Jump to content
The World News Media

Srecko Sostar

Member
  • Posts

    4,635
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    75

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    Srecko Sostar reacted to George88 in "In doing the math we found that the amount of money flowing out will be much greater than the amount of money that we are coming in at this time. Why is that?" - Stephen Lett, May 2015   
    I always enjoy your distorted videos from YouTube, Srecko. They always put a smile on my face. Especially the cut and past portions to fabricate and use of other people's words. Keep them coming, lol!
  2. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    Don't mind me not participating in the discussion about dates and events. There is a lot of math, comparing and memorizing, and reading a lot of books. I don't have that capacity, and I don't have enough persistence.
    Should we deal with the figure of "70 years" as an important factor? Not really, as far as I can see. Because there were several "exiles" for many nations and individuals, not just some. And they all started and ended at different times.
    Another thing that is troubling in general when we want to rely on statements in the Bible is this. God himself declared that his covenant with the Jews and his Law and some other things will last forever (not 70 or 700,000 years, but forever).
    What is visible today of that "eternity"? Something still persists/continues, but how and in what way? Some claim that "that eternity" no longer lasts.
    I conclude that relying on the "70 years" benchmark is unreliable.
  3. Like
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from Pudgy in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    Don't mind me not participating in the discussion about dates and events. There is a lot of math, comparing and memorizing, and reading a lot of books. I don't have that capacity, and I don't have enough persistence.
    Should we deal with the figure of "70 years" as an important factor? Not really, as far as I can see. Because there were several "exiles" for many nations and individuals, not just some. And they all started and ended at different times.
    Another thing that is troubling in general when we want to rely on statements in the Bible is this. God himself declared that his covenant with the Jews and his Law and some other things will last forever (not 70 or 700,000 years, but forever).
    What is visible today of that "eternity"? Something still persists/continues, but how and in what way? Some claim that "that eternity" no longer lasts.
    I conclude that relying on the "70 years" benchmark is unreliable.
  4. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    Then why does Jeremiah say that that the deportation of the remaining inhabitants happened 5 years AFTER the Fall of Jerusalem? And why was it only such a small number who were actually exiled according to Jeremiah: 4,600 total out of perhaps hundreds of thousands?
  5. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    You are funny. Did you really think that, in the Bible, Jehovah associates the fall of Jerusalem with both the 18th year and the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar in order to create contention among scholars who won't then be able to figure out the precise year? Or perhaps so that your own idolized scholars will stand out as greater and somehow get the upper hand when they choose neither date, but pick one that's only 20 years off? 
  6. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    I'm kidding about those dates being relevant to @scholar JW. These dates (587 and 586) have ALL the best evidence behind them for the Fall of Jerusalem, and 607 has absolutely NONE, imo. But no one who has invested so many years at the altar of 607 and its idolized celebrated scholars will very easily see the relevance of 587/6, because it's NOT relevant to 1914. But 607 is relevant to 1914. 587/586 is actually the good guy, but it's considered to be the feared, evil "nemesis" god that threatens to make the 607 idol fall on its fishy face, relegated to the "piles" of a Dagon day gone by. 
  7. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    Let's break that down: You say 586 or 587 are being given for an event in Biblical history called the Fall of Jerusalem. Then you say these two regnal years of Nebuchadnezzar are irrelevant unless they are tied to an event in Biblical history such as the Fall of Jerusalem. 
    Yeah!! I graciously accept your apology!! It took a while to convince you. Thank you for explicitly admitting that the years 586 or 587 are relevant! 
  8. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    ... continued...
    Not according to the evidenced chronology, of course, but according to the WT chronology. 
    (Jeremiah 52:27-30) . . .Thus Judah went into exile from its land. These are the people whom Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar took into exile: in the seventh year, 3,023 Jews.  In the 18th year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, 832 people were taken from Jerusalem. In the 23rd year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, Neb·uʹzar·adʹan the chief of the guard took Jews into exile, 745 people. In all, 4,600 people were taken into exile.
