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

[AlanF]

allensmitth28 wrote:

Quote

 

:: LOL! I posted no such nonsense. YOU posted it. Either you're completely looney, or a pathological liar.

LOL!!!!:D

Forgetting your place in this thread!!!!!!

 

I'll let readers decide if you're looney, a liar or just plain stupid.

I posted this link:

http://www.bible-history.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html

This is shown in the red-outlined URL in your page copy of my post.

You somehow managed to change it:

http://www.biblehistory.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html

Using your changed URL, you then marched out to left field.

LOL!

AlanF

[Arauna]

20 minutes ago, AlanF said:

See if you can get back on track: your denial of my argument that news of Cyrus' coming Edict could easily be spread among the captive Jews

1.      The Jews from the 10 tribe were scattered ALL over the empire - many of those taken by the Syrian empire were put in Elam and the cities of the Medes....and the river Gozan. Look on a map - this is at the outskirts of the empire territory.     

The root cause of the ten tribe deportation is given in 2 Kings 18: 11,12  together with the names of the areas they were deported to. The root cause for Israel was the SAME reason for the exile of the Juda - disobedience to the law and the pollution of the land. They broke the covenant of Jehovah excessively with their deity worship.  NOT a whim of  Jehovah for them to have a change...of ruler 

Your 'theory' above - not true.    It must have taken some time to reach them in the far reaches of the empire!  The call went out to ALL of israel to return.

2.    617 BCE - Jehoiachin - The upper class of the population is taken to the Babylon - including the metal workers, mighty warriors, craftsmen, court officials princes, including Daniel and his 3 friends, Ezekiel and their families.... the numbers for the men are given in the scriptures I cited in my response above - the number of men as the numbers of the wives and children are not given.  I have already given you the proof that Ezekiel  (Ez 1)  visited a  community of the first group of exiles at the river Chebar......   Not all these people were settled in the city of Babylon itself and they were not in a position to hear any court gossip....too far away... look on your map where they were...(there were two more incursions by Nebuchadnezzar after this - most probably taking all the smaller cities around Jerusalem.) 

3. The poor people who were left behind under Zedekia and the prophet Jeremiah - together with a group of high officials - could have been spared being removed from the land BUT as you rightly said - they did not listen to Jeremiah/Jehovah. However!   The first group of exiles had already left for Babylon almost 10 years before - it was not the entire group that would have been spared the exile as you have implied in your previous answers.   

The temple of worship was destroyed and all the rest in the city were taken. Thousands who took refuge in Jerusalem during the 18 month siege (some Jewish sources say 30)  died from famine and sickness, war injuries, and the fire which destroyed the temple ( Lam 4:10

With their own hands compassionate women
    have cooked their own children

I remember reading that the Babylonians catapulted dead bodies,   which Jews had thrown over the wall (most probably swollen in the heat), they were projected back into the city - the conditions must have been absolutely devastating - especially for Jews who were not supposed to touch a dead body. The Talmud says that almost a million died....  I believe this is exaggerated but it gives one a good idea of the devastation - apart from those who died in other cities.

Zedekiah's sons and many, officials, priests etc. were put to death. Only 832 men survived Jerusalem with the remnants of their families. Jer 52:29 (In the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar, 832 people were taken from Jerusalem).   Jerusalem and its land was definitely left desolate. 

Jer 9:11  ¹¹ “I will make Jerusalem a heap of ruins,
    a haunt of jackals;
and I will lay waste the towns of Judah
    so no one can live there.”

13...The Lord said, “It is because they have forsaken my law,

Jer 32: 43 - a wasteland without man and beast

Several archeologists confirm that archeological surveys confirm there was not a single known case where a town of Judah was continuously occupied because of the violence that was visited on the Judah.  City after city was ceased to be inhabited at this time - some never to be reoccupied. 

 

The above scriptures and events prove why the countryside was almost empty - all the deaths and the exile of those who survived - that hegemony was NOT the main reason for the exile but it was disobedience to Jehovah that led to the total devastation of their capital city and its land.

 

 

[Arauna]

1 hour ago, AlanF said:

Strong's Comprehensive Concordance of The Bible", entry for "city"

We are not talking about the city of  Cain or the nomadic settlements in the time of Abraham - (although Ur was a city state and Melchizedek was a priest-king of Jerusalem /Salem) in his time.

