Recently while INEFFECTIVELY discussing the difference between 586 & 607 bc
the question came up.....
this 586 that is described in alleymoms KISS method, ...
is it the FALL or the DESTRUCTION of Jeruselm?
A city can fall & not necessarily be destroyed & visa versa.
I MENTIONED THAT MAYBE thats where the 20 yr discrepancy comes from !!!
Has anyone ever heard this explanation before ??
thanks for any comments - esp in light of the new "what does the bible REALLY teach" book
wp
FALL or DESTRUCTION re 607bc is there a diff???
by Will Power 4 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
Will Power
-
Honesty
I MENTIONED THAT MAYBE thats where the 20 yr discrepancy comes from !!!
The 20 year discrepancy originated in the twisted minds of the Governing Body to further the confusion of the braindead masses.
-
JCanon
No, this is just a clear difference of opinion of dating and what the Bible says.
The 586BCE dating comes from the surviving (revised or otherwise) pagan records, including some astronomical texts. JWs feel obligated to date the fall/destruction 70 years from the return from Babylon because of 2 Chronicles 36:20-22, which they feel more than clearly indicates a desolation of the land at least for 70 years after its destruction.
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.
In this case, when their interpretation of the Bible conflicts with the secular history, which they feel is flawed, they go with an adapted Biblical dating for this event. 607BCE and 587BCE are not the only dates considered for this event, however.
JC
-
Will Power
whether WT chronology jives with biblical or secular history has no bearing on this question.
It is just another attempt at dishonest manipulation that the WT NEEDS to control its sales force.
It sounded like the 20 yrs diff excuse was more to confuse. 2 different words with 2 different meanings to explain away each other. i.e. fall & destruction.
scenario 1:
the fall in 586, meaning the gov fell, but the city was destroyed in 607
scenario 2 is the other way around.
it is a deflection to change the subject or bait & switch, because if you add up the reigns of the kings which is black & white there is no dispute.
BUT last night i found in the book "babylon the great has fallen" on pg 161 it states specifically that 607 was the destruction.
AND that that is the way things had to happen to prove Jehovah is true and (on pg 163) this proved Jehovah's prophecy by Jeremiah true. It occurred toward the middle of the seventh month, Tishri or Ethanim (Sept-Oct), which would be near October 1, 607 BC
I laugh when I read how nit picky with each detail, yet are dead wrong on the big items hahahaha. Like the reader will assume if they know what brand of toilet paper the scribes were using, then they also must know the day and the hour that Jeruselm fell. LOL
wp -
JCanon
AND that that is the way things had to happen to prove Jehovah is true and (on pg 163) this proved Jehovah's prophecy by Jeremiah true. It occurred toward the middle of the seventh month, Tishri or Ethanim (Sept-Oct), which would be near October 1, 607 BC
Hi Will Power. I think the problem is facing the reality that you have more than one chronology for this period that don't agree.
Case in point is Josephus. He claims that 70 years occurred between the last deportation and the 1st of Cyrus. The claim is that he "changed his mind later when he got better references" in a later work, but the fact remains that that first reference to 70 years makes the Neo-Babylonian Period 26 years longer than what we find in the records coming from this period from the Babylonians and Persians (actually the Persians since the Babylonian Chronicle upon which Nebuchadnezzar events are based was copied in the 22nd year of Darius II per its own reference).
So there is no compatibility here. No way to twist things to work. One gives you a longer Neo-Babylonian Period than the other and that's that. Now there are lots of theories as to why there are different takes on this part of the chronology but that is after the fact of simply recognizing that there is not a "misunderstanding" between sources but a direct contradiction.
The witnesses use 2 Chronicles and its reference to the land "paying back its sabbaths" for seventy years as a direct contradiction to the Babylonian records that survived. Their NB Period is thus 20 years longer than those dating the fall in 587BCE, it's just that simple. That is, they believe there were more years involved in the period from the fall of Babylon in 539BCE and the 19th of Nebuchadnezzar.
Another good example is the length of the reign of Evil-Merodach. In Antiquities, Josephus first claims that he ruled for 18 years. But then in Against Apion, he claims he ruled for just 2 years! The 2-year reference agrees with the Babylonian records, but his first statement about the 18 years is a contradiction. So there is no resolving anything here. There's no interpretation or concept about this, it's just a clear-cut contradiction between two different references.
Ant. 10.11.2 "When Evil-Mcrodach was dead, after a reign of eighteen years, Niglissar his son took the government..."
Against Apion 1:20 "...whereupon his son Evilmerodach obtained the kingdom. He governed public affairs after an illegal and impure manner, and had a plot laid against him by Neriglissoor, his sister's husband, and was slain by him when he had reigned but two years."
The chronologies conflict. They are different. The Bible and Josephus and Jehovah's witnesses have a 20 to 26-year longer timeframe for the Neo-Babylonian than the Persian Period dated records.
So sometimes it is not about harmonizing this or that, it's about accepting one record versus the other. That's what we have here.
JC