i am preparing a critique that looks at the 51 instances the wts's brochure "the origin of life" uses scientists.. without preempting what i am looking for, i will appreciate your thoughts on the following endnotes: 7, 12, 17, 21, 23.. i need you to read what the brochure's author wrote and then compare that with the source.. thanks,.
doug.
I am preparing a Critique that looks at the 51 instances the WTS's brochure "The Origin of Life" uses scientists.
Without preempting what I am looking for, I will appreciate your thoughts on the following Endnotes: 7, 12, 17, 21, 23.
I need you to read what the brochure's author wrote and then compare that with the source.
Thanks,
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.
Borg Off,
I will take a close look at key points in their letter.
I spent some time looking for the text of the Adad Guppi stele (also: Adda Guppi stele / stelae) as reported by Gadd in Anatolian Studies in 1958. I do have the original text "somewhere" but maybe you or someone can dig it up.
These are two identical tablets written about that time and it provides the chronology.
I will come back to you tomorrow (it's late Sat night and bitterly cold - snowing nearby) and I will check out key points in their letter. Always feel free to email me.
Regards,
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.
OK Scholar,
Show me:
(1) Where the Bible says the moment when the 70 years ended.
(2) How to guarantee the exiles returned in 537. (Google with 536 BCE -- then with 536 BC -- then with 538 BCE -- and then with 538 BC).
(3) Who says that 539 (or 538) is a "pivotal" date? (Google with pivotal date or with pivotal dates).
Edwin was correct -- and I have personal letters from him - that no dates can be obtained from the Bible in BCE format.
When Jeremiah declared the 70 years it was made against several nations. If they obeyed, they could remain in their land and serve out their servitude to Babylon. Jeremiah told Zedekiah there was no need for Jerusalem to fall. All that was required was to accede to the subjugation.
Thank you for your comments as these are making it clearer for others who are reading this Thread.
I say it is absolutely impossible for the Judahites to exile into Egypt a bare two months after Jerusalem's destruction, following Gedaliah's murder.
https://jwstudies.com/Did_Jews_exit_after_two_months.pdf
All the best,
Doug
the following is not a criticism of the wts.
i am providing this for technical clarification and my expectation for accuracy.. endnotes 43 and 45 on page 27 of the wts’s brochure, “the origin of life” refer to the new scientist periodical of 30 may 2009.. the text in the wts’s brochure does not match the text of the new scientist’s online article.
further investigation shows that the online text does not accurately replicate the text that appeared in print in the physical magazine.
The following is not a criticism of the WTS. I am providing this for technical clarification and my expectation for accuracy.
Endnotes 43 and 45 on page 27 of the WTS’s brochure, “The Origin of Life” refer to the New Scientist periodical of 30 May 2009.
The text in the WTS’s brochure does not match the text of the New Scientist’s online article. Further investigation shows that the online text does not accurately replicate the text that appeared in print in the physical magazine. The WTS’s brochure matches the print version of New Scientist.
In an email response dated 9 August 2019, New Scientist advised me:
------
“Thank you for your observation, which has been passed to me. As an increasing proportion of publications do, we put news and comment articles online as soon as they are ready. We then cut them to fit the space available in print. Sometimes, as in the case you highlight, this involves rewriting, often to make the text denser and perhaps crisper - and always to fit a rectangular page.”
------
So I asked Professor Beard, writer of the item in question, about the amendments to his text and the addition of artwork. In an email of 10 August 2019, Professor Beard responded:
------
“My recollection is that both the online and print versions of my original piece were edited by the staff at New Scientist. The prose in the online version is closer to what I originally wrote, but even that version was edited. I think they were trying to emphasize the PR aspects of the episode in the print version of the magazine. The cladogram shown in the online version was produced by New Scientist and not by me. It has some serious problems, notably including the omission of tarsiers and showing ‘Ida’ and other adapiforms as being nested within lorises and lemurs rather than being outside the crown clade, as they should be.”
------
Email me if you want to see the direct comparison of the online and print version of Professor Beard's opinion piece in the New Scientist.
Professor Beard referred me to a contemporary 2009 article of his that appeared in “The American Scientist, Volume 97, September-October 2009, pages 410-413. It is available online at: https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-weakest-link
I hope that online text accurately reflects the print version. I have not checked.
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 Scholar,
It's been a while since we chatted.
No chronologist says that 539 BCE is an Absolute Date. If it were an Absolute Date, why did Russell and Rutherford use 538 BCE? When and why did the WTS change?
