Posts by scholar

All evidence for the period confirms that Jerusalem was destroyed in 587 BCE. The planetary observations are just one more means of confirmation, but poor ‘scholar’ rejects them by necessity.

--

Nonsense.All of the evidence: secular, biblical, historical and scientific points very clearly that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE.

----

The JW chronology is out of step with reality by 20 years, as independently determined by the Bible, Assyrian history, Egyptian history, Babylonian history, Babylonian financial documents, and the literal heavens. But ‘scholar’ will cling to mother Watch Tower.

--

WT/JW Bible Chronology has clearly demonstrated that the NB Period fails to account for at least a gap of twenty years as independently confirmed by VAT 4956 which has been hailed by WT critics especial SDA scholars and COJ as the cornerstone of NB Chronology.

The said scholar maintains his adherence to God's Word the Bible also championed by celebrated WT scholars.

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

The fact is that if the Watch Tower Society announced tomorrow that Jerusalem was destroyed in a different year (like when they previously insisted it was in 606), ‘scholar’ would jump right on board. He doesn’t care about the facts, just his religious dogma.

---

Your comment is indicative of despair and desperation and fails to acknowledge that the said scholar loves facts and has no time for dogma.

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Rocketman123

hen your a corrupt intellectually dishonest bible scholar, just like the so called WTS/JWS bible scholars

--

Thank you for the compliment.

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Rocketman123

One thing to note about JWS and 607 BCE is that if you are going to be an accepted member and identified in good standing you have to agree and support 607 BCE., which includes agreeing with 1914.

Isn't that right Scholar ?

---

Absolutely!!!!

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

See https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/216056/vat-4956-comparison-lunar-three-time-intervals-years-568-7-bce-588-7-bce for AnnOMaly's excellent thread analysing the astronomical observations in VAT 4956 against the claims made in the November 2011 issue of The Watchtower.

---

Now debunked by Furuli using the best or the more professional astro-program available SkyX

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

Haha... so, based on the information purportedly from Furuli, I was basically right on both counts when I said:

---

Aren't you a smart little boy.

---

(Furuli allegedly says it was he who 'assisted', but in the capacity as the primary 'researcher' for his fudged 'observations'.)

-- Furuli was consulted and played a major part in the research for the WT article using others to corroborate his research but his research could well be the basis for the article.

---

But as has already been pointed out, it is quite obvious why Watch Tower (and Furuli) need to discount the observations of the planets

--

The WT article did not discuss the planetary data for the reasons given in the article but Furuli most certainly does in his research proving that these were simply retro calculations therefore not reliable.

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

joey jojo

Here are 2 lines of VAT4956:

Line 2: Saturn was in front of the Swallow.

Line 9: Saturn was in front of the Swallow.

If I am reading the tablet right, the time between the observance of Saturn in the first line and the second is about 28 days. So , for weeks, Saturn was roughly in front, or to the east, of the Swallow constellation

This is all the information that anyone that knows anything about astronomy needs. A difference in half a degree here or there is totally inconsequential. In fact, any one of these 2 observations are enough to pinpoint the year.

Saturn takes 29 years to complete its orbit around the Sun and reappear in the same place. The difference between 568 and 588, as argued is only 20 years.

If the location of Saturn in regard to the Swallow matches for 567/8,then it will not match for 588- it won't even be close. 588 is incorrect, everyone, except the WT knows it.

Actually, I'm pretty sure they know it too.

--

A little dose of plain common sense that the lunar observations would be more use than that of planetary observations for the fact of its proximity to the Earth and ease of observations over the centuries.

The simple fact is that the planetary observations are open to interpretation and as the WT article notes that in the case of VAT 4956 which contained 15 planetary observations and 13 sets of lunar observations. The latter are are observations considered superior to the former and show a precise match for 588 BCE. Other celestial bodies relating to the moon can also be identified and their positions can be dated with a good measure of certainty.

