To "Scholar"

by Farkel 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    scholar,

    I noticed that you saw it fit to respond to Alan F's and Hillary Steps most reasoned arguments in the 607BC thread. I also noticed that you said you would destroy my humble and simple arguments in that same thread. You never came back to either rebut or destroy my simple arguments. You pee-peed in your pants, scholar.

    It was far easier for you to take the long and detailed arguments from Alan F and twist them around or change them to fit your WT agenda than it would be to take my very simple argument about how Freddie used a 360 day year to arrive at nonsense. Why didn't you address MY simple argument and demolish it, scholar? Why did you say you would eat me for lunch (basically) and then never came back and debated me, scholar? I'm just a dummy who is a High School Graduate who also happens to play the piano better than most people. Including you. That's, all.

    Why don't you feel the obligation to defend that faith that the Bible tells you to do?

    Or are you just another dub who is a loser?

    Farkel

  • pr_capone
    pr_capone

    LMAO

    Farkel strikes again! w00t!

    Kansas District Overbeer

  • shamus
    shamus

    LMAO, too, Farkel.

  • Holey_Cheeses*King_of_the juice.
    Holey_Cheeses*King_of_the juice.

    scholar,

    Probably the wisest course of action for you to take would be to bend over and take it like a man, stand erect, and shout it out that -

    I'VE BEEN WELL AND TRULY

    FARKELED

    cheeses - who appreciates a good farkeling when he sees one.

  • JCanon
    JCanon

    Hi Farkel-Pianoman!

    I noticed that you saw it fit to respond to Alan F's and Hillary Steps most reasoned arguments in the 607BC thread. I also noticed that you said you would destroy my humble and simple arguments in that same thread. You never came back to either rebut or destroy my simple arguments. You pee-peed in your pants, scholar.

    You didn't give a link reference to the previous discussion. I'd like to know what kinds of arguments the WBTS is coming up with as well with all the new info we have. Guess I could go back and look up the thread but it's possible there are more than one and it's not the one you are specifically referring to. Can you provide a reference to the previous discussion please? Sounds like it's involved. Thanks!

    Cannon

    P.S. You're fortunate to have a real grand piano to play on (right); but the keyboards models they have out now give you the same sound! It's amazing! My "grand piano" fits neatly in my closet!

  • setfreefinally
    setfreefinally

    With regards to Daniel 4: it would be ok I guess if those 7 "times" referred to a period of time known as a "year" (and as we all know years averaged 365 1/4 days and was even so in Daniel's day). I would have no problem with that. But the WTS doesn't teach that. It teaches it was 7 years of months, but not 7 years of months conforming to the Jewish calendar (which was periodically adjusted to compensate for the lost 5 days in using 30 day months). NO! They were ALL lunar months! So the "calender" intepreted by Fred Franz was not only one that isn't used in modern times, but wasn't even used by the Jews in ancient times! As this phony "ancient" calendar was using to predict a modern date using a modern calendar!

    You lost me on this one Farkel. Care to elaborate? Thanks.

    SFF

  • minimus
    minimus

    go get em Fark. Show him you're a man! He's probably petrified to deal with you. Humiliate the idiot. He'd rather deal with others than deal with you. He's no "scholar". You are! Make mincemeat out of him, I tellya. How dare that jerk ignore you! My God, what is this place coming to? After you're done with him, see if he opens his big, stupid mouth again. I betcha he keeps a lid on it with you, boy. Let Alan deal with him. He's not worthy of your time. I hope "scholar" doesn't make the mistake of his life. Poor, poor "scholar".

  • wannaexit
    wannaexit

    Farkel,

    You are a scholar in my eyes. I read your posts all the time.

  • JCanon
    JCanon
    NO! They were ALL lunar months! So the "calender" intepreted by Fred Franz was not only one that isn't used in modern times, but wasn't even used by the Jews in ancient times! As this phony "ancient" calendar was using to predict a modern date using a modern calendar!

    Hi Farkel-da-man!

    Not so sure if this was a quote from you or not, but...

    The actual calendar used by the Jews was a LUNISOLAR calendar which included 13 months some of the years.

    Thus the WBTS reference to the calculations, which is just an interpretation, especially since the Bible rounds off things, such as each month 30 days and every 3-1/2 years as 1260 days OR 1290 days, is to calculate the years and months based upon the 1260 days but then when applied use the standard lunisolar years. Thus the times are representative and not precise.

    But this is as close as one can get to this since "intepretation belongs to God" and thus all we can do is make comparisons to determine what might be the correct interpretation, but obviously there is room for more than one calculation.

    BUT GENERALLY, the Bible acknowledges the lunisolar year in the 1260 days and the 1290 days reference to the same period of "times, time and half time" (Daniel 12) which makes the two interchangeable, depending.

    But the WTS basically admits that they first CALCULATE the years based upon 1260 for 3.5 years or 360 for a "time" but when those years are played out, they are played out in LUNISOLAR years.

    Thus, in case you hadn't noticed, with some months being 29 days and some 30 days, 12 x 12 months of exactly 30 days is 360 days a year, thus a 12-month year of lunar months is going to be less than 360 days per year for the 12-month year. But the SOLAR YEAR is 365-1/4 days as you noted, which is more than 360 days a year. BUT....when the alternating 13-month lunar year arrives, you have a 385-390 day year (1 month of 30 days added to 360 is 390).

    But, in the greater scheme of things, therefore, the ACTUAL CALENDAR THE JEWS USED, which was the adjustable lunisolar calendar, about every 19 years the adjusting lunar years and the solar years equal nearly the same amount of time.

    So again, the WTS RULE is when calculating the years, use 30 days per month, 360 days per year and 1260 or 1290 days for 3.5 years. But when applying the time, use regular solar years or lunisolar years which are basically the same if more than 19 years.

    So the "phony ancient calendar" remark is not exactly applicable for the WTS method of dating, since the Jews themselves were not on a strictly lunar month calendar which seems to be what you are implying. If I've misunderstood you, then I apologize. Please elaborate if you wish.

    Thanks, Farkelman!!

    Cannon

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    : With regards to Daniel 4: it would be ok I guess if those 7 "times" referred to a period of time known as a "year" (and as we all know years averaged 365 1/4 days and was even so in Daniel's day). I would have no problem with that. But the WTS doesn't teach that. It teaches it was 7 years of months, but not 7 years of months conforming to the Jewish calendar (which was periodically adjusted to compensate for the lost 5 days in using 30 day months). NO! They were ALL lunar months! So the "calender" intepreted by Fred Franz was not only one that isn't used in modern times, but wasn't even used by the Jews in ancient times! As this phony "ancient" calendar was using to predict a modern date using a modern calendar!

    This was pretty simple, I thought. Only Fred Franz tried to muddle it all up. ANY calendar in the world that worked on only 360 days per year would eventually have summer months end up being winter months and vice versa. With a five and a quarter day loss each year it doesn't take a dummy to figure out that in just four or five months, October would be September and four or five months later September would be August. That's why even the ancients corrected their calendars periodically because even they realized that there were more days in a year than Fred Franz.

    However, Fred Franz used a 360 day year spread over 2,520 YEARS to make his stupid prediction. No calendar he used was Biblical, Babylonian or even Insaneoniun. The only Insaneoniun was Fred Franz himself. I made up the word "Insaneonium." It seemed fitting.

    I hope that answers your question, but if your question is about times being years, being months of years, being days which are actually years themselves, then I've already written extensively about that over the years, (those years I've written my stuff over are NOT 360 day years, by the way!).

    See my "1914 For Dummies" article, for example.

    This is all "Bible-Based(tm)."

    Farkel

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit