Posts by Earnest

25

Sexual abuse and Jehovah's witnesses- the gift that keep on giving

by wannaexit in

there seems to be no end to the many jw's who sexually abused minors.

here is another story:.

https://www.inquirer.com/news/pa-jehovahs-witnesses-sex-assault-attorney-general-shapiro-20221027.html.

Earnest

TonusOH : Victims are frequently forced to face their attacker without any concern for their own mental and emotional wellbeing, and possibly even without any supporters to help them through it.

While that has been true in the past, it is not true now.

Shepherd the Flock of God, April 2022, 14.18 "Child Abuse - Investigating Allegations"

During the investigation process and during the judicial committee process, a victim of child sexual abuse is NEVER (my capitals) required to make her allegation in the presence of the alleged abuser. However, victims who are now adults may do so, if they wish. In addition, victims can be accompanied by a confidant of either gender when presenting their accusation to the elders. If a victim prefers, the accusation can be submitted in the form of a written statement. Generally, in the case of a victim who is a minor, elders should be able to obtain necessary information from the parents. In addition, sufficient evidence needed to establish wrongdoing on the part of an alleged abuser may already be available to the elders. In the exceptional event that the two elders believe it is necessary to speak with a minor who is a victim of child sexual abuse, the elders should first contact the Service Department

25

Sexual abuse and Jehovah's witnesses- the gift that keep on giving

by wannaexit in

there seems to be no end to the many jw's who sexually abused minors.

here is another story:.

https://www.inquirer.com/news/pa-jehovahs-witnesses-sex-assault-attorney-general-shapiro-20221027.html.

Earnest

DarleneGatus : The way they won't allow consecutive victims to be counted as more than two witnesses causes further insult to victims

Shepherd the Flock of God, April 2022, 12.40.2 "Evidence Establishing Wrongdoing - Eyewitnesses"

If there are two or three witnesses to the same kind of wrongdoing but each one is witness to a separate incident, the elders can consider their testimony. While such evidence is acceptable to establish guilt, it is preferable to have two witnesses to the same occurrence of wrongdoing.

173

Is the tide turning against covid vaccines?

by slimboyfat in

have you seen this video about the covid vaccines?

have you got any views on the information?

i find it worrying at least.

Earnest

The Telegraph (UK) reported on Saturday that a teenager died after deteriorating 'astonishingly' quickly when she suffered rare heart inflammation linked to the [Covid-19] virus.

Samantha Holden, a consultant paediatric pathologist, gave a cause of death of acute myocarditis associated with Covid-19 infection.

During the inquest, Ms Halliday asked Dr Nicholas Tarmey, a consultant in intensive care medicine at the Queen Alexandra Hospital who treated Jorja, whether her daughter would have suffered a less severe reaction to Covid if she had received the vaccination (the day she died she was due to have her coronavirus vaccine).

Dr Tarmey said: "I really do not know as it's such an unusual situation. We know having a Covid jab reduces risk of severe complication, we think that it trains the immune system.

"I suppose having a Covid jab might reduce the risk of these complications but I am extrapolating that from the benefits we know."

88

New method to absolutely date Fall of Jerusalem.

by waton in

for what it is worth to those interested.

1914.. tel-aviv university.

"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.

Earnest

Bear in mind that the Aramaean and Assyrian campaigns use different anchors to those used for the Babylonian campaigns. It's interesting (to me) what we can learn from those other anchors.

The destruction of the town of Gath by the Aramaeans (2 Kings 12:18) is one such anchor. Both the archaeomagnetic direction and intensity from Gath show outstanding agreement with three other destruction layers: Tel Rehov Stratum IV, Horvat Tevet Level V, and Tel Zayit Level XIII. Thus, the archaeomagnetic results strongly support the synchronization of these three destructions with that of Gath, and suggest that they were also the result of the Aramean campaign(s) of Hazael.

Lachish (in the time of Sennacherib) is another anchor. According to biblical and Assyrian sources (2 Kings 18–19; Isaiah 36–37; 2 Chronicles 32), many other Judean sites were destroyed during that Assyrian campaign but none are securely identified. The archaeomagnetic data from Tel Beersheba, Tel Zayit Level XI, and Tell Beit Mirsim argue for their destruction during the same military campaign.

So, the archaeomagnetic data is excellent for establishing destruction events that happened at the same time as the anchor points, and is moderately good for establishing whether other military campaigns were earlier or later. It in itself tells us nothing about dates.

88

New method to absolutely date Fall of Jerusalem.

by waton in

for what it is worth to those interested.

1914.. tel-aviv university.

"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.

Earnest

Jeffro : ... the method doesn’t establish the date of Jerusalem’s destruction. But I have also already pointed out that the method disproves Watch Tower Society chronology for earlier events in the Iron Age.
Fisherman : What results does the magnetic dating method yield using 607 instead of 586? How does it falsify 607?

It would be well worth reading the article before asserting that the method disproves Watch Tower Society chronology. It does not. It negates or supports hypotheses of contemporaneity. For example,

The intensity results from Tel Malhata are slightly lower than those recorded in Lachish II [which was destroyed at the same time as Jerusalem]. This supports the hypothesis that in 586 BCE the Babylonian army was focused on Jerusalem and had no interest in going far south to the area of Malhata. It seems that after 586 BCE, when the Kingdom of Judah ceased to exist, the eastern and southern periphery of the kingdom collapsed, probably in a gradual process, and sites were destroyed, perhaps by the Edomites or other nomadic elements.

In the above quotation, reference to 586 BCE is based on the presumption that the destruction of Jerusalem happened on that date. But what if Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE?