Thus as the planetary observations are open to some interpretation and although not considered in the WT article were certainly examined by Furuli who found that these are only approximately correct and may have been retro calculations based on the historical assumption that Neb's 37 th year was 568 BCE

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Regarding Ann O'Maly's paper 'Fact-checking 'VAT4956.com' I sent a copy to Rolf Furuli receiving his reply by email this morning for his comment and it is just as I always suspected that the differences between experts regarding this tablet amounts to Methodology and the use of different tools or resources. Furuli offers the following comment on O' Maly's paper:

ASTRO PROGRAMS: Furuli, WT author for the Watchtower, Nov.1, 2011 and O' Maly use different astro-programs. Furuli's use of The SkyX is the preferred choice by professional astronomers in the USA. O'Maly uses the Cartes du Ciel 4.2.1 . Furuli comments on this that "For positions in the sixth century BCE, there can be a difference of a half degree, or in some instances even more between different astro-programs".

THE CALCULATED POSITIONS: O'Maly used a hypothesis based on a ellipitical coordinate system as explained on page 2 in her paper. Contrariwise, Furuli used no a system but rather what an observer/ Babylonian scribes saw when looking at the sky on a certain date or putting it simply bt direct observation whereupon he chose to use the Sky x program.

Furuli notes that he had assisted the brother in the Writing Department who wrote the two articles on Chronology with ongoing discussions and the exchanging of drafts for two years prior to the publishing of the two articles. During that period Furuli asked him to find two Witnesses with astronomical knowledge who could test his astro calculations. Furuli met one of the two researchers 15 years ago who had given a lecture at an international astronomical congress in Oslo, Norway. Furuli comments that the findings of these two matched exactly his findings with the only difference of a few minutes in some places.

Furuli further comments that he does not endorse the hypothesis that the Babylonian scribes used the elliptic system as does o' Maly and others but he believes that the calculations of the scribes were not theoretical but based on historical data. The same celestial phenomena would occur at the same intervals, for example, the 18 year cycle of the Moon, such periodic phenomena were the basis for their calculations.

Furuli also advises readers that in his 2nd edn of his Assyrian, Babylonian and Egyptian Chronology all the coordinates of each of these positions namely the 13 lunar sets is given so one could compare O'Maly's positions with his by means of the SkyX program using the coordinates in each case and see which position is correct.

So we have different experts who have different opinions based on their own hypotheses and different methodologies.

scholar JW

150

Nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 or 568 BC?

by Vanderhoven7 in

anybody know something about vat 4956?.

nebuchadnezzar's 37th year matches the year 588 bc?

any independant astronomer can test it and it only matches 568 bc.. .

scholar

Jeffro

It is not the case that a significant majority of scholars prefer 586, but any who do are wrong. No "poblem" for me whatsoever. Even mother Watch Tower disagrees with you.

The Watchtower, 1 October 2011, page 31:

---

Most scholars prefer 586 not 587 BCe. Keep up reading the WT for you may be converted to 607 BCE

---

Most translations of Jeremiah 29:10 properly refer to 70 years for Babylon. Even in the rendering of the few translations that incorrectly allude to 70 years as a period at Babylon, the 70 years doesn't include the journey home, and allows the 70 years to end before attention is given to their return. But the JW interpretation is a distorted mess because they say the 70 years (which supposedly started more than a decade after most of the Jews were already in exile) ended only once they'd arrived in Judea. Worse still, in the JW interpretation, most of the Jews are in exile for over 80 years, some are in exile for less than 70 years and others are in exile for about 65 years.

--

Traditional renderings favour 'at Babylon' rather than 'for Babylon' and the NWT is in very good company in this respect.. The 70 years as explained in our publications is simple and clear as the Return was in 537 BCE, the Jewish Exile lasted 70 years so it must have begun in 607 BCE with the Fall. You talk about a 'distorted mess' then you should look at the journal articles on the subject and you will see a mess indeed just like your pretty chart.

scholar JW