it is not an issue whether 587 or 586 is correct, since I do not hang my faith on any dating system. The problem is for the WTS to prove that its date is correct, not that mine is incorrect. Nevertheless, I provide you with:

    SCHOLAR: I have a personal copy of the DOTHB and fully appreciate historiography and history as related to the Bible and I believe that such matters have a direct bearing on chronology and theology. ... In short, one finds that in historiography and history with its development of theology provides a 'ground' for WT Bible chronology.
    DOUG: For those who do not have ready access to the article that Scholar and I are talking about, I have provided an OCR scan at:

    SCHOLAR: Ezra wrote the book of Chronicles.
    DOUG: Wrong. Ezra did not write it, so you need to remove Ezra from your list. Then you need to explain the “70 years” at 2 Chronicles in the terms of historiography, which you understand.

    SCHOLAR: Jeremiah is not specific about a precise event or date for that prophecy to begin.
    DOUG: I agree with you, Jeremiah is not specific about what even started the Seventy Years.That’s the problem for the WTS. It does not matter for me, since my faith does not hinge on dates.

    SCHOLAR: The removal of humans and animals from the land as punishment was for the period of seventy years (607 -537BCE).
    DOUG: There was no need for all people and every domestic animal to be removed from the whole of Judah. Archaeology shows this never happened. Historiography again.

    SCHOLAR: Exile-servitude-desolation describes Babylon's fate which began after Judah's punishment had ended and it could be argued that it began with the Fall of the city in 539 BCE.
    DOUG: Your “exile-servitude-desolation” of Babylon did not require either the city or the country to be devoid of humans and their domestic animals. And that certainly did not happen in 539 BCE.

  • Alwayshere
    Scholar, said Babylon's world power could not have ended in 539 because the jews were still exiled in Babylon. Yes, Scholar the jews were still in Babylon in 539. Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 so Babylon's world power of 70 years ended in 539. Cyrus made the proclamation for he jews to return to their homeland during his first year when he conquered Babylon. his first year was 539-538. Scholar, when do you think Babylon fell? My other question was "How could Daniel have been taken in 618 and in 617?"
  • scholar


    Post 645

    What I said was that the seventy years belonged to Judah and that period could only have ended at their Return to their homeland in 537 BCE. It could not have ended in 539 BCE because the Jews were still in Babylon under the control of a new king ruling at Babylon. In short, they were still in exile in Babylon and were still in servitude to Babylon. The very fact that there was a change in rulership at Babylon in 539 BCE had not immediate effect until Cyrus proclaimed his Decree in 538 BCE thus paving their return in 537 BCE.

    scholar JW

  • Mickey mouse
    Mickey mouse

    Blah Blah

    How was Jerusalem destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in 607 when Nebuchanezzar was not yet even King, nevermind in his 21st year or his reign as the Bible indicates?

    Precisely how did Satan accomplish a worldwide conspiracy by altering the dating on thousands of stone tablets (this has to be the work of Satan to attempt to discredit a second adventist cult which would not exist for another 2500 years, right)?

    Presumably it was also Satan who moved the stars and planets so the astronomical data would not match either?

    I find it impossible to see how anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty can take the WBTS assertion that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 seriously.

    It's as untenable as me claiming 9/11 happened on January 2nd 2008. There is too much reliable historical data to prove otherwise.

    Unfortunately, conspiracy theorists do not put any stock in historical data; they prefer flights of fancy.

  • The Oracle
    The Oracle

    Hi Scholar,

    Looks like you have been schooled by Doug on this topic . Perhaps you should tackle something that isn't so easily disproved as the 607 BCE date. Even the WT is on the verge of admitting that 607 BCE was not the correct date for the fall of Babylon. The spin doctors in Brooklyn are considering there options even as we speak. What will you say when the WT changes its position on this date based on the now accepted secular viewpoint?

    It's going to be just like when the WT changed its stance on each creative day being literally 7,000 years long. By the way, did you argue as vehemently in support of the each creative day being 7,000 years long? Or was it 1,000 years long? It was one or the other, but it doesn't really matter. The point is - when secular evidence (encyclopedias, school curriculums etc) gained overwhelming acceptance around the world, the WT decided to change its teaching on the length of each creative day. I just wonder if you were one of the ones who argued (in a scholarly style of course) that the earth is less than 50,000 years old, carbon-14 dating is a sham, and basically the scientific community is under the direct control of Satan so who should you trust when it comes to the age of the earth? The governing body or some demonized geologists?

    The same is happening now with the 607 BCE date. Secular evidence (encyclopedias and school curriculums) teaches that Babylon fell in 586 BC. The problem with this one, and the reason the spin doctors in Brooklyn are working overtime to try and come up with a position on this, is that unfortunately for them this false teaching is tied intrinsically to the core doctrine of the end of the gentile times and 1914. It is quite a conundrum. However, if anyone can figure out a way to spin this one - it is the WT. I never thought they would be able to pull off making the core teaching that the generation of 1914 would not pass away before Armageddon arrived, disappear - but somehow they did it! If they can change that one - they can change anything, but nevertheless, this one will be quite a challenge and I predict it will take many years to make it happen. It will be very interesting to see how they do it.

    The Oracle

  • scholar

    Doug Mason

    Post 738

    In connection with the seventy years of Zechariah these clearly ended in 537 BCE and not in the second and fourth year of Darius as you claim. It was simply the case that in those years respectively that Zechariah received an angelic visistation. That conversation simply shows that the seventy years rather than being of ongoing duration as some claim it was in fact a reference to those past seventy years whereupon Zechariah was given words of comfort that Jehovah's would be rebuilt. Further, in the fourth year of Darius, Zechariah was again reminded about the annual fastings during that seventy year period during which the Jews were exiled in Babylon whilst the land remained desolate Zechariah and up to the present ( fourth year of Darius) again received words of comfort that true worship would again be restored at Jerusalem.

    Correct, but in the seventy year texts taken as a collective refer to the seventy years as a fibite period of desolation-exile-servitude which could only have ended at the time of the Jews returning home thus ending the exile, servitude in Babylon and repopulating the land. It all fits together like a jigsaw.

    The Absolute Date of 539 BCE is astronomically fixed as well explained in Insight On The Scriptures, 1988, Vol.1.p.353. The WTS has a long tradition of acceptance and use of astronomical evidence ritht up to the days of Charles Russell.

    Tensions between the city and country folk are just a small part of the tapestry of Late Judean history and have no bearing on the theology, history and chronology of that period. Yes, Jehovah's judgement was against Judah, its territory and Jerusalem.

    It is foolish because it is just plain wrong and dumb and goes beyond common-sense.

    The 586/587 debate is most certainly an issue for scholars and it is an issue for those criitics of 607 BCE who nicely ignore the fact that they do not know the precise date for the Fall when they boast that 607 BCE is wrong. Please give me a break from such stupidity. It is best to get your house in order before you attack anothers. No. it is just as incumbent upon you to prove your date as it is to prove ours and we most certainly have proved 607 BCE

    Ezra wrote Chronicles according to scholarship right up to 1968 when dissenting scholars challenged that opinion. Presently as explained in the DOTHB there remains much controversy but for Bible Students and the celebrated WT scholars we see no reason to believe that Ezra was not the Author of Chronicles.

    I would rather use God's Word than historiography to interpret the seventy years. Historiography is simply a tool useful in places but decptive in others.

    Jeremiah did not assign a precise date or event for the beginning of the seventy years but he give a formula and that composition of exile -desolation-servitude constitute markers as to when and how the period is to be chronologically and historically applied.

    There was every need for the land to bereft of animals and humans and that in part was that the land 'could pay off its sabbaths'-2 Chron.36:21. Archaeology is in a state of flux and since the year 2000 scholarship is slowly moving more towards and acknowledgement of 'An Empty Land'.

    The exile-desolation-servitude formula was certainly experienced by Babylon and indeed was characteristic of the history of the Anceient Near History (historiography again) but in the context of Jeremiah and Deuteronomy this was specific to Judah. The formula as applied to Babylon did not commence until after 537 BCE and not before but certainly the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE was foretold by other prophets namely Isaiah and certainly had a 'embryonic' aspect with the prophecy of Jer.25:12 which foretold her destruction.


    scholar JW

  • Alwayshere

    SCHOLAR, Jeremiah 29:10 God says when 70 years have been fullfilled AT Babylon, he would turn his attention to them. Do you even know when King Neb. first year to rule was? And how could Daniel have been taken in 618 and again in 617? Guess I will never get an answer to the last question.

  • scholar

    The Oracle

    Post 1072

    The date 607 BCE has not been disproved but in fact has been validated by the Bible. To say that the WT is going to abandon 607 BCE sometime soon is just apostate gossip with no foundation in reality. In fact, I could just as say that the world will soon endorse 607 BCE for many good reasons.

    You are correct that scholarship favours 586 rather than the apostate date of 587 BCE so why are not the apostates converting to 586 BCE? Further, 1914 and the Gentile Times are also well founded both biblically and theologically.

    When you fellows have sorted out the 586/587 fiasco then and only then can you worry about the WTS.

    scholar JW

  • garyneal


    I asked Scholar the same question a few posts ago. What will he do when the Society stops teaching 1914 C.E.? If 1975 is any indication, the society is going to spin it to make it look like it is the fault of overzealous witnesses (like scholar perhaps). Billy has already pointed out that the society used this method to dropped the 'this generation' link with 1914. It is only a matter of time before 1914 is dropped completely.

    I predict that within the next 20 years, there will be witnesses who has never heard of 1914.

Share this