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

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, Nana Fofana said:

I know "Samaria was reinhabited with imported captives from other parts of the Assyrian Empire", but I believe Jerusalem and its vicinity were to be, and were, emptied and left "desolate" , according to the  Bible.

That's correct, of course. Jerusalem and the nation of Judea were definitely to be emptied and left desolate. But nowhere does the Bible say that the full and complete desolation measured from some specific point in time, was to begin counting off the 70 year period. In fact, there is no Bible passage that says the entire 70 years of Babylonian domination was equal to be equal in length to a 70 year period of full desolation.

The Bible appears to be saying that the desolation of Jerusalem was a key part of that desolation, the final key to the desolation. But most of the exiles had been taken 10 to 11 years prior to that destruction, according to the specific numbers given in the Bible. Judean had been escaping to the nations all around them during the entire period of the 70 years given to Babylonian domination. But it was not a true safety as Jeremiah said that those nations would feel the hammer of Babylonian domination in time, themselves. Isaiah shows that all these places absorbed fleeing Judeans . . .

• (Isaiah 11:11, 12) . . .In that day Jehovah will again offer his hand, a second time, to reclaim the remnant of his people who are left from As·syrʹi·a, from Egypt, from Pathʹros, from Cush, from Eʹlam, from Shiʹnar, [Babylon] from Haʹmath, and from the islands of the sea. 12 He will raise up a signal for the nations and gather the dispersed ones of Israel, and he will gather together the scattered ones of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

One point to notice of course is that the Insight book added the word "suddenly" but then quoted two archaeologists/historians that, if you read them, are both quite clear that this was NOT a sudden desolation, in their opinion. Of course, I'm not saying it was sudden, or it wasn't sudden. That word can be subjective, depending on the historical perspective. I was only pointing out that the Bible gives an impression of a process of desolation that was never pinpointed to a specific event. Even if the Bible had tied the final and full desolation to a specific event, such as the destruction in Neb's 19th year, or the final captivity in his 24th year, that even this was never tied to the count of the 70 years.

But in all events, remember that I agree completely that the nation and city became totally desolated, a pile of stones, effectively without an inhabitant.

 

[AlanF]

As usual, JW defenders with their preset agenda are here making pronouncements on subjects they know little or nothing about. I'll disabuse them of some of their notions with facts.

On 1914:

C. T. Russell made the 1914 date the linchpin of his chronological doctrinal structure beginning in 1876. His creation, the Watch Tower Society, has continued with this false structure through today.

How do we know that Russell's chronological structure is false? By many methods, but what I'll mention here is that the proof is in the pudding:

Not a single one of Russell's predictions for visible events based on that structure came true.

Not one of the supposedly Bible-based claims made by Russell's successors in the Watch Tower Society for the post-1914 period are valid:

Famine in the world has, on average, been much less severe than pre-1914.

Pestilence in the world has, on average, been much less severe than pre-1914.

War has been, on average, nearly the same in terms of per capita killed than pre-1914.

Earthquake frequency and intensity have been about the same as pre-1914. The risk of death due to earthquakes is substantially lower than pre-1914; the per-capita death rate in the 18th century was about 2 1/2 times lower than in the 20th century.

Had the mass killers of history claimed by the Watch Tower Society to have been operating on an unprecedently high level since 1914 actually been so operating, they would have killed an unprecedently high percentage of world population, resulting in a massive population crash. Yet we see a massive population explosion beginning in the early 1800s and continuing without letup through today.

Yes, today there are many potential severe killers on the loose: global warming, political crises, war, etc. But these do not support the Watch Tower Society's tradition about post-1914 events (e.g. famine, pestilence, war, earthquakes). Thus, trouble in the world today is irrelevent to the Watch Tower Society's claims about events beginning in 1914.

On 607:

The Watch Tower Society's pivotal date for its 1914 chronology is 537 BCE, which it bases on speculation that there were about two years between the fall of Babylon in 539 BCE and the return of some Jewish exiles to Judah in 537 BCE. Yet there is no proof of this speculation, and one will find only speculation in Watch Tower publications. Further, the available evidence is that the Jews returned to Judah in 538 BCE, thus wiping out Watch Tower chronology in one fell swoop.

