AlanF

Joined

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

Posts by AlanF

• 
  13

  another 607 thread

  by BlackSwan of Memphis in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  aren't you excited?.

  i was looking through the net for some more info on ptolemy and astronomical records etc etc.

  and found this site:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  George Parrish used to post on this board and the old H2O board. His ideas on chronology are largely based on the Watchtower, and his dismissal of virtually all secular dating is just as goofy as theirs.

  AlanF
• 
  72

  The "Seventy Years" explained

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  here is a picture-based explanation of the "seventy years" prophesied by jeremiah.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/70_years_of_servitude.pdf.

  please note that there are several pages and that you should set your pdf reader to full page.. as i said before, i have a red-green color vision deficiency, but this time i have taken the plunge and used color.

  please tell me where i need to make corrections with the colors.. as always, i appreciate your suggestions for improvements, corrections and additions.. doug.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Scholar pretendus is so full of himself that it's both amusing and sad. He certainly is an empty, rattling can. This is especially evident when posters demand full, clear, scriptural explanations from him, and he refuses to quote and directly comment on any scriptures at all. All he can manage is limp responses like, "The Bible teaches blah blah blah" -- exactly the same thing that the Watchtower Society has often decried in its doctrinal opponents. This is exactly like young-earth creationists who claim, "The Bible clearly teaches that the universe was created in six literal days" but refuse to consider the many mitigating factors that old-earth creationists bring to bear.

  AlanF
• 
  30

  Bush to Have Colonoscopy at Camp David

  by JamesThomas in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  requiring a temporary head removal, i imagine.. j.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  I hope he gets his ass reamed in many other ways.

  AlanF
• 
  20

  Someone doesn't like Alan F. & Carl O.

  by whereami in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  check out these two post that were made:.

  jw1983 - rolf furuli .

  a slightly revised edition of "assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Carl Jonsson is the expert here, and if history is any guide, he'll pretty well demolish Furuli's 2nd book just as he did the 1st. Obviously, Furuli isn't approaching the subject objectively, but with the goal of reaffirming his religious beliefs. That leads to all manner of scholastic dishonesty and manipulations.

  AlanF
• 
  125

  ?Please explain Evolution to me in simple terms

  by Guest with Questions in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  and please dont give me links to read.

  i dont want a complicated version; just a very simple explanation on the theory of evolution, and if possible, in your own words.

  many of us are very ignorant on this subject and it seems that a few here are very knowledgeable so i hope you can help me and others also.. also if you believe in the theory of common descent, could you explain that to me also?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Warlock said:

  : Why don't you go fly a kite in a thunderstorm.

  You've completely proved my point. LOL!

  AlanF
• 
  125

  ?Please explain Evolution to me in simple terms

  by Guest with Questions in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  and please dont give me links to read.

  i dont want a complicated version; just a very simple explanation on the theory of evolution, and if possible, in your own words.

  many of us are very ignorant on this subject and it seems that a few here are very knowledgeable so i hope you can help me and others also.. also if you believe in the theory of common descent, could you explain that to me also?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  B_Deserter wrote:

  : I liken the creation/evolution debate to a jigsaw puzzle that no longer has a box . . . that is being put together by Science, with Creationism looking on. . .

  Excellent illustration!

  AlanF
• 
  125

  ?Please explain Evolution to me in simple terms

  by Guest with Questions in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  and please dont give me links to read.

  i dont want a complicated version; just a very simple explanation on the theory of evolution, and if possible, in your own words.

  many of us are very ignorant on this subject and it seems that a few here are very knowledgeable so i hope you can help me and others also.. also if you believe in the theory of common descent, could you explain that to me also?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  RAF wrote:

  :: What would you take as proof?

  : No questions left aside

  You'll never have proof of anything, then.

  But equally, you'll never have proof of a creator.

  : The thing is why should I stop questioning when there is still no proof - I mean why should I buy the whole thing?

  You shouldn't. However, weight of evidence is the key to at least provisional acceptance of any idea, including what are generally accepted as scientific facts. As paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould wrote:

  In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent."

  : Why do you buy the whole thing for instance?

  Weight of positive evidence. And the great deal of evidence that makes no sense in terms of a super-intelligent creator.

  : Do you think that we are a Chimp descendant?

  No. I think that mankind and chimps are descendants of a common apelike ancestor that lived 7-8 million years ago. But I'm open to revision, since new data can come along at any time.

  : Why an Ape more than a PIG?

  Body structure, behavior and genetics. Body structure is obvious. Chimps, gorillas and orangutans display some behaviors remarkably like humans, far more so than pigs. Genetically, modern apes and man have DNA that's at least 95% the same, whereas pig DNA is a good deal more different (you can find more information on this with as much effort as I can).

  : When you only have to crumble the genomes to get a human being (not sure I'm clear here but I think you get what I mean).

  I have no idea what you mean.

  : And the real question is why would anyone really want to force me (or anyone) to believe the whole thing ...

  Is anyone forcing you to believe anything? Now, in a cult like the JWs, enforcement of belief is de rigeur. But not in normal human endeavors.

  : What does it change in other people lives? Is it not enough to give an opinion and let people make their own opinion? I love to debate but really most of the time it turns into name calling which are not arguments but some kind of intimidation and influence on weak minds I don't want to get into this game but it happens that I really feel like but then it wouldn't satisfy me to win or to lose this way since most of the time there is nothing to lose or win in this anyway.

  Debate about important topics tends to generate heated discussion. My personal observation is that the majority of people who don't accept solid scientific notions like evolution is that they have few facts or good arguments to back them up, and so they quickly resort to name-calling when backed into a corner, or they run away from discussion, which frustrates those willing to debate, or they even threaten other debaters with destruction from God. Most often, it's only after those things occur that more scientifically inclined people return the favor.

  AlanF
• 
  125

  ?Please explain Evolution to me in simple terms

  by Guest with Questions in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  and please dont give me links to read.

  i dont want a complicated version; just a very simple explanation on the theory of evolution, and if possible, in your own words.

  many of us are very ignorant on this subject and it seems that a few here are very knowledgeable so i hope you can help me and others also.. also if you believe in the theory of common descent, could you explain that to me also?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  It's obvious that you can't answer my questions, Warlock.

  It's obvious why you can't answer my questions. If you did, you'd have to abandon your emotionally derived beliefs. You can't bring yourself to take the first step, much like a dyed-in-the-wool JW can rarely bring himself to take the first step of questioning his belief in JW leaders.

  AlanF
• 
  116

  The simplest explanation of 607 BCE

  by Doug Mason in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  if you are looking for the simplest picture that shows how the wts calculates that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, and if you want to understand basic problems with their method, this might be what you want.. http://au.geocities.com/doug_mason1940/wts_false_reasoning_for_607_bce.pdf.

  (make sure that your pdf reader displays the whole page.).

  doug.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Scholar pretendus wrote:

  : The date of 997 BCE is based upon the acknowledgement and interpretation of Ezekiel's '390 years' culminating in the end of the Monarchy in 607 BCE which also is attested by Jewish tradition.

  Not just attested by Jewish tradition, but entirely based on Jewish tradition -- which was exactly the point of my post.

  : By ignoring this prophecy, Christendom's scholars such as Thiele have failed to harmonize the regnal data of the Divided Monarchy producing variable dates, confusion thus abounds.

  Nonsense. Thiele's chronology of Jewish kings is almost entirely consistent with all biblical data. It's also very consistent with solidly established secular chronology. There is almost no confusion.

  On the other hand, Thiele sets forth, and solves, a number of sticky problems that Watchtower writers simply ignore. One does not eliminate confusion by ignoring problems.

  : Further, the Dead Sea Scrolls nicley confirm this exegesis produced by the 'celebrated ones'.

  References please.

  But it really doesn't matter. A careful study of the Greek Septuagint, produced in roughly 270 BCE, shows that the Jewish scholars who produced it were so thoroughly confused by the apparently conflicting chronologies of kings shown in the books of Kings and Chronicles in the Masoretic text that they actually changed many of the figures for the reigns of the kings so that it made sense to them. They ended up producing what is recognized today as a hopelessly wrong overall chronology of Jewish kings in the LXX. Since the Dead Sea Scrolls came from later Jewish commentators, it would be as foolish to rely on them for a good interpretation of the Masoretic text's chronologies as it would be to rely on the Septuagint's figures.

  AlanF
• 
  7

  Greg Stafford Update

  by thepackage in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  word is greg s. has a new book comin out, do you know anything about it?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  AlanF

  Most likely because he also defends some of the Watchtower's pet doctrines, like No Trinity, minimus.

  While Stafford was once a staunch defender of Watchtower dogma, he's evolved to the point where he really does think for himself, so where he defends some doctrine, it's largely because he feels he can justify it. WTS chronology failed, and so did blood.

  AlanF