scholar

Joined

• started 4 topics
• posted 3,054 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by scholar

• 
  90

  WTS Chronology(Oslo Hypothesis) from Vicar;Trinity College Fellow,Cambridge

  by Gamaliel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  gamaliel report, september 2003: .

  the source of the 606 and 607 bce date for nebuchadnezzar's destruction of jerusalem was originally based on misunderstanding ptolemy and some poor biblical exegesis.

  interestingly, a lot more jehovah's witnesses are now aware of second adventist origins for c.t.russell's ideas.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Alan F

  Again you have soiled yourself, I wish you would be more careful. Your assertion that I misled readers by my referencing is blatantly false and only highlights your ignorance of academic conventions. Did you bother to consult any Style Manuals before you launched your criticism? Did

  you consult the Chicago Manual of Style or the SBL Handbook of Style or any other style manual relative to the disciplines of theology and religious studies? I think not.

  My referencing the quotation from COC is in accordance with current academic convention. Please refer to section 8.67 with the heading Date of Publication: I quote the following: "There may also be one or more dates shown in addition to the date of the copyright. Since those refer to reprintings, or new impressions, not to new editions, they should not be given for the date of publication" (Turabian, Kate L, A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, 1996, 6th edn., p.134, University of Chicago Press, Chicago).

  In short, I corectly gave the date of publication as the copyrighted date of 1992, 2nd edn. which also is similarly listed on the inside title page

  I will respond to your response to the historical blunder made by Franz and Jonsson as alleged by me in a couple of days.

  Your favorite scholar

  BA MA Studies in Religion
• 
  90

  WTS Chronology(Oslo Hypothesis) from Vicar;Trinity College Fellow,Cambridge

  by Gamaliel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  gamaliel report, september 2003: .

  the source of the 606 and 607 bce date for nebuchadnezzar's destruction of jerusalem was originally based on misunderstanding ptolemy and some poor biblical exegesis.

  interestingly, a lot more jehovah's witnesses are now aware of second adventist origins for c.t.russell's ideas.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Alan F

  Your criticism of my remark regarding Jonsson's historical blunder is mistaken. You claim that my reference in COC, 1992, 2nd., p.367 is an error. This edition which is the initial printing, May 1992 has the following on page 367 in the Appendix:

  Now, for the first time, a measure of acknowledgement is made of the extent of the indebtedness to these other, earlier sources, as in the case of John A. Brown's development of the theory of the 'seven times' of Daniel chapter 4 as representing a period of 2,520 years and relating this to the 'times of the Gentiles' of Luke 21:24 --this some fifty years before Russell.

  Franz was then of the view that Brown equated the Gentile Times with the seven times which contradicted Jonsson's view of the matter. The Society, however, holds that Brown did not equate these times but these were connected, It was not until the 4th edn of COC, that Franz in a footnote on page 179 corrected himself in deference to Jonsson. I would assume then that even in his 3rd edn this earlier opinion was held by Franz and was not publicly corrected until 2002.

  Franz has made a historical blunder like Jonsson because if you read page 208 in Vol 2 of Brown's work you will see that the connection of the seven times and the Gentile Times is plainly made. Hence, Jonsson and Franz have shown themselves incompetent with the handling of modern historical sources. How then can Jonsson be trusted with any analysis of ancient primary sources?

  You refer me to pages 142 and 143 in the belief that this is the material that I should gave referred to. You are mistaken because this material simply shows that Franz acknowledged Jonsson as his source and simply discusses the seven times, its duration, begiining and termination.