The claim that the prophet Jeremiah predicted exactly 70 years of desolation of Judah is demonstrably false, using the Bible alone. What Jeremiah predicted was 70 years of Babylonian hegemony over the Near East. Desolation of Judah was to occur only if the Jews refused to bow to Babylonian rule.

Much more could be said, but for now I'll leave it at that.

AlanF

[Arauna]

2 hours ago, Witness said:

I am dumbfounded by your condemnatory words against the anointed who are AMONG

I was talking about contributors who believe that the anointed will come back in the flesh to live on earth after they have already received their heavenly calling.  I was NOT talking about the anointed on earth today who have not yet been given a heavenly body.

Jesus did not come back in the flesh and ‘live’ amongst the people on earth did he?   He came back for only 50 days before he went back to his father.

 

2 hours ago, Witness said:

lders do not carry God’s laws within their heart, allowing them to teach as God intended; they carry a man contrived set of rules.

I think they do a pretty good job of the training work they are doing in all the earth.  It is hard to manage so many different societies with so many different histories, previous religions and cultures and maintain functioning unity and harmony. How would you have managed it? 

I see you call it rules….  Well, to manage such a large family and keep out those who foment false teachings and divisions – there should be guidelines.  One shoe cannot fit all situations and therefore a body of elders should use their own combined discretion in situations where there are no guidelines. But there should be some form of uniformity in all the earth. It is not a perfect system but it works….we are still on this side of Armageddon – nothing is perfect.

I do not think you understand what the word "rule" means.  The letters in Arabic - which is close to the Hebrew- means to judge.  This means that "decisions” will be made regarding the administration of the restoration of the earth and of individual people – who may not be cooperating. 

One need not be among the people 'physically' to do this - just like a board of a company does not have to be present physically to make decisions about a company.

I also said - this does not mean that they will not be able to materialize for special purposes.  However, Jehovah is the perfect planner and everything he does has logic to it:-  

Why will he give a heavenly ‘reward’ and then bring them back to earth in materialized form to live on earth for thousand years.    Would it not have been more practical to let them stay here on earth in human form and then take them to heaven AFTER the 1000 years?   

As I said before - adopted sons of Jehovah will be part of his heavenly family like the other sons. 

Their bodies:

Rom 8:23 Not only that, but we ourselves also who have the firstfruits, namely, the spirit, yes, we ourselves groan within ourselves while we are earnestly waiting for adoption as sons, the release from our ‘bodies’ by ransom. 

1 Cor 15: 50 But I tell you this, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit God’s Kingdom, nor does corruption inherit incorruption.

 The Place:

Rev 3:21 To the one who conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, just as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.

Hebrew 8:1 – What tent is spoken of in these verses? The temple in earthly/fleshly Jerusalem or the heavenly one?

“…and he has sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister of the holy place and of the true tent, which Jehovah set up, and not man. 

4  If he were on earth, he would not be a priest, since there are already men who offer the gifts according to the Law. These men are offering sacred service in a typical representation and a shadow of the heavenly things;

Hebrews 9: For its part, the former covenant used to have legal requirements for sacred service and its holy place on earth.

24 For Christ did not enter into a holy place made with hands, which is a copy of the reality, but into heaven itself,

The reality of the new covenant is in heaven - 

Hebrews 10: for the way of entry into the holy place by the blood of Jesus, which he opened up for us as a new and living way through the curtain, that is, his flesh, 

(Entire Hebrews 10 is about Jesus offering up his flesh - a fleshly body was prepared for him as sacrifice - so will the anointed offer up their flesh)

Hebrews 12:22  But you have approached a Mount Zion and a city of the living God, heavenly Jerusalem, and myriads of angels in general assembly, and the congregation of the firstborn who have been enrolled in the heavens,

. God will be present in this city:

Revelation 22: And there will no longer be any curse. But the throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his slaves will offer him sacred service; and they will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. God will shed light upon them, and they will rule as kings forever and ever.

NEW NATION and citizenship:

Phil 3:20 But our citizenship exists in the heavens, and we are eagerly waiting for a savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our humble body to be like his glorious body by his great power that enables him to subject all things to himself.

MT ZION: Isaiah 8 :18 Jehovah resides on Mount Zion.  

(apologies for the format - it is late and I want to go to bed)

[scholar JW]

Ann O Maly

Well, what took you so long? 2 hours from my old sparring partner on JWD, Alan F who incidentally was forced to concede that there is, in fact, a 'connection' established from the context on page 208. I hope it takes you much less time to discern the nature of the 'connection'!

5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

I also have his 2nd edition, although it's a 1992 printing. Franz did not "support the Society's position" about what was stated in the Proclaimers book. He actually said:

"Brown first published this interpretation in 1823 and his method
converted the “seven times” into 2,520 years in exactly the same way
found today in Watch Tower publications."

... meaning that the way Brown converted 'seven times' into 2,520 years, by using a day-for-a-year method, is the same one Watchtower uses. That's quite different to what you were implying

Read that paragraph again on p. 367 in Franz's COC , 2nd edn, Sept, 1994 which clearly shows Franz' s agreement with the Society's later published statement in the Proclaimer's book that Brown did, in fact, connect Daniel's 'seven times' with Lukes' Gentile Times in Luke 21:24.

6 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

By 2004, Franz had added a footnote:

"See page 134 of Jehovah’s Witnesses—Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom. The book
makes the erroneous statement that, although not ‘clearly discerning’ the date with
which the 2,520 years would begin or end (evidently meaning that his dates for the
beginning and the ending did not match those of Watch Tower teachings), Brown
“did connect these ‘seven times’ with the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24.” As
Jonsson’s book The Gentile Times Reconsidered correctly states “Brown did not
himself associate this period with the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24.” His 2,520-
year calculation did, however, play a part in the later linking of the “seven times”
with the Gentile Times in 1826. See The Gentile Times Reconsidered, pages 32-36,
for a full discussion of this development." - p. 179

That is correct, Franz was forced to withdraw his earlier view in harmony with Carl Jonsson's original dogmatic claim, however, this was no doubt due to the fact that I had written to Franz to seek the reason for his change of mind. He had none but simply acknowledged Jonsson's work but it left the impression in my mind that the reason for this change was the simple fact that the said 'scholar' by means of that email had compromised him.

scholar JW

[Arauna]

 

2 hours ago, AlanF said:

The claim that the prophet Jeremiah predicted exactly 70 years of desolation of Judah is demonstrably false, using the Bible alone.

2 CRON 36:20 + 21

²⁰ He took all the survivors to Babylonia, where they served him and his descendants as slaves until the rise of the Persian Empire. ²¹ And so what the Lord had foretold through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: “The land will lie desolate for seventy years, to make up for the Sabbath rest^[c] that has not been observed.”

Daniel 9

Darius the Mede, who was the son of Xerxes, ruled over the kingdom of Babylonia. ² In the first year of his reign I was studying the sacred books and thinking about the seventy years that Jerusalem would be in ruins, according to what the Lord had told the prophet Jeremiah. ³

 

Jeremiah 29:10Good News Translation (GNT)

¹⁰ “The Lord says, ‘When Babylonia's seventy years are over, I will show my concern for you and keep my promise to bring you back home.

 

Jeremiah 25:

¹¹ And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years.

¹² And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon, a

 

The books of Daniel and Chronicles confirm what Jeremia said:  

[scholar JW]

Alan F

2 hours ago, AlanF said:

As usual, JW defenders with their preset agenda are here making pronouncements on subjects they know little or nothing about. I'll disabuse them of some of their notions with facts

Yes Alan, let's get some facts.

I shan't worry about your early comments on 1914 as these are simply nonsense. As this post is about 607 BCE let us stick to that!

2 hours ago, AlanF said:

The Watch Tower Society's pivotal date for its 1914 chronology is 537 BCE, which it bases on speculation that there were about two years between the fall of Babylon in 539 BCE and the return of some Jewish exiles to Judah in 537 BCE. Yet there is no proof of this speculation, and one will find only speculation in Watch Tower publications. Further, the available evidence is that the Jews returned to Judah in 538 BCE, thus wiping out Watch Tower chronology in one fell swoop.

The claim that the prophet Jeremiah predicted exactly 70 years of desolation of Judah is demonstrably false, using the Bible alone. What Jeremiah predicted was 70 years of Babylonian hegemony over the Near East. Desolation of Judah was to occur only if the Jews refused to bow to Babylonian rule.

No, the pivotal date for WT chronology is 539 BCE and not 537 BCE and there is no speculation associated with the calculation of 537 BCE for it is a 'stand alone' date based on the historical events described 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-3:1-7.

The word speculation is defined as: contemplation along with other related meanings such as conjecture but nothing of that sort is present in WT publications discussing the chronology of the Return of the Jewish Exiles. The date 537 BCE is well established historically, biblically and in accordance with sound principles of Chronology. The WT publications clearly outline all of the data associated with this period and a relevant dating is thereby established as outlined. There is nothing 'bogus' or 'fuzzy' here. In fact, even Carl Jonsson has not found any problems with our Methodology  simply proposing 537 or 538 BCE for the Return.In fact, biblical historians leave this matter open by simply either omitting a precise date or giving a suggestive date for the Return.

Your date of 538 BCE does not fit the evidence and is a poor choice, yes you can make it fit but it is a tight squeeze, for 537 BCE is just a nice fit, comfortable in scope and nature.

Your claim that Jeremiah's 'seventy years' represents only a period of Babylonian hegemony over the Near East is only partially correct for this period also represents total desolation of Jerusalem and Judah and the Exile for and in Babylon.No other theory than this fits all of the biblical, historical data coincides with secular history namely Josephus and fits well within the OT theological context.

scholar JW

 

 

[AlanF]

Scholar JW Pretendus wrote:

Quote

. . . Alan F who incidentally was forced to concede that there is, in fact, a 'connection' established from the context on page 208.

LOL! A leopard doesn't change its spots, and pathological liars rarely quit lying.

I never claimed that Brown wrote or implied that there is no "connection" between "the seven times" and "the Gentile Times". Rather, I have always explained exactly what Brown meant by "connecting" them. And that connection is not what the Society implied in the Proclaimers book (p. 134), which is that Brown equated the two time periods. The implication is clear from the arguments presented in the Proclaimers book.

The overall topic is stated in the title to the section "End of the Gentile Times". The section begins:

Quote

The matter of Bible chronology had long been of great interest to Bible students. Commentators had set out a variety of views on Jesus’ prophecy about "the times of the Gentiles" and the prophet Daniel's record of Nebuchadnezzar's dream regarding the tree stump that was banded for "seven times."--Luke 21:24, KJ; Dan. 4:10-17.

Most readers, especially JW readers, are well aware that the Watch Tower Society has always equated these two periods. Therefore, when the Proclaimers book uses the word "connect", readers will automatically interpret that to mean "equate". That is especially so in view of the book's failure to mention that Brown did not equate the two periods. Here is the offending statement:

Quote

As early as 1823, John A. Brown, whose work was published in London, England, calculated the "seven times" of Daniel chapter 4 to be 2,520 years in length. But he did not clearly discern the date with which the prophetic time period began or when it would end. He did, however, connect these "even times" with the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24.

So then, SJWP, in exactly what sense do you think that the Proclaimers book connected the "seven times" with the "Gentile Times"? And how did Brown connect them? Justify your answer by quoting the appropriate sources.

Of course, all who know your wily ways understand that you'll never answer, any more than you did in our old debate 14 years ago. Rather, at best you'll unleash a blather of gobble-de-goop in an attempt to sidestep.

Quote

I hope it takes you much less time to discern the nature of the 'connection'!

Ann O'Maly is well aware of exactly what the "connection" is. You are obviously clueless.

