anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
scholar:
I care because I want to know unlike you what I am talking about
Non sequitur. Unless you’re saying that you don’t know the contents of your own library until you post it on this forum. And you reject the contents of the books you boast about having. 🤦♂️
anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
scholar:
I wish to advise you that I have the following in my theological library:
Who cares what you ‘have in your library’. You’re still wrong.
anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
All that effort and still doggedly clinging to JW propaganda.
Tell us, oh great scholar, how attention was given to the Jews’ return after the Jews had already returned (as is required by the JW interpretation of Jeremiah 29:10-14). 🤣
anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
scholar:
Furuli carried out independent research and has always shown to be an independent thinker and scholar right from the days of his first published work.
He’s certainly an ‘independent thinker’ as far as scholarly consensus goes. 🤣 But it’s blatantly obvious that his efforts were targeted at ‘affirming’ JW interpretations. All those pesky verses at just the wrong places that need novel explanations. 🤣
Further, your claim to have arrived independently as the best scholarship amounts to the simple fact that you were either directly or indirectly influnence by Carl Jonsson's GTR.
Fallacy: argument from incredulity. As much as it pains you to realise that multiple people can independently arrive at the same factual conclusionr from the information in the Bible, I hadn’t even heard of Jonsson, his book, or this forum, or even any other secular arguments about the period when I first thoroughly debunked the JW 607 doctrine.
anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
scholar:
At the very least Furuli is a scholar which you are not.
Unlike Furuli, I’ve independently arrived at the same conclusions as the best scholarship. Furuli is a pariah as far as his JW apologetics go.
anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
scholar:
even Rolf Furuli
hahaha... I like the way you say "even Rolf Furuli", as if he's supposed to be a particularly credible source for such matters.
anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
scholar:
a theory similar to your spurious claim that Daniel was written in the Seleucid period.
I don't even need to respond to your other nonsense because this well demonstrates the level of your dishonesty and/or ineptitude. It is the scholarly consensus and a matter of historical fact, and not merely my 'specious claim', that Daniel was written during the Seleucid period.
anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
scholar:
What is false about your post is the claim that Daniel in this instance used a different calendrical system.
Wrong again, 'scholar'. Daniel's use of Nisan/accession dating is consistent throughout the book of Daniel, and it was the dating system used in Babylon where the story is set (and where Daniel was purportedly educated), the subsequent Persian period when JWs believe Daniel was written, and the Seleucid period when Daniel was actually written.
Jeremiah's use of Tishri/non-accession dating is also consistent for kings of Judah. There is insufficient information in Jeremiah to confirm whether he uses Nisan or Tishri dating for Babylonian kings (though likely Nisan consistent with 2 Kings), but he consistently uses non-accession dating (except for the Babylonian interpolation at Jeremiah 52:28-30, which is evident from the relative references to the 7th and 18th years).
anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
scholar:
What your pretty chart demonstrates the validity of WT Chronology and its scholarship based on biblical evidence.
It's already obvious that you're too deep in your delusion. You don't need to keep affirming it.
anybody know something about vat 4956?.
nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?
any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .
'scholar':
You need to this inaccurate history especially to Jehoiakim's 'third year'.
Seems to be a verb missing there, but let's ignore that for now... Shame on you trying to confuse Vidqun when you should know very well that Jehoiakim's 'third year' as referenced by Daniel uses Nisan/accession dating and refers to the year that began in Nisan 605 BCE and specifically to events in early 604 BCE, as opposed to Jeremiah's reference to his fourth year using Tishri/non-accession dating.
More detail here.
