1914/607 Exposed!

The 1914 date is the central backbone of the JW religion. Without it, they lose the importance of their "End Times" preaching message. Let's examine all of the facts as well as the reasoning for which this date is based on.

The JWs believe that Daniel chapter 4 prophesied the Gentile Times of the Nations (Luke 21:24)in which Jehovah would not have a kingly ruler. This extends from the end of God's rulership through the Jews in 607 B.C., until God re-established his Kingdom in heaven in 1914. The Gentile Times are the 2,520 year period in between. The basis for this comes from Daniel, where the JWs have interpreted the following: 1)The cutting down of the tree represents the destruction of the Kingdom of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar in 607 B.C.
2) The "seven times" constitute 2,520 days, 7 years of only 360 days each.
3) The "principle" of "a day for a year" converts 2,520 days to 2,520 years.
4) The 2,520 years of the Gentile Times ended in 1914, coinciding with the start of Jesus' heavenly rulership.

In order for this to be true, the temple in Jerusalem would have had to of been destroyed in the year 607 B.C. History paints a completely different picture. There is a wealth of information to go over that will prove that this calculation is in error. But before we look at the historical facts, let's look at some bible verses and see how strong their case is.

Daniel chapter 4 is the first place we should look to, since it is this chapter that the entire prophecy is based upon. Instantly we find a problem. Verses 28-37 go on to state that the dream was fulfilled. So if the dream was fulfilled, that would mean that the 7 times already happened, which of course offsets the entire mathematical calculation. There is no second fulfillment of this chapter. I could simply end this here, but let's examine another verse in Jeremiah.

Jeremiah 25:11-12 "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, 'their error, even against the land of the Chal·de´ans, and I will make it desolate wastes to time indefinite.'"

This shows the 70 years were the entire period the Babylonians were conquering "these nations", and the period of vassalage to the Babylonians. Jeremiah 25 ends the 70 years with the "account against the King of Babylon". The Babylonians dominated for a seventy year period from their defeat of Assyria in 609 B.C.E., to their fall in 539 B.C.E.

Jeremiah 29:10 concurs with this. In a number of translations, this verse links the completion of the 70 years with Babylon.

"This is what the LORD says: "When seventy years are completed for Babylon, I will come to you and fulfill my gracious promise to bring you back to this place." New International Version - see also ESV, NASB, RSV, ASV and DBY.

Not having a proper understanding of who the 70 years were being applied to is yet another mistake to add to their calculation. The next verse to consider is found again in Daniel.

Daniel 9:2 "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."

The JWs point to this as proof that the 70 years apply to the desolation of Jerusalem. But that is not the word used here. It is the devastation of the temple. Zechariah 1:12 clarifies this by saying : "Then the angel of the Lord said, “Lord Almighty, how long will you withhold mercy from Jerusalem and from the towns of Judah, which you have been angry with these seventy years?” In other words, when are you going to rebuild the temple? An important point to add here is the time in which this question was asked. Zechariah 1:1--In the eighth month of the second year of Darius, the word of the Lord came to the prophet Zechariah son of Berekiah, the son of Iddo". Darius' second year was 519 B.C.E. So, that verse cannot be used to support 607.

Now let's examine some history.

A: Ancient Historians---Berossus, the Royal Canon(better known as Ptolemy's Canon)

B: The Cuneiform Documents----Chronicles, Kinglists, Royal Inscriptions, Economic-Administrative and Legal Documents, Prosopographical Evidence, Chronological Interlocking Joints

C: Synchronic Links to the Chronology of Egypt----Chronology of the Saite period, Synchronisims to the Chronology of the Saite period

D: Astronomical Diaries---VAT 4956, B.M. 32312, The Saturn Tablet (B.M. 76738 + 76813)

A: Ancient Historians

Berossus was a Babylonian priest that lived in the 3rd century B.C.E. He wrote a history of Babylon, which have been lost, but his work has been quoted and paraphrased by other ancient writers. The most famous being Josephus. The figures he gives for the reigns of the Neo-Babylonian Kings substantially agree with the evidence found in the ancient cunieform documents.

