Another thought about WT 607 bull.
The Babylonian empire didn't start until Assyria was finally defeated in 612 BC. Then as we know Babylon supposedly destroyed Jerusalem in 607 according to WT. Before Jerusalem was destroyed Babylon had taken Jerusalem and taken prisoners including the king and deported them to Babylon and then according to Ezekiel at 33:21 twelve years into their captivity a man from Jerusalem came and told him the city had been destroyed.
Ok so how does Jerusalem get conquered 12 years before 607 when the Babylonians hadn't even become the major power yet??
According to cuneiform texts and the chronicles of Nebuchadnezzar Jerusalem was originally sacked by Babylon in 598. 598-12 years the Jews were in captivity when the man said the city had been destroyed equals 586. Doesn't a lot of historians believe this to be the date of Jerusalems destruction?
The JW dogma is, of course, wrong. But the problem with what you have stated above is that what actually occurred in 612 BCE is attributed - incorrectly - by JWs to the year 632 BCE.
Back in reality, Babylon conquered Assyria at Nineveh in 612 BCE, and Assyria's capital was moved to Harran. Harran was then conquered by Babylon in 609 BCE, at which point Assyria disappears from history.
For more information, see here.
for further information read: The Gentile Times Reconsidered. x Carl Olof Jonsson. also you will see what the wt/gb do to anyone who comes up with study and answers they didn't!
Your totally correct Jeffro, I didn't bring up Harran only to make the point that Assyria was pretty much done as an empire in 612. The move to Harran was a last ditch effort to hold on . I didn't realize the GB moved the dates for these events back too. It's amazing all the historical and archeological evidence to the contrary. Their major mistake is being convinced that the 70 year prophecy came true. So with this being their premise they have got themselves stuck.
zeb, I wasn't sure if Carl tackled this but figured he did. I have never read his book but from what I've read sounds like he really went over all the issues. Again it's one thing for WT to claim 607 but then to claim these other events happened also at an earlier date is just way over the top. The evidence is just way to much to overcome.
That was one of the things I told my mother that definetely bothered her about the Org. She passed days asking me more information from the internet. She got to the conclusion herself that the only articles that defends WT position is the WT's. After the initial thrill, she came back to the routine and forced herself to forget it probably.