"The fear of יהוה is the beginning of wisdom, And the knowledge of the Set-apart One is understanding"

30 Day Months Myth

For the open discussion of all calendar related issues.

Moderator: Watchman555

BrotherArnold
Posts: 327
Joined: 19 Oct 2007, 23:22
Location: Conyers, GA
Contact:

Postby BrotherArnold » 21 Nov 2007, 06:35

Re: chuck


BrotherArnold wrote:

Arnold> How can you prove that the 17th day of the 2nd and 7th moon/month was the 1st day of a solar month????

Chuck> I never said it was. I believe that the sun & moon were in sync at that time, so the 17th day of the lunar month would be the SAME as the 17th day of the solar month.


Arnold> RESPONSE; your answer seem confusing you said you did not say it was then said it was.

Next question, how can you prove they were in sync?

Brother Arnold
Lunar Sabbaths is one of the most provable doctrines in Scripture...

Brother Arnold
See www.lunarsabbath.info

chuckbaldwin
Posts: 334
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 13:44
Location: East Ridge, TN

Postby chuckbaldwin » 21 Nov 2007, 09:12

BrotherArnold wrote:Arnold> How can you prove that the 17th day of the 2nd and 7th moon/month was the 1st day of a solar month????

Chuck> I never said it was. I believe that the sun & moon were in sync at that time, so the 17th day of the lunar month would be the SAME as the 17th day of the solar month.

Arnold> RESPONSE; your answer seem confusing you said you did not say it was then said it was.
Sorry Arnold, you're not making sense. You obviously didn't read what i said.
Next question, how can you prove they were in sync?
I can't prove it, just like you can't prove Lunar Sabbaths; i just believe it, because of the 5 30-day months in a row.

And also because of the "42 months" = "1260 days" = "3.5 years" in Revelation & Daniel :mrgreen:
Chuck Baldwin
By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.

chuckbaldwin
Posts: 334
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 13:44
Location: East Ridge, TN

Postby chuckbaldwin » 21 Nov 2007, 09:21

BrotherArnold wrote:not so, draw it out on a sheat of paper and counting the 17 of the 2nd month through the 17th of the 7th month is 150 days fo corse I have had people try to argue that eather the 1st 17th when the water started or the last 17th when the ark rested wos not counted which would make 149 but when both 17th are counted it is 150. Do the math.
I see your point, IF the count was Inclusive, but i don't believe it was, so that one's a stalemate. I have more about 30-day months in my other post. (1260 days = 42 months)
as for the solar month you mentioned, I have never seen or heard of a solar month in scripture.
Neither have i. But YOU are the one who brought it up; i was just using your terminology.

On the other hand, the books of Enoch & Jubilees have "solar months", consisting of:
(30+30+31)*4 = 364 & 364/7 = exactly 52 weeks. With this calendar, the 1st day of the year (1st day of the 1st month) is always the 1st day of the week.
Chuck Baldwin

By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.

eriqbenel
Posts: 269
Joined: 19 Oct 2007, 20:28
Location: Jonesboro, GA
Contact:

Postby eriqbenel » 22 Nov 2007, 06:21

The first thing to be aware of is that this is NOT "exactly" 150 days, and the Scripture never says it is. The Scripture says that the "waters prevailed upon the earth" for 150 days. It does NOT say that the Ark rested on the 150th day, nor can such be logically inferred. This is explained below.

To say this is "ONLY possible… where each month contains 30 days" is incorrect. In a lunar year, it is very possible, if not common, to have two 30 day months, one 29 day month, and then two more 30 day months after. Such is probably the case with Gen 7:11 through Gen 8:3-4.

The months are not counted from the 17th to the 17th, they are counted from "chodesh" to "chodesh". This is the beginning of the error in the miscalculation here. The math is faulty in more ways than one. What the so-called scholars have done is get us looking at their math (5 X 30= 150) and thus leading us to their inaccurate conclusion. This conclusion is arbitrary. For example, if the Scripture had said that the waters "prevailed" 140 days, I could have concluded that the must have been 28 day months (140 / 5 = 28 )! However, this would have been an arbitrary calculation, just like the 30-day month conclusion.

