Posts by jwposter

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

Right is about 393.5 years because the iniquity of Solomon's son didn't occur until after the 3rd year but the 390 years are for the iniquity so it would be 390 years.

Let's read together:

2Ki 25:8 And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem:

2Ki 25:9 And he burnt the house of the LORD, and the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man's house burnt he with fire.

2Ki 25:10 And all the army of the Chaldees, that were with the captain of the guard, brake down the walls of Jerusalem round about.

So when was the Temple and Jerusalem destroyed? - Answer - 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar.

And who was the king at the time? - Zedekiah (See earlier verses)

And who was Zedekiah? - he was the last king to serve of the 390 years reigns of the kings of Judah.

Do you see now that the destruction was at the 390th year and that year was the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar?

Hopefully, you see that now - I mean that sincerely. I want you to get this right.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

LOL, Jeffo, you can easily settle this. Go read the Bible and count the years of the Reigns. Its there. Go count it. It is 390 years AFTER the reign of Solomon.

Again, lets look at the facts, YOU stated that 959 BCE was the time of the completion of the Temple.

Regardless of when you think the 70 years occurred, your problem is still the following:

959 - 28 (remaining years of Solomon) = 931 BCE

931 BCE - 390 = 541 BCE. So that would mean that the 19th year is right at or around 541BCE. And that would again mean that 18 years later would be 523 BCE for the 37th year. So your support of -567 (568 BCE) for VAT4956 is sunk.

You obviously don't know enough to argue against a Bible timeline. But will me schooling you here, you may be able to in the future.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

Jeffro:

It’s not a matter of being alive. The information is thoroughly outdated, not to mention theologically biased.

The information is outdated? Well are you now saying that you can't count the reigns of the House of Judah because you need some some updated counting? Did the length of their reigns change? Do you suspect they changed? How ridiculous. And yes, you did change your timeline. You were at one point supporting your position with 390 years of the chronology of House of Judah with somehow an overlapping 70 years of captivity and then you wanted to support your position using a Septuagint shorter rendering of the Chronology.

Now we have this from Jethro:

They really weren’t. The land was fallow for 49 years as (retroactively) prescribed in Leviticus (though in reality parts of Judea remained populated through the entire period), from the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BCE until the return in 538 BCE. See also Leviticus 25:8; 26:28, 32-35.

I can keep schooling you as it appears you want me to do. The land is to lay fallow for Sabbatical and Jubilee years.

1Es 1:56 And as for her glorious things, they never ceased till they had consumed and brought them all to nought: and the people that were not slain with the sword he carried unto Babylon:

1Es 1:57 Who became servants to him and his children, till the Persians reigned, to fulfil the word of the Lord spoken by the mouth of Jeremy:

1Es 1:58 Until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths, the whole time of her desolation shall she rest, until the full term of seventy years.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

See now Jeffro is trying to change his timeline to get stuff to fit better by using the Septuagint when he/she already was using 390 years in their rebuttal. Apparently that failed so bad as I called it out and now they are looking for an out.

Jeffro:

Good grief. Already covered here. Your interpretation of Jeremiah 29:10 is nonsensical. Like the JW position, your interpretation of Jeremiah 29:10-14 requires that attention was given to the Jews’ return only after they were already there, which is clearly absurd

See the desperation in trying to get out of your position. Let me school you more. The 70 years of captivity were a year for each year that the land didn't lay fallow. Therefore, if the Jews didn't return to the land after the 70 years then the punishment would have been longer because the land would still be laying fallow as long as the Jews did not have the land. Therefore, the Jews 70 years of captivity had to result in the immediate return to the land. Therefore, your absurd remarks are showing how deep the crater of your ignorance is.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

Jeffro it doesn't matter that Gill died in 1771. That is a fallacy you are resorting to. Are we supposed to only listen to those people alive today. How absurd. You have no idea of his chronology is the consensus of scholars as that is another fallacy. Whether or not Gill supports my position of the destruction of Jerusalem occurring in 530 BCE has nothing to do with whether Gill believes there was 390 years of Chronology to that point in time after the death of Solomon. Again, another fallacy.

Jeffro:

Additionally, the Bible never once mentions ‘70 years of exile’, and it instead explicitly identifies Babylon’s 70 years as a period that ends when Babylon is called to account, not the subsequent return from exile.

This is too easy. Jer_29:10 For thus saith the LORD, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place. Yes, but you say that Ezekiels 390 years includes the 70 years. That is nonsense and indeed refuted by the statements I've already made. So Jethro continues his/her barrage of fallacies and a bad understanding of the scriptures in their attempt to penetrate the solid timeline I put forward. Those efforts are proving futile. FACTS are causing Jethro to stumble. So much so that now Jethro is attacking the chronological facts of the reigns of the House of Judah and the 70 captivity.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

Jeffro's timeline fell apart. Now trying to say that Ezekials reference to 390 years is simply alluded to and the 70 years of captivity was part of the 390. Not realizing that scholars have counted the years of the Reign as anyone can do by reading accounts in Kings and Chronicles.

From John Gills commentary:

"three hundred and ninety days; which signify three hundred and ninety years; and so many years there were from the revolt of the ten tribes from Rehoboam, and the setting up the calves at Dan and Bethel, to the destruction of Jerusalem; which may be reckoned thus: the apostasy was in the fourth year of Rehoboam, so that there remained thirteen years of his reign, for he reigned seventeen years; Abijah his successor reigned three years; Asa, forty one; Jehoshaphat, twenty five; Joram, eight; Ahaziah, one; Athaliah, seven; Joash, forty; Amaziah, twenty nine: Uzziah, fifty two; Jotham, sixteen; Ahaz, sixteen; Hezekiah, twenty nine; Manasseh, fifty five; Amos, two; Josiah, thirty one; Jehoahaz, three months; Jehoiakim, eleven years; Jeconiah, three months and ten days; and Zedekiah, eleven years; in all three hundred and ninety years."

So REGARDLESS of how Jeffro wants to FEEL about Ezekiel's "alluding" to 390 years. The 390 years were chronologically the ACTUAL years from Rehoboam to the destruction of the Temple. They don't include the 70 years of captivity and nobody I know believes that EXCEPT for Jeffro but I suggest that is because she/he sees the bind they are in.

Furthermore, apparently Jeffro doesn't understand why there is 70 years of captivity. If she/he did, they would realize that the land was supposed to rest during the 70 years and not have Kings of House of Judah reigning during that period in those lands. It is apparent that Jeffro is lacking knowledge here or incapable of holding himself/herself in error. If it is the latter, I'm sure we will see further fudging of the numbers.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

Jeffro's calculations are off: Jeffro from page 15 of this thread:

This misdirection is so nonsensical that I had to actually laugh. Of course I’m quite aware that the dedication followed the completion of the building, and would have been in October 959 BCE following the completion in November 960 BCE (Tishri dating). And… that still leaves his math off by two years for the 480/490 years.

Maybe Jeffro hasn't done the math to see the problem with that and his position of -567 for the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar. I'm hoping that others that know the Bible history and chronologies can see the problem. Solomon dedicated the Temple after he completed it his 11 year. We know that Solomon only reigned for 40 years. So if it was his 11 year when he completed it and Jeffro is using the next year as the dedication that would mean that the dedication took place in Solomon's 12th year. Now we take the 40 year reign of Solomon and minus those 12 years and we have still another 28 years (40 - 12 = 28) of Solomon's reign left after the dedication. This means that his last year or 40th year would have been 931 B.C.E (according to the timeline that Jeffro gave for the dedication of the Temple). Now we know that the House of Judah reigned for 390 years until its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar in his 19th year as King of Babylon. Therefore, at a minimum we would take 931 - 390 = 541. See that? It comes to 541 just to get to the 19th year of Nebuchadnezzar using Jeffro's logic. So Nebuchadnezzars 37 year couldn't be in -567 or 568 B.C.E. Again, -567 (568 B.C.E) doesn't fit. And if you were to continue to take off another 18 years to get to the 37th year in that scenario you would get to 523 B.C.E approx. Therefore, this is a miss by over 50 years to the year -567 which Jeffro claims the VAT 4956 Tablet represents.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

Ok, 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 as I write up more analysis on this and do more studies as I get together the ones that are ready and getting ready. I came for those users that are are JWs to give them another look at the VAT. Was a pleasure to be here. If anyone needs to get a hold of me just message.

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

So the newer translation that I posted earlier from 1988 by S/H is an echo of the same problem reported in the earlier text from 1915 as seen below:

3. ... At the beginning of the night of the 8th, the moon 1 cubit in front of the star at the rear foot of the Lion. On the 9th, the sun was surrounded by a halo in the west.

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

271

VAT4956 - 530 BC destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar

by jwposter in

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.

jwposter

A major problem with -567 is that it doesn't fit line 3:

3: it rained? Night of the 9th (error for 8th ), beginning of the night, the moon stood 1 cubit in front of β Leonis. The 9th, the sun in the west [was surrounded] by a halo 3: [ .... The 11th ]

The moon is actually behind Beta Leonis at the time mentioned and not in front as specified. Since the moon determines the beginning of the month this is a big deal because we can't trust the subsequent findings. Now in -511, the moon is in front of Beta Leonis.