The Gentile Times Reconsidered Chronology Christ

458 THE GENTILE TIMES RECONSIDERED
the mention of later generations may as well refer back to Genesis 15:13-16,
whence we learn that at that time the sins of the Amorites had not yet reached
their full measure, and so no action would be taken against them just then.
In the latter part of the first paragraph RF tells us that ‘the captivity of the Jews
in Babylon is spoken of as an exile’, which is hardly news, but of the three
scriptures referred to containing the term gâlût (which may be translated
‘captivity’, or ‘exile’, even ‘exiles’ or ‘captives’ collectively) one is slightly off:
Jeremiah 52:32 should be 52:31.
The final clause of this paragraph is also deceptively formed: Jeremiah 25:11
does not connect the 70 years with the exile but with the servitude of ‘these
nations’ under Babylon, and 29:10 clearly applies them to Babylon and to no
one else! Actually, RF admits as much in the very first clause after the
quotations, saying, ‘... but the text does not say explicitly that it refers to an exile
for the Jewish nation’! Of course it doesn’t, for that simply would not have
been true. Aside from the poor syntax of parts of these paragraphs this
statement is a gem by which the author actually casts aspersions on his own
argumentation right from the outset! His grammatical analysis ‘of’ (not ‘in’)
Jeremiah 25:11 is defective: he ignores the first clause in which the subject is
‘this whole country’, ‘will become’ is the verbal, and ‘a desolate wasteland’ is the
subjective complement. Then, of course, ‘these nations’ is the subject of the
latter clause, and ‘will serve’ is the verbal, while ‘Babylon’ is what is usually
called the direct object (the term ‘patient’ used by the author belongs to the socalled
‘Case Grammar’ and is not commonly used in connection with Hebrew
which lost its case endings in antiquity. However, his use of it makes no
difference whatsoever for the analysis of this Hebrew text). Moreover, he states
quite correctly that according to the grammatical analysis ‘“Babylon“... is the
nation that should experience the period of 70 years’, after which he blows it by
falsely claiming that, ‘Nevertheless, the writers of Daniel and 2 Chronicles
understood the words of Jeremiah to imply a 70-year exile for the Jewish
nation’! Now, it may be said with absolute certainty that they could not have
understood Jeremiah’s words to imply anything like that, simply because the
prophet never stated that with even a single word anywhere and so, if anyone
‘understood’ them in that way it would be either a gross error or, even worse, a
deliberate misrepresentation of the inspired message. Barring extreme
sloppiness on the part of the writer, the latter may well be the case!
Really, it boggles the mind to try to fathom this claim, that two inspired
spokesmen of Almighty God should have misrepresented the inspired words of
another faithful servant of God, an inspired prophet who served in Jerusalem
during one of the most turbulent periods of her history and who was faithful in
performing the task which Jehovah had entrusted to him, despite all the
difficulties and hardships he had to suffer for 40 years in Jerusalem and some
time later in Egypt! This is a harsh treatment of Jeremiah, as well as of Daniel
and the Chronicler who evidently had no difficulty in understanding Jeremiah’s
words, as is obvious from a close reading of the scriptures in question. By the
way, the quotation from 2 Chronicles at the bottom of page 75 is not merely
from 36:20, but includes verse 21, even though it is not marked as such.