Posts by Jeffro

33

Maths Virus 1914

by Anna Marina in

this is my latest video.

it is part 1 of a series that reveals the mathematical trickery watchtower uses to con people about the 1914 doctrine.

it takes a radically different approach to that of carl olof jonsson who dealt with dates.. this video focusses on how watchtower misuses the numbers in scriptures and creates a mental fog that prevents people from understanding and therefore prevents them from challenging.. the full title of the video is maths virus - revealing the antivirus to 1914. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llkmrul3afg.

Jeffro

shepherdless:

I am solely focused on Watchtower’s strawman argument, where Watchtower claims that “secular” historians are the source of 586/587 BC. To repeat myself, outside of the Bible, there is no evidence of the event. Therefore, outside of the Bible, there is no date. The 586/587 BC date is a biblical date.

Thanks for the clarification. It is certainly the case that the Watch Tower Society tries to 'demonise' 'secular' sources, and to use this as a distraction from the fact that the information in the Bible only actually allows for 587 BCE (unless an incorrect year is presumed for the start of Nebuchadnezzar's reign).

And in relation to whether it is 586 or 587, I leave that to others, because my understanding is that it is not so straight forward.

Rest assured, 587 is definitely correct year. The confusion generally stems from some (mostly religious) sources trying to reconcile Bible verses about the subject without understanding the different dating systems used in different Bible books (and additional confusion about the interpolation at Jeremiah 52:28-30). Some sources also fail to properly account for the fact that the primary exile is properly counted from 598 BCE (rather than 597) because it occurred prior to Nisan of 597. Additionally, some sources refer to "587/6" because the Jewish year starting in Nisan spans parts of both years of our calendar, with the destruction of the city still actually occurring in 587 BCE.

33

Maths Virus 1914

by Anna Marina in

this is my latest video.

it is part 1 of a series that reveals the mathematical trickery watchtower uses to con people about the 1914 doctrine.

it takes a radically different approach to that of carl olof jonsson who dealt with dates.. this video focusses on how watchtower misuses the numbers in scriptures and creates a mental fog that prevents people from understanding and therefore prevents them from challenging.. the full title of the video is maths virus - revealing the antivirus to 1914. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llkmrul3afg.

Jeffro

Anna Marina:

The Bible does not say that Jerusalem fell in the 18th year of Nebuchadnezzar anywhere. But it does say it was under seige.

You've quoted Jeremiah 52:29 after that statement. However that verse, referring to Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year excluding his accession year, does refer to exiles taken after the destruction of Jerusalem (587 BCE) rather than the ongoing siege. (Also note that the reference to the '7th year' excluding accession year at Jeremiah 52:28 is the same year as the '8th year' including accession year at 2 Kings 24:12.)

On the other hand, the reference at Jeremiah 32:1 includes the accession year as Nebuchadnezzar's first regnal year, and does indeed refer to the ongoing siege the year (588 BCE) prior to the city's fall.

33

Maths Virus 1914

by Anna Marina in

this is my latest video.

it is part 1 of a series that reveals the mathematical trickery watchtower uses to con people about the 1914 doctrine.

it takes a radically different approach to that of carl olof jonsson who dealt with dates.. this video focusses on how watchtower misuses the numbers in scriptures and creates a mental fog that prevents people from understanding and therefore prevents them from challenging.. the full title of the video is maths virus - revealing the antivirus to 1914. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llkmrul3afg.

Jeffro

shepherdless:

Babylonian tablets record events in some years of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, but the relevant tablet or tablets from (going from memory) the 11th to 20th years have never been found. The event isn’t mentioned by the Egyptians etc, either. Thus there is no record of the event outside of the Bible. Therefore 586 or 587 is not the “secular” date. It is the one and only biblical date. There is no “secular” date because the event didn’t occur, as far as secular history is concerned.

Though it is wise not to automatically trust religious texts as historical documents, it is a false dichotomy to dismiss out of hand the Bible's description of these events during the Neo-Babylonian period as 'not secular'. Also, automatically concluding that all parts of the Bible are unreliable because some parts are is a fallacy of division.

Stripping away the religious bias of the text, the core description of the events of Jerusalem's destruction is consistent with Nebuchadnezzar's activities in the region during the Neo-Babylonian period. Hence, while there is insufficient corroboration to say it definitely happened (or happened as stated), nor is it entirely without basis.

It is of note that the interpolation at Jeremiah 52:28-30 appears to be from a Babylonian source. Whilst the rest of Jeremiah chapter 52 is copied from 2 Kings, these verses are a separate addition. Also, unlike the rest of the book of Jeremiah, these verses do not count accession years.

33

Maths Virus 1914

by Anna Marina in

this is my latest video.

it is part 1 of a series that reveals the mathematical trickery watchtower uses to con people about the 1914 doctrine.

it takes a radically different approach to that of carl olof jonsson who dealt with dates.. this video focusses on how watchtower misuses the numbers in scriptures and creates a mental fog that prevents people from understanding and therefore prevents them from challenging.. the full title of the video is maths virus - revealing the antivirus to 1914. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llkmrul3afg.

Jeffro

shepherdless:

Therefore (assuming the Bible is true) the event occurred in 586 or 587 BC.

No, it was definitely 587 BCE. The 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar including accession year, which is his 18th year not including accession year.

