Nice non sequitur. 🤷♂️
You're still wrong.
Posts by Jeffro
-
362Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
-
362
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
Not so.WT Bible Chronology arose from two sources namely Nelson Barbour and Christopher Bowen an Anglican Rector.
🤦♂️Barbour was an Adventist you doofus. (I suppose you'll try to irrelevantly 'argue' that he wasn't a Seventh-day Adventist, probably not understanding that Adventism is broader than just SDAs.)Rubbish. The hole that has been dug is for those who support 586 or 587 BC for the Fall of Jerusalem now disproved by a more accurate representation of VAT 4956 which confirms 588 BC for Neb's 37th year. Thus such additional evidence along with the 70 years proves with a comparison with NB Chronology the missing 20 years and the calculated date of 607 BCE for the Fall of Jerusalem.
Correct year is definitely 587BCE. Not 586BCE. And very obviously not 607BCE. I've already demonstrated that the Watch Tower Society's mangling of VAT 4956 is impossible.
However, VAT 4956 says differently as shown by WT scholarship made public so that the scholarly community can reap the benefit. Scholars are very interested as shown by some published criticism on this new understanding which the said scholar has to hand. You seem to be very troubled by those anonymous researchers but the said scholar is rejoicing in their anonymity.
VAT 4956 identifies a year that had an intercalary month prior to Nisan, and no intercalary month at the end of that year. 568BCE fits both criteria. 588BCE fails both. Not to mention the more specific observations of the stars and planets that definitely disprove the JW dogma, which is why they pretend the names for the planets are ambiguous.
-
362
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
'scholar':
WT scholars have a long-withstanding interest in biblical scholarship and that is why from the early beginnings of the Bible Students who advanced and promoted the subject of Bible Chronology
The Bible Students adopted earlier Millerite (Adventist) chronology. They've consistently been wrong, and they've never been at the forefront of anything.
and such a similar interest has now been enhanced with a more accurate view of this tablet - VAT 4956 with its description of Neb's 37 th year.
Hardly. They've just dug themselves a deeper hole by doubling down on 588BCE supposedly being Nebuchandezzar's 37th year (despite 588BCE actually being what JW chronology calls 608BCE). By claiming that VAT 4956 isn't consistent with 568 BCE, the Watch Tower Society can never fill the 20 years of its missing neo-Babylonian chronology without admitting its reinterpretation of VAT 4956 is complete rubbish.
The data in this tablet with its notable lunar eclipse of 15th July and in the third month Simanu means that the year began in May 588 BC so the evidence is there for the benefit of mainstream scholarship.
Simanu never begins in July (or any day after 27 June), just as Nisan never begins in May, so this automatically tells anyone with even a passing understanding of the subject that the Watch Tower Society's interpretation is obviously wrong. And the intercalary month in early 568BCE is exactly where VAT 4956 says it should be. No one in mainstream scholarship is interested in adopting the Watch Tower Society's nonsense. (And certainly not without knowing who the supposed 'researchers' were. 🙄)
-
362
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
"fresh and new examination".🤣 No, 'scholar', it's a religious sect's desperate attempt to distort the chronology of the neo-Babylonian period, intended primarily for its gullible compliant members. It has no acceptance among actual scholars or anyone else who has even a passing understanding of the subject. It is immediately obvious that you have the wrong year if you find that Nisan "must" begin in May, which it never does. Imagining that Nisan uniquely starts in May just where JWs need it to is especially naive.
-
362
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤦♂️
The lunar eclipse was on 5 July 568 BCE. Obviously ‘scholar’ is wrong because Nisan never starts in May, and it wasn’t necessary to add an intercalary month after the vernal equinox.
-
362
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
For those playing along at home, line 6 of VAT4956 refers to an increase in river height in the interval of 8 Adar II (1 April) until 28 Nisan (20 May) 568BCE. The intercalary month Adar II (called “month XII2” in the translation of the tablet) began on 25 March in 568 BCE, and is confirmed in Parker and Dubberstein’s table. Despite ‘scholar’s’ bleating, there was no intercalary month before Nisan in 588BCE.
(The forum strips out the subscript formatting of the 2 in “XII2”.)
-
362
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
But there is an intercalary month in VAT 4956 for Neb's 37th year
No, doofus, VAT4956 indicates an intercalary month before Nisan of Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year, which is at the end of his 36th year, completely consistent with PD.
🤦♂️ You’re just embarrassing yourself.
-
362
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
Scholars previously thought that 568 BC was an accepted fit
No, doofus, scholars still know that 568 BCE is the correct year. No one in the scholarly community cares about JW fantasies, and Furuli’s apologetics have no acceptance among scholars.
-
362
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
I find it interesting that one observes an intercalary month associated with the PD table for the same year- 588 BCE and similar an intercalary month assigned for Neb's 37th year in VAR 4956.
The particularly embarrassing part of all this is that Parker and Dubberstein’s tables do not allow for the 20-year gap in JW chronology for the neo-Babylonian period. So rather than trying to fit observations from the actual year 588BCE to VAT4956, the JW cronies should be looking at the actual year 568BCE, which JWs call 588BCE. Then they could say that VAT 4956 actually does support that year without making obviously false claims about Babylonian months starting at impossible times. But that would distort later astronomical observations during the neo-Babylonian period, including those that confirm 539BCE as the year Cyrus conquered Babylon.
For their alternative chronology, they need to insert 20 years somewhere between 559BCE after the known years of Evil-Merodach and 541BCE allowing at least three years for Belshazzar indicated in Daniel, but they can’t be more specific because they have no evidence for any intervening kings. Not to mention the fact that cuneiform documents indicate the explicit transitions of all the known kings.
-
362
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat infor newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
-
-
Jeffro
‘scholar’:
Why is that important? At least the footnote describes the method used and the names of the astro tables and while we are at it what is the source of your data?
The poor addled JW apologist doesn’t understand why something he considers scholarly should cite its source for a claim that disagrees with all scholarship. The ‘method’ described is obviously flawed, so it would be nice to know who the ‘researchers’ were if for no other reason than to laugh at them, but at least they would also have an opportunity to explain their dishonesty. And anyone paying attention would already know my source for this topic is Parker and Dubberstein’s tables, from which I even provided an extract. 🤦♂️
I find it interesting that one observes an intercalary month associated with the PD table for the same year- 588 BCE and similar an intercalary month assigned for Neb's 37th year in VAR 4956.
Except there isn’t an intercalary month in Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year. 🤦♂️ Adar II before Nisan of 568 BCE falls in Nebuchadnezzar’s 36th year.
The intercalary month at the end of Nebuchadnezzar’s 17th year only further demonstrates that that year could not have started in May (which is already impossible because Nisan never starts in May).