by Vanderhoven7 150 Replies latest watchtower bible
Whoever this deluded girl or guy "scholar" is, she/he is acting like a troll here. Many many times before have all the rubbish claims that come from "scholar" been refuted, but we have to go over the same stuff, because the motive is I reckon to confuse a J.W reading here in to thinking there is some substance to the arguments of the ironically self named "scholar".
There is not.
Scholar, you are a case of "look my son is in step and everyone else is out of step." Follow the following scriptures:
8 Therefore this is what Jehovah of armies has said, For the reason that YOU did not obey my words, 9 here I am sending and I will take all the families of the north, is the utterance of Jehovah, even [sending] to Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land and against its inhabitants and against all these nations round about; and I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of astonishment and something to whistle at and places devastated to time indefinite. 11 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. 12 And it must occur that when seventy years have been fulfilled I shall call to account against the king of Babylon and against that nation, is the utterance of Jehovah, their error, even against the land of the Chaldeans, and I will make it desolate wastes to time indefinite. 13 And I will bring in upon that land all my words that I have spoken against it, even all that is written in this book that Jeremiah has prophesied against all the nations. (Jer. 25:8, 9, 11-13)
For this is what Jehovah has said, In accord with the fulfilling of seventy years at Babylon [for Babylon, CSB, ESV, CSBO, NABO] I shall turn my attention to YOU people, and I will establish toward YOU my good word in bringing YOU back to this place. (Jer. 29:10)
This is what occurred as the word of Jehovah to Jeremiah the prophet concerning the nations, 2 For Egypt, concerning the military force of Pharaoh Necho the king of Egypt, who happened to be by the river Euphrates at Carchemish, whom Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon defeated in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, the king of Judah (Jer. 46:1, 2)
12 And in the fifth month, on the tenth day of the month, that is, [in] the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadrezzar, the king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan the chief of the bodyguard, who was standing before the king of Babylon, came into Jerusalem. 13 And he proceeded to burn the house of Jehovah and the house of the king and all the houses of Jerusalem; and every great house he burned with fire. (Jer. 52:12, 13)
27 And these the king of Babylon proceeded to strike down and to put them to death in Riblah in the land of Hamath. Thus Judah went into exile from off its soil. 28 These are the people whom Nebuchadrezzar took into exile, in the seventh year, three thousand and twenty-three Judahites. 29 In the eighteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar, from Jerusalem there were eight hundred and thirty-two souls. 30 In the twenty-third year of Nebuchadrezzar, Nebuzaradan the chief of the bodyguard took Judahites into exile, seven hundred and forty-five souls. All the souls were four thousand and six hundred. (Jer. 52:27-30)
In the third year of the kingship of Jehoiakim the king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and proceeded to lay siege to it. (Dan. 1:1)
So the angel of Jehovah answered and said, O Jehovah of armies, how long will you yourself not show mercy to Jerusalem and to the cities of Judah, whom you have denounced these seventy years? (Zech. 1:12)
20 Furthermore, he carried off those remaining from the sword captive to Babylon, and they came to be servants to him and his sons until the royalty of Persia began to reign; 21 to fulfill Jehovah's word by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days of lying desolated it kept sabbath, to fulfill seventy years. (2 Chr. 36:20, 21)
Here's some articles and books on the subject. The list is not up-to-date. There's many more. Compare the "Insight" articles and Furuli's books with these. Secular history and Bible history compares well with each other with few contradictions. The authors of these articles have no hidden agenda:
