Jeremiah 29:8-21 and the August 2012 Oral review

by Bobcat 20 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • AnnOMaly
  • kepler


    Since I also had a discussion of the Nebuchadnezzar Egyptian campaign from the Egyptian studies side, I thought I'd look through that too. I am not sure Toby Wilkinson is the same Wilkinson that F.C. Cook cites above. Besides "Rise and Fall of Ancient Egypt", published in 2010, Wilkinson also has a dozen or so references of his own cited, including "Lives of the Ancient Egyptians", vs "Manners and Customs of the Egyptians" noted above. In any case, in Section V - Change and Decay (1069-30 BC), chapter 21, Fortune's Fickle Wheel, Wilkinson concludes on page 417 that the Babylonian invasion setting off in 567 BC was roundly defeated.

    Determining "who's on first" or who was on first back then gets tricky with remaining chronology discrepancies and conventions for naming Egyptian monarchs. In Wilkinson's system, it is described as follows with some noteworthy events:

    Psamtek I, 664-610 BC

    Nekau (Necho) II, 610-595

    Psamtek II, 595-589

    Wahibra 589-570

    Ahmose II 570-526

    After the defeat or fall of independent states in Syria, Lebanon and Palestine,

    "Egypt was now the front line. Psamtek II's son and successor Wahibra successfully repulsed an attempted Babylonian invasion in 582, but knew very well he would need allies to safeguard Egyptian independence. Following his father's example, he looked to the Greek world, and appointed Ionian and Carian mercenaries to positions of prominence in the Egyptian army. ... deeply unpopular with the native Egyptian military, who felt increasingly marginalized by the high ranking foreigners in their midst.

    "... in January 570 when a disastrous campaign in Libya led to a full-scale mutiny by the surviving Egyptian forces, Wahibra sent one of his most experienced commanders, Ahmose, to put down the revolt. By far from reimposing order, Ahmose promptly seized power and was proclaimed king by the rebels. ...By August the geneneral had been recognized as Pharaoh, a second Ahmose, throughout the western delta. ...Wahibra [after a battle that fall] fled to abroad ... to the court of Babylon. The Babylonian king, Nebuchadrezzr, could scarcely believe his luck. Here wa an unmissable opportunity to meddle in Babylonian affairs and put a Babylonian puppet on the throne of Horus.

    "Realizing the impending danger, Ahmose II (570-526) took immediate measure to guard against an invasion. He concluded an alliance with the Greeks of Cyrene, ... while removing a Greek garrison in the eastern delta thought to harbor sympathies for Wahibra. Pragmatism, not ideology was was the order of the day. In 567, a Babylonian force led by the deposed king attempted to invade Egypt by land and sea, but was roundly defeated. This time there was no escape for Wahibra. He was captured and killed.... nonetheless buried with full royal honors by a victorious Ahmose..."

    Subsequent political and military leadership continued to have a Greek contribution and the city of "Naukratis swiftly became the busiest port in Egypt", if that is what constitutes a 40 year desolation.

    It seems to me that OT prophets invoked "desolations" much like medieval popes called for Crusades. In either case, they are enlisting the services of others: available Assyrian or Babylonian power bases or warrior classes of fuedal states respectively.

    Jeremiah writes at length (e.g., chapters 43, 44) about fleeing to Egypt and then predicts calmity both for Egypt and the Judeans who seek refuge there. If that were the case over the long term, then I suspect there would not have been a Septuagint Bible.

    Elsewhere I had mentioned the similar prophecies about Babylon's permanent desolation (25:12), that was to follow immediately the 70-desolation of Jerusalem. At least one contradiction within the Bible itself is the account of Ezra assembling later year returnees

    Ezra 8:1

    "These with their genealogies , were the heads of the familes who set out from Babylon with me in the reign of King of Artaxerxes."

    A week or so ago, when I had encountered several elders at a commonly frequented local coffee house, I had pointed out that Greek and Persian records clearly indicated that Babylon was not destroyed by Persian Cyrus or hardly even sacked. It changed to new management more favored by the priests of Marduk vs. Assyrian born Naibonidus and his son. The elders said at that time in unison that they only acknowledged biblical sources.

    This week, when I encountered a party of six of them, I brought Ezra up. The lead said that they would look into this matter when they got back to their KH. I told them that that was not necessary. On a piece of paper I had the above quote and several others and placed it on their table so that they all could read.

    I said, "This clearly contradicts Jeremiah 25:12."

    They said absolutely nothing in response.

    But they did laugh among themselves as I walked away.

  • Bobcat


    I appreciated you comments and ensuing discussion on the link you gave me. It seems like you caught on to the Society's word games alot faster than me.


    I was hoping you might put in an appearance. Thank you for the scans. I'm printing them out (a little enlarged for my tired eyes) to go over them.


    And thank you (and your typing fingers). That's some interesting stuff to think about. (And I will.) I can tell you, that to the WT trained mind, its difficult at first to even open up to. Daniel Block's commentary on Ezekiel offers the possibility that the prophecies were not set in stone. Like in Jonah's case, a change of circumstance might call for a change in the divine mind - I think Block says something like, 'God won't be held hostage by his own word.'

    As far as elders (and COs for that matter) go, the Society would like the R&F to look to them for answers to all your questions. Fat chance. They are good for trumpeting the company line.

    Thanks again

  • Jeffro
    I appreciated you comments and ensuing discussion on the link you gave me. It seems like you caught on to the Society's word games alot faster than me.

    Better late than never. Sorry you had to put up with JCanon's nonsensical replies on the other thread though.

  • Leolaia

    There never was a forty-year desolation of Egypt in the sixth century BC. It didn't happen. Ezekiel was wrong. Just as he was about Tyre.

    Here I show that Nebuchadnezzar's campaign was a bust and Amasis' reign continued uninterrupted:

  • Bobcat


    Thanks. I gotta print that out to absorb it during lunch breaks.

    Its interesting. One asks a sincere question and the answers can branch into areas never imagined before.

    That's apostacy, WT style.

    I prefer facts and info to 'just take our word for it.'

    Take Care

  • Jeffro
    Here I show that Nebuchadnezzar's campaign was a bust and Amasis' reign continued uninterrupted:


    I had to laugh at the next response in that thread:

    Leolaia, were you once one of Jehovah's Witnesses?

    Apparently the best form of defense is (ad hominem) attack.

  • AnnOMaly

    The Elephantine Stele! That record passed me by! I thought I had saved Leolaia's list but I'm darned if I can find it. It's definitely saved now!

  • kepler


    Went back and read and filed some of that material. Plus "bumped" it up to the present.

    That was excellent for this particular Ezekiel case

    and the general subject of history by selected prophetic fiat. Research and reflections.

    Hope as many people as possible get a chance to read and think about it.


    Excellent research. Thanks to all of you.

    Interesting in the Insight quotes above is how in the 1st quote Herodotus is taken at his word, but in the 2nd, anything he says is written off as unreliable.

    I think that sums it all about the spimGB and how they treat the hard work and research of others.

    Herodotus wasn't so accurate as a modern historian nor like Thucydides, but just consider the spim of the GB to raise such claims: Egypt remaining desolate for 40 years and the Greeks who commerced with it for centuries to make no mention about it! Such a desolation would have been a major economic disaster of those ages. Still no mention!

Share this