Ann O'Maly

@Arauna Lighten up! 😆

7 hours ago, scholar JW said:

One starts at 537 BCE for it is the established date for the return with the issuing of the Decree in Cyrus; first year as sted by the Ezra the historian and confirmed by Josephus the historian.

Nonsense. You are twisting Jeremiah's words. The Babylonian king was not 'called to account' two years after the 70 years ended.

8 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Jer. 51:37 was certainly fulfilled by the time of the 4th century CE as noted by Jerome. The entire chapter, 51 contains the prophecy of judgement against Babylon which is of various stages of fulfillment which included the Fall in 539 BCE continuing throughout its turbulent history concluding desolation right up to our day. Just read the entire chapter as there is no need to 'cherry pick'.

No, this is what I encouraged you to do, Neil - to read Jer. 51:37 in context. You're swinging this around again, lol.

Thus, you cannot tell me when in Babylon's history certain key elements of Jeremiah 51 were fulfilled, i.e. when,

• Media and its allies reduced Babylon to rubble,
• There was a bloody battle with said invaders, resulting in the Babylonian army being slain,
• God's people had to run for their lives from the city.

So no, Jer. 51:37 was not fulfilled with the city's gradual, centuries'-long decline culminating in its final abandonment in the 4th c. CE. To use this as support for your back-to-front argument about Jer. 25:12 is a prime example of cherry-picking! 🙄

Gertoux was about to submit a University thesis in the mid/late 2000s on archaeology and history of ancient worlds. He made the mistake of courteously informing the governing body about it and they told him to stop or he'd get disfellowshipped. Obviously he diverged from the official WT teaching somewhere. Echoes of COJ, hey? The difference was that, at the time, he did stop.

FYI: Your images haven't embedded, @JW Insider

2 hours ago, AlanF said:

Arauna appears stuck in the pre-1980 Watchtower world

Nearer to 1950s and '60s Watchtower- and fringe-ideas-world.

To be fair, 'The Genesis Flood' was written before the mechanics of crustal plate movement were fully known and published.

And then there's Velikovsky ... 🤨

2 hours ago, Arauna said:

Teutonic plates

🤣 Love it!

17 minutes ago, Arauna said:

I have,  and I have come to the conclusion that the earth-wide flood is responsible for the layers we see on earth today....

I meant read proper science books. 🙄

12 minutes ago, Arauna said:

Why do you not rather talk about the highest mountains in the world which all have  fossils from the sea in its layers.  and the Cambrian explosion which brought forth in ONE layer all the different fossils and all are fully developed!

1. It's off topic,

2. Do some reading on Earth history, plate tectonics, and geological time. 🙄

@AlanF, may I suggest that, rather than have Anna's thread go off track, a new one might be started on human existence/development, etc.?

12 hours ago, scholar JW said:

one must determine when these words apply. Was it at the time of Babylon's Fall in 539 BCE

Yes! The king was certainly punished then.

12 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Next, again applying the rules of exegesis the verse 12 describes to whom and what the judgement would apply-King of Babylon, the Nation and the Land of Chaldea all together as a single entity meriting judgement. Clearly, Babylon was not desolated in 539 BCE. ...

... Jehovah's judgement against Babylon was not a momentary or singular event in time but would be one of desolation which as a process occurred over periods of time  even up to the present day. ...

... The answer to your second question would be as reported by Jerome about the 4th century CE- Jer. 51:37

Why start the judgment in 537? Which king was punished in 537? Why not start the judgment in the 4th century CE when Babylon was a pile of rubble and the nation's punishment was complete? It doesn't work, Neil.

Anyway, contextually, Jer. 51:37 is talking about the desolation and depopulation of Babylon at the hands of the Medians and its allies (v. 27f.). When did that happen? It also talks about God's people having to flee for their lives during this same bloody battle resulting in the slaughter of the Babylonian army (v. 1-6, 45). When did that happen?

(Yeah, I guess we're straying into the nature of prophecy, how literally we're supposed to take it, and which cherry-picked parts are historically true. Another can of worms, lol.)

6 hours ago, Anna said:

Yes, that's what I wondered, and this is where I found myself favoring Ezra over Jeremiah in order to make 607 fit 🤪. (I am not familiar with how WT solved that problem. I will have to take a look....)

Jeremiah is the source of the 70-years prophecies, though. Later interpretations and references to them need to harmonize with what Jeremiah actually said. The root of WT's divergence from mainstream understandings of the 70 years is its insistence that the 70-year period relates to the length of time the land would be 'desolate, without an inhabitant.' However, Jeremiah nowhere says this. He talks about a '70 years servitude' to Babylon and a '70 years for Babylon' but not that the land would be uninhabited for 70 years. It is this (mis)understanding that locks Watchtower into its chronological scheme. 

As far as I can see, WT nearly always ignores the problem of Jer. 25:12's sequence of events. One time it attempts to resolve it (w79 9/15 p. 23-24) by claiming the nations continued serving the king of Babylon after the city had been conquered and its king removed by Cyrus because Cyrus then became king of Babylon - the 70-year period was only up two years after the conquest and it was when Cyrus let the Jews go that the Babylonians were punished. Not only is this convoluted tripe not in keeping with the wording in Jer. 25:12, but it goes against Ezra's wording too at 2 Chron. 36:20:

"He [Neb] carried off captive to Babylon those who escaped the sword, and they became servants to him and his sons until the kingdom of Persia began to reign"

As for WT's solution to Jer. 29:10 - it doesn't offer one. It sticks with its translation 'at Babylon' and sidesteps the context by applying it to exiles taken 10 years later.

7 hours ago, Anna said:

True, but I think WT is looking at this from the point of view of how it affected the Israelites, since the scriptures are concerned with God's people and how surrounding political and world situations impacted them, not everyone else. In this case I think WT is correct to think that way. 

But we still have the wording of the texts to get past. The 70 years are fulfilled, then the Babylonian king is punished / then God will turn his attention to the exiles. It's not the other way around.

11 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

Read the entire verse 12 because it refers to the fact that the King, is nation and the land would be become ' a desolated wasteland for all time'-NWT Such a process was not just a one off but would come into effect after the 70 years had expired which was 537 BCE

You're asking us to believe that the King of Babylon was called to account two years after he was forcibly deposed and his city conquered. Riiight.

When did Babylon become a desolated wasteland, by the way?

15 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

Unnecessary because Young simply employed a methodology to resolve the 586/7 BCE dilemma and his opinion favoured 587 BCE.

Thank you for also confirming that Young did, in fact, resolve the 587/586 dilemma and that you initially told a whopping fib. 👍

2 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

Jer. 25:12 clearly proves that after the 70 years had ended then Judgement against Babylon, its King and the land of the Chaldeans would come into affect.

You've just confirmed what I've said! The 70 years end and Babylon is judged. When was Babylon, its King and the land of the Chaldeans judged, Neil, you dipstick? (Hint: it wasn't 537!)

5 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

In fact it is your conscience  Ann that should prick you that something is wrong with current methodology even the latest proposed by Young has not yet been endorsed by current scholarship wherein 586 rather than 587 is highly  championed.

So no apology for telling your big, fat, porky pie about Young and his conclusion about the year of Jerusalem's destruction. Smh. 🙄

2 hours ago, Anna said:

We can take those 70 years and slide them to the left by 2 years to get to 537 and I think it would still be fair to say that this could count as the end of servitude to Babylon.

But Babylonian domination wasn't limited to over the Jews. Babylon dominated a whole host of other nations too.

Source

When did the 70 years' servitude for the nations end? Did it depend on when Cyrus proclaimed his decree to the Jews and when they were settled back home? The nations' freedom couldn't all hinge on that, surely?

2 hours ago, Anna said:

I am still learning, as I'm sure you have guessed, so I apologize. Some of the things I say might sound ridiculous to you and Ann.

No need to apologize. Your questions/comments are genuine and come from the right place. Even if we end up not agreeing or are not entirely convinced with each other's viewpoints, at least we're having an open, intelligent discussion. 🙂

2 hours ago, Anna said:

But according to Ezra, it could have been the decree of Cyrus that signaled the end of the 70 years, and as you said earlier, that happened in 537

How does that fit with the 70 years being fulfilled when the Babylonian king was 'called to account' (Jer. 25:12)? 

Edit to add: How does this also fit with Jer. 29:10 where the 70 years are fulfilled then God turns his attention to bringing the exiles back?

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

Maybe you are the one with no insight - because he may be correcting you and you are too obtuse to see it.

The fact that you cannot see the connection between the gods and the stars indicates that you have no clue of Babylonian culture.  They did not have science - religion was their 'everything' - superstition spells and all.

It's. Simple. Math!

360 / 12 = 30

F'goodness' sake!

