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

Following is a summary of the major inconsistencies between the nutter chronology offered in this thread and the content of VAT 4956. Various 'minor' inconsistencies (mostly lunar observations) are not included. Note that other sources may have different criteria and margins of error for what I consider a 'major inconsistency'. Because the nutter chronology is unreliable, some dates may vary by a day, but none of the problems are resolved by the difference of 1 day. Where there are interpolations in the translation indicated by square brackets [], a best-case match is indicated for the alternative chronology where possible. (Apologies for any table formatting stripped out by the forum.)

Date	Line	Comments
13-Mar	6	Impossible reference to 8th of month XII2; there was no intercalary month the previous year
5 Apr (am)	2	Saturn between Aquarius and Capricorn, not in front of ‘the Swallow’ (Pisces)
15-16 Apr	4	Jupiter not anywhere near acronychal
18 Apr (am)	4	Sunrise to moonset 55 minutes (39 minutes longer)
5 May (am)	9	Saturn between Aquarius and Capricorn, not in front of ‘the Swallow’ (Pisces); Mercury had set, not visible
6 May (pm)	10	Mars did not enter Praesepe or anything else significant
9 May	10	Mars did not go out of Praesepe or anything else significant
21 May (pm)	11	Venus near Cancer, not below α Leonis
30 May (am)	11	Moonrise to sunrise 58 minutes (22 minutes shorter)
2 Jun (pm)	12–14	Mars and Mercury not visible in evening; briefly visible before next sunrise, but not in front of α [anything]; Mercury passed below Mars to the East; Jupiter in Leo, not above α Scorpii; Venus in west far below θ Leonis
6 Jun (pm)	14	Moon in Virgo, not near “end of Lion’s foot”
11 Jun	16	Impossible date for solstice
11 Jun (pm)	16	Moon between Virgo and Leo, not above α Scorpii
14 Jun (pm)	16	Mars visible for less than an hour in the morning, not notably above [anything] to warrant measurement in cubits
18 Jun (am)	17	Sunrise to moonset 118 minutes (88 minutes longer)
14 Jan (am)	3'	Venus in Sagittarius, not below Capricorn
24 Jan (pm)	5'	Sunset to moonset 102 minutes (44 minutes longer)
25 Jan (am)	5'	Jupiter in Virgo, not behind elbow of Sagittarius
3-4 Feb	7'	Moon in front of Cancer, not relative to α Leonis
7 Mar (am)	16'-17'	[Mercury] in front of the “band” of ‘the Swallow’ (Pisces) behind Venus, too far from Venus to match observation
7 Mar (am)	16'-17'	Moon already set before sunrise
Between 7 Mar and 14 Mar	17'-18'	[No observable planets] above Mercury and below Venus in required period; Mars below [?] granted due to ambiguity
15 Mar (am)	19'-20'	Mercury in Pisces but not observable, Venus did not enter the “band” of ‘the Swallow’ (Pisces)
21 Mar (am)	20'	Neither Mercury nor Venus [entered or left] the "band" of Anunitu (Pisces); Mercury was not observable

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

The actual quote from Clement is as follows:

And that it is said, that we and the Greeks know the same God, though not in the same way, he will infer thus: "Neither worship as the Jews; for they, thinking that they only know God, do not know Him, adoring as they do angels and archangels, the month and the moon. And if the moon be not visible, they do not hold the Sabbath, which is called the first; nor do they hold the new moon, nor the feast of unleavened bread, nor the feast, nor the great day."

Clement is saying that neither Christians nor Greeks worship in the same manner as the Jews. Clement is not referring to weekly sabbaths at all, nor associating weekly sabbaths with lunar cycles. The reference to the 'sabbath' as part of the expression "the Sabbath, which is called the first" is in reference to the 'feast of trumpets' (Rosh Hashanah) marking the 'Sabbath' (that is, rest) commanded on the first day of the (civil) new year. See also Leviticus 23:24.

It would be redundant to say the first day of the seventh month is also a sabbath if the first day of every month were a sabbath anyway.

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

The Sabbath depending, in Israel’s nomadic period, upon the observation of the phases of the moon

I already explained this. As the Jewish Encyclopedia explains, the nomadic period relates to a much earlier Semitic period, not Jewish practice in the Neo-Babylonian period, and certainly not in the 1st century. Specifically, "When the Israelites settled in the land and became farmers, their new life would have made it desirable that the Sabbath should come at regular intervals, and the desired change would have been made all the more easily as they had abandoned the lunar religion." (The Jewish Encyclopedia, Sabbath)

The moon was the beneficent… [herald] of the shepherds

There's those ellipses and interpolations again... you're copying and pasting from nutter websites, not the actual sources. The Jewish Encylcopedia actually says "The moon was the beneficent deity of the shepherds in the region" in that earlier nomadic period. Little wonder the nutter sites, wanting to stick to an illusion of a monotheistic history, want to disguise that...

Just stop.

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

1899 edition

🙄 and even that is taken out of context. For example…

so that the New Moon no longer coincided with the first day [of the month ]

This is talking about the ‘new moon’ as the first observable crescent being differentiated from the ‘new moon’ as no visible moon at all. It is nothing to do with the date of the sabbath.

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:

From Clement of Alexandria

So… not a Jewish source.

Neither worship as the Jews…[for] if the moon is not visible

This particular quote, always with the ellipsis and omitted text, is very conspicuously only on lunar sabbath nutter websites. As is usually the case with these nutty fringe views, the ellipsis serves as a warning that the statement is out of context. Let’s see if he’ll provide the full quote of the text in between…

Aside from the fact that Clement isn’t a Jewish source, he is obviously not talking about the Jews when he says ‘they’ do not hold various Jewish observances. It is also obvious that ‘the first’ in the second quote (when the moon is not visible) is not the same as ‘the first week’ in the first quote (during a half moon).

Clement is referring, in the first passage to a general approximation of the lunar cycle, and in the second to various observances that do not dictate the timing of the sabbath.

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:

So if you said that it is was ok for the Sabbath to fall on the new moon then your affirming a belief that the sabbaths are not bound by the moon.

Duh.

if the moon falls on the 5th day of the week, you are stuck in what to do with the doors.

No, it quite clearly says to open the door on the new moon, overriding the directive to usually close the door. It’s not complicated. Are you dim?

The Jews needed the moon in order to observe the Sabbath day.

No, they just needed to be able to count to 7. They had that covered.

This nonsense you’re peddling is fringe 20th century Adventist drivel. Just stop.

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 question for those that believe the Sabbaths were always on solar day is what do you do if the Sabbath falls on the day of the new moon?

In both cases the door was to be opened so it’s pretty obvious. 🤦‍♂️ But maybe in your addled mind there would be some overly complicated procedure of opening the door twice. 🤷‍♂️🤣

But the Jews do have provisions for if things like temple duties etc fall on a sabbath. There’s no ‘gotcha’ here.

There’s no such thing as ‘solar weeks’.

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?