Posts by Jeffro

178

Interesting Find with Chronology

by Kelley959 in

i hope this is in the right area.

i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.

for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.

Jeffro

scholar:

False, the Bible clearly and unequivocally describes the 70 years as a Period of Exile or as many historians describe this period of Jewish History as the 'Exilic period'. Refer Rainer Albertz.
Biblical texts that describe the 70 years as exilic are the following: Jer. 25:11-12; 29:10 2 Chron 36:20-23; Dan 9:1-19.

No, doofus. Historians date the initial exile to early 597 BCE and the destruction of Jerusalem to 587 BCE (with some Christian sources preferring 586). None of the passages mentions 70 years of exile

Jer. 25:11-12 refers to nations serving Babylon, not exile (and Jeremiah 27:8-11 specifies that serving Babylon is the way to avoid exile).
Jer. 29:10-14 specifies that returning to Jerusalem necessarily follows the end of the 70 years
2 Chron 36:20-23 stipulates that nations served Babylon until the kingdom of Persia began, not until Jews returned from exile, with the return following the end of serving Babylon (and also noting that the interpolation from Leviticus 26:34-35 is not 'the word of Jeremiah')
Dan 9:1-19 (written in the 2nd century BCE) reflects recognition of the order events of Jeremiah 29:10-14, being that 70 years would end and then attention would be given to the Jews' return

178

Interesting Find with Chronology

by Kelley959 in

i hope this is in the right area.

i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.

for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.

Jeffro

scholar:

For starters, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, Edwin Thiele; Handbook of Biblical Chronology, Jack Finegan; The Chronology of the Old Testament, Floyd Nelson Jones.

Ho hum... no argumentation provided and nothing new here. Only one of those is a recent source, and he inconsistently applies dating systems for the reigns of Jehoiakim and Zedekiah (giving Zedekiah a 13-month accession period) resulting in his error of 586.

178

Interesting Find with Chronology

by Kelley959 in

i hope this is in the right area.

i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.

for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.

Jeffro

scholar:

Nope. The seventy years was a period of the Exile in Babylon, Desolation of the Land of Judah and Servitude to Babylon beginning with the Fall of Jerusalem in 607 BCE. and ending with the Return in 537 BCE. Nice and easy!!!

You're such a doofus. Of course the Bible never mentions 70 years of exile at all. But it's worse than that. According to the Bible, attention would be given to the Jews' return after 70 years had ended. But according to pseudo-scholar and other JWs, the Jews have already returned when the 70 years ends (even though most of the Jews remained in Babylon and the 'return' in 538 BCE was actually just permission to rebuild the temple), so turning attention to their return after they've arrived is just stupid.

178

Interesting Find with Chronology

by Kelley959 in

i hope this is in the right area.

i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.

for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.

Jeffro

Hahaha once again a response bereft of any argumentation whatsoever. If you have any sources presenting argumentation for 586, just provide them. However, I am yet to see any argument for 586 that is compatible with a correct understanding of the relevant dating systems. And obviously 607 has been thoroughly debunked to the point that it’s beyond a joke.

10

144000 and the great multitude

by cmaymann in

hellow.

i am studying some material about jehovah’s witness – and i wonder why they think, that the 144.000 from rev 7 should be in heaven, and the great multitude should be on earth.

can anyone give me some argument for this opinion?.

Jeffro

JWs completely misrepresent the 144,000, from who they are to what they do and when. Whilst there is no reason to believe it is actually a real group, the Bible presents quite a different view of the 144,000 to that of JWs. For example, the Bible says it is the ‘great crowd’ who rule as kings and priests for 1,000 years, whereas the 144,000 rule as kings (but not priests) forever.

What Does the Bible Really Teach… About the 144,000?

178

Interesting Find with Chronology

by Kelley959 in

i hope this is in the right area.

i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.

for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.

Jeffro

Kelley959’s method, using twelve 360-day years and seven 390-day years per Metonic cycle, results in a period that is 110 days too long per cycle.

