My perception of some JW's has changed. I have acquired a great deal of respect for ex JW's. I thought JW's were not as sharp or educated, but I was wrong, very wrong.
never a jw
JoinedPosts by never a jw
-
64
Have You Changed Since Getting On To This Site?
by minimus inare you the same poster/person now?
i have seen many posters mature here.
some still act like jws but others have shown recovery and progress from the witness mentality..
-
-
-
529
Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals
by Ethos ini agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.
i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.
therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.
-
-
never a jw
AnnOMaly,
You have a PM
-
529
Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals
by Ethos ini agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.
i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.
therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.
-
-
never a jw
I get a headache. And as much I trust the fall of jerusalem happened in 587 BCE, I still considered the posts defending this date superfluous. The Bible is vague, contradictory and has large gaps. It can not provide by itself a reliable account of the chronology of the sixth century BCE. If I have to split my 10 point vote, I give 8 points to defenders of 587 BCE and 2 points to defenders of 607. The only time Ethos seem to have made sense is when he said --I paraphrase-- with the Bible you have to conjecture. Exactly.
Let the Babylonian clay tablets solve the problems. They are 99.999999 percent reliable in determining all important dates of the neo-Babylonian period. Sorry Bible lovers, but the "god" of the Babylonians was a better communicator and a better record keeper than the God of the Hebrews. When it comes to history and chronology, I trust the Babylonian text much more than the Bible's.
-
53
VAT 4956 - Comparison Of The Lunar Three Time Intervals For Years 568/7 BCE and 588/7 BCE
by AnnOMaly invat 4956 - comparison of the lunar three time intervals for years 568/7 b.c.e.
the online sky view cafe (svc) and the cartes du ciel* (cdc) astronomy programs have been used for these results.. observer's location: babylon, 32 33' n / 44 24' e.. sr = sunrise; ss = sunset; mr = moonrise; ms = moonset.. .
svc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 1.75 to 6.5. average difference 3.5.. cdc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 0.75 to 8.5. average difference 4. .
-
-
never a jw
AnnOmaly,
Thanks again for all your help. Your notes are perfect and I appreciate that you took the time to improve the presentation of my conclusions.
It may not be relevant to this thread, but in my research I ran into a Lynn47 in some other site. He sounds intelligent and well informed, at least to a neophyte such as myself. However, he looks like another Furuli with a different chronology. Is he another christian apologist who picks and chooses "weak" or controversial data to cast doubt in the prevalent chronologies while at the same time ignores piles of incontrovertible data, only to create his own "chronology of the Bible". Just curious
Thanks for the link to the site with the planetary information. It looks great. I think it's going to save me a lot of time in my research.
-
53
VAT 4956 - Comparison Of The Lunar Three Time Intervals For Years 568/7 BCE and 588/7 BCE
by AnnOMaly invat 4956 - comparison of the lunar three time intervals for years 568/7 b.c.e.
the online sky view cafe (svc) and the cartes du ciel* (cdc) astronomy programs have been used for these results.. observer's location: babylon, 32 33' n / 44 24' e.. sr = sunrise; ss = sunset; mr = moonrise; ms = moonset.. .
svc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 1.75 to 6.5. average difference 3.5.. cdc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 0.75 to 8.5. average difference 4. .
-
-
never a jw
AnnOMaly
I greatly appreciate your taking the time to go over my tables. The subjects of the neo-Babylonian period and astronomy are something I recently have taken interest in. Each subject by itself is very interesting, but you put them together and it just couldn't get more fascinating. Thanks for your help. With your great help I am sure I will solve my doubts and misconceptions and move on to the next subject, the planetary observations. I know that's going to get tougher to delucidate, but I feel that the rewards are going to be greater than when I saw with my own eyes the almost perfect match of the Babylonian data and the data from my astronomy program regarding the lunar threes for years 568/567. Thanks a million.
Felipe
-
123
New here
by Change Name ini had been studying with the jehovah's witnesses for the last couple years.
they have been interesting study sessions and have learned quite a bit about them and their beliefs.
much of what they teach is what i had learned through personal bible study.. growing up was normal.
-
-
never a jw
Change Name,
So you dislike the Catholic Church. JW's leadership is not very different from the Catholic Church of the 15th century. The only difference is that the WTS has no power to control and inflict damage as the Catholic church did.
Let's see:
The Catholic church banned reading literature opposing the church. WTS does the same. Ask in the congregation how many have read Carl O. Jonsson or Ray Franz. The ones who have read either of these authors are no longer JW's.
The Catholic church rejected science (remember Galileo). The WTS is the troglodyte of christian religions today. Don't be fooled by their articles on science, it's a cover up filled with intellectual dishonesty and fallacies.
