scholiar:
There is no room for dogma in chronology.
LOL.
Rodger Young supports 587 BCE but his regnal lists for the Divided Monarchy supports WT chronology.
The comparison is meaningless. And Young does not support the years assigned by "WT chronology" for the Divided Monarchy anyway.
Chronology = Methodology+Interpretation
You're still not using the word "methodology" correctly.
The Fall of Assyria marking the beginning of the seventy years is problematic because no year can be positively asserted for not all historians would agree that 609 BCE should be the only marker for the purposes of chronology.
Many works clearly indicate that the Assyrian empire disappears from history in 609. Aside from that, if you truly believed the Bible, you would acknowledge that a significant event - the end of the Assyrian empire - occurred in 609 BCE, 70 years before Babylon was called to account in 539. You are clearly just plain dishonest.
Jeremiah's prophecy restricts this to Judah alone
No. It doesn't. You're a liar. Jeremiah is explicitly told to take the 'cup' to a bunch of nations.
The foundation for 607 BCE is as firm as ever
Well, yes, it's as firm as it ever was. That is, not firm at all. You are continually forced to admit that you have nothing but speculation for your endpoint of the 70 years, and you count from the wrong event anyway. You know very well that 607 is (mathetmatically) entirely reliant on their selection of 537, but dogmatically tied to 1914 instead.
You know full well that scholars and historians nominate 586 rather than 587.
You know that's a lie, and not even supported by your beloved "WT scholars". It hardly matters whether you erroneously focus on the 'legacy' of Edwin Thiele, as he's not the only source. Further, 586 is not possible in light of what is stated in the book of Jeremiah.
even thoughthe leadership changed at Babylon with the Medo-Persian Empire the exiled Jews still remained in Babylon
That has nothing to do with what is stated at Jeremiah 25, which says nothing about 70 years of exile.
Jeremiah 29:10 indicates that the Jews would be released after Babylon's 70 years ended; 29:12-14 further indicates that the Jews wouldn't immediately be in Jerusalem at the end of the 70 years, but that the 70 years would end, then they would pray, and then be brought back to their land.
I do not desperately seek scholarship to support 607 BCE.
That's a lie. If you thought a single scholar actually supported 607, you'd be all over it.
WT chronology is supported by secular chronology with the adjustment of the seventy years. ... For example if a watch is out of sync with some standard of time the watchmaker uses a screwdriver to adjust the watch so that it tells the corect time.
Nope. As I previously showed with an animation on this thread, even without the 20-year gap in the WTS' delusional chronology, they've also distorted other events during the early part of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. BM 21946 disproves the WT distortions.
Don't you love this powerful illustration?
Idiot.
Jeremiah 25; 12 quite clearly foretold the fate of the king, the land and territory as I have explained many times in great detail on this forum.
That's a stupid argument. There was no Neo-Babylonian king after 539. No judgement befell Babylon's king in 537, irrespective of some eventual 'judgement' on the land. In any case, it's still inhabited. The preserved heritage area (less than half a kilometre across) is surrounded by modern buildings with parked cars, and is located near a city of over 350,000 people. http://goo.gl/maps/JM7WC.
I raise the matter of COJ with Jeffro because Jeffro has simply rpeated or rehashed the Jonsson nonsense. He says that he has noit read COJ but how can he be trusted.? If you trust his word fine but for me the coincidence is too much. If Jeffro used scholarship as COJ has done then that would give some credibilkity to his independent research but Jeffro shows no interest in such therefore suspicsion remains.
Idiot.
