Oh, I apologize then, when I presented content at 4thHorsemanNews I was able to keep a lighter tone and I didn't intend that to change. I don't use AI for these answers (on rare occasions I do quote an AI sentence or two, always with attribution).

I've worked to see all sides of many questions such as this one. Ernest Martin put a lot of work into presenting a devotional support of 9/11 before the date became famous, and people often cite him for that quality. Some people prefer to make devotional reference to planetary positions that would have been invisible at the time (i.e. behind the sun) but that could theoretically have been regarded as symbolic and are held as such today; they find this more useful than reference to the festivals Jesus celebrated that are constantly given as waymarks in history. But everyone who comes to the question typically ends up with the know-it-all tone sooner or later (I do slip into it), partly defensively and partly offensively. It was my original intent when first publishing on the subject to be tentative, and yet to put my date out there complete with a "3 a.m." timestamp to indicate that it's partly tongue-in-cheek and everything is improvable. My discussion tactics aren't always best.

You answered my question, and the probability of that answer is the reason I asked it that way rather than weigh you down with the detailed, involved, intelligent realizations I've come to. I respect you and your joint contributions here and want this to continue to be a supportive family for you. Perhaps we'll have occasion to speak again more constructively; if you're still reading I encourage you that you should have power to unlock 4thHorsemanNews and see those vibrant contributors return.