In a Lunar year. It is quite common to have TWO 30 day months in a row! Here is an example of how this 150 day period is probable in a lunar calendar year:

2nd Month (30 day month) ----------------------- 14 days + (left, including the 17th)

3rd Month (30 day month) ----------------------- 30 days +

4th Month (29 day Month) ------------------------- 29 days +

5th Month (30 day Month) ------------------------- 30 days +

6th Month (30 day Month) ------------------------- 30 days +

7th Month (to the 17th) --------------------------- 17 days = (Note: this is a 29 day month)
________
150 days


In addition, the Scriptures do NOT say that the Ark rested at Mt. Ararat ON the 150th day:

7:24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

Now if the waters prevailed for all 150 days, it doesn't make since that the Ark would have rested on the 150th day! Verse 3 and 4 explain.

8:1 And Elohim remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and Elohim made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters asswaged;
8:2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;
8:3 And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.
8:4 And (THEN) the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.




So then, it was AFTER the 150 days were over that the Ark rest, perhaps on the 151st day, or the 152nd, who knows? The point is that the 150 days was just to describe the time of the prevailing of waters, NOT to indicate a calendar. And even if it WAS, I have clearly shown that the calendar definitely could have been a LUNAR calendar. This should clear up the whole "Noah's Ark" calendar issue, but we'll go on.

The last time this was presented to me, I pointed what I believe to be three faults in this logic:

1. Just because 354 + 10 equals 364, doesn't mean that there should be a 364 day calendar "read into" the context. There is NO REASON to suggest that the "year and ten day period suggest a 364 day solar calendar".

Would any combination of days that add up to the numbers 364, or 360 or 354 "automatically" presume an annual calendar calculation? For instance, if you begin counting TODAY, and a series of events eventually leads to 364 days later, does that mean that we should use the days from this time until that time to theorize an annual calendar?

2. Following up with that in mind, it should be noted that the passage says absolutely NOTHING about a "year". It only mentions the passing of days from one event to the next.

Since when do we count a "year" from the second month to the second month of the next year?! There is NO annual calendar being suggested in this time period, only the passing of days.

3. Again, you have yourself shown the clear possibility of a lunar count, that along with the 150 day explanation of the prevailing waters is enough to dispute adequately ANY objection the these passage conflict with a lunar calendar.
Shalom in the name of YHWH,

Eriq

chuckbaldwin
Posts: 334
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 13:44
Location: East Ridge, TN

Postby chuckbaldwin » 22 Nov 2007, 10:04

eriqbenel wrote:The first thing to be aware of is that this is NOT "exactly" 150 days, and the Scripture never says it is. The Scripture says that the "waters prevailed upon the earth" for 150 days. It does NOT say that the Ark rested on the 150th day, nor can such be logically inferred. This is explained below.
If the Scripture says 150 days, i believe it means what it says. More below.
To say this is "ONLY possible… where each month contains 30 days" is incorrect. In a lunar year, it is very possible, if not common, to have two 30 day months, one 29 day month, and then two more 30 day months after. Such is probably the case with Gen 7:11 through Gen 8:3-4.
I addressed all that in my previous post; you're basically repeating the same argument that Arnold made.
The months are not counted from the 17th to the 17th, they are counted from "chodesh" to "chodesh". This is the beginning of the error in the miscalculation here.
C'mon Eric, think about that. If there are x number of days between the same numeric dates in 2 different months, then backing up to the 1st (chodesh) of each month will give you the exact same number of days.
In addition, the Scriptures do NOT say that the Ark rested at Mt. Ararat ON the 150th day:

7:24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

Now if the waters prevailed for all 150 days, it doesn't make since that the Ark would have rested on the 150th day! Verse 3 and 4 explain.

8:1 And Elohim remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and Elohim made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters asswaged;
8:2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;
8:3 And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.
8:4 And (THEN) the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.
The fact that you had to ADD the word "THEN" (which isn't in the text), shows that i could be right. On the other hand you could be right. But it doesn't make sense to me that they would keep sailing around after the waters had "abated".

