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

[Ann O'Maly]

23 hours ago, Anna said:

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

In 626 BCE, Nabopolassar (Nebuchadnezzar's father) took the Babylonian throne from the Assyrian ruler, Sin-šarra-iškun. Yes, Nabop. began a new era of Babylonian rule BUT he didn't gain hegemony over parts of Babylonia and the predominant power Assyria for some years. There were some Babylonian cities/states that were still loyal to Assyria - it was, politically, a messy time with each side trying to wrest control from the other, bringing in support from other sympathetic nations. Eventually, Nabop. prevailed and, with the help of the Medes, trashed Assyria's capital Nineveh in 612 BCE. Aššur-uballit (the new Assyrian king) went west and made Harran the new Assyrian capital. Long story short, Nabop. conquered Harran in 610/609 BCE and took its spoils. Aššur-uballit tried to take it back a few months later in the summer of 609 BCE but failed. The Assyrian kingdom was finished.

So, if one wants to take the 70 years' period of nations' servitude literally (rather than as a rounded or figurative number), one could reasonably argue that Babylonian domination over the nations began in 609 BCE and ended with the Persian conquest of Babylon in 539 BCE.

The point about how long the exiles were 'at Babylon' is that Jeremiah's letter at Jer. 29 is specifically addressed to the vast number of Jews who had been deported in 597 BCE with King Jehoiachin and the royal family (the second recorded siege of Jerusalem in the Bible - the first one, of course, being the one mentioned at Dan. 1:1). Jer. 29:10 says that when the 70 year period was completed, God would turn his attention to these exiles and make good on his promise to bring them back home ... only, if we use WT time, those exiles would have been taken in 617 BCE. So, assuming a 537 BCE return (just for the sake of argument), it would mean the majority of the total number of exiles (from all the deportations) would be 'at Babylon' for 80 - not 70 - years. It doesn't fit.

 

[Ann O'Maly]

@scholar JW

Neil, as I said, you and I have had these discussions numerous times. Your objections have been countered and rebutted each time. Rainer Albertz agrees with the conventional timeline (see his table on p. xxi) and you already know what I'm going to say about you selecting one of Josephus' figures over the other one he gives.

[scholar JW]

Ann, Yes we have had numerous discussions numerous times and your objections have been countered and rebutted on each and every occasion. Rainer Albertz does conform to traditional Chronology or timeline except that he begins the Exie or Exilic Era from the destruction of Jerusalem in 587/586 BCE, rather than an earlier date. Josephus gives several references which are explanatory of the 70 years and it is only one other that refers to a period of 50 years which alone is contentious.

scholar JW

 

[scholar JW]

Ann

It is impossible to begin the 70 years of nation's servitude in 609 BCE because nothing of any historical significance occurred in that year. At that time it is historically incorrect to speak of any Babylonish domination at that time for the major player in the Region was Egypt and remained a dominant player until the Battle at Carchemish some four years later.Further, nowhere does the OT refer to the expression of '70 years of nation's servitude' for it seems you are conflating this with the seventy years of Jeremiah'.Scholars including Albertz refer to 3 deportations so that means that for some exiles their respective exiles would vary in length as you have explained but when we come to the chronology and nature of the 70 years our minds are focussed on that Exile proper which consumed the nation and as Albertz termed it- a CATASTROPHE. It is this Exile which began after the Fall and lasted until the Return which the 70 years of Jeremiah refer because it was commensurate with a period of servitude to Babylon and Desolation of the land of Judah.

scholar JW

[scholar JW]

JW Insider

WT Chronology only uses the secular date for the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE for all other dates are based on the biblical narrative counting backwards or forwards in order to construct a scheme of Chronology, During the Neo-Babylonian Period alone there is found to be a Gap of 20 years and thus is used as 'corrective'in order to harmonize Biblical Chronology with traditional Chronology. For Dates that lie outside this period the biblical data where applicable is used to construct a Chronology that goes far back to Adam in 4026 BCE. 

