AlanF

Joined

• started 104 topics
• posted 4,636 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by AlanF

• 
  13

  Exotic Food

  by simplesally in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  i love moroccan food.

  has anybody else been to a moroccan restaurant?

  there are at least 2 i know of here in the la area.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  I like Morroccan food, alright. Eating with your fingers without getting hollered at is nice!

  AlanF
• 
  48

  Can it be proven that the WTS is NOT God's personal organization?

  by M.J. in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  imagine trying to prove to someone that firmly believes in leprechauns that they simply don't exist.

  where do you start?

  an excellent saying i have heard is "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  If you figure that the God of the Bible is a real entity, and is The God of Truth, then the Watchtower can't be His organization because most JWs, including and especially the leaders, prove under pressure to be pathological liars.

  AlanF
• 
  77

  did snakes have legs

  by tijkmo in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  questions from readers.

  did the serpent lose legs or feet as means of movement as a result of the divine curse recorded at genesis 3:14?.

  at genesis 3:14 we are told: "and jehovah god proceeded to say to the serpent: ?because you have done this thing, you are the cursed one out of all the domestic animals and out of all the wild beasts of the field.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  It's a pretty stupid concept, snakes having legs very recently. Imagine putting four legs on a modern snake. The body is so long that it wouldn't be able to support its own weight. That alone clobbers the Watchtower's idea.

  This whole notion is nothing more than an ancient myth from people who knew nothing of biology.

  AlanF
• 
  763

  Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

  by Little Bo Peep in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  hello all, i've been reading your site for a couple of years now, and have found, for the most part, it to be very helpful.

  i must say, at first i was very "scared" at what i might find, but contrary to what i grew up learning, there is a "wealth" of information outside of the watchtower organization.

  i haven't attended meetings for about two years now, and like many i've read about, have spent many hours researching, telling myself "i'm not wrong for searching", and doing more research.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Leological One,

  In addition to Narkissos' comments, I will add that the Watchtower's interpretation of the 70 weeks of Daniel apply from 455 B.C. to 36 A.D. They try to establish the 455 date (incorrectly, it turns out) completely independently from the way they try to get the 607 date, so as Narkissos said, one has nothing to do with the other.

  AlanF
• 
  763

  Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

  by Little Bo Peep in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  hello all, i've been reading your site for a couple of years now, and have found, for the most part, it to be very helpful.

  i must say, at first i was very "scared" at what i might find, but contrary to what i grew up learning, there is a "wealth" of information outside of the watchtower organization.

  i haven't attended meetings for about two years now, and like many i've read about, have spent many hours researching, telling myself "i'm not wrong for searching", and doing more research.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Good one, the_classicist!

  AlanF
• 
  763

  Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

  by Little Bo Peep in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  hello all, i've been reading your site for a couple of years now, and have found, for the most part, it to be very helpful.

  i must say, at first i was very "scared" at what i might find, but contrary to what i grew up learning, there is a "wealth" of information outside of the watchtower organization.

  i haven't attended meetings for about two years now, and like many i've read about, have spent many hours researching, telling myself "i'm not wrong for searching", and doing more research.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Scholar pretendus:

  I have posted information whereupon Edwin Thiele's complete chronology for the OT and the Divide Monarchy.. Readers on this board can access Thiele's book that I referred to and see the charts for themselves. You, on the other have had a long time to provide an alternative to Thiele's chronology as all you can do is criticize something that you do not have.

  Where is your alternative to Thiele's chronology that is presented in his book which includes charts of dates for the OT and charts of dates for the Divided Monarchy?The WT hypothesis does not give much credit to Thiele's or Jonsson's scheme bevcause Thiele believes in 586 and Jonsson believes 587. And the WT scheme is divided against itself, as proved by my quotation from the Paradise restored book. So you are in big disagreement with the WT bigtime. Come on, put up or shut up/

  AlanF
• 
  763

  Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

  by Little Bo Peep in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  hello all, i've been reading your site for a couple of years now, and have found, for the most part, it to be very helpful.

  i must say, at first i was very "scared" at what i might find, but contrary to what i grew up learning, there is a "wealth" of information outside of the watchtower organization.

  i haven't attended meetings for about two years now, and like many i've read about, have spent many hours researching, telling myself "i'm not wrong for searching", and doing more research.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Scholar pretendus said:

  : You have not yet provide a chronology for the OT and for the Divided Monarchy.

  Personally, no. But neither have you. If you claim you have, then post a link to where you did.

  On the other hand, I've given Edwin Thiele's chronology as a workable one, just as you say that WTS chronology is a workable one.

  Your hypocrisy and double standards are evident yet again.

  : You have not supplied any substantive criticism of WT chronology as you have claimed to have provided.

  Of course I have. I've given the links to that substantive criticism, which is in this very thread.

  : Ihave fully addressed your previous criticisms and showed these to be false.

  No you have not, you fucking liar. As I said, the fact that you refuse to provide links to your supposed addressing of my criticisms proves that you've done no such thing, and are now merely lying to yourself.

  Where did you address my proof that 2 Chronicles 36:20 disproves WTS chronology?

  Where did you address my proof that Jeremiah 25:12 disproves WTS chronology?

  Where did you address my proof that Jeremiah 27:7 disproves WTS chronology?

  Where did you address my proof that the Society has never addressed the above scriptures?

  Where did you address my proof that the Society's own book Paradise Restored to Mankind By Theocracy disproves WTS chronology?

  It astounds me that any human being could be so stupid as you, Neil, as to think that anyone besides yourself believes your lies.

  AlanF
• 
  763

  Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

  by Little Bo Peep in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  hello all, i've been reading your site for a couple of years now, and have found, for the most part, it to be very helpful.

  i must say, at first i was very "scared" at what i might find, but contrary to what i grew up learning, there is a "wealth" of information outside of the watchtower organization.

  i haven't attended meetings for about two years now, and like many i've read about, have spent many hours researching, telling myself "i'm not wrong for searching", and doing more research.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Alwayshere said:

  : He is probably a dumb ass elder!

  You can omit the elder part. Scholar pretendus is far too stupid even to be an elder.

  AlanF
• 
  763

  Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

  by Little Bo Peep in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  hello all, i've been reading your site for a couple of years now, and have found, for the most part, it to be very helpful.

  i must say, at first i was very "scared" at what i might find, but contrary to what i grew up learning, there is a "wealth" of information outside of the watchtower organization.

  i haven't attended meetings for about two years now, and like many i've read about, have spent many hours researching, telling myself "i'm not wrong for searching", and doing more research.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Scholar pretendus:

  You have not yet provided a chronology of the OT and nor have you provided a chronology of the Divided Monarchy except by claiming that the Watchtower's is acceptable, which is a meaningless statement. Your so called Neo-Babylonian is in fact for all practical purposes useless.

  Thiele's chronology is complete a workable framework completely suitable for Christians and those loyal to God's Word.

  As for your claim about Watchtower chronology:

  : There are no pieces of scriptural data that conflict with it. Put your claim to the test and provide a list of texts that conflict with it.

  I already did that is this very thread, the last time you made this claim, you idiot: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/87714/3.ashx in posts dated 31-Mar-05 20:34 and 02-Apr-05 22:50. You failed to comment on anything in the first, even though you claimed you would, and made comments on the latter that various posters have thoroughly disproved. And of course, you're very well aware that the Society's own comment in the Paradise Restored book proves that your claims about Zechariah 7:1-6 are wrong.

  : I have already provided a tentative list of the Reigns of the Neo-Babylonian dynasty as described in WT literature.

  No, you have not. You're a pathological liar. The only way for you to get out of this lie is post a link to the thread and to the specific post where you did. And don't insult readers by claiming that a simple, general comment amounts to a list.

  A proper list would be of the form:

  King Length of Reign B.C. Dates

  Nabopolassar 21 years 625-605
  Nebuchadnezzar 43 years 604-562
  Awel-Marduk 2 years 526-560
  Neriglissar 4 years 560-556
  Labashi-Marduk 3 months 556
  Nabonidus 17 years 556-539

  Now will you look at that! I've already provided a framework for you. All you have to do is type in your own numbers!

  Of course, we all know that you'll find some excuse to avoid doing that, and avoid posting a link to where your above claim can be verified. And once again you'll have confirmed that you're a cult-minded liar.

  AlanF
• 
  44

  Seeker4 Facing DFing - Seeks advice!! Lawyer??

  by Seeker4 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  some of you may remember me, seeker4, from several hundred posts 3 to 6 years ago.

  i recognize some of the names in today's forums, and maybe some of you remember me.

  don't confuse me with seeker - i'm s4.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Howdy Seeker4! Long time no talk.

  I think that much of the outcome of this stupid situation hinges on how you handle the matter personally with these elders. The key point is that the Flock book explicitly gives conditions that might let elder "hold the matter in abeyance", and you fit those conditions. They have no directive from the Society to DF you, so what they decide is entirely up to them personally.

  You might try what I did when faced with a similar situation ten years ago: call up one elder late at night to catch him off guard. Tell him that you're no threat to the congregation since you have no contact with them. Tell him that he should leave you alone from here on in, and that if he or other elders do anything to besmirch your good name in the community, you'll take him or the other elders personally to court. The Society would not be involved in your lawsuit, and probably wouldn't even want to get involved, which leaves the elders to their own resources. If that doesn't make him agree to leave you alone, then retain a good lawyer and have him write a "cease and desist" letter like the one posted earlier, or one that I can send you, which has a proven track record. With your circumstances, it makes no sense for the Society to do anything besides tell these bozos to back off.

  Sounds to me like your soon-to-be ex is pestering them to do this, just as mine did. It's very much a get-even thing, and that might even be used in court, if it comes to that.

  AlanF