I_love_Jeff

Joined

• started 129 topics
• posted 328 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by I_love_Jeff

• 
  4

  VAT 4956 question: What is Dr. Furuli talking about? "backward calculations"?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff

  Thank you BobCat and what about this quote from Carl Olof Jonsson:

  "Finally, Furuli's hypothesis is self-contradictory. If it were true that the planetary positions "represent backward calculations by an astrologer who believed that 568/67 was year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar II," and if it were true that "the original tablet that was copied in Seleucid times was made in 588/87," which Furuli argues was the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, then the astrologer/copyist must have dated the tablet to the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar from the very beginning! No modern manipulation of the date would then have been necessary".

  I am not clear on this and I did read the article. It's very interesting indeed.
• 
  5

  Could someone please explain this self contradiction made by Dr. Furuli?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  "furuli's hypothesis is self-contradictory.

  if it were true that the planetary positions "represent backward calculations by an astrologer who believed that 568/67 was year 37 of nebuchadnezzar ii," and if it were true that "the original tablet that was copied in seleucid times was made in 588/87," which furuli argues was the 37th year of nebuchadnezzar, then the astrologer/copyist must have dated the tablet to the 37th year of nebuchadnezzar from the very beginning!

  no modern manipulation of the date would then have been necessary"..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff

  "Furuli's hypothesis is self-contradictory. If it were true that the planetary positions "represent backward calculations by an astrologer who believed that 568/67 was year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar II," and if it were true that "the original tablet that was copied in Seleucid times was made in 588/87," which Furuli argues was the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar, then the astrologer/copyist must have dated the tablet to the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar from the very beginning! No modern manipulation of the date would then have been necessary".
• 
  5

  VAT 4956 question: What is Dr. Furuli talking about? "backward calculations"?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  "the following principal conclusions can be drawn on the basis of the discussion of vat 4956: the diary is most likely a genuine tablet made in seleucid times, but in modern times someone has tampered with some of the cuneiform signs.

  because of the excellent fit of all 13 lunar positions in 588/87, there are good reasons to believe that the lunar positions represent observations from that year, and that the original tablet that was copied in seleucid times was made in 588/87.

  because so many of the planetary positions are approximately correct, but not completely correct, there are good reasons to believe that they represent backward calculations by an astrologer who believed that 568/67 was year 37 of nebuchadnezzar ii.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff

  "The following principal conclusions can be drawn on the basis of the discussion of VAT 4956: The Diary is most likely a genuine tablet made in Seleucid times, but in modern times someone has tampered with some of the cuneiform signs. Because of the excellent fit of all 13 lunar positions in 588/87, there are good reasons to believe that the lunar positions represent observations from that year, and that the original tablet that was copied in Seleucid times was made in 588/87. Because so many of the planetary positions are approximately correct, but not completely correct, there are good reasons to believe that they represent backward calculations by an astrologer who believed that 568/67 was year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar II. Thus, the lunar positions seem to be original observations from 588/87, and the planetary positions are backward calculations for the positions of the planets in 568/67."
• 
  4

  VAT 4956 question: What is Dr. Furuli talking about? "backward calculations"?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff
• 
  4

  VAT 4956 question: What is Dr. Furuli talking about? "backward calculations"?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff
• 
  224

  Is the Holy Spirit God Himself or a force like in Star Wars?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. jw
  2. friends
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff

  @undercover angel-LOL

  so what do you guys think of my question/research?

  http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AkzH4k.Au2cycb6VO8q3FsXty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20111120194541AA6FB5l
• 
  224

  Is the Holy Spirit God Himself or a force like in Star Wars?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. jw
  2. friends
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff
• 
  224

  Is the Holy Spirit God Himself or a force like in Star Wars?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. jw
  2. friends
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff

  PSacramento-hehehehehe
• 
  224

  Is the Holy Spirit God Himself or a force like in Star Wars?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. jw
  2. friends
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff

  you guys are funny!! I LOVE IT!!
• 
  224

  Is the Holy Spirit God Himself or a force like in Star Wars?

  by I_love_Jeff in

  1. jw
  2. friends
  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  I_love_Jeff

  I just recently posted this question:

  http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AkzH4k.Au2cycb6VO8q3FsXty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20111120194541AA6FB5l

  I thought my opposition was quite clear and the responses given were weak accept for 1. I was wondering if someone can tell me what BAR-ARANGES is talking about? sounds like jibberish to me. What do you think of my rebuttle?