spamandham

A. anyone can write a wiki entry. For all I know you wrote this.

B. It's irrelevant anyway. It does not address the point that merely because the Bible associates an event with an eclipse, that does not imply the event necessarily happened coincident with the eclipse. It merely implies that the author was aware of both and associated them. It's actually a bit weaker than that. It merely implies that the author was aware of the event and associated it with AN eclipse. Partial eclipses were also considered omens in the ancient world, and they happen frequently.

I have no idea, and it's irrelevant.

Larsguy47

Yes. But it is either true or not. Why don't you try and find out which?

What is "relevant" here is that you clearly have no clue what the issue here is.

Only because this whole issue slipped past you. But that's okay, I have enough understanding for both of us. Cool... :>

LG47

spamandham

That's what we're engaged in here.


This coming from some delusional whackjob who claims to be the messiah and can't even properly interpret a fucking PDF chart that he presented as part of his own argument.

You're a joke Larry-the-Messiah-Guy, and I'm most certainly laughing at it.

Larsguy47

The chart speaks for itself. The Y axis is labeled "RELATIVE PROBABILITY" and shows a scale of 0.0 to 1.0 weighed against varying levels of shading over certain dates. I'll let you take it from there.

And yes, you don't UNDERSTAND the reference here, dismissing something as "irrelevant" when it is most indeed relevant.

There is not a single eclipse mentioned in the Bible connected with any event, so you're not even on the topic here. This is about the redating of a strictly secular eclipse reference.

LG47

spamandham

I agree, and yet you refuse to listen to it.

Huh?

What about Amos 8:9, Matthew 24:29, Acts 2:20, Matthew27:45-54 ?

Glancing back through my posts, I agree I didn't state very well what I was trying to say regarding eclipses. The usage of eclipses in ancient texts, Biblical or otherwise, can only be reliably used to bound when the text itself was originally written, and any events it refers to which are not later redactions.

Larsguy47

Amos 8:9 “‘And it must occur in that day,’ is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, ‘that I will make the sun go down at high noon, and I will cause darkness for the land on a bright day. "

This is not an eclipse. This is a premature setting of the sun. Next...

Matthew 24:29 29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken."

The "stars will fall from heaven"? The sun being darkened isn't necessarily an eclipse either. It just means it's light will cease to be given. It's symbolic and not related to AN ECLIPSE associated with some specific event. Next.

ACTS 2:20
20 the sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the great and illustrious day of Jehovah arrives...

Again, this is a general symbolic reference to the darkening of the sun and moon, could be references to an eclipse in general, but it is not associated with an actual eclipse in the Bible dating anything. This light from the sun and moon is considered Biblical knowledge and enligtenment that will be in darkness at this time. Next?

MATTHEW 27:45-54:
"45 From the sixth hour on a darkness fell over all the land, until the ninth hour."

Does this say there was an eclipse? Dark clouds could have covered the sun or it's light blocked in some other way than an eclipse. Besides, we know this was the 20th of the month and solar eclipses only happen during the time of the new moon. So this was not a natural eclipse that then was used to connect with something going on in the earth. This was a mysterious darkness not associated with an eclipse. But of note, there was an eclipse on the night of passover! But the Bible doesn't mention the eclipse, and thus it wasn't particularly considered as a special result of what was going on.

So as I said, nothing in the Bible associated with any eclipse is used for dating. But thanks for explaining yourself. Appreciated.

Your concept of historical eclipses is somewhat inaccurate when it gets right down to the actual facts and actual eclipses.

LG47

spamandham

Says you.

...maybe Christmas just came early that year.

Again, says you. You speak authoritatively on that which you know nothing about.

Perhaps the sky ws filled with black child messiah bullshit, thus blocking off sunlight as well.

Larsguy47

You claim this is something I "know nothing about" which we presume you know at least a little better? But you don't put for any argument. Simply stating: "Well, 1 + 1 isn't 2!" doesn't change a thing. You have to demonstrate your point. But since there is no point, obviously, you didn't.

Bottom line is, and this is the TEST likely here, is that if I'm truly the messiah, you can't prove I'm not.

Zech 3:Is this one not a log snatched out of the fire?”

3 Now as for Joshua, he happened to be clothed in befouled garments and standing before the angel. 4 Then he answered and said to those standing before him: “Remove the befouled garments from upon him.” And he went on to say to him: “See, I have caused your error to pass away from upon you, and there is a clothing of you with robes of state.”




You can only not believe. You can never disprove.

LG47

spamandham

You have already proven to everyone here but yourself that you are not any kind of fucking messiah. The test is over.

jess

Say the word, and I shall be healed.

If I am healed, I will post so.