607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?

[JW Insider]

18 minutes ago, Anna said:

So is it wrong to say that the dominance given to Babylon started with the destruction of Jerusalem?

I think so. The dominance given to Babylon would have been when Babylon became the obvious ascendant heir to the Assyrian Empire. Egypt had dominance when they were the "world empire" then Assyria had dominance when they were the "world empire." Therefore, it would start around 609 BCE and end in 539 BCE, when Babylon was the "world empire." It's the exact same time period given to the 70 years of Babylon over Tyre.

[Anna]

8 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I think so. The dominance given to Babylon would have been when Babylon became the obvious ascendant heir to the Assyrian Empire. Egypt had dominance when they were the "world empire" then Assyria had dominance when they were the "world empire." Therefore, it would start around 609 BCE and end in 539 BCE, when Babylon was the "world empire." 

Ok....so that is looking at the dominion of Babylon in general, but wasn't the point of the 70 years referring only to how it affected the Jews politically, i.e. when Jerusalem, as the capital, and the Temple representing everything the Jews stood for, was razed? Wasn't that the coup d'etat? Not all the bits and pieces that occurred all the years leading up to it? (paralyzing fear of Babylon, followed by desecrations by Babylon, deportations to Babylon,  death and destruction by Babylon etc)

22 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

It's the exact same time period given to the 70 years of Babylon over Tyre.

I feel this must be an important point. I have heard about Babylon and Tyre but am not familiar with it. I will have to do some homework on that..

[scholar JW]

Hi Anna and JW Insider

Let us be perfectly clear. The 70 years of Jeremiah cannot refer to Babylonish domination alone as dating from either 609 or 695 BCE for the simple reason that the geopolitical world at that time did not favour Babylon but rather Egypt as all good historians know. The geopolitical situation at the Dawn of the 6th Century had Babylon in its infancy with no hegemony respecting the land of Judah. This major historical point reality was made very clear to me when I was presented with a number of slides of maps for the region and time period prepared by the team led by Prof. Obed Lipschits at Tel Aviv University.less than two years ago. The online University program which I received a Certificate of Completion with a Academic Grade is called 'The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem'. Such a program of study proved to me that the 70 years could not have  begun in either 609 or 605 BCE because no event of any significance occurred at these dates to warrant the beginning of the most important event in Biblical and Jewish history namely the beginning of the Exile- a Catastrophe.

Therefore, the only  possible event in history which could begin the 70 years is the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 BCE which is exactly as the Bible describes In Jeremiah, Daniel, Chronicles, Isaiah and Zechariah.

scholar JW

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, scholar JW said:

Let us be perfectly clear. The 70 years of Jeremiah cannot refer to Babylonish domination alone as . . .

At least we should be able to agree that the 70 years that Jeremiah mentions is always about the length of time of Babylonian domination though, right?

Jeremiah mentions the 70 years in three different places and ALWAYS with reference to Babylon's time of domination:

• (Jeremiah 25:11, 12) 11 And all this land will be reduced to ruins and will become an object of horror, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years.”’ 12 “‘But when 70 years have been fulfilled, I will call to account the king of Babylon and that nation for their error,’ declares Jehovah, ‘and I will make the land of the Chal·deʹans a desolate wasteland for all time.
• ^{(jw.org Byington,Living Bible)}  (Jeremiah 29:10, from JW.ORG) For Jehovah says, As soon as Babylon has had a full seventy years, I will look after you and keep my good word for you, bringing you back to this place.
• ^{(jw.org American Standard Bible)}  (Jeremiah 29:10, from JW.ORG) For thus saith Jehovah, After seventy years are accomplished for Babylon, I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place.

Clearly, those involved in developing the Watchtower's doctrine were not too pleased with the fact that the Hebrew says "for Babylon" here, so without any authority from the Hebrew language manuscripts or Dead Sea Scrolls, etc. The NWT decided to translate this as "at Babylon" which gives a slight different idea, as if it might refer to 70 years of Judea's affliction in Babylonian captivity, which of course doesn't even make sense, since people were taken both before and after the time of Jerusalem's destruction.

• (Jeremiah 29:10) . . .For this is what Jehovah says, ‘When 70 years at Babylon are fulfilled, . . .