33

Maths Virus 1914

by Anna Marina in

this is my latest video.

it is part 1 of a series that reveals the mathematical trickery watchtower uses to con people about the 1914 doctrine.

it takes a radically different approach to that of carl olof jonsson who dealt with dates.. this video focusses on how watchtower misuses the numbers in scriptures and creates a mental fog that prevents people from understanding and therefore prevents them from challenging.. the full title of the video is maths virus - revealing the antivirus to 1914. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llkmrul3afg.

Jeffro

More correctly, arithmetic is a branch of mathematics, and mathematics is a science.

33

Maths Virus 1914

by Anna Marina in

this is my latest video.

it is part 1 of a series that reveals the mathematical trickery watchtower uses to con people about the 1914 doctrine.

it takes a radically different approach to that of carl olof jonsson who dealt with dates.. this video focusses on how watchtower misuses the numbers in scriptures and creates a mental fog that prevents people from understanding and therefore prevents them from challenging.. the full title of the video is maths virus - revealing the antivirus to 1914. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llkmrul3afg.

Jeffro

Anna Marina:

It is Almighty God Himself who has done this.

No, it’s not. If you want to credit anyone with the number of years between the relevant events, that would be Nebuchadnezzar.

33

Maths Virus 1914

by Anna Marina in

this is my latest video.

it is part 1 of a series that reveals the mathematical trickery watchtower uses to con people about the 1914 doctrine.

it takes a radically different approach to that of carl olof jonsson who dealt with dates.. this video focusses on how watchtower misuses the numbers in scriptures and creates a mental fog that prevents people from understanding and therefore prevents them from challenging.. the full title of the video is maths virus - revealing the antivirus to 1914. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llkmrul3afg.

Jeffro

I’m already quite familiar with the subject. But I’m sure that your videos will be helpful to others.

Ezekiel 40:1 confirms that the Jews reckoned their captivity 11 years prior to Jerusalem’s destruction.

Trivially, Nebuchadnezzar’s 33rd regnal year is 14 years after he destroyed Jerusalem in his 19th year.

In preparing your videos, ensure that you correctly consider whether sources count the accession year as part of the reign.

For Judah: 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles and Jeremiah use Tishri-based dating and count accession years.

For Israel and Babylon: 2 Kings, 2 Chronicles and Jeremiah (except 52:28–30) use Nisan-based dating and count accession years

Daniel and the Babylonian interpolation at Jeremiah 52:28–30 use Nisan-based dating and do not count accession years

Ezekiel counts Nisan-based years of exile.

33

Maths Virus 1914

by Anna Marina in

this is my latest video.

it is part 1 of a series that reveals the mathematical trickery watchtower uses to con people about the 1914 doctrine.

it takes a radically different approach to that of carl olof jonsson who dealt with dates.. this video focusses on how watchtower misuses the numbers in scriptures and creates a mental fog that prevents people from understanding and therefore prevents them from challenging.. the full title of the video is maths virus - revealing the antivirus to 1914. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llkmrul3afg.

Jeffro

It appears that the video does not properly account for the fact that the author of Daniel does not count accession years, whereas the author of Jeremiah does. Both verses refer to events in the same (Nisan-based) year, but the events of Daniel 1:1 (January/February 604 BCE) actually come some months after those of Jeremiah 25:1 (September 605 BCE).

I have not watched the other video parts (they don't seem to exist?), though I fear that if it goes in the direction of taking '19' and '14' from '1914' and using those figures for some purpose during Nebuchadnezzar's reign, then that would constitute an equivocation fallacy. (This might be okay if it is used as a mnemonic only rather than asserting some special significance.)

(It's not even worth bothering to deal with the erroneous drivel offered by 'scholar'. His suggestion that 'kingship' means something other than reign is entirely false as the term in the original text is the word for 'reign' and has nothing to do with vassalage.)

10

Before 1990 did the watchtower magazines have a Price tag

by Hotpepper in

jw
friends

i forget ?

did the awake and watchtower magazines have a price tag on the front page saying .25 cents or one quarter dollars in print.

i remember they we're 25 cents americans dollars.

Jeffro

A specific price was indicated for all JW publications prior to the Jimmy Swaggart case regarding taxation on religious literature. A price tag was not included on the cover, but the magazines provided the price in small print on the inner front cover.

Awake!, January 8, 1975, page 13:

No doubt you noticed how inexpensive Awake! and The Watchtower are—just five cents (U.S.) a copy—whereas other magazines today often cost seventy-five cents per copy and more. Do you know why? It is because Awake! and The Watchtower are produced by a unique family that is interested, not in material gain, but in providing information that they believe is of vital importance to others.

Um... no... other magazines are more expensive because they have to pay their staff.

104

2020-Articles Of Association--Bylaws--Notice Of Special Meeting! (as of 2020-11-25)

by Atlantis in

jw
friends

2020--articles of association and bylaws--3 pages.. .

2020--notice of special meeting in december--8 pages.

if you are a jw read carefully before you sign.. .

Jeffro

Vidiot:

Jeffro - "...if understand it right is JWs inactive being kicked out of congregation..."
...
Jeffro - "...Can't imagine org wanna suddenly drop what could be 100000s of members. I think they are that many. Think of the donations org will have to do without."

You have attributed statements to me that were actually made by asp59. I only responded to those statements.