The Royal Canon, better known as Ptolemy's Canon, is a list of kings and their lengths of reign beginning with Nabonassar (747-734 bce) and continuing on through the Babylonian, Persian, Greek, Roman, and Byzantine rulers. However, Claudius Ptolemy was not where this list originated. A table of this kind was a prerequisite for the research and calculations performed by Babylonian and Greek Astronomers. Without it, they would have had no means for dating the astronomical events their calculations showed as occuring in the distant past. The Royal canon omits the rule of Labashi-Marduk, who only ruled for a few months, since it lists in whole years only.

B: The Cuneiform Documents

Neo-Babylonian Chronicles record specific details about Babylon, and which King was ruling. It also links certain kings together as one king would succeed another one. There are also details about kings from other nations, such as the Persian king Cyrus defeating the Median king Astyages and capturing the capital of Media. An interesting fact here is that the Nabonidus Chronicle which contains the account of the fall of Babylon, has Cyrus defeating the Medians in the 6th year of Nabonidus' reign. Cyrus ruled for 29 years and died in the year 530 bce. If 607 bce was when Jerusalem fell, this would not be possible. Though the Chronicles do not give a complete chronology for the Neo-Babylonian period, the dates that are preserved support those given by Berossus and the Royal Canon.

The Uruk Kinglist was badly preserved and some portions of it are missing. However, it still contains the names of Kings, and the length of reign of eack king during the Neo-Babylonian era. The preserved portion gives the following information.

Kandalanu 21 years
Sin-shum-lishir-and Sin-shar-ishkun 1 year
Nabopolassar 21 years
Nebuchadnezzar 43 years
Awel-Marduk 2 years
Neriglissar 3 years 8 months
Labashi-Marduk 3 months
Nabonidus 17 years.



The argument against this document is that is was recorded more than 300 years after the Neo-Babylonian era, so perhaps it is inaccurate. But the numbers line up with other independent forms of evidence.

Royal Inscriptions from the Assyrian and Babylonian eras have been found in great numbers. There are 3 of these inscriptions that are original documents from the reign of Nabonidus. 1.)Nabon. #18 is a cylinder inscription from an unnamed year of Nabonidus. Fulfilling the desire of Sin, the moon-god, Nabonidus dedicated a daughter of his to this god as a priestess at the Sin temple of Ur. A moon eclipse led to this dedication. Studies show that there was an eclipse that matches the description of this one during his 2nd year of reign, and the inscription also states that his daughter began her dedication took place during his 2nd year on the throne, thus confirming his length of reign. 2.) Nabon. #8 clearly establishes the total length of reigns of Neo-Babylonian kings up to Nabonidus, and enables us to know both the beginning year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, and the crucial year in which he desolated Jerusalem. 3.) Nabon. #24 provides the length of each kings reign, from Nabopolassar down to the 9th year of Nabonidus.

Economic-Administrative, and Legal Documents....there are literally thousands of documents such as promissary notes, contracts (the sales of houses, property, slaves, livestock, etc.), and records of lawsuits. Each document contains the year of the reigning king, the month, the day of the month. Every year of the Neo-Babylonian era is covered by these documents.

Prosopographical Evidence is basically the study of careers, especially of individuals linked by family, economic, social, or political relationships. The collection of tablets found were dated like the documents mentioned previously, and make it easy to determine when each King ruled, and for how long. The Egibi business house can be tracked quite easily from the time of Nebuchadnezzar to the time of Darius.

Chronological Interlocking joints.

a) Nabopolassar to Nebuchadnezzar. Chronicle 5 (neo-babylonian chronicles) says that Nabopolassar ruled for 21 years, that he died on the eighth day of the month of Ab(5th month), and on the first day of the next month (Elul) his son Nebuchadnezzar ascended the royal throne in Babylon.

b) Nebuchadnezzar to Awel-Marduk. Business document B.M. 30254 confirms that Nebuchadnezzar was succeeded by his son, Awel-Marduk in the 43rd year of his reign.

c) Nebuchadnezzar to Awel-Marduk to Neriglissar. A ledger on a tablet known as NBC 4897 tabulates the annual growth of a herd of sheep and goats belonging to the Eanna temple at Uruk for ten consecutive years, from the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar to the 1st year of Neriglissar.

d) Neriglissar to Labashi-Marduk. A tablet YBC 4012 shows that Labashi-Marduk succeeded Neriglissar as king early in the 4th year of his father's reign.

e) Neriglissar to Labashi-Marduk to Nabonidus. Royal inscription Nabon. No. 8. Nabonidus speaks of his own enthronement and names the last four of his predecessors: Nebuchadnezzar and Neriglissar, which he considered legitimate rulers, and their sons Awel-Marduk and Labashi-Marduk, which he regarded as illegitimate usurpers.

f) Nabonidus to Cyrus. Nabonidus Chronicle B.M. 35382. Nabonidus was ruling when Cyrus conquered Babylon.

