Vidqun

Joined

• started 26 topics
• posted 2,003 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Vidqun

• 
  32

  Cancer has been with us for a long time

  by Coded Logic in

  1. social
  2. current

  a 2 million year old hominid has been discovered that had cancer in its foot - making it the oldest neoplasia found in the human lineage.

  now, as to why cancer predates original sin by nearly 2 million years, i'd love to hear christian apologists try and explain.. http://sajs.co.za/osteogenic-tumour-australopithecus-sediba-earliest-hominin-evidence-neoplastic-disease/patrick-s-randolph-quinney-scott-williams-maryna-steyn-marc-r-meyer-jacqueline-s-smilg-steven-e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Thanks LoveUniHateExams. That's the point I am trying to make. Walking upright doesn't prove anything.
• 
  32

  Cancer has been with us for a long time

  by Coded Logic in

  1. social
  2. current

  a 2 million year old hominid has been discovered that had cancer in its foot - making it the oldest neoplasia found in the human lineage.

  now, as to why cancer predates original sin by nearly 2 million years, i'd love to hear christian apologists try and explain.. http://sajs.co.za/osteogenic-tumour-australopithecus-sediba-earliest-hominin-evidence-neoplastic-disease/patrick-s-randolph-quinney-scott-williams-maryna-steyn-marc-r-meyer-jacqueline-s-smilg-steven-e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Yes, Cofty, emphasis here on pre-human. That's why they are referred to as apes and not humans. The fact they they walked upright has nothing to do with the price of eggs. Some apes do that.
• 
  32

  Cancer has been with us for a long time

  by Coded Logic in

  1. social
  2. current

  a 2 million year old hominid has been discovered that had cancer in its foot - making it the oldest neoplasia found in the human lineage.

  now, as to why cancer predates original sin by nearly 2 million years, i'd love to hear christian apologists try and explain.. http://sajs.co.za/osteogenic-tumour-australopithecus-sediba-earliest-hominin-evidence-neoplastic-disease/patrick-s-randolph-quinney-scott-williams-maryna-steyn-marc-r-meyer-jacqueline-s-smilg-steven-e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Coded Logic, take note, according to Wiki Australopithecus sediba is classified as a primate which may have lived in savannas, eating fruit and other foods from the forest—behavior similar to modern-day savanna chimpanzees, thus non-human.
  
• 
  16

  That Most Uneven of Judicial Procedures~The Gradual Lifting of Restriction After Reinstatement

  by TMS in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  those with substantial experience as jws will likely agree that judicial matters are handled with considerable inconsistency.

  elders certainly vary in skill level, understanding, compassion or even knowledge of the talmudlike watchtower rules.

  the punishment and, it is actually punishment, for similar offenses can result in anything from private or public reproof to disfellowshipping or sometimes an elder will choose to simply offer private counsel without even bringing the matter before the body of elders.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  On the subject, I know of a sister that applied for reinstatement. The elders told her: "Don't call us, we'll call you." So they will decide whether the person has repented enough. They will decide whether the heart condition of a person has improved to such an extent that he/she can be reinstated. Methinks they have taken over Jesus' role as judge. Now that's presumptuous. What idiots!
• 
  11

  Speculation about GT

  by aintenoughwiskey in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  what were/are your speculations about the great tribulation.

  unless those days were cut short no flesh would be saved?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  I believe for God to be fair there must be a literal fulfillment of Rev. 11. When the two witness-prophets appear on the scene, they will make things clear. Their ministry will last 3 1/2 years, long enough for all to make up their minds as to which way they want to go.
• 
  47

  here i am

  by notalone in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i was a 4th gen born in.my adult children were the 5th.

  my mother was one of the newly'anointed' we have all left.

  i have been lurking since october.i was really too terrified someone would find out who i was and what would happen.well we are out now so here is a part of my story.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Notalone, welcome and thank you for sharing your story. I read it to my mother, who is on her way out if not out already. This is something I have predicted all along. How can an organization survive if molestors and predators are allowed the benefit of the doubt while the victims continue to be victimized? They are stumbling whole families. As a consequence, whole families will leave. They seem to be ignoring the following scriptures, which will be to their detriment in the end:

  Because sentence against a bad work has not been executed speedily, that is why the heart of the sons of men has become fully set in them to do bad (Eccl. 8:11).

  Then he said to his disciples, It is unavoidable that causes for stumbling should come. Nevertheless, woe to the one through whom they come!