178

Interesting Find with Chronology

by Kelley959 in

i hope this is in the right area.

i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.

for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.

Jeffro

Hahaha. Mildly curious to see your list of sources arguing for 586 over 587—not just parroting tradition but providing argumentation. But I won’t hold my breath. Your previous promised responses have been delayed since Christmas. Of 2013. 😂

178

Interesting Find with Chronology

by Kelley959 in

i hope this is in the right area.

i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.

for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.

Jeffro

scholar:

Your methodology for the attempt to expose the calculation of 1914 CE and the 607/586/587 debacle is inapplicable. Celebrated WT scholars in WT publications have shown the difference between calender years such as the Julian and Gregorian and a 'prophetic year' used in the Bible of 360 days of 12 months of 30 days each.. Refer to All Scripture Is Inspired Of God And beneficial, 1963, 1990, p.282, pars. 22,23.

🤦‍♂️ Kelley959's method (not 'methodology') is indeed invalid, as is yours. The 'explanation' in All Scripture is also wrong, since Babylon didn't actually have a 360 day year. It is just a simplification.

scholar JW emeritus

You misspelled 'meritless'.

178

Interesting Find with Chronology

by Kelley959 in

i hope this is in the right area.

i've been studying the 2520 days/years 607/587/586 debacle.

for a while now i have felt 1914 was wrong.

Jeffro

Kelley959:

The Jewish Calendar has 12 months at 30 days, so 360 days a year.

No, they didn't. The Jewish calendar, based on the Babylonian calendar, did not actually have 360 days per year. That is just a simplification. They had 353, 354 or 355 days in a common year or 383, 384 or 385 days in years with an additional month.

But every 19 year cycle (cycle is important in this), there are seven extra months added, so seven years have a "leap month" for lack of a better terminology.

The regular Metonic cycle was only adopted about 100 years after the Neo-Babylonian period. During the Neo-Babylonian period, the additional month was ad hoc based on astronomical observations.

So take 360 days times 19 years gives you 6,840 days, plus add another 210 days to give you 7,050 days per cycle.

No. Just, no.

Then for fun, I put in October 1, 1975 and subtracted 935,049. WOAH! Sunday, September 9, 586!
I thought that Fred Franz at one point told a group in a special program, "Something happened in 1975, but we're not telling."

Not only is your approach not valid, but Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE, not 586.

24

Ah, Jonah. 3 day air supply explained ?Whale sharks gulp down air to float vertically while feeding

by waton in

here from new scientist magazine: .

whale sharks gulp down air to float vertically while feeding.

life 12 may 2021by christa lesté-lasserre.

Jeffro

HowTheBibleWasCreated:

I'm an atheist all on here know that and most know I'm a minimalist in biblical research. But in regards to Jesus quoting Jonah. if we assume the texts are true Jesus quotes the Jonah story saying Jonah was in the whale's belly three days and three nights

Except the author of Luke said 'the sign of Jonah' was something entirely different (probably because Matthew's claim isn't even consistent with the 'resurrection story', which has Jesus dead for less than 48 hours).

Regarding the 'sign of Jonah', Luke 11:30, 32 says:

For just as Joʹnah became a sign to the Ninʹe·vites, so will the Son of man be to this generation. ... The men of Ninʹe·veh will rise in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, because they repented at what Joʹnah preached. But look! something more than Joʹnah is here.

So 'the sign of Jonah' according to Luke alludes to Jonah 'preaching to the Ninevites' and nothing at all to do with piscatorial accommodations or reanimated corpses. At least one of the quotes isn't really 'what Jesus said', let alone whether he meant it literally or not. So it's more likely the anecdotes were entirely made up later.

The author of Matthew, with his Jewish audience, was especially interested in taking things from the Old Testament, and framing them as 'prophecies', often without any basis in the OT that it was ever meant to be considered 'prophetic'.