Denne debat er fuldstændig nyttesløs. Om Jerusalem blev ødelagt i det ene eller det andet årstal? hvad i alverden kan skal man dog bruge den oplysning til?
Det er jo fuldstændigt ligegyligt om Jerusalem “faldt” (lidt eller meget eller måske slet ikke) i 607 BC eller om det var i 587BC for ”øvelsen” handler om
hvornår man kunne regne sig frem til eller tilbage til, Jesu ”genkomst”.
Om det er 607BC eller 587BC eller 625BC betyder overhovedet intet ud over, ”hvem der har ret” i hvad?
_________________________________________________
Prøv du at forestille dig at få besøg af en håndfuld ”vidner” af
den ene eller den anden trosretning og så skulle høre på dem i årevis om det ævl og kævl om ”hvornår var det nu det var”?
____________________________________
Men nu dette debatemne og den henvisning (link) her til emnet. Det er jo mange års studium og skriverier der er lagt i dette arbejde og hvem kan det interessere? Jo, det kan interessere
dem der gerne vil forudse ”hvornår kom (kommer) Jesus igen”.
Har han været her? Er han her? Eller er han gået igen? Den der med at sige; ”jo, han kom og er her, men det er bare i himmelen, usynlig”.
Den er nærmest ”gratis”.
_____________________________________________________
Hvis jeg skal citere lidt fra
”bogen” der er linket til:
Notable among the treasures of present truth are the doctrines of chronology and time prophecy.
Those who understand the presentation of these subjects in Volumes 2 and 3 realize how inter-twined they are with the subject of the Lord's Return.
It is that relationship which imparts to them special importance.
They testify that we stand today at a transition of the ages. And they are not alone in this testimony.
The Second Presence of the Lord, though unseen by the world, is evident to us also by the signs
which have flooded around us.
Darkage creeds have yielded to the light of the Divine Plan. There has been a harvest work, and the sickle of truth has gathered many of the wheat from Christendom.
Satan's kingdom has been struck with two World Wars, Israel is a nation again, and mankind
everywhere have been aroused to look for something better.
______________________________________________________
Section 2 s. 7:
It is precisely this which holds the answer to the question which must be faced as we proceed. If there are (as I believe) adjustments to be made in the chronology we use, how is it that an imperfect chronology has correctly brought us to (for example) the Lord's return when the signs confirm it began, to Israel's recovery since 1878, and to the end of the seven times marked by World War I?
It is because we were not all wrong.
Some correct applications formed the backbone of an arrangement to which other features were adjusted to fit. We will refer to this matter again in Section Thirteen.
______________________________________________________
Here is the fuller citation. "The exact year of the shemittah is in dispute, and different dates are given. According to Talmudic calculations the entrance of the Israelites into Palestine occurred in the year of Creation 2489, and 850 years, or seventeen jubilees, passed between that date and the destruction of the First Temple. The first cycle commenced after the conquest of the land and its distribution among the tribes, which occupied fourteen years, and the last jubilee occurred on the 'tenth day of the month [Tishri], in the fourteenth year after that the city was smitten' (Ezek. 40:1),
which was the New-Year's Day of the jubilee ('Ab. Zarah 9b; 'Ar. 11b-12b). Joshua celebrated the first jubilee, and died just before the second (Seder 'Olam R., ed. Ratner, xi. 24b-25b, xxx. 69b, Wilna, 1895). The Samaritans in their 'Book of Joshua' date the first month of the first Sabbatical cycle and of the first jubilee cycle as beginning with the crossing of the Jordan and the entrance of the Israelites into their possession; and they insist that the date was 2794 of Creation, according to the chronology of the Torah 'and the true reckoning known to the sages since the Flood' ('Karme Shomeron,' ed. Raphael Kirchheim, §15, p. 63, Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1851). The First and the Second Temple, the Talmud says, were destroyed 'on the closing of the Sabbatical year' ('Moza'e Shebi'it'). The sixteenth jubilee occurred in the eighteenth year of Josiah, who reigned thirty-one years; the remaining thirteen years of his reign, together with the eleven years of those of Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin and the eleven years of that of Zedekiah (2 Kings 25) fix the first exilic year as the thirty-six year of the jubilee cycle, or the twenty-fifth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin, or fourteen years from the destruction of the Holy City ('Ar. and 'Ab. Zarah l.c.; see Rashi ad loc.). The
Babylonian captivity lasted seventy years. Ezra sanctified Palestine in the seventh year of the second entrance, after the sixth year of Darius, when the Temple was dedicated (Ezra 6:15, 16; 7:7). The first cycle of shemittah began with the sanctification of Ezra. The Second Temple stood 420 years, and was destroyed, like the First, in the 421st year, on the closing of the shemittah ('Ar 13a)." (Jewish Encyclopedia, 607)
Citat slut.
______________________________________________________________
6. The three scriptures appealed to as the basis of the Jewish double are Isaiah 40:2, Jeremiah 16:18, Zechariah 9:12.
Some brethren have observed that the latter text probably means a double of favor, rather than disfavor as frequently supposed. (See nasb, Smith-Goodspeed, Rotherham as examples.) Nevertheless the death of the Messiah is the obvious place to assign the turning aside of favor from the Jewish nation who did not receive the Messiah. None of these texts require a double of precise time, just as Revelation 18:6 clearly does not require a double of precise time. But as the Jewish age was in so many respects a shadow and example of the Gospel age, it is certainly a credible and appealing possibility that God arranged the length of one age to pattern the length of the other. If Jacob indeed died in the spring of 1813 bc -- implied from view 3 (Section 12) -- then the death of the one who began the 12 tribes of natural Israel is exactly 1845 years before the spring of 33 ad, when Jesus died who began the 12 tribes of spiritual Israel (Rev. 7:4-8). The date 1878, 1845 years from 33 ad, has been noted by the brethren and even others such as David Ben Gurion as a turning point in the modern resettlement of the Jews in Palestine. That year the treaty resulting from the Berlin Congress of Nations gave all in Palestine -- thus including the Jews -- equal privilege and protection of the law (see also B218, para. 2 to B221, para. 1). The Jews used this to the greatest practical advantage. There is another possible "double" flexing about the date of Jesus' death which has curiously gone unobserved until now. As several have noticed, 1878 is just 70 years before Israel became a nation again in 1948. I have wondered if this had any relevance to the 70 years of Babylon's power, during which Israel lost their nationhood. But I am unable to make a specific connection. The answer of when the correct date for Jerusalem’s destruction has become very important to several groups who use the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar as the starting point for calculations relating to Christ’s return, the apocalypse, the gentile times or the history of the modern nation of Israel. The King James and other bibles have confused matters slightly by their incorrect use of the phrase ‘at Babylon’ rather than ‘for Babylon’, but that aside, a look at the context in Jeremiah 29:4-11 shows these words to be part of a letter sent from Jeremiah to those who were taken captive from Jerusalem in the second (of three) deportations. This second deportation happened eleven years before Jerusalem’s final destruction. Jeremiah is telling the captives they should settle themselves and not expect a quick return as some false prophets had predicted, for only after seventy years had been accomplished ‘for Babylon’ would they return. This only makes sense if the seventy years had already begun.
If the seventy years were to begin with the destruction of Jerusalem some ten years after Jeremiah’s words were written, it would mean the people Jeremiah was writing to would have to wait even longer than seventy years. Plus to do so would mean God had already decided that Jerusalem would be destroyed. And if this were this case, the later warnings recorded at Jeremiah 38:17, 18 would have no meaning. It reads:
‘Jeremiah now said to Zedekiah: ‘This is what Jehovah, the God of armies, the God of Israel, has said, ‘If you will without fail go out to the princes of the king of Babylon, your soul will also certainly keep living and this city itself will not be burned with fire, and you yourself and your household will certainly keep living. But if you will not go out to the princes of the king of Babylon, this city must also be given into the hand of the Chaldeans, and they will actually burn it with fire, and you yourself will not escape out of their hand.’
Yes, God had ‘numbered the days’ of the kingdom of the Babylonians. Exactly seventy years after they finally defeated the Assyrians, the Medes and the Persians under King Cyrus put an end to the Babylonian dominance. Daniel concludes: ‘In that very night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was killed’ (Daniel 5:30).
This obviously refers back to the prophecies of Jeremiah. This ‘numbering of days’ was of course revealed in advance and not kept secret (Amos 3:7).
Let’s look at Jeremiah 25:11, 12 again and note the order of events:
‘And all this land must become a devastated place, an object of astonishment, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years. And it must occur that when seventy years have been fulfilled I shall call to account against the king of Babylon and against that nation,’ is the utterance of Jehovah.’
First the seventy years had to run out, and then the king of Babylon would be called to account. Any interpretation that puts the ending of the seventy years after Babylon was called to account, is a contradiction of the text.
Citat slut.
http://www.2001translation.com/607.htm
________________________________________________
Kommentar:
Altså når de, der her, igen og igen ønsker at debattere dette spørgsmål om 607BC eller 587BC - og henviser til alt muligt og ikke engang selv gider at sætte sig ind i stoffet endsige præcisere hvad et egentligt talt er for noget de vil pege på - i et så langt kompendium, så har jeg altså ikke meget respekt for sådanne tiltag.
Det er også én af grundene til, at jeg vælger at citere det ”hulter til bulter” og ikke dele det op og give læseren mulighed for at forstå ”de enkelte dele”.
Jo, jeg har læste ”bogen” igennem. Det er lige som Søren Kierkegaard; Kierkegaard rager to meter op og har kostet 165 mio. Kr. 55 bind, 17 år.
Så, hvis du vil debattere eller kommentere Kierkegaard, eller har en mening om ”det”, lige som om det er 607BC eller 587BC, så tag lige at sætte dig ind i tingene først.
55 bind, 17 års forskning og et beløb på 165 millioner Kroner. Var der noget?
_________________________________________
Hvad er så formålet med at debattere om det var 607 BC eller 587 BC? Jo, det er for at kunne bevise, at Jesu genkomst fandt sted i 1914.
Vor HERRE bevare os.
Platoon
http://politiken.dk/kultur/boger/ECE1903041/forskning-om-kierkegaard-rager-to-meter-op-og-har-kostet-165-mio/