I keep seeing people reference the Oct/Nov CrapTower on final resolution of the 607 BCE thing. What did I miss? New Light?
Did I miss new light on 607 BCE?
by sinis 6 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
thetrueone
No just a bunch of aversive WT propaganda to support their past BS.
They juggle dates so quickly you cant determine where they are going to land.
-
sinis
Any examples or specific posts I can read this new light on? Being looking around and can't find a definative article.
-
thetrueone
A good thread on this topic can be found here
-
sinis
Thanks! Still have ONE family member in... though I think hell would freeze over first before they come to their senses... but you never know...
-
thetrueone
Following are citations verifying that the correct date for the fall of Jerusalem was not 607 B.C, but 586 B.C.
- According to Encyclopedia.com, the Babylonian captivity, is defined as "the period from the fall of Jerusalem (586 B.C.) to the reconstruction in Palestine of a new Jewish state (after 538 B.C.)."
- "You will recall that the Babylonians, under Nebuchadnezzar, after twice laying siege to Jerusalem, finally captured it in 586 B.C.E. Nebuchadnezzar's army then pillaged the city, destroying the Temple and sending the inhabitants off to exile in Babylonia. ("Biblical Archaeological Review, Biblical Archaelogical Review).
- "...Nebuchadnezzar promptly invaded his unhappy country and besieged Jerusalem for a year and a half. In 587 Jerusalem fell and numbers of its inhabitants were carried away captive to Babylonia..." (Unger, Merrill, F., Unger's Bible Dictionary, Moody Press, Chicago, 1966, page 782).
- Notice that the year 587 is offered instead of 586. There is sometimes a difference of opinion as to which year is the exact one. Nevertheless, it is obvious that 607 B.C. is not even close.
- "586, Jerusalem destroyed and burned ( Jer. 52:13b .); people taken captive (52:28-30). (The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1982, page 1016)
It is quite clear that the Jehovah's Witness organization is wrong about the 607 B.C. date upon which they place so much of their end times theology. If they are wrong about such a basic event and have not changed their error to match historical fact, how can they be trusted to represent biblical truth? They cannot.
The fact is that they can not change their date of 1914 because they have so much invested in it. They are forced to retain their 607 BC date even though it is in obvious error. To admit they were wrong is to undermine the whole credibility and truth of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. This they cannot do because they are more dedicated to their organization than they are to the truth.
-
Larsinger58
Note that Josephus claims 70 years of servitude by the last deportees, the "poor people" who were deported out of the land in year 23 of Neb2 from year 23. That is a secular reference that is ignored in most of these discussions. So, again, the critical points when you follow Josephus are:
1. Josephus dates the literal 70 years from year 23 and assigns the deportees to be those remaining from the sword out of Egypt. The WTS claims those deported in year 23 were those scattered about outside of Judah, which has no secular or Biblical support whatsoever. In addition, why is the WTS avoiding having the witnesses think those deported in year 23 came out of Egypt. Obviously because it would require them to travel the main highway through Judea. But all of this is a moot point anyway, since the prophecy about the desolation of the land for 70 years to pay back its sabbaths was not just about the land of Judah but also Israel, the Northern Kingdom! The Northen Kingdom was occupied by other nations and so you have a context of other nations being deported to serve 70 years at/for Babylon in conjunction with the last deportees of the Jews doing the same thing. So we have a clear indication the WTS understands the last deportees were those "remaining from the sword" out of Egypt (i.e. including Jeremiah and Baruch) but since that complicates their 1914 doctrine, they got out of their way to deceive the average witness, who is not paying attention anyway.
2. The chronology of Josephus, per Ant. 11.1.1 which assigns a 70-year servitude to those last deported in year 23 directly contradicts the secular chronology now in place from the Babylonian records. Problem is, even the Babylonian Chronicle confirms it is a "copy" during year 22 of Darius II, that is, his 22nd year as King of Babylon (likely about year 2 of his sole rule over Persia). So that just confirms the Persians were the ones who revised the Babylonian records. That is, both Josephus and the Bible's NB Period is 26 years longer than the revised Persian-Babylonian records. There is no way around this. So any discussions about this chronology and the 70 years that does not address what the Bible and Josephus are claiming means this discussion is not about what the Bible says or traditional Jewish history records at all.
3. The above is about "relative chronology." When it comes to absolute chronology, the Bible dates the 1st of Cyrus to 455 BCE. That is, when the "word goes forth to rebuild Jerusalem" the messiah would arrive 69 weeks later during the same month. The 70 weeks must begin specifically in the 7th month to fulfill the messiah being killed in the middle of the 70th week at Passover time. Thus the Festival of Booths which celebrates God coming down to dwell with mankind is the time of Jesus' birth and the beginning of his 3.5 year ministry. Passover, which is six month later celebrates the time of his death. These two annual week-long Jewish festivals bookend when the messiah arrives and when he leaves, a point totally lost on the WTS. Having noted that, note that the work on the temple specifically began on the first day of the 7th month. That is when the city began to be rebuilt. By year 20th of Artaxerxes I, the temple, and the wall were already rebuilt. All Nehemiah did in 52 days was repair the wall that had already been "finished" during the time of Bardiya/Smerdis. The wall was completed even before the temple was and fabulous homes were built on top of the wall. So it is a hard sell that the fulfillment of the prophecy about rebuilding Jerusalem in the context of the original destruction by Nebuchadnezzar was not fulfilled in the 1st of Cyrus, thus dating the 1st of Cyrus to 455 BCE.
Fact is, once you realize this and begin to look for revised chronology during the NB and Persian Period it is not long that you discover that Xerxes and Artaxerxes were the same king. Xerxes faked his death and used his secondary name, "Artaxerxes" to claim he was his own son. At the end of the day, the Persians added some 82 fake years to the Persian Period. This involved 56 years added to the Greek Period, combined with the removal of 26 years of the NB Period so that the 1st of Cyrus is 82 years earlier than the true date of 455 BCE. (537 vs 455 BCE).
So anybody discussing this history without acknowledging the revisions is just incompetent at this point and certainly not Biblical.
The irony is that the WTS, though dismissing all other secular dates, claim that 539 BCE is a good date for the fall of Babylon, when in fact, 539 BCE is a part of the revised timeline! The WTS wants to straddle the fence, using some secular sources they claim are reliable and then adding the Bible's chronology on top of that instead of strictly following the Bible.
So just know that the 539 BCE destruction of Babylon anchor date which is the basis of both 607 BCE and 586 BCE are not the only dates to consider for the fall of Jerusalem. The critical Biblical date is 455 BCE which some like Phillip Mauro and Martin Ansety follow. Even if you don't agree with those interpretations, ignoring them completely is irresponsible. These need to be discussed and dismissed like any other theory about the chronology.
When 455 BCE dates the 1st of Cyrus to 455 BCE, then the 70 years begin in 525 BCE, year 23 of Nebuchadnezzar II, the year of the last deportation. The Bible dates the fall of Jerusalem to year 19, 4 years earlier and thus 529 BCE. If you apply the "7 times" prophecy of the 2520 years to date the 2nd coming you come up with 1992. But 1992 is the same date you get when you apply the "1335 days" prophecy to 1947, the year the gentile times ended, that is, the year the Jews officially regained their control and ownership of their promised land. This ends the "1290 days" and means the messiah would arrive to fulfill the 1335 days 45 years later. That is 45 + 1947 = 1992. So two prohecies confirm the correct date for the 2nd coming. 1914 is wrong so many ways it's a joke.
A. Jerusalem falls in year 19, not 18.
B. The 70 years were served by the last deportees, year 23 of Neb2, not the year Jerusalem falls.
C. The NB secular timeline, including 539 BCE, was revised by the Persians and contradicts both the Bible and Josephus. The original date for the 1st of Cyrus was 455 BCE. The VAT496 includes lunar observations from year 511 BCE in Lines 3 and 14 that confirm the original chronology. That is, when 511 BCE dates year 37 of Neb2, then year 23 falls in 525 BCE, the same as the Bible's dating.
CONCLUSION: Just wanted to let you know limiting your discussion to 607 vs 868 BCE is not good enough if you want the Biblical dating for the fall of Jerusalem, which was actually 529 BCE. The debate should be whether Jerusalem fell in 607 BCE, 586 BCE or 529 BCE. If you don't include 529 BCE and the 1st of Cyrus in 455 BCE arguments, then you are just participating in false, non-Biblical propaganda.
LS