Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals

by Ethos 529 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Jeffro
    Jeffro
    AnnoMaly says: "Jerusalem was desolated from 609 to 539" (70 years)
    2 Chronicles 36:21 "ALL the days of lying desolated it KEPT SABBATH."
    AnnoMaly and Jeffro say the land kept sabbath for only 49 years. This is getting embarassing.
    AnnoMaly and Jeffro are reduced to contradicting their own chronology and their own secular sources.

    LOL. Now it's guilt by association. I didn't say Jerusalem was desolated for 70 years, but that all the nations were subject to Babylon for 70 years.

    The original-language word translated "fulfilling" (Strongs' H4390) at Daniel 9:2 means completing, finishing. It means that the end of the 70 years were associated with the end of Jerusalem's devastations. By the end of the 70 years, Jerusalem was completely desolate. It does not require that Jersualem was desolate for the entire 70 year period.

    Daniel refers to "the word" that had occurred "to Jeremiah".

    What did Jeremiah say about 70 years??

    • He said all the nations would serve Babylon 70 years. (Jeremiah 25:11)
    • He said when Babylon's 70 years were fulfilled, Babylon's king would be judged. (Jeremiah 25:12) (According to the account in Daniel chapter 5, Daniel was eye-witness to a magical hand writing on a wall that Bayblon's king would be judged, the same night that the Babylonian empire fell, but we're expected to believe this wasn't the end of the 70 years. Sigh.)
    • He said that after Babylon had been dominant for 70 years, then Jehovah would turn attention to the Jews going home. (Jeremiah 29:10)
      (The phrase "turn my attention" (Strongs' H6485) also suggests arranging for the return at that point rather than the WTS view that the 70 years end once they had returned.)

    Jeremiah never said "the devastations of Jerusalem" would go for 70 years.

  • Jeffro
    Jeffro

    Earlier I said:

    Now it's guilt by association. I didn't say Jerusalem was desolated for 70 years, but that all the nations were subject to Babylon for 70 years.

    I should note that I'm not aware that AnnOMaly made any such claim that Jerusalem was 'desolate from 609 until 539' (and she has specifically stated that she did not). The point remains that, whether she or anyone else did make such a claim has nothing at all do with what I have said.

  • AnnOMaly
    AnnOMaly

    Of course I didn't say Jerusalem was desolated from 609 to 539! LOL. Ethos made it up.

  • isaacaustin
    isaacaustin

    Outlaw,

    Ethos 'scholarly' efforts have not convinved you of the 'validity' of 607BCE? LOL

    I would say he is probably one step more braindead than Scholar was.

  • Witness My Fury
    Witness My Fury

    I'm open minded enough to still analyse the evidence from both perspectives, ...I have yet to see anything compelling about the 607 date.

    Nice try Recovery, ... but no cigar.

    What you need to understand is this, if there is no other hard support (years of kings ruling, astronomical, cuniform tablets, even biblical support, etc etc) for your understanding of a scripture... then it is likely that your understanding of that scripture is faulty. It is far less likely that all of the hard evidence to the contrary position is faulty or faked.

    So is it 70 years of exile and desolation (as dated in basic terms from the destruction of the temple in Nebs 18th year in WTS land) ...

    or 70 years of servitude with the possibility of exile and destruction (as dated by almost everyone one else on the planet as being from the rise of the Babylonian world power in 609 and the exile starting with the 1st exile of Jerusalem of Daniel etc in Nebs 1st year 605)?

    Any 'understanding' of the terms needs to be backed up by OTHER compelling evidence. There is plenty for the latter. But all you have is the misunderstanding and misapplication of the terms exile and desolation and the misreading the the relevant verses.

    We KNOW why this is, even if you claim not to. It is because 607 HAS to be true because 1914 HAS to be true and the two dates are inextricably linked in WTS doctrine, otherwise your whole religion and your whole life up to now has been based on a lie and as such is totally pointless. This is not an acceptable possibility, so confirmation bias comes heavily into play and instead of looking at this with a rational clear mind you look at it with hostility and fear.

    Your hostility and fear is coming through loud and clear. And if you want to help people to see the holes in the WTS teachings then you are doing a bang on job of it. So keep it up, the more you shout and protest and insult and get all huffy then the more people will see what a crock of shit the whole Watchtower edifice rests on.

  • Pterist
    Pterist

    TornApart....*** OK.. I'm not bothering anymore.. You're clearly only interested in debating with Jeffro and AnnOMaly. Why do I get the impression that this Recovery reincarnated?*****

    Yes, it seems very apparent that is the case, but the question in my mind is Why? ....He made reference to JWfacts on another thread, that referred to this thread.

    The only thing that it maybe is that these nice people are his or the WTS biggest "torn in their flesh"

    1. JWFACTS ....Excelent website..... http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/607-1914.php

    2. Jeffro......Some research shows that A JEFFRO77 has an excellent website also.. http://jeffro77.wordpress.com/607-for-dummies/ .....but it may NOT be the same person.

    3. Ann O Mally......Could not find anything on Ann, except that she replied nicely to me , and I love the Irish name...LOL

    I still consider myself a NOOB here, so maybe others can fill in the blanks, as to why Ethos's direct "come ons" are to these specific people.....!!??!!??

    Shalom my friend

  • tornapart
    tornapart

    Interesting point P... Well, Ann is excellent on the 607 debate as is Londo (the thread Recovery debated on). Yes, you are a NOOB.. (LOL) but seem pretty clued up on the subject too... so maybe he'll take you on as well.

    Me... I started reading Gentile Times Reconsidered and have yet to try and get past the first few pages.. but I am determined!

    What did it totally for me was a video on youtube about the Egibi family records and this website:-

    http://www.jwstudies.com/babylonian_captivity.html

    @WMF... Spot on!

  • AnnOMaly
    AnnOMaly

    3. Ann O Mally......Could not find anything on Ann, except that she replied nicely to me , and I love the Irish name...LOL

    Top o' th' mornin' to ya. No website (maybe one day). Try looking at the topics I started - it'll give you a picture.

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    Here's some information that was posted by a member here, full of provocative thought and evaluation (AlanF)

    The Watchtower Society's 1914 chronology hinges on a dicey chain of claims. If any of these claims is wrong, then the chain is broken and Watchtower chronology collapses. Along with it goes the entire belief structure built on it, including most importantly the claim of the leaders of Jehovah's Witnesses to have been specially appointed in 1919 by God over "all Christ's belongings" on earth. In other words, the authority structure of Jehovah's Witnesses collapses.

    One claim in this chain is that the Jews returned to Judah in 537 B.C., which allows the Society to calculate back 70 years to 607 B.C. and assign it as the date of Jerusalem's destruction, and then calculate forward 2,520 years (the length of the so-called Gentile Times, they claim) to 1914 A.D.

    It is easily shown by the Bible and secular history that the Society's claim for 537 B.C. is wrong, and that the correct date is 538 B.C. It is easy to show that the Society's claim for the 537 date is based on nothing but speculation going back to C. T. Russell.

    Here is the proof:

    Ezra 1 clearly states that Cyrus, in his first year, gave a decree allowing the Jews to return to Judah. According to undisputed history, Cyrus' first year was Nisan (March/April), 538 B.C. through Adar (February/March), 537 B.C. The Bible gives no explicit statement about exactly when this decree was issued.

    Ezra 3:1-7 states that by the 7th Jewish month Tishri (September/October), the Jews were settled in their cities, and at that time they gathered together in Jerusalem to offer sacrifices and collect money for the rebuilding of the Temple. From this we deduce that, whatever calendar year this was, the Jews returned in the preceding year, since the secular Jewish year began in Tishri (keep in mind that the sacred Jewish year began six months offset from Tishri, in Nisan, and the Jewish months were numbered beginning with Nisan). In other words, the year in which the Jews returned was the first year of their coming home, and the new year beginning in the Tishri mentioned in Ezra 3:1 was the second year of their coming home.

    Ezra 3:8, 10 states that a little later in that second year the Temple foundations were laid (NASB):

    8 Now in the second year of their coming to the house of God at Jerusalem in the second month, Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel and Jeshua the son of Jozadak and the rest of their brothers the priests and the Levites, and all who came from the captivity to Jerusalem, began the work and appointed the Levites from twenty years and older to oversee the work of the house of the LORD.

    10 Now when the builders had laid the foundation of the temple of the LORD, the priests stood in their apparel with trumpets, and the Levites, the sons of Asaph, with cymbals, to praise the LORD according to the directions of King David of Israel.

    The crucial piece of information here is that the Temple foundations were laid in the second month (Iyyar; April/May) of the same year in which the Jews gathered in Jerusalem immediately after they returned to Judah.

    The Bible does not explicitly relate these events to any event that can be firmly dated to our Gregorian calendar. However, a careful examination of historical data indicates that it was Cyrus' general practice to free captives from the nations he conquered shortly after he secured his authority. Since he captured Babylon in October, 539 B.C., and the inhabitants would have known of his general practice, they would have expected him to soon begin freeing Babyonian captives, including the Jews. It is a good bet that Cyrus would have done this around the time of celebrating the beginning of his first regnal year.

    A careful examination of Ezra 1-3 indicates that there might have been very little delay between the issuing of Cyrus' decree and the departure of the Jewish captives for Judah. Because Cyrus' first regnal year began in Nisan, and the Jews arrived by Tishri, if this all occurred in 538 B.C., there would have been at most six months for the Jews to complete their preparations and journey, and get settled in Judah. Since the trip takes about three to four months for a normal caravan, there is just enough time for these events to happen in 538 B.C.

    The Watchtower Society speculates that Cyrus issued his decree sometime in late 538 or early 537 B.C., still in his first regnal year. They then claim that the Jews journeyed back to Judah in 537 B.C. However, the Society gives no justification for this speculation.

    How then, can one decided if the Jews returned in 538 or 537?

    Josephus provides the tie breaker.

    In Against Apion I,21, Josephus states:

    These accounts agree with the true histories in our books; for in them it is written that Nebuchadnezzar, in the eighteenth year of his reign, laid our temple desolate, and so it lay in that state of obscurity for fifty years; but that in the second year of the reign of Cyrus its foundations were laid, and it was finished again in the second year of Darius.

    The crucial piece of information is that the Temple foundations were laid in the second regnal year of Cyrus.

    Combining this with the information from Ezra that the Temple foundations were laid in the second month (Iyyar) of the second year of the Jews' return to Judah, we conclude that this second year corresponds with the second year of Cyrus. Since Cyrus' second year began in Nisan, 537 B.C. and Iyyar was the second month of that regnal year, the first year of the Jews' return was 538 B.C. This also works if one uses Tishri dating for Cyrus' reign, as some might argue that Josephus did.

    In other words, Josephus has provided the crucial information to decide between 538 and 537 B.C.

    According to Watchtower chronology, the Temple foundations were laid in 536 B.C., which contradicts Josephus' statement.

    Now, readers already understand that our resident JW defenders will scream bloody murder about the above facts, so I will here present a chronological tablulation that is in harmony with all known facts. By proving that the Jews returned to Judah in the autumn of 538 B.C, this proves that the Watchtower Society's mere speculation that the Jews returned in 537 B.C. is wrong. Because that date is wrong, every other important Watchtower date that hinges on it, such as 607 B.C. for Jerusalem's destruction, is wrong.

    Table of Cyrus' Early Years As King of Babylon, With Important Events

    539___Tishri____Sep/Oct___Cyrus' 0th Year, Month 7__Babylon falls, Cyrus' accession year

    539___Heshvan___Oct/Nov___Cyrus' 0th Year, Month 8

    539___Chislev___Nov/Dec___Cyrus' 0th Year, Month 9

    539/8_Tebeth____Dec/Jan___Cyrus' 0th Year, Month 10

    538___Shebat____Jan/Feb___Cyrus' 0th Year, Month 11

    538___Adar______Feb/Mar___Cyrus' 0th Year, Month 12

    538___Nisan_____Mar/Apr___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 1__Cyrus' 1st year; issues his famous decree

    538___Iyyar_____Apr/May___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 2

    538___Sivan_____May/Jun___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 3

    538___Tammuz____Jun/Jul___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 4

    538___Ab________Jul/Aug___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 5

    538___Elul______Aug/Sep___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 6__Jews arrive in Judah

    538___Tishri____Sep/Oct___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 7___Jews are settled in their cities

    538___Heshvan___Oct/Nov___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 8

    538___Chislev___Nov/Dec___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 9

    538/7_Tebeth____Dec/Jan___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 10

    537___Shebat____Jan/Feb___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 11

    537___Adar______Feb/Mar___Cyrus' 1st Year, Month 12

    537___Nisan_____Mar/Apr___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 1

    537___Iyyar_____Apr/May___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 2__Temple foundations are laid

    537___Sivan_____May/Jun___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 3

    537___Tammuz____Jun/Jul___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 4

    537___Ab________Jul/Aug___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 5

    537___Elul______Aug/Sep___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 6

    537___Tishri____Sep/Oct___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 7

    537___Heshvan___Oct/Nov___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 8

    537___Chislev___Nov/Dec___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 9

    537/6_Tebeth____Dec/Jan___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 10

    536___Shebat____Jan/Feb___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 11

    536___Adar______Feb/Mar___Cyrus' 2nd Year, Month 12

    536___Nisan_____Mar/Apr___Cyrus' 3rd Year, Month 1

    536___Iyyar_____Apr/May___Cyrus' 3rd Year, Month 2

  • AnnOMaly
    AnnOMaly

    Ethos, take note of Finkelstein's post reproducing AlanF's arguments in favor of the 538 BCE date. This is the kind of thing we meant by 'provide evidence.' Now, can you produce a set of arguments of similar standard to justify the 537 BCE date?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit