Posts by Jeffro

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

Your ‘understanding’ of the concept of sabbaths is (intentionally) overcomplicated and wildly inaccurate. Who fed you that nonsense?

jwposter:

As historical researchers know (and the Jewish Encyclopedia), the Jews use to observe the Sabbaths according to the Lunar weeks and not according the solar weeks.

The Jewish Encyclopaedia explicitly contradicts your claims, clearly stating what is obvious to anyone with the most rudimentary understanding of the subject: The sabbath is every seventh day. The closest the Jewish Encyclopaedia gets to your ‘lunar weeks’ drivel is that the practice could possibly have originally developed in relation to lunar cycles among early nomadic Semites prior to Jewish settlements. More likely, also explained in the Jewish Encyclopaedia, is that it was probably adapted from Assyro-Babylonian practices.

Please just go away.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

Me:

So we can only conclude that the tradition about the day of atonement is just wrong.

That statement was intentionally glib because I didn’t feel like going down this particular rabbit hole that is ultimately based on unverifiable traditions and cannott be relied upon as historical.

But… if it is assumed that the story about Zechariah were on the day of atonement in the 8th course in 6 BCE (24 October), then the priest courses would actually match up for the first course on 30 August 70 CE. With a subsequent period of at least 15 months for Elizabeth’s 6 months and Mary’s pregnancy, that would place Jesus’ birth in… 4 BCE. (That would be a few months before Jesus’ presumed birth possibly around October; however it is also only tradition that Mary immediately became pregnant when visited by the ‘angel’, which is not stated in the story.)

Of course, it can’t be stressed enough that we don’t really know the actual circumstances of Jesus’ birth or death (beyond that he was probably executed), all of which is only in stories written many years later.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

jwposter:

For those that are following along.

The only people following along are laughing at you. A good number of those are wondering why I waste my time on you, but it's not really for you, it's for others who might otherwise fall for your nonsense.

Let's remember there is no year 0.

Good grief. Thanks for that.

Since Jesus was born in 3 B.C.E

No.

during the Feast of Lights

Citation needed. Or to put it another way... no.

Jesus was in His 30th year in 27 AD

By your reckoning, (incorrectly) placing his birthday around Christmas (🙄), he would only be in his '30th year' for a few days at the end of 27 CE, with most of it in 28 CE.

Jesus was in His 33rd year when He was crucified

Probably, which would be 30 CE. Though we don't actually know exactly when he died, beyond contradictory stories written much later.

and rose from the Dead

No evidence that that actually happened.

in 31 AD.

No.

being 32 years of Age.

That's the only thing you got right in this post. (Specifically, about 32.5 years old at the time of his death based on the traditional time of year for his death - but about 32.25 by your nonsense - but we don't really know exactly when he actually died.) It does show that you recognise they counted ages ordinally compared to the way we typically count ages now. So that's something I guess.

Also, what is with your need to capitalise random words?

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

jwposter:

What a wonderful sign showing that our Lord is Coming to His Church.

I think your Shift key might be getting stuck. 🙄

These wandering stars will begin to come into Virgo in Sept of 2040

It's a pity these end-times nutters can't come up with something happening a bit sooner. 😒

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

jwposter:

We know that the 8th course served during the day of Atonement when Zacharias was serving in the Temple in 4 B.C.E.

It is only a tradition that this was on the day of atonement. It is not indicated in Luke (and the spurious story is only found in Luke), which was written after the temple was destroyed.

We simply plot the courses through the years backwards from 70 AD and see that the 8th course would be serving during the 2nd week of the 7th month in 4 B.C.E

Okay, I'll play... Day of atonement in 4 BCE was 2 October. There were 24 courses. Assuming 8th priest course on that date, by 30 August 70 CE (3804 weeks later) that gives us course... 21. Oh dear.

What about 5 BCE... Day of atonement in 5 BCE was 13 October. Assuming 8th course on that date, on 30 August (3855 weeks later) it brings us to... course 23.

So we can only conclude that the tradition about the day of atonement is just wrong.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

jwposter:

Another great piece of our evidence for Jesus is that he entered his 30th year when Tiberius was in the 15th year of his reign. This further cements the 3 B.C.E birth of Jesus since we know that Tiberius became the emperor in 14 AD.

It's good that you say Jesus was in his 30th year, because they did indeed count ages ordinally at the time. However, Tiberius actually began to reign in 12 BCE (with Augustus). And this also places Jesus' first year in 4 BCE.

Your reckoning of Tiberius' reign from the start of his independent reign in 14 BCE would place Jesus' 30th year in 28 CE, which would place his first year in 2 BCE, which is not only incorrect, but also not consistent with your own nonsense.

Another piece we have to remember is the Sabbatical years.

No. We don't. That's just superstitious nonsense that you're asserting as a premise to fit your conclusion.

Please go away.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

jwposter:

Of course we now know that Herod's dating of his death to 4 BC is in error.

No, you just 'need' it to be 'in error' for your superstitious nonsense. But I've already demonstrated that your nonsense is thoroughly wrong all over the place from start to finish. And instead of dealing with any of the problems, you just bumble along to the next dumb assertion.

We know that he died after the lunar eclipse of Jan 10th in 1 B.C.E according to Josephus.

The eclipse in question was 13 March 4 BCE.

Please go away.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

Good grief. You're just doubling down on your nonsense that assumes your conclusions. Just stop.

Clement of Alexandria quoted the year of Jesus birth very well with saying that it was 194 years, 1 month, and 13 days before the death of Commodus.

So? Clement, a Christian theologian, relies on Christian traditions that had developed up until his time. But putting Jesus' birth in 3BC would be after Herod's death, and the story breaks anyway. The date Clement assigns is one of various suggested dates by early so-called 'Christian fathers', because they actually didn't know the date. This is just more 'Texas sharp shooter' nonsense.

We know that Jesus death was in 31 AD because that is the 1st year of the 40 years to the Destruction of the 2nd Temple by the Romans. That destruction and 40 years also serving the type for those that follow Bible Typology.

Aside from this being superstitious nonsense at its core, it's obviously wrong if you're going by this 'typology' drivel, because 27 March 31 CE to 30 August 70 CE is less than a full 40 years anyway. You would need to start from 30 CE to fulfil 40 years by the time the temple was destroyed.

The traditional date of Jesus' death in the 'gospels' is unverifiable, and rooted in superstition to connect it to Jewish tradition about the Passover. We don't know the actual date of Jesus' death at all. But based on the traditional dating, he would have more likely died on 7 April 30 CE.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

jwposter:

The Birth of Jesus was in 3 BC and the Death and Resurrection was in 31 AD. This is important because a few things intersect at the time in the year of the Resurrection. We have to have correlation to the 70 AD destruction, correlation to the Jubilees, correlation to the 70 weeks Prophecy and correlation to the Festivals and to the Exodus timeline. While it is highly disputed one when the year of the resurrection and the Birth of Jesus was it really shouldn't be when we analyze the data.
Jesus was born during the Feast of Lights in 3 BC. And was crucified on the Jewish day beginning on March 25th (Julian) of 31 AD. We have a lot of good evidence for these dates.

You’re just asserting years that ‘fit’ your numerology. We don’t ‘have to’ ‘correlate things with jubilees’ at all; that’s just you fallaciously assuming your conclusion. There’s no evidence of a resurrection at all. Aside from that, Jesus would more likely have been born in 4 BCE (though the contradictory stories of his birth and early life aren’t particularly reliable sources) and died 30 CE.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

in my studies, i have concluded that year 530 bc was when the destruction of jerusalem occurred and the temple destroyed.

i had determined this prior to investigation of vat4956.

i had already found that the jubilees, sabbaticals, courses of the priests, and chronology attested to this.

Jeffro

Our tedious ’friend’ will likely object because the month did technically start on the evening of 21 May if using modern methods of identifying new moons. At the time, in the 6th century BCE, determination of the new month was based on observation. 0.9% was not observable.

His claims about visibility of the moon in his alternative days in 512BCE remain incorrect either way.