Library Visit # 2: 607 BCE vs. 587 BCE - With Pictures!

by mentallyfree31 113 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  alice.in.wonderland

  "What this brain trust (AIW) is suggesting is taking the known fact of Cyrus's overthrow of Babylon (539 BCE.),

  minus the 70 years of the prophetic prophecy and you come to 607 BCE.

  Opps wait a second we have a problem, Nebuchadnezzar didn't come to power until 605 BCE. upon the death of his father.

  So maybe the captivity didn't last 70 prophetic years after all.......shoot !

  Hey I thought the bible was the word of god or at least inspired by god.

  Its funny how these discreet fibs and stories of embellishment never coincide with facts and reality in the real world outside

  of spiritualistic mysticism. I must be too analytical for fictionalized fantasy"

  According to the Cyrus cylinder the Jews were released from captivity.
  
  http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/History/hakhamaneshian/Cyrus-the-great/cyrus_cylinder.htm
  
  Inscription corroborates many of the details in Ezra 1:1-5 describing Cyrus supporting the Jews in returning to Judea from captivity to rebuild the Temple in 537 BCE. Isaiah also backs up the idea of Cyrus as a benign and chosen ruler.
  
  The cuneiform tablet entitled “Strassmaier, Cyrus No. 11” mentions Cyrus’ first regnal year. By this tablet it is calculated that this year began March 17/18, 538 B.C.E., and it ended on March 4/5 of 537 B.C.E., Gregorian time. So Cyrus’ second regnal year began the next day, on March 5/6, 537 B.C.E. In this case Cyrus’ decree must have been made before this latter date that is, late in the year 538 or early in 537 B.C.E. See pages 14, 29 of Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.-A.D. 75, edition of 1956, by Parker and Dubberstein.
  
  607 BCE is derived from counting 70 years from the Jews release from Babylonian captivity (I already pointed this out). If it was 605, the early Bible students would have simply said this. You're using a backwards philosophy and losing yourself in a matrix of information for no good reason. You can either use the fulfillment of the 1914 Bible prophecy to establish 607 as the date of Jerusalem's destruction or an endless array of data to disprove Bible prophecy. It doesn't make any sense to choose the latter if a prophecy has already been fulfilled. You would have to come up with a conspiracy theory as to how Russell and the early Bible students started World War I since the prophecy has already been fulfilled.
• 

  thetrueone

  607 BCE is derived from counting 70 years from the Jews release from Babylonian captivity (I already pointed this out). If it was 605, the early Bible students would have simply said this. You're using a backwards philosophy and losing yourself in a matrix of information for no good reason. You can either use the fulfillment of the 1914 Bible prophecy to establish 607 as the date of Jerusalem's destruction or an endless array of data to disprove Bible prophecy. It doesn't make any sense to choose the latter if a prophecy has already been fulfilled. You would have to come up with a conspiracy theory as to how Russell and the early Bible students started World War I since the prophecy has already been fulfilled.

  I hope people can see this and have themselves a good laugh, your ridiculously comical.

  Its obvious your not interested in facts or established Data, the only interest you hold to is supporting the JWS bogus calculations.

  Facts for you are prophetic prophecy and nothing else, tossing rational sense of reasoning out the window.

  The WTS leaders love you for the way you think, your all in-line for your grand reward, AIW.

  Piss ...... don't ever go to college and study ancient history it will really F..k you up.
• 

  mentallyfree31

  Regarding the origin of 606 BCE, I looked at quite a bit of information a while back. John Aquila Brown, spoke of the 2,520 years well before Charles Russell was born. His book "The Even Tide" was written in the early 1820's. But his timeline was 604 BCE to 1917 BCE, I believe. So I still don't know the real origin of 606 BCE. It could have been this:

  Armageddon was predicted for 1914. When Russell/Barbour accepted John Aquila Brown's 2,520 year prophecy - they backed up from 1914 and arrived at 606 (mistakenly counting a zero year).

  -mentallyfree31-
• 

  diamondiiz

  AIW - first of all, you haven't showed proof of anything other than that Cyrus conquesred Babylon in 539BC. I don't deny that nor does any other historian. The arguement isn't about when and if Babylon fell in 539BC. WTS' claim is that Jerusalem fell in 607BC to which there is no proof in archeaology. One set of artifacts pointing to Cyrus victory are accepted by WTS and yet all the other artifacts pointing to 586/7 destruction of Jerusalem are ignored and downplayed. Artifacts which specify lunar eclipses so important in Babylonian culture are totally ignored by wts, and these artifacts show which year of Neo Babylonian king the particular events occurred. Specific eclipses agree with today's astronomical calculations. These artifacts prove that 607BC is not the year of Jerusalem and wts is wrong. Historians don't calculate events by subtracting or adding random numbers to make up historical dates. If you want to show me your math I would love to see it, show me the reigns of babylonian kings, with their lengths of rule and the applicale archeaological evidence and we'll see how you achieve 607BC. The verse used for 70 years doesn't even specify that Jerusalem will be laid desolate for 70 years as the verse speaks of nations and not a nation. Thousands of artifacts pointing to what historians belief today cannot be dismissed just because WTS doesn't want to belief it but reallity shows that the historical evidence on Neo Babylonian kings is clear.

