Posts by AlanF

68

Sorry, another 607 question? I'm confused.

by lost_light06 in

im trying to figure something out concerning the wts 607-1914 chronology that has me confused.

i thought they based the chronology on when jerusalem was destroyed.

however, the following is taken from the daniel book and it seems to base it on something else.

AlanF

hillary_step said to scholar pretendus goatus buggerus:

:: It is not your business to decide what methodology the celebrated WT scholars should employ. It is their business and they have decided that 539 BCE is a adequate pivotal date for the reconstruction of OT chronology.

: With this alarming confession, you have buried any credibility that you might of had left in dealing with this chronological issue. I think we can all go home now, and all the JW 'lurkers' reading this thread will recognize the sound of defeat in your post.

I was thinking the same thing. A bit further on in his post, this moron virtually admitted to being on this board simply for the fun of pretending to be a real JW -- "The foresaid scholar is brilliant." I'm beginning to wonder if we're dealing with a truly pathological case of split personality here. I mean, the guy doesn't respond to challenges in a sane way.

scholar pretendus goatus buggerus said to Hellrider:

: It is not your business to decide what methodology the celebrated WT scholars should employ. It is their business and they have decided that 539 BCE is a adequate pivotal date for the reconstruction of OT chronology.

Right. Just as these morons once decided that 1874 was a pivotal date in more recent human history. Just as other morons have decided that Genesis is a literal description of earth history.

: If you prefer another date then you go with that and reap the futility of doing so.

'Futility'. LOL! Your use of this term is a fine example of circular reasoning. You need the 607-1914 'chronology' to establish a foundation for your worship of Watchtower leaders. Anything not in line with that need is 'futile'.

: Certainly, 539 is a derived date but so are all dates derived from established data so you are merely stating the obvious.

Wrong. "Derived date" is a technical term used in contrast with "astronomically fixed date". The latter is a date fixed to a historical event by finding in a document a reference to some unique astronomical event linked with that historical event. A derived date is one found by linking historical evidence that is not astronomically determined to an astronomically fixed date. This is all BY DEFINITION.

What you want to do, scholar pretendus, is misuse these clearly defined terms to pretend to yourself that you have a point.

: The very fact that Freedman admitted that there was some controversy about 586 or 587 proves that such methodology is faulty and is unreliable.

Nonsense. The basis for the discrepancy is as so many scholars have said: the Bible is ambiguous about the date.

: It would have been preferable if scholars followed the lead of the celebrated and very wise WT scholars.

Right. And come to such nonsensical conclusions as that Jesus returned in 1874 or 1914 -- take your pick. Or that Watchtower leaders are divinely directed.

: All dates are derived

Here's that dishonest use of a technical term again.

: as they are not mentioned as such in Scripture or other secular writings and are subject to interpretation and methodology

This is gibberish.

: hence scholar's formula: CHRONOLOGY = INTERPRETATION + METHODOLOGY. The foresaid scholar is brilliant.

You've become insane. Either that or you're a troll.

AlanF

14

What are your favorite WT misquotes?

by ithinkisee in

we hear a lot on this board how the society likes to misquote scientists, encyclopedias, and so forth.

.

what are your favorite and most offensive misquotes from the society when you went to do some fact-checking?

AlanF

The Creation book claims that the famous author and paleontologist Richard Lewontin supports the notion that the "design" of living things proves the existence of a Supreme Creator. However, in the Scientific American article they quote, Lewontin says the exact opposite. Apparently the Society's author uncritically borrowed the wrong idea from one Francis Hitching, a paranormalist and the author of The Neck of the Giraffe, from which the Society's author borrowed many other wrong ideas. Hitching in turn uncritically borrowed the wrong idea from the young-earth creationist Gary Parker writing in the creationist pamphlet Impact. When Lewontin found out about Parker's misrepresentation, he lambasted Parker in print. I once confronted Parker with this, and he simply shrugged it off with something like, "I didn't misquote him." I later confronted the Creation book's author, editor-in-chief of Awake! Harry Peloyan, about this, and he also claimed there was no misquote. Lying hounds, all of them.

The Creation book claims that a "scientific journal" said that man might only have been around for a few thousand years. Turns out this was Popular Science magazine, which is hardly a scientific journal. But the magazine never said that. Rather, in an article about how good radiocarbon dating is for dating human artifacts from several tens of thousands of years ago, it quoted a young-earth creationist who was merely giving his religious views.

In the 1944 book The Kingdom Is At Hand, the Society displays a chronological chart in which the date of Jerusalem's destruction is shown as 607 B.C. There is a footnote which claims that the date was changed from 606 to 607 B.C. on a specific page in the 1943 book The Truth Shall Make You Free. But that book says nothing of the kind. So the Society is here even misquoting its own literature.

AlanF

154

Shocking Announcement: Society feels Armaggedon coming this year?

by truthseeker in

jw
friends

a rumor alert indeed, but it could be related to the distribution of kingdom news no.37, "false religions end is near.".

the following is posted from e-watchman's forum.. make of it what you will, but in light of all the rhetoric about "deliverance at hand" and "independent thinking", nothing would surprise me anymore.. http://e-jehovahs-witnesses.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1502&st=0 we posted about an announcement it was only local to our cong.

however we have found out that there is going to be an announcement sometime in september and it is supposed to be shocking.

AlanF

Within inner Watchtower circles, the 8,000 number is not taken seriously. For many years, the Governing Body and its Bethel minions, "anointed" or not, have privately viewed most of the claimed 8,000 "anointed" as nutjobs. Only a few hundred "anointed", mostly living in the New York area, are viewed as legitimate. These facts, of course, can only be relayed to the most "loyal" (read "morally compromised") of JWs, such as some elders who are trusted by the Brooklyn masters not to spill the beans. Stating the unvarnished opinions of the Jaracz-camp to the JW rank-&file would be organizational suicide -- as if these morons really need any help.

AlanF

184

Celebrated WT scholars? :)

by Augustin in

prof lester l. grabbe on rolf furuli's "oslo chronology":.

"once again we have an amateur who wants to rewrite scholarship" (jsot 28:5 [2004], p. 42).. ...celebrated wt scholars?

--augustin --

AlanF

scholar pretendus goatus buggerus lamented:

: I am an active JW

I am so sorry you feel that way! Let me prescribe some morphine to ease your pain! Perhaps another lobotomy would do some good.

: and I am in good standing in the Christian Congregation.

Right. Based on your performance on this board, they most certainly view you as grossly mentally deficient and make great allowances.

: But more to the point what is your status? Are you a disfellowshipped person from the Christian Congragation?

What does Ozziepost's status with regard to the JWs have to do with the topic of this thread?

Nothing. Your mental deficiency is evident.

: When it comes to hypocrisy, apostates exceed in bucketfuls because once they believed they had found theTrue Religion and after careful study of the Scriptures they were convinced that this was the case and then proceeded to confirm this intellectual decision by means of dedication and baptism. Now such ones because of some pitiful issues betray that intellectual and spiritual commitment and persue a course of abandonment not having found the True Religion. Such ones find themselves in spiritual darkness and spend their time opposing their former associates and allegiances. This is hypocrisy at its worst.

This is a pretty good demonstration of your complete stupidity. What you've described is what people do when they find they've been hoodwinked, and change their mind about the hoodwinkers. The wankers at Watchtower headquarters have been hoodwanking people for close to 130 years now, and a large percentage of the hoodwanked have perceived the wankers and withdrawn from them as normal people do. That's called "wising up to bullshitters". Some people refer to this as "changing your mind when you get the facts." Hypocrisy, on the other hand, consists of saying you believe one thing but doing something different. This is quite different from changing your mind, because changing your mind is a consistent mental activity, whereas hypocrisy is by definition an inconsistent mental activity. When a JW finds that the Watchtower organization is not what it claims to be, and leaves because he has perceived that he has been lied to by the Watchtower Wankers in headquarters, this is quite the opposite of hypocrisy -- it is acting in accord with reality. On the other hand, when a supposedly loyal and active JW acts completely opposite to the instructions published in JW literature, that is hypocrisy. And that perfectly describes you, Oh scholar pretendus goatus buggerus. But don't get me wrong. I encourage you to keep posting because you've done far more toward teaching lurkers why they should not be JWs than anyone else I've ever come across.

: I care nought for your compliments because it is not in the nature of apostates to compliment others

Only someone as braindead as scholar pretendus could think that Jeffro's comments were other than a scathing denunciation.

: but simply to vent their anger at loyal Christians.

Loyal Christians? LOL! Loyal borgobots is more like it.

So, oh you most horny goatus buggerus, when are you going to make your attempt to refute Josephus' proof that the Jews returned in 538 B.C.? Is Rolfie not coming through?

AlanF

8

The misapplication of the ever increasing light

by greendawn in

jw
friends

one of the favourite verses of the wts is proverbs 4:18 which they totally distort, as they often do with the bible, in a very casual and irresponsible manner.

the verse there talks about the lifestyle of the righteous which is like an ever increasing light and juxtaposes it with the way of the wicked in verse 19 which is always like darkness where they can't see where they going and may stamble on obstacles along it.

18 "but the path of the just [is] as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.

AlanF

The Proverbs 4:18 misapplication was actually invented by the Millerites in the 1840s to excuse Miller's prediction of "the end" falling through. Russell and other Adventist-based sects used it later to excuse their own false predictions.

It's amazing how self-serving delusional "prophets" misuse the Bible in the same way, and never notice how much they engage in special pleading.

AlanF

184

Celebrated WT scholars? :)

by Augustin in

prof lester l. grabbe on rolf furuli's "oslo chronology":.

"once again we have an amateur who wants to rewrite scholarship" (jsot 28:5 [2004], p. 42).. ...celebrated wt scholars?

--augustin --

AlanF

scholar pretendus goatus buggerus said:

: The fact is that Alan F and I have been in dialoque

That's like saying the U.S. was in dialogue with Saddam Hussein in 2003.

: for many years and I have never lost ground on any single issue,

Sure. Just like it's ok to bugger goats if a non-JW says "don't do it." Please find another hobby, Neil.

: in fact it was scholar that solved a scriptural dilemna that he had over the seventy years.

LOL! I've never seen a better example of a self-serving delusional moron than scholar pretendus goatus buggerus.

AlanF

37

Re: What do you do for a living?

by MARTINLEYSHON in

jw
friends

as many of you are aware being brought up in the organisation, there was a general directive from the wt that secular education was good, but not encouraged as far as university and further education was concerned.

many witnesses left school in the 70s with no formal qualifications.

my question therefore is 2 fold.. 1. what would you have liked to become as far as your career is concerned?.

AlanF

Well, by early 1978 my non-JW father-in-law convinced me to consider college, and so I embarked on a college career. I enrolled in a local community college and did well. Then I transferred to MIT and did well there, and got a Bachelors Degree in electrical engineering. After that I got a decent job and continued my education and got a Masters Degree in electrical engineering from Oregon State University. I took further courses toward a Ph.D. but various circumstances worked against it and my official academic career stalled. Today I design microchips for an international microchip company, and the stuff I design finds its way into everything from cellphones to video games to hard drives.

AlanF

184

Celebrated WT scholars? :)

by Augustin in

prof lester l. grabbe on rolf furuli's "oslo chronology":.

"once again we have an amateur who wants to rewrite scholarship" (jsot 28:5 [2004], p. 42).. ...celebrated wt scholars?

--augustin --

AlanF

I don't think so, ozziepost. I suspect that scholar pretendus will go off for a little while to lick his mental wounds, gradually forget his lesson, and come back again in full force claiming he's fully vanquished all enemies of the celebrated Watchtower chronology.

AlanF

184

Celebrated WT scholars? :)

by Augustin in

prof lester l. grabbe on rolf furuli's "oslo chronology":.

"once again we have an amateur who wants to rewrite scholarship" (jsot 28:5 [2004], p. 42).. ...celebrated wt scholars?

--augustin --

AlanF

Despite his protestions, methinks Leolaia's quotations have chastened scholar pretendus a bit.

AlanF

30

What's missing from this forum is ....

by Spectrum in

... enough jws and non ex-jws to have a two sided debate that can give more depth than the current one sided debates that are typical of almost every thread apart from creation/evolution threads.

these manage to polarise us in informative albeit heated debates.

an argument should have a counter argument so that as much ground is covered as possible on both sides of the debate.

AlanF

A fine idea in principle, but not in practice. For years, JW apologists have had their heads handed to them on most topics by knowledgeable ex-JWs. Most JWs who might be of a mind to debate already know this, and they don't want to get involved in debates. This is easily proved. There are a tiny number of online forums where a few 'scholarly' JWs will debate with selected others, but they explicitly refuse to deal with ex-JWs, calling them "apostates". Anyone who shows too much knowledge of the JW inner workings is quickly branded an "apostate" and summarily booted off the board. But only ex-JWs have both the knowledge and motivation to properly deal with the dishonest arguments generally fielded by JW apologists. So this board, being largely inhabited by ex-JWs, is not going to be regularly visited by sane JW apologists. Every once in a while, a naive JW will wander in, but they're quickly handed their heads and leave. The only dogged JW apologist who regularly posts here is one "scholar", who has proved himself the epitome of the dishonest and thoroughly braindead JW apologist. I don't think he is entirely sane.

If you want to try to convince some would-be apologist to come here and debate, good luck!

AlanF