AlanF

[scholar JW]

Alan F

Again you misrepresent the facts for nowhere did the Society in the quotation on page 134 of the Proclaimers book use the word 'equate' but used the word 'connect' which is not synonymic. Brown simply connects these two time periods simply on the basis that the 'seven times' would be the 'Gentile Times' as part of the signs of his second coming which also would include his second judgement etc..(Eventide , 1823, vol.2.p.208) The Proclaimers  book on p.134 simply stated the fact of the connection between the two time periods contra Jonsson who had asserted the contrary. How then as you claim that Brown equated the two periods when in fact he interprets both periods differently throughout his treatise and the Society did not 'equate' these either but simply affirmed the connection which is clearly understood by any unbiased reader.

The Society in its publication did not explain the connection but simply affirmed it, Brown, on the other hand, connected the two contextually by means of two successive paragraphs, one with the former 'seven times' and in the next, by a quotation of Lule 21;24. Further, the link between the two time periods is part of the' signs of his second coming'.

There you have it in a 'nutshell'. No need for 'gobble-de-goop'.

scholar JW

 

[scholar JW]

Nana Fontana

Thank you for the source but is typical of how this subject is treated in the literature. You should note that there is no specific date given for the Return despite the clear historical facts presented by the Chronicler.

scholar JW

[AlanF]

Arauna:

You yourself just proved what I said:

:: The claim that the prophet Jeremiah predicted exactly 70 years of desolation of Judah is demonstrably false, using the Bible alone.

Since you insist, I'll have to demonstrate my claim.

Quote

 

2 CRON 36:20 + 21

20 He took all the survivors to Babylonia, where they served him and his descendants as slaves until the rise of the Persian Empire. 21 And so what the Lord had foretold through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: "The land will lie desolate for seventy years, to make up for the Sabbath rest[c] that has not been observed."

 

The GNT is a "dynamic equivalence" translation that often relies on interpretation rather than literal interpretation. The above misrepresents what Jeremiah said, because it is an interpretation not a literal translation. Much better is the NWT's rendering:

Quote

20 He 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, 21 to fulfill Jehovah’s word spoken by Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days it lay desolate it kept sabbath, to fulfill 70 years.

Who did the Jews become captive to and servants of? To Nebuchadnezzar and his sons. Until when were they captive? Until the kingdom of Persia began to reign in place of the kingdom of Babylon. In what year was that? In 539 BCE. Therefore the captivity of the Jews to Nebuchadnezzar and his sons ended in 539 BCE -- not in 537 BCE as the Watch Tower Society claims. What fulfilled "Jehovah’s word spoken by Jeremiah"? The ending of the Jews' captivity by their being released by the newly reigning kingdom of Persia.

Also note that Jeremiah prophesied nothing about the land paying off sabbaths, so "Jehovah’s word spoken by Jeremiah" had nothing to do with the paying off of sabbaths. Nor does the passage say that the paying of sabbaths ended when the 70 years ended. It merely says that during the 70 years the land would be paying sabbaths. Since various sources prove that the 70 years were a time of Babylonian supremacy over the Near East, and they most likely began in 609 BCE when Babylon overthrew the last remnants of the Assyrian empire, and they most certainly ended with Babylon's overthrow in 539 BCE, and Jerusalem was overthrown in 587 BCE, the sabbaths were certainly being paid during that time of Babylonian supremacy.

Thus, various other Bible passages must be understood in light of the clear and unambiguous statement in 2 Chron. 36:20 that the Jews were captive to the Babylonians until the Persians began to reign, which was in 539 BCE.

Quote

 

Daniel 9

Darius the Mede, who was the son of Xerxes, ruled over the kingdom of Babylonia. 2 In the first year of his reign I was studying the sacred books and thinking about the seventy years that Jerusalem would be in ruins, according to what the Lord had told the prophet Jeremiah. 3

 

A good example of what I just said, and of the interpretation put upon Daniel 9 by the GNT. A literal translation shows that Daniel did not say that Jerusalem would be in ruins for 70 years. The NWT is again much more literal:

Quote

9 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus -- a descendant of the Medes who had been made king over the kingdom of the Chadeans -- 2 in the first year of his reign I, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of years mentioned in the word of Jehovah to Jeremiah the prophet to fulfill the desolation of Jerusalem, namely, 70 years.