    If you say the 18th year refers to 607, then the 7th year would be 618 BCE when the greater number were taken into exile.  In fact, as mentioned before, this number was two-thirds of the entire number of exiles, and the number exiled in the 18th year ("607") was only about one-sixth of the total number of exiles. 
    Daniel said he was among a group of Judean exiles in an earlier group than "607." Jeremiah spoke of the exiles 10 years before "607." And Ezekiel goes so far as to use a new era of dating where each year was one of the "YEARS of OUR EXILE."  
    (Ezekiel 33:21) . . .At length in the 12th year, in the tenth month, on the fifth day of the month of our exile, a man who had escaped from Jerusalem came to me and said: “The city has been struck down!”
    So it really makes no sense to start claiming that something called "The Exile" (as if there were only one) MUST have started ONLY in the year of the smallest number of exiles, what you call 607. It also flies in the face of Ezekiel's use of the term "in the 12th year of our Exile" to refer to a time starting 10 years before "the Exile" that you are arguing for.
    Why do you need to start "the Exile" a decade LATER than Ezekiel starts "the Exile"? 
  9. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    If only Jeremiah's prophecy had made the 70 years of Babylon's domination commensurate with the Fall of Jerusalem and the deportation of the populace as exiles. But instead Jeremiah merely says that Babylon will have 70 years of dominance so that all the nations around will serve them. Here are some of the problems with that theory:
    1. Jeremiah NEVER says the 70 years are for Judah, the prophecy says those 70 years are for Babylon and about Babylon.
    2. Jeremiah says that many nations will come under this servitude of Babylon. Note:
    (Jeremiah 25:9-26) . . .I am sending for all the families of the north,” declares Jehovah, “sending for King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon, my servant, and I will bring them against this land and against its inhabitants and against all these surrounding nations. I will devote them to destruction and make them an object of horror and something to whistle at and a perpetual ruin. . . . 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.”’  “‘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. I will bring on that land all my words that I have spoken against it, all that is written in this book that Jeremiah has prophesied against all the nations.   . . . So I took the cup out of the hand of Jehovah and made all the nations to whom Jehovah sent me drink: starting with Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, her kings and her princes, to make them a ruin, . . .  then Pharʹaoh king of Egypt . . .Uz;. . . the Phi·lisʹtines, Ashʹke·lon, Gazʹa, Ekʹron, . . . Ashʹdod;  Eʹdom, Moʹab,. . . Amʹmon·ites; . . .Tyre, . . .Siʹdon,. . . Deʹdan, Teʹma, Buz, . . . the Arabians . . .Zimʹri, . . . Eʹlam, . . .the Medes; . . . the kings of the north near and far, one after the other, and all the other kingdoms of the earth that are on the surface of the ground; and the king of Sheʹshach will drink after them.
    So it's pretty obvious that the devastating effects of Babylonian domination will come upon all the known lands around them "ALL these surrounding nations." Not just Judah. So the 70 years were about a Babylonian domination that would END after 70 years. True, it was Jehovah's purpose that Judea and Jerusalem will be desolated through that domination, seemingly in a worse way than any of the other nations, but after those 70 years FOR BABYLON their domination would end, and it would be Babylon's turn for desolation.
    Now it was mentioned before that Isaiah uses an expression about Babylon and 70 years, too. The expression in the prophecy against Tyre was that she:
    "will be forgotten for for 70 years, the same as the lifetime of one king.  . . . At the end of 70 years, Jehovah will turn his attention to Tyre, and she will return to her hire and prostitute herself with all the world’s kingdoms on the face of the earth. But her profit and her hire will become something holy to Jehovah. . . . Look! Jehovah is emptying the land and making it desolate. He turns it upside down and scatters its inhabitants.  It will be the same for everyone:. . .
    The WT publications say that this "70 years" expression means "70 years, the same as the lifespan given to one KINGDOM, Babylon" who will desolate the prostitute, Tyre, but that after the 70 years are over, Tyre will prostitute herself again with all the nations. As you know, the WTS explains it more fully this way:
    *** ip-1 chap. 19 p. 253 par. 21 Jehovah Profanes the Pride of Tyre ***
    Jehovah, through Jeremiah, includes Tyre among the nations that will be singled out to drink the wine of His rage. He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27) True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. 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.
     
