These celebrating WTS heads do not have a clue about the subject -- they rely on RF for their material on the neo-Babylonian chronology.
Doug
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
These celebrating WTS heads do not have a clue about the subject -- they rely on RF for their material on the neo-Babylonian chronology.
Doug
alex - thank you for your offer to have a conversation about evolution.. i accept the scientific evidence that all life - including humans - evolved from a common ancestor through unguided evolution over millions of years.
this isn't even a controversial position in the scientific community.. the evidence rests on the data from many interconnected fields including paleontology, comparative anatomy, geology and especially genetics.
it is no exaggeration to say that the evidence for your own non-human ancestry is contained in every cell in your body.. it is my experience that jws are generally quite ignorant (not in a pejorative sense) of the scientific case.
Alex,
Your reference to Shapiro is lifted from page 5 of "The Origin of Life: Five Questions Worth Asking:, Endnotes 3, 4, and 5 -- Scientific American, June 2007. ("A Simpler Origin for Life")
Shapiro's article is available at: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-simpler-origin-for-life/
The article’s heading explains the brochure’s selective quotes:
“The sudden appearance of a large-self-copying molecule such as RNA was exceedingly improbable. Energy-driven networks of small molecules afford better odds as the initiators of life.” (underlining mine)Excerpts from that article:
DNA, RNA, proteins and other elaborate large molecules must then be set aside as participants in the origin of life. … Fortunately, an alternative group of theories that can employ these materials has existed for decades. The theories employ a thermodynamic rather than a genetic definition of life …
One assumption of the small-molecule approach is that coupled reactions and primitive catalysts sufficient to get life started exist in nature. ... The small molecule approach to the origin of life makes several demands upon nature (a compartment, an external energy supply, a driver reaction coupled to that supply, and the existence of a chemical network that contains that reaction). These requirements are general in nature, however, and are immensely more probable than the elaborate multi-step pathways needed to form a molecule that can function as a replicator. …
If the general small-molecule paradigm were confirmed, then our expectations of the place of life in the universe would change. … The small-molecule alternative is in harmony with the views of biologist Stuart Kauffman: “If this is all true, life is vastly more probable than we have supposed. Not only are we at home in the universe, but we are far more likely to share it with unknown companions.”
alex - thank you for your offer to have a conversation about evolution.. i accept the scientific evidence that all life - including humans - evolved from a common ancestor through unguided evolution over millions of years.
this isn't even a controversial position in the scientific community.. the evidence rests on the data from many interconnected fields including paleontology, comparative anatomy, geology and especially genetics.
it is no exaggeration to say that the evidence for your own non-human ancestry is contained in every cell in your body.. it is my experience that jws are generally quite ignorant (not in a pejorative sense) of the scientific case.
The WTS does not want to distinguish between the "origin" of life and the "evolution" of living entities:
"Some evolutionary scientists would like to make a distinction between the theory of evolution and the question of the origin of life. But does that sound reasonable to you?" ("The Origin of Life: Five Questions Worth Asking", Page 12)
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Scholar,
I do not need to provide a date for the Exiles' return. It's the issue for the WTS as it matters to them, but it is not significant for me.
I have analysed the WTS's explanations -- see pages 6ff of my investigation, including diagrams, at:
https://jwstudies.com/The_Jews_return_home_ver_3.pdf ]
Doug
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Scholar,
So you are unable to prove 537. Most interesting.
Doug
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Hi Finkelstein,
Rutherford turned the organisation upside down during the 1920s, almost causing it to totally collapse. This included dropping the "Palestine Hope" and the Pyramidology. You will know about 1925. He invented the term "Jehovah's witnesses" in the early 1930s applying it only to the Elect.
Doug
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
I have been asked by Scholar to vouch for him.
We have enjoyed several friendly Skype sessions and I have found him to be firmly convince in his ideas. He is well read and as he has indicated, has undertaken formal studies in related subjects.
We have agreements on some things while disagreeing on others.
He appears to be firmly fixed and convinced with his position but I have no understanding of his background to know the reasons for his stubbornness. I accept that Scholar believes he operates with integrity and that he is honest to himself.
I find his contributions useful, inasmuch as they enable others to see the weakness of the WTS's typical arguments.
The real person who needs to be the focus of interest has the initials RF (and these are not Scholar's initials).
Doug
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
CTR taught that the Parousia had taken place in 1874. He said there would be a 40 year Time of Trouble, which would end in 1914 with the Kingdom of God on earth under the Zionist Jews. That's why he called his magazine "Zion's Watch Tower" and "the Herald of Christ's presence" (meaning 1874). At one stage, Russell expected his church to be glorified to heaven in 1910, in preparation or the incoming Zionist rule.
Rutherford hung onto the 1874 Parousia until about 1930.
They used dates such as 538 BCE for Babylon's Fall, changing it to 539 only after Rutherford's death, with Parker and Dubberstein providing the detailed dates for the period in question, including the 539 BCE date. Since P&D is correct for 539, their other dates, which might be out by only one day, the WTS is very selective in what it accepted.
Doug
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
Scholar,
537?
How can that date be proven?
Doug
a month ago i sent a letter to the us branch about 607. my purpose for sending it was because i wanted to show to my parents through the letters the truth behind the date system.
two days ago, i received a response from them.
i think this is gonna be the first of many.
The Mother of Nabonidus: On two stelae found in Harran, one in 1906 and one as recently as 1956, we have what appears, stylistically, as a tomb inscription of the mother of Nabonidus. …
I am Adad-guppi', the mother of Nabonidus, king of Babylon, a devotee of Sin, Ningal, Nusku and Sadarnunna, my gods, with whom (lit.: with whose godhead) I always, even since my childhood, took refuge, I who-(even) in the 16th year of Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, when Sin, the king of all gods, became angry with his city (i.e., Harran) and his temple, and went up to heaven and the city and the people in it became desolate. …
From the 20th year of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria, when I was born, until the 42nd year of Ashurbanipal, the 3rd year of his son Ashur-etil-ili, the 21st year of Nabopolassar, the 43rd year of Nebuchadnezzar, the 2nd year of Awel-Merodach, the 4th year of Neriglissar, during (all) these 95 years in which I visited the temple of the great godhead of Sin, the king of all the gods in heaven and in the nether world, he looked with favor upon my pious good works and listened to my prayers, accepted my vows. …
I have obeyed with all my heart and have done my duty (as a subject) during the 21 years in which Nabopolassar, the king of Babylon, the 43 years in which Nebuchadnezzar, the son of Nabopolassar, and the four years in which Neriglissar, the king of Babylon, exercised their kingship, (altogether) 68 years ; I have made Nabonidus, the son whom I bore, serve Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabopolassar, and Neriglissar, king of Babylon, and he performed his duty for them day and night by doing always what was their pleasure . He also made me a good name before them and they gave me an elevated position as if I were their real daughter. …
(Postscript :) She died a natural death in the 9th year of Nabonidus, king of Babylon . Nabonidus, king of Babylon, the son whom she bore.
Ancient Near Eastern
Texts Relating to the Old Testament (Third Edition), pages 560, 561, James B. Pritchard (editor), Princeton
University Press (1969)