Posts by OldSoul

the following was forwarded to me, and i post it in its entirety, with a few edits for clarity, without comment.. ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ .

many of my friends are well aware that i'm not the slightest bit religious.

with other friends the subject has never come up - and might never have - i'm not much of a proselytizer.

OldSoul

{brain fluke} That's it OldSoul. Climb to the top of that blade of grass. You will become part of my species' life cycle soon enough. You will be in paradise. It will be wonderful.

76

Jer. 29:10 -- Dr. Ernst Jenni replies to Leolaia and Scholar

by Alleymom in

in the gentile times reconsidered, carl olof jonsson has a section on jeremiah 29:10 and the question of whether the hebrew text should be translated "seventy years for babylon" or "seventy years at babylon.".

(see pp.

211- 215 in the third and fourth editions of gtr and pp.

OldSoul

leolaia: Moreover, "Babylon" is not just a place name but a political entity, a kingdom.

A key point. Just from the standpoint of deductive reasoning, without knowing Hebrew, it makes sense that there was no intent to convey static-locative.

The exiled Jews were notified of their liberation throughout the entire Kingdom, not just the city of Babylon. The text couldn't have referred to a locale that was separate from Judea and Israel, as Judea and Israel were part of the Kingdom of Babylon/Persia throughout the exile. (2 Chronicles 36:22-23)

Guess I'm just showing my lack of intellectual integrity again.

Respectfully,
OldSoul

81

The Second Amendment

by Englishman in

jw
friends

i like guns.

i like the feel of them.

i like the fine engineering too.

OldSoul

I like the way you are reasoning, Bas. Follow that line of thought. Why do they need them? From their perspective, are we the bad guys? Of course! And the bad guys have them, right? So why shouldn't they also have them?

Similarly, if you outlaw weapons only the outlaws will have them.

76

Jer. 29:10 -- Dr. Ernst Jenni replies to Leolaia and Scholar

by Alleymom in

in the gentile times reconsidered, carl olof jonsson has a section on jeremiah 29:10 and the question of whether the hebrew text should be translated "seventy years for babylon" or "seventy years at babylon.".

(see pp.

211- 215 in the third and fourth editions of gtr and pp.

OldSoul

Satanus: He and scholar could share beers and victory stories one day

I had no idea! When did they start serving alcohol in asylum?

76

Jer. 29:10 -- Dr. Ernst Jenni replies to Leolaia and Scholar

by Alleymom in

in the gentile times reconsidered, carl olof jonsson has a section on jeremiah 29:10 and the question of whether the hebrew text should be translated "seventy years for babylon" or "seventy years at babylon.".

(see pp.

211- 215 in the third and fourth editions of gtr and pp.

OldSoul

scholar: You forget that I read everything possible

You are not the first and, I daresay, you will not be the last JW to equate reading with scholarship. What a pity.

76

Jer. 29:10 -- Dr. Ernst Jenni replies to Leolaia and Scholar

by Alleymom in

in the gentile times reconsidered, carl olof jonsson has a section on jeremiah 29:10 and the question of whether the hebrew text should be translated "seventy years for babylon" or "seventy years at babylon.".

(see pp.

211- 215 in the third and fourth editions of gtr and pp.

OldSoul

scholar: I do not trust poztates because they are wiley and lack intellectual integrity and I know that scholarship from whatever the direction is about opinion, interpretation and research, so your criticism is simply erroneous and pathetic.

Do I understand, then, that you credit the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society with "intellectual integrity" in their expressed views on all matters? That seems to be the unspoken thrust of your reply, who else would poztates be compared with.

Has this organization always had this mark? If so, please indulge me and define "intellectual integrity" so I will understand how you account for so much knowing deceit. For example: take note of their application of "nouthesia" in the lesson considered today by the majority of Witnesses earth-wide. How do you make this kind of blatantly manipulative and deceitful application fit with some notion of "intellectual integrity?"

There is absolutely no way a Greek reader of Ephesians could get the idea that Paul encouraged fathers to put the mind of God into their child. Rather, the Greek reader would have understood "nouthesia" to mean recalling God to their mind by way of admonishment. Consistently, for four consecutive paragraphs (9-12), an obvious intellectual deceit is perpetrated to convey the idea to the unscholarly Witness that the mind of God should be put into their child. Is my questioning this an example of my "wiley" "lack [of] intellectual integrity?" Or is your acceptance of it without challenge evidence of your lack of intellectual integrity?

Seriously. I'd love to know what you think intellectual integrity is. For the record.

Curiously,
OldSoul

28

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 5-15-05 WT Study (Children Pt 2)

by blondie in

(psalm 36:9) parents, how do you view receiving such a precious gift from god?.

(scriptures: 1 snippet, 1 cited).

(scriptures: 2, cited; 2 snippets).

OldSoul

Thanks again, blondie, for all your efforts.

Remember, your children are God?s gift to you; so treat them as such; answerable to God: 3 guilt-making statements in a row

It is amazing how throughly a supposedly "love-motivated" people must be guilted into doing what ~~Jehovah~~ the Governing Body directs ... on second thought, maybe that isn't "amazing" so much as it is telling.

Respectfully,
OldSoul

7

Oh no! What if they're right?

by OldSoul in

jw
friends

if i am right, i expect to live a full human life, complete with miseries and delights, and then die.

if jehovah's witnesses are right, i expect to live a full human life, complete with miseries and delights, and then die.

... on the other hand ... .

OldSoul

I think I understand what you mean, Mark. The problem with codified religion is not that they investigate spirituality but that they systematize spirituality.

I see that as a problem with Science as well. We have placed barriers up that keep us from discovering beyond certain horizons because of codified scientific beliefs. I like the approach you suggest, discover and build on the discoveries of others without ruling on the validity of the discovery of another. But, unfortunately, we keep devising conceits that limit us until another limiting conceit forces the old one into the realm of old wive's tale. I have hopes this will one day end.

Respectfully,
OldSoul