WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2

by AnnOMaly 322 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • sd-7

    And remember that the first prophecy Jeremiah makes in chapter 25 is that Jerusalem and these surrounding nations--which he names in detail in the same chapter--will SERVE the king of Babylon 70 years. The 70 years would end when God brought punishment on Babylon itself. You can't argue that they continued to serve the king of Babylon for 2 more years after Babylon was defeated. They were serving the king of the Medes and Persians then.

    Either way, nowhere does the Bible mention any year at all. That's the biggest problem with the whole setup.


  • leavingwt

    sd-7: Exactly.

    And when they say the 'majority' of scholars believe the date was 587 B.C., what they really mean is "every scholar on earth except Rolf Furuli, who is a JW". This date is not a debate for anyone on Earth except Jehovah's Witnesses. The arguments put forth by the Society consist of "if" statements or "could" statements.

    "If his 37th year was 588 B.C.E., then Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C.E., the date that is indicated by Bible chronology." But saying "if it happened, then it fits with what we already believe regardless" is not evidence. It's a hypothesis that has a considerable amount of contrary evidence, which is why NONE of the scholars quoted in this article believe Jerusalem was destroyed in 607. NONE. NOT ONE SCHOLAR COULD BE FOUND TO QUOTE FROM IN SUPPORT OF 607. NOT ONE.

    Religious leaders who are known for lying and are not experts in Babylonian history, or scholars who have spent decades thoroughly researching this era and are experts AND have nothing personally at stake for whatever year Jerusalem was destroyed? Tough decision.

    "Why not investigate the evidence for yourself?" Sounds like an invitation. Good idea, guys! Let's do just that.

  • PSacramento

    The simple fact is that bibel chronolgy is dependent on secular dating and the secular dating is clear via multiple lines of evidence.

  • minimus

    A typical JW: All I KNOW is that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C.E.

  • Lore

    So. . . Calculating the time based on the position of the moon, but not taking into account where the planets where.

    Isn't that a bit like calculating the the time of day by the minute hand but disregarding the hour?

    "Well the minute hand was in this position at 12:31 which seems to coincide with scientists theories about the time of Kennedy's assassinatoin but our research has shown that it was also in this same position at 10:31 only 2 hours earlier." *

    *Because the location of the hour hand is open to speculation and multiple opinions the hour hands position was not
    used to pinpoint the time of the assassination in our study.

  • VM44

    When discussing the VAT 4956 tablet the article says (pg 25):

    "Because of the superior reliability of the lunar positions, researchers have carefully analyzed these 13 sets of lunar position on VAT 4956."

    The article goes on to say that the researchers' analysis reveals that "all 13 sets match calulated positions for 20 years earlier, for the year 588/587 B.C.E."

    On page 27 it is stated that "the lunar position in line 3 (of VAT 4956) finds an exact match on Nisanu 9 of 588 B.C.E. "Reference is then made to footnote 21 which mentions that "the previously mentioned analysis concluded that on Nisan u9, the moon was 2 deg, 04 minutes in front of and 0 degree below the star beta Virginis. It was considered and exact match."

    The article's conclusion concerning VAT 4956 depends entirely on the results of these reseachers!

    However, the researchers are NOT identified! We do not know who they are!

    The reader is supposed to simply accept the conclusions made by unknown persons!

  • wannabefree

    I found this by Jonsson very informative. A clear difference to me in the writings of Furuli and Watchtower compared to Jonsson is honesty in presentation. Furuli and Watchtower, to me, seem to present information with a set agenda, Jonsson presents unbiased research and lets the facts speak for themselves.

    A critical review of Rolf Furuli’s 2 nd volume on chronology:

    Assyrian, Babylonian and Egyptian Chronology . Volume II of Assyrian, Babylonian, Egyptian, and Persian Chronology Compared with the Chronology of the Bible (Oslo: Awatu Publishers, 2007)

    Part V: Were there unknown Neo-Babylonian kings?

    © Carl Olof Jonsson, Göteborg, Sweden, December 2008


  • PSacramento

    With Furuli all you get is opinion, speculation and "ifs", but with Jonsson you get facts and citations and multiple lines of evidence.

    Enough said.

  • james_woods
    And anyway, who cares? 607 was the starting point for calculating 1914! and 1914 turned out to be a big hoax anyway.

    Many thanks for that! I will never understand why the watchtower keeps stubbornly insisting on this 607 date when the whole line of prophecy based on it turned out to be a total bust.

  • VM44

Share this