Thank you for the post Slim , . Beautiful eulogy for an incredible man. Rest in peace Carl Olaf, we all owe you a great debt of gratitude.🥀
Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday
by slimboyfat 362 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Diogenesister
Further, he overstated the case of VAT 4956 as providing solid evidence for the date of 587 BCE as an Absolute Date for the Fall of Jerusalem rather than the preferred date of 539 BCE for the Fall of Babylon advocated by WT scholars since 1963. A Semitic scholar and former Winess, Dr. Rolf Furuli has since published scholarship that shows that VAT 4956 can also be interpreted to prove a 20 year gap in the NB Chronology which supports 607 BCE rather than 586BCE or 587 BCE.
Scholar This is taken from Ralf Furuli's Wikipedia page (I realise it may not be the best source, but I have read elsewhere that Furuli is no expert in the area he weighs in on here). Also, you can hardly decry Carl Olaf's scholarship, whilst calling Watchtower researcher's "scholars" in the same breath. Neither being qualified in the traditional sense.
" In response, in a 2004 issue of Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Lester L. Grabbe, professor of Hebrew Bible and Early Judaism at the University of Hull, said of Furuli's study: "Once again we have an amateur who wants to rewrite scholarship. ... F. shows little evidence of having put his theories to the test with specialists in Mesopotamian astronomy and Persian history."[14]"
-
DATA-DOG
That’s sad… We all die. Time is the undefeated Champion.. Personally I don’t care if I die anymore. Really, the only reason I’m around is the feeling that my being gone will make others sad. So even after leaving the cult I’m controlled.. Life, the great Cosmic joke…
DD
-
Fisherman
586 is interpretation and may be liked like the theory of evolution ( not saying that the comparison is congruent) but 539 is a historical fact. There are 2 schools of thought but wt 607 based on Bible interpretation is also valid. And there are solid reasons to conclude that the land lay desolate 70 years to pay back it’s Sabbaths. Archeology has not debunked wt 607. It stands same as creation. There is a great thread on this forum where “Scholar”argues against the interpretation of the stele that suggest 586. Wt has published as sbf highlights that wt is fallible but that doesn’t mean wt is equivocating on 607. We’ll see what happens sooner or latter.
My sympathy to the loved ones of COJ.
-
Alethia
Carls rebuttal to the 2011 Oct/Nov watchtowers was excellent! Especially the parts where he points out WT's dishonesty by misquoting experts. They are not to be trusted.
I really dont get JWs like Scholar etc. Are you messing with us Scholar or are you really that deluded?
RIP Carl
-
Beth Sarim
some people are just 'delude'. They just can't see the forest for the trees.
When all the facts are pointed point blank at the face at them.
-
scholar
Alethia
really dont get JWs like Scholar etc. Are you messing with us Scholar or are you really that deluded?
---
The only persons who were deluded were Carl Jonsson and his associates as they failed to disprove 607 BCE as the only date for the Fall of Jerusalem. COJ's thesis is flawed from many standpoints as he gave more weight to NB Chronology than the Biblical record. which shows the historical reality of the 70 years as a period of the desolation of Judah which has been a stumbling block for scholarship also he failed to properly account for the Jewish/Babylonian Exile of 70 years.
scholar JW
-
scholar
Diogenesister
Scholar This is taken from Ralf Furuli's Wikipedia page (I realise it may not be the best source, but I have read elsewhere that Furuli is no expert in the area he weighs in on here). Also, you can hardly decry Carl Olaf's scholarship, whilst calling Watchtower researcher's "scholars" in the same breath. Neither being qualified in the traditional sense.
--
Furuli unlike COJ admits to his lack of expertise in some areas but in other areas, as a Semitic scholar, he has expertise in dealing with ancient languages and has demonstrated competence in interpreting the astronomical data contained in the cuneiform clay tablets. COJ was no scholar in that he had no University degree in the fields in that he claimed expertise but nevertheless, his thesis presents sound scholarship worthy of a critique. Furuli was a WT scholar and has the academic credentials to be fully qualified in the traditional sense.
---
n response, in a 2004 issue of Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Lester L. Grabbe, professor of Hebrew Bible and Early Judaism at the University of Hull, said of Furuli's study: "Once again we have an amateur who wants to rewrite scholarship. ... F. shows little evidence of having put his theories to the test with specialists in Mesopotamian astronomy and Persian history."[14]"
--
I am fully aware of Grabbe's criticism of Furuli but again his expertise is not in the field of Semitic studies.
scholar JW
-
slimboyfat
I did read The Gentile Times Reconsidered, and appreciated the level of detail in it, but I can’t say I ever came to terms with all the technical arguments or understood them properly. I enjoyed reading about the background and history of interpretation more than the parts about ancient tablets and astronomical dates.
For me, I gave up on the whole 607BCE/1914CE idea one day when sitting in the book study group and one of the chapters of the Isaiah book dealt with the 70 years prophecy with respect to Tyre. It made the brief comment that in this case the 70 years was not a full 70 years. But if that 70 years wasn’t a “full 70 years”, then why does the other 70 years have to be a full 70 years? It didn’t make any sense. So I gave up trying to work it out anything about tablets and astronomical dates because the whole idea was a nonstarter.
Just out of curiosity scholar, have you got an apologetic answer for that one? Why should we take the 70 years literally in one case but not the other? Here is the relevant quote from the Isaiah book:
Isaiah goes on to prophesy: “It must occur in that day that Tyre must be forgotten seventy years, the same as the days of one king.” (Isaiah 23:15a) Following the destruction of the mainland city by the Babylonians, the island-city of Tyre will “be forgotten.” True to the prophecy, for the duration of “one king”—the Babylonian Empire—the island-city of Tyre will not be an important financial power. Jehovah, through Jeremiah, includes Tyre among the nations that will be singled out to drink the wine of His rage. He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8–17, 22, 27) True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble. What will then happen to Tyre?
[Isaiah’s Prophecy—Light for All Mankind I p. 253-254]
-
Sanchy
So I gave up trying to work it out anything about tablets and astronomical dates because the whole idea was a nonstarter.
Same. To me, the chronology aspect is interesting, but what really made the JW’s 1914 formula fall apart, in a more convincing way IMO, was simply realizing that it takes some extreme mental leaps to claim a second fulfillment for Dan 4, which is the entire premise of the concept.