scholar

Joined

• started 4 topics
• posted 3,119 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by scholar

• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  leolaia

  Post 15343

  'Celebtate' means to proclaim or make known publicly not to worship.

  scholar JW
• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Mary

  Post 12402

  Yes, Furuli has an agenda and so does Hunger, Jonsson and others of their ilk including yourself.

  It does not matter if there is no secular evidence that directly supports 607 BCE because it is well established biblically. However, there is sufficient secular evidence that supports 607 BCE in that all of NB chronology is a scheme that merely falls short a mere twenty years. How about that! Don't you luv it?

  How can your Bible Chronology prove that the Fall did not occur in the precise calender year of 607 BCE when it cannot prove whether the Fall occurred in 586 or 587 BCE? Your assertion is meaningless. Unless your Bible chronology can prove what precise calender year Jerusalem fell then you cannot disprove the precise calender year as 607 BCE for the Fall. You are grasping at straws.

  When it comes to the tampering matter I cannot comment either way and neither can you, Jonsson or Hunger for it is best left to a panel of scholars trained in such matters.

  Wiuth regard to the celebrated WT scholars perhaps you should read Daniel 12:3,4.

  What I report on my Field Service Report is my business and not yours for at least I engage in the ministry. Do you? How are you fulfilling Matt 28:19,20?

  scholar JW
• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  AnnOMaly

  Post 1509

  The matter of such published works beings subject to Peer Review and supported by Referrees goes a long way to preserve the integrity of scholarship as well thge necessity of appropriate Bibliography and referencing standards. Nevertheless. misinformation and misrepresentation continue to be an issue for scholars but I would add a further enemy and that is bias which is clearly manifest in the treatment of Furuli by Hunger. the clarification that I received came from Jonsson and not yourself, all that you said I knew instinctively when commparing Jonsson with Hunger.

  5.6.7 Well you are no expert either and i wonder if you have truly read Furuli and understood it! You make pretensions about expertise in all of those fields but state my lack of expertise in those areas such as anceinet astronomy, cunieform texts etc.

  With all of these people using any number and type of astro programs then confusion and different interpretations abound and you expect me to sort it out. Give me a break. When the experts get it sorted then I may take a look at it. Why did not Hunger use his astro-program rather than relying on others?

  I do not want a gold star but a pat on the head would do nicely. Furuli states on p.244 that since 1915 no critical study of VAT 4956 had been published. Such a critical study has been undertaken in connection with this book. In the footnote 270 Furuli cooments that Hunger's work in 1988 was not a critical scientific study. Hence scholar staes that Furuli's was the first scientific study of the tablet. I need that gold star now!

  You only need to compare the content of Furuli's research on the VAT 4956 with Hunger's meagre attention to the detail that Hunger wasnot able to come to grips with that material and this is the same with Jonsson. Furuli's hypothesis of tampering has still not been addressed by Hunger or Jonsson it seems that they are only concerned with the identity of the forger, the name and brand of the tool used. Perhaps it was a Makita grinder!

  9. I repeat Furuli has nothing to lose because I cannot see in any way that his hypothesis can be disproved because after all the Bible proves that there is a twenty year gap. So, Furuli is on firm ground. The only thing that will change is some fine tuning to technical details if required.

  I will check your comments on Stephensen and Willis as to whether it is a scientific study but without detailed photos it may not be in the same leaguq as Furuli.

  scholar JW
• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  just n from Bethel

  Post 135

  scholar is pleased that he entertains you. What would life be without humour and entertainment.

  scholar JW
• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  just n from Bethel

  Post 134

  Your post does indeed raise some interesting issues but the bottom line is is that we are all individuals and as scholar is a dedicated Christian enjoying the responsibilies of Christian Freedom one must decide for oneself one's conduct. One such imperative or Christian responsibility is that of defending one's faith and this is the sole reason why scholar posts on this forum. Scholar is not interested in rationalizing about such matters for he simply does what needs to be done in order to protect other innocent ones by the deceit and treachery of apostates. Perhaps the time will come when scholar will cease from posting on this forum probably out of sheer boredom or lack of time or interest. Historically, the role of Apologists has always been controversial so the 'difficulty' that you wish to make for scholar is not unexpected but please be assured that loyalty, obedience and integrity are very important to scholar but sometimes one of the major challenges that all Christians have to face is that dilemna of Doing the Right Thing, At the Right Time and in the Right Manner.

  scholar JW
• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Mary

  Post 12401

  Well Furuli made a 'hands on ' examination accompanied by a detailed translation of the tablet and detailed photography which was enough to convince him of this hypothesis. There may well have been other factors aside from the above that led him to come to that conclusion. In any event Furuli has submitted the evidence so it is for fothers to make their assessment on the worth of the tablet. Furuli, the 'celebrated WT scholars and the said 'scholar' do not need this tablet for the support or non-support of our chronology. Our wondrous Bible chronology can stand on its own and does not need the whimsical interpretations of modern scholarship.

  You say that there is no evidence of tampering: well you are not a scholar and your opinion counts for nothing. All that you are doing is simply blindly following your masters, Jonsson, Hunger and others.

  Hunger, Jonsson and Gallagher have everything to lose if Furuli is correct and only time and further research will prove the matter one way or the other. Furuli has nothing to lose because as with the rest of the JW community our faith is not dependent on the theories of men but rather on the testimony of God's Word, the Holy Bible. The evidence for 607 BCE is sufficiently based on the Bible so we have nothing at all to worry about.

  scholar JW
• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  Post 6343

  You forgot to include Hunger and Jonsson or are they immortal?

  scholar JW
• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  isaac austin

  Post 6342

  What errant nonsense. Attempts made on this forum to discredit WT Bible Chronology have been legion but everyonse single point made and used has been defeated or addressed by scholar over these past many years. The foresaid 'scholar' has met every challenge and disproved the 586/587 nonsense. Scholar has advance new areas of exegesis in regard to the Gentile Times, the seventy year texts etc. It was scholar that came up first with the 70 year formula that 70 years=DESOLATION+SERVITUDE+EXILE which demolished Jonsson's approach of Babylonian sovereignty. Scholar has drawn up lists of facts concerning the superiority of 607 BCE ove rthe other false dates.

  scholar JW
• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  wobble

  Post 3510

  Circular reasoning is a product of logic and is not without its pitfalls but in the real world of 'common sense' and rationality it is a legitimated logical device in which we all employ in our normal lives. NB chronology also uses this tool and if WT scholars are accused of it then so be it. Let me put this question to you: Do you think Jesus, the Great Teacher can be accused of using Ciruclar Reasoning as a Rhetorical Device?

  scholar JW
• 
  248

  H. Hunger Reviews R. Furuli's "Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian Chronology, Volume II"

  by AnnOMaly in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  a long-awaited review by professor h. hunger, foremost authority on babylonian astronomical cuneiform tablets, of dr. r. furuli's assyrian, babylonian, and egyptian chronology.

  volume ii of assyrian, babylonian, egyptian, and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible is now available to read for anyone who is interested.

  you can find it at http://goto.glocalnet.net/kf4/reviewhunger.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  AnnOMaly

  Post 1507/8

  1. A disadvantage that I can live with.

  3. The Reviewer would be the reader in this instance.

  4. No, I would not say that it is a Svengali influence over certain scholars but simply collusion, a working together to defeat a common enemy. Evidence of collusion was confirmed by my receiving yesterday a reply from Jonsson to a my post, a resposnse to Hunger posted yesterday by means of a third party. Jonsson himself explains the circumstances behind Furuli's review and how and why it was posted on the Internet on a site hosted by Leslie Wiklander and why it was not published in the AFO.

  5.6.7. I am firmly of the view that Hunger's review simply amounts to 'nitpicking' presented in a somewhat technical nature. However, their combined reviews of Jonsson and Hunger fail to measure up to Furuli's technical expertise. For example, their coverage of Furuli's analysis of the VAT4956 is somewhat deficient and weak in comparison to Furuli's arguments.

  In respect of the astronomical observations I see that there are three different astro programs involved. Furuli has one, Jonsson uses another and Hunger relies on a source in which I suspect have usen another. In order, to make a proper evaluation of Furuli's data then surely there must be a better way of researching and interpreting the Phases of the Moon and the Planets in order to match Neb's 37 th year with either 588 or 568 BCE!.

  Furuli was the first scholar to give scientific analysis to VAT 4956, he gives a detailed history of its provenance and the history its scholarship. For this, Furuli should have received commendation from Hunger and not criticism. Further, he gives in a few places a detailed summary of his findings on the tablet in which Hunger ignores and Jonsson trivializes.

  Hunger it seems is critical not so much of Furuli's research but his hypothesis that the tablet was subject to modern tampering but he does not address the evidence that Furuli presents as a much plausible hypothesis that cannot and should not be so easily dismissed especially when it is championed to be the 'bees knees' of NB chronology.

  9. Furuli ha snothing to lose in this debate but the likes of Hunger, Jonsson and Gallagher have much to loose if Furuli is only approximately correct. His research will move scholarship forward not hinder its progress and this can only be a good thing. Furuli's research is highly technical in nature and no doubt can benefit from criticism and fine tuning especially in areas of translation and the handling of data and if others find errors then such errors should be presented to Furuli.

  Furuli is fully aware of what has been published regarding VAT 4956 and if you dispute his claim that his was the first scientific study then you should pursue that with him. For starters, where has anyone else published extensive photographs of the tablet?

  Also, Jonsson himself does read these posts on this forum but because he is to busy to post he leaves such responses to the likes of yourself and others in which he chooses to identify.

  Awaiting your reply with much anticipation and excitement.

  scholar JW