Your claim that 'we have absolutely no idea at what point between 607 and 539 for example, that we have actually added the 20 years that we needed' is simply nonsense.The fact of the matter is that period, the Neo-Babylonian Period parallels Biblical Period of Jewish history and contains events that are or can be synchronized between both schemes. It is proven that there is a 20 years gap which floats between the two because of the '70' years missing from the NB Period historically, therefore, any interpreter, Chronologist or scholar needs to make an adjustment or corrective in order to harmonize the two systems. This is what scholars call -METHODOLOGY!!!!! This represents sound academic practice.

According to at least not half a dozen as you say but there are 17 lines of evidence which would corroborate NB Chronology along with thousands of clay documents wherein no mention or description of the biblical 70 years occurs. How strange! Yet the Bible mentions. discusses, explains this most important and critical period of biblical history so it cannot be ignored for it intruded upon and shaped the NB Period.

scholar JW

[scholar JW]

Anna

Herein I will attempt to answer your questions in your last two posts simply for if you read my responses to Ann and JW Insider these would address your questions in part.

The two dates of 609 and 605 BCE are used in our publications for different events so it is not the events but the dates that are not recognized in our publications or in WT/ Bible Chronology. Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 which of course lies between these two dates but these events, the battle at Carchemish and Megiddo preceded the Fall thus must be duly corrected or adjusted.

The dates for those events 629 and 625 now corrected by means of the insertion of the biblical 70 years causing a twenty-year corrective factor.

scholar JW

 

[JW Insider]

7 hours ago, scholar JW said:

During the Neo-Babylonian Period alone there is found to be a Gap of 20 years

Not true. There has never been found to be a 20 year gap. That's the problem. And it really is a problem of honesty. No one has found one, no one has seen any hint of one. No one would even know where to look for such a gap because each and every year is completely accounted for.

7 hours ago, scholar JW said:

WT Chronology only uses the secular date for the Fall of Babylon in 539 BCE for all other dates are based on the biblical narrative counting backwards or forwards in order to construct a scheme of Chronology

As I said, it is a matter of honesty. Although merely highlighting the word "scheme" here would be a cheap shot. The real problems were already discussed and you (scholar JW) already failed to provide any evidence for your claims, even though you gave the impression you have been looking for evidence even among scholarly circles for many years now.

It's almost like you have come into a room with 100 people to claim that 20+30=70, while 99 others are saying that 20+50=70. You can't find your evidence, but say it exists, then you go away for a time but come back saying the evidence exists, but you still can't find it.

7 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Your claim that 'we have absolutely no idea at what point between 607 and 539 for example, that we have actually added the 20 years that we needed' is simply nonsense.The fact of the matter is that period, the Neo-Babylonian Period parallels Biblical Period of Jewish history and contains events that are or can be synchronized between both schemes. It is proven that there is a 20 years gap which floats between the two because of the '70' years missing from the NB Period historically, therefore, any interpreter, Chronologist or scholar needs to make an adjustment or corrective in order to harmonize the two systems. This is what scholars call -METHODOLOGY!!!!! This represents sound academic practice.

As I said, it is a matter of honesty. You don't have any idea at what point between 607 and 539 where you have added the 20 years. It's as if you think it just floats somewhere between the two dates. Then you say it is proven, but you still say that you have no idea where the point is. You even admit the words that:

• "there is is a 20 years gap which floats between the two because of the '70' years missing from the NB Period historically."

What does that even mean? That you actually do know the point because it floats somewhere at some unknown point? As I said, it's a matter of honesty. What you have done here is what scholars call a lack of methodology. It's completely unsound academic practice. Sorry, but it sounds like pretentiousness in the hopes that no one will read what you just said very carefully.

7 hours ago, scholar JW said:

According to at least not half a dozen as you say but there are 17 lines of evidence which would corroborate NB Chronology along with thousands of clay documents

Yes. There are even more lines of secular evidence that corroborate a timetable which is also confirmed by the Bible. And this overwhelming evidence is no challenge at all to the Bible's chronology. The Bible chronology works just fine with the secular chronology here. The 70 years of Jeremiah is a nearly perfect fit, as a matter of fact.

But there is a simple way for you to show whether you are telling the truth. If you actually do have an idea at what point between 607 and 539 you have added the 20 years, simply tell me where it is. You have the secular dates, nearly a 50 year period from 587 to 538, and you know the names and length of reigns of each of the know Neo-Babylonian kings in this period that have even been admitted by the Watchtower publications. So just tell us where the extra 20 years fits into that secular chronology. Show us at what point the secular chronology went wrong, and then we'll know if what you said was true, or nonsense.

[scholar JW]

JW Insider

The Babylonian Gap of 20 years is proved by comparing that period with the 70 years of biblical history, The Bible specifies the period which was commensurate with the Babylonian Period therefore that Period requires that adjustment. Such a corrective harmonized all of the data allowing an accurate scheme of chronology to be realized

The scheme of WT chronology.is a valid presentation of all of the evidence and can be tested and has been subject to scholarly inquiry over many decades but recent research has proven its validity such as in the case of Furuli's research into VAT 4956 amongst other things. I am no late entrant into this discussion but remain very comfortable not only with our Chronology but of others and have long debated these matters over decades with many different WT critics.

You do not need a specific point to insert the twenty years but if you require some specificity I would insert it between the Neb's 18th year and the last year of Nabonidus' reign in 539 BCE for that will do nicely.Honesty requires consideration of all relevant factors so if you ignore the 70 years then your scholarship is compromised. This requires sound methodology and this is plainly evident because all factors are considered even secular evidence where necessary and relevant. There is no room for pretentiousness in Chronology but simply following the evidence where it leads.

Traditional Chronology ignores the seventy years mostly and where some have included it in their schemes there is a lack of consistency in its timing or its nature is misconstrued eg such lists or schemes end it with the Fall of Babylon and not the Return so this creates many problems. In your last paragraph, I have answered your question in the foregoing: iNSERT the 20 years anywhere between 587/586 and 539 BCE and that will expand the timeline to 607 BCE. QED

scholar JW

[Ann O'Maly]

15 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Rainer Albertz does conform to traditional Chronology or timeline except that he begins the Exie or Exilic Era from the destruction of Jerusalem in 587/586 BCE, rather than an earlier date.

... and finishes it in 520 BCE, while acknowledging that "it is difficult to delimit the exilic period historically" and there were "substantial deportations" from earlier times (p. 2). This doesn't help your defense of WT's chronology, Neil. Why bring it up?

14 hours ago, scholar JW said:

It is impossible to begin the 70 years of nation's servitude in 609 BCE because nothing of any historical significance occurred in that year.

Perhaps you need to re-read my earlier post that evidences the opposite.

14 hours ago, scholar JW said:

At that time it is historically incorrect to speak of any Babylonish domination at that time for the major player in the Region was Egypt and remained a dominant player until the Battle at Carchemish some four years later.

ip-1 chap. 19 p. 253 par. 21
"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."

14 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Further, nowhere does the OT refer to the expression of '70 years of nation's servitude' for it seems you are conflating this with the seventy years of Jeremiah'.

Jer. 25:11 - "'And all this land will be reduced to ruins and will become an object of horror, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years.'"

3 hours ago, scholar JW said:

The scheme of WT chronology.is a valid presentation of all of the evidence and can be tested and has been subject to scholarly inquiry over many decades but recent research has proven its validity such as in the case of Furuli's research into VAT 4956 amongst other things.

You don't know whether Furuli's 'research' is valid or not. You've not checked.
 

[JW Insider]

@scholar JW,

At least you have admitted that your claim was totally FALSE. Thank you.

Let's review:

• I said that we [in the WT publications] have absolutely no idea at what point between 607 and 539, for example, that we have actually added the 20 years that we needed. We just say that it's in there somewhere, and maybe someday maybe some evidence will turn up for it.
• You said, that's nonsense. More specifically you even said: "Your claim that 'we have absolutely no idea at what point between 607 and 539 for example, that we have actually added the 20 years that we needed' is simply nonsense."
• I said: there is a simple way for you to show whether you are telling the truth. If you actually do have an idea at what point between 607 and 539 you have added the 20 years, simply tell me where it is.
• Then you admit that you have still FAILED to identify the point in question. You said that you can INSERT the 20 years anywhere between 587/586 and 539 BCE.

Your last statement is so patently false. It's such an admission of failure that I'm surprised you ever bothered to call something I said "nonsense" and then so clearly showed that it was correct all along.

As I said, it's a matter of honesty.

