Ok, thanks. Well, then I guess there`s no logical reason why it shouldn`t be the case that the Babylonian chronology could be wrong, but it would mean that each and every one of the five kings would have to reign a LOT longer than what the chronology says. Or, if Nebuchadnessar lived to be really old, and had his reign last for 63 years instead of 43, then his 18th year, when he threw out the jews, could perhaps be 607, but It is so extremely unlikely that it`s almost ridicolous. But then, hey, they believe man has only existed for 6000 years, and that the dinosaurs were put on earth only to "salt the earth", so what the heck. However, it`s very hypocritical of the WT to accept the part of the chronology that suits their claims (the date of return, because they had to return in 537 if the 607-date is supposed to be 70 years earlier), but dismiss the part they don`t like. Also, it might be logically incompatible to use a chronology to set one date, but then change it to reach another date in the chronology. But thanks for clearing up that question for me. It`s to bad it`s not possible to set a firm and clear chronology solely based on the Bible and one pivotal year (because this can`t be done JCanon, although you seem to hint at this on several occasions), because that would have put it all to rest once and for all.
Hellrider
JoinedPosts by Hellrider
-
39
Corrupting historical facts
by Hellrider inat the university of oslo, norway, there is a professor, who is also a jw.
he does not even have a degree in history, he is a professor in semittic languages, still he has now published a book (in norwegian and english, and it`s going to be translated into lots of other languages also):.
http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/chronlgy.htm.
-
-
-
39
Explaining the hateful passages of the Bible
by Rex inhere is a link to an author whose books may help you:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/0060762055/ref=ase_agoramedia-20/103-0623759-2877415
bishop shelby spong is of well repute in liberal theological circles.
-
-
Hellrider
Have a nice day!
?? Whats with the mean tone, here? I just simply stated a problem with the kind of approach Spong has, and why it is hard for me to swallow that kind of thinking, nothing more. To me it`s "accept the Bible and all of it as Gods words, or don`t", because anything else brings you into the problems I mentioned in the previous post. This dilemma is age-old, nothing new at all.
Perhaps you can tell us what your world view is? On what source of strength do you draw on when you contemplate the meaninglessness of life?
...obviously, you want to "rescue the Bible", I don`t know why. Is it because you want to believe in God? And so you decide that all the "evil" parts of the Bible can be explained away by saying that they are the words of man, that has slipped it`s way into the book otherwise written (under inspiration) by God? Well, just because you want something to be the case, that doesn`t mean that it actually is the case. And for the record: I don`t need any "source of strength" when I "contemplate the meaninglessness of life", because I don`t think it`s meaningless.
-
39
Explaining the hateful passages of the Bible
by Rex inhere is a link to an author whose books may help you:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/asin/0060762055/ref=ase_agoramedia-20/103-0623759-2877415
bishop shelby spong is of well repute in liberal theological circles.
-
-
Hellrider
Hm, here`s the description of his other book, "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism":
"From Publishers WeeklySpong (Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism), a retired Episcopal bishop and prominent spokesperson for liberal Christianity, focuses this book on "terrible texts" which have been used to justify such "sins" as overbreeding, degradation of the environment, sexism, child abuse and anti-Semitism. These biblical texts, according to Spong, are not the incontrovertible Word of God, but flawed human responses to perceived threats. An incendiary example of this is Spong's assertion that Paul was a closeted gay man whose anti-gay statements were motivated by little more than his own self-loathing. Spong does not stop there; in the course of the book he suggests that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married; that none of the supernatural events described in the Bible took place (including the resurrection); and that theism itself is a misunderstanding of God. Interestingly, readers who do not endorse Spong's radical reinterpretation of Christianity will still find much in this book they can affirm. His explanation of the roots of Christian anti-Semitism is fascinating and much less challenging to orthodoxy than many of his other claims. Unfortunately, Spong leads with his weakest section, which features a variety of poorly constructed arguments claiming, but giving inadequate evidence for, a strong causal relationship between biblical injunctions and both overpopulation and environmental problems. Nonetheless, this absorbing book has much to offer readers of all persuasions."