It also doesn't make sense to me that the datesgiven would have no connexion to the number of days

Of course, there's the contradiction between verses 4 & 5, which further confuses the issue, and doesn't help either one of us, but i'll leave that for you to address if you wish.
The point is that the 150 days was just to describe the time of the prevailing of waters, NOT to indicate a calendar. And even if it WAS, I have clearly shown that the calendar definitely could have been a LUNAR calendar.
Of course it was a LUNAR calendar, and also a SOLAR calendar, because at THAT time the MOON was in perfect sync with the SUN.
The last time this was presented to me, I pointed what I believe to be three faults in this logic:

1. Just because 354 + 10 equals 364, doesn't mean that there should be a 364 day calendar "read into" the context. There is NO REASON to suggest that the "year and ten day period suggest a 364 day solar calendar".
I have no idea what you're talking about now; it seems that you have swithed to an unfamiliar topic.
Would any combination of days that add up to the numbers 364, or 360 or 354 "automatically" presume an annual calendar calculation? For instance, if you begin counting TODAY, and a series of events eventually leads to 364 days later, does that mean that we should use the days from this time until that time to theorize an annual calendar?
Still don't know where you're going.
2. Following up with that in mind, it should be noted that the passage says absolutely NOTHING about a "year". It only mentions the passing of days from one event to the next.
If you're still talking about the 150 days of the flood, it doesn't ONLY mention passing of days, it ALSO mentions the dates that those events started and (IMO) ended.
Since when do we count a "year" from the second month to the second month of the next year?! There is NO annual calendar being suggested in this time period, only the passing of days.
I disagree.
3. Again, you have yourself shown the clear possibility of a lunar count, that along with the 150 day explanation of the prevailing waters is enough to dispute adequately ANY objection the these passage conflict with a lunar calendar.
I repeat, i see no conflict with a lunar calendar; what i see is a lunar calendar that is IN SYNC with the sun, unlike our current situation. And it's going to change back again, since the Tribulation will have 42 months = 1260 days = 3 1/2 years.

I'm still not sure where the 364 day year fits in, but i'm open to any additional information. :mrgreen:
Chuck Baldwin

By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.

ErichMatthewJanzen
Posts: 51
Joined: 11 Nov 2007, 12:16
Location: Conyers, GA
Contact:

Flood Calendar

Postby ErichMatthewJanzen » 22 Nov 2007, 16:53

Shalom, All,

All a person needs to do is write out 5 months on a sheet of paper, all of which contain 30 days, and then count from the 17th day of the 2nd month to the 17th day of the 7th month and you will find that this sequence will not align with the 150 days mentioned in Genesis.

Then do the same thing, except make your months, 30, 30, 29, 30, 30 and you will see that this sequence aligns perfectly. I did this a few years ago and still have the calendar saved on my computer. If anyone would like me to email them the calendar I will be glad to. My email is emjanzen @ yahoo.com

Matthew

ErichMatthewJanzen
Posts: 51
Joined: 11 Nov 2007, 12:16
Location: Conyers, GA
Contact:

My Thoughts on the Genesis Flood and 150 Days

Postby ErichMatthewJanzen » 22 Nov 2007, 17:00

Good Day to All,

Proponents of strictly 30 day months point to the book of Genesis, and the account of the great flood. Genesis 7:11 reads thusly:

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

Here we see that the rain of the flood began on the 17th day of the second month. Let me now point out that the word month here in the Hebrew language is the word chodesh, which according to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance has the meaning of “the new moon; by implication a month” What this shows is that we are dealing with lunar months here, because of the use of the word chodesh. Lunar months consist of either 29 or 30 days; please remember this. We will now continue with the commentary.

And the rain was on the earth forty days and forty nights. On the very same day Noah and Noah's sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark they and every beast after its kind, all cattle after their kind, every creeping thing that creeps on the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind, every bird of every sort. And they went into the ark to Noah, two by two, of all flesh in which is the breath of life. So those that entered, male and female of all flesh, went in as Elohim had commanded him; and Yahweh shut him in. (Genesis 7:12-16)

Here we see that (1) the rain came down for 40 days and nights, (2) Noah and family entered the ark on the 17th day of the 2nd month, (3) the beasts, cattle, creeping things, birds went in the ark on this same day as well, and (4) Yahweh shut the door on this day. Continuing:

17Now the flood was on the earth forty days. The waters increased and lifted up the ark, and it rose high above the earth. 18The waters prevailed and greatly increased on the earth, and the ark moved about on the surface of the waters. 19And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered. 20The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered. 21And all flesh died that moved on the earth: birds and cattle and beasts and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, and every man. 22All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, all that was on the dry land, died. 23So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark remained alive. (Genesis 7:17-23)

Here we see (1) that the flood (rain) continued for 40 days as verse 12 already stated, (2) the waters prevailed and caused the ark to be upon the surface of the waters, (3) the high hills and mountains were covered, (4) all that was in the dry land died, and (5) only Noah and company remained alive. Continuing:

And the waters prevailed on the earth one hundred and fifty days. (Genesis 7:24)

Here we see that the waters were strong upon the earth for 150 days. Do not get the time that it rained confused with the time the waters were strong. It rained for 40 days and nights, but the waters continued strong for 150 days. We thus have the following facts to consider in regards to the situation thus far:

The rain began on the 17th day of the 2nd month
The rain continued for 40 days and nights
The waters were strong for 150 days

Continuing:

Then Elohim remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the animals that were with him in the ark. And Elohim made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters subsided. The fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were also stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained. (Genesis 8:1-2)

Here we see that (1) Yahweh remembered Noah and all company, including the animals, (2) Yahweh caused a wind to come and subside the waters, and (3) the rain from heaven stopped. What is interesting here is the fact that this verse makes it sound as if the rain stopped after 150 days, but this cannot be so because we know the rain was only for 40 days and nights. What this shows is that Genesis 8:2 must not be in chronological order as pertaining to the rain. Genesis 8:1-2 actually are to be understood in retrospect, i.e. this occurred at the end of the 40 days and nights of rain. Continuing:

And the waters receded continually from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. (Genesis 8:3)

Here we have (1) the waters receding after the stopping of the rain, and (2) at the end of the 150 days (mentioned in 7:24) the waters ceased to prevail upon the earth. What we thus have is rain for 40 days and nights, and then (inclusive of the 40 days) the waters prevailing (being strong) on the earth for 150 days. Continuing:

Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat. And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month. In the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen. (Genesis 8:4-5)

This passage shows (1) the ark resting on the mountains of Ararat in the 17th day of the 7th month, and (2) the waters decreased until the 10th month, and on the new moon of the 10th month the tops of the mountains were seen. This would mean that there was still water on the earth covering things other than the tops of the mountains. What this passage does not say is that the ark rested immediately at the end of the 150 day period the waters were strong upon the earth. That is an assumption, not a fact. The fact is that as we have seen, and will continue to see, the passage is not in perfect chronological order in its telling of events. Let us Continue:

So it came to pass, at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made. Then he sent out a raven, which kept going to and fro until the waters had dried up from the earth. He also sent out from himself a dove, to see if the waters had receded from the face of the ground. But the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, and she returned into the ark to him, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth. So he put out his hand and took her, and drew her into the ark to himself. (Genesis 8:6-9)

Now, let me ask you. Does the event of 8:6 happen immediately after the events in 8:4-5? Was the end of 40 days after the end of 150 days? Was the end of 40 days after the new moon of the 10th month? The answers to these questions are no. What we have here is a compilation of facts that are not in chronological order, but simply depict for us some of the happenings and times during the great flood. One might possibly say that the 40 days of 8:6 are not the same 40 days of 7:12, 17. I would say that this is indeed a possibility. That is, that after the 150 days of the waters prevailing upon the earth there was an additional 40 days which after Noah sent out a raven and a dove.

However, if this is the case, then we could also say that the 150 days are not inclusive of the original 40 days and nights of rain. This would mean that 40 days and nights of rain occurred and then there was an additional 150 days of the waters prevailing upon the earth, totaling a sum of 190 days + the 40 days of Genesis 8:6, equaling 230 total days. Is this possible? Yes. Is this exactly what happened? I'm not so sure, but my point of all this is that this passage is not one in which we can concretely secure a calendar. There are events out of chronological order and facts are simply given. This causes me to veer away from trying to implement a calendar teaching at this Scripture.

Shalom,
Matthew Janzen

chuckbaldwin
Posts: 334
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 13:44
Location: East Ridge, TN

Re: My Thoughts on the Genesis Flood and 150 Days

Postby chuckbaldwin » 23 Nov 2007, 08:10

ErichMatthewJanzen wrote:Here we see that the rain of the flood began on the 17th day of the second month. Let me now point out that the word month here in the Hebrew language is the word chodesh, which according to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance has the meaning of the new moon; by implication a month What this shows is that we are dealing with lunar months here, because of the use of the word chodesh. Lunar months consist of either 29 or 30 days; please remember this.


Greetings Matthew, and thanks for sharing your thoughts. Before addressing the main body of your post, i would point out a misconception in the above statement. The lunar months of a 360-day year are exactly 30 days each. For an Enochian year (364 days) they would be 30+1/3 days each (91 days or 13 weeks per quarter).

By calculation, if the orbital speed of the earth were increased enough to make a 360-day year, the lunar cycle (w/o changing its orbital speed) would automatically become 30 days. The 364-day year would need the moon's speed to change as well as the earth. I believe that "wormwood" (aka "planet x" aka "nibiru") may effect these changes. (Dan.2:21)

As for the flood chronology, there's room for interpretation of the SOME of the dates and durations. However, with the exception of 8:1-3, i believe everything is in sequence. Here's the timetable that i see:

600th year
2/17 - 7/17: the waters prevailed upon the earth 150 days. This includes the 1st 40 days that it was actually raining; otherwise the prevailing would've gone past 7/17.
7/17: the waters had abated enough for the keel of the ark to rest on a mountain.
7/18-10/1: waters continued to decrease.
10/1 - tops of mountains were seen (in addition to the 1 they rested on).
10/1-11/10: after 40 more days Noah opened the window, and sent the raven & dove.
11/10-11/16: 1st flight of the dove (7 days), dove returned.
11/17-11/23: 2nd flight of the dove (7 days), dove returned with olive leaf.
11/24-11/30: 3rd flight of the dove (7 days), dove didn't return.
12/1-12/31: they partied all month. :lol:
601st year
1/1: Noah looked out, face of ground was dry.
2/27: Earth was dried; they left the ark.

Notice that there is NO possible "wiggle room" between the waters abating and the ark resting, because as long as the waters prevailed the ark couldn't find rest. And since the ark rested on 7/17, that was exactly 150 days after the waters started prevailing. As far as i can see the 150 days are fixed and unmoveable. :mrgreen:
Chuck Baldwin

By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.

eriqbenel
Posts: 269
Joined: 19 Oct 2007, 20:28
Location: Jonesboro, GA
Contact:

Re: My Thoughts on the Genesis Flood and 150 Days

Postby eriqbenel » 23 Nov 2007, 08:39

chuckbaldwin wrote:
ErichMatthewJanzen wrote:Here we see that the rain of the flood began on the 17th day of the second month. Let me now point out that the word month here in the Hebrew language is the word chodesh, which according to Strong's Exhaustive Concordance has the meaning of the new moon; by implication a month What this shows is that we are dealing with lunar months here, because of the use of the word chodesh. Lunar months consist of either 29 or 30 days; please remember this.


Greetings Matthew, and thanks for sharing your thoughts. Before addressing the main body of your post, i would point out a misconception in the above statement. The lunar months of a 360-day year are exactly 30 days each. For an Enochian year (364 days) they would be 30+1/3 days each (91 days or 13 weeks per quarter).

By calculation, if the orbital speed of the earth were increased enough to make a 360-day year, the lunar cycle (w/o changing its orbital speed) would automatically become 30 days. The 364-day year would need the moon's speed to change as well as the earth. I believe that "wormwood" (aka "planet x" aka "nibiru") may effect these changes. (Dan.2:21)

As for the flood chronology, there's room for interpretation of the SOME of the dates and durations. However, with the exception of 8:1-3, i believe everything is in sequence. Here's the timetable that i see:

600th year
2/17 - 7/17: the waters prevailed upon the earth 150 days. This includes the 1st 40 days that it was actually raining; otherwise the prevailing would\'ve gone past 7/17.
7/17: the waters had abated enough for the keel of the ark to rest on a mountain.
7/18-10/1: waters continued to decrease.
10/1 - tops of mountains were seen (in addition to the 1 they rested on).
10/1-11/10: after 40 more days Noah opened the window, and sent the raven & dove.
11/10-11/16: 1st flight of the dove (7 days), dove returned.
11/17-11/23: 2nd flight of the dove (7 days), dove returned with olive leaf.
11/24-11/30: 3rd flight of the dove (7 days), dove didn't return.
12/1-12/31: they partied all month. :lol:
601st year
1/1: Noah looked out, face of ground was dry.
2/27: Earth was dried; they left the ark.

Notice that there is NO possible "wiggle room" between the waters abating and the ark resting, because as long as the waters prevailed the ark couldn't find rest. And since the ark rested on 7/17, that was exactly 150 days after the waters started prevailing. As far as i can see the 150 days are fixed and unmoveable. :mrgreen:


Shalom Chuck,

You wrote
Notice that there is NO possible "wiggle room" between the waters abating and the ark resting, because as long as the waters prevailed the ark couldn't find rest.


That is a contradiction. The waters were still "prevailing" on the 150th day! The ark could not have "rested" on a day the waters were still "prevailing".

------------------------

And since the ark rested on 7/17, that was exactly 150 days after the waters started prevailing. As far as i can see the 150 days are fixed and unmoveable.

This is NOT what the Scripture says. YOU are putting 7/17, 150 days and the Ark resting all together when the Scripture does not do this.

Instead of addressing any of Matthews evidence. What you did was begin your response by setting up your version of a calendar, with no support or evidence for such, then you went on to "prove" the timeline for Noah BASED ON YOUR VERSION OF A CALENDAR.

Of course there is no "wiggle room" on YOUR VERSION! So when you say "as far as I can see..." it seems that the distance is what you believe in your mind. Also, you did not address the timeline of 150 days that I layed out that clearly shows a 150 count in a lunar based calendar. Perhaps it was beyond what you can see...'
Shalom in the name of YHWH,



Eriq

chuckbaldwin
Posts: 334
Joined: 21 Oct 2007, 13:44
Location: East Ridge, TN

Re: My Thoughts on the Genesis Flood and 150 Days

Postby chuckbaldwin » 23 Nov 2007, 13:24

eriqbenel wrote:You wrote
Notice that there is NO possible "wiggle room" between the waters abating and the ark resting, because as long as the waters prevailed the ark couldn't find rest.

That is a contradiction. The waters were still "prevailing" on the 150th day! The ark could not have "rested" on a day the waters were still "prevailing".
How come when i say something, it's a "contradiction", but when YOU say the exact same thing, it's not?? Because that's exactly what you did. And i agree with your last 2 sentences, because both of our statements above say the same thing.

The last (150th) day of the waters prevailing was 7/16. It couldn't have been earlier, because it would have been less than 150 days. And it couldn't have been later, because the ark rested the very next day - 7/17.
Of course there is no "wiggle room" on YOUR VERSION! So when you say "as far as I can see..." it seems that the distance is what you believe in your mind. Also, you did not address the timeline of 150 days that I layed out that clearly shows a 150 count in a lunar based calendar.
You're right i didn't address it, so i'll do it now. I just went back and looked at it and it is 1 day short. 2/17 - 7/17 inclusive should be 151 days, not 150, because the 150th day was 7/16 as i explained above. :mrgreen:
Chuck Baldwin

By this shall all men know you are my disciples: if you have love one for another.

orenjoshandjessica
Posts: 8
Joined: 21 Dec 2007, 20:06
Location: Plano, Texas
Contact:

counting days

Postby orenjoshandjessica » 21 Dec 2007, 20:26

The way my hubby and I do it from Scripture is we begin our month by the new moon (Scripturally that is the "visible" to the naked eye without help from technology "new moon"). Then we count our days from there. When the moon seems to "disappear" that's when it's close to the end of the month and the beginning of the new month. This can be 29 days or 30 etc...it just depends on when you "see the new moon again" when it seems to re-appear in the night sky. Happy hunting. Evey month it's different. It's not every time the same. That is why you have to go out and look every time. That's why the Y'srlites (Israelites) had to signal each other and blow on the shofar when they saw it to let everyone know the new moon/moonth/month had started...hmmm
May Yahuah show favor upon your house and your studies.

principessa-yisraeliana
Posts: 52
Joined: 18 Oct 2007, 19:23
Contact:

How does the Book of Jubilees add to this discussion?

Postby principessa-yisraeliana » 26 Feb 2008, 06:43

I have wondered about this passage in the Book of Jubilees (Chapter 6)

23 And on the new moon of the first month, and on the new moon of the fourth month, and on the new moon of the seventh month, and on the new moon of the tenth month are the days of remembrance, and the days of the seasons in the four divisions of the year. These are written and ordained
24 as a testimony for ever. And Noah ordained them for himself as feasts for the generations for ever,
25 so that they have become thereby a memorial unto him. And on the new moon of the first month he was bidden to make for himself an ark, and on that (day) the earth became dry and he opened
26 (the ark) and saw the earth. And on the new moon of the fourth month the mouths of the depths of the abyss beneath were closed. And on the new moon of the seventh month all the mouths of
27 the abysses of the earth were opened, and the waters began to descend into them. And on the new
28 moon of the tenth month the tops of the mountains were seen, and Noah was glad. And on this account he ordained them for himself as feasts for a memorial for ever, and thus are they ordained.
29 And they placed them on the heavenly tablets, each had thirteen weeks; from one to another (passed) their memorial, from the first to the second, and from the second to the third, and from the
30 third to the fourth. And all the days of the commandment will be two and fifty weeks of days, and (these will make) the entire year complete
. Thus it is engraven and ordained on the heavenly
31 tablets. And there is no neglecting (this commandment) for a single year or from year to year.
32 And command thou the children of Israel that they observe the years according to this reckoning- three hundred and sixty-four days, and (these) will constitute a complete year, and they will not disturb its time from its days and from its feasts; for everything will fall out in them according to
33 their testimony, and they will not leave out any day nor disturb any feasts. But if they do neglect and do not observe them according to His commandment, then they will disturb all their seasons and the years will be dislodged from this (order), [and they will disturb the seasons and the years
34 will be dislodged] and they will neglect their ordinances. And all the children of Israel will forget and will not find the path of the years, and will forget the new moons, and seasons, and sabbaths
35 and they will go wrong as to all the order of the years. For I know and from henceforth will I declare it unto thee, and it is not of my own devising; for the book (lies) written before me, and on the heavenly tablets the division of days is ordained, lest they forget the feasts of the covenant
36 and walk according to the feasts of the Gentiles after their error and after their ignorance. For there will be those who will assuredly make observations of the moon -how (it) disturbs the
37 seasons and comes in from year to year ten days too soon. For this reason the years will come upon them when they will disturb (the order), and make an abominable (day) the day of testimony, and an unclean day a feast day, and they will confound all the days, the holy with the unclean, and the unclean day with the holy; for they will go wrong as to the months and sabbaths and feasts and
38 jubilees. For this reason I command and testify to thee that thou mayst testify to them; for after thy death thy children will disturb (them), so that they will not make the year three hundred and sixty-four days only, and for this reason they will go wrong as to the new moons and seasons and sabbaths and festivals, and they will eat all kinds of blood with all kinds of flesh.




Can anyone tie this into the discussion, OR, are we not convinced that the Book of Jubilees is accurate perhaps? http://www.reluctant-messenger.com/book_jubilees.htm

eriqbenel
Posts: 269
Joined: 19 Oct 2007, 20:28
Location: Jonesboro, GA
Contact:

Postby eriqbenel » 26 Feb 2008, 20:56

It depends on what you mean by "accurate".

The Book of Jubilees used calendar perspectives that were prevalent at the time it was written, being heavily influenced by Egyptian and Greek calendar systems.

The calendar ideas of the Book of Jubilees do not correspond to what is written in the Tanak. In fact, the two wholly contradict one another. And if we are to make a decision as to which of the two ideas are the best choice for righteousness and obedience, we certainly would do well to stick with the Torah.
Shalom in the name of YHWH,



Eriq

BrotherArnold
Posts: 327
Joined: 19 Oct 2007, 23:22
Location: Conyers, GA
Contact:

Postby BrotherArnold » 27 Feb 2008, 17:10

I accept the book of jubilees and all books minus the parts that contradict scripture.

Brother Arnold
Lunar Sabbaths is one of the most provable doctrines in Scripture...



Brother Arnold

See www.lunarsabbath.info


Return to “Calendar Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron