by zeb 45 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Thanks for the clarification shepherdless
It has to be realized the WTS never really had well educated bible scholars.
Russell was a clothing salesman and Rutherford a lawyer by trade but they did own and operate their own publishing house and the people who came after them were just learners of those men's pseudo bible scholarly.
So Fisherman if you want to accept the lies and ignorance of the WTS leaders that's your own ambition but there will always be the truth .
I just re-read my post and I need to clarify that Watchtower's fabrication is to say that the 70-year period of Babylonian domination is the same 70 years as the desolation of Judah. History shows that the desolation occurred sometime later. Using 586/7 as the fall of Jerusalem and the beginning of the desolation, seventy years later would take us to 516 BCE, the year Jerusalem's temple was rebuilt ending the desolation. On this, history and the Bible agree, while Watchtower is on its own.
Fisherman: Compare Jeremiah 29:10 with Isaiah 50:1.
Seems like you are throwing up random Bible verse to distract and obfuscate. Jeremiah 29:10 is part of a letter if instruction from Jehovah to ex-King Jeconiah and his entourage who were captive in Babylon. So it is a letter:
(a) on how to survive the 70 years of captivity, even though according to Watchtower theology they were not part of that captivity;
(b) at a time when, according to Watchtower theology, there was no captivity; and
(c) couriered by a person who was supposed to be dead (according to Watchtower) by the time captivity commenced.
Isaiah 50:1 is prophetic, the Jews not in exile yet. Your referenced scripture is about the completion of 70 and does not establish its start, and its interpretation must also reconcile with 539-70.
Isaiah 50:1 is so vague and nebulous, I can't see how it adds anything. No mention of 70 years, exile, start, finish or anything relevant. Nothing to reconcile there.
Your belief depends upon interpretation but 607 depends upon 539. So unless you can debunk 539, 607 makes sense to me.
Nobody seeks to debunk 539 BC. Everyone agrees that that is the correct date. The point is, 539 BC is NOT 536 BC, a number that would have fitted well with Balbour's milllerite numerology, and fitted with Russell's "pyramid inches".
* * * * *
There is a simple solution to all of this. The 70 years commenced when the bible says it commenced (see Jer 27:1-6), not when Watchtower® says it commenced.
The blog was sent to the ARC as it illustrates how the wts works all over and reduces considerably any claim they may make about something happening as a 'local' thing in a particular country.
539-70 is very clear. Wt 607 is a valid interpretation. And that is that.
Isaiah 50:1 is also clear:
50 This is what Jehovah says:“Where is the divorce certificate of your mother, whom I sent away?Or to which of my creditors did I sell you?Look! It was because of your own errors you were sold,And because of your own transgressions your mother was sent away.
In the above quoted scripture, the prophet Isaiah refers to God's covenanted people as a nation, as the mother of you people, God being in a husbandly like covenant with the entire nation. But the scripture also refers to the nation as being sent away at that time before the desolation actually occured, as if it already happened and the nation was already in captivity, before the desolation. Hence this scripture is prophetic, being "sent away" was future but as certain as if it had already occurred. And so, your enterpretation of the verses you cite and the interpretation of others as to when the Bible says events actually happened versus the prophetic language of the Bible. You, yourself admitting to being confused about Isa 50:1
It is well established and accepted that the king of Babylon raided Jerusalem 2x. The first time taking part of the nation captive Ez1:1.
It was to king Zedekiah that the prophet Ezeqiel said: "Remove the turban and lift of the crown..remove even the high one..a ruin I shall make it.... it shall cerainly become no one's" (the throne still having a king as Ezeqiel spoke) The "70 years" was a future event and did not begin with the first raid. But you can believe and interpret what you like, your views not invalidating WT. I respect your views and conclusions about the verses you cite but they do not establish the date of the destruction of the first Temple and of Jerusalem. I have posted a very simple method of extrapolating the date.
The desolation begins after the destruction of Jerusalem, the land rests 70 years, then a remnant is to be restored. Going back in time, Babylon falls and the Jews return; subtract 70 years from the date Jewish feet trample Jerusalem ending its rest and one arrives at circa 607. That is how I see it. And I rest my case.
First of all, Fisherman, I enjoy having a good friendly debate. However, I warn in advance, I may disappear for long periods, and not respond.
Comments in response:
539-70 is very clear. Wt 607 is a valid interpretation. And that is that.
697 BC may be a valid interpretation, but not for the date of the fall of Jerusalem. That is where CT Russell stuffed up, and where Watchtower is wrong. Russell copied (via Balbour) the work of John Aquila Brown but didn't understand it, stuffed it up, and Watchtower has been trying to assert Jerusalem fell in 606 BC or 607 BC to hide Russell's stuff up, ever since.
Isaiah 50:1 is also clear:
50 This is what Jehovah says:“Where is the divorce certificate of your mother, whom I sent away?Or to which of my creditors did I sell you?Look! It was because of your own errors you were sold,And because of your own transgressions your mother was sent away.
That is as clear as mud. In contrast, the passages I have referred to are clear and unambiguous.
In the above quoted scripture, the prophet Isaiah refers to God's covenanted people as a nation, as the mother of you people, God being in a husbandly like covenant with the entire nation. But the scripture also refers to the nation as being sent away at that time before the desolation actually occured, as if it already happened and the nation was already in captivity, before the desolation. Hence this scripture is prophetic, being "sent away" was future but as certain as if it had already occurred. And so, your enterpretation of the verses you cite and the interpretation of others as to when the Bible says events actually happened versus the prophetic language of the Bible. You, yourself admitting to being confused about Isa 50:1
I am not confused about Isa 50:1. Forget my interpretation, and look at yours. Even your interpretation is consistent with, the 70 years commencing with the first captives being led from Jerusalem, not the fall of Jerusalem.
It is well established and accepted that the king of Babylon raided Jerusalem 2x. The first time taking part of the nation captive Ez1:1.
Yes, agreed.
It was to king Zedekiah that the prophet Ezeqiel said: "Remove the turban and lift of the crown..remove even the high one..a ruin I shall make it.... it shall cerainly become no one's" (the throne still having a king as Ezeqiel spoke)
So what?
The "70 years" was a future event and did not begin with the first raid. But you can believe and interpret what you like, your views not invalidating WT. I respect your views and conclusions about the verses you cite but they do not establish the date of the destruction of the first Temple and of Jerusalem.
On the contrary, I have established the sequence of events, according to the bible alone. If babylon fell on 539 BC (a date Watchtower agrees with) then Jerusalem fell on 587 BC (a date everybody agrees with, except Watchtower).
I have posted a very simple method of extrapolating the date.
...but not what happened on the date.
The desolation begins after the destruction of Jerusalem...
No biblical support for that statement. In fact it contradicts Jer 27:1-6.
...the land rests 70 years, then a remnant is to be restored. Going back in time, Babylon falls and the Jews return; subtract 70 years from the date Jewish feet trample Jerusalem ending its rest and one arrives at circa 607. That is how I see it. And I rest my case.
The bible is very clear that the 70 years ends when (or arguably before) the fall of Babylon: Jer 25:12.
First of all, Fisherman, I enjoy having a good friendly debate. However, I warn in advance, I may disappear for long periods, and not respond.
Me too.
I am not confused about Isa 50:1.
You stated that it was muddy to you,
Forget my interpretation, and look at yours.
None stated, only your remarks about your muddy understanding of the scripture. Same can be said of any Bible verse or the Bible as a whole when something said challenges your position.
On the contrary, I have established the sequence of events,
No you haven't
according to the bible alone.
According to you, as you say the Bible says.
If babylon fell on 539 BC (a date Watchtower agrees with) then Jerusalem fell on 587 BC
No it did not. That is a conclusion based on interpretation. Not based on evidence but interpretation of the evidence.
(a date everybody agrees with, except Watchtower).
True
Even your interpretation is consistent with, the 70 years commencing with the first captives being led from Jerusalem,
No, it is not. Isaiah was not alive at the time of the first raid. Jewish tradition holds that the prohet was sawn assunder by king Mannaseh. In any event, he was dead.
fact it contradicts Jer 27:1-6.