The other two translations available on the JW.ORG website, Byington and American Standard, both match the Hebrew by translating the equivalent of "for Babylon." I think the best translation is actually this one:

GOD'S WORD® Translation

• (Jeremiah 29:10) This is what the LORD [Jehovah] says: When Babylon's 70 years are over, I will come to you. I will keep my promise to you and bring you back to this place.

For a time, when a couple of the NWT Bibles in other languages began to translate from the Hebrew instead of the English, they actually began using the term "for Babylon" instead of "at Babylon." Currently, with the 2013 NWT, I believe we are back to translating the other languages from the English rather than the the Bible manuscripts.

So I hope you can at least agree about what these 70 years refer to. Do you agree with the Isaiah book where it references Jeremiah's 70 years with respect to Tyre?

*** ip-1 chap. 19 p. 253 par. 21 Jehovah Profanes the Pride of Tyre ***

• “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27) . . . Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble.

 

 

 

[scholar JW]

JW Insider

No, I cannot agree that Jeremiah's seventy years refers to Babylonish domination alone but only in part for those two texts that you have quoted make it quite clear that the 70 years was also a period of Exile and desolation of the land of Judah.This is proven by the context of Jer. 25:8-11 wherein the Exile and Desolation is well described. In vs. 12 judgement will befall Babylon only after a period of 70 years has expired. In Jer. 29:10 the servitude and Exile to Babylon and in Babylon is foretold. So this means that apart from the other 70 texts of Daniel, Zechariah and Ezra, Jeremiah' confirms the fact of DESOLATION-EXILE-SERVITUDE.

The translation of Jer.29:10 remains a matter of dispute as to whether the Hebrew proposition should properly be rendered as 'for' or'at' as these are possible meanings. However, it does not matter because the above interpretation of the 70 years as outlined above can accommodate either of these two meanings. In short, it makes no difference whatsoever.for the simple reason that the 70 years contains the element of servitude as shown by 'for' indicating purpose  and exile as shown by 'at' indicating location.

The 70 years of Isaiah belonging to TYRE are totally different to Jeremiah's seventy years which belong to Judah so we should not conflate the two periods for the only commonality is that both indicate Babylon's domination either in part or in whole. The 70 years of Jeremiah does contain that one aspect of Babylon's domination or servitude to or for Judah.

scholar JW

[Ann O'Maly]

7 hours ago, scholar JW said:

However, it does not matter because the above interpretation of the 70 years as outlined above can accommodate either of these two meanings.

The JW interpretation can't accommodate either meaning because, if it was "at Babylon," the context demands that the exiles Jeremiah was addressing would have been there 80 years - not 70, and the destruction of Jerusalem was still only a future possibility rather than a foregone conclusion. Anyway, we've had this conversation many times before - the scriptural and historical facts speak for themselves and you *still* won't change your views to align with them. Hope you and yours are well, btw.  

[Anna]

I am really late on the scene here as JWI started this topic in 2016, with the intent of keeping it devoid from any personal attacks but keeping strictly to the subject, which is great. I hope also it will be free from personal bias. I am no scholar and I am just starting to look into the 607/587 chronologies, so please bear with me because I may have some stupid questions!

I wouldn't mind keeping to some order and developing this systematically (otherwise I'll get lost with all you guys who know so much about it)

One thing I wouldn't mind having explained first is the for/at Babylon thing. If this was for Babylon, then some sources suggest this meant the the period of the Babylonian empire, but according to Wikipedia: The Neo-Babylonian Empire  began in 626 BC and ended in 539 BC”

So that there is 87 years is it not? So I am thinking,  why would the 70 years apply to Babylon, rather than to the Jews under Babylonian captivity?

[scholar JW]

Hi Anna

This highlights a major problem for WT critics as to when should the dating of the 70 years properly begin? Because the beginning of the NB Period is an open question historically speaking. The beginning of the 70 years should be an event that meets all of the prophetic and historic considerations and the only possible candidate for this epochal event is when Jerusalem was destroyed which scholars use the term the 'Fall of Jerusalem'. the 70 years would be and was a period of desolation of the Land Of Judah- a period of servitude for/to Babylon and Exile in/at Babylon- this formula alone encapsulates all of the relevant '70year' texts of Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezra and Zechariah and duly noted by Josephus.