    If this is true then the 70 years do not need to be associated directly with Judea's and Jerusalem's fall. It's the other way around, those 70 years for Babylon's domination would ultimately bring on a devastating effect in Judea and Jerusalem. It didn't need to be for the full 70 years that Babylon was given to begin it's period of greatest domination. So it also makes sense that we do not need to look for a specific date, exactly 70 years prior to October 539 BCE, or some arbitrarily chosen date within the first year of Cyrus. In fact most of Judea fell into exile a decade or more before Babylon tried to take the walled city of Jerusalem. (Jeremiah 52)
    But think about this: Tyre didn't come under the domination of Babylon for a full 70 years. In fact some of those nations in Jeremiah's list appeared to hardly come under domination at all. Some nations that once paid tribute to Egypt or Assyria would simply transfer that tribute over to Babylon. That's probably what Jeremiah had in mind for Judea when he said to just put yourself under the yoke of Babylon without rebellion and you'll save yourselves.
    So it makes sense that Babylon has control for 70 years but not all nations need to come under their thumb instantly, or all at once. But what if Tyre had come under their control earlier in Nebuchadnezzar's reign and had been in servitude to Babylon for, say, 75, 80 or 85 years. Would the 70 year prophecy make sense if it were really 80 years for example?
    I think you'll see what I'm getting at. The fact that Babylon was given 70 years to dominate would make no sense if some of those nations that came under the 70 years were actually dominated for 80 or even 85 years.
    Yet this is what MOST of the Judeans were -- MOST were exiled for 80 or even 85 years according to the WTS chronology. 
    continued in next post  . . . 
     
     
  10. Haha
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Pudgy in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   



     
    A farmer, a physicist, and a mathematician are tasked with designing a fence to enclose a flock of spherical chickens. The farmer suggests a simple circular fence, but the physicist argues that a cylindrical fence would be more efficient. The mathematician ponders for a moment and then says, "I have a solution. First, assume a spherical chicken..."
     
  11. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Pudgy in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    I have tried to follow along with the discussions here, but it seems I am lost and not able to do so.
    I suspect that it is somewhat similar to quantum physicists from Cornell University in New York arguing with quantum physicists at Stanford University in California.
    Unless that is your intense area of interest, everyone else will just fade out.
    So if you will take a moment and indulge me, a single paragraph?
    To me the bottom line is “was God’s kingdom established, the return of Christ in any form whatsoever in 1914 or 1918, or 1915 or whatever the current flavor is.?”
    I assume that’s why these discussions are apparently important?
    It’s to prove or disprove some thing or another about THAT? 
    Or what?

  12. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    There you go again with that specious argument that goes:
    So it must be either 586 or 587 so since we don't know which of those two years is certain, we must dismiss them both and go with a year that's 20 years off, which forces us to pretend there must be an unidentified 20 year gap.
    And we don't even know where that gap might fit correctly. We can't put it in Nebuchadnezzar's reign. And we make use of a 17-year Nabonidus reign. That leaves only a place where we have mundane business documents for a total of 4 years. So we must think that this period was actually 24 years and even though business documents have shown up for EVERY SINGLE known year of every king's reign, including those 4 years, but now we suddenly have 20 extra years in that "4-year" period where no business was transacted, and every single Babylonian lost their memory for those 20 years, and all the astronomical lunar and metonic cycles stopped, and the stars and planets also stopped moving, yet caught up instantly after the 20-year "gap" was completed.
    We must sound like complete idiots to the same people we treat as experts when we quote from them about anything else in the "Insight" book.   
  13. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Pudgy in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    “  …. pay no attention to the man (men) behind the curtain …” (Wizard of Oz)
    …. and anytime someone says “… no doubt …” it is a red rocket flare arcing high into the night sky!
  14. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Pudgy in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    So … um … what’s a “pivotal year”, and how many of them have there been in history?
    I think of a “pivotal year” being something like 65,203,112 BCE when the dinosaurs were wiped out, with 95% of all other living things on Earth. ….. and with all the dates being bandied about, did anyone take into account “leap years” and other “adjustments”?
    I seem to remember something about the Popes screwing around with calendars, cancelling 7 months (?) and people being infuriated because they thought seven (?) months of their lives had been lost.
    If priests of Marduk in Babylon did similar things and didn’t leave records …. well ….. BLOOIE!
     

  15. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from Pudgy in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    If I could I would put 2 emoticons. Laughter and sadness. I can see through your comments how much information you have and "expertise" in presenting it.
    I could have guessed your answer. I knew the WTJWorg "researchers" wanted to remain anonymous for the reason stated. Maybe one is trying to be more modest than the reality is. Furthermore, such an explanation could have passed some 20 years ago. Today, to say such a thing is so ridiculous and unconvincing, when we see many JWs key figures providing "spiritual guidance" and "interpretations" with head and beard, with first and last name and without any shyness, on JWTV and other digital platforms.
    As a class and as individuals, they proved that they are without "leadership from above". They are at the same time subordinated to the main condition that the "company/corporation" should not fail but survive at all costs. Entangled in a series of their own nonsensical interpretations and clarifications, they prove themselves constantly incapable of providing the "truth". Because they changed "the truth" countless times.
    Unfortunately, or fortunately for me, I cannot "submit" myself to your "generated" (recognizable) answer, because it looks like the use of an AI platform, which has been repeatedly exposed here, which gives wrong and misleading information.
    I appreciate the possibility that you deeply believe in it, but that will not make the premise real and proven.
    I remain to enjoy this academic discussion. 
  16. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Matthew9969 in Q: How much credit do PIMO Jehovah’s Witnesses owe to Zoom for freeing them from attending boring meetings at the Kingdom Hall?   
    As a residential and business internet installer/trouble-shooter for the past 16 years, I have heard the sentiments plenty of times that people are a bit paranoid about their cameras being on. Some even conspiratorial about the cameras on their computers.
  17. Haha
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from Alphonse in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    So now you back off and tone down your previous claim. Thank you.
  18. Haha
    Srecko Sostar reacted to George88 in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    Srecko, if you're eager for that information, take the initiative to research it yourself. Let intelligence guide the discussion instead of baseless opinions. Everyone is putting in the effort to research, so get involved and contribute. Otherwise, bring intelligent input to this stagnant discussion. 
    Carl Olof Jonsson encountered a significant issue. He posed leading questions to scholars, forcing them to assert that the Watchtower misinterpreted their research. However, the real problem did not lie with the Watchtower's understanding; rather, it stemmed from individuals manipulating the truth for hidden agendas. Consequently, this distortion of facts inevitably clouded the truth.
    Please, let the argument continue uninterrupted, if you don't mind.
  19. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    On all these pages where history and dates are discussed, many people are very clearly mentioned with their first and last names and with the names of books, publications, and sources from which they are quoted.
    Please, who are the people, by name and surname, who are WT scholars? Let them stand behind their claims with their full name and surname.
  20. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar got a reaction from Pudgy in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    My behavior in communication on the forum is subject to subjective (yours or someone else's) judgment because they observe my actions through their individual prism of judgment, which they acquired mainly under the influence of their religious affiliation.
  21. Upvote
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    If the astronomical evidence is open to interpretation why do you put faith in 539 as a "pivotal" year?
    Since there is even more direct astronomical evidence for:
    604 as Nebuchadnezzar's 1st year, and 598 as Nebuchadnezzar's 7th year, and 591 as Nebuchadnezzar's 14th year, and 589 as  Nebuchadnezzar's 16th year, and 588 as Nebuchadnezzar's 17th year, and  580 as Nebuchadnezzar's 25th year, and 579 as  Nebuchadnezzar's 26th year, and 578 as  Nebuchadnezzar's 27th year, and 577 as  Nebuchadnezzar's 28th year, and 571 as  Nebuchadnezzar's 32nd year, and 568 as Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year, and therefore 587 as Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year . . . . . . then why not use the years of Nebuchadnezzar's reign as even more pivotal? In other words, why do you have faith that all those years are wrong and have faith that 539 for Cyrus accession is right?
    How did you personally arrive at the conclusion that 539 was indeed the year of Cyrus conquering Babylon? Do you think that most Witnesses even know how one arrives at 539 for Cyrus Accession, or 538 for Cyrus 1st year, and 537 for Cyrus 2nd (including the last few months of Cyrus 1st)? Was it through your own research or was it faith in the tradition of our WT publications? If it was through your own research, then again I ask very seriously, how did you arrive at it yourself? And lastly, I think it's great that you had Professor Obed Lipschits -- although you should know that his name is NOT Obed, but Oded Lipschits. My question is:
    Why do you think that your Professor Oded Lipschits believes Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year was 587 BCE?
  22. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    Again, that's a valid proposition for an interpretation. But then what do you do with the fact that you can independently calculate Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year, "six ways from Sunday"  and discover that each independent way brings you to the year 586 BCE. 
    Everything might have looked like a proper interpretation up to that point, but if you look at the exile and consider it to be 70 years long, you end up with a contradiction. The 70 years takes you all the way to 516 BCE. Yet, the same exact set of calculations that show Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year as 586 BCE show the first year of Cyrus over Babylon as 538 BCE.
    So, you end up with a 70-year period that looks a lot more like the one in Zechariah, which was closer to 516 BCE, as admitted by the "Insight" book:
    (Zechariah 1:12) . . .So the angel of Jehovah said: “O Jehovah of armies, how long will you withhold your mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah, with whom you have been indignant these 70 years?”
    *** it-2 p. 1225 Zechariah, Book of ***
    The last time indicator found in the book of Zechariah is the fourth day of Chislev in the fourth year of Darius’ reign (about December 1, 518 B.C.E.). (7:1) Accordingly, this book could not have been committed to writing before the close of 518 B.C.E. 
    So that' s the big question for me. What do you do when you discover that the same astronomical evidence that gives you 538 BCE for Cyrus 1st year over Babylon also gives you 587 BCE for Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year? 
    It seems to me you'd have to make another adjustment to your theory, or else you would be forced to keep sowing seeds of doubt about the Neo-Babylonian chronology. But it's the same chronology that gave you 539 and 538! So you'd merely be sowing more seeds of doubt about the whole interpretation.
    To keep this theory, you have to somehow keep believers afraid to look at the astronomical and archaeological evidence for the period. I don't think that's a sustainable way to promote a traditional interpretation. People are naturally curious, and some are going to find out, no matter how much doubt is sown.
  23. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to Pudgy in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    After 12 pages of discussion/argument about this,  I have lost track which side is “winning” the argument.
    But either way, what is the end product of WHY this is apparently so important?
    What practical value will knowing the correct answer have?
    It seems to me that being able to PROVE MATHEMATICALLY that Christ began ruling in 1914 or 1918, and Armageddon occurred then is useless …. as there is not a single piece of evidence on planet Earth that supports that supposition.
    None whatsoever.
    World War I and 1914 was, based on everything that is real, was only a coincidence.
     