3 hours ago, César Chávez said:

[Quoting Francesca Rochberg's In the Path of the Moon: Babylonian Celestial Divination and Its Legacy (2010), p.363-4]

"As discussed earlier the 360 ideal calendar days could have been transformed into ecliptical degrees by associating intervals of solar risings along the horizon with the 12 ideal months. The sun would stay in each of the twelve arcs for 30 days, giving rise to a numerically identified solar path divided into twelve portions of 30 units each, called UŠ. This, as posited by Brack-Bernsen and Hunger, is a plausible derivation of the twelve zodiacal signs and the 360 degrees of the ecliptic."

The answer was even there in your random c&p's. You're too much of a giant nitwit to have noticed! 🤣🤣🤣

🤣 at Cesar's Googling and lengthy, but irrelevant, copy-and-pastes in a vain attempt to hide his embarrassing blunder, and that further drive home the point that he had no clue what Gertoux or I were talking about.

 👋👋👋 Well done!

5 hours ago, scholar JW said:

The period began in 997 BCE  with the splitting of the kingdom of Israel

Date is disputed. Other non-WT models are out there that fit the 390 years with the conventional timeline.

5 hours ago, scholar JW said:

The foretold definite historic period of '70 years' ended with the Return of the Jews under the Decree of King Cyrus of Persia in 537 BCE. Jer. 25:12; 2 Chron.36: 22-23; Ezr.1: 1-4; 3:1.

As has been shown ad infinitum, Jer. 25:12 falsifies your claim that the 70 year period of the nations' servitude to Babylon ended with the repatriation of the Jews.

6 hours ago, scholar JW said:

The 70 weeks of years of Daniel

... is another subject beyond the scope of this thread and it similarly involves an erroneous WT starting date.

6 hours ago, scholar JW said:

The Gentile Times or the appointed times of the nations of Daniel ... ... destruction of Jerusalem by King Nebuchadnezzar in 607 BCE with a duration of 2520 years or 'seven times'. Da. 4: 10-17; 20-25  and ended with the installation of Jesus Christ, King of God's Kingdom in 1914 CE. Da. 4: 17; 25-26, 32, 34; Lu 21:24; Da. 7:13-14; Rev. 12:5-12. 

Again, WT interpretation of these periods is upended by sound exegesis and by WT following its own new approach regarding types and antitypes:

Humans cannot know which Bible accounts are shadows of things to come and which are not. The clearest course is this: Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so. - w15 3/15 p. 18

6 hours ago, scholar JW said:

The 586/7 dilemma continues to haunt modern scholarship from the days of Edwin Thiele which was heightened as real conundrum of secular chronology by Rodger Young who has not yet solved the problem and has not yet been solved. 

Neil, whatever WT fantasies you have swirling around in that stubborn skull of yours, you know what you've just said above isn't true. You know Young's articles well enough and are familiar with his conclusions. Doesn't your conscience prick you when you lie like that, especially when you can be caught out so easily? Have you no shame? Smh. 😦

"In this paper, the method is applied to all Scriptures in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, 2 Kings, and 2 Chronicles relating to the date of Jerusalem's fall to Nebuchadnezzar. It is shown that all texts involved are in harmony with themselves and with each other, and the only year possible for Jerusalem's fall is 587 BC."

- http://www.rcyoung.org/papers.html

"The conclusions from the analysis are as follows.

"(1) Jerusalem fell in the fourth month (Tammuz) of 587 bc. All sources which bear on the question—Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and 2 Kings—are consistent in dating the event in that year."

- Young, R.C., 'When Did Jerusalem Fall?', JETS 47/1 (March 2004) 21–3.

There you go again, Neil. Back in your fantasy world.

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

I recently looked at the chronology again.  It cannot fit into the skewed secular dates.

It's Watchtower chronology that skews the biblical and secular dates for that period. Otherwise, the Bible and history fit very well. 

1 hour ago, Anna said:

Yes, the 70 years were a given, so you will still probably agree that the 70 years of servitude to Babylon, whether Jerusalem was to be destroyed or not, or whether some of the Jews stayed or not,  had to start somewhere. Counting back 70 years from the return of the Jews to Jerusalem (or the decree by Cyrus to rebuild the temple) could still be an option to pinpoint when the 70 years started or not?

But the 70 years are not contingent on Jerusalem being repopulated. Jeremiah prophesied that the nations would serve Babylon for 70 years and that time would be up when the Babylonian king was 'called to account.' (Jer. 25) That 'calling to account' happened in 539 when Nabonidus and Belshazzar were deposed/killed. Thus, 539 marked the end of the 70 years servitude to the Babylonian dynasty.