  In 1800s when Barbour pulled 606 out of his ass, he was dead wrong as other crazies also tried to come up with a date for Jesus' return according to 7 times. Some used 604, the accesion year of Nebuchadnezzar and some used 587 as the start of the gentile times as it was the known date for the fall of Jerusalem, others used other dates. If I remember correctly Barbour thought Babylon fell in 538bc thus 606BC was assumed by Barbour as the fall of Jerusalem. Barbour and thus Russell believed there was a 0 year and their calculations ended up with 1914 for the end of the gentile times. Then, WTS discovered there was no year 0, they also learned that Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539BC, they changed the 606 to 607 and 606 just became part of WTS' bogus history. I might dig up info on manuscripts which point to Neo babylonian periods and maybe post them here for your research, but seeing what and how you write, it most likely is a waste of my time as any intelligent person would see that 607BC is not the date for Jerusalem's fall from just a small research into the history. All the evidence can be easily researched on the net or your library or you can visit your nearest Museum (not car museum ) . But AIW seems to only accept wts writings as authority on everything, from biblical interpretations to historical events, archeaology and prophesy. With this cult mentality it probably benefits AIW and the likes to stay within their cult suroundings.
• 

  thetrueone

  For AIW,

  False Prophets Will Be Numerous, And Very Successful:

  Mat 24:11 And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.
  Mat 24:12 And because iniquity [lawlessness] shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

  2 Pet 2:1 [NIV] But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.
  2 Pet 2:2 [NIV] Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.
  2 Pet 2:3 [NIV] In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.

  1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

  AIW consider yourself witnessed to.
• 

  alice.in.wonderland

  " I hope people can see this and have themselves a good laugh, your ridiculously comical.

  Its obvious your not interested in facts or established Data, the only interest you hold to is supporting the JWS bogus calculations.

  Facts for you are prophetic prophecy and nothing else, tossing rational sense of reasoning out the window.

  The WTS leaders love you for the way you think, your all in-line for your grand reward, AIW.

  Piss ...... don't ever go to college and study ancient history it will really F..k you up."

  I don't pattern my thinking after the “WTS leaders.”

  Have any of you talked to Joel Osteen about pushing the prosperity gospel and profiteer preaching if the "WTS leaders" have some sort of erroneous agenda?

  However, those who are determined to be rich fall into temptation and a snare and many senseless and hurtful desires, which plunge men into destruction and ruin. For the love of money is a root of all sorts of injurious things, and by reaching out for this love some have been led astray from the faith and have stabbed themselves all over with many pains. 1 Timothy 6:9-10

  You don't have to go to any great lengths to disprove the existence of invisible beings.
  
  By faith Moses was hid for three months by his parents after his birth, because they saw the young child was beautiful and they did not fear the order of the king. By faith Moses, when grown up, refused to be called the son of the daughter of Phar′aoh, choosing to be ill-treated with the people of God rather than to have the temporary enjoyment of sin, because he esteemed the reproach of the Christ as riches greater than the treasures of Egypt; for he looked intently toward the payment of the reward. By faith he left Egypt, but not fearing the anger of the king, for he continued steadfast as seeing the One who is invisible. By faith he had celebrated the passover and the splashing of the blood, that the destroyer might not touch their firstborn ones. Hebrews 11:23-28
  
  Why is it you folks try and dance a gig all over the 1914 prophecy when the existence of God can be dismissed studying the book of ophthalmology?
• 

  Black Sheep

  Inscription corroborates many of the details in Ezra 1:1-5 describing Cyrus supporting the Jews in returning to Judea from captivity to rebuild the Temple in 537 BCE.

  T he Cyrus cylinder does no such thing. It does not contradict the return in 538 BC.

  If you believe otherwise, take up the challenge in the thread below and make point-by-point refutations of Alan's arguments. I would love to see what you come up with.

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/118291/1/Fact-Jews-Returned-In-538-BC-Kills-Off-Watchtower-Chronology

  Cheers

  Chris
• 

  BluesBrother

  The last time I saw a WT comment on this, they did bot bother to explain away the archaeology supporting the dates 587/586 BCE....they simply said that the accept 539 BCE as if it were gospel truth, they add a couple of years to 537 to allow for preparation and journey and deduct 70 years and that is that.

  Since "The Bible foretold seventy years desolation", that is good enough, since they say something like 'Our faith is based on Scripture, not the shifting sands of archaeological discoveries' (or words to that effect)

  Despite the fact that they say that all ancient dates are subject to review, they base their entire modern expectations on the date 1914 which is based on 1] an ancient date, 2] plus an application by them of a scripture 3] a human mathematical calculation to come to the modern date.

  So I regret that the display of evidence for the 587 date will do nothing for the dedicated dub who simply sees it as a secular attack on his faith, which he believes is based on The Bible but in fact more like the "Artfully contrived false stories " of 2 Peter 1 ;16
• 

  Pistoff

  Alice in wonderland, a truly well named poster:

  We don't care if someone, including you, wants to be a witness. Go for it.

  But don't pretend that 607 is really the date for the destruction of Jerusalem, notwithstanding your quote from an iranian website, niasnet.org, one that stands to gain from your viewpoint.

  NO credible historian agrees with the WT; even the WT does not agree with the WT, as they changed from 606 to 607. Or would you have us believe that God made a mistake, and had to bump it one year?
• 

  Pistoff

  Have any of you talked to Joel Osteen about pushing the prosperity gospel and profiteer preaching if the "WTS leaders" have some sort of erroneous agenda?

  AIW, years of listening to the logical fallacies of the WT has dulled your thinking ability.

  What does Joel Osteen have to do with your refusal to outline YOUR proof for 607? (As far as I can see, Joel Osteen does not preach much from the 'gospel' but insists that we are all OK and deserve a good life. Is he a charlatan? Not even in the same league as the liars and fake scholars at the WT).

  Why don't you just take the challenge and show us the fine scholarship of yourself and the WT? Quoting from Iranian preservation societies is not going to prove your point.

  The WT was not right about anything to do with 1914; before the war broke out, they had asserted that 1914 was the END of the end, not the beginning; they said that Jesus would be back by 1914, then had to "explain" that he came all right, oh but INVISIBLY, right.

  Wake up.