We are talking about the culture of cities-states which was started by Nimrod (built many cities in Babylon and Assyria) and formed the network of cities which became the Sumerian, Assyrian and Babylonian empires.

comparing apples with .... 

In Greece they also had city-states...... Athens, 

A polis consisted of an urban centre, often fortified and with a sacred centre built on a natural acropolis or harbour, which controlled a surrounding territory (chora) of land. The term polis has, therefore, been translated as ‘city-state’

Other cultures had a similar social and political structure, notably, the Babylonians, Etruscans and Phoenicians,

among the most important were Athens, Sparta, Corinth, Thebes, Syracuse, Aegina, Rhodes, Argos, Eretria, and Elis.

Abraham was looking forward to a 'city' - as described by Paul.  This refers to a government with a king which is a priest - like Melchizedek! 

Later cities: the function of the priests became separated from that of the king.... Most cities had large temples where priests fed and clothed the God of the city and tended to the "God" and people who came for predictions.  All were polytheists - so there were many shrines to the other Gods.

[AlanF]

Arauna wrote:

Quote

 

:: See if you can get back on track: your denial of my argument that news of Cyrus' coming Edict could easily be spread among the captive Jews

1.      The Jews from the 10 tribe were scattered ALL over the empire - many of those taken by the Syrian empire were put in Elam and the cities of the Medes....and the river Gozan. Look on a map - this is at the outskirts of the empire territory.

 

As I said above, this is entirely irrelevant. That scattering occurred a hundred years earlier, and those Jews were not part of the Return from Babylon.

Quote

The root cause of the ten tribe deportation is given in 2 Kings 18: 11,12  together with the names of the areas they were deported to. The root cause for Israel was the SAME reason for the exile of the Juda - disobedience to the law and the pollution of the land. They broke the covenant of Jehovah excessively with their deity worship.  NOT a whim of  Jehovah for them to have a change...of ruler

Once again: Wrong. The cause of the deportation of Judah was the Jews' failure to submit to Babylon. The cause for God's giving Babylon 70 years of supremacy in the Near East was the wickedness of the inhabitants.

Quote

Your 'theory' above - not true.    It must have taken some time to reach them in the far reaches of the empire!  The call went out to ALL of israel to return.

Totally wrong. By that time the 10 tribes were scattered to the four winds. Need I remind you of what the Bible says?

Quote

2.    617 BCE - Jehoiachin - The upper class of the population is taken to the Babylon - including the metal workers, mighty warriors, craftsmen, court officials princes, including Daniel and his 3 friends, Ezekiel and their families.... the numbers for the men are given in the scriptures I cited in my response above - the number of men as the numbers of the wives and children are not given.

Wrong on the dating. Daniel and a few others were taken in 605/604. A lot more were taken in 597, and another batch in 587 and afterwards.

Quote

I have already given you the proof that Ezekiel  (Ez 1)  visited a  community of the first group of exiles at the river Chebar......

Like I said: what of it?

Quote

Not all these people were settled in the city of Babylon itself and they were not in a position to hear any court gossip....too far away...

I said nothing about court gossip. I described Daniel and others possible notification that big things were in the works -- hardly gossip.

Quote

look on your map where they were...(there were two more incursions by Nebuchadnezzar after this - most probably taking all the smaller cities around Jerusalem.)

Yes, and to where? To the close vicinity of Babylon.

Quote

3. The poor people who were left behind under Zedekia and the prophet Jeremiah - together with a group of high officials - could have been spared being removed from the land BUT as you rightly said - they did not listen to Jeremiah/Jehovah. However!   The first group of exiles had already left for Babylon almost 10 years before - it was not the entire group that would have been spared the exile as you have implied in your previous answers.

You don't know the Bible at all. As I said, Daniel and a few others were taken in 605/604. In early 597 Zedekiah was made king, and that was when Jeremiah received God's word pleading with the Jews to remain on their land by submitting to Babylon. They had another decade to submit before Nebuchadnezzar came against them again because Zedekiah refused to submit. So most of the Jews could have avoided deportation.

Quote

The temple of worship was destroyed and all the rest in the city were taken. Thousands who took refuge in Jerusalem during the 18 month siege (some Jewish sources say 30)  died from famine and sickness, war injuries, and the fire which destroyed the temple ( Lam 4:10

Yes, all of which occurred between 589 and 587 BCE.

