Jeffro

Joined

• started 46 topics
• posted 6,784 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Jeffro

• 
  78

  God, one person, or three?

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.

  niv.

  gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Sorry for derailing. I do like fan fiction.
• 
  78

  God, one person, or three?

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.

  niv.

  gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Do people still say that?
  
• 
  78

  God, one person, or three?

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.

  niv.

  gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  No, it's definitely this thread.

  Unless you mean that god, one person, or three are three separate options, in which case the first option cannot be established to exist, and the second option leaves out a large number of people, but 'three' is definitely a thing.
  
• 
  78

  God, one person, or three?

  by slimboyfat in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  the trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.

  niv.

  gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  I smell a false dichotomy.
  
• 
  271

  VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

  by jwposter in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  jwposter:

  I think I demonstrated enough here to show that Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year can not be -567 and is actually -511 (512 B.C.E)

  🤦‍♂️🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

  I won't be back here for awhile

  We can only hope.
  
  
• 
  271

  VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

  by jwposter in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  jwposter:

  So as you can see both text had the same problem. Since the Moon is actually BEHIND and not in FRONT of.

  (Actually in this particular case the newer translation says B Virginis, and the observation is corrected by noting that the day is actually one day off, already noted in the 1915 translation. But there are similar issues for lines 11 and 14 so we’ll let it slide…)

  Note the hypocritical inconsistency. For his own position with its blundering interpretations of other observations in VAT 4956 (not to mention the rest of his nonsense), he jumps through hoops to try to justify problems, or simply ignores problems altogether. From using a wrong definition of ‘in front’ or ‘behind’ as ‘closer to west on a compass’, to claiming identification of the solstice ‘really’ means ‘start looking for the solstice 3 weeks before’, to claiming ‘Mars entering Praesepe’ was backwardly identified despite the fact there is no corresponding observation in his own nutty interpretation at all, to completely ignoring most of the planetary observations altogether…

  But when the tablet has some (actually a total of 3) minor inconsistencies in wording for observations among literally dozens of correct matches for 568/7 BCE? ‘568 must be wrong’. 🤦‍♂️ VAT 4956 is expected to be perfect when he says so, but wrong or misinterpreted when convenient.

  The cognitive dissonance is beyond disgusting.
• 
  271

  VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

  by jwposter in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  As before, he continues to ignore all the massive problems with his nonsense and cling to what he imagines are points in his favour. And he relies on an inferior translation from 1915. And he’s still wrong.

  Bear in mind that this joker claiming that line 3 is a ‘major problem’ is the same person who claimed early in this thread regarding the mammoth problems in his own interpretation of VAT 4956:

  Any portions of the Tablet that are not translated to what can be simulated in software for year 512 BC is either a scribe error, transcribing error, translation error, or software or algorithm error or intentional corruption of the tablet.

  As is frequently the case with this type of fanatic, there is a blatant double standard when it comes to expectations of accuracy.

  You’re going round in circles and preaching utter nonsense. Just go away.
• 
  271

  VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

  by jwposter in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  jwposter:

  So I think for the readers that I have given enough information to thoroughly see that the Jews observed the lunar sabbaths at the time of Christ and before.

  You think that, do you? 🤣 I’ve thoroughly trounced you on every aspect. It was also plain that that was the particular site you copy and pasted from for the quotes taken out of context. What a joke.

  moved away from the lunar-solar calendar in the 4th century

  Another irrelevant distraction that has nothing to do with the determination of sabbath days. The Hebrew calendar remained lunisolar, but it was changed to base months on calculations rather than observations only.

  the relationship of the festivals to the 15th day and the lunar month

  The fact that the 15th day of a lunar month is related to… the lunar month is yet another self-evident distraction from the fact that your nonsense about ’lunar sabbaths’ (in either the neo-Babylonian period or the first century) has been shown to be completely wrong. Your own cited sources make it clear that sabbaths were only based on a lunar cycle in a very early period of nomadic Semites prior to Jewish settlements.

  But if you really think you’ve ‘given enough information’, feel free to finally just go away.
  
  
• 
  271

  VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

  by jwposter in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  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.