This does not state that the desolation of Jerusalem would end when the 70 years ended. Indeed, it could not mean that, since we have the direct statement in 2 Chron. 36:20 that the 70 years of captivity ended when the Persian empire came to power in 539 BCE.

The ESV allows for this fact:

Quote

9 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, by descent a Mede, who was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans -- 2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, perceived in the books the number of years that, according to the word of the Lord to Jeremiah the prophet, must pass before the end of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy years.

According to this rendering, all that Daniel said was that 70 years must pass before the desolations of Jerusalem would end, not that the end of the desolations would coincide with the end of the 70 years.

So Daniel 9 cannot be used to prove anything; it is ambiguous and therefore must be understood in light of other Bible passages.

Quote

 

Jeremiah 29:10 Good News Translation (GNT)

10
“The Lord says, ‘When Babylonia's seventy years are over, I will show my concern for you and keep my promise to bring you back home.

 

This passage explicitly proves what I have said: the 70 years refer to Babylonian supremacy, not to the captivity of the Jews as a whole or the desolation of Jerusalem.
 

Quote

 

Jeremiah 25:

11 And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years.

12 And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon, a

 

Who are "these nations" that were to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years? The context of Jer. 25 is clear: the Jews and the nations round about. During what time period did they serve? From the beginning of Babylon's rule over the Near East in 609 BCE to its end in 539 when the Persian empire overthrew it.

Note that servitude is not the same as captivity. Jeremiah implored the Jews not to rebel against Babylon. If they did not, Jehovah would allow them to remain on their land during the 70 years of Babylonian supremacy. -- Jer. 27:4-11 They rebelled, and so were punished with captivity.

So you can see how easy it is to disprove Watch Tower Chronology using the Bible alone -- as long as you don't saddle the Bible with Watch Tower traditions.

For a great deal more information on this topic, see here:

https://ad1914.com/

Also see:

https://ad1914.com/category/alan-feuerbacher/

These links contain many links to other definitive deconstructions of Watch Tower chronology.

AlanF

[TrueTomHarley]

I feel privileged as though watching a superhero movie with fantastic heroes and villains converging, ready for combat & settling old grudges once and for all. But what will happen if I get up for popcorn or to use the restroom?

(wait till @Top Cat O'Malighan reveals his true identity)

(and just where does the Librarian fit in? What great personage was she back in the day before ruin set in and she gathered some books to start a new persona?)

(and exactly who is @Ann O'Maly and how did she get her paws on every paper that's ever been printed?)

(why does @AlanF call @scholar JW Scholar Pretendus and how did Christopher Hitchens become Yoda the wise?)

(has @JW Insider succeeded beyond his dreams summoning up the spirits, perhaps scaring even himself?)

(who is Neil Galt?)

(Am I full of you-know-what?)

[AlanF]

Scholar JW Pretendus wrote:

:: As usual, JW defenders with their preset agenda are here making pronouncements on subjects they know little or nothing about. I'll disabuse them of some of their notions with facts

Quote

 

Yes Alan, let's get some facts.

I shan't worry about your early comments on 1914 as these are simply nonsense.

 

As usual you provide no evidence whatsoever -- just your bald assertions which are contradicted by a world of facts.

Quote

As this post is about 607 BCE let us stick to that!

:: The Watch Tower Society's pivotal date for its 1914 chronology is 537 BCE, which it bases on speculation that there were about two years between the fall of Babylon in 539 BCE and the return of some Jewish exiles to Judah in 537 BCE. Yet there is no proof of this speculation, and one will find only speculation in Watch Tower publications. Further, the available evidence is that the Jews returned to Judah in 538 BCE, thus wiping out Watch Tower chronology in one fell swoop.

:: The claim that the prophet Jeremiah predicted exactly 70 years of desolation of Judah is demonstrably false, using the Bible alone. What Jeremiah predicted was 70 years of Babylonian hegemony over the Near East. Desolation of Judah was to occur only if the Jews refused to bow to Babylonian rule.   

Quote

No, the pivotal date for WT chronology is 539 BCE and not 537 BCE

So they claim, but their actual statements prove this wrong.