[JW Insider]

@Anna ,

I think that the following explanation offers a good start for discussing the points in a well organized manner. It's well written, easy to understand, and I don't think it comes from anyone who has a biased stake in the current Watchtower explanation. It's just another person trying to grapple with the same Bible verses that we are, and trying to defend the Bible against Bible detractors. From here to the remainder of the post, it's all a quote from an article at http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/years.htm

-----------beginning of quote, through end of this post -------------

Seventy years of Babylonian rule: A detailed look at Jeremiah 25:9-12 and some objections that skeptics have

Many people have questioned the accuracy of Jeremiah's prophecy about a 70-year period during which Babylon would dominate Judah and hold Jews as captives in Babylon. These questions, in my opinion, are based on a mistaken belief that the captivity was supposed to last 70 years. My response is in three parts:

• Part 1. Summary of my understanding of the prophecy
• Part 2. My explanation of when the 70 years ended.
• Part 3. My theory on when the 70 years began.

Part 1. Summary of my understanding of the prophecy:

1. Jeremiah 25:9-12 said that Judah would serve Babylon for 70 years.

2. Jeremiah 29:10 makes it clear that Babylon's domination of Judah would include a captivity during which Jews would be taken as captives to Babylon.

3. Jeremiah 29:10 said that the captivity would end when the "70 years" ended.

4. But Jeremiah never said that the captivity itself would last 70 years. He only said that Babylonian rule would last 70 years.

5. Babylon's rule lasted 70 years, from 609 BC when the last Assyrian king, Ashur-uballit II, was defeated in Harran, until 539 BC when the Medo-Persians conquered Babylon.

Part 2. My explanation of when the 70 years ended:

The people who have questioned the accuracy of this prophecy are, as far as I have been able to determine, are correct in that the captivity Jews in Babylon did not last 70 years, if the commonly assigned dates for the captivity are taken seriously. Most historical sources that I have seen state that 539 BC was the year that Babylon was conquered by the Medo-Persians. And that would seem to be a reasonable ending date for the captivity. But when did the captivity begin? Some say it began in 597 BC, when Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem. If this date is accepted, then the captivity spanned no more than 59 years. So how does or 59 years equal 70 years? It can't and it doesn't.

Believers, including myself, often point out that the book of Daniel states that there was an earlier taking of captives from Judah to Babylon, in either 605 BC or 606 BC, depending on which source of information is used. And, the believers often point out that although Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 BC, he didn't release the Jews until the following year, in 538 BC or even 537 BC. And some believers have assigned the actual year in which the Jews of Babylon did begin to return to Judah was 537 BC or 536 BC. Using the two extremes as the starting and ending points, one could arrive at a 70-year span. But, in my opinion, none of this is even necessary because Jeremiah never said that the captivity would last 70 years. He only said that Babylonian rule would last 70 years.

In Jeremiah 25:9-12, it said that Judah and the surrounding nations would serve Babylon for 70 years. But, Jeremiah does not say that the forced deportation of Jews from Judah would last 70 years. The captivity is something that grew out of Babylon's domination of Judah. The domination was supposed to span 70 years, but Jeremiah never said that the captivity itself would span 70 years. Below is the NIV translation of Jeremiah 25:9-12:

Jeremiah 25:9-12

9 I will summon all the peoples of the north and my servant Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon," declares the LORD, "and I will bring them against this land and its inhabitants and against all the surrounding nations. I will completely destroy them and make them an object of horror and scorn, and an everlasting ruin.

10 I will banish from them the sounds of joy and gladness, the voices of bride and bridegroom, the sound of millstones and the light of the lamp.

11 This whole country will become a desolate wasteland, and these nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years.

12 "But when the seventy years are fulfilled, I will punish the king of Babylon and his nation, the land of the Babylonians, for their guilt," declares the LORD, "and will make it desolate forever.

But, in Jeremiah 29:10, Jeremiah does clearly say that the captivity will terminate at the end of the 70-year period. Below is the NIV translation of Jeremiah 29:10:

Jeremiah 29:10

This is what the LORD says: "When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my gracious promise to bring you back to this place.