49 minutes ago, Anna said:

Again, when does one pinpoint exactly when to start counting the Jews as "having returned to Jerusalem"? The WT article chose the date when true worship was resumed, albite as you say; on makeshift altars. I assume that would have been about about 6 months prior?

Ezra said Cyrus' decree was given in his 1st year. WT understands that to have been late 538/early 537 (we won't go into how valid or otherwise that assumption is for now). The trip, according to Ezra 7:9, takes about 4 months. Ezra also said the Jews were settled in their cities by the 7th month (Tishri - around October). Therefore, WT understands that the first batch of Jews had returned to their homeland in 537.

"Then, during his first year as ruler of Babylon, Cyrus issued a decree opening the way for the Jewish exiles to return to Jerusalem. (Ezr 1:1-4) ... A remnant that numbered 42,360 (including men, women, and children) made the journey, arriving in Judah in 537 B.C.E. (Ezr 1:5–3:1; 4:1)"
- it-2 p. 332 - Insight, Volume 2

32 minutes ago, Anna said:

You try not to figure out exactly which deportation Jeremiah was applying the 70 years to, because as you know there was more than one deportation. So to be on the safe side, you count the 70 years back from when the Jews returned to Jerusalem and started rebuilding the temple.

The problem with that approach is that God's promise in v.10 would have been meaningless or misleading to those thousands of exiles already there. The whole reason for the letter was to neutralize false information coming from bad prophets who said the Babylonian yoke will be broken within a couple of years (Jer. 27 & 28). The letter was meant for those already exiled - not for those still in Jerusalem who, at that point in time, may never have ended up in exile. After all, God was giving them opportunities to avoid disaster:

Jer. 27:11, 17 - But 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.

Do not listen to them. Serve the king of Babylon and you will keep living. Why should this city become a ruin?

Had they listened, Jerusalem would have been left alone and no more captives would have been taken. Jerusalem's destruction was not a foregone conclusion; 70 years servitude to Babylon (regardless of whether the Jews were exiled or at home) was inescapable.

13 minutes ago, Anna said:

I don't think so. 

Excerpt from WT 11/10/1

When were the Jews released? The decree ending their exile was issued in “the first year of Cyrus the king of Persia.” (See the box “A Pivotal Date in History.”) Thus, by the fall of 537 B.C.E., the Jews had returned to Jerusalem to restore true worship.—Ezra 1:1-5; 2:1; 3:1-5.

Those scriptures only talk about them settling in their cities in the 7th month and building some makeshift temporary altar.

Ezra 3:6 - From the first day of the seventh month they started to offer up burnt sacrifices to Jehovah, though the foundation of Jehovah’s temple had not yet been laid.

Ezra 3:8 - In the second year after they came to the house of the true God at Jerusalem, in the second month, Ze·rubʹba·bel the son of She·alʹti·el, Jeshʹu·a the son of Je·hozʹa·dak and the rest of their brothers, the priests and the Levites, and all those who had come to Jerusalem out of the captivity started the work; they appointed the Levites from 20 years old and up to serve as supervisors over the work of the house of Jehovah.

So the Jews, quite sensibly, didn't start work on the temple during the winter but waited till the next spring (536, WT time).

3 minutes ago, Anna said:

Sorry, I meant Jeremiah, Jer 29:10

Think about that for a minute. 

Let's use the rNWT for this verse:

10 “For this is what Jehovah says, ‘When 70 years at Babylon are fulfilled, I will turn my attention to you, and I will make good my promise by bringing you back to this place.’

But who was Jeremiah talking to? V. 1, 2:

These are the words of the letter that Jeremiah the prophet sent from Jerusalem to the rest of the elders among the exiled people, the priests, the prophets, and all the people, whom Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar had taken into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon,  after King Jec·o·niʹah, the queen mother, the court officials, the princes of Judah and Jerusalem, and the craftsmen and the metalworkers had gone out of Jerusalem.

The letter was for the exiles taken in 617 (WT time). Checking the figures in 2 Kings 24 and at the end of Jer. 52, the greatest number of captives were taken then. Jehovah told these exiles that he would turn his attention to them once their 70 years 'at Babylon' was fulfilled. But if these exiles were taken in 617, when God turned his attention to them after Babylon fell, they would have actually been 'at Babylon' 80 years - not 70.

Something has gone awry with WT's translation and application here, don't you think? Or do you have a resolution for this anomaly?