In short, you are quite correct the 70 years applies to Jews exiled to Babylon and to their former homeland-Judah.

scholar JW

[scholar JW]

Ann O'Maly

Hi Ann

WT interpretation most certainly accommodates both meanings 'for' or 'at Babylon' because your proposition asserts  that the Exile began 10 years earlier and it is true that for those earlier exiles their length may well have been much longer than 70 years. However, the Biblical passages relevant to this matter synchronize the seventy years with the land being desolate so this requirement necessitates that the Exile proper began only after the Fall in 607 BCE. This viewpoint is in harmony with current scholarship and I urge you to read 'Israel In Exile' by Rainer Albertz and expert in the specialized study of the Exile and Restoration. Further, this also matches the description of the 70 years by Josephus. I can say much more on this topic but that will do for now!

scholar JW

[Anna]

Another question:

The battle of Megiddo was in 609 where Egypt and its ally the Assyrian Empire went against the Neo-Babylonian empire (also when Josiah is killed and Judah becomes a vassal state of Egypt). 

Then the battle of Carchemish in 605 where the Neo-Babylonian empire defeats the Egyptians...

Are the dates of these two battles recognized by WTS?*

If so, is there any reasonable theory where Jerusalem could have been destroyed by the Babylonians in the years between Megiddo and Carchemish? 

 

*did some research later and no,  according to WT Carchemish happened in 625.  As for Megiddo, WT doesn't seem to give a date, at least I can't find one...ok, found it..WT gives Megiddo 629......it's those notorious 20 years again!

[Anna]

9 hours ago, Anna said:

 according to WT Carchemish was 625.  and   Megiddo 629.....

 

To get the 609 and 605 dates for the two battles what source was used? I calculated it comes to those dates using VAT 4956, but were there any other sources for dating those two battles? How come  WT dates it earlier by 20 years? 

[JW Insider]

9 hours ago, Anna said:

To get the 609 and 605 dates for the two battles what source was used? I calculated it comes to those dates using VAT 4956, but were there any other sources for dating those two battles? How come  WT dates it earlier by 20 years? 

It's pretty simple. The Watchtower merely relies on secular dating to get all dates during this period.

To get any date up to and prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, they merely take the secular date and add 20 years:

• 587+20=607
• 605+20=625
• 609+20=629
• In effect, this would have to have gone all the way back to Adam, if there had been an unambiguous timeline going all the way back.

In fact, it averages out to something similar when comparing to Bishop Ussher's numbers which put Adam's creation at 4004 BCE and we effectively add 22 years to that (4004+22=4026).

For any date after and including the destruction of Babylon in 539, the Watchtower relies completely on this secular date. They merely take the secular date and add 0 years:

• 539+0=539

There is an exception made for the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus, but only so that we can make the 70 weeks of years fit an interpretation that is easier to explain.

*** it-1 p. 182 Artaxerxes ***

• Artaxerxes Longimanus, the son of Xerxes I, is the king referred to at Ezra 7:1-28 and Nehemiah 2:1-18; 13:6. Whereas most reference works give his accession year as 465 B.C.E., there is sound reason for placing it in 475 B.C.E.—See PERSIA, PERSIANS (The Reigns of Xerxes and of Artaxerxes).

At this point, with Artaxerxes, we are moving back from the secular dating by 10 years, not 20, but that was after accepting the secular dating as exactly correct in 539. The reason is always to make our interpretations work.

The embarrassing part of all of this is that we have absolutely no idea at what point between 607 and 539, for example, that we have actually added the 20 years that we needed. We just say that it's in there somewhere, and maybe someday maybe some evidence will turn up for it.

Remember that the WT had to add 20 years to the Neo-Babylonian calendar to push the destruction of Jerusalem far enough back so that 2,520 years would end in 1914. In effect, then, the WT must add 20 years to every secular date. The WT is forced to break not just one line of evidence for 587, but at least half-a-dozen lines of evidence, plus the evidence derived from LITERALLY!! ALL of more than 10,000 clay tablets and literally ALL the evidence from Babylonian, Assyrian and Persian sources in the relevant time period.

if you look too closely at this, be prepared to become ashamed or become [academically] dishonest. It's just my opinion, but I see no other choices.