Posts by scholar

24

the seventy year thing

by logic in

i hate to keep bringing it up but i would to give the jws something to think about.

if the isrealites had done as god had told them, to serve babylon voluntairly as they had done in the beginning, then when would the seventy years of so called total devastation have began.

god said that only if they did not serve babylon that they would be destroyed.

scholar

Alleymom

Post 787

Yes I have. Our interpretation is the only one that works, is in harmony with the Bible and Josephus.

scholar JW

24

How do JW's arrive at 537BCE for the release of the jews by Cyrus?

by digderidoo in

from all of my research so far on the 607 issue the only argument that jw's have for it is the 70 year period counting backwards from 537bce.

as 539bce is the accepted date for cyrus conquering babylon, why do they say 537bce is the date he released the jews and not 538bce or 536bce for instance?.

paul.

Josephus' comment concerning 'fifty years' pertains to the oberved fact that the Temple lay in a state of obscurity for that length of time which was within the overall seventy year period of desolation-exile and servitude. The other four references by Josephus confirm the Bible statements about the duration and nature of this fixed historic period.

scholar JW

103

Jeremiah and the 70 years. Jewish exile or Babylonian rule?

by digderidoo in

i have never until a few days ago been able to reconcile the 70 year prophecy with the 587/6 bce date for jerusalems destruction.

although a post was about this in a previous thread by a@g , i would like to explore this more.. when the 70 years are applied to babylonian rule, rather than the jewish exile everything seems to make sense.. to ellaborate for those who haven't come across it, this is how 587/6 does match the 70 year prophecy.. i hope a@g doesn't mind but i have cut and paste his post:-.

the 587 date does match the bible.... (jeremiah 25:11) 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.".

scholar

JCanon

Post 3686

No, Josephus and the Bible agree as to the fact that the seventy years began when the Temple, Jeusalem was destroyed and the land emptied of its inhabitants by the seventh month 607 BCE. Jeremiah 44 simply refers to those Jews who had fled to Egypt to escape the Babylonian armies but they too would not escape. The seventy years did not begin in the 23rd of Neb but in his 18th some five years earlier whereby Neb took Jewish captives not from Judah but from surrounding territories.

scholar JW

103

Jeremiah and the 70 years. Jewish exile or Babylonian rule?

by digderidoo in

i have never until a few days ago been able to reconcile the 70 year prophecy with the 587/6 bce date for jerusalems destruction.

although a post was about this in a previous thread by a@g , i would like to explore this more.. when the 70 years are applied to babylonian rule, rather than the jewish exile everything seems to make sense.. to ellaborate for those who haven't come across it, this is how 587/6 does match the 70 year prophecy.. i hope a@g doesn't mind but i have cut and paste his post:-.

the 587 date does match the bible.... (jeremiah 25:11) 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.".

scholar

Narkissos

Post 8754

The five references of the 'seventy years' by Josephus are certainly consistent with the testimony of the Bible writers that this period can only be viewed as a period of servitude-exile-desolation from the Fall to the Return, He is the only secular historian of Jewish history outside of the authors of the OT even though he is a first century historian far removed from the sixth century his testimony must stand on its own merits, He remains the sole source for Berossus who himself lived some three centuries from that late Judean period. Secular history is imperfect and we have use those records that are available even though these are not contemporaneous with the events in question. For this reason, the testimony of Bible writers is far superior as they recorded events as observed at the time or soon thereafter.

In regard to the seventy years which Jeremiah and Daniel experience first hand and soon after were commented upon by Ezra and Zechariah so their testimony as a collective is nicely confirmed by Josephus.

You too make assertions without proof at a particular time for example in your post 8717 that the seventy years is a round number, that the seventy year texts do not have the same period in view, and that there are three interpretations of the period none of which is supported by argument. What I do agree with you is that within scholarship and apostate opinion, the seventy years has become a complex situation.

It is certainly correct that there are conflicting views of the seventy years and you have your own view and Jonsson has another in which he unlike yourself views the seventy years as a period of Babylonian domination and serviude. If I am incorrect on this point then please confirm whether you agree totally with Jonsson and if not please explain how you differ.

The two references in Zechariah to the seventy years refers to that past historic period as this is the only view thatmakes sense otherwise you periods all over the place and how could a Jew living then or a person living now have any means of knowing what time period is in question. Jonsson's analysis of these texts is impossible and the chronology is plain stupid. Do you agree with the chronology that he sets forth? Rolf Furuli who is a competent Hebre schollar has examined the philology and the linguistics of those texts and proves that the Hebrew syntax shows that Zechariah was speaking of a previous period of seventy years, known by all of the people, namely the Babylonian exile which had ended more than 15 years earlier.

One very simple reason why all of the seventy years texts refer to one and the same period is the simple fact that they all echo the prohecy of Jeremiah and this is also found in Josephus. Also, such commonalities as 'serving', desolation, exile are the key elements of the seventy years period in short, these texts have a common vocabulary and theme.

I stand apart from scholars and apostates for the simple reason that I do not share their confusion over the interpretation of the period hence the pseudonym scholar JW

scholar JW

103

Jeremiah and the 70 years. Jewish exile or Babylonian rule?

by digderidoo in

i have never until a few days ago been able to reconcile the 70 year prophecy with the 587/6 bce date for jerusalems destruction.

although a post was about this in a previous thread by a@g , i would like to explore this more.. when the 70 years are applied to babylonian rule, rather than the jewish exile everything seems to make sense.. to ellaborate for those who haven't come across it, this is how 587/6 does match the 70 year prophecy.. i hope a@g doesn't mind but i have cut and paste his post:-.

the 587 date does match the bible.... (jeremiah 25:11) 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.".

scholar

CunningMan

Post 98

There are several good reasons to believe that the Tree Dream described in Daniel 4 has both a typical and anti-typical fulfillment and I list these some of these reasons as follows:

1. Kingdom references. Daniel 4: 3,17, 25,32, 34

2. Use of Aramaic word iddan for 'times'.

3. Traces of Messianism

4. Fuflfillment as a period of chastisement. Leviticus 26: 17,18, 24, 28

5. Luke 21 :24 Jesus' description of 'Gentile Times'

6.Patristic references

7.Dream-Interpretation-Fulfillment as an object of its narration

6. Jesus' use of Daniel in His Olivet Discourse

7.Context of Daniel 4 within the entire book

8.Historiography

9. Use of Greek word kairon for times.

This will do for starters and will give you some structure for a required exegesis.

scholar JW

103

Jeremiah and the 70 years. Jewish exile or Babylonian rule?

by digderidoo in

i have never until a few days ago been able to reconcile the 70 year prophecy with the 587/6 bce date for jerusalems destruction.

although a post was about this in a previous thread by a@g , i would like to explore this more.. when the 70 years are applied to babylonian rule, rather than the jewish exile everything seems to make sense.. to ellaborate for those who haven't come across it, this is how 587/6 does match the 70 year prophecy.. i hope a@g doesn't mind but i have cut and paste his post:-.

the 587 date does match the bible.... (jeremiah 25:11) 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.".

scholar

AnnOMaly

Post 769

The fact of the matter is that I have both articles to hand and both of which discuss the relevance of methodology to chronology and that really is the only point I wish to make. Young's opinion about the status of 587 over 586 is simply his opinion and time will tell which date will remain. My ball is already parked in the corner of 607 BCE as the only verifiable date.

scholar JW

103

Jeremiah and the 70 years. Jewish exile or Babylonian rule?

by digderidoo in

i have never until a few days ago been able to reconcile the 70 year prophecy with the 587/6 bce date for jerusalems destruction.

although a post was about this in a previous thread by a@g , i would like to explore this more.. when the 70 years are applied to babylonian rule, rather than the jewish exile everything seems to make sense.. to ellaborate for those who haven't come across it, this is how 587/6 does match the 70 year prophecy.. i hope a@g doesn't mind but i have cut and paste his post:-.

the 587 date does match the bible.... (jeremiah 25:11) 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.".

scholar

Narkissos

Post 8752

Seeing that you make a reference to me in this post I feel obliged to reply.

Josephus is quite descriptive in his many references to the seventy years describing the period as one of servitude-exile-desolation running from the Fall of Jerusalem until the Return of the Jews. His testimony is unambiguous on this subject and agrees with the statements by Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezra and Zechariah each of which referrred to the seventy years from different standpoints and yet they all agreed with the foregoing. Higher critics and apostates dishonestly misrepresent those clear descriptions of the period by introducing fuzziness as to the chronology and emphasizing that the period began much earlier from the time of the first exile of prominent Jewry to Babylon and that the period was of Babylonian domination.

Such a hypothesis conflicts with the clear testimony of the Bible writers and finds no support in Josephus and amounts to a clear distortion of the Biblical evidence. There is simply no reason for believing that Jeremiah 25: 11 bc;29 applies before the Fall of Jerusalem and that the period ran after the Return according to Daniel and Zechariah. This is simply nonsense. The relevant texts speak for themselves.

