SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)

[Ann O'Maly]

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! 🙄

[Arauna]

11 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

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

The babylonian empire fell - if you know the entire book of Daniel well - you will  know it gives us a summary of the march of world powers one after another.  The four beasts mentioned  are Babylon, medea-persia, Greece and Rome. 

The 70 years was the end of babylonian dominion - Babylon would NEVER have set Israel free so jehovah replaced them with medea-persia at the right time he had determined before. 70 years to be exact - to release Israel to go back.. 

Tyre suffered a blow under Babylon but its island was not destroyed - that only came later when Alexander the great destroyed it.  Babylon only became a wilderness much later when the salt deposits made the land infertile. 

You guys like to argue over the silliest details because you want to be right at all costs - to satisfy your egos. This has nothing to do with God or the bible....... you want to humiliate Jehovahs people who believe in him only and associate with his people.  

Your institutions - from whom you receive your mothers milk - will not save you.....  Only jehovah can save ...... and you have taken sides against him in favor of secular knowledge.   I prefer to drink His milk than your skewed secular interpretations of the bible. 

[Ann O'Maly]

44 minutes ago, Arauna said:

The babylonian empire fell...

...The 70 years was the end of babylonian dominion

Thank you. Yes it was, and this is what I, AlanF, and JW Insider have been trying to get into Neil's stubborn skull. 

[AlanF]

11 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Alan F

Well at least unlike you I believe the Bible is God's inspired Word.

scholar JW

You obviously believe that God is the ultimate generator of nonsense. Like father, like son.

[AlanF]

11 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Alan de Fool

Really!! You have matters arse about. The 70 years ends then Babylon, its Kingship, Nation and Land proceeds into oblivion

Desolation is what Jer.25:12 is all about you idiot!

scholar JW

More nonsense.

[AlanF]

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Thank you. Yes it was, and this is what I, AlanF, and JW Insider have been trying to get into Neil's stubborn skull. 

Arauna, as usual, is clueless, but from time to time, like a stopped clock, accidentally gets something right.

[AlanF]

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Of course, I'm sure you already knew both of these attempts were failures before you even provided them.

Of course he did. That's why so many of his debate opponents call him a fake, a charlatan and a liar.

What ScholarJW Pretendus does is as Mommy Watchtower does -- use references to real scholars dishonestly to pretend that they support the Writer's claims.

[scholar JW]

JW Insider

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Now you mentioned Appendix A, where Nles gives an idea of the broad range of views from scholars and Bible commentators, past and present. I don't see any of them confused about the chronology of those 70 years of Babylonian domination between about 609 to 539 (plus or minus a couple of years). Most of them chose that very chronology as the interpretation of Jeremiah's 70 years. Apparently every single one of them understood that chronology to be able to place the destruction of Jerusalem in 587-586 BCE, or the larger exile (e.g. Ezekiel, et al) from 598-597 BCE. Everyone has a right to their set of Biblical interpretations for the varying uses of the term "70 years" whether literal, close, symbolic, an approximation, or even believing (as Niles himself does) that various Bible writers may have used it to refer to multiple periods. But this does not imply any confusion about the chronology.

Nevertheless, a broad range of opinion is presented so these respective chronologies cannot be considered to be 'definitive' in order to preserve the claim of an Absolute NB Chronology.

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Every one of them understood the chronology of the time of Babylonian domination, or they could not have all consistently put dates like the ones pictured above, on all the Judean events. I will repeat again: Apparently 100% of them used the date 587 or 586 for the destruction of Jerusalem. No confusion about the chronology, just different interpretations of which start and end dates to use within that fixed chronology. For those who don't know, I'll reproduce the columns from the first 3 pages:

Nevertheless, these may believe in the concept of Babylonian domination which is also held by WT scholars with our Chronology but how this related to Jeremiah's 70 years is open to much dispute as shown in Niles' Thesis. The very fact that no definitive date of either 586 or 587 BCE for the fall is deeply troubling and remains a much vexed issue.

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Did I mention this? Every one of the above accepts a chronology within a couple years of the standard chronology, and every one of the above accepts a chronology that is about 20 years different from the "special chronology" that the WTS promotes.

(I add that last part about the 20-years difference, because there are people who think that 605 BCE, above, is only 2 years different from the WTS chronology of 607. It's actually 18 years different. Because the WTS publications present the above 605 date as 625 BCE.)

Well a couple of years is a 'margin of error' and does not fit well with claims that NB Chronology is 'absolute'. The twenty year difference or gap between WT Chronology and secular chronologies is because of an interpretation of the 70 years which has no 'margin of error' being part of that strong cable of WT Chronology.

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

The last 8 listed scholars from the final two pages (not included above) discuss variations of Biblical interpretation about the 70 years, but they are not at all confused about the chronology of the period of Babylonian years of domination in the region. I'll just pick any one of them to see what they say about the period of Babylonian domination:

The first one, Anneli Aejmelaeus, we don't have to look up, because Niles already tells us she understands the significance of 587 BCE (Jeremiah 25) and 597 BCE.

So I'll pick another and then look up whether Bryan and Albertz fit the criteria of dating the destruction of Jerusalem more than two years different than 587 BCE.

These last 8 different scholars highlights the problem of interpretation of the 70 years and that was really goes to the heart of Niles' thesis about the necessity of recognizing those three concepts.

Niles' thesis proves one thing that it is vital that only a correct interpretation of the those 70 years makes for a truly accurate Chronology of the OT which is what those celebrated WT scholars have done.

scholar JW

[scholar JW]

JW Insider

19 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I quote from page 108, where Bryan shows no problem with the following date for the destruction of Jerusalem:

". . . the destruction of Jerusalem in 587/86" (p.108)

He is also aware that some scholars have made a point about the 70 year period from the (second exile and) destruction of the temple by Babylon (587/6) to the reconstruction in 516/515 since this also is a 70-year period (which he does not accept as the period referenced by Jeremiah, which he says had already been recognized as fulfilled.) [Note that C.F.Whitley, another example from Niles' "Appendix C" is a proponent of 586 BCE to 516 BCE, with full knowledge that 586 BCE refers to the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and 516 to the reconstruction under Haggai/Zerubbabel.]

So your reference to Steven M Bryan is a failure.

False, the following paragraph:"Jewish literature handled the prophet Jeremiah's prediction that the exile to Babylon would last for seventy years is evidence for the belief that the exile had ended with the return from Babylon". (p.108).

19 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Note: "conquest of Jerusalem, 2d deportation (July / August 587)." He sees that the Bible chronology fits the standard archaeological foundation for the chronology. These dates are also 20 years off from the ones promoted by the Watchtower publications.

Of course, I'm sure you already knew both of these attempts were failures before you even provided them.

You really are a clown. i never stated that Exilic scholars support WT Chronology but supported the our view that the Exile began with the destruction of Jerusalem until not the Fall of Babylon but the Return under Cyrus which is also how Josephus placed the Exile along with WT scholars.

scholar JW

[scholar JW]

Alan de Fool

23 hours ago, AlanF said:

ndeed: FIRST the 70 years ends, THEN Babylon falls. In practice, the two were virtually simultaneous. Read Daniel 5.

You have it arse about as usual. Babylon Falls-seventy years are fulfilled then Babylon is 'called to account' with its eventual desolation.

23 hours ago, AlanF said:

Desolation was its ultimate fate, irrespective of whether the 70 years ended in 539 or 538 or 537, you idiot

Desolation is the 'calling to account' after the 70 years had been fulfilled.

scholar JW

[scholar JW]

Alan de Fool

23 hours ago, AlanF said:

es, we're well aware that you think the Bible is nonsense. That's why you can't make sense of it.

You are the self-declared atheist so any view of the Bible rates zero credibility. Go and plat with your crystal set.

scholar JW

[AlanF]

57 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

Alan de Fool

You are the self-declared atheist so any view of the Bible rates zero credibility. Go and plat with your crystal set.

scholar JW

Here's an excellent video, just for you. It's got cartoons, so even you ought to understand it: