Posts by Alleymom

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

:: Do you mean that all the foreign language translations of the NWT are translations from the English NWT into the receptor language rather than from Hebrew and Greek into the receptor language?

:That is essentially correct. The Watchtower Society decided that the English NWT was so accurate that it was virtually a replacement for the original texts, and issued an edict that all non-English versions would be translated from the English one.

<speechless!>

Ok, here's a question. Has the NWT been translated into modern Hebrew (Ivrit) and modern Greek? If so, can you tell me how the hybrid name "Jehovah" has been rendered in modern Hebrew and Greek?

Thanks,
Marjorie

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

all foreign language translations are based on the English NWT so it would logically follow that according to lother languages or dialects there would be a different prepositional meaning.

Neil --

I don't understand what you are saying. Can you clarify this for me? Do you mean that all the foreign language translations of the NWT are translations from the English NWT into the receptor language rather than from Hebrew and Greek into the receptor language?

If so, these are NOT real translations of the Hebrew and Greek scriptures.

Good grief! I am horrified.

Marjorie

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

Evilforce -

:Alley.... what I meant in my post was that the experts didn't have a date that needed to be justified....they looked at the evidence with an open mind and established 586/587.... I did not infer that they didn't care what date was arrived at. I was trying to say that they didn't have a religion to support moving into their research so therefore would be unburdened by dogma and not care if PROOF ended up saying it was one or the other.

Ok. I see what you mean, and, of course, I quite agree. The Society has a date they must protect, so they approach the Scriptures and the secular evidence with the mindset that anything which does not agree with 607 must be wrong.

M.

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

Alan --

:Marjorie, I think you're beginning to understand why some of us treat this disgusting and overwhelmingly hypocritical Pharisee of a Christian as we do.

You may have forgotten, but I've been around the mulberry bush with Scholar on several threads in the last couple of years. Do you remember the " Furuli's New Books--Attempt to Refute COJonsson" thread?

I am laboring under no illusions.

Do not make the mistake of assuming that I am naive or gullible simply because I do not belittle Neil in my responses. As I have said in the past, I do feel that I was too sharp in my approach in the Furuli thread. Some of the cheers from the crowd made me stop and think about whether this was really the way I wanted to present my information.

But I understand that you have your own voice and your own approach. And after your years of associating with other ex-JW's, you have personal knowledge of the damage this organization causes. I do appreciate that.

But it's just not me.

Kind regards,
Marjorie

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

Evilforce --

: As I have mentioned in other posts about secular experts arriving at 586/587.... to them would they really care if it was 586/587 or 607 ? Since they are secularlist they couldn't care one whit about trying to fix a date one way or the other.

Well, you want to watch how you phrase that, because, yes, actually, experts in the field would care very much if you tried to say that it doesn't matter one way or the other whether it's 586/7 or 607.

What I was saying was that in terms of whether or not I (or anyone else) accepts the WTS as the FDS, all that matters is whether the 607 date is right or wrong.

However, professional academicians in the fields of Assyriology, ANE history, archaeology, etc. do care very much about all the details. They write entire articles and books on very narrow topics within the field, often engaging in debate over a particular reading of one line in one text.

: I have not found a SINGLE, SOLITARY, quote from the catholics and/or the secularlists stating 607, and have REPEATEDLY asked Scholar to post them. I have now asked him 6 TIMES on 3 threads to POST THE EVIDENCE......Now make that 7 times.

I see that you joined the board a couple of months ago and have asked him numerous times for these references. Now, take a look at the information under Scholar's name and you will see that he has been on the board for four years. Can you imagine how many times he's been asked for this information, not only by you in the last two months, but by many others in the last four years?

The reason that he has not posted the names and references you ask for is because there is no scholarly support whatsoever for the 607 date. None.

I can assure you, after having spent many years reading scholarly articles (I have a B.A. in religion), if there is one thing scholars love to do, it is to debate and dissect other scholars' arguments. In order to make a name for yourself, you have to contribute something of substance, not just agree with everyone else.

So, if there were ANY evidence, however meager and tenuous, for the 607 date, you can be sure that there would be at least one or two eager young Ph.D's out there who would be debating it. But there is no argument about this at all in the scholarly world. Why not? Because every single real scholar is acquainted with the primary documents and knows that an absurd date like 607 is just a piece of fantasy. Think about this: would you expect to find accredited astrophysicists publishing scholarly articles in science journals debating the relative merits and demerits of the hypothesis that the moon is made of green cheese?

: Scholar, please refute her posts individually using proof (not your delusions) from secular sources and I mean USE QUOTES and REFERENCES!!! 8 times now.

Neil's approach is fideistic. He has placed his faith in the WTS. He is not concerned that the cuneiform documents do not in any way support the 607 date.

You are asking him to do the impossible: the references are not there.

Regards,
Marjorie

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

let's see who has the most convincing case for their chronology

OldSoul --

But, not being one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I have no interest whatsoever in trying to establish, proclaim, or promote a particular chronology.

If the 607 date is wrong (and it is), then Jesus did not return in 1914 and he did not examine all the religious groups on earth and choose the Bible Students to be the FDS, the sole channel for dispensing spiritual food.

If someone tells me that his religious organization is the only true Christian body on earth today, and that I am not a true Christian because I have not accepted that Jesus returned in 1914 (and I have therefore not associated myself with the WTS), all I need to show is that 607 is wrong (and I have done so on many occasions).

I don't need to show whether 586 or 587 is right, and I would not presume to tell someone else that they must accept one of those dates over the other. It is of no consequence whatsoever to the life of faith, imo.

In the three years that I have been a member of this board I have discussed the 607 date with Scholar many times.

I have an interest in archaeology and history, especially the neo-Babylonian chronology, and I have read rather extensively in that area. I have a large collection of academic journal articles, many of them dealing with the dated cuneiform tablets which establish the names and regnal lengths of the kings of the neo-Babylonian empire.

It is a simple matter to demonstrate that the 607 date is wrong. As a matter of fact, the WTS's own literature proves that the 607 date is untenable, which is why Scholar has steadfastly refused to give me a direct answer to the question of whether or not he accepts the statements in the 1/1/65 WT as completely accurate. I addressed this in the KISS thread two years ago and it has never been refuted. It can only be refuted by repudiating the WTS's own teachings as presented in the literature I referenced in message #2 of that thread.

The 607 date is wrong and Jesus did not return to earth in 1914 and later pick the Bible Students to be the FDS. I don't have to join the organization in order to have eternal life. Neil doesn't need to stay associated with an organization whose leaders, men with no academic credentials in Assyriology, archaeology, ANE history, or Semitic languages, have the hubris not only to teach the false 607 date but to insist upon its acceptance as a requirement for continuing membership in their religious organization.

Regards,
Marjorie Alley

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

Perhaps, it proves that even though I am a devotee of 607, I have a equal fascination with 587, Ah, it is time to meet with Jim Bean methinks.

Perhaps it proves that deep down you know we're right.

Are you sloshed enough to tell me why you are spending your whole life collecting these articles and books when NONE of them agree with the 607 date? Are you hoping that someday, if you just persevere long enough, you'll come across some scholarly support for 607?

Neil, that's really sad. You know that's not going to happen.

I bet you'd have fun learning Hebrew. You could forget about all this chronology stuff for awhile and just concentrate on the Scriptures.

Marjorie

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

What does Ab stand for?

A month in the Hebrew calendar. Also transliterated as "Av".

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

Boy, you are a sharp one. Even I did not notice that. I wonder if Alan noticed that too for it just goes to show that life is full of coincidences. Perhaps, it proves that even though I am a devotee of 607, I have a equal fascination with 587, Ah, it is time to meet with Jim Bean methinks.

It sounds as if you and old Jim have already had quite a meeting tonight, my friend! Are you ok?

Marjorie

763

Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?

by Little Bo Peep in

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.

Alleymom

:If you turn to page 2 under the heading 2. Chronological solutions,

BTW, heading 2, "Chronological Solutions," starts on page 562, not page 2.