Further, the two references to the seventy years in Zechariah most clearly showed that the period had already long ended before he received the vision and this well supported by the context for both chapters. Otherwise we have a hodge-podge of several seventy year periods all over the place which makes no sense at all.

The evidence is quite clear that there was only one definte historic period of seventy years pertaining to Judah and this was well described by Ezra, Jeremiah, Daniel and Zechariah, a period of exile-desolation-servitude from the Fall in 607 BCE until the Return in 537 BCE confirmed by Josephus. Scholars and apostates with regard to the seventy years share one thing in common; confusion of interpretation of the seventy years.

scholar JW

103

Jeremiah and the 70 years. Jewish exile or Babylonian rule?

by digderidoo in

i have never until a few days ago been able to reconcile the 70 year prophecy with the 587/6 bce date for jerusalems destruction.

although a post was about this in a previous thread by a@g , i would like to explore this more.. when the 70 years are applied to babylonian rule, rather than the jewish exile everything seems to make sense.. to ellaborate for those who haven't come across it, this is how 587/6 does match the 70 year prophecy.. i hope a@g doesn't mind but i have cut and paste his post:-.

the 587 date does match the bible.... (jeremiah 25:11) 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.".

scholar

AnnOMaly

Post 768

No, the Samaria article is about methodology wherein the Introduction discusses three major factors that produce conflicting chronologies. All of these involve methodology and the article's summary discusses five reasons that require careful analysis in determining the beginning and end of the regnal years. The preceeding jounal article is the one that sets out Young's preference for 587 over 586 for Jerusalem's Fall. It is the former article nott the latter that interests me but the reverse is true in your case no doubt.

I am not dodging the ball but playing catch up as I always have done on this forum and every now and then I throw a little further so as to annoy the apostates.

scholar JW

103

Jeremiah and the 70 years. Jewish exile or Babylonian rule?

by digderidoo in

i have never until a few days ago been able to reconcile the 70 year prophecy with the 587/6 bce date for jerusalems destruction.

although a post was about this in a previous thread by a@g , i would like to explore this more.. when the 70 years are applied to babylonian rule, rather than the jewish exile everything seems to make sense.. to ellaborate for those who haven't come across it, this is how 587/6 does match the 70 year prophecy.. i hope a@g doesn't mind but i have cut and paste his post:-.

the 587 date does match the bible.... (jeremiah 25:11) 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.".

scholar

Cunningman

You are sadly mistaken. The seven times of Neb's madness had a typical and antitypical fulfillment and this is proven by the use of 'times' and the context of Ch. 4.

The day for a year principle is well enshrined in Biblical Hermeneutics and has a long history of tradition apart to being well attested in Scripture. So you are certainly wrong on both counts. You need to research the subject more deeply rathing than relying on the mischief of apostates. Why not make a detailed analysis of Daniel chapter 4, verse by verse for starters and scholar will help you.

scholar JW

103

Jeremiah and the 70 years. Jewish exile or Babylonian rule?

by digderidoo in

i have never until a few days ago been able to reconcile the 70 year prophecy with the 587/6 bce date for jerusalems destruction.

although a post was about this in a previous thread by a@g , i would like to explore this more.. when the 70 years are applied to babylonian rule, rather than the jewish exile everything seems to make sense.. to ellaborate for those who haven't come across it, this is how 587/6 does match the 70 year prophecy.. i hope a@g doesn't mind but i have cut and paste his post:-.

the 587 date does match the bible.... (jeremiah 25:11) 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.".

scholar

AnnOMaly

Post 767

We are both talking about different articles. The article by Young that you refer was entitled 'When Did Jerusalem Fall' which was the second part of a series of three studies wherein Young raises the issue of methodology in chronology. He discusses the calendrical issues when using a 'regnal' based approach and proceeds by using Dcision Analysis which according to his new hypothesis favoured 587 BCE. In his third article 'When Was Samaria Captured The Need For Precision In Biblical Chronologies' he explores in more detail the issue of methodology and it is this article that I am mainly interested. I have said on many occasions that chronology is methodology and interpretation and is well supported by Young's contribution.

Methodology would vary amongst scholars especially with chronology and that is why there are numerous schemes and dates within scholarship but this is the first time that a scholar has 'nailed the matter to the mast' apart from the aforesaid scholar.

scholar JW