this may already have been posted, but if not i am sure that carl jonsson will forgive my linking his review of furuli's book from another site,.
http://user.tninet.se/~oof408u/fkf/english/furulirev.htm .
best regards - hs.
Scholar,
Just wondered if you had an answer to explain why Furuli's chronological chart at the end of the book doesn't go further back in time than 539BC? If he was so confident over the 607BC date then why not include that?
I'm presuming you've actually read the Furuli book.
CF.
this may already have been posted, but if not i am sure that carl jonsson will forgive my linking his review of furuli's book from another site,.
http://user.tninet.se/~oof408u/fkf/english/furulirev.htm .
best regards - hs.
There's also a good refutation of Furuli's linguistic juggling of Jeremiah 25:11. When I read Furuli I thought it was obvious that the "these nations" was the grammatical subject of the verse simply because of the context of Jeremiah 25:9 and 27:7. Furuli thinks otherwise.
I also thought it interesting that Furuli's own chronological chart at the end of the book goes no further back in time than 539 BC. This is almost an admission that any chronological reconstruction of dates before this year to arrive at 607BC is impossible.
this may already have been posted, but if not i am sure that carl jonsson will forgive my linking his review of furuli's book from another site,.
http://user.tninet.se/~oof408u/fkf/english/furulirev.htm .
best regards - hs.
Thank you very much for posting that link hillary_step.
I was recently given this book by a brother in my old congregation after I told my mother about the 587/586 problems. I read the first four chapters and have to agree with the statement from the link:
Furuli quotes this statement on page 67, but on the next page he mentions some of the mythological material and errors in Berossus' discussion of earlier Babylonian periods. The obvious purpose of this is to call into question Berossus' statements about Neo-Babylonian chronology. This is a form of ad hominem argument called "poisoning the well," in which someone presents unfavorable information (true or false) about an opponent to suggest that any claim he makes is probably false. In other words, it is an attempt to bias the audience.
I thought when I read Furuli's arguments about ignoring Berossus that he was wrong. He dismisses Berossus for writing about myths and legends when all Berossus was doing was translating older documents and tablets from Babylon. Berossus would have got his chronology of the Neo-Babylonian period from more historical documents such as the Babylonian Chronicle.
Anyway, thanks for the link.
CF.
if this has already been posted, i apologise for repeating it.
in the july wt, the writers have come up with the new theory that islam is the new king of the north.
i haven't seen the article yet, .
I agree with you justhuman, China would logically be the next choice of 'King of the North'.
It's still a communist country as was the old king of the north. It has the largest army, fastest growing economy (6th largest in the world), it's on the UN security council, and who knows what arguments will develop between the US and China as manufacturing jobs go from one to the other.
I suppose Islam could be a choice because of the present conflict. I just had a quick glance at my 'Pay Attention to Daniel's Drivel' book and it says the Soviet Communist bloc replaced Germany as 'king of the north' simply because it stood 'in strong opposition to the Anglo-American alliance'. So I suppose using that line of 'reasoning' then Islam would now be King of the North. I don't think the Watchtower will actually state this but may say something like 'time will tell' if Islam has become this King.
It would save them a lot of time and effort if they realised the real King of the North died over 2000 years ago.
according to the dubs, and other faiths, adam was created with no defects of any kind.
he was created with no sin.
then adam sinned.
Schizm,
Have you been reading "How to win friends and influence people" again?
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=1798765&partnersite=espn
racist fans taunt, spit on american on norwegian club
oslo, norway -- an american soccer player in norway was subjected to racial taunts and spit on by fans during a game.. .
This is the Premiership's best player:
The player on the right below is my favourite player for my team:
So I'm not sure what your comment means.
i'm new to the forums so i just wanted to say hi.
kind of nervous at the moment.. i'm one of the jehovah's witness kids that is looking for the whole truth.
i go to the meetings and have my own problems with the organization but i do believe in alot of it's beliefs.. since i got that out the way i wanted to see what other people think about the newer jehovah's witness teens.
One of the things that made me leave the JWs was the hypocritical double-lives that MOST of the JW youth in my district were living. It really is a religion where the youth do one thing for their parents and do what they want to the rest of the time. Well it was 10 years ago and I don't suppose it's changed much since.
Yes
a while ago it was asked what your ethnic background was and only 2 said they were some percent black.
why do you think few black people actively speak out against wt?
few african-americans can be seen protesting at assemblies.
andonly 2 said they were some percent black. Why do you think a few percenage of X-Ws even bother to post?
That doesn't make any sense to me. What are you trying to ask?
as many of you likely know, the owner of the e-watchman website constantly charges the wts with having committed spiritual fornication with the united nations organization (the so-called ngo affair).
i would like to ask you all a question in order to find out your opinion as to whether or not watchman has done a near equivalent thing that he charges the wts with having done.
most of you were probably aware that watchman once advertised the e-watchman site on this site here (jw.com).
Schizm
E-watchman is simply wrong. He appears to have similar beliefs to the WTS which is enough for me to say he is wrong. He is also unimportant, in fact so unimportant to the JW world that most of them will not have heard of him. He is also totally unknown to the rest of the outside world. His message is therefore meaningless.
I agree, he's guilty of the same kind of things that the Watchtower has done, mainly with his holier-than-thou attitude. I don't care if he writes hundreds of letters to the society. To six billion people around the world his message is unknown and meaningless.
If he's making a personal stand with these letters then I suppose it's a positive move, but it's still the same message after all, and most of us are sick of hearing it.
CF.
