Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday

by slimboyfat 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Jeffro

  Haha. Poor ‘scholar’ really seems to believe that something that literally never happens happened in just the right year to support JW dogma. Despite the fact that JWs know the Memorial is always in March or April. 😂

  And the claim about Nisan beginning in May in the footnote isn’t from the source ‘scholar’ cites, it is only an assertion by Watch Tower. And Parker and Dubberstein’s tables do not indicate the year starting in May either. Nisan of 588BCE began in the evening of 3 April. But in the year indicated in VAT4956, 568BCE, Nisan began 23 April. In both cases this was because Adar II had already been added so that Nisan wouldn’t begin too early. Such a liar!
• 

  Jeffro

  Pierre’s responses are even more pathetic. ‘Maybe Hillah is in a different direction’ (but there is irrigated farmland in the other directions anyway). 🤦‍♂️ And no, the modern city of Tyre isn’t in a different location, and includes the Sidonian Port that was used to conquer the city from the north after the causeway plan failed (and the heritage protected area in the south-west are Roman ruins). Just go away.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Haha. Poor ‘scholar’ really seems to believe that something that literally never happens happened in just the right year to support JW dogma. Despite the fact that JWs know the Memorial is always in March or April.

  ---

  Haha. Poor Jeffro for the simple fact is that the right year namely Neb's 37th year according to VAT 4956 is a better fit for 588 BCE than 586 BCE according to the data. This has nothing to do with the Memorial for its observation is based on lunar observations at Jerusalem and not Babylon. Silly Jeffro!!!

  ---

  And the claim about Nisan beginning in May in the footnote isn’t from the source ‘scholar’ cites, it is only an assertion by Watch Tower. And Parker and Dubberstein’s tables do not indicate the year starting in May either. Nisan of 588BCE began in the evening of 3 April. Such a liar!

  --

  A pathetic response for the quoted scholarly source that Jeffor has not read or consulted. The simple fact is that if the data suggests that the New Year for 588 BCE began in early May then the said scholar says: 'So be it!' No assertion is needed but simply recognizing the facts of the matter. Nisan began on 4 April 588 BCE according to P &D. Such a liar!

  scholar JW

  scholar JW

  
  
• 

  Jeffro

  Now he pretends that days weren’t reckoned as starting from the previous sunset to try to convince readers that I got ‘3 April’ wrong. 🤦‍♂️ That is the day of 4 April, doofus. (Even his precious Watch Tower footnote mentions “April 3/4”, but dishonestly pretends that wasn’t because Adar II had already been added.) And he shoots himself in the foot because citing P&D simply confirms that Nisan of 588BCE definitely didn’t begin in May. 😂
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  Now he pretends that days weren’t reckoned as starting from the previous sunset to try to convince readers that I got ‘3 April’ wrong. 🤦‍♂️ That is the day of 4 April, doofus. And he shoots himself in the foot because citing P&D simply confirms that Nisan of 588BCE definitely didn’t begin in May. 😂

  --

  Then that is the day- the 4th from midnight to midnight presented in PD as civil days but in Babylonia, the day began with the preceding sunset thus you should have referred to the 4th day rather than the 3rd day. Nisan in 588 BCE began on April 4 and not in May but the table used by Huber and De Meis is used by WT scholars along with Furuli's research that in 588 BCE, Nisan began in early May and PD shows that in that year an additional month was inserted.

  scholar JW
  
  
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  While we are at it and see you are such an expert then no doubt you have to hand a copy of page 186 of the reference book referred to in footnote 17 in that WT article and please explain why the reasoning in that footnote and its related paragraph in the Wt article on page 25 is in error.

  scholar JW
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  The facts are these:

  VAT 4956 shows that Neb's 37th year showed an eclipse - the 15th of the third Babylonian month Simanu which corresponds to July 15 588 BC as shown in the tables published by Huber and De Meis which means that the beginning of that month would be June 30/July 1, 588 BCE. This means that the year beginning with the first month Nisanu or Nisan would have begun two months earlier on 2/3 May 588 BCE which would make such a year a most suitable date for Neb's 37th year rather than 586 BCE.

  scholar JW
• 

  Jeffro

  🤦‍♂️ ‘scholar’ knows very well that none of the sources support the Watch Tower claim that Nisan began in May in 588BCE. It is purely Watch Tower conjecture based on their incorrect assertion that Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year ‘must’ be 588BCE. The correct year is 568BCE, with which all the secular sources agree.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  ‘scholar’ knows very well that none of the sources support the Watch Tower claim that Nisan began in May in 588BCE. It is purely Watch Tower conjecture based on their incorrect assertion that Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year ‘must’ be 588BCE. The correct year is 568BCE, with which all the secular sources agree.

  --

  You are not very smart, are you? Vat 4956 simply gives a certain lunar eclipse along with other lunar and planetary data. The tablet indicates that a certain eclipse namely 15th Simanu which can fit the eclipse dated July 1 588 BCE. The Babylonian month Simau is the third month thus the first month Nisan must have begun two months earlier in May, if you have a May problem then take it up with the scribes who recorded Vat 4956 There are other lunar and planetary data that fit 588 BCE better than 586 BCE so 588 BCE is now properly considered for Neb's 37th year with a 20-year difference between 586 and 588 BCE. Thus 607 BCE is firmly established based on historical, biblical and astronomical evidence.

  scholar JW

  
  
• 

  Jeffro

  'scholar' will continue to deny reality. But for honest readers, the following extract from Parker & Dubberstein confirms, as I previously stated, that the first day of Nisan 588BCE (i.e. Nebuchadnezzar's 17 year) was 4 April and the first day of Nisan 568BCE (i.e. Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year) was 23 April. Babylonian Chronology - 626B.C.-A.D. 75, Parker & Dubberstein, page 28:

  

  And of course, not only do Parker and Dubberstein's tables show that Nisan didn't start in May in 588BCE, but the 21 pages of tables further confirm that Nisan never starts in May (and Simanu never begins in July either for that matter despite the dishonest Watch Tower footnote). Incidentally, "2/3 May" (Julian calendar) as claimed by the Watch Tower Society was also never the first day of the second month in any year during Nebuchadnezzar's reign, and the table above shows 4 May as the first day of Aru in 588BCE (which would be 3/4 May starting from the previous evening).

  I did make one error in previous comments though: there was no intercalary month immediately prior to Nisan of 588BCE (but there was one at the end of that year), which just means the Watch Tower Society's lie about their misapplication of VAT4956 is even worse.

  But despite the facts in black and white (and some highlighter), 'scholar' and other JW cronies will continue to lie and reject reality.