  24. Like
    Srecko Sostar reacted to JW Insider in The Watchtower's 20-year adjustment to the standard Neo-Babylonian chronology   
    OK. I understand that. Thanks.
    And I meant something more like whether the Bible ever contains statements like this:
    "And Jerusalem and Judea began going into Exile in the 3rd year of Jehoiakim" "And I will bring this nation into exile starting in the 11th year Zedekiah." You will be free from this Exile when the Persians conquer the Babylonians." "And I will free you from this Exile in the first year of Cyrus" "Two years and 3 months after Cyrus conquered the King of Babylon many of the exiled Jews began returning to their homeland and the Exile was declared completed."  There is something very close to that for the end of the exile, but nothing like it for the beginning of the exile. 
    So the "dates" for the start and end of the Exile become a matter of interpretation, not a matter of clear Bible declarations or statements. 
    As I said before, we need not worry about the beginning and end of the exile in order to determine the BCE date for the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar. The 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar is the date for the fall of Jerusalem as far as the Bible tells us. Similarly, the 14th year of Nabopolassar is the primary date for the fall of Nineveh, if we were to return to the original topic of this thread. So whether the Exile began exactly at that time, or 20 years earlier or 20 years later, the real goal is to find a BCE date that fits the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar and the 14th year of Nabopolassar. 
    But I would like to try to think through your question anyway. It's the one question where you have pushed me to think in a different direction in the past, and I'd like to take it more seriously this time. I'll probably move this part of the discussion to a new topic/thread, so that we'll have a more serious place to discuss it.
    For now, I'll start rambling off my thoughts about it. 
    I think that it's best to think that the exile began when Nebuchadnezzar first began taking exiles. So we should look for the first time the Bible puts any kind of date on events related to "exiles."
    The most obvious "first" verse in that regard at first might appear to be this one:
    (Jeremiah 52:28) . . .These are the people whom Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar took into exile: in the seventh year, 3,023 Jews.
    I've tested about 8 different pieces of Babylonian astronomical evidence and my software programs always puts that in the year 598. The Babylonian Chronicles claim that it happened very late in that year and therefore probably included an early part of 597. So that would be 598/597 BCE.  
    The next verse shows that a much smaller number of exiles were taken in Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year, which was the same year the city and the temple at Jerusalem was considered destroyed:
    (Jeremiah 52:29) . . .In the 18th year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, 832 people were taken from Jerusalem.
    All the astronomical evidence I have seen, and that I have tested myself, consistently places that 18th year as 587 BCE.
    The next verse shows a smaller number of people taken as exiles in Nebuchadnezzar's 23rd year:
    (Jeremiah 52:30) . . .In the 23rd year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, Neb·uʹzar·adʹan the chief of the guard took Jews into exile, 745 people.. . .
    And, of course, all the astronomical evidence places this date as 582 BCE.
    But that's not the whole story, of course. The Watchtower publications show that Nebuchadnezzar was marching around Syria-Palestine, so that we know he was near the Judean nation much earlier. The Babylonian Chronicles and the Watchtower publications both agree that this was in the Accession year of Nebuchadnezzar . All the astronomical tablet evidence places that date in the year 605 BCE. The same year that Nebuchadnezzar defeated the King of Egypt (Necho) at Carchemish. The Bible dates that, too:
    (Jeremiah 46:2) . . .For Egypt, concerning the army of Pharʹaoh Neʹcho the king of Egypt, who was along the Eu·phraʹtes River and was defeated at Carʹche·mish by King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon in the fourth year of Je·hoiʹa·kim son of Jo·siʹah, the king of Judah:
    But do we have evidence that there were exiles taken from Judah this early in Nebuchadnezzar's regime? 
    (Daniel 1:1-6) . . .In the third year of the kingship of King Je·hoiʹa·kim of Judah, King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it. 2  In time Jehovah gave King Je·hoiʹa·kim of Judah into his hand, . . . Then the king ordered Ashʹpe·naz his chief court official to bring some of the Israelites, including those of royal and noble descent. . . . They were to be trained for three years, and at the end of that time they were to enter the king’s service. Now among them were some from the tribe of Judah: Daniel, Han·a·niʹah, Mishʹa·el, and Az·a·riʹah. 
    So the answer is apparently Yes. During that early march through the land, just as both the Watchtower publications admit and the Babylonian Chronicles also claim, there were some exiles taken at that time, too. They were even called by the term exiles.
    (Daniel 2:25) . . .Arʹi·och quickly took Daniel in before the king and said to him: “I have found a man of the exiles of Judah who can make known the interpretation to the king.”
    Of course, I am quite aware that the Watchtower interpretation doesn't agree with the date mentioned in Daniel 1:1. So the Watchtower changes the meaning of "third year of Jehoiakim" to mean something else.
  25. Haha
    Srecko Sostar reacted to George88 in Trying to nail down 612 BCE as the date of Nineveh's destruction   
    Srecko, it is true that an evil person can sometimes display moments of kindness. However, this does not change their nature of being evil. Take Satan, for example. He may appear pleasant towards those who worship him, but he treats Jehovah's Witnesses with cruelty. He manipulates ex-witnesses to distort matters and orchestrate persecution against the Watchtower, similar to how the Pharisees persecuted Jesus. Unlike the Pharisees, who were nice to their followers but evil in their treatment of Christ and the apostles, these are two entirely distinct situations.
    It's relieving to know that there are regions where they are treated with kindness, instead of being met with hostility elsewhere.
×
×
  • 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.