When is the Sabbath?

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

That was one of the larger fragments as an example or sample, as was said, and was posted simply to show a sample of the general range of the dating. You are now being openly dishonest to protect your calendar machinations. There are fragments containing portions of the book of the luminaries from Qumran which are clearly older than what you claim; but since you have now been informed, it is not my job to do the rest of your research into the matter for you. You will believe what you want to believe because it suits your paradigm and, as said to you previously, your paradigm is clearly your king. Not much of a watchman if you ask me: for you only watch out to make sure no one refutes your imaginative and false calendar which you have already claimed to be "God's Calendar", (lol).

Just words daqq, I have all the evidence for God's Calendar that will always exist whether you ignore it or not. I agree the fragment found of Enoch dates to between 200 BC and 50 BC and although the calendar in chapter 73 in Enoch is not the Julian calendar exactly it is a very similar type of fixed solar calendar that has 12 months consisting of 8; 30 day months and 4; 31 day months = 364 days.

 

[Jacob]

Jacob unless you engage in the debate by looking at the material presented to you I cannot debate with you and sadder than that you cannot learn anything new.

I am not here to debate with you.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

I am not here to debate with you.

Are you sure because we have been discussing various matters in a public arena, putting forward are arguments.

debate
noun
1.a formal discussion on a particular matter in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward and which usually ends with a vote.
2.argue about (a subject), especially in a formal manner.

 

[Jacob]

Are you sure because we have been discussing various matters in a public arena, putting forward are arguments.

debate
noun
1.a formal discussion on a particular matter in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward and which usually ends with a vote.
2.argue about (a subject), especially in a formal manner.

I have presented what I know to be true.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

I have presented what I know to be true.

I know and so have i but you have not given a considered opinion because you have not understood it. i suppose I can do no more and wish you shalom.

 

[daqq]

Just words daqq, I have all the evidence for God's Calendar that will always exist whether you ignore it or not. I agree the fragment found of Enoch dates to between 200 BC and 50 BC and although the calendar in chapter 73 in Enoch is not the Julian calendar exactly it is a very similar type of fixed solar calendar that has 12 months consisting of 8; 30 day months and 4; 31 day months = 364 days.

You do not appear to be very precise with words and writing, (in fact, way too casual with critical writing and therefore thinking). I did not say that the particular fragment which I linked to dates to between 200 BC and 50 BC, (or B.C.E. which is the same). I said the fragments date to between 200 B.C.E. and 50 B.C.E. That particular fragment dates to between 200 B.C.E. and 150 B.C.E.

Nope. We have fragments from Cave 4 and Cave 7 at Qumran, (including fragments from the book of the luminaries), dating between 200 B.C.E. and 50 B.C.E. Here is an Aramaic sample of one, and please note that the estimated date range even says, "copied ca. 200-150 B.C.E.", which implies that an unknown original was even older: https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/scrolls/scr3.html

Get your facts straight if you really want to be a watchman on the wall. :chuckle:

You have accused others here of having bad reading comprehension yet you yourself appear to have difficulty understanding what others post for the same reason. You cannot get your facts straight if you cannot comprehend what you read, O watchman. :chuckle:

 

[Jacob]

I know and so have i but you have not given a considered opinion because you have not understood it. i suppose I can do no more and wish you shalom.

You said Kislev and I said Torah. Do you understand the reason for me saying the ninth month? The Torah does not give a name for it.

Shalom.

Jacob

 

[Jacob]

Yes it is the 6th of Kislev but on the ancient Hebrew calendar it means that the Sabbaths are on days 8, 15, 22 & 29 of each lunar month. Watch this:

The Creator's Calendar

9 min long (or faster with the high speed setting):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbzFGEfgP_8

I have watched your video. I do not agree with it.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

You said Kislev and I said Torah. Do you understand the reason for me saying the ninth month? The Torah does not give a name for it.

Shalom.

Jacob

I know, Kislev is the Babylonian name which the Jews adopted.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

You do not appear to be very precise with words and writing, (in fact, way too casual with critical writing and therefore thinking). I did not say that the particular fragment which I linked to dates to between 200 BC and 50 BC, (or B.C.E. which is the same). I said the fragments date to between 200 B.C.E. and 50 B.C.E. That particular fragment dates to between 200 B.C.E. and 150 B.C.E.



You have accused others here of having bad reading comprehension yet you yourself appear to have difficulty understanding what others post for the same reason. You cannot get your facts straight if you cannot comprehend what you read, O watchman. :chuckle:

Sounds like I've upset you but it's good to see you make the post that has made any real sense, i.e. noticing that it is not the Julian calendar (exactly) and that I missed it saying 150BC. It's known that many 'mad' people often obsess with detail I hope you can use that same obsessive nature to study God's Calendar in the OP.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

I have watched your video. I do not agree with it.

Okay, as long as you understand it.


Jacob the Julian calendar began on the 1st January 45BC and this was a Friday. What was the day before?

 

[daqq]

Sounds like I've upset you but it's good to see you make the post that has made any real sense, i.e. noticing that it is not the Julian calendar (exactly) and that I missed it saying 150BC. It's known that many 'mad' people often obsess with detail I hope you can use that same obsessive nature to study God's Calendar in the OP.

Neither am I upset, neither am I "mad", (more bad reading comprehension on your part).

You belie yourself too easily: people always make it personal when they have no answer for what has been presented. Seems one of your favorites is calling people insane or mad because they disagree with your rubbish and can support what they say with scripture.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Neither am I upset, neither am I "mad", (more bad reading comprehension on your part).

You belie yourself too easily: people always make it personal when they have no answer for what has been presented. Seems one of your favorites is calling people insane or mad because they disagree with your rubbish and can support what they say with scripture.

You still sound upset but weirdly you are making sense again. Is this a correlation?

 

[daqq]

You still sound upset but weirdly you are making sense again. Is this a correlation?

Lol, if you imagine yourself to have the power to upset someone on the internet for a whole day then you really do love to flatter yourself and your supposed IQ of 140, (but as already suggested, you really need to take that test over again and get a second opinion). :chuckle:

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

Lol, if you imagine yourself to have the power to upset someone on the internet for a whole day then you really do love to flatter yourself and your supposed IQ of 140, (but as already suggested, you really need to take that test over again and get a second opinion). :chuckle:

Please respond to the OP or abstain from making inflammatory remarks and bombing threads thank you.

 

[daqq]

Please respond to the OP or abstain from making inflammatory remarks and bombing threads thank you.

You said that because I appear to be insane you cannot respond to me anymore. I therefore responded to CherubRam and you responded to my post to him with the incorrect assumption that the Enoch calendar is the Julian calendar. That is your problem: it is an open forum and you are posting in a public place. Stop making personal comments and respond to your own thread or the matters which come about in your threads as they progress. I only responded to you this time because you responded to my post to CherubRam with incorrect information.

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

You said that because I appear to be insane you cannot respond to me anymore. I therefore responded to CherubRam and you responded to my post to him with the incorrect assumption that the Enoch calendar is the Julian calendar. That is your problem: it is an open forum and you are posting in a public place. Stop making personal comments and respond to your own thread or the matters which come about in your threads as they progress. I only responded to you this time because you responded to my post to CherubRam with incorrect information.

Please respond to the OP or abstain from making inflammatory remarks and bombing threads thank you.

 

[daqq]

Please respond to the OP or abstain from making inflammatory remarks and bombing threads thank you.

I am responding to things you have said to me and that is simply how forums work.

Sounds like I've upset you but it's good to see you make the post that has made any real sense, i.e. noticing that it is not the Julian calendar (exactly) and that I missed it saying 150BC. It's known that many 'mad' people often obsess with detail I hope you can use that same obsessive nature to study God's Calendar in the OP.

You still sound upset but weirdly you are making sense again. Is this a correlation?

And now it is plain as day who is truly upset. :chuckle:

 

[WatchmanOnTheWall]

I am responding to things you have said to me and that is simply how forums work.





And now it is plain as day who is truly upset. :chuckle:

Please respond to the OP or abstain from making inflammatory remarks and bombing threads thank you.

 

[chair]

No there were hundreds of calendars in use around the world but Christ used the ancient Hebrew calendar as described by Moses and others in the Bible which was a lunar-solar calendar not fixed to the 365 day year. From 45BC the Roman's were trying to force the new Julian calendar on the Israelites but they kept rejecting and resisting it until 359 AD when they finally accepted it's new 7 day rolling week and incorporated that into the their new Jewish calendar made by Rabbi Hillel II which they still use to this day.

You keep stating this over and over again, as if it is a fact. There is simply no evidence for this, despite your videos.

All that Hillel II did was to change from observation of the New Moon to a calculated New Moon. There is no evidence that he 'fiddled' with the week. Nor does anything expect a separate 7 days cycle fit in with the Biblical Commandment to work 6 days then rest one day.

Your usual response is to say that I am of poor comprehension, that I am not as smart as you etc. (perhaps this is what is driving you here- the need to prove that you are smarter than everyone else). But you happen to be wrong, and somebody as smart as you ought to be able to take a critical view of things and figure that out.

There is no solid evidence that Hillel II changed the week. None. There are academic speculations, and long videos that don't include real evidence.