When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed? Why It Matters - What the Evidence Shows

by wannabefree 224 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • wannabefree

    Obviously 607 is a problem, Watchower coming out full forces on this one in the latest Public Edition.


  • sabastious
    Instead of saying 70 years “at Babylon,”
    many translations read “for Babylon.” (NIV)
    Some historians therefore claim that this
    70-year period applies to the Babylonian Empire.
    According to secular chronology, the
    Babylonians dominated the land of ancient
    Judah and Jerusalemfor some 70 years, from
    about 609 B.C.E. until 539 B.C.E. when the
    capital city of Babylonwas captured.

    Secular chonology also says Jerusalem was destroyed in 586/587. They cherry pick secular dates.


  • jay88

    Where is my popcorn?......

  • wannabefree
    But if the evidence from the inspired Scriptures
    clearly points to 607 B.C.E. for Jerusalem's
    destruction, why do many authorities
    hold to the date 587 B.C.E.? They lean on two
    sources of information-the writings of classical
    historians and the canon of Ptolemy. Are
    these sources more reliable than the Scriptures?

    Here they automatically imply that secular sources disagree with the Bible ... which do YOU trust? Loaded question isn't it. Yet, they fail to consider that secular sources conflict with Watchtower explanation of the Scriptures, not the Scriptures themselves.

  • LostGeneration

    Article starts on page 26 for those looking for it. Pretty amazing they even admit there is a problem with the introductory quote:

    “According to historians and archaeologists, 586 or 587 B.C.E. is generally accepted as the year of Jerusalem’s destruction. Why do Jehovah’s Witnesses say that it was 607 B.C.E.?

    Of course they don't really answer the question honesty which would be: We need Jerusalem to be destroyed because of our silly 1914 date which we still cling to despite zero evidence supporting it. Gonna take a while to digest this article. Would love to see some JWN scholars (not you "scholar") refute some of the points presented in this propaganda piece.

  • Quendi

    We all know the reason for the WTS insistence upon 607 BC as the date of Jerusalem's destruction at the hand of the Babylonians. They are determined to hold on to 1914 as the end of the Gentile Times and the year that Jesus Christ began his kingdom rule. However, even if it could be proved without a doubt that Jerusalem was indeed destroyed in that year, there is still no way that a link can be established between that year and 1914. There is plenty of evidence from the Scriptures themselves to demonstrate that the WTS calculation of 2,520 years being the length of the "Gentile Times" is completely false.

    But the issue at hand is the year of Jerusalem's destruction. The WTS relies on the fact that when it makes ex cathedra pronouncements like the one given here, the rank and file will follow. Most Witnesses are not critical or free thinkers. They rely entirely upon the cult leadership to give them the information they need to function. They also think that the Governing Body and its writing staff are completely honest, are careful and thorough researchers, and go over their findings with a fine-toothed comb before publishing them. They believe that Jehovah himself is directing them, and that whatever appears in the publications ultimately has a divine source.

    I liked how wannabefree concluded his last post. "Yet, they fail to consider that secular sources conflict with Watchtower explanation of the Scriptures, not the Scriptures themselves." I couldn't put it any better myself.


  • diamondiiz

    Funny they included this in the wts. It appears the date is troubling to them but these idiots will not revise this thus it looks like they are sealing their fate and 1914 will stand until they fall. What morons! I like how they use the words "generally" and "usually" when they speak of 587/6 acceptance by historians. The only wackos accepting 607 are wts and handful of other cults.

    As always they use works of few people including Josephus to create an idea that historical facts are based on these individuals and put doubt in the mind of the reader that secular history cannot be trusted. Then they they use tablets to show Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 while ignore the number of tablets listing Babylonian kings. They ignore the finds that show the specific lunar eclipses tied to Babylonian kings. They list some Babylonian kings to create confusion while they fail to list all kings and their reigning years. Very dishonest article if you ask me.

  • Diest

    I hope someone with more knowlegde refutes this....I have been making this point to people and will need a we bit of backup.

  • cantleave

    Makes you wonder if DJeggnog is something to do with the writing committee!

    Unfortunately using the bible to give 70 years of exile is the only argument they have. But they use the word "scholarly" in the pre-amble to the artcile, so 7,000,000 witlesses will take the WTS ridiculous arguments as gospel and dismiss the real scholars!

  • LostGeneration

    I agree cantleave, lots of dates, Babylonian king names, and pretty pictures of ancient tablets there. Probably the main goal of the article is to get JWs to skim over it, shrug their shoulders, and accept 607 without a second thought.

Share this