H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

by AnnOMaly 248 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  bohm

  Scholar: You wrote back on page 1:

  "It is my expectation that Hunger's review whatever format is presented should be published in a respected academic journal in order to give his Review a measure of respectability and integrity."

  I asked you to tell me which "respected academic journal" Furuli has published his ideas on the evidence in question, and you gave me a reference to his book. Well, i can just conclude Furuli has never published his work on the clay tablets etc. in a "respected academic journal". As I am sure you will be familiar with, the review procedure of a book is very different (or entirely nonexistent) from that of a journal, and the two should not be placed on equal footing.

  I hope you will be humble enough to adress these two standards, and modify your original claim regarding Hunger, or apply it equally to Furulli. As it is now it is not consistent.

  Ps.

  Personally, I think any argument, no matter where it is published, deserve attention, and would a-priori not disregard Furuli or Hungers work on this subject because it has not been published. The review process it not some magic wand of truth :-).
• 

  OUTLAW

  I simply do not have the expertise in examining the minutae of Furul's research and Hunger's review.....Scholar JW

  AnnOMaly.....Post 1537

  Your posts amount to nothing more than hysterical ramblings. Furuli has certainly got Hunger, Jonsson and you on the ropes.

  scholar JW

  How would you know?..

  You already admit to not understanding Furuli or Hunger..

  Regardless if Furuli was Right or Wrong.....You wouldn`t understand Why,in either Case..

  So your Opinon is Worthless..

  Your a Babbling Idiot..

  ...................... ...OUTLAW
• 

  isaacaustin

  Outlaw,

  This is insanely funny. Pseudoscholar is so sure of Furuli's so-called expertise that when asked to explain he admits he can not.
• 

  Mad Dawg

  Furuli? He can't even explain it from the Bible - of which he claims to be an expert.
• 

  isaacaustin

  Mad Dawg, how long have you been awaiting 'scholar's' promised answers? LOL Don't hold your breath.
• 

  PSacramento

  I wrote to one of the heads of Neurosurgery in Canada, I told him he was wrong on how he was doing things because my interpreation of the bible said so.

  He never replied.

  Obviously I was right.
• 

  OUTLAW

  LOL!!@IsaacAustin!!..

  Only a DimWit would Defend something,He admits he can`t Comprehend..

  "How could I possibly be Wrong?"..

  "I have No Idea what the Subject is About!"..

  ................. ...OUTLAW
• 

  Mad Dawg

  I have been waiting well over a year. "scholar's" silence has been defening. His inability/refusal to provide an answer only leads me to believe that he is entirely clueless. For the record the question is: Can you prove, using ONLY the Bible that Jerusalem fell in 607 BC? I would think that would an easy one for one who claims to have so much "proof". "scholar" has singlehandedly destroyed any notions that I may have had that JW's even have any concept of what 'truth' is. He is truly a disgrace to Jehovah.
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  Has anyone ever written in agreement with Furuli, defending his nonsense? Has Furuli every converted anyone to his 607 chronology? ... Well, by "anyone", I mean anyone that isn't a pyramidologist?

  Has the Watchtower ever published or publicly endorsed Furuli's speculations? Or is Furuli an "independent thinker", running ahead of "Jehovah's organization" trying to bring fame to himself instead of honoring the Governing Body of the Faithful Slave? Are renegade JW university lecturers like him the reason that JWs discourage "higher education"?

  It must be remembered that just as the "faithful slave" has readily abondoned their generation teachings many times in recent years, they are equally capable of completely dumping 607 in one sentance of one paragraph of one Kool-Aid edition of the Watchtower. The 607 nonsense will eventually get dumped just like Rutherford dumped Russell's pyramidology. And there will be Furuli, an abandoned old fool remembered only for his crazy efforts at rewriting history to somehow validate a cult as being approved by God a hundred years ago. And "scholar" will be remembered for his worshipful adoration of a "celebrated" old fool.
• 

  thetrueone

  And "Scholar" will be remembered for his worshipful adoration of a "celebrated" old fool.

  No truer words Good one Billy