scholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
‘scholar’:
The simple fact is that all of the universal flood stories are similar or identical to the world wide not local Flood of Noah.
🤦♂️ Stories written by people who survive floods contain details about people surviving floods. Amazing. The claim that they are “identical” Is simply a lie though.
scholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
‘scholar’:
Equally, the said scholar can apply the same line of reasoning to all of your propositions including your claims about Chronology, VAT 4956, Neb's regnal years in the Chronicles etc. as you have no firm position with the exception of your atheism which only leads to scepticism. For sceptics, there is no proof for any proposition.
Yeah, direct analysis of evidence is just like words in a story attributed to someone decades after their death. 🤦♂️ You don’t need to keep demonstrating the extent of your delusion. It’s already obvious. And it sounds like you don’t understand what atheism is too.
scholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
Jorden:
For those that do not believe now, I will tell you that when WW3 breaks out and this current system collapses and as a result the UN is given authority for 42-months, many will certainly start to believe at that time.
Fallacy: appeal to fear, begging the question, non sequitur.
Even if such a war were to break out, it would not be evidence of God, or that it happened specifically because of ‘prophecies’, though it is plausible that people in positions of authority could deliberately try to influence events to ‘fulfil’ it.
scholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
Fisherman:
Jesus refers to them as real: “ Male and female he created them.” So does the rest of the Bible refers to them as historical and not allegory.
Aside from the fact that there’s no way of knowing that Jesus said anything attributed to him decades after his death, Jesus also purportedly said that Abraham was up in heaven able to deliver drops of water to people suffering in hell. But you don’t believe that’s literal, and you have no evidence that Jesus wasn’t just referencing elements of a story to make a point. (A point that demonstrates ignorance of various intersex conditions, but a point nonetheless.) And if Jesus did literally believe Adam and Eve were real people, then he was wrong.
for newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?
he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.
the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.
Fisherman:
And you can believe that if that’s what you like to choose. But scholar has shown that it is reasonable to conclude that based on solid -539 and 70 year desolation based on JW valid Bible interpretation is is not nonsense because you don’t like JW. You say it is nonsense but it makes sense and prophetic sense also.
Fallacy: Straw man attack. I have provided a great deal of information specifically indicating why the JW position is incorrect. The claim that I simply ‘don’t like JW’ is therefore an obvious lie.
scholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
‘scholar’:
If a person does not stand for something then where is the credibility?
It seems that you are using ‘stand for something’ as a placeholder for ‘maintain some kind of religious superstition’, which is, of course, ridiculous. Credibility, on the other hand, is derived from not appealing to arbitrary interpretations.
scholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
Just for fun, here’s what ChatGPT thought of Fisherman’s last bit of drivel:
There are several fallacies and poor reasoning in the provided passage:And yes, I know, AI bad, ChatGPT leftist, yadda yadda. 🙄
1. False dichotomy: The passage presents a false dichotomy between only two options - either experiencing God physically or only having a belief that He doesn't exist. There are other possibilities, such as making an inference based on evidence or lack thereof.
2. Appeal to ignorance: The passage suggests that since there is no way to disprove the existence of God, it is plausible that He exists. However, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and lack of evidence for the existence of God does not make it more likely that He exists.
3. Special pleading: The passage argues that the reality of God does not depend on proof, which is a form of special pleading - offering an exception to a general rule without justification.
4. Ad hoc reasoning: The passage uses ad hoc reasoning to explain away any evidence that contradicts its claims, such as the parting of the Red Sea or the resurrection of someone from the cemetery, by suggesting that such evidence can be rejected.
5. Circular reasoning: The passage cites the Bible to support its claims, which is an example of circular reasoning - using the conclusion to support the premise.
Overall, the passage presents several fallacies and poor reasoning, which weaken its argument and make it less persuasive.
scholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
🤦♂️
Fallacy: shifting the burden of proof.
How do you know for a fact that there aren’t invisible goblins that want your socks.
scholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
Back on Jorden’s topics, neither ‘scholar’ nor Fisherman have provided any justification whatsoever for the several ways that JW interpretations about the ‘appointed times of the nations’ and related concepts deviate from what the Bible actually says.
scholar and fisherman, i started this thread because i didn't want to highjack the one in regard to 588/568.. i just wanted to ask if you were both current active jw's that believe the jw's beliefs?.
do y'all believe the gb are the f&ds?
if the answers are no, then why do y'all defend so passionately the date 607?
‘scholar’:
In short, you are an atheist and anyone who does not believe in the Flood and Noah's Ark is a bit of a worry.
‘scholar’ seems to imagine these are negative qualities. But in reality, in the absence of evidence for assertions about deities, the default position is atheism. Not to mention the mountains of evidence that categorically show that the ‘flood’ is nothing more than a tale adapted from the Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic. Do better, ‘scholar’.