Since Wiseman’s complete translation of the Chronicles in 1956, many pertinent studies and reviews have appeared which deal specifically with the problems of the chronology of the last days of Judah. Among the more important, from the most recent in chronological order, are the following: A. Malamat, “The Last Years of the Kingdom of Judah” and H. Tadmor, “The Chronology of the First Temple Period,” The Age of the Monarchies: Political History (WHJP 4/1; ed. A. Malamat; Jerusalem: Massada Press, 1979) pp. 44–60; pp. 205–21; B. Oded, “The Last Days of Judah and the Destruction of Jerusalem (609–586),” Israelite and Judaean History (ed. John H. Hayes and Maxwell Miller; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977) pp. 469–476; A. K. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles; A. Malamat, “The Twilight of Judah: In the Egyptian-Babylonian Maelstrom,” VTSup 28 (1975) pp. 121–145; E. Stern, “Israel at the Close of the Period of the Monarchy: An Archaeological Survey,” BA 38 (1975) pp. 26–54; E. Kutsch, “Das Jahr der Katastrophe: 587 v. Chr.,” Bib 55 (1974) pp. 520–545; D. J. A. Clines, “The Evidence for an Autumnal New Year in Pre-Exilic Israel Reconsidered,” JBL 93 (1974) pp. 22–40; J. M. Myers, “Edom and Judah in the Sixth-Fifth Centuries b.c.,” Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright (ed. H. Goedicke; Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1971) pp. 377–392; K. S. Freedy and D. B. Redford, “The Dates in Ezekiel in Relation to Biblical, Babylonian, and Egyptian Sources,” JAOS 70 (1970) pp. 462–485; K. T. Anderson, “Die Chronologie der Könige von Israel und Juda,” ST 23 (1969) pp. 69–119; S. B. Frost, “The Death of Josiah: A Conspiracy of Silence,” JBL 87 (1968) pp. 369–382; A. Malamat, “The Last Kings of Judah and the Fall of Jerusalem,” IEJ 18 (1968) pp. 137–156; S. H. Horn, “Where and When was the Aramaic Saqqara Papyrus Written,” AUSS 6 (1968) pp. 29–45; “The Babylonian Chronicle and the Ancient Calendar of the Kingdom of Judah,” AUSS 5 (1967) pp. 12–27; G. Larsson, “When did the Babylonian Captivity Begin?” JTS 18 (1967) 417–423; E. R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965) pp. 161–173; John Bright, Jeremiah (AB 21; Garden City: Doubleday, 1956) xlvi–lv; J. Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology (Princeton: Princeton University, 1964) pp. 87–92; D. N. Freedman, “Old Testament Chronology,” The Bible and the Ancient Near East (ed. G. Ernest Wright; Garden City: Doubleday, 1961) pp. 265–299; M. Noth, “Die Einnahme von Jerusalem in Jahre 597 v. Chr.,” ZDPV 74 (1968) pp. 133–157; F. Nötscher, “ ‘Neue’ babylonische Chroniken und Altes Testament,” BZ 1 (1957) pp. 110–114; E. Vogt, “Die neubabylonische Chronik über die Schlacht bie Karkemish und die Einnahme von Jerusalem,” VTSup 4 (1957) pp. 67–96; D. N. Freedman, “The Babylonian Chronicle,” BA 19 (1956) pp. 50–60; A. Malamat, “A New Record of Nebuchadrezzar’s Palestinian Campaign,” IEJ 6 (1956) pp. 246–256; J. P. Hyatt, “New Light on Nebuchadrezzar and Judean History,” JBL 75 (1956) pp. 277–284; H. Tadmor, “Chronology of the Last Kings of Judah,” JNES 15 (1956) pp. 226–230; E. R. Thiele, “New Evidence on the Chronology of the Last Kings of Judah,” BASOR 143 (1956) pp. 22–27; W. F. Albright, “The Nebuchadrezzar and Neriglissar Chronicles,” BASOR 143 (1956) pp. 28–33.
The discrepancy in Daniel and Josephus, part and parcel of the Society's arguments, is easily explained.
Berossus vs. Josephus: 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 BCE),
he took Jewish captives into exile, confirming that the 70 year period, as a
period of servitude to Babylon, would begin in 605 BCE. That would mean that
the 70-year period would expire in 535 BCE. Berossus also insists that
Nebuchadnezzar took Jewish captives in his accession year. No cuneiform
documents support this. Yet, the book of Daniel (1:1-3) mentions a minor
deportation in the third year of Jehoiakim, which would correspond to the first
year of Nebuchadnezzar (cf. Jer.
25:1; 46:2).
As a minor deportation, it is not surprising that it does not feature on the
list of Jeremiah 52:28-30.
The Jewish historian Josephus respected Berossus. However, he states that in the year of the battle of Carchemish Nebuchadnezzar would conquer all of Syria-Palestine “excepting Judea,” thus contradicting Berossus and conflicting with the claim that 70 years of Jewish servitude began in Nebuchadnezzar’s accession year.—Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews X, vi, 1 [10.86]. Furthermore, Josephus elsewhere describes the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians and then says that “all Judea and Jerusalem, and the temple, continued to be a desert for seventy years” (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews X, ix, 7 [10.184]). He pointedly states that “our city was desolate during the interval of seventy years, until the days of Cyrus” (Josephus, Against Apion I, 19 [1.132]). Here he shares the misconception of a later editor and/or redactor of the book of Daniel, “fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years” (cf. Dan. 9:2).[1] The same goes for the second-century (CE) writer Theophilus of Antioch who believed the 70 years would commence with the destruction of the temple after Zedekiah had reigned 11 years. As seen, Jeremiah applied the seventy years to the Judahites’ Babylonian servitude, and not to the desolation of the land.
[1] Devastations vs. reproach. In the OG we have ὀνειδισμός, meaning “reproach” (singular). See NETS. This is viewed as an error in the transmission: Jer. 25:9 καὶ εἰς ὀνειδισμόν and (I turn them) into a disgrace ולחרפות is read for MT ולחרבת and (I will turn them) into desolations. However, as seen, Dan. 9:2 is not drawn from Jer. 29:10, but Jer. 25:9-12. Here it could mean “reproach, disgrace, insult” (cf. Jer. 18:16; 19:8; Ezek. 5:13, 14). Specifically Jer. 25:9וְלִשְׁרֵקָ֔ה וּלְחָרְב֖וֹת עוֹלָֽם , “and something to whistle at and places devastated to time indefinite.” LXX καὶ εἰς ὀνειδισμόν, ולחֶרְפַּת. See BHS footnote. KBLex, in accordance with the textcritical note suggests an emendation to לְחֶרְפַּת (“as a disgrace”). See J. Lust, E. Eynikel & K. Hauspie (2003). A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint: Revised Edition. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft: Stuttgart. According to secular chronology, Jerusalem did not lie desolate for seventy years, but her reproach and humiliation could have started with Jehoiakim’s three year servitude, completing Jeremiah’s seventy year cycle (2 Kings 24:1, 2; cf. Is. 25:9, 11).
Vidqun
Here's some articles and books on the subject. The list is not up-to-date. There's many more. Compare the "Insight" articles and Furuli's books with these. Secular history and Bible history compares well with each other with few contradictions. The authors of these articles have no hidden agenda:
Since Wiseman’s complete translation of the Chronicles in 1956, many pertinent studies and reviews have appeared which deal specifically with the problems of the chronology of the last days of Judah. Among the more important, from the most recent in chronological order, are the following: A. Malamat, “The Last Years of the Kingdom of Judah” and H. Tadmor, “The Chronology of the First Temple Period,” The Age of the Monarchies: Political History (WHJP 4/1; ed. A. Malamat; Jerusalem: Massada Press, 1979) pp. 44–60; pp. 205–21; B. Oded, “The Last Days of Judah and the Destruction of Jerusalem (609–586),” Israelite and Judaean History (ed. John H. Hayes and Maxwell Miller; Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1977) pp. 469–476; A. K. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles; A. Malamat, “The Twilight of Judah: In the Egyptian-Babylonian Maelstrom,” VTSup 28 (1975) pp. 121–145; E. Stern, “Israel at the Close of the Period of the Monarchy: An Archaeological Survey,” BA 38 (1975) pp. 26–54; E. Kutsch, “Das Jahr der Katastrophe: 587 v. Chr.,” Bib 55 (1974) pp. 520–545; D. J. A. Clines, “The Evidence for an Autumnal New Year in Pre-Exilic Israel Reconsidered,” JBL 93 (1974) pp. 22–40; J. M. Myers, “Edom and Judah in the Sixth-Fifth Centuries b.c.,” Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William Foxwell Albright (ed. H. Goedicke; Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1971) pp. 377–392; K. S. Freedy and D. B. Redford, “The Dates in Ezekiel in Relation to Biblical, Babylonian, and Egyptian Sources,” JAOS 70 (1970) pp. 462–485; K. T. Anderson, “Die Chronologie der Könige von Israel und Juda,” ST 23 (1969) pp. 69–119; S. B. Frost, “The Death of Josiah: A Conspiracy of Silence,” JBL 87 (1968) pp. 369–382; A. Malamat, “The Last Kings of Judah and the Fall of Jerusalem,” IEJ 18 (1968) pp. 137–156; S. H. Horn, “Where and When was the Aramaic Saqqara Papyrus Written,” AUSS 6 (1968) pp. 29–45; “The Babylonian Chronicle and the Ancient Calendar of the Kingdom of Judah,” AUSS 5 (1967) pp. 12–27; G. Larsson, “When did the Babylonian Captivity Begin?” JTS 18 (1967) 417–423; E. R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965) pp. 161–173; John Bright, Jeremiah (AB 21; Garden City: Doubleday, 1956) xlvi–lv; J. Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology (Princeton: Princeton University, 1964) pp. 87–92; D. N. Freedman, “Old Testament Chronology,” The Bible and the Ancient Near East (ed. G. Ernest Wright; Garden City: Doubleday, 1961) pp. 265–299; M. Noth, “Die Einnahme von Jerusalem in Jahre 597 v. Chr.,” ZDPV 74 (1968) pp. 133–157; F. Nötscher, “ ‘Neue’ babylonische Chroniken und Altes Testament,” BZ 1 (1957) pp. 110–114; E. Vogt, “Die neubabylonische Chronik über die Schlacht bie Karkemish und die Einnahme von Jerusalem,” VTSup 4 (1957) pp. 67–96; D. N. Freedman, “The Babylonian Chronicle,” BA 19 (1956) pp. 50–60; A. Malamat, “A New Record of Nebuchadrezzar’s Palestinian Campaign,” IEJ 6 (1956) pp. 246–256; J. P. Hyatt, “New Light on Nebuchadrezzar and Judean History,” JBL 75 (1956) pp. 277–284; H. Tadmor, “Chronology of the Last Kings of Judah,” JNES 15 (1956) pp. 226–230; E. R. Thiele, “New Evidence on the Chronology of the Last Kings of Judah,” BASOR 143 (1956) pp. 22–27; W. F. Albright, “The Nebuchadrezzar and Neriglissar Chronicles,” BASOR 143 (1956) pp. 28–33.
