The 1914 Chronology of The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society

In the 1914 chronology of Jehovah's Witnesses, and it's an extremely important doctrine for Jehovah's Witnesses.

They speak much of it, and in fact it's also important to them in the fact that it's sort of special to them.

There's no one else running around talking about 1914, and so they feel rather special with that knowledge.

And you may ask, well, you know, if you're talking about presenting the Gospel to Jehovah's Witnesses, why would you spend time talking about Neo -Babylonian chronology, which we'll be discussing tonight, and talking about astronomical data and eclipses and Stella found at archaeological sites and stuff like this?

Why would you even bring any of this up? Well, we're not the ones who have said that Jerusalem fell in 607 and then taken a section from Daniel chapter 4 and interpreted that to mean this, that, and the other thing.

We're not the ones who brought this up. Society is the ones who created this complicated

Bible chronology, and so we must deal with what they've brought up and realize that an individual

Jehovah's Witness has no idea whatsoever that there is anything wrong, either biblically or factually, with the presentation made by the society concerning 1914.

They have no idea that there's a problem there. Here in their little

Bible study book, You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth, they have a whole section concerning the 1914 prophecy, a picture of the tree being cut down, and a description of Daniel chapter 4 and the prophecy, and this is a part of what they present to everyone.

And if it can be shown to them in a rational, logical way that this is falsehood, that the society has actually attempted to deceive them at that point, you might be able to get them to the point of starting to have some doubts, starting to restart the thinking process and become an independent person again.

Right now, they are not thinking independently. They are thinking only what the Governing Body tells them to think, but they need to have that thinking process restarted.

Now, I've mentioned a couple times Daniel chapter 4, so if you have a Bible, you might want to look at what

Daniel chapter 4 has to say. This is very important to witnesses, and I want to point out where even biblically, there is simply no support for the society's presentation.

Daniel chapter 4, verse 10 says, Now these were the visions in my mind as I lay on my bed.

I was looking, and behold, there was a tree in the midst of the earth, and its height was great. The tree grew large and became strong, and its height reached to the sky, and it was visible to the end of the whole earth.

Its foliage was beautiful and its fruit abundant, and in it was food for all. The beasts of the field found shade under it, and the birds of the sky dwelt in its branches, and all living creatures fed themselves from it.

I was looking in the visions in my mind as I lay on my bed, and behold, an angelic watcher, a holy one, descended from heaven.

He shouted out and spoke as follows, Chop down the tree and cut off its branches. Strip off its foliage and scatter its fruit.

Let the beasts flee from under it and the birds from its branches. Yet leave the stump with its roots in the ground, with a band of iron and bronze around it in the new grass of the field, and let him be drenched with the dew of heaven, and let him share with the beasts in the grass of the earth.

Let his mind be changed from that of a man, and let a beast's mind be given to him, and let seven periods of time pass over him.

This sentence is by the decree of the angelic watchers, and the decision is a command of the holy ones, in order that the living may know that the

Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind, and bestows it on whom he wishes, and sets over it the lowliest of men.

Now, this passage, of course, when we look in the context of Daniel chapter 4, is in reference to Nebuchadnezzar himself.

In fact, the Bible provides that interpretation in the fourth chapter. It applies these things to Nebuchadnezzar and to Nebuchadnezzar only.

There is no indication anywhere in the fourth chapter of Daniel that this has any other application, other than the fact that Nebuchadnezzar was going to be stripped of his position, and he's going to live in the fields, and things like that, for seven periods of time, which did happen to him, as we're told in the book of Daniel.

However, the society has decided, on what authority,

I don't know, but it's certainly not the Bible's authority, that the tree represents the kingdom of God, as expressed in its manifestation in God's rulership in the nation of Israel.

Actually, in this case, the nation of Judah. And his rulership in that way. And so the society believes that what this means is that God's rulership through a kingdom is going to be ended in the cutting down of the tree.

Seven periods of time are going to pass over it before it is restored.

Now, you've got to follow here, because I've never guaranteed that society teaching was extremely consistent, or made a whole lot of sense, but try to follow this.

You may recall that in that time, the year was 360 days. Which is true.

The society is correct about that. So what they've done is they've taken a principle that a day is as a year, and a year is as a day.

Now, this is not a completely valid principle. There are a few examples of it, but it certainly isn't consistent throughout

Scripture. Jesus said three days, and that didn't mean three years. You know, that certainly is a problem for the society.

But they say that each day of those 360 days in a year is representative of a year.

So 360 times the seven periods of time is what they do.

They multiply seven by 360. And end up with 2 ,520 years.

2 ,520 years from the destruction of the earthly kingdom representing

God's rulership. 2 ,520 years later, God's kingdom is going to be re -established.

And so, society believes that Jerusalem fell to Nebuchadnezzar in his 19th year reign in 607.

607 B .C. 607 plus 2 ,520 just happens to be 1914.

They say that in 1914, Christ returned and again set up God's rulership.

Now, he returned invisibly. No one saw him return. But that is their biblical chronology.

Quote, unquote. Now, it might be pointed out that Daniel chapter 4 itself provides a good deal of information that would refute this.

Verses 19 -27 say that this vision is in reference to Nebuchadnezzar not the kingdom of God.

Another point that might be brought out is that verse 16 says,

Let his mind be changed from that of a man and let a beast's mind be given to him and let seven periods of time pass over him.

We must ask, does that mean that if we're going to apply this to the kingdom of God that God's kingdom was given the mind of a beast during those years?

I certainly don't think society would accept that. So even from the biblical viewpoint, there is really no foundation for this.

But what is more important, I think, and what we'll be dealing with tonight is the fact that the society has changed history to make their prophecies work.

Jerusalem did not fall in 607. Now, of course, most witnesses obviously don't know that.

Most Christians haven't the foggiest idea when Jerusalem fell. Most Christians don't even know who Nebuchadnezzar was, for that matter.

So it can hardly be unusual that most Jehovah's Witnesses that go door -to -door don't hear too many

Christians correcting them concerning this error that the society teaches that Jerusalem fell in 607.

Well, how can you show someone when Jerusalem fell?

How do we know it fell in 586? I mean, it might have fallen in 607. How do I know?

Well, that's what we're going to look at. And we're going to get a little bit involved. The reason is this.

Some of you have gone out witnessing with me in encounters, and I don't think

I have ever had the opportunity of sitting down and sharing all the information that I'm going to share with you tonight with a

Jehovah's Witness. It just hasn't happened. But you know that the better you know a subject, the better you're able to distill it down into a shorter presentation that makes sense to the person you're talking to.

If you don't know your subject, you're not going to be able to communicate with someone rapidly and well in the witnessing situation.

So I give you all the information, I explain it to you so you have the whole background, and you may only be able to spend five minutes on the subject with a witness.

But if you have all this information in your background, you will be able to present that information in the best way you possibly can to the particular

Jehovah's Witness that you're speaking to. And so we present it in good bit of detail so that you can have a solid understanding.

Now how do you establish an ancient date? Any ancient date. And when

I'm talking ancient here, I'm talking maybe from 500 years after Christ on, being the ancient world.

How do you establish a date back there? Well, first you look for fixed dates. A fixed date is a date that has an astronomical foundation behind it.

When I say an astronomical foundation, realize that there is only one absolutely accurate timekeeper around.

The heavens above us move in perfect order. Today an astronomer could tell you exactly where a particular planet is going to be at a particular time a thousand years from now with minute accuracy.

In the same way, ancient people made observations of the stars and made such good observations of the stars that a modern astronomer can take those observations and determine exactly when that took place.

In fact, in reference to, for example, eclipses of the moon, we can determine the very time that it took place within a few minutes.

Hundreds and even thousands of years ago. And so these astronomers would make note of these things and they would write it down and say this happened at such and such a time in the reign of such and such a king.

In the X year of his reign. In the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign this happened.

When we find out exactly when those astronomical projections were taken, we can determine right when that was and that gives us a fixed date in history upon which to begin hanging our information.

If we know that the king's 37th year was this year, then we know when his first year was.

We can calculate back and determine that. We can determine when he took the throne by doing that. And so you find these fixed dates.

Then another thing used are king lists. It's to be sort of like our, you know, in our junior high schools or our grade schools, up above the chalkboard you'll have a list of the presidents of the

United States. A lot of times the years that he was in office up there. Well, that's nothing new.

Thousands of years ago, in a palace, for example, one of the big columns that would support the roof, on there they would chisel in king lists.

And this king reigned this many years and he did this, that and the other thing and this was his god and all the rest of the stuff.

Then this king reigned and how long he reigned and things like this. And so these king lists are extremely valuable because if you can find a fixed date in one of those kings, you've just developed a chronology for those kings that went before and after if the king list is accurate.

So you get fixed dates, you get king lists. Then you have cuneiform tablets. Now thousands of these things have been found.

Now, you know, if you go to a store right now and buy something, they get out a carbon and they write you out a receipt and you get the carbon of that.

Well, they didn't have carbon paper back then. You got out a big old clay tablet and you chiseled into it, on such and such a day

I sold such and such to such and such. And when you dated it, you dated that cuneiform tablet.

For example, if a person in Babylon were to sell an ox to someone else, they would write out on this tablet and they would date it.

Let's say they dated it, they sold it on the first day of the sixth month of the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, which would be written out 6 -1 -2

Nebuchadnezzar. Sixth month, first day of the second year of Nebuchadnezzar.

And it was dated to the king's reign. And so when you have thousands of these tablets that have been discovered with this dating system on it, you can get an idea of how long these kings reigned by the dates that are placed upon these cuneiform tablets.

And finally, you take all that information and you put it all together. You correlate it to one another.

And this is how you establish ancient dates. Let's do that for the time period that we're most interested in.

And that is, can we determine when the events of the Bible took place?

Specifically, the fall of Jerusalem to Nebuchadnezzar, it is recorded in 2

Kings and 2 Chronicles. Can we determine when that happened? I think we can.

Let's look at the astronomical data. The first piece of astronomical data that is important to us is called

VAT4956. Now, this is an ancient tablet that records astronomical observations made during Nebuchadnezzar's 37th regnal year.

In other words, it says right on there, these were made during the 37th year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.

Now, by examining those astronomical observations, we are able to tell that the year in which this happened was 568 -67.

Now you say, why not just 568 or 567? Our year starts basically in the middle of winter.

Ancient years did not. So whereas we would have, okay, here's

January and here is December, and this is one year, let's say this is the year for us, 568

B .C. The Babylonians and Jews and most other people did not have their years beginning at those times.

For example, if you started your year say in the fall, then you would have a year that went like this.

Then the next year would go like this. And this might be 568, and this is 567, but for us, 568 takes up part of 568 and 567 in their calendar system.

And so normally you will see two dates given because their year started either in spring or in fall.

Alright? So we know from this VAT -4956, which by the way is in the

British Museum in London, that the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign was 568 -567.

Hence, figuring backwards, his first regnal year was spring 604

B .C., or using the Babylonian reckoning, 605 -604 B .C. The Jewish civil calendar, which was different than the

Babylonian calendar, would have been 606 -605 and they went fall to fall, whereas the

Babylonians went spring to spring. Now, that helps us get a...

first indication of when these events took place. This is not the only information we have.

British Museum, that's BM, N47811 is another similar thing to VAT -4956 and it tells us that Cambyses, and Cambyses was a

Persian ruler that came after Cyrus. Cyrus is the one that defeated the Babylonians. His 7th regnal year is 523 -522.

We shall see that Cyrus was enthroned 16 years earlier in 538 -537 and that will become important later on.

Finally, we have Ptolemy's Almagest. Ptolemy recorded 19 lunar eclipses.

Two of them are interesting to us. The first one occurred April 21st, 621

B .C. and it is dated to the 5th year of Nabal -Pelacid. Nabal -Pelacid was

Nebuchadnezzar's father. He reigned right before Nebuchadnezzar. The second one was 11

P .M. We can get very specific here. July 16th, 523 which again is referenced to the 7th year of Cambyses which we saw up in BM, N47811.

Notice the correlation between these two. The eclipse gives us and VAT -4956 gives us that Nabal -Pelacid's first year was 626.

Notice that the eclipse said April 21st, 621 B .C. That was the 5th year so 5 years back was 626.

Nabal -Pelacid's last year we know he reigned for 21 years would have been 605.

VAT -4956 told us that the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar was 586. Hence, what was his first year of Nebuchadnezzar?

The same year that his father died which makes plenty of sense. See here you have two completely separate and distinct sources agreeing perfectly with each other.

Now that shouldn't surprise us. The stars are extremely accurate and so we should not be surprised by the fact that these two sources, widely separated as they are, agree perfectly and both point to the fact that Nebuchadnezzar's first year was 605 and Nabal -Pelacid's last year was 605.

That is when he died. Nabal -Pelacid was Nebuchadnezzar's father, as I said. Let's look at some considerations here.

Since Cyrus took the throne in 538 -37 the Jews could have settled in Jerusalem by 537 -36.

Now remember Cyrus is the one who released the Jews from their bondage. He gave the decree. Ezra mentions him.

And Ezra also mentions it was about a four month journey back. So they could have been there by 537 -36.

Hence the 70 years reckoning inclusively, and I'll explain that in a moment, would have begun in 606 -605, fall to fall in the

Jewish calendar. Now this has been locked in as Nebuchadnezzar's accession year.

Two things to explain there. A. Reckoning inclusively. Very important.

In ancient systems of reckoning any part of a year was considered a year.

There are examples of this. So when you add this up you might say it's only 68 years.

But if it took a part of the year before and a part of the year after it was considered a full 70 year time period.

Now the other important thing is that you need to understand that there was a lot of different systems of reckoning back then.

One of them was the accession year method which the Babylonians did use. The Jews did not.

The accession year said that if a king started to reign later on in the year, his first year would not include that first part.

That would be called his accession year. His first official year would begin at the beginning of the next full year in their calendar system.

For example, this crops up in the Bible. For we find out from Jeremiah that a certain event occurred in the 4th year of Jehoiakim.

But Daniel in Babylon says it was the 3rd year. Now why the difference?

Well Jeremiah over in Judah in Israel and Palestine is not going to be using the accession year method.

But Daniel back in Babylon is. So Daniel counts the accession year plus 3 years is the same as Jeremiah's simply 4 years.

So though many people have said the Bible contradicts itself. One guy said 3 years. One guy said 4 years.

It's not a contradiction. They were using different time reference systems because they were in different cultures and different places.

So there is not a contradiction between the two. So the considerations of what we've seen so far from the astronomical data will tell us that the 70 year time period prophesied by Jeremiah began in 606 -605.

Some place in there. We've yet to determine exactly what that is but we'll find out in a few minutes just what that is that happened.

If you'll take your hand out and look at the second page we need to establish a king list.

We need to know who reigned when and how long. Now in 1906

Nabonidus Stella A was found. Now this is a rock mass. It is a stella upon which writing is engraved.

And it was found at Heron in Mesopotamia. And it had a complete king list on it of the exact period in which we're dealing with.

Unfortunately it was badly damaged at that very part. Now interestingly enough the

Watchtower Bible and Tract Society in it's big huge book called Aid to Bible Understanding talks about this very fact.

How terribly messed up this king list is. And they use this to try to discredit

Babylonian chronology and say it's all guess work. And many Jehovah's Witnesses have accepted this.

The problem is just a few years later Nabonidus Stella B was discovered.

It's contents were published in 1956. And Nabonidus Stella B also known as Heron Stella B contains the identical king list in perfect shape.

Now of course the society forgets to mention this in it's literature. For obvious reasons.

What does the king list tell us? Well you have it right there in front of you. Nebopolassar reigned for 21 years.

Nebuchadnezzar reigned for 43 years. Amelmarduk also known as Evilmarduk reigned for 2 years.

And Neroglycer reigned for 4 years. And the Stella was written during the reign of Nabonidus.

So obviously there is not a time period given for him because he's still alive. So no period of reign is given for him.

And so we have this excellent resource that gives us the relative reigns of these kings.

Now this list is also supported by the cuneiform tablets. And what scholars have done is they've gone over 4 ,000 cuneiform tablets.

And what you're given here in the table on your handout is the name of the king,

Nebopolassar for example. The number of years he reigned, 21. And then you're given two dates.

The first date is the earliest date in our reckoning that mentions

Nebopolassar as king. The second date is the last date that mentions

Nebopolassar as king. You'll notice that some of them overlap. Why would that be?

Well obviously the news of the king's death, you couldn't just pick up Ma Bell and call everybody and let them know.

Babylonia was a fairly large land and so it would take days, sometimes weeks or months for the news to travel throughout the land.

And so the king may have kicked off two weeks ago. I don't know it yet and so I am still recording my dates by Nebopolassar whereas in actuality

Nebuchadnezzar is now king. And I just don't know it yet. So you'll notice. Let's look at our king list.

Nebopolassar, 21 years. May 17, 626 is the earliest. August 15, 605 is the latest.

Nebuchadnezzar, 43 years. September 605 is the earliest. October 8, 562 is the latest.

Then we have Amalmarduk, 2 years. Nergal -Sharar -Usur is

Neraglissar. You can pronounce their names lots of different ways. 4 years. Then you have

Labashi -Marduk. Now Labashi -Marduk does not appear on the Bonadustela B or A.

You think you can see why? He only reigned 2 months. And there are some who feel that there was a struggle there for the throne.

And he was not even universally accepted as king even during that time period. And so he does not appear in a lot of the king lists because he did not complete a full year of reign.

He was not on the throne when the new year started. So he didn't even have an accession year. But May 3rd and June 20th there are a few that mention

Labashi -Marduk. Notice Nabaniad, also known as Nabonidus, reigned 17 years.

And he has some cuneiform tablets that date within the same period as Labashi -Marduk.

Which leads scholars to think that there was an argument about it that Labashi -Marduk was not acclaimed as king throughout all the land.

Then Nabonidus by the way had a co -regency with Belteshazzar who we know of from Daniel's account.

Cyrus the Persian reigned 9 years taking

Babylonia. He reigned 9 years and Cambyses 8 years till 522.

So this is the information given to us by over 4 ,000 cuneiform tablets. Now think about that in another way also.

How could anybody have changed this? Some people would actually go so far as to say someone must have changed all this information because the watchtower must be right.

Someone must have changed this information. How could you have in 500

BC gone around and gathered up 4 ,000 cuneiform tablets from all over Mesopotamia and changed all of them?

I mean that just simply is not a possibility. It's beyond the realm of logical thinking whatsoever.

And so we have the cuneiform tablet information. So now we have our fixed dates.

We have our king list. We have our cuneiform tablets. Let's put it all together and let's figure out what we've got here.

The correlation. Nebuchadnezzar reigned 21 years from 626 to 605.

His 5th year is fixed at 621 -620 according to Almagast, remember the eclipse, the

Ptolemy report. Nebuchadnezzar reigned 43 years, 605 -562.

We know this because his 37th year was 568 -567 according to VAT 4956.

Edomorodac reigned 2 years, 562 -560. Neroglycer reigned 4 years, 560 -556.

Labashi -Marduk reigned for 2 months during the year of 556. Nabonidus reigned 17 years, 556 -539.

Cyrus took over 539 -530. Cambyses 530 -522.

Now, now that we have all that down, you say, what does that have to do with this whole thing? Well, there are two views as to how to understand

Jeremiah's 70 year prophecy. The first view, which is written here, is taken by the

Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. And that is that the 70 years began in Nebuchadnezzar's 19th regnal year when he destroyed

Jerusalem, removed Zedekiah, and took the populace captive. That is recorded in 2

Kings 24 -18 25 -21 and 2 Chronicles 36 -21.

Let me explain to you what the Society is saying here. What they're saying is the 70 year period starts when

Nebuchadnezzar sacks Jerusalem. This is during the reign of Zedekiah, the last king.

This, of course, has to be for them because the tree is cut down. Remember in their prophecy in Daniel 4 there can't be anything more after that.

So the final king to rule in Judah was Zedekiah. And Nebuchadnezzar in his 19th regnal year, 19th year of his reign, sacked

Jerusalem and took Zedekiah away, destroyed Judah. That was it. And so they are forced into the situation where they have to identify

Nebuchadnezzar's 19th regnal year as occurring at that point.

And what they do is they say okay, the Jews came back in 537. The Bible says 70 years.

70 years before 537 is 607. So Nebuchadnezzar must have been in his 19th regnal year in 607.

And so the society teaches its people that Nebuchadnezzar was in his 19th year in 607.

That's their view. Second view. This view also marks the end of 70 years with the return of the

Jews to Jerusalem. However, it marks the beginning in the 4th regnal year of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, corresponding to Nebuchadnezzar's first regnal year, 605.

Okay? This view says the 70 years is to be reckoned inclusively.

And that it begins when Nebuchadnezzar first came up against Jerusalem.

He had gone, he had defeated the Egyptians at Carchemish, which the Bible mentions, and of course is verifiable from historical sources, and came to Jerusalem, defeated

Jerusalem, and put it under his control. Now, the reason

I mention here in the notes, Jeremiah 25 -12 is significant, is that this mentions that there are going to be two signs of the end of the 70 years.

One is the return of the Jews to Jerusalem. The second is the destruction of Babylon. Now that's very interesting.

Because you see when Cyrus took Babylon, he didn't destroy it. There was no fighting, no bloodshed, only

Belteshazzar was killed. In fact, the people in Babylon hailed

Cyrus as a... someone who was setting them free. They didn't even resist him.

And so how are we going to understand this, that God says one of the signs of the end of the 70 years is the destruction of Babylon.

Was God wrong? Or does he mean something different by destruction here? What we see is that Babylon never recovered from the

Persian takeover. It slowly declined until today.

If you go there, they're pasturing sheep there. I mean, it is just simply ruins.

Nothing left of it. It's been completely destroyed, utterly destroyed, as God prophesied. But it began at that time, and it was a process.

This is important because a witness will say, no, wait a minute. The Bible says that Jerusalem is going to be destroyed at the beginning of the 70 years, and they're going to be driven off the land and all the rest of the stuff.

But if God was using the idea of destruction to be a gradual decline for Babylon, then it is quite consistent to believe that from the time that Jerusalem was placed under the control of Nebuchadnezzar, lost its sovereignty in the fourth year of Jehoiakim when he first came up against them in his first regnal year, that that is the beginning of the 70 -year prophecy.

Those are the two views. Which view accords with the facts? Well, you probably have already noticed that, but let's look at it.

Which view fits? View A has a 70 -year period being 607 to 537. Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year, according to View A, which is the watchtower position, would be 607.

And Nebuchadnezzar's first year would be 626. Now what have we already seen up here?

According to all the information. Who is reigning in 626? Nebuchadnezzar had just ascended the throne in 626.

Nebuchadnezzar is not even on the throne at that time. In fact, Nebuchadnezzar's 19th year is supposed to be 607 according to the watchtower position.

Nebuchadnezzar wasn't even on the throne in 607. He wasn't even king.

What about View B? View B has a 70 -year period reckoned inclusively being 605 to 537.

Nebuchadnezzar's 19th regnal year would be 586. And Nebuchadnezzar's first year, 605.

That is exactly what we have historically.

Is that his first year was 605 and then Jerusalem fell to Nebuchadnezzar in his 19th regnal year in 586

BC. There is no question about that. That view takes into consideration all the biblical evidence and I personally think it's really neat that we can take the

Bible's historical narrative and nail it down with non -biblical sources the way that we can.

I mean, a Christian has nothing to fear of the facts. The facts of history, the facts that are given to us by astronomy, by archeology, by everything that we can put our hands to validifies the biblical account, validifies the biblical view.

I think that's great. I think that's really neat that that's the case. Now there's some supporting evidence to this.

For example, BM 21946 records, and this is a historical chronicle of the

Babylonians, this is one of their history books basically, that Nebuchadnezzar conquered

Hattiland in September 605. Now Hattiland is the

Babylonian way of referring to Palestine. That's what they called it. And so this record tells us that in September 605

Nebuchadnezzar conquered that. Now it is interesting that this corresponds to when

Nebuchadnezzar in Jehoiakim's fourth regnal year came against Jerusalem and defeated it.

In his fourth regnal year, he was defeated by Egypt. In his sixth regnal year, he quelled rebelling

Arabs. The next winter, he took Jehoiakim as well as Ezekiel.

And this is referenced in 2 Kings 24 verse 14. Again, the Bible gives us this information.

Notice again, however, that Nebuchadnezzar was not even king in 607 whatsoever.

Another historical stellar, historical record, BM 22047 says that Nabal Palassert was king in 607.

And that during 607, what was he doing? He was leading a military campaign against the mountains of Zah in Assyria.

There wasn't even a Babylonian army anywhere near Palestine in 607. So it is completely and totally impossible on the basis of historical evidence that agrees perfectly with Biblical evidence that Jerusalem fell in 607 to Nebuchadnezzar during his 19th regnal year.

That is just simply not a possibility. Now you might ask, well, do

Jehovah's Witnesses know this? Well, they don't know. Does the Governing Body know this?

Yes, they do know. This book right here is called

The Gentile Times Reconsidered by Carl Olaf Johnson. Mr. Johnson was a Jehovah's Witness.

A pioneer out in active ministry when he encountered a person in his

Bible study. He was having a Bible study with him. And undoubtedly they ran across this section.

And the man said, 607, could you prove to me that Jerusalem fell in 607?

And Mr. Johnson, of course, feeling that well, certainly, took it upon himself to do some research to prove it to the man.

Well, obviously you can figure out what happened. He spent years researching the subject and this book is the result of that.

Now he did not rebel against the society. He put all his information together and there is much more information here than even what

I've given you tonight. I mean, there is Egyptian information and there is much more in the cuneiform tablets and things like that than what

I've mentioned to you. All, again, coming together in perfect harmony. Giving the same dates which

I've given you this evening. He put all this information together and sent it to the Governing Body.

Fully expecting that being honest men, they would reconsider their position.

Obviously they did not. One of the Governing Body members by the name of Raymond Franz, who wrote the book

Crisis of Conscience, was given the assignment of writing the chronology section in the

Aid to Bible Understanding book, the large blue reference book of the Watchtower Society. The chronology section is the longest in the entire book.

And he records in his book Crisis of Conscience that he, when assigned that, went out to do research concerning this very topic, 607.

That he searched through libraries and he talked to professors and he was unable to find so much as one shred of evidence to support their contention concerning 607.

And yet he wrote an entire section that just simply attacks all this solid information about it, without presenting any information that it actually took place the way that society teaches it does.

So the Governing Body does know that Jerusalem did not fall in 607. They do know that they are teaching falsehood about that.

It has been shown to them numerous times and yet they continue to do so. So here you have a group of men that are so powerful, that have so much power over their followers, that they can actually alter history for their own purposes.

And a Jehovah's Witness cannot question on pain of disfellowshipping and quote -unquote loss of their salvation.

That is how much power these people have. It reminds me a great deal of Well's book, 1984, where the government has basically complete power over everyone.

You have to think what the government tells you to think. Well Jehovah's Witnesses have to think what the Governing Body tells them to think.

That Jerusalem fell in 607. It didn't. There is not one shred of evidence that it did. They have to believe it though.

Because if not, then their entire prophetic structure falls apart. Now, on the backside of this tape, we are going to be discussing the 1914 chronology as far as the fact that the society has not always taught that Christ returned visibly in 1914.

But for right now, this is the information that if you can get the outline down, get the facts down, and distill it down and be able to share with the person, hey look, from many different sources we know exactly when

Nebuchadnezzar reigned. Exactly when his 19th regnal year was. And it fits perfectly with the

Bible. And it didn't happen in 607. And you can take that discussion and immediately say, now if the society can change history, how can you trust them for your theological teaching?

For your very salvation? How can you do that? That is how you can use this information to lead the discussion back into the discussion of the gospel of Jesus Christ and how they can be free in Him.