Please remove the (meaningless) bullet point at the bottom of page 2.
The corrected file is online.
Doug
Doug Mason
JoinedPosts by Doug Mason
-
21
Critique of the October 1 Watchtower article"When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?"
by Doug Mason inmy critique of the october 1, 2011 watchtower article "when was ancient jerusalem destroyed?
http://www.jwstudies.com/critique_of_when_was_ancient_jerusalem_destroyed.pdf .
i am looking forward to hearing of correction or omissions.. please note that this is a large file (almost 7 meg) which takes a while to download and a while to format in a web browser.. the design of the critique allows a single major topic to be individually printed, so that those pages may be handed to an apologist for the watchtower society.
-
-
-
21
Critique of the October 1 Watchtower article"When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?"
by Doug Mason inmy critique of the october 1, 2011 watchtower article "when was ancient jerusalem destroyed?
http://www.jwstudies.com/critique_of_when_was_ancient_jerusalem_destroyed.pdf .
i am looking forward to hearing of correction or omissions.. please note that this is a large file (almost 7 meg) which takes a while to download and a while to format in a web browser.. the design of the critique allows a single major topic to be individually printed, so that those pages may be handed to an apologist for the watchtower society.
-
-
Doug Mason
I have to advise a correction:
Page 33: the correct title of Depuydt's article is "More Precious than All Gold"
Page 34, footnote 42: the correct title of Depuydt's article is "More Precious than All Gold"
I have corrected the online file.
Apologies,
Doug
-
21
Critique of the October 1 Watchtower article"When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?"
by Doug Mason inmy critique of the october 1, 2011 watchtower article "when was ancient jerusalem destroyed?
http://www.jwstudies.com/critique_of_when_was_ancient_jerusalem_destroyed.pdf .
i am looking forward to hearing of correction or omissions.. please note that this is a large file (almost 7 meg) which takes a while to download and a while to format in a web browser.. the design of the critique allows a single major topic to be individually printed, so that those pages may be handed to an apologist for the watchtower society.
-
-
Doug Mason
My Critique of the October 1, 2011 Watchtower article "When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed?" is available at
http://www.jwstudies.com/Critique_of_When_Was_Ancient_Jerusalem_Destroyed.pdf
I am looking forward to hearing of correction or omissions.
Please note that this is a large file (almost 7 Meg) which takes a while to download and a while to format in a web browser.
The design of the Critique allows a single major topic to be individually printed, so that those pages may be handed to an apologist for the Watchtower Society. In those circumstances, the Critique needs to be printed single sided.
Doug
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
Doug Mason
Copernic,
I expect I will be able to provide my fuller rebuttal of the October article tomorrow.
It appears that Amazon carries the book by Dougherty (a reprint, no doubt) for $20 plus postage.
Doug
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
Doug Mason
Copernic,
You can use whatever you wish from my site.
One day the twig will still be there but I will not be on it, so I am quite keen for others to take material and circulate anything they agree with.
Doug
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
Doug Mason
Alleymom,
I notice that on page 21 of "Achaemenid Chronology and the Babylonian Sources", Christopher Walker writes:
"We appear to be dealing with a surprisingly sophisticated eclipse theory already in the eighth or seventh century BC (Stephenson and Steele, forthcoming)".
Given your contact with Steele, are you able to elicit the relevant information from him?
Thanks,
Doug
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
Doug Mason
Alleymom,
Thank you for your permission.
Doug
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
Doug Mason
St G,
Thanks for the correction.
Doug
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
Doug Mason
This is my uninformed guess at the reason these chronology articles appeared. Just a guess, nothing more.
Mr Furuli has developed a following among many Witnesses, almost a personality cult. As the saying goes, if you tell a lie often enough and loudly enough, it becomes truth (that's how the WTS system works, anyway).
Over time, some of these fully convinced Furuli adherents have made it into areas where they were able to wield their influence on the Writers. At some stage, Furuli would have become involved.
I have a feeling that the November issue was delayed by a few days. If that is correct, this suggests difficulties over certain details. It will be interesting to be able to know the internal discussions, who the dissenters are and what they had to say. I would not be surprised if some of the questions raised in this Forum were also raised internally, such as "Why bring up the subject?"
Just wild guesses. Nothing more.
Doug
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
Doug Mason
Alleymom,
I hope you do not object, but I plan to include your excellent diagram (your post Sept 3 "A Quick Rebuttal"), suitably credited to you, in my Critique of the article in the October Watchtower.
If all goes according to plan, I will make my Critique available in a day or two. I will start a new thread when I do.
Doug