The Catholic church kept the masses in ignorance. WTS dissuades, or rather emotionally coerces the young to forgo higher educaton.
The Catholic church tortured and killed dissenters. The WTS does not go that far, because it's illegal. But I wonder if they were given the power, they would go beyond what they do today, namely destroy the social life and the families of those who no longer believe the lies of the WTS. Actually, the WTS does have blood in their hands, especially of children whose parents have prevented doctors from saving their lives through a blood transfusion.
The Catholic church until recently protected child molesters. WTS still does (read the latest letter to the elders regarding child molesters)
The Catholic church made history. WTS is trying to re-write history. Have you heard about Jerusalem being destroyed in 607 BCE?
The Catholic church was considered dogmatic, until the governing body of JW's took the meaning of the word to a whole new level.
-
53
VAT 4956 - Comparison Of The Lunar Three Time Intervals For Years 568/7 BCE and 588/7 BCE
by AnnOMaly invat 4956 - comparison of the lunar three time intervals for years 568/7 b.c.e.
the online sky view cafe (svc) and the cartes du ciel* (cdc) astronomy programs have been used for these results.. observer's location: babylon, 32 33' n / 44 24' e.. sr = sunrise; ss = sunset; mr = moonrise; ms = moonset.. .
svc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 1.75 to 6.5. average difference 3.5.. cdc's range of difference between its results and that of the text, when a time interval could be taken, is 0.75 to 8.5. average difference 4. .
-
-
never a jw
Program used: The SkyX Light Edition
The table for Furulli's year contains up to three dates for the same babylonian date because is not clear,
at least to me, what Julian dates Furulli wanted to match with the calendar dates of the VAT 4956 lunar
threes. You will see on the far right who selected each of those three alternative dates (scroll to the right using the bar at the bottom)
Never a JW
37th year of Nabuchadnezzar or Julian Year 568/567 BC, beginning April 22 after sunset and ending April 12, 567 BC at sunset
Date
First Day
Julian
Interval
Measured
Begin
End
Interval
Degrees
Differ
Abs.
Judgment
Diff.
(Babyl.)
Julian
Date
VAT 4956
Sky X
Sky X
Sky X
(decimal)
ence
Diff
Call
(min.)
I-14
23-Apr
May 6, 568
SR-MS
4
5:13:42
5:30:08
0:16:26
4.11
0.11
0.11
Excellent
0.43
II-26
23-May
June 17, 568
MR-SR
23
3:17:06
4:46:32
1:29:26
22.26
-0.74
0.74
Excellent
2.97
III-1
21-Jun
June 20, 568
SS-MS
20
7:08:52
8:36:47
1:27:55
21.98
1.98
1.98
Good
7.92
III-15
21-Jun
July 5, 568
SR-MS
7.5
4:49:11
5:23:21
0:34:10
8.54
1.04
1.04
Very good
4.17
XI-1
13-Feb
Feb 12, 567
SS-MS
14.5
5:43:23
6:52:59
1:09:36
17.40
2.90
2.90
Acceptable
11.60
XII-1
15-Mar
March 14, 567
SS-MS
25
6:06:26
7:49:07
1:42:41
25.67
0.67
0.67
Excellent
2.68
XII-12
15-Mar
March 26, 567
SR-MS
1.5
6:08:52
6:12:00
0:03:08
0.75
-0.75
0.75
Excellent
3.00
Average difference
1.17
Year 588/587, beginning April 4/3, 588 and ending April 22, 587 BC at sunset
Date
First Day
Julian
Interval
Measured
Begin
End
Interval
Degrees
Differ
Abs.
Judgment
Diff.
(Babyl.)
Julian
Date
VAT 4956
Sky X
(decimal)
ence
Diff
Call
(min.)
I-14
4-Apr
April 17, 588
SR-MS
4
5:37:41
5:28:47
0:08:54
-2.23
-6.23
6.23
Very bad!!
24.90
II-26
4-May
May 29, 588
MR-SR
23
3:46:04
4:53:24
1:07:20
16.83
-6.17
6.17
Very bad
24.67
III-1
2-Jun
June 1, 588
SS-MS
20
6:58:19
7:49:56
0:51:37
12.90
-7.10
7.10
Very bad
28.38
III-15
2-Jun
June 16, 588
SR-MS
7.5
4:46:38
5:12:22
0:25:44
6.43
-1.07
1.07
Very good
4.27
XI-1
25-Jan
Jan 24, 587
SS-MS
14.5
5:26:16
6:34:10
1:07:54
16.98
2.48
2.48
Acceptable
9.90
XII-1
24-Feb
Feb 23, 587
SS-MS
25
5:52:22
7:43:13
1:50:51
27.71
2.71
2.71
Acceptable
10.85
XII-12
24-Feb
March 7, 587
SR-MS
1.5
6:35:09
6:06:42
0:28:27
-7.11
-8.61
8.61
Very bad!!
34.45
Average difference
4.91
In penultimate column the exclamation points indicate an impossible measurement
Year 588/587, beginning May 3/2, 588 -- according to R. Furruli / Watchtower calendar
Date
First Day
Julian
Interval
Measured
Begin
End
Interval
Degrees
Differ
Abs.
Judgement
Diff.
(Babyl.)
Julian
Date
VAT 4956
Sky X
(decimal)
ence
Diff
Call
(min.)
I-14
3-May
May 17, 588
SR-MS
4
5:02:38
5:08:25
0:05:47
1.45
-2.55
2.55
Acceptable
10.22
Hunger
May 16, 588
SR-MS
4
5:03:33
4:32:52
0:30:41
-7.67
-11.67
11.67
Very Bad!!
46.68
Ann, N a JW
II-26
1-Jun
June 28, 588
MR-SR
23
3:35:56
4:47:06
1:11:10
17.79
-5.21
5.21
Very bad
20.83
Hunger
June 26, 588
MR-SR
23
2:22:11
4:46:45
2:24:34
36.14
13.14
13.14
Very bad
52.57
Never a JW
June 27, 588
MR-SR
23
2:57:43
4:46:55
1:49:12
27.30
4.30
4.30
Bad
17.20
AnnOMaly
III-1
1-Jul
July 1, 588
SS-MS
20
7:11:30
8:20:16
1:08:46
17.19
-2.81
2.81
Acceptable
11.23
Hunger
June 30, 588
SS-MS
20
7:11:58
7:30:58
0:19:00
4.75
-15.25
15.25
Bad
61.00
Ann, N a JW
III-15
1-Jul
July 16, 588
SR-MS
7.5
4:54:22
5:57:52
1:03:30
15.88
8.38
8.38
Very bad
33.50
Hunger
July 15, 588
SR-MS
7.5
4:53:48
4:51:30
0:02:18
-0.58
-8.08
8.08
Very bad !!
32.30
Ann, N a JW
XI-1
23-Feb
Feb 22, 587
SS-MS
14.5
5:51:34
6:32:15
0:40:41
10.17
-4.33
4.33
Bad
17.32
H, Ann, N a JW
XII-1
24-Mar
March 24, 587
SS-MS
25
6:12:52
7:38:12
1:25:20
21.33
-3.67
3.67
Bad
14.67
Hunger, Ann
March 23, 587
SS-MS
25
6:12:14
6:28:27
0:16:13
4.14
-20.86
20.86
Very bad
83.45
Never a JW
XII-12
24-Mar
April 7, 587
SR-MS
1.5
5:51:56
6:11:20
0:19:24
4.85
3.35
3.35
Bad
13.40
Hunger
April 4, 587
SR-MS
1.5
5:56:12
4:42:34
1:13:38
18.41
-19.91
19.91
Very bad !!
79.63
Never a JW
April 5, 587
SR-MS
1.5
5:54:47
5:13:49
0:40:58
10.24
-11.74
11.74
Very Bad!!
46.97
AnnOMaly
Average difference
8.43
4.33
13.32
for dates chosen by
AnnOMaly
Hunger
N a JW
Excellent
Under 3 minutes
Very good
Under 6 minutes
Good
Under 9 minutes
Acceptable
Under 12 minutes
Bad
Between 12 and 20 min.
Very bad
Over 20 minutes
-
529
Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals
by Ethos ini agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.
i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.
therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.
-
-
never a jw
Wrong thread
-
529
Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals
by Ethos ini agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.
i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.
therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.
-
-
-
529
Analysis of anti-607 BCE Rebuttals
by Ethos ini agreed yesterday to engage in the '607' topic.
i've read numerous threads and am well aware that this topic has been addressed and dissected quite thoroughly.
therefore, if you are uninterested in participating, that's fine.
-
-
never a jw
AnnOMaly,
I finished completing the tables for years 588/587 BCE (real Babylonian calendar) and 588/587 (Furulli's fabrication). Since I had disagreements with you and professor Hunger as to the dates to choose for Furulli's calendar, I included your dates, my dates and professor Hunger's dates. Since I am a neophyte in astronomy and neo-Babylonian studies, I have to defer to you and Mr. Hunger. Regardless, the results for any of Furulli's dates or around his suggested dates are abysmal. I will post the results later in the thread where you posted my first table. My calculations using your dates are very similar to your own calculations.