Since Russell's day, the Watch Tower Society used 536 BCE as the pivotal date for its chronology, claiming that Babylon was destroyed and the desolation of Judah ended then. Thus they used 606 BCE as the beginning date for "the Gentile Times". In the 1940s and 1950s they changed a number of dates. Babylon's fall occurred in 536, then 537, then 538 and finally 539 BCE. The desolation of Jerusalem ended in 536, then 537 BCE. The "times of the Gentiles" began in 606, then 607 BCE. Always the goal was to maintain the 1914 date.

The WTS's basic claim is that the beginning of the "Gentile Times" is to be counted from 70 years back from 537 BCE. This counting back 70 years has always been the most fundamental claim for WTS chronology.

Quote

and there is no speculation associated with the calculation of 537 BCE for it is a 'stand alone' date based on the historical events described 2 Chronicles 36:22-23 and Ezra 1:1-3:1-7.

More unevidenced gobble-de-goop. As I pointed out some 12 years ago, Josephus made statements about the beginning of the building of the temple in 537 BCE that, in conjunction with Ezra, prove that the Jews did not return to Judah in 537 but in 538 BCE. Need I refer you back to the old JWD threads where your claims were demolished?

Quote

The word speculation is defined as: contemplation along with other related meanings such as conjecture but nothing of that sort is present in WT publications discussing the chronology of the Return of the Jewish Exiles.

Easily falsified with some examples:

Quote

 

Cyrus’ decree freeing the Jews to return to Jerusalem likely was made late in the year 538 or early in 537 B.C.E. -- Insight, Vol.1, p.568

This decree was evidently issued late in 538 B.C.E. or early in 537 B.C.E. -- All Scripture, p. 85

Cyrus’ first regnal year would end on March 5 of 537 B.C., or toward the end of the rainy season. Doubtless he considerately issued his decree near the end of the rainy season, shortly before March 5 of 537 B.C. -- W64 2/1 p. 80

 

Since no definitive evidence is presented in any Watch Tower publications, the words "likely", "evidently", "doubtless", etc. clearly prove speculation.

Quote

The date 537 BCE is well established historically,

Wrong. There are NO historical sources that are well established regarding 537 as you claim. The proof is easy: you cannot provide any.

Quote

biblically

Wrong again. Ezra and Josephus together prove that 537 is impossible, and that 538 BCE is almost certainly the date. See https://ad1914.com/category/alan-feuerbacher/ for a brief discussion.

Quote

and in accordance with sound principles of Chronology.

Translation: "in accordance with Watch Tower Tradition".

Quote

The WT publications clearly outline all of the data associated with this period and a relevant dating is thereby established as outlined. There is nothing 'bogus' or 'fuzzy' here.

As shown above, even the Watch Tower admits it's speculation. It is proved by the complete lack of definitive evidence.

Quote

In fact, even Carl Jonsson has not found any problems with our Methodology  simply proposing 537 or 538 BCE for the Return.

Wrong again. Do I have to cite page numbers from GTR for you, oh great and wonderful Oz?

Quote

In fact, biblical historians leave this matter open by simply either omitting a precise date or giving a suggestive date for the Return.

Wrong again. Most refuse to speculate, but a few offer 537 -- always without solid evidence -- and an equal number of others offer 538, usually without much evidence.

Quote

Your date of 538 BCE does not fit the evidence and is a poor choice, yes you can make it fit but it is a tight squeeze, for 537 BCE is just a nice fit, comfortable in scope and nature.

It certainly does fit the evidence, the only actual evidence being given by the combined testimony of Ezra and Josephus, as the above link shows.

Quote

Your claim that Jeremiah's 'seventy years' represents only a period of Babylonian hegemony over the Near East is only partially correct for this period also represents total desolation of Jerusalem and Judah and the Exile for and in Babylon.No other theory than this fits all of the biblical, historical data coincides with secular history namely Josephus and fits well within the OT theological context.

Your usual unevidenced claims. As Christopher Hitchens observed, that which is set forth without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Except that I and others have provided mountains of evidence against Watch Tower Chronology.

AlanF