The geomagnetic field data have nothing to say about that. All it tells us is whether other cities that were burned down in military campaigns had the same geomagnetic field data (which suggests it occurred during the same military campaign). It could also suggest whether other Babylonian campaigns were earlier or later based on a probability distribution of ages. So, if Jerusalem (and Lachish) was destroyed in 607 BCE then the probability distribution curve for the Babylonian military campaigns would be shifted by 20 years.

What about the other evidence which cause the vast majority of researchers to accept 586 BCE? That has been discussed endlessly elsewhere on this forum and I don't think it has changed the view of the protagonists on either side. But if we are to simply discuss the use of geomagnetic field data and not indulge in the childish sport of always having the last word, it is clear that this method does not in itself falsify 607.

88

New method to absolutely date Fall of Jerusalem.

by waton in

for what it is worth to those interested.

1914.. tel-aviv university.

"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.

Earnest

Jeffro : “70-100” suggest an error margin of plus/minus 15 years...

Yes, you're right. I had a mathematical blind spot. Sorry about that.

Jeffro : But it’s not clear why you would say the base date used is irrelevant though.

You earlier wrote that the initial assertion that the geomagnetic dating method 'confirms 586' was a misrepresentation of the source material. I agree. That is what I meant in saying that geomagnetic dating is irrelevant in determining the base date. The base dates are not calculated using geomagnetic dating, but are accepted as reliable by most scholars using other criteria.

88

New method to absolutely date Fall of Jerusalem.

by waton in

for what it is worth to those interested.

1914.. tel-aviv university.

"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.

Earnest

Jeffro : Also note that the range of "70-100" years indicates a margin of error that renders inconsequential the selection of 586 instead of 587 for the fall of Jerusalem for their purposes.

That margin of error also renders inconsequential the selection of 586/587 instead of 607! However, the date of Jerusalem's destruction is irrelevant to geomagnetic dating as it is used as an anchor as the majority of scholars accept the date 586 as reliable.

88

New method to absolutely date Fall of Jerusalem.

by waton in

for what it is worth to those interested.

1914.. tel-aviv university.

"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.

Earnest

Jeffro : Even the Watch Tower Society acknowledges the reliability of carbon dating for that period .

The article I referred to which indicated that carbon-dating was not reliable at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem was in The Economist of December 18, 2021 which I copied in full in an earlier post.

There it stated :

[The period from about 830 BC to the destruction of Jerusalem is] an extremely useful span, for it coincides with a hiatus in the archaeological record called the Hallstatt plateau. This "plateau" is a flat stretch of the calibration curve used for a technique called radiocarbon dating. It is a period from 400-800 BC, when, for reasons not entirely clear, radiocarbon dating breaks down.
Samples from the time of the plateau have hitherto been undatable within that four-century span.

Wikipedia has this to say about the Hallstatt plateau :

The Hallstatt plateau is a term used in archaeology that refers to a consistently flat area on graphs that plot radiocarbon dating against calendar dates. Radiocarbon dates of around 2450 BP (Before Present) always calibrate to c. 800–400 BC, no matter the measurement precision. The carbon 14 dating method is hampered by this large plateau on the calibration curve in a critical period of human technological development. Just before and after the plateau, calibration is accurate; during the plateau only techniques like wiggle matching can yield useful calendar dates.

88

New method to absolutely date Fall of Jerusalem.

by waton in

for what it is worth to those interested.

1914.. tel-aviv university.

"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.

Earnest

Fisherman : If you could link the articles that don’t require membership or login, great.

The Rosette stamped jar handle system and the Kingdom of Judah at the end of the First Temple Period is linked here and The Settlement on the Southwestern Hill of Jerusalem at the End of the Iron Age: A Reconstruction Based on the Archaeological Evidence is linked here.

JSTOR allows "independent researchers" to read articles online for free. On both links there is an "alternate access option" which allows those who cannot access JSTOR through a school or library, to read 100 articles a month free. You do need to register with your email address but there is no payment.

88

New method to absolutely date Fall of Jerusalem.

by waton in

for what it is worth to those interested.

1914.. tel-aviv university.

"biblical military campaigns reconstructed using geomagnetic field data.

Earnest

Fisherman : Conclusions. I’m not convinced.

I understand. The date of Jerusalem's destruction has often been discussed on this forum and I have no quarrel with those who use 539 as an anchor and work back 70 years to determine when Jerusalem was destroyed. That is based on faith and exegesis with which not everybody agrees. This particular thread is about a scientific method to reconstruct when biblical military campaigns occurred and uses 586 as an anchor for the destruction of Jerusalem, which the majority of scholars accept.

I referred in an earlier post to the archaeological reasons for this. If you have an interest in knowing why the majority of scholars accept 586 you can read the two articles I referenced, here and here. The book by Oded Lipschitz, The Fall and Rise of Jerusalem: Judah under Babylonian Rule, should be available in most academic libraries and you can see the contents here.

Fisherman : ... I think that 539 is the standing WT also uses to establish the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecy in Daniel 9 of Jesus in the 1st Century.

The crucial year WT uses to establish the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecy in Daniel 9 is 455 for the 20th year of Artaxerxes, when Nehemiah was granted permission to rebuild Jerusalem. This is contrary to most secular works which place Artaxerxes' 20th year at 445/444, but, again, 455 is largely based on faith and exegesis. As the book Aid to Bible Understanding states (p.137):

Undoubtedly the strongest proof for the date of 455 B .C.E . as the twentieth year of the reign of Artaxerxes, however, is the fact of the Messiah's appearance in the year 29 C .E., and his death in 33 C .E ., in fulfillment of the time period indicated in Daniel's prophecy.-Dan. 9 :25, 26.