Jump to content
The World News Media

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


JW Insider

Recommended Posts

  • Member
45 minutes ago, allensmith28 said:

[ Gobble-de-goop snipped ]

Then it becomes, what happened between Nisan 538BC March/April to Nisan 537BC March/April.

Here, a great opposer, JEFFRO proposes, that in Nisan 538BC the Jews left home, and they arrived on OCT-538BC. This has been the theme. All in one year. So, this means, as soon as Cyrus declared his DECREE, everyone packed and rushed home in one day. If Cyrus didn’t know what God had in store for him until HE received the inspiration? Once again, how would the Jews know, when to get ready, get set, GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Both Jeffro and I have explained all this in great detail. The fact that you don't read it at all, or that you don't seem to retain what you read, does not change that.

As I've explained above and in the link I've given a dozen times, there were up to nearly six months for the preparation and the journey from Nisan 538 BCE. The journey was about four months, assuming that other biblical references to a similar journey can be used. That leaves nearly two months for preparation. And that assumes that the Jews were unaware of Cyrus' general practice of releasing captives, which they would have known of since Cyrus had been marching around the Near East for quite a few years. So they could have had a preparation time of up to seven months.

What do you think could not be accomplished in two to seven months?

Let's see that razor sharp Watch Tower trained brain in action!

AlanF

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 62.9k
  • Replies 774
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hmmmm......I beg to differ. How about we both ask a number of friends a simple question at the KH this Sunday or in a field service group: "do you know how to explain why we believe 1914 and 607?"

This is where Freedom and sanity, and peace come from .... when you disregard people who have proved they have no credibility whatsoever ... and STOP BEING AFRAID OF DYING.  Every living thing th

Posted Images

  • Member
9 hours ago, AlanF said:

You've learned well from Mommy Watch Tower.

 

6 hours ago, AlanF said:

Let's see that razor sharp Watch Tower trained brain in action!

 

11 hours ago, AlanF said:

You obviously have no clue what evidence is.

See how insulting this fellow is. It will be his undoing, most likely.

The fact that he worships the Dawkins-Harris-Hitchens Trinity makes it even more interesting.

Quick, someone find me a scripture of how a contemptuous person comes to ruin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
10 minutes ago, Nana Fofana said:

True- so should I keep looking for an applicable scripture? "Contemptuous" is certainly an applicable word regarding he.

 

No, don't look because this thread is about 607, not about chastising strangers on the internet. I think @TrueTomHarley meant that suggestion to be purely rhetorical. Plus I don't think Alan F gives two monkeys bottoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

TrueTomHarley wrote:
 
:: You've learned well from Mommy Watch Tower.

"With thankful hearts we acknowledge God’s mercy and gratefully and willingly show our respect for Jehovah’s organization, for she is our mother and the beloved wife of our heavenly Father, Jehovah God."--"The Watchtower", May 1, 1957, p. 285

:: Let's see that razor sharp Watch Tower trained brain in action!

Quote

See how insulting this fellow is. It will be his undoing, most likely.

"Serpents, offspring of vipers, how will you flee from the judgment of Gehenna?"--Matt. 33:23

See how insulting this fellow is. It will be his undoing, most likely.

Quote

Quick, someone find me a scripture of how a contemptuous person comes to ruin.

Done.

:: You obviously have no clue what evidence is.

"these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years."--Jer. 25:11

"Jeremiah 25:11 describes the seventy years as a period of servitude of the Jewish nation."--scholar JW

Evidence: "these nations" is plural and refers both to the Jews and to the nations round about.

Quote

The fact that he worships the Dawkins-Harris-Hitchens Trinity makes it even more interesting.

From one paraphrase of Hitchens you manage to make this conclusion? You haven't even read their books.

"When anyone replies to a matter before he hears the facts, It is foolish and humiliating."--Prov. 18:13

AlanF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

allensmith28 wrote

Quote

JEFFRO: ALANF: 539 Darius the Mede conquers Babylon (September). Cyrus becomes King (October). Persia replaces Babylon as world power. Seventy years of nations serving Babylon ends.

Wow! You do have a modicum of reading comprehension.

Quote

This has always been your problem, hasn’t it?

It's not a problem for me, Jeffro or any competent scholar.

Quote

What was Cyrus accession year, versus the first regnal year in EZRA?

You yourself provided the answer by quoting from "Beside the Ulai (Chapter 10)":

<< If we look at Cyrus as king of Babylon, however, then the Persians conquered that city on October 7, 539 BC. The Persian year ran from spring to spring and the Persians used the Accession Year method of reckoning, so probably October 539 to March 538 was Cyrus' Accession  Year and his first year ran from March 538 to March 537, his second year was 537/536 and his third year would be 536/535. >>

Exactly as I have said.

By the way, your presentation of source references is atrociously bad. You give no source reference information -- just jpg images.

The Watch Tower Society agrees with these dates:

<< Since the seventh year of Cambyses II began in spring of 523 B.C.E., his first year of rule was 529 B.C.E. and his accession year, and the last year of Cyrus II as king of Babylon, was 530 B.C.E. The latest tablet dated in the reign of Cyrus II is from the 5th month, 23rd day of his 9th year. (Babylonian Chronology, 626 B.C.–A.D. 75, by R. Parker and W. Dubberstein, 1971, p. 14) As the ninth year of Cyrus II as king of Babylon was 530 B.C.E., his first year according to that reckoning was 538 B.C.E. and his accession year was 539 B.C.E. >> -- Insight, Vol. 1, p. 453.

So some time between March 538 and March 537 Cyrus issue his decree of release. Again the Watch Tower Society agrees:

<< In “the first year” (evidently as ruler over Babylon) of Cyrus the Persian (538 B.C.E.) the royal decree went forth freeing the exiled Jews to “go up to Jerusalem, which is in Judah, and rebuild the house of Jehovah the God of Israel.” (Ezr 1:1-4) >> -- Insight, Vol. 2, p. 44.

So at this point in my reply, we know that Mommy Watch Tower agrees with the dates I've given for the reign of Cyrus.

It seems quite obvious that you don't know that Julian/Gregorian calendar years do not coincide with Jewish or Persian or Babylonian years. Thus, while Cyrus actually became ruler over Babylon in October, 539 BCE, his accession year ran from Nisan (~ March) of 539 up to the next Nisan, in 538.

Quote

If Newton hypotheses for the Accession year in 539BC fell in January,

This statement is proof that you don't understand the calendars.

Nor do you seem to understand that Isaac Newton wrote around 1700, when far less historical information was available than today. And of course, you give no reference to your sources for Newton.

Quote

and Cyrus entered Babylon in October, then, where does that leave the accession year, NOT in Nisan 538BC?

First, an accession year cannot occur in one month.

Second, as shown above, Cyrus' accession year began Nisan 1, 539 and ended the last day of Adar, 538. That's so even though his physical rule began in October (Heshvan) 539 (assuming Cyrus was credited with beginning his rule when his army overthrew Babylon and killed king Belshazzar).

Quote

Then, Cyrus first regnal year in Ezra would fall on October 538BC. That has been the worse contradiction by researchers. Then Cyrus 2nd year would be what? 537BC

Again you prove to have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote

 

Zondervan illustrate bible dictionary

. . .

Babylon fell to the Persians on October 12, 539 B.C., and Cyrus in the first year of his reign issued a decree permitting the Jews to return and rebuild the temple (2 Chr. 36:22; Ezra 1:1). On the basis of Nisan regnal years, this would have been 538. [p.1104]

 

Again consistent with the dates I've given.

Quote

If Cyrus made his edict in 538BC, it would have been after October 538BC,

Based on what reasoning, in view of the Watch Tower approved dates shown above?

Quote

Cyrus Official Regnal year recorded in EZRA.

This sentence fragment is gobble-de-goop.

Quote

It is seer speculation what Cyrus accession year was, and who recorded it by what MEANS.

Not according to recognized historians and Mommy Watch Tower.

Quote

Babylonian, Persian, Hebrew time reckoning.

Another meaningless sentence fragment.

Quote

It’s an intellectual DISHONESTY to say Cyrus accession year was reckoned from spring to spring,

So Mommy Watch Tower is guilty of intellectual dishonesty. I certainly agree, but not on this basis.

Quote

and then suggest the chronicler of the bible used that SAME METHOD.

You have a better method? Let's see you explain it.

Quote

According to this hypothetical Nisan regnal year.

Another ignorant sentence fragment. Perhaps you should take a hint from scholar JW and use Grammarly.

Quote

Then you can use your frivolous attempt of synchronizing your fast-paced theory. There, goes 1 of your 7 months that ends up in 537BC.

Wrong, in view of the above information.

Quote

Where, could, you possibly put, number 2?

How about after number 1?

Quote

Once again, this is SECULAR DATA that every opposer embraces!!!

So does Mommy Watch Tower.

Quote

It would also sync to the time of the Olympiads. OCT-539BC to OCT-538BC 1 year, OCT-538BC-OCT-537BC year 2. By your rules of secular chronology.

What of it?
 
 

Quote

So, even if we went with your theory, you and Jeffro are completely WRONG!!!! By biblical standards of EZRA that you claim to defend.

Yep, totally clueless.

Quote

 

JEFFRO_ALANF: ·  538 Cyrus makes decree for Jews to return home. End of the ‘7 weeks’, Cyrus acts as ‘Messiah‘ (literally “anointed one”), per Isaiah 45:1.

·  538 (October) Jews repatriated in cities, back in land 49 years after Jerusalem destroyed (seven Sabbaths of years), making the following year a Jubilee year.

 

Proved by your quotation of "Beside the Ulai (Chapter 10)", which I partially reproduced above.

You other jpg here is unreadable, and since you don't even give a source reference, irrelevant.

Quote

 

Ezra 5:13 Context: Tattenai's Letter to Darius

13However, in the first year of Cyrus king of Babylon, King Cyrus issued a decree to rebuild this house of God.

This means what about Darius? HE WAS NO LONGER IN CHARGE OF BABYLON by October of 538BC.

 

That's neither here nor there. We're talking about Cyrus.

Quote

Now if you want to get technical? Then look at the inscription of Darius the Mede. Who was this person? Technically, Darius held the Kingship under the direction of Cyrus until October of 538BC. This would also confirm Cyrus first official regnal year. Or coregency.

No one knows, since the Bible given virtually no information, nor do secular sources. Darius is irrelevant.

[ Irrelevant information regarding Darius snipped ]

Quote

Now, as for the Jewish people knowing ahead of time what Cyrus was going to declare, it’s NOT what is written in scripture. If Cyrus didn’t know until God moved his heart to declare the edict, then and only then would the Jews, have been made aware.

What an ignorant claim. That's not even what I said. I said this: The Jews and other captives would have known that Cyrus was in the habit of releasing captives, based on knowledge of his military conquests all around the Near East.

This misrepresentation is sterotypical of JW apologists. Sometimes it's done because the apologist has little reading comprehension. Sometimes it's done out of sheer malice and desperation.

Quote

Even critics of other published works! Get it right once in a while.

LOL!

Quote

So, you’re WRONG!! To think you have it down pat with Cyrus 1st regnal year. Don’t you ever use God’s word in vain with me, junior? Your computations and bible understanding belong in the kiddy table.

LOL even more!

Quote

Just like I told *JEFFRO* in JWN, if you have a degree or doctorate, RETURN it. I will extend the same curtesy to you.

In addition to Grammarly, you need a spell checker.

AlanF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Nana Fofana wrote:
 
I thought last week's WT lesson might apply to why the land had to be desolated for 70 years despite Manasseh  repenting and being allowed to live longer and continue as king, even though-

The land did not have to be desolated at all, much less for 70 years. Do you not accept what the Bible says about this?

"'the nation that brings its neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon and serves him, I will allow to remain on its land,' declares Jehovah, 'to cultivate it and dwell in it.'" -- Jer. 27:11.

AlanF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
5 minutes ago, allensmith28 said:

ON the rest of you egotistical claims, I will state, the same thing you stated to Scholar? word, for word.

Don't bother me with nonsensical calculations.  It's clear you haven't done enough research just like COJ, and your bluster is meaningless to argue.

LOL! Sometimes it's fun to see how the abysmally ignorant try to say something sensible.

The above is fairly typical: I certainly didn't say that to Scholar.

More abysmal reading comprehension on display.

AlanF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

allensmith28

Alan F would have us believe that the six month interval from Nisan, 538 BCE month 1 until Tishri, 538 BCE, month 7 according to his tabulation would be of sufficient time for the Jews to return home with a four-month journey inclusive. Now if ones' imagination cannot accommodate such a hypothesis then it must also be considered that the Jews were prior to Month 1 would have been in an anticipatory or preparatory frame of mind with some preparations already in hand. Now, this of course is an interesting scenario but if Alan F demands such an indulgence proving 538 BCE for the Return then how is it the case that he refuses one to believe or to concede the possibility that the Jews could have more easily returned the following year in 537 BE. 

The 538 BCE scenario perhaps first developed by Jeffro on his colourful website then later copied by Alan F is ridiculous, stupid and impossible unless Cyrus had the Internet, publish, circulate by email to all Jews waiting at the door with their Go- bags  packed  waiting for the air-conditioned coach to take them to the airport where they could travel cattle class by jet travel from Babylon to Jerusalem in a matter of a couple of hours and days.

Frankly, this scenario is garbage. The very fact that COJ remains silent or indifferent on this matter is quite telling for COJ is their hero, their Poppa and these two characters will simply whatever nonsense without any evidence. There is simply no evidence for the many assumptions Alan F and Jeffro make such as:

1. Cyrus issued his Decree in Month 1, 538 BCE

2. That the Jews arrived in Judah in Month 6, 538 BCE

This is just for starters.

scholar JW emeritus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On ‎1‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 7:06 PM, Witness said:

The Body of Elders replacing the Body of Christ – the anointed ones. Ezek 44:7-9; Matt 24:15

We have clear instructions on how elders must be chosen - no females.  So if an anointed were on earth now in human form (before obtaining her heavenly calling where there will be no biological females - should they then serve as elders - now? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • … and donchew forget now … the GB now allows Sisters to come to meetings and go out in field service in slacks or Mumus.  Or slacks AND Mumus, if poundage appropriate. Did I ever mention I once dated a Sister that made Mumus out of parachutes? She was an Opera singer, and had a UN diplomatic passport. She was on “speed”, couldn’t blink, and typed 600 words a minute with 100% errors. Occasionally she would get lipstick in her eyebrows.  
    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,411

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,680
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.