H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II" (page 5)

AnnOMaly

(Apologies for the blank post above - the formatting went weird and it wouldn't let me edit)

Neil,

One can be humble and yet still be disinclined to 'suffer fools gladly'.

Nitpicking? Hardly. Much of Furuli's book picks over words - often in minute detail. Hunger's review addresses and corrects some of those details.

I am not competent enough to comment on the technical details of either Furuli or Hunger but there are some specific points in Hunger's review that I am competent in evaluating such points.

I'd be interested in hearing the specific points you feel you're competent enough to evaluate. It would be nice to get past the posturing and character assassination stage to something concrete about the review. Are you willing to share?

I would have no problem in 'raising the bar' with Hunger but that would be a waste of my time.

ROFL! Please. You couldn't 'raise the bar' to a height sufficient to panic a lilliputian limbo dancer!

Hunger does indeed deal with technical issues of Furuli's thesis and ignores the theological issue as you say but that is where Hunger errs.

Ah now, no longer do you believe he ignores the technical issues in Furuli's book but indeed deals with them ... but because he is dealing with them to a technical level, you call it 'nitpicking.' What a fair and unbiased opinion you have!

You speak in haste for as yet I have not seen Gallagher's review of Jonsson.

Strange. This is contrary to what you asserted on Posts #1568 and #1571:

"I have already a copy of the Review in that leading journal by W. Gallagher. ... I shall write to Gallagher when I can locate him and the Editor of the Journal giving my views on this Review as soon as practicable."

"This journal AfO is only published annually and is German so it would be easy to miss out on that Review. The University whereupon I obtained my copy has only recently acquired this volume and it is the latest copy in its holdings even though it is for 2005/1006."

Were you telling a lie back then, Neil?

scholar

AnnOMaly

Post 1505

You and I have a different definition of humility.

A comparison of both Hunger and Furuli in my opinion shows Hunger's 'nitpicking', Furuli is simply presenting his thesis in a careful manner. It is for the reader to make his /her assessment on this matter.

Yes, I will comment on those points in which I am competent to do so. You are right; 'raising the bar' with Hunger would be useless as shown by his reply by email to me. After all it is not my dispute but Furuli can respong as he sees fit.

Hunger' s 'nitpicking' is the consequence of his ignoring Furuli's methodology.

Frankly, I cannot recall the matter but it well have been that I acted on the basis that a copy was at hand or perhaps I indeed do have a copy somewhere in my files. Anyway, you were not prepared to post a copy of the Review if indeed you have it and can read German. A lie hardly but perhaps a innocent mistake. Can you forgive me?

scholar JW

scholar

Ultimate Reality

Post 183

At last we concur that the seventy years was a period of desolation-servitude and exile. All that you need to change now isarethe events from Babylon to Judah and the two dates. Congratulations you are nearly there!

scholar JW

scholar

AnnOMaly

Post 1505

A correction to my last post. I have just opened my Inbox for my emails and a friend of mine has just forwarded to me the copy of the Review in the AFO journal and I recognized it straight away. Yes, imust have a copy in my files because I had read and made as you comments on it. I have filed in another file somewhere so when you brought it up I consulted my Jonsson file and it was not there. So, the problem is now resolved and I have not lied to you or to others. Further , my friend also sent a copy of another Review of Jonsson's GTR in the Bibliotheca Orientalis. Now I am very happy to have Reviews by scholars on Jonsson's thesis.

scholar JW

Mickey mouse

The real question is, does Furuli's position support the Watchtower's?

If it does, it must be correct.

^Thoughtstop.

bohm

Scholar, how about the question i asked in the previous page regarding Furulis peer-reviewed articles on cuniform tablets?

PSacramento

I believe that the Bible is superior to that of secular records and that where unlike Hunger there is a difference of fact then the Bible is deemed to be more credible and trustworthy because the Bible alone is 'Inspired by God' -2Tim.3:16.

Enough said.

Translation: Regardless of proof or evidence, anything that seems to contridict MY interpreation of the bible will be rejected.

AnnOMaly

Neil,

Yes, I will comment on those points in which I am competent to do so.

Great! Are you planning on commenting today or this week sometime?

Frankly, I cannot recall the matter but it well have been that I acted on the basis that a copy was at hand or perhaps I indeed do have a copy somewhere in my files. Anyway, you were not prepared to post a copy of the Review if indeed you have it and can read German. A lie hardly but perhaps a innocent mistake. Can you forgive me?...
... (#1904) A correction to my last post. I have just opened my Inbox for my emails and a friend of mine has just forwarded to me the copy of the Review in the AFO journal and I recognized it straight away. Yes, imust have a copy in my files because I had read and made as you comments on it. I have filed in another file somewhere so when you brought it up I consulted my Jonsson file and it was not there. So, the problem is now resolved and I have not lied to you or to others. Further , my friend also sent a copy of another Review of Jonsson's GTR in the Bibliotheca Orientalis. Now I am very happy to have Reviews by scholars on Jonsson's thesis.

Fantastic. As you'll know by now, the Gallagher review is in English.

What a real nice favor your friend and his friend have done in getting those reviews to you. I hope you appreciate their kindness!

Can I forgive your muddle-headedness? Sure :-)

isaacaustin

Furuli is not a scholar in Neo-Babylonian chronology...therefore his opinions are not of any additional weight.

scholar

AnnOMaly

Post 1506

I have some time this morning so I should have something of a preliminary nature to say but you must be a good girl.

I found my copy of the article which was on one sheet ot paper with my underlining in red of some of the points that I raised in response to Gallagher on this forum. Carl Jonsson through my friend provided me with some details of Gallagher's academic qualifications just this morning. On the reverse side of my copy which was in fact in my Jonsson file was the Call Number for its holding in the Fisher Library at the University of Sydney. I had simply forgotten all about that Review but when I received another copy I knew immediately that I had it somewhere. Eureka!

Truly, scholar indeed is a 'muddle-headed' wombat to use and Aussie colloquialism.

scholar JW

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

Share this