C: Synchronic Links to the Chronology of Egypt.

2 Kings 23:29, Jeremiah 46:2, Jeremiah 44:30, and B.M.33041. Each of these names different rulers from either Egypt, Babylon, or Judah ruling at the same time. So now the boundaries are set. Chronology of the Saite period which is the 26th dynasty is established through death stelaes and stelaes of Holy Apis bulls. Basically this does for Egypt what the above evidence has done for Babylon. it allows us to know which Egyptian king reigned during which years, and for how long. Now examing the verses from the bible, 2 Kings 23:29 establishes that Josiah was killed by Necho during the time that each were ruling. Necho began his reign in the year 610 bce. Jeremiah 46:2 establishes that Nebuchadnezzar fought Necho during the 4th year of the King of Judah, Josiah's son. It was also Nebuchadnezzar's first year/ascension year on the throne which was in 605 bce. Jeremiah 44:30 establishes that Zedekiah had already lost and Jerusalem was destroyed during the reign of King Hophra/Apries, who ruled from 589-570 bce. The 4th document establishes that Nebuchadnezzar marched against Egypt during the reign of Amasis during Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year on the throne. The math fits perfectly. All of this makes the 607 claim impossible.

What needs to be established is the chronology of Egypt, which is done by way of a series of death stelae and stelae of holy Apis bulls. The length of reigns of the first four kings of the 26th dynasty can be established.

Psammetichus I--54 years, Necho II--15 years, Psammetichus II--6 years, and Apries (Hophra)--19 years. Amasis--44 years and Psammetichus III--6 months, are established by historians Herodotus and Manetho, as well as other lines of evidence such as the papyrus Rylands IX, which dates the time of Darius I (521-486 B.C.E.)and lists the 44th year of Amasis as his last year.

D: Astronomical Diaries


Vat 4956 is a diary dated from Nisanu 1 of Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year to Nisanu 1 of his 38th year. The positions were so exactly described that modern day astronomers can easily fix precise dates when they were seen. By doing so they have been able to show that all of these observations must have been made during the year 568/67 bce. This lines up with all of the evidence listed already, since it would place Nebuchadnezzar on the throne on 605/604 bce.

B.M. 32312 This diary gives details on the position of Mercury, Saturn, and Mars, which date it to the year 652/51 bce. An historical notice also repeated in the Akitu Chronicle and there dated to the 16th year of Shamashshumukin, fixes that year to 652/51 bce, which prevents any extension of the Neo-Babylonian era backwards in time.

The Saturn Tablet establishes the reign of Kandalanu, predecessor of Nabopolassar. The pattern of positions described in the text and fixed to specific dates in the Babylonian Lunar calendar is not repeated again for more than 17 years. The first 14 years of his reign are mentioned in the text. This also gives us the exact year in which Nabopolassar's reign began, which is 625 bce.


I think it is clear to see that history proves the attempted calculation of the JWs is incorrect. For them to not only ignore this evidence, but then attempt to teach this incorrect view to the public is something that Jesus warned against.

Matt. 24:23--At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it.

Saying that they know exactly when Jesus began ruling is an exact fulfillment of this warning. Jesus also stated : No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

So how can anyone assume to know exactly when Christ began his rule? That is an assumption based on a poor calculation.

Also, Jesus made it perfectly clear as to the attempt at calculating dates of importance. Acts 1: 6, 7 reads--So when they met together, they asked him, "Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?" He said to them: "It is not for you to know the times or dates the Father has set by his own authority.

If Jesus told his disciples that it was not for them to know the times or dates the Father has set, would it be wise to assume that this view has changed during modern times? Is this human calculation enough proof to assume that God has allowed anyone to know when Jesus began to rule as King?