Quote

 

Jer 9:11  
11
“I will make Jerusalem a heap of ruins,
    a haunt of jackals;
and I will lay waste the towns of Judah
    so no one can live there.”

13...The Lord said, “It is because they have forsaken my law,

 

Once again, this desolation was contingent on the Jews failing to reform and submit. Jer. 9 is part of a larger plea given by God through Jeremiah for the Jews to reform, or else. In Jer. 7:3-7 God says:

<< Reform your ways and your actions, and I will allow you to keep residing in this place. . . For if you truly reform your ways and actions; if you truly uphold justice between a man and his neighbor; 6 if you do not oppress foreign residents, orphans, and widows; if you do not shed innocent blood in this place; and if you do not follow other gods to your own harm; 7 then I will allow you to keep residing in this place, in the land I gave to your forefathers for all time. >>

Oh yeah, you don't believe the Bible.

Quote

Jer 32: 43 - a wasteland without man and beast

A prophecy made in Zedekiah's 10th year, while Jerusalem was under siege. By then it was too late for God to show mercy and let the Jews remain. Again you don't know the Bible.

AlanF

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Perhaps the Universe has decided you have "bad karma", and is out to GET YOU!

BrouhaHAHahahaha !!

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

This sort of discussion has been going on a long time in the "Muslim World".

Martyrs are promised if they die for Allah, they will go to Paradise, and get 72 Virgins ... or it could be 72 white raisins.

Some highly prefer one over the other .... but they never argue about the number.

[AlanF]

4 hours ago, allensmith28 said:

Can you read the accusation TheWorldNewsMedia? You “ringer” has just accused me of HACKING your website. Shall you call the FBI or shall I.

 

Yep, completely looney.

AlanF

[AlanF]

1 hour ago, allensmith28 said:

But will see who is lying?

Completely looney people can hardly be accused of lying when they muck up as badly as you have.

AlanF

[AlanF]

55 minutes ago, allensmith28 said:

As you can very well see. My remark was geared towards this webpage that alanf used as an illustration.

And another ( http://www.bible-history.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html ):

http://www.bible-history.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html

Either way. I'll move forward. It doesn't matter to me. The Topic is, 

607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported? So, let's move on.

Now you're compounding your lunacy by lying. This is the URL you originally posted on page 26 of this thread:

http://www.biblehistory.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html

Somehow you left out the "-" in "bible-history" and got a different website from the one I posted.

Naturally, you're too looney and arrogant to acknowledge that your LOL post was based on your own incompetence.

AlanF

[JW Insider]

8 hours ago, allensmith28 said:

A hilarious example by AlanF!!!

http://www.biblehistory.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html

I see you made a mistake here @allensmith28in the transcription of the URL that @AlanF gave.

I clicked on your "typo" URL that you created when you left out the hyphen. I'm sure this was an accident on your part, but I was surprised that it linked to a Bible timeline that put the Exile from 585 to 487 and ended the Divided Kingdom in 586. I thought it an interesting coincidence that both sites would have such similar URLs. But it turns out that even if you had accidentally made further adjustments to the link, even with your own name in it, for example: 

http://www.biblehistory.com/ALLEN_SMITH_28.htm

. . . that it also would have taken you to the same page with the 586 date on it. You can try it by clicking above.

In fact, you did originally use the actual link AlanF's provided, on which you based your comments, just as you claimed. AlanF was wrong to offer only those three choices about you personally in response to your simple mistake. AlanF was also mistaken in not recognizing that you had gone on to criticise other parts of the page/site, beyond the point he was using and quoting, to point out the chronology information from the map found on this page and other parts of the same website -- which contained information not consistent with AlanF's views.

Of course, even so, your only salient point is that there is some stuff on the site where AlanF's link came from that AlanF clearly doesn't believe in. We've been through this same type of logical fallacy before, where just because a site or page has something wrong on it that other things on the same site or page can't be useful. (Often a "composition" fallacy, sometimes a "poisoning the well" fallacy. Don't know the Latin for @TrueTomHarley's collection.)

You had a chance to leverage the mistake to your own advantage, but then you went off and made some more serious logical blunders of your own.