--
I wish to inform you that I have all of these in my theological library with the exception of those Journal articles or publications in German. Have you read any of these publications or journal articles or are you simply 'big noting' yourself?
scholar JW
Jeffro
hahaha... I like the way you say "even Rolf Furuli", as if he's supposed to be a particularly credible source for such matters--
--
At the very least Furuli is a scholar which you are not.
scholar JW
Phizzy
Whoever this deluded girl or guy "scholar" is, she/he is acting like a troll here. Many many times before have all the rubbish claims that come from "scholar" been refuted, but we have to go over the same stuff, because the motive is I reckon to confuse a J.W reading here in to thinking there is some substance to the arguments of the ironically self named "scholar".
There is not.
--
Many have tried but failed for the said scholar remains unassailed or undefeated.
scholar JW
Scholar, I have comprehensive libraries at my disposal (Logos, Libronix, BibleWorks, the Online Bible, etc.). If I do not have access to an article, I have a huge University Theology library not too far away.
But coming back to the subject at hand, I am thankful that I am not trapped in JW theology anymore. In my pursuit of truth, I now I have the freedom to study all of the above articles at leisure, without the criticism or negative influence of Big brother. See footnote "Devastations vs. reproach."
Hopefully Rolf Furuli will realize that he is now free to pursue his academic interests without the shackles of the Watchtower to drag him down. For years and years he has been trapped in the Freddy Franz mindset. And as has been said repeatedly, his articles and books have been reviewed by his peers and found wanting.
It seems you have the same problem. You should try to break free. It's exhilarating, as though one is discovering a new world. The indoctrination of the Watchtower is harmful to academic research. It forces one in a specific direction and keeps one's intellectual curiosity stunted. The truth is above all of that. Why do you think they vehemently oppose tertiary education?
If you think you have the truth, put it to the test. E.g., compare Biblical chronology of the last days of Judah to Babylonian chronology. There is minor differences that has to do with the regnal and ascension years, but easily explained if you work out what system was followed. It is not necessary to discredit the scribes because you don't like the contents of their tablets. There is no reason why they should falsify the tablets. There are many reasons why the Society would like to discredit them.
scholar:
At the very least Furuli is a scholar which you are not.
Unlike Furuli, I’ve independently arrived at the same conclusions as the best scholarship. Furuli is a pariah as far as his JW apologetics go.
MMM:They do reference Jerimiah. And Jerimiah has very clear language.It's not that Jerimiah was or was not "all about" the Exile. He talks about it. But he doesn't equate it to the 70 years.scolar: False. Ezra and Daniel when referring to the Exile quote Jeremiah's prophecy of the 70 years thus proving that Jeremiah linked the Exile with the 70 years.
You've put yourself on the horns of a dilemma: Either the Bible contradicts itself, or the WT is incorrect - which do you choose? Your statement above prefers the Bible to contradict. Jerimiah's language is so plain and simple, attempts to "clairify" it by later prophets just means there is a contradiction in the scriptures. You are asserting "Yes, Jerimiah referred to seventy years of servitude, not equated to the desolation, and yes, he said plainly that it applied to many nations (plural), and yes he explicitly stated that the seventy years would end and then the desolation would end, but you know, Jerimiah was really sloppy with his writing. Yeah the language is really clear, but golly gosh darn, it seems what he REALLY meant was something completely different. He meant it WAS the seventy years wasn't servitude, and applies to Judah only (singular), and ends together with the seventy years, because they are the same thing. See? Ezra just "clairifies" all of that for us."