In Daniel 9:1-2, the prophet Daniel refers to the 70 years in that "the desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years." But he too does not state that the captivity was supposed to last 70 years. What did he mean by "desolation?" Some might argue that he meant "captivity." But that would be an assumption, and nothing more than an assumption. And, in my opinion, given the fact that Daniel is probably referring to the Jeremiah prophecy, it would be a weak assumption to think that he meant "captivity" when he said "desolation." The desolation could simply refer to Babylonian domination, lasting from 609 BC to 539 BC. Others might claim that the "desolation" that Daniel referred to might actually be a reference to the 70 years in which the Temple had been destroyed. The Temple, and Jerusalem, were destroyed in 586 BC by the Babylonians. The Temple, which was rebuilt, was consecrated in 516 BC, 70 years after its destruction. Below is the NIV translation of Daniel 9:1-2:

Daniel 9:1-2

1 In the first year of Darius son of Xerxes (a Mede by descent), who was made ruler over the Babylonian kingdom--

2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, understood from the Scriptures, according to the word of the LORD given to Jeremiah the prophet, that the desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years.

In 2 Chronicles 36:19-21, the Bible refers to a 70 year period during which the land of Judah enjoyed its Sabbath rests. This Bible passage begins with a reference to the 586 BC destruction of Jerusalem, during which the Temple was also destroyed. If it specifically meant to apply Jeremiah's 70-year prophecy to the destruction of the city, then that application could find fulfillment in that the Temple remained destroyed and non-operational for 70 years, from 586 BC to 516 BC. After the Jews rebuilt the Temple, it was consecrated in 516 BC. But regardless of how the 70 years reference is being used in this passage, it does not say that the captivity itself would last 70 years. Below is the NIV translation of 2 Chronicles 36:19-21:

2 Chronicles 36:19-21

19 They set fire to God's temple and broke down the wall of Jerusalem; they burned all the palaces and destroyed everything of value there.

20 He carried into exile to Babylon the remnant, who escaped from the sword, and they became servants to him and his sons until the kingdom of Persia came to power.

21 The land enjoyed its sabbath rests; all the time of its desolation it rested, until the seventy years were completed in fulfillment of the word of the LORD spoken by Jeremiah.

In Zechariah 1:12, the prophet Zechariah makes a passing reference to a 70 year period. But that passage also does not in any way contradict my contention that the 70 year prophecy of Jeremiah refers to Babylonian rule and that Jeremiah never said that the captivity would last 70 years.

Part 3. My theory on when the 70 years began:

When did Babylon begin its domination of Judah? We know that there are historical records that claim that the Assyrian Empire dominated Judah, and many other nations. And we know that the Assyrian Empire was conquered by the Babylonian Empire.

In 612 B.C. the Babylonians and the Medes conquered Nineveh, which at that time was the capital of the Assyrian Empire. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica: "…Nineveh suffered a defeat from which it never recovered. Extensive traces of ash, representing the sack of the city by Babylonians, Scythians, and Medes in 612 BC, have been found in many parts of the Acropolis. After 612 BC the city ceased to be important…"

After the defeat of Nineveh, the last of the Assyrian kings, Ashur-uballit II, fled to the west with members of his army. Most online historical references that I have been able to find state that the reign of Ashur-uballit II ended in 609 BC. My sources for this are the two Web site addresses below, the first of which is a page from the Missouri Western State College web site:

http://crain.english.mwsc.edu/Jonah/assyrians.htm

The conquest of the Assyrian Empire allowed Babylon and the Medes to divide the empire amongst themselves. The Babylonians chose a vast area of the Assyrian-controlled territories, including Judah and the surrounding countries.

Using the 609 BC date for the demise of the Assyrian Empire and for the rise of the new Babylonian Empire, and using the 539 BC date for the end of the Babylonian Empire, we end up with a 70-year span of Babylonian rule. That, for the reasons described above, is what I believe is the 70-year period referred to in Jeremiah 25:9-12 and Jeremiah 29:10.

 

----- end of quote from http://www.aboutbibleprophecy.com/years.htm

[Ann O'Maly]

Another very helpful non-JW/Bible-believing discussion from a respected journal for @Anna:

JEREMIAH'S SEVENTY YEARS FOR BABYLON: A RE-ASSESSMENT PART I: THE SCRIPTURAL DATA

JEREMIAH'S SEVENTY YEARS FOR BABYLON: A RE-ASSESSMENT PART II: THE HISTORICAL DATA