1914 was to be the date of the time of the end of the gentile nations. When that failed, it became 1915 until that failed then sometime in 1916, 1914 became the date that Christ invisibly returned, tossed Satan out of heaven and took His throne.
While 607 BC doesn’t appear to be important, arriving at the date 1914, relies on it to be the correct date that Jerusalem fell. Without 607 BC you can’t apply the 2,520 years mentioned in the book of Daniel and arrive at 1914, the time of the end of the gentile times.
When Charles Taze Russell, was working with biblical chronology, 607 BC. was the favored date for the fall of Jerusalem.
Much work has been done in the field of archaeology since the late 1800s and significant finds have been found. There are now hundreds if not thousands of pieces of evidential proof that pin point the fall of Jerusalem to 586 / 587 BC. Unfortunately for the Watchtower it is impossible for them to change this date without significantly changing their doctrine
Therefore using the equations of Russell to get to 1914 we end up in 1934. Aynthing special about 1934?
Many have tried to find secular sources to agree with the Watchtower Society’ date of 607 BC for the fall of Jerusalem, but always fail in their attempts. To date there is no professor, scholar or authority which subscribes to the Watchtower’s use of the 607 date, however, they do all agree on one thing and that is that Jerusalem fell in 586 / 587 BC.
Update:To date there is no professor, scholar or authority which subscribes to the Watchtower’s use of the 607 date, however, they do all agree on one thing and that is that Jerusalem fell in 586 /587 BC...
@Poя¢єℓαιη Gαвву'ηαтну (στην αλήθ..., has posted a site that, surprise, surprise, claims to prove the date correct. Have a look you will be amazed by the twisted logic.
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
Former Jehovah's Witness here. Establishing 607 BC for the fall of Jerusalem is critical to the chronology used by Jehovah's Witnesses to arrive at the conclusion that Jesus second coming, or presence as they prefer to say, happened invisibly in 1914. Every single belief they hold dear about the signs of the end of this wicked system of things, the coming of Armageddon and the establishment of a paradise earth hinges on 1914. If they've got 1914 wrong, then how do they keep 7 million publishers out there publishing? How do they motivate the membership to devote their lives to the organisation if it turns out they got 1914 wrong?
The link below shows how far out they are. Here is part of the relevant bit:
"Turn to every encyclopaedia or archaeological text on the subject and you will find that Jerusalem fell between 586 and 587 B.C. The Watchtower uses 607 B.C. by claiming all historical evidence we have on the subject is wrong. Yet to make such a claim opens a paradox - if archaeology is unreliable for 587 B.C., and this same information is being used to determine 607 B.C., then 607 must be equally unreliable.
There are numerous ways used to determine that Jerusalem fell in 587 B.C. This includes Ptolemy's Canon, the Nabonidus Chronicle, Harran, Hillah stele and synchronization with Egyptian chronology. The Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology, page 274 states "Archaeological evidence for the destruction of the kingdom in 586 B.C. comes from Jerusalem, Lachish, Tell Beit Mirsim, and other sites." Tens of thousands of detailed economic-administrative and legal documents have been unearthed outlining daily, monthly and yearly occurrences during the reign of the Babylonian kings."
They're out by about 20 years. That means they should have been looking to 1934 to mark the time of this so-called invisible second presence. But how could the 'faithful and discrete slave' possibly have got the wrong date when, since 1919, they were chosen as Jehovah's sole channel of communication? Clearly, everybody else must be wrong because they, and only they, have the truth. And to disagree with the 'faithful and discrete slave' is to disagree with Jehovah's organisation.
Perhaps that's the real reason why they stick to 607 BC?
If it did prove to be incorrect, as if it wasn't already, they would just change the dates to correspond and take some time and let it's "New Light" teaching sink in and then disown the old as like it never happened and go on from there. Date setting and date changes are nothing new to the Jehovah's Witnesses. They have mastered the lie of setting false dates and disowning them. This 1914 date was originally 1874 which was founded by Charles Taze Russell in 1876 and this date held till after his death. Then the Judge took over, stole the show. and set his own failed dates but keeping the 1874 date and it was not until 1943, after the Judge's death, that the 1874 date was changed to the 1914 date. Their whole religion is based on this concept of Jesus' invisible presence in 1874 then changed in 1943 to 1914. Not only was his presence "invisible" but was here on earth. To further back up this concept they tell fo a time that Jesus inspected all the religions of the world and found them "The Watchtower Society" to be the only ones serving the proper food at the proper time. So they were chosen by Jesus to be the "mouth piece" of God. Interestingly enough, the teaching they had back then is so much different then now. Jesus' presence was not here on earth but in heaven and he only turned his attention towards earth and took up his Crown and began his Kingly duties.
And they call Herold Camping "nuts". The Jehovah's Witnesses do not get anything correct let alone the "math" in biblical Chronology. Christianity is about Faith and Belief in Jesus Christ, not faith and belief in biblical Chronology, nor a bible code or any other man made, Satan endorsed gimmick. Setting these dates are sinful and then believing in them and putting your faith in them is beyond just a sin but is a road map to disaster. History has proven Jerusalem had fallen in 586/587 BC not 607. But since this is the date that the Watchtower has plucked out of darkness and pushed it as light the Jehovah's Witnesses will believe in this date only. They place their faith solely in those whom they believe to be the anointed ones of the 144,000 and they believe this will in turn give them salvation on earth.
the excuses that the Watchtower provides for accepting 607 could desire to do with the actuality that they accept as true with historians on 539 B.C.E. because of fact the date for the autumn of Babylon; and permitting 2 years for the eventual launch and return of the Jews to Jerusalem, the Watchtower only counts back 70 years from 537 to reach at 607. So, their reasoning is that because of fact the Scriptures say that Jerusalem could lay desolate for 70 years; and from the date 586/7 to 537 is only approximately 40 9 years, the Watchtower is going with 607. regardless of the undeniable fact that, the entire argument is relatively moot besides, given the actuality that it relatively is reasoned out scripturally that the Gentile situations have not have been given something to do with the so-referred to as seven situations of Daniel besides. considering Jesus' presence is by employing stealth, like a thief contained in the night, the sole way he could desire to relatively arrive as unexpectedly--as though a thief--to those that're in any different case in expectation, is that in the event that they are initially led to have faith some little bit of incorrect information related to Christ's presence. (i.e 1914 coaching)
They admit that no man knows the hour or the day but then presume to know the "year" conveniently side stepping the issue.
There are a number of dates put forward for the date of the fall of Jerusalem to Babylon in 587 BC + or - 10 years but no respected authority have put it as early as 607 BC. It seems this date has been chosen subtracting backwards from 1914 in order to fit in with preconceived ideas as you suggest.
607 was the fall of the northern kingdom [samaria] to the assyrians
587 was the fall of the southern kingdom [judah ] to the babylonians , 587 would have included jerusalem
I trust that Jeremiah and Daniel knew how long 70 years was.
(Daniel 9:1-4) 9 In the first year of Da·ri′us the son of A·has·u·e′rus of the seed of the Medes, who had been made king over the kingdom of the Chal·de′ans; 2 in the first year of his reigning I myself, Daniel, discerned by the books the number of the years concerning which the word of Jehovah had occurred to Jeremiah the prophet, for fulfilling the devastations of Jerusalem, [namely,] seventy years. 3 And I proceeded to set my face to Jehovah the [true] God, in order to seek [him] with prayer and with entreaties, with fasting and sackcloth and ashes. 4 And I began to pray to Jehovah my God and to make confession and to say:. . .
As for the scholars, while they disagree with our dating, they also can not agree when the Jews left Egypt, nor when Abraham traveled in Canaan. Since they fight with each other about those dates, my reliance on the Bible is more sure than any scholar's changing mind.
Greetings,
You seem confused about our teachings. 1914 marks both the end of the “gentile times” and when Christ invisibly returned in kingdom power.
But, your primary question is illogical. Your question is moot unless you can come up with solid evidence which disproves the BIBLICAL evidence that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607. You might as well ask “Would it really matter if science was right about germs causing disease?”
Christians believe what the Bible teaches and the evidence is irrefutable that Christ returned in Kingdom power and began his invisible presence in 1914 (Mt.24:3ff; 2Tim.3:1ff; Rev.10:10ff).
The dual Scriptural witness of a beginning of troubles and the chronology of Daniel which points to the date 607 serve to make the date 1914 rock solid (Mt.18:16; 24:3ff). Absolutely no other date can be pointed to as fulfilling Christ's prophecy regarding the end of “Gentile” rule and the restoration of God's rulership.
I've only seen non-Scriptural arguments attacking the 606/607 date. But, in every case, acceptance of any alternative left them without a fulfillment or any way to reconcile the obvious relevancy of the events of 1914. So yes, it is valid to look at the events of 1914 to confirm what is the accurate understanding of Daniel’s chronology.
Since the date 1914 is solidly confirmed by historical evidence, it gives a solid base for the 70 years as starting in 607.
Next, the date 607 is very important not just because it confirms the date 1914 but also because it verifies the accuracy of God’s prophetic Word. Accepting secular historians’ 50 year desolation would mean that you disagree with the Biblical evidence that it was a full 70 years.
Next, it is false to state that “There are now hundreds if not thousands of pieces of evidential proof that pin point the fall of Jerusalem to 586/587 BC.” Whoever told you that demonstrates a great ignorance of how secular scholars come up with their date of 587\86 BCE.
There are absolutely no archeological records which “pin-point” the date Jerusalem fell and the “evidence” used to support the 587 date is actually only speculations and interpretations of the information found in Egyptian, Assyrian, or Babylonian chronology.
Secular historians must be very selective in their use of the Babylonian King lists. They must pick and choose between conflicting chronologies and astronomical data found in ancient records as well as contradictory interpretations by different scholars. And many times these records are “only 3rd or 4th hand accounts of writers quoting ancient writers who quoted older writers who quoted even more ancient other writers of a list a guy under a different culture wrote about events that happened 250 years earlier.”
So, it should come as no surprise that there is disagreement between True Christians and secular authorities regarding the date of Jerusalem's destruction in 607 B.C.E.
The question is a simple one. Do you believe God's Word that the Jews were in Babylon for a period of 70 years, or do you accept secular historians’ dating? (2Chrn.36:21; Jer.29:10; Dan.9:2)
The majority of historians agree that Babylon fell in 539 B.C.E. and that Cyrus' first regnal year began in the spring of 538 B.C.E. So the Jews would be back in their homeland by October 537 B.C.E. (Ezra 3:1).
It is a simple matter of counting back 70 years which brings us to 607 BCE for Jerusalem's destruction. Dates other than 607 BCE ignore the statements in Scripture that the land would be desolate for 70 years and arbitrarily change it to what agrees with their own chronology. Yet, Daniel's account shows that he relied on a literal 70 years and not a round number (Dan 9:1, 2).
So, Jehovah's Witnesses accept the detailed testimony of the inspired Word of God, rather than the uncertain and contradictory chronology found in human historical records.
Here is a brief summation by Semetics Professor Rolf Furuli:
“I started my chronological research in order to see whether cuneiform tablets and ancient writings really did contradict the 70-year exile of the Bible. And the answer I have found is negative. The data are found in my book. There is only one piece of evidence that speaks for a 50-year exile, and that is the Astronomical Diary VAT 4956. And VAT 4956 was not used to create the Neo-Babylonian chronology but was used to confirm it (circularity is lurking in the background). There are less than ten other astronomical tablets that may relate to Neo-Babylonian chronology, but their data are ambiguous or unspecific.
In my book I present a list of 52 tablets from the accession year of Neriglissar and the second year of Evil Merodach whose dates overlap. ...Taken at face value these tablets definitely destroy the supposed witness of VAT 4956! I also present a list of 10 tablets whose dates overlap between Nebuchadnezzar and Evil Merodach. Other evidence exist as well.
Sincerely,
BAR-ANERGES
It won't prove incorrect because it's absolutely correct and corresponds to Bible chronology as well as fits PERFECTLY with Bible prophecies that have already come true.
You're wasting your time dude.... Seriously.
The only thing you're accomplishing is actually providing us with definite proof of that in which we already know, that you and people such as yourself put more confidence in the world than in God's Word the Bible as the final authority on matters (http://bit.ly/nwOZA0 ). An example of the truth in this is found in 'Carl's' statement where he typed in part; "no respected authority have put it as early as 607 BC".
Unlike you, 'Carl' and those who think as you do, the members of the unified worldwide Christian congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses put faith in the Bible as God’s INFALLIBLE Word and the FINAL RESPECTED AUTHORITY on matters which gives us the absolute conviction that what we have is indeed most definitely the truth.
The 587 date is a poor very explanation which is full of more holes than swiss cheese (http://bit.ly/oYOpIL ), while 607 HARMONIZES WITH THE WHOLE BIBLE like no other date:
http://bit.ly/oLwfnB
If anything, I as one of Jehovah's Witnesses would like to thank you for having provided me with more Faith in God's Word. I know this wasn't your intention but that's what happens when you try to go against the Truth, it only serves in bringing to the fore just how truthful and trustworthy the Truth actually is.
Capeesh?
You guys (and those like you) remind me of those so called Bible based segments that appear on 'The History Channel' from time to time that do nothing to actually promote genuine Faith in the Bible as the infallible Word of God, but rather, do the exact opposite by revealing their LACK of genuine faith in what the Bible itself shows, teaches and reveals.
Keep trying 'I Try", keep trying. ;-)
Ciao
607 is the correct date
http://thirdwitness.com/607_BCE/www.jehovahsjudgme...
well written question and I pray they look into these things like Bareans and consider Galatians 1 and ask do they have another gospel?