Well, personally I have a problem with this approach, because claiming that parts of the Bible, certain passages, are not the word of God, is to me like dismissing the whole Bible. Because, who decides which parts are his words, and which are not? Won`t that be completely arbitrary, determined by whatever is politically correct at the time? Attempts have been made (hermeneutic theology, I have a minor degree in western philosophy), but that`s just rubbish in my view.
-
63
Early Christian Worship
by the_classicist ini think ~150 a.d. is early enough for debunking any wt position: .
"and this food is called among us eukaristia [the eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as christ has enjoined.
for not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as jesus christ our saviour, having been made flesh by the word of god, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of his word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that jesus who was made flesh.
-
-
Hellrider
I desire the bread of God, the heavenly bread, the bread of life, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who became afterwards of the seed of David and Abraham; and I desire the drink of God, namely His blood,
...not trying to be blasphemous here, but this reminds me of cannibalism...drinking someones blood and eating their flesh, even though it`s symbolic, it`s really weird.
-
39
Corrupting historical facts
by Hellrider inat the university of oslo, norway, there is a professor, who is also a jw.
he does not even have a degree in history, he is a professor in semittic languages, still he has now published a book (in norwegian and english, and it`s going to be translated into lots of other languages also):.
http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/chronlgy.htm.
-
-
Hellrider
Ok, it really wasn`t my intentions to make this into another 607/587-thread (there are plenty of thos allready), I just wanted to make sure everyone knoew Furuli was a JW. But now that we`re allready discussing this, there is only one more thing I`m unsure of, about the 607/587-thing, and some of you, like City Fan or Honesty should be able to clear this up (it`s just a small thing): I understand that the Babylonian chronology says that:
Nabonidus reigned for 17 years (539 is a pivotal point, I assume, the one JWs and secular historians agree upon, right?)
Labashi-Marduk reigned for 9 months
Neriglissar reigned for 4 years
Evil-Merodach reigned for 2 years
Nebuchadnezzar reigned for 43 years
What I`m wondering about, is: To what extent does the Bible confirm the lengths of these kings reigns? Some of their reigns (the short ones in the middle) are mentioned, but in the case of Nebuchadnezzar, I only found a reference to his 23rd year (in Jeremiah) (I am also confused when reading the bible, because there are so many other characters/kings/statesmen being mentioned, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah etc). Now, if the BIBLE itself gives the entire chronology of the lenght of the 5 kings reignal years, then the WT-doctrine is screwed once and for all. Because, trying to "add a couple of years" to each kings reign, would mean claiming that the Bible lies, and the WT cannot possibly go that far.
-
39
Corrupting historical facts
by Hellrider inat the university of oslo, norway, there is a professor, who is also a jw.
he does not even have a degree in history, he is a professor in semittic languages, still he has now published a book (in norwegian and english, and it`s going to be translated into lots of other languages also):.
http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/chronlgy.htm.
-
-
Hellrider
Hellrider
You are talking rubbish and it is apparent that you too have a biased agenda against WT chronology.
The question is: WHY would a linguist, a person with no professional experience or education as a historian, engage in such a complex and wast issue as Babylonian chronology and history? And WHY this specific subject? And why is his whole research done with a goal in sight? (the 607-date) And why is he the only scholar (not a historian, though) in the entire world that insists on the 607-date? Ahh, then it becomes clear: He is a JEHOVAHS WITNESS! ...and by all academic standards and ideals, his "research" should be dismissed allready then. No person with a personal agenda or interest in reaching a certain conclusion, should be allowed to study the subject in question (this goes for all subjects. You wouldn`t put a neo-nazi in charge of doing revisionist work on the Holocaust, would you??!! - I think we all would know what his conclusions would be..)
-
30
Who Will Conquer the World in the 1970's? - Public Talk
by Bonnie_Clyde injuly 1970 km page 3 (under announcements) - "a new circuit assembly program is scheduled to begin in september.
we believe you will find it most informative and upbuilding.
the public talk will be "who will conquer the world in the 1970's?".
-
-
Hellrider
Kiss, Black Sabbath, disco music, Abba, pants that were amasingly wide down by the ankles, the north-vietnamese, the WTb&ts, the (oh no, forget that last one)...
-
39
Corrupting historical facts
by Hellrider inat the university of oslo, norway, there is a professor, who is also a jw.
he does not even have a degree in history, he is a professor in semittic languages, still he has now published a book (in norwegian and english, and it`s going to be translated into lots of other languages also):.
http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/chronlgy.htm.
-
-
Hellrider
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you confusing Jonsson with Jim Penton? Dr. Penton taught history for many years at the University of Toronto. Jonsson, however, was not a professional academic
...you`re right (), I did (I have edited that post now, to cover up my mistake...not unlike our friends at the WTb&ts).... My apologies for that. However, Furuli is not a historian either, I`m right about that part, he`s a scholar in semittic languages.
BTW, Hellrider, are you by any chance from the town of Hell?)
LoL, no, but you`re right, there is a small town (very small) in Norway called Hell, yes, I grew up about an hour by car from it.
-
39
Corrupting historical facts
by Hellrider inat the university of oslo, norway, there is a professor, who is also a jw.
he does not even have a degree in history, he is a professor in semittic languages, still he has now published a book (in norwegian and english, and it`s going to be translated into lots of other languages also):.
http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/chronlgy.htm.
-
-
Hellrider
Hellrider... have you read Furuli's work? I haven't read his books, but judging from his 'net postings, I don't think there's a danger of anyone with any scholarly knowledge taking it for a serious work.
No, I think actually reading it would be a waste of time. Anyway, Furuli probably knows he is wrong, in the (I don`t know, I think it`s the preface that has been posted on the ad for the book), he writes:
A word of caution
Ancient history cannot be proven, because there are no living informants. And any attempt to make a chronological scheme of the kings of ancient nations is tentative. The Oslo chronology does not claim to represent the final word of the matter, but it represents a new approach to chronology. It does not generally challenge the interpretations and datings of astronomical tablets by experts such as Sachs, Hunger, Watson, Steel, and Brack-Bernsen, but it asks about the origin and quality of the tablets in question, thus scrutinizing the connection between the dates and regnal years of real kings. Its advantage is that the cuneiform data are not seen through the glasses of the traditional chronology, but the evidence of each tablet is presented in its own right. It is also an advantage that published cuneiform sources are much more numerous and much more complete than was the case 50 years ago when Parker and Dubberstein did their work. The real importance of the Oslo chronology, therefore, is not that it has established "the only true chronology", but that it has demonstrated that neither the accepted chronology which is based on P&D is "the only true chronology" .
...so he even admits, in a way, that he could be wrong. And when a JW actually does that, you just know he`s full of shit.
-
39
Corrupting historical facts
by Hellrider inat the university of oslo, norway, there is a professor, who is also a jw.
he does not even have a degree in history, he is a professor in semittic languages, still he has now published a book (in norwegian and english, and it`s going to be translated into lots of other languages also):.
http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/chronlgy.htm.
-
-
Hellrider
No what you resent is that a Jehovah's Witness is able to engage in pure research and challenge current orthodoxy because Furuli has the necessary academic qualifications
He does NOT have the necessary academic qualifications. He has a degree, and teaches in semittic languages! He is NOT a historian! The only reasons for him to even engage in historical research, is his agenda in trying to create doubts about the (by the entire rest of the world) accepted historical knowledge on Babylonian chronology! And WHY would he want to do this? What OTHER motive could a professor in semittic languages, which also just happens to be a Jehovahs Witness have, than to make his religion more plausible? And doing THAT, is corrupting his profession, and undermining the integrity of the academic institutions (I`m an academic myself btw, and am therefore personally outraged by this).Jonsson's theories on chronology are absurd and simp;y are the work of an amateur who clearly reveals his biased agenda against the superior Watchtower chronology.
You can NOT say that Furuli is unbiased. If any of these two has an agenda, it is Furuli, because HE is the one trying to challenge decades of historical research and knowledge, only to make his own (insane) biblical beliefs more plausible. Of course, I don`t expect you to understand this. In my opinion, mr. Furuli should be kicked out of UIO on his ass, for making a mockery of the institution.