The prophet Jeremiah predicted that the Babylonians would destroy Jerusalem
and make the city and land a desolation. (Jeremiah 25:8, 9) He added: "And
all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and
these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years."
(Jeremiah 25:11) The 70 years expired when Cyrus the Great, in his first
year, released the Jews and they returned to their homeland. (2 Chronicles
36:17-23) We believe that the most direct reading of Jeremiah 25:11 and other
texts is that the 70 years would date from when the Babylonians destroyed
Jerusalem and left the land of Judah desolate.Jeremiah 52:12-15, 24-27;
36:29-31.
You seem to forget to quote Jeremiah 25:12 (NIV):
Then after seventy years are completed, I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, the land of the Chalde'ans, for their iniquity, says the LORD, making the land an everlasting waste.
What do we learn from this? AFTER some 70 year period is completed, the king of Babylon will be punished. When was the king of Babylon killed? Even the WTBS says 539 BCE. So HOW can 70 years end in 537? How can the king of Babylon be punished 2 years after he is killed? It doesn't say the king of Babylon will be punished AND THEN 70 years will be completed. You've got to learn to read the whole text, not just the sections of it the WTBS quotes.
The bible chronology agrees with history, not the WTBS interpretation. The Bible says that "these nations" will serve the king of Babylon for 70 years. Something that was going on LONG before Nebuchadnezzar's destruction of the city.
When Nebuchadnezzar first came to power, it says he made Jehoiakim his vassal servant. Servant? As in, one who serves.
2 Kings details several uprisings (how can you uprise unless you're in subjection to somebody?). In 2 Kings 25:17, Nebuchadnezzar puts Johoiachin's uncle on the throne and gives him a new name, a Babylonian name, Zedekiah. So, Babylon is having problems with Jerusalem. They take their king off the throne, put somebody else on and even throw out his name in favor of a new one. Doesn't this show subserviance?
Eventually Zedekiah rebelled too, bringing on Nebuchadnezzar's final assault in his 18th year.
Doesn't this make it obvious that Jerusalem served Babylon even though it had kings on its throne? You can't rebel unless you serve. The Jews were to serve Babylon for 70 years. Those 70 years started long before Zedekiah's defeat. They started before Zedekiah was even on the throne. And by the term "these nations", it doesn't only apply to Israel.
If 70 years ends in 539, and if 70 years is literal, the starting point is 609 BC. That would change 1914 into 1912. But according to the WTBS, everything changed as-of 1914. So that doesn't work.
Yet those who rely primarily on secular information for the chronology of
that period realize that if Jerusalem were destroyed in 587/6 B.C.E.
certainly it was not 70 years until Babylon was conquered and Cyrus let the
Jews return to their homeland. In an attempt to harmonize matters, they claim
that Jeremiahs prophecy began to be fulfilled in 605 B.C.E. Later writers
quote Berossus as saying that after the battle of Carchemish Nebuchadnezzar
extended Babylonian influence into all Syria-Palestine and, when returning to
Babylon (in his accession year, 605 B.C.E.), he took Jewish captives into
exile. Thus they figure the 70 years as a period of servitude to Babylon
beginning in 605 B.C.E. That would mean that the 70-year period would expire
in 535 B.C.E.
Those who rely on secular information? Without it, even the WTBS wouldn't have any idea of these dates. They certainly stand by 539 and 537, which come from secular information.
But the Bible itself provides even more telling evidence against the claim
that the 70 years began in 605 B.C.E. and that Jerusalem was destroyed in
587/6 B.C.E. As mentioned, if we were to count from 605 B.C.E., the 70 years
would reach down to 535 B.C.E. However, the inspired Bible writer Ezra
reported that the 70 years ran until "the first year of Cyrus the king of
Persia," who issued a decree allowing the Jews to return to their homeland.
(Ezra 1:1-4; 2 Chronicles 36:21-23) Historians accept that Cyrus conquered
Babylon in October 539 B.C.E. and that Cyrus first regnal year began in the
spring of 538 B.C.E. If Cyrus decree came late in his first regnal year, the
Jews could easily be back in their homeland by the seventh month (Tishri) as
Ezra 3:1 says; this would be October 537 B.C.E.
This is simply not true. These accounts report the Jews being released to their homeland, but does not say that that was related to 70 years. 70 years ends, babylon falls, cyrus releases the jews, they return home. What does 70 years of serving Babylon have to do with Cyrus?
Just read the Bible. Read 2 Kings. Read Jeremiah. It's all there. Just put it together. Secular history isn't needed to disprove the Watchtower. The Bible does a pretty good job all by itself.
This whole writeup is only meant to try to cast doubt on historical sources, much like OJ Simpson's lawyers trying to raise questions in DNA evidence. The sources are as accurate as any other history. It's time to come to that realization and drop the formula.
I have a question about this too. Russell originally said 70 years was from 606 to 536, forgetting about no 0 year. Don't you think it's odd that all this stuff got rearranged, but the end date is the thing that stayed the same?
-jws