  2 It would be of more advantage to him if a millstone were suspended from his neck and he were thrown into the sea than for him to stumble one of these little ones (Luk. 17:1, 2).
• 
  32

  God does not desire any to be destroyed?

  by stuckinarut2 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  so if the idea is promoted that god doesn't want anyone to be destroyed, why does he make it so confusing for people to learn about him?.

  why are there thousands of differing religions?.

  why has "his only true organisation" even taught so many varying doctrines?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Let’s look at another scenario. Two prophets appear on the world scene. They are able to perform miracles and cause drought. They play cat and mouse with the authorities. They kill with fire anybody that wants to harm them. Say the two of them carry on like that for three and a half years. At the end of three and a half years they are killed. After three and a half days, they are resurrected. Everybody on earth would be able to follow their activities and eventual demise on social media. Two choices would be available, one is either for them (and God) or against them. That would simplify matters, will it not? It will also prove God’s fairness, something the Witnesses will never be able to do with their skewed preaching work (cf. Rev. 11:3-12).
• 
  27

  Proof that Daniel was written 400 years after the events it describes and how much it gets wrong

  by purrpurr in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i've been studying the bible anew and have just realised that the writer of daniel gets the kings of babylon completely wrong and confused.

  he says that nebuchadnezzar was succeeded by his son belshazzar .

  then along comes good old cyrus the great who liberates the jews.. yet this is wrong!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Steve2, if one compares the different versions, especially that of the Masoretic Text (MT), Theodotion, and the Old Greek Daniel, one notices that a lot of editorial work had gone into the book. The Jewish Talmud would imply that the “Men of the Great Synagogue” had edited parts of Daniel.[1] Then there are the additions (included in the Catholic Bibles). Most scholars prefer the Daniel of the MT. So, we are reasonably sure that the compilation we have before us today is not necessarily the version of the original writer or compiler of the work. Even if the original work had been inspired by God, what is left of it? At this stage, nobody knows. Nevertheless, whatever one believes, there’s some interesting material contained in the book, worthy of study.

  [1] Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Baba Bathra folio 15a: “The men of the Great Assembly wrote Ezekiel, the Twelve Minor Prophets, Daniel, and the Scroll of Esther.” Rashi supposes that the reason why Ezekiel did not write his own book was that he lived outside Eretz Yisrael. The same goes for Daniel and Esther.
• 
  27

  Proof that Daniel was written 400 years after the events it describes and how much it gets wrong

  by purrpurr in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i've been studying the bible anew and have just realised that the writer of daniel gets the kings of babylon completely wrong and confused.

  he says that nebuchadnezzar was succeeded by his son belshazzar .

  then along comes good old cyrus the great who liberates the jews.. yet this is wrong!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Sorry, David, I have had it before. I find it difficult to express myself. I am working on it.

  According to J. J. Collins, Jewish tradition related the end of the Prophecy of the Seventy Weeks to the destruction of the temple, an interpretation that may already be implied in Josephus: “Daniel also wrote about the empire of the Romans and that Jerusalem would be taken by them and the temple laid waste.”[1]

  And according to Josephus: “Alexander came into Syria, and took Damascus, and when he had obtained Sidon, he besieged Tyre, when he sent an epistle to the Jewish high priest, to send him some auxiliaries, and to supply his army with provisions; and that what presents he formerly sent to Darius he would now send to him, and choose the friendship of the Macedonians, and that he should never repent of so doing; (318) but the high priest answered the messengers, that he had given his oath to Darius not to bear arms against him and he said that he would not transgress this while Darius was in the land of the living.” [2]

  Alexander and his army were on their way to Jerusalem to destroy the city, when the priests met him and showed him that he featured in prophecy. He was so impressed he that spared the city. Fact of the matter is (and for whatever reason), Alexander never attacked Jerusalem.

  Josephus referred to Daniel as “one of the greatest prophets,” because not only did he prophesy future things, but he also fixed the time during which these should come to pass. He was also of the opinion that the book of Daniel was in existence prior to the arrival of Alexander the Great in the fourth century BCE. He viewed the third kingdom of Dan. 2 as Greece, “from the west,” intimating that the fourth would be Rome. Elsewhere Josephus interprets the actions of Antiochus IV Epiphanes as being the fulfillment of prophecies made by Daniel in the 6th century BCE. He also tells of a tower that Daniel had built at the height of his fame, at Ecbatana or Susa (according to Jerome’s copy) that became the burial place of kings. This structure was still in existence in his day, so his detractors could go and see it.[3]

  I believe “where there is smoke, there is fire.” If none of this were true, he would have been ridiculed by his enemies and detractors. Would Josephus have mentioned the above, knowing that Daniel was only written 200 years before him? Would he not have mentioned that Daniel was a Maccabean production? Speaking of the Maccabees, in the first book of Maccabees (ca. 100 BCE), Daniel is viewed as one of “our ancestors.” They make many references to the book of Daniel (1 Macc. 2:51-60 JB). Would they have respected him if they knew he was a fraud and a liar? Just too many coincidences there, I’m afraid.

  And then, we haven't even touched on the language. The Hebrew of Daniel is written in the same style as Chronicles and Ezra. The Aramaic of Daniel can be classified as Imperial Aramaic (not Western Palestinian Aramaic as the Genesis Apocryphon found amongst the DSS).

  
  
  

  ---

  [1] John J. Collins, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, Hermeneia-series, p. 356, footnote 82. See Josephus, Antiquities, Book X, Chapter XI, § 7 [10.276].

  [2] Josephus, F., & Whiston, W. (1987). The works of Josephus: complete and unabridged. Peabody: Hendrickson [Antiquities 11.317, 318].

  [3] Josephus, Antiquities, Book X, Chapter XI, § 7 [10.267]; Book XI, Chapter VIII, § 5 [11.337]; Book X, Chapter X, § 4 [209, 210]; Book XI, Chapter VIII, § 5 [10.276]; Book X, Chapter XI, § 7 [10.264] (W. Whiston translation).
  
• 
  27

  Proof that Daniel was written 400 years after the events it describes and how much it gets wrong

  by purrpurr in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i've been studying the bible anew and have just realised that the writer of daniel gets the kings of babylon completely wrong and confused.

  he says that nebuchadnezzar was succeeded by his son belshazzar .

  then along comes good old cyrus the great who liberates the jews.. yet this is wrong!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  David, I think you misunderstood. I take exception to the fact that scholars use those scriptures "to prove" Ezekiel's Daniel was not the same as the writer of the book. Those scriptures, especially the one at Ezek. 28:2, 3, actually proves the opposite, that Daniel was indeed a contemporary of Ezekiel. Would he have compared the Prince of Tyre to a well-known person living at the time, or would he have compared the Prince of Tyre with an obscure historical figure? Would a Jewish hero from the past even be known to the Prince of Tyre? And if he didn't know who Ezekiel was referring to, he wouldn't get the point, would he?

  I'm with you, Joe134cd. I think this might be what you are referring to:

  Belshazzar vs. Nabonidus: The relationship of Belshazzar in Daniel 5:11 is stated to be that of a “son” to Nebuchadnezzar, whereas it is known that Belshazzar was actually the son of Nabonidus. Dougherty, professor of Assyriology at Yale University, dealt with this question in a thorough and satisfying manner in 1929. The Yale scholar shows that Nabonidus was in all probability married to Nitocris, the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, at least as early as 585 BCE.[1] It hardly needs to be added that a grandfather in Hebrew usage is often referred to as a “father,” as, for example, in Genesis 28:13 and 32:10. Indeed, there is no other term for “grandfather” besides this in the Old Testament.[2] [3]

  Belshazzar is referred to as “king” in Daniel 5:1–30. Cuneiform temple receipts from Sippar attest that Belshazzar presented sheep and oxen there as “an offering of the king.”[4] While it is true that no cuneiform record refers to Belshazzar by the explicit term sharru (“king”), it is clear that during the latter years of Nabonidus’s reign, while the latter made his headquarters at Teima in Arabia, Belshazzar ruled as his viceroy, with all the authority of the king. That this fact was well known to the author of Daniel is clearly implied by the fact that in Daniel 5:7, 16 the viceroy could promise to the successful interpreter of the handwriting on the wall only the honor of third ruler in the kingdom. Obviously Belshazzar himself was only the second ruler.[5]
  

  
  
  

  ---

  [1] R. P. Dougherty, Nabonidus and Belshazzar, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1929), pp. 60-68.

  [2] (1979). Bibliotheca Sacra, 136(542), p. 135.

  [3] (1979). Bibliotheca Sacra, 136(542), p. 134.

  [4] R. P. Dougherty, Nabonidus and Belshazzar, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1929), p. 88.

  [5] (1979). Bibliotheca Sacra, 136(542), pp. 134, 135.