Jump to content
The World News Media

SECULAR EVIDENCE and NEO-BABYLONIAN CHRONOLOGY (Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus, etc.)


JW Insider

Recommended Posts

  • Member

Ann O' Maly

8 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

That is rich coming from you, Neil, as somebody who said he could not be bothered learning how to use an astronomy program to check the celestial positions on VAT 4956 for himself, and prefers instead to wallow in his own ignorance and self-admitted incompetence while hurling insults at those who have actually done the work

Yes, but I am not the expert on these matters on which I have fully explained. You and Alan F are the experts and even when another person who has a level of expertise such as Rolf Furuli then you ridicule him, go to great lengths to undermine his thesis of which you are entitled to do. If someone of Furuli's scholarship has examined the evidence, tested it, able to translate the primary sources, has others to peer review his research and quotes extensively from leading experts in these fields then a layman like myself can only that the' Work has been done.' Furuli has at the very least able to question the integrity and interpretation of NB Chronology in a scientific way.

So, Ann it seems that you cannot provide the answer or you are too scared to consider the matter for the said scholar has something over you like the 'sword of Damocles'.

scholar JW

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 26.4k
  • Replies 679
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Let me try to lay this out for you (although this is more for any interested readers' benefit than for yours). The stars, planets, and Moon are components in a giant sky-clock that keeps perfect time.

Since love doesn't keep account of the injury and covers a multitude of sins, I will not go back and show you what you have actually said. Besides, I've never wanted to make this into a contest of who

Most of what CC says is just bluster he finds randomly, evidently by Googling key words. And if it he doesn't quite understand it, he must think others won't understand it either, and therefore he thi

Posted Images

  • Member
35 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

That is rich coming from you, Neil, as somebody who said he could not be bothered learning how to use an astronomy program to check the celestial positions on VAT 4956 for himself, and prefers instead to wallow in his own ignorance and self-admitted incompetence while hurling insults at those who have actually done the work. Why should I or AlanF or JW Insider or anyone else spoon-feed easily Googleable answers to someone who is too bone-idle to find the answer for himself, despite boasting about how great a scholar he is? Let me know when you can be bothered, Neil. Until then, hooroo.

This moron is not only irredeemably lazy, but stupid enough to think that he can lay a trap for JW critics by proposing a silly task that, as you and I have pointed out, can easily be accomplished via Google. I even pointed him to a website that does Julian to Gregorian conversion, etc., as well as to definitive Watchtower statements about the 539 date. I don't know what this charlatan's game is here, but I ain't playing along anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Alan de Fool

7 hours ago, AlanF said:

This moron is not only irredeemably lazy, but stupid enough to think that he can lay a trap for JW critics by proposing a silly task that, as you and I have pointed out, can easily be accomplished via Google. I even pointed him to a website that does Julian to Gregorian conversion, etc., as well as to definitive Watchtower statements about the 539 date. I don't know what this charlatan's game is here, but I ain't playing along anymore.

It would appear that you have something to lose, afraid to put your supposed scholarship to the test. If it is so simple as you claim by simply asking Doctor Google then why has not this data been provided in any academic scholarship published or otherwise?

scholar JW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

So back to check whether all the different, independent witnesses to the Neo-Babylonian timeline are really as consistent as secular experts and specialists claim they are. We have checked the sources that give us a complete relative timeline for the period. And we checked points from an astronomical tablet LBAT 1419 which clearly gave excellent identifiable BCE dates to various parts of the timeline, including the dates to attach to Nebuchadnezzar's rule. I also chose to check about half the eclipse dates on the LBAT 1420 tablet, and so far they give us several more direct astronomical dates to attach to Nebuchadnezzar's reign. I wanted to check at least one more of these for good measure, although there has not really been any question yet that we are dealing with an excellent matchup for the entire dating of Nebuchadnezzar that is consistent with the first dates given on LBAT 1419.

So now we will look at the eclipses reported for NEB28 (Nebuchadnezzar's 28th year of reign).

image.png

For the first one we would expect Month THREE to have an eclipse on the 14th of the lunar month, which will be typical since the eclipse falls on the full moon. The portion that tells just how many degrees of eclipse to expect or at exactly the time is damaged. But the fact that it set eclipsed is evidence that the moon is setting when the sun comes up, and the moon will still be eclipsed when it sets below the horizon. Let's see if that turns out to be true of the Month THREE eclipse in the year following his 27th year which turned out to be 578 BCE. The year after 578 BCE is 577 BCE, so we'll look there first.

In the THIRD month, on the 14th day since the new moon was visible (14th day) we see that there is a lunar eclipse that must have started it visible partial eclipsing as early as midnight. here are some shots of the hours from midnight until the moon sets (below the horizon), so we can check if it is still eclipsed when it was setting.

image.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.png

No doubt that the Month THREE eclipse was still eclipsed (almost fully) when it set below the horizon, which was at sunrise, as expected. That happened on June 14, 577.

So what about the second eclipse described for the same year (577 BCE) but the NINTH month? We should expect a full eclipse visible from 7 hours after sunset. (3.5 beru). The 9th month would land in December, since the 3rd month landed in June. And here is what we have at the full moon in December 577 BCE:

Here is the sun going down at exactly 5 pm on December 7 577 BCE, and we can see the earth's shadow is very far away from the moon. But this is near the winter solstice so it is going to be a long night:

image.png

Here are the readings from 1 hour after sunset to 7 hours after sunset:

image.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.png

We also read that it will clear in the West some time before morning. So we trace the next few hours, the 8th hour after sunset, until just an hour before the moon itself sets as the sun rises.

image.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.pngimage.png

Even though the exact hour before morning when the the moon was cleared or released from the eclipse was missing from the tablet, we see that it was "cleared in the west" and this was between 3 and 4 hours before sunrise. The reading is nearly perfect for December 8 577 BCE.

Since I had some time, and the software is getting easier to use, I checked the remaining complete eclipse descriptions on LBAT 1420. As expected, they all match 577 BCE for Nebuchadnezzar's 28th year (NEB28).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
28 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

Alan de Fool

It would appear that you have something to lose, afraid to put your supposed scholarship to the test. If it is so simple as you claim by simply asking Doctor Google then why has not this data been provided in any academic scholarship published or otherwise?

scholar JW

I already did it for you, you fucking liar. You're just too stupid to know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
27 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

Here is Ann O'Malys words on a discussion board from another apostate site, for LBAT 1420

""Because the scheme with eclipses on LBAT 1420* will perfectly fit a reign of Nebuchadnezzar starting in many different years, the tablet cannot be used to prove that Nebuchadnezzar's year 1 is 604 B.C.E. Moreover, we cannot know whether the scheme of eclipses with five and six month intervals used for the backward calculations by the astrologer was the correct scheme. And a scheme with different intervals would give a perfect fit if 624 was year 1 of Nebuchadnezzar. "

Are you an idiot or a liar (or both), CC? Those were not my words. Here's another picture for you:

image.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
7 hours ago, César Chávez said:

I hope people see the hypocrisy with people that are allowed to be that abusive, and how people like you respond in kind with a soft tone.

Yet, some call this site a JW forum, please! It's no better than any other witness trash site.

Why you think that you have problem with @JW Insider kind tone? In my opinion JW Insider giving proper model of behavior and polite, decent treatment of all.

You speaking about "trash". And how this site is "trash". Come on! WTJWorg 140 years of human doctrines and instructions are in direct competition to any "trash forum".... and is winner. 

 WTJWorg doesn't use "indecent" terms, but it does use lies. So now, you please tell me what you're having trouble with? With f words?

And what do you have no problem with? With lies?

:))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
9 hours ago, César Chávez said:

Remember how "Allen Smith" was "banned" and "deleted" for being straightforward with strong language that wasn't profanity?

Yes. I do remember. And I agree that it wasn't really fair to you. The only time I think a person should be banned is when they are threatening to hurt someone, or if it is obvious they are bullying someone. I don't like the strong language because it's distracting and it gives people an excuse to judge the person making the argument, without having to consider the argument. And profanity drives people away.

But it doesn't mean people should be banned over it. Just a reminder should be enough. This is why I never thought that you should have been banned over the strong language. I only see a few examples from "Allen Smith" where you used profanity. It wasn't enough to ban you over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Alan de Fool

You have not completed the answer so try again!!!

scholar JW

Still you lie. Go back page by page and search for "Nisan 1" in my postings. In at least one post, you'll find my answers.

Of course, this is rocket science for someone too stupid to figure out how to Copy/Paste.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,381

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.