There is NO universal agreement on the date when the first of the Exiles returned. Dates range from 538 to 535 BCE.
The Bible writers do not say that the Exile's Return marked the end of a 70-year period. 2 Chronicles 36, written 200 years later, mentions the 70 years in terms of Cyrus defeating Babylon (see verses 20 and 22). Jeremiah spoke only of several nations serving Babylon for 70 years, not just Judah, and the nations served Babylon while remaining in their own land. Jeremiah told the people they had to continue living in Babylon because their 70 years had yet to continue running its course.
Even though Jeremiah decreed 70 years of servitude to Babylon, he pleaded with the king to accept the situation, so that Jerusalem did not need to be destroyed.
We must not impose 21st century mathematical attitudes upon their ancient cultural attitudes. The number 70 had a cultural meaning.
You are one of the few people who knows that the WTS does not start their "70 years" with Jerusalem's destruction.
As I wrote, I am genuinely pleased to "see" you again.
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.
Their start date of 539 is a calculated date. It is calculated from secular tablets. It is not arrived at from Scripture.
The Absolute Date for the period is 568 BCE for Neb's 37th year, then the secular chronology is used to arrive at 539 BCE.
How can they reject the source date for Nebuchadnezzar and reject the accepted chronology yet accept the date that is calculated from those factors?
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.
Oh, G'day Scholar!
Really great to catch up!
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.
What an interesting response. Thank you for sharing.
There are so many issues so I suggest you focus on one and hang onto it like a dog with a bone.
If it were me, I would focus on their "year 537 B.C.E., the Jewish remnant had returned to populate once again Jerusalem and the land of Judah".
Previously, they had pointed to the 7th month when Returnees gathered at the temple site, some time after returning from Babylon. (7th month is about October, hence they pointed to October 1914). Note that Jerusalem was destroyed in the 5th month (about August).
Ask them how they can guarantee the returnees arrived in 537 BCE. There is no universal agreement on the year, ranging from 538 BCE to as late as 535 BCE. Keep it simple and do not let them slip around like a wriggling snake.
Doug
the leaders of the jws and the ibsa had their own unique inherent sins ingrained in their teachings and established doctrines.. c t russell taught and preached pyramidology to establish the date of jesus's return and subsequent armageddon.
this fixated date setting carried over even when he passed on and the following leaders of the wts propagated new dates such as 1925, 1975 etc.
it would appear the leaders of the wts created more relevance and importance toward themselves than even jesus and his spoken words of direction and how to be one his chosen select.. it would appear also that the leaders of the wts/jws were more involved in creating their own power and money through the organization that they created in their endeavor as proliferating literature charlatans.. the doctrinal mistakes that have come out of these men are many, from setting dates of christ's return, to mistakes on blood transfusions, memorial mistakes, encouraging and influencing children to get baptized, over use of disfellowshiping , sometimes done so to protect their wrongly devised doctrines.
The people who wrote the "Matthew" Gospel warned their people against listening to those who claimed to be "the Christ" (24:5).
This Greek word "Christ" means "the Anointed".
So, watch out for those who claim to be "the Anointed" even "self-anointed".
a brief overview of how the term "angels of god" mentioned at deuteronomy 32:8 was replaced by "sons of israel.
" textual evidence is explored in the targum and the septuagint versions of the bible.
who were the masoretes and what was their agenda?
Firstly, the text was in a constant state of flux for a long period, with scribes thinking it was their responsibility to amend the text to suit their current understanding. (The WTS "text adjusters" are rank amateurs.) There is no way known that anyone knows what was originally written, whether it be in Aramaic, ancient Hebrew, Greek or whatever. Today there are arguments over the various Hebrew Scripture texts (Symmachus, various LXX, Theodotian, etc.) When the Masoretes decided on their Hebrew text they simply set a corrupted text in concrete (Emanuel Tov). Likewise with the Greek Scriptures, disagreements run over Erasmus' Textus Receptus, Westcott-Hort, Nestle/Aland, etc., or a mixture (eclectic).
Secondly, many/most of the concepts taken up by the very early Christians came from the material produced during the Second Temple Period,not from the Hebrew Scriptures. Typical of these include "Azazel/Beliar/Mastema/Devil =>Satan", also the idea of a "war inside heaven", and so on. We are speaking of Enoch, Jubilees, etc. The Book of Daniel was a late product of this heightened eschatology/demonology, even including The Watchers.
Deuteronomy was the product of the Josianic period and was greatly influenced during the neo-Babylonian period.
Doug
