Need help disproving 607BCE

by 2pink 160 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  scholar

  Doug Mason

  Post 739

  1. Hardly, it seems that in reading the literature on this subject it is only the WTS that give a definitive date for the Return in 537 BCE.

  2. Agreed. The Seventy years began right on time to the very month and ended on time at that very month.

  3. Well hope does spring eternal and it is a fine Christian virtue to have. History is always hopeful as it is never complete so scholars and historians have to fill the holes or gaps as it were. In any event there is sufficient evidence for the establishment of 537 BCE which is more secure than any other date offered. The Insight articles certainly prove the matter much better than anything else.

  4. Regardless of politics all of the people were caught up in events beyond their control and were forced to flee the land leaving it completely depopulated in 607 BCE for the countdown of the seventy years.

  5. Jeremiah gave a formula period. It described the nature of the seventy years thus providing clear markers for identifying the beginning and end of the seventy years . As I have argued before it is impossible for the seventy years to end with the Fall of Babylon because the Jews were still exiled.

  6. Yes but is your reading of archaeology current? Does it include current research in the Myth of an Empty Land ?

  7. Historiography as a tool must be used selectively for it is a product of man's thinking and if it contradicts God's Word then it must be abandoned.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Leolaia

  Post 13773

  I have already told you that the 'rot'started in 1935 according to DOTHB wherein it dicussess the unity of Ezra, Nehemiah, 1 and 2 Chronicles perhaps we are talking about a different matter.

  I believe that whatever the direction a consensus is moving the fatc of the matter is that scholars are now lookiing more closely at this slice of Judean history and I believe that the research thus far is encouraging for our interpretation of the nature of that period. What has been discovered is the existence of a 'gap' in civilization between the Babylonian destruction and the Persian period according to Stern and Stager. Such a 'gap' proves that the land was completely desolated according Bible prophecy.

  scholar JW
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  garyneal: "However, he still won't answer the question concerning how he will respond when the society drops 1914."

  We can be confident that "scholar" will respond the same way "scholar" responds every time he's confronted with truths about the Society's history of pyramidology, misquotes, and false prophecies.

  I'm providing this visual aid depicting "scholar's" response when Watchtower Corporation dumps their 607BCE and 1914 lies...

  

  "Huh? What? I never said anything about 607BCE or 1914. I'm just a humble farmer."
• 

  The Oracle

  excellent points Billy.
• 

  Alwayshere

  Scholar, I still want you to tell me when King Neb. 1st year to rule was. Is the question too hard?
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  Scholar 1826: "The WTS has a long tradition of acceptance and use of astronomical evidence ritht up to the days of Charles Russell."

  As proof of Pastor Russell's "acceptance and use of astronomical evidence," I present this quote from Studies in the Scriptures Vol. 3, p. 321 (bold mine):

  Prof. Smyth has concluded that the Great Pyramid was builded in the year 2170 B. C., reaching this conclusion, first, from astronomical observations. Perceiving that the upward passage angles correspond to a telescope, and that the "entrance Passage" corresponds to an astronomer's "pointer," he set about to investigate to what particular star it could have pointed at any time in the past. Calculations showed that a Draconis, the dragon-star, had occupied a position in the heavens which looked directly down the entrance, at midnight of the autumnal equinox, B. C. 2170. Than, considering himself as an astronomer at that date, with his pointer fixed upon a Draconis, and considering the ascending passages as though they were a telescope, which they much resemble, he calculated what constellation or what notable star would have been before his telescope thus fixed at the particular date indicated by his pointer, and found that it must have been the Pleiades. So wonderful a coincidence convinced him that the date of the Great Pyramid's building was thus indicated; for a Draconis is no less a symbol of sin and Satan than Pleiades is a symbol of God and the center of the universe. The Great Pyramid thus indicates that its Architect knew of the prevalence of evil and of its domination over the downward course of mankind, and indicates also what lies beyond all human sight

  I'm sure that "celebrated JW scholars" still believe this astromical evidence propounded by Pastor Russell. Only apostates believe that the star cluster Pleiades is not the center of the universe where Jehovah lives. And since worldly scholars and apostates are vague and uncertain in their statements that the Great Pyramid was "constructed over a 20 year period concluding around 2540", they are obviously lying. Since Pastor Russell, based on the astronomical observations of Prof. Smyth, is able to clearly pinpoint that the Great Pyramid was constructed at midnight of the autumnal equinox, B. C. 2170, then the rest of the world is obviously wrong by 390-370 years. Only Pastor Russell, backed with data from Prof. Smyth and his pyramid inch measurements and his astronomical observations--evidently using a time machine--these men are able to pinpoint the exact minute that the pyramid was constructed.

  "Rome wasn't built in a day", huh? Maybe not, but look what was built in one minute...

  
• 

  isaacaustin

  isaacaustin

  Pseudoscholar said:

  Post 4236

  There is indeed a strong exegetical connection between Luke 21 and Daniel 4 and this shown by a common vocabulary and the fact that the focus of the tree dream and the Gentile Times are in connection to Kingship and the city of the King, Jerusalem which typified God's Kingdom. So, there are commonalities in both narratives that link the two but as this is interpretation then the matter must rest with the reader. If you are not convinced then seek a better interpretation and when you find one, let me know.

  The theme of Dan 4 is God's Kingdom, the theme of the book of Daniel is God's Kingdom. the theme of the Old Testament is God's Kingdom, the theme of the New Testament is God's Kingdom. Are you getting the point? This simple fact is acknowleged by many theologians and Bible scholars form all denominations.

  I have no problem with your last comment on the dominance of Babylon for seventy years because Jeremiah clearly knew this for Judah was servient to Babylon, exiled in Babylon leaving a desolated land all under Babylon's dominance for that period of seventy years. Well done!!!!!

  scholar JW

  My reply: BS pseudo, like your whole spiel. Common vocabulary means they are speaking of the same thing? Are you that far gone? The focus of the Dan 4 is Neb's rulership shown to be in the hands of God...that's all there is to it...Dan says flat out that it was fulfilled in Neb.

  Sorry my comment does not mean what you tried to edit it to mean. Babylon was the dominant power for 70 yrs- yes...609-539...at which poin tthe 70 yrs ended and they were called to account. It does not say Jeru will serve the King of babylon 70 yrs, its says these nations.
• 

  jonathan dough

  Babylon was the dominant power for 70 yrs- yes...609-539...at which poin tthe 70 yrs ended and they were called to account. It does not say Jeru will serve the King of babylon 70 yrs, its says these nations.

  Yes, definately. Nail in the coffin.

  http://144000.110mb.com/607/i-3.html#G
• 

  isaacaustin

  Right on Jonathan Dough...I like your website by the way! Well done, very easy to follow.

  Amazing how this 607BCE assumption requires the ignoring of so many clear facts stated in the Bible, isn't it? Archaeology and astronomy simply confirm 586/7.
• 

  Doug Mason

  Scholar,

  Pages 157ff of DOTHB considers whether Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah were a single work. After careful consideration, the article concludes:

  “The overall evidence seems to fall short of being able to regard Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah as a single work. ... The most likely conclusion, therefore, is that Ezra-Nehemiah does not simply continue the Chronicler's history of Israel, contrary to what is implied by the order of the two works in English Bibles and the LXX. Rather, as their reverse order in the MT indicates, they originally were two distinct works, both of which dealt with the restoration of Israel, but from quite different perspectives. They then were brought together by an editor, perhaps by the Chronicler personally, to demonstrate that the work of restoration in the sixth and fifth centuries BCE had its origins in God’s purposes for the whole human race and his promises to the Davidic line. (pp 160-161).

  Regards,

  Doug