Posts by jeanV

36

Rolf Furuli

by Alleymom in

the following message posted on the b-hebrew discussion list may be of interest to jwd members.. http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/2007-march/031707.html.

.

jeanV

Thanks Veradico. Furuli's book on chronology vol. II is still not available (I guess because of translation not being finished). On his website he does make an interesting comment:

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" .

There is some truth in it. What Furuli fails to mention is that Neo Babylonian chronology is well supported by historical documents and is surely not a period where a lot of discussion is still going on among scholars (except on details). Furuli basically rejects 90% of the accepted chronology from the 5th to the 7th century BCE. Honestly, on numbers alone, what are the chances that he is right?

36

Rolf Furuli

by Alleymom in

the following message posted on the b-hebrew discussion list may be of interest to jwd members.. http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/2007-march/031707.html.

.

jeanV

Marjorie, if for example you type Oded Lipschits as author you will note that all his books are actually published by Eisenbrauns.

whereami, I sometimes look at that site, too bad some of the posters do not dare to come here to confront their ideas

26

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 3-18-07 WT Study (Your Appreciation)

by blondie in

comments you will not hear at the 02-18-07 wt study (february 1, 2007, pages 22-25)(your appreciation).

review comments will be in red.

wt material from today's wt will be in black.

jeanV

Excellent work as usual Blondie.

Referring to the below statement, I wonder how many JW are aware of the teaching about those being resurrected not to marry.... something I never accepted even when I believed everything coming from Brooklyn.

Lost his wife in a traffic accident…drugs…professional help…could not answer why God allowed his wife to die?
So did Jose find out that JWs teach that God allows individuals to die to put forward a higher cause of vindicating God’s sovereignty and that the end is SOON and he will see his resurrected wife but that they will not longer be able to be a married couple?

36

Rolf Furuli

by Alleymom in

the following message posted on the b-hebrew discussion list may be of interest to jwd members.. http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/2007-march/031707.html.

.

jeanV

I never really looked at Furuli’s work with regard to lexicon and Bible translation but was interested in his arguments on chronology.

For quite a while I had some admiration for him, a man who stands up to defend WTBTS chronology, while the authors of it hide behind a good for the naïve only “we believe the Bible and not secular chronology”. At least he had the guts of examining the evidence, mention the documents by their name and try to build some counter arguments that go beyond the “we are right and therefore whatever you find that could prove us wrong, it must be wrong/fake/conspiracy”.

While still giving a chance to 607 (which I would still give if new archeological evidence would prove it) I examined some of I came across a discussion that Furuli was having with AlanF at http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/b-hebrew/2000-October/008691.html where he states:

The whole New Babylonian chronology rests on the astronomic diary VAT 4956 which is correlated with Nebuchadnezar's 37 year. This is a later copy, and remember, just one year extra that can be demonstrated in the succession of kings, the information of this table falls apart. It must be correact as to the year, if not, it is totally wrong.

OMG, my two years old daughter knows that the affirmation I marked in bold is fallacious. It is also interesting to note how is thought has evolved since then as highlighted in a letter posted by thirdwitness at

http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id=311102&startcat=501&start=101&CategoryID=2967&ThreadID=2402573

Furuli’s conclusions:
There is evidence that the dates on VAT 4956 (years 37/38 of Nebuchadnezzar) may have been added after the tablet was written. So even if all the observations were made in 568/567, the tablet does not prove that this was the 37th year of Nebuchadnezzar II.
The fact that planetary positions serving as omens are not noted give us strong reasons to believe that the lunar positions were copied from one tablet and the planetary positions from another. Because the lunar positions are similar in 588/587 and 568/567, the planetary positions that only fit 568/567 could have been copied from a tablet made in 568/567 and the lunar data from a tablet made in 588/587.

I marked in bold some typical WT expressions when one has no arguments to support a theory.

My conclusions are that Mr. Furuli sells himself as a scholar while his behaviour is not that of a truly honest scholar (he is not interested in the truth but in proving a chronology that has no legs to walk. In his study the facts do not lead to the conclusion but the conclusion leads to the facts; a totally biased approach the disqualifies him).

No wonder he prefers not to reveal that he is a JW, his credibility is then immediately put into question as he seems to never ever contradict the WTBTS (an organisation that in terms of scholarship and research has a very poor record). Really, how credible is he as a scholar (except among JW)?

I just wish he did examine the cornerstone of his chronology (BM33066 aka Strm. Kambys 400) with the same critical eye he uses for whatever is against his Oslo Chronology, as a true scholar should do.

46

How did you dispose of your JW books? (Or did you?)

by exwitless in

little drummer boy and i have a small house and we do not have room for the wasted space all of these books are creating.

here's a brief rundown of what we have:.

several nwt hardcover bibles, chinese bibles (lots of chinese students in our town), insight on the scriptures, concordances, a few bound volumes, song books, km books, reasoning books, the entire bible on audio tape, and more.

jeanV

some of the old books are worth being kept, particularly life everlasting in the freedom of the children of God, a masterpiece. Funny that is not being studied again at book studies

7

WTS misrepresented what CTR wrote

by Doug Mason in

it is bad to make a false and misleading prophecy.

it is worse to later infer that the prophecies were correct.

in 1973, at the height of the frenzied anticipation for the imminent start of the millennium in 1975, the wtbts published gods kingdom of a thousand years has approached.

jeanV

excellent point Doug. BTW do you know where scans of that article (Bible examiner) can be found?

You are right, but this kind of criticism hardly makes a dent with most JW's because they are convinced that it has to be more than just coincidence that Russell pointed to 1914 as a 'marked year' in bible prophecy and WW1 erupted in that very year - an event that numerous statesman and historians describe as a significant 'turning point' in modern history.

Agree entirely.

What is a significant turning point in history? Is WW1 more important/significant than the discovery of vaccins? Or of French Revolution or Industrial revolution? How many historians point to 1914 as a turning point in history as JW claim? Apart from those quoted by the WTS (I can't even remember if it is more than one or if it is just the typical WT sentence "historians agree... without citing any source) is anyone able to find sources that make that claim?

JW also say that war was unexpected. COJ in GTR clearly mentions historical sources that say that a war was expect.

46

Would you die for what you believe?

by avidbiblereader in

with many strong feelings or beliefs either way for christianity, atheism, jw would you be willing to die for your beliefs, or are they just feelings that never come from the heart?

if faced with death for your beliefs, would you?.

abr.

jeanV

I went into surgery refusing the option of a blood transfusion in case it was needed.
Can you imagine that MOST of us would be DEAD because of this belief alone?

some of us may have been ready to sacrifice our children for this belief

90

Would U Be Offended If A Lesbian Couple Showed Affection in A Public Place

by minimus in

jw
friends

in missouri at a ihop, a lesbian kissed another female (her gf) on the cheek, once while sitting in the restaurant.

the manager went over to the ladies and told them they were not welcomed there and therefore had to leave.

the women described the kiss on the cheek as a similar type of kiss to an "uncle".

jeanV

Would U Be Offended If A Lesbian Couple Showed Affection in A Public Place?

No.

Unfortunately I have more difficulties with gays.

46

Would you die for what you believe?

by avidbiblereader in

with many strong feelings or beliefs either way for christianity, atheism, jw would you be willing to die for your beliefs, or are they just feelings that never come from the heart?

if faced with death for your beliefs, would you?.

abr.

jeanV

deputy dog, today I honestly can say that I do not know, maybe to help others to see the truth about the truth (but that is a strong feeling due to what is going on inside me after finding out I allowed myself to be deceived for a good portion of my life), then to enjoy the time with my children, for my work. In general I am trying to figure out what I want to do with the rest of my life.

Whatever I think and believe now, may be proven wrong in the future. The only certainty I have is that there are no certainties (which is in itself a contradiction ;-) ), therefore I doubt that there is any belief that is worth giving up one's life for.

46

Would you die for what you believe?

by avidbiblereader in

with many strong feelings or beliefs either way for christianity, atheism, jw would you be willing to die for your beliefs, or are they just feelings that never come from the heart?

if faced with death for your beliefs, would you?.

abr.

jeanV

thanks nvr.

I am reading a book all JW (and not only them) should read. why we believe what we believe by Andrew Newberg. So far a fascinating mind expander.