No it does not and not a fact. The scripture is prophetic and does not establish that Jerusalem fell on 587.
697 BC may be a valid interpretation, but not for the date of the fall of Jerusalem.
607 is a valid interpretation of when the destruction of Jerusalem occured.
That is where CT Russell stuffed up, and where Watchtower is wrong.
Wrong
Russell copied (via Balbour) the work of John Aquila Brown but didn't understand it, stuffed it up,
How does that show that 586 is the correct date?
and Watchtower has been trying to assert Jerusalem fell in 606 BC or 607 BC to hide Russell's stuff up, ever since.
How does that show that 607 is incorrect?
Let's just leave it at that. You have an agenda to convince lurkers. I don't want to get in your way since I have no agenda but only to have my say. Anyway thanks for your Bible references and your views on them.
The point of contention rests whether one holds to prophetic interpretation or one holds to a calculated date through support from both the bible and archeological findings when Jerusalem fell. 586 BCE
One date holds itself within intellectual honesty and one date holds within itself by faith inspired theological belief. 607 BCE
One thing that interesting about the Kingdom or civilization of Judah and Israel is that it was being a made vassal of both of the Egyptian as well Babylonian empires even decades before the beginning of the 7 century BCE
On his return march to Egypt in 608 BCE, Necho found that Jehoahaz had been selected to succeed his father, Josiah.[36] Necho deposed Jehoahaz, who had been king for only three months, and replaced him with his older brother, Jehoiakim. Necho imposed on Judah a levy of a hundred talents of silver (about 3 3⁄4 tons or about 3.4 metric tons) and a talent of gold (about 34 kilograms (75 lb)). Necho then took Jehoahaz back to Egypt as his prisoner,[37] never to return.
Jehoiakim ruled originally as a vassal of the Egyptians, paying a heavy tribute. However, when the Egyptians were defeated by the Babylonians at Carchemish in 605 BCE, Jehoiakim changed allegiances, paying tribute to Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon. In 601 BCE, in the fourth year of his reign, Nebuchadnezzar unsuccessfully attempted to invade Egypt and was repulsed with heavy losses. This failure led to numerous rebellions among the states of the Levant which owed allegiance to Babylon. Jehoiakim also stopped paying tribute to Nebuchadnezzar[38] and took a pro-Egyptian position. Nebuchadnezzar soon dealt with these rebellions. According to the Babylonian Chronicles, after invading "the land of Hatti (Syria/Palestine)"[39][40] in 599 BC, he lay siege to Jerusalem. Jehoiakim died in 598 BC[41] during the siege, and was succeeded by his son Jeconiah at an age of either eight or eighteen.[42] The city fell about three months later,[43][44] on 2 Adar (March 16) 597 BCE. Nebuchadnezzar pillaged both Jerusalem and the Temple, carting all his spoils to Babylon. Jeconiah and his court and other prominent citizens and craftsmen, along with a sizable portion of the Jewish population of Judah, numbering about 10,000[45] were deported from the land and dispersed throughout the Babylonian Empire. (2 Kings 24:14) Among them was Ezekiel. Nebuchadnezzar appointed Zedekiah, Jehoiakim's brother, king of the reduced kingdom, who was made a tributary of Babylon.
Despite the strong remonstrances of Jeremiah and others, Zedekiah revolted against Nebuchadnezzar, ceasing to pay tribute to him and entered into an alliance with Pharaoh Hophra. In 589 BCE, Nebuchadnezzar II returned to Judah and again besieged Jerusalem. During this period, many Jews fled to surrounding Moab, Ammon, Edom and other countries to seek refuge.[46] The city fell after a siege which lasted either eighteen or thirty months[47] and Nebuchadnezzar again pillaged both Jerusalem and the Temple,[48] after which he destroyed them both.[49] After killing all of Zedekiah's sons, with the possible exception of one,[50] Nebuchadnezzar took Zedekiah to Babylon,[51] putting an end to the independent Kingdom of Judah. According to the Book of Jeremiah, in addition to those killed during the siege, some 4,600 people were deported after the fall of Judah.[52] By 586 BCE much of Judah was devastated, and the former kingdom suffered a steep decline of both economy and population.[53]
