Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday

by slimboyfat 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Jeffro

  Pierre1977:

  And since when does farmland count as an rebuilt city?

  It counts as inhabited. 🙄 Maybe he thinks farms farm themselves. And we won’t tell him about the built up area on the other side of the river to the north. 🤦‍♂️ Who would have guessed that land allocation, heritage listing and building decisions were controlled by a superstitious religious text. 😂 Additionally, given the central location of the inner city (the Ishtar gate being just one of various entrances), it’s incredibly naive to assert that the outer city didn’t extend to the south where Hillah is (let alone the built up area on the other side of the river less than 1km away from the Ishtar gate and even closer to the rest of the heritage listed ruins). 🤦‍♂️

  I only claimed that Tyre isn't fully rebuilt, not that not any part of it is rebuilt. All of Tyre should be rebuilt to make the prophecy unfulfilled.

  Why? Because you say so? 😂 It should have been completely destroyed with no buildings left for the prophecy to be fulfilled too, but that never happened.

  And Tyre should have the glory of Ancient times, too, as I said:

  And “not being found” again raises the question: In what way found? Clearly not simply by the location because Ezekiel said Fishermen would be there. So, “not being found” doesn't mean not being located by anyone, but not in the condition of a mighty and wealthy port city like Tyre once was.

  From the inspired book of Pierre. 😂 Funny how it’s not ‘really’ rebuilt at all if it’s not ‘fully rebuilt’, but a place to put fishing nets necessitates a built up area. 🤦‍♂️ You do realise, I hope, that the point of describing it as an area to lay out fishing nets (Ezekiel 26:5) conveyed that it was to be flat - a “bare rock”, with all the buildings gone (Ezekiel 26:4). That was the point, hence the city not being found. 🤦‍♂️ But because that failed it gets conveniently reinterpreted as ‘oh, it can still be a fishing village’ (with well over 100,000 people).🙄

  “He that praises himself spatters himself.” — Romanian proverb

  Oh no. I hope you don’t put a gypsy curse on me too.
• 

  Jeffro

  ‘scholar’:

  Nope. According to the data in VAT 4956 the eclipse is more correctly assigned to 15 July 588 BC and not to 5 July 568 BCE as the result of the research by WT scholars.

  It is definitionally impossible for an eclipse on 15 Simanu to have occurred on 15 July in any year during the Neo-Babylonian period.

  And what are the names of these ‘WT scholars’? 😂 Funny how the dismal 2011 attempt at defending their nonsense didn’t name the “researchers” who supposedly analysed VAT4956.
  

  The said scholar does not trust your interpretation of PD's tabulation!!

  So? You’ve already shown that you couldn’t even understand the placement of the intercalary month in early 587BCE, so your adjudication means nothing.
• 

  Jeffro

  Pierre1977:

  Clearly not simply by the location because Ezekiel said Fishermen would be there.

  Did he? He didn’t actually mention fishermen and he certainly didn’t say they would live there. Ezekiel said Tyre was supposed to become a bare rock suitable for spreading out fishing nets. Now, that does suggest fishermen, but not a built up area of any kind. Exactly the opposite, Ezekiel said it would be a place to spread out fishing nets because it would be a “bare rock”.
• 

  Jeffro

  slimboyfat:

  Check out the images on Google

  Your Christadelphian 'friend', like the Watch Tower Society, doesn't want you to know (or may not even know for himself) that at the time of ancient Tyre, the mainland city was Ushu, not Tyre.

  Despite JW claims, the mainland city was relatively unfortified and wasn't the area Nebuchadnezzar took 13 years trying to attack, which was actually a blockade intended to prevent supplies reaching the island. Several verses refer to the shock that Tyre’s supposed destruction would cause for the people of other islands (Ezekiel 26:15–18; 27:35), indicating that it was indeed the city on the island rather than the mainland that Nebuchadnezzar was ‘prophesied’ to destroy “in the midst of the sea” (Ezekiel 26:5).

  After Alexander's plan to attack Tyre from the causeway failed, Alexander hired people from Cyprus and Sidon to attack Tyre from the sea and eventually scaling the southern wall and entering the city.

  
• 

  slimboyfat

  I see. 👍 If I meet the Christadelphian speaker again I’ll let him know.

  How long would it take to rebuild Tyre? I reckon it would take a Goodyear. 🙂
• 

  Jeffro

  slimboyfat:

  How long would it take to rebuild Tyre? I reckon it would take a Goodyear. 🙂

  At least, but it might be a bit of a letdown if the repairs didn’t gain traction.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  It is definitionally impossible for an eclipse on 15 Simanu to have occurred on 15 July in any year during the Neo-Babylonian period.

  --

  Utter nonsense for interpretation is involved with astro data just as a methodology and WTscholars including Furuli's research find differently.

  --

  And what are the names of these ‘WT scholars’? 😂 Funny how the dismal 2011 attempt at defending their nonsense didn’t name the “researchers” who supposedly analysed VAT4956.

  --

  Why is that important? At least the footnote describes the method used and the names of the astro tables and while we are at it what is the source of your data?

  ---

  So? You’ve already shown that you couldn’t even understand the placement of the intercalary month in early 587 BCE, so your adjudication means nothing.

  --

  I suspect neither do you for I find it interesting that one observes an intercalary month associated with the PD table for the same year- 588 BCE and similar an intercalary month assigned for Neb's 37th year in VAR 4956. As one famous Australian politician once said: 'Please explain!' On the other hand, please don't for you are no expert.

  scholar JW
  
  
  

  
  
• 

  Jeffro

  ‘scholar’:

  Why is that important? At least the footnote describes the method used and the names of the astro tables and while we are at it what is the source of your data?

  The poor addled JW apologist doesn’t understand why something he considers scholarly should cite its source for a claim that disagrees with all scholarship. The ‘method’ described is obviously flawed, so it would be nice to know who the ‘researchers’ were if for no other reason than to laugh at them, but at least they would also have an opportunity to explain their dishonesty. And anyone paying attention would already know my source for this topic is Parker and Dubberstein’s tables, from which I even provided an extract. 🤦‍♂️

  I find it interesting that one observes an intercalary month associated with the PD table for the same year- 588 BCE and similar an intercalary month assigned for Neb's 37th year in VAR 4956.

  Except there isn’t an intercalary month in Nebuchadnezzar’s 37th year. 🤦‍♂️ Adar II before Nisan of 568 BCE falls in Nebuchadnezzar’s 36th year.

  The intercalary month at the end of Nebuchadnezzar’s 17th year only further demonstrates that that year could not have started in May (which is already impossible because Nisan never starts in May).
• 

  Jeffro

  ‘scholar’:

  I find it interesting that one observes an intercalary month associated with the PD table for the same year- 588 BCE and similar an intercalary month assigned for Neb's 37th year in VAR 4956.

  The particularly embarrassing part of all this is that Parker and Dubberstein’s tables do not allow for the 20-year gap in JW chronology for the neo-Babylonian period. So rather than trying to fit observations from the actual year 588BCE to VAT4956, the JW cronies should be looking at the actual year 568BCE, which JWs call 588BCE. Then they could say that VAT 4956 actually does support that year without making obviously false claims about Babylonian months starting at impossible times. But that would distort later astronomical observations during the neo-Babylonian period, including those that confirm 539BCE as the year Cyrus conquered Babylon.

  For their alternative chronology, they need to insert 20 years somewhere between 559BCE after the known years of Evil-Merodach and 541BCE allowing at least three years for Belshazzar indicated in Daniel, but they can’t be more specific because they have no evidence for any intervening kings. Not to mention the fact that cuneiform documents indicate the explicit transitions of all the known kings.
• 

  scholar

  Jeffro

  The particularly embarrassing part of all this is that Parker and Dubberstein’s tables do not allow for the 20-year gap in JW chronology for the neo-Babylonian period. So rather than trying to fit observations from the actual year 588BCE to VAT4956, the JW cronies should be looking at the actual year 568BCE, which JWs call 588BCE. Then they could say that VAT 4956 actually does support that year without making obviously false claims about Babylonian months starting at impossible times. But that would distort all later astronomical observations during the neo-Babylonian period, including those that conform 539BCE as the year Cyrus conquered Babylon.

  ---

  The said scholar and WT scholars are well aware that the PD tables do not allow for the 20 year gap in NB Chronology and that is no big deal for PD tables are about Babylonian Chronology and WT scholars are all about Bible Chronology.

  What it is all about is trying to determine in a modern calendar what date can be properly assigned for Neb's 37th year described by astronomical data such as lunar eclipses described in VAT 4956. Scholars previously thought that 568 BC was an accepted fit but now owing to the research of Rof Furuli and confirmed by WT scholars that 588 BCE is a better fit for the data in VAT 4956. Such research does not affect or conflict necessarily with other tabulations but is confined to a specific year-Neb's 37th year and a specific tablet -VAT 4956.

  scholar JW