8 hours ago, allensmith28 said:

The gobbledygook and ignorance belong to Alanf supporters. By the way. This website is structured by the ideology of an American Scholar Edward Robinson Born in 1794AD. If this website is going to be used as proof of something, then 19-century ideology is PROOF of ancient events, as well. Try showing some coherency. Keep learning Junior, you have a long way to go before you can understand scripture like a 6-year-old.

Yes. Someone used a word like "gobbledygook" with reference to ideas you have promoted or defended, so naturally you have no choice but to blame-shift and redirect that word onto those you oppose. Logically, however, there is no reason to push these words onto "AlanF supporters," whoever they may be.

Also you point out that the American scholar, Edward Robinson, was born in 1794 and that this site is structured by his ideology. Is this really a problem to you? It has already been pointed out, even by you yourself, that we can expect some issues with the chronology of scholars who worked so early in the 19th century, but no one says that this means everything they say is to be under suspicion. After all, the WTS still prefers the support of 19th century scholars over 20th and 21st century scholars. It's off topic, but I have a couple in mind in case you doubt this.

Also, guess who quotes Edward Robinson himself. Yep . . . here's the Awake! magazine, and it's only one of at least a dozen more times he is quoted, especially for Biblical language studies:

*** g80 5/8 p. 17 A Book That Tells What the Future Holds ***

• What is the condition of ancient Edom today? “Around us were the desolation of ages; the dwellings and edifices of the ancient city [Petra, the former capital city, carved out of the mountain crag] crumbled and strewed in the dust.”—Edward Robinson, in “Biblical Researches in Palestine.”

Then you say, "If this website is going to be used as proof of something, then 19-century ideology is PROOF of ancient events, as well." I think you are making the same mistake that Arauna made in misunderstanding the different uses of evidence, when 'proof' is not part of the equation. Besides, your statement is completely illogical on many levels.

As far as the "Junior" and "6 year old" I think AlanF deserves to be treated just as he treats others, and I'm as entertained as anyone by the back-and-forth slinging. Although, I must say that those particular attempts sound like desperate shifting projections.

[JW Insider]

5 hours ago, allensmith28 said:

I would agree Jerusalem Temple was burned in 586BC

That's progress! I can see 586 as a strong possibility too. Of course, most of the fake controversy between 586 and 587 is presented as a way to try to trick those who haven't studied the subject yet. The ruse is used to trick fellow JWs and others into thinking that the secular evidence for this period is just so faulty (over a one year difference!). When in fact the "Insight" book has admitted that this is not really a controversy at all. It's not the secular dating that is questionable here, it's an inconsistency in the Bible's reference to the date. But it's easily explained, as is done here in Insight.

*** it-2 p. 481 Nebuchadnezzar ***

• on Tammuz (June-July) 9 in the 11th year of Zedekiah’s reign (Nebuchadnezzar’s 19th year if counting from his accession year or his 18th regnal year), a breach was made in Jerusalem’s wall. Zedekiah and his men fled but were overtaken in the desert plains of Jericho. Since Nebuchadnezzar had retired to Riblah “in the land of Hamath,” Zedekiah was brought before him there.

That's because it's the Bible that says these events happened in his 19th year:

• (2 Kings 25:8, 9) . . .In the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, that is, in the 19th year of King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar the king of Babylon, Neb·uʹzar·adʹan the chief of the guard, the servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. 9 He burned down the house of Jehovah, the king’s house, and all the houses of Jerusalem; he also burned down the house of every prominent man.

And the Bible refers to several of these events happening in his 18th year:

• (Jeremiah 52:29) In the 18th year of Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, 832 people were taken from Jerusalem.

There are also some very similar Biblical references to the year of the Judean king, Zedekiah, for example. There is absolutely no issue at all identifying Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year in secular chronology, nor is there any problem identifying his 19th year. From the perspective of studying chronology, the entire Neo-Babylonian period is just as "absolute" as is the Persian period. The idea some have tried to promote (that this controversy is due to a weakness in the secular sources) is a hoax.

[TrueTomHarley]

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I clicked on your "typo" URL that you created when you left out the hyphen. I'm sure this was an accident on your part, but I was surprised that it linked

This remark is addressed to Allen, I know, not me - but my current nefarious scheme is to change all URLs - even those of AlanF!! - in all posts to point to my blog. My goal is to one day place $1.00 into the outstretched hand of @The Librarian (the old hen) as I stop for the red light getting off the expressway. #willblogforfood     

hehehehe :))))))))