  It is in the Appendix that Franz critically reviewed the Proclaimer's book where he agreed with the Society's position and it is in the self same critical review of the Proclaimer;s book, that Jonsson disagrees with the Society's position.

  scholar

  BA MA Studies in Religion
• 
  90

  WTS Chronology(Oslo Hypothesis) from Vicar;Trinity College Fellow,Cambridge

  by Gamaliel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  gamaliel report, september 2003: .

  the source of the 606 and 607 bce date for nebuchadnezzar's destruction of jerusalem was originally based on misunderstanding ptolemy and some poor biblical exegesis.

  interestingly, a lot more jehovah's witnesses are now aware of second adventist origins for c.t.russell's ideas.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Gamaliel

  It is good that you have drawn attention to the work of Eliott's work which shows that expositors at that time had a much greater appreciation for the relevance of chronology to prophecy which remains foundational to WT chronology. This is in sharp contrast to the empty Jonsson hypothesis whic his now under serious challeng by Furuli's scholarship. The Jonsson hypothesis contains an historical blunder when it claims that John Aquila Brown did not associate the Gentile Times with the seven times. The Society in its Proclaimeers book, p. 134 notes that Brown connected these times. Raymond Franz in his Crisis of Conscrience, 1992, 2nd edn.,p.367 agrees with the Society and takes the opposite view to Jonsson who first made this claim in his original treatise.

  Now Franz in his latest edition has chanfged his mind and now supports Jonsson which means that neither of these men can interpret modern history so how is it possible they can be trusted with ancient primary sources. Penton using Barbour also provides information that supports the Society's postion on this simple historical fact that Brown did connect the Gentile Times with the seven times.

  scholar

  BA MA Studies in Religion
• 
  113

  Why Aren't Jehovah's Witnesses Allowed To Freely Express Themselves?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's a simple fact.

  jw's cannot freely express themselves.

  they can't freely tell another about a doubt or a question that they might have for fear they could be exposed to the elders.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  hilary_step

  You can ask me as many questions as you like but I have no time for idiotic questions. The WT chronology is based upon men of learning and certainly well educated and has its roots in James Ussher and Sir Isaac Newton moving through to many expositors who lived in the eigtheenth and nineteenth century. So this biblical chronology is based on received Church doctrine and is not the product of higher criticism of Jonsson's ilk. The matter of academic credentials is releveant when amateurs such as Raymond Franz and Jonsson conspire to present an historical blunder and have not got the intellectual honesty to admit to at least ONE basic flaw in their writings. These men have deceived many who are ignorant and childlike in their understanding of chronology and theology. These men have set themselves as teachers and they bear a heavy responsibility when they pass their chronology as infallible doctrine. By way of contrast that when you read Furulis's work one can see the lack of bias and an openness to criticism. At least this man is a well qualified scholar of which Jonsson is not.

  scholar

  BA MA Studies in Religion
• 
  113

  Why Aren't Jehovah's Witnesses Allowed To Freely Express Themselves?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's a simple fact.

  jw's cannot freely express themselves.

  they can't freely tell another about a doubt or a question that they might have for fear they could be exposed to the elders.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  ozziepost

  My letters were sent to the Writing Department as indicated by the letterhead and the replies were forwarded to the Australian Branch who forwarded it to me. The letters AB with date was a stamp indicating that the reply was sent from and received by the Australian Branch. Many people are aware of my academic studies and interests including my local elders and I have found no difficulty whatsoever. This proves beyond doubt that we truly enjoy Christian freedom.

  You made some comment about the reception of the Jonsson hypothesis as being to difficult to understand. What utter rubbish, the brothers wanted to handle it in the appropriate manner and told Jonsson that it should be confidential but his presumptuousness mastered him.

  scholar
• 
  113

  Why Aren't Jehovah's Witnesses Allowed To Freely Express Themselves?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's a simple fact.

  jw's cannot freely express themselves.

  they can't freely tell another about a doubt or a question that they might have for fear they could be exposed to the elders.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  hilary_step

  I received a signed copy of Furuli's book this week and it represent a unbiased critique of traditional chronology which I believe exposes the many flaws in the Jonsson hypothesis. Have you read it yet? At the very least it is written by an accredited scholar which is something that Jonsson is not but simply an amateur with a personal vendetta against the Society's brilliant and evidential chronology.

  scholar
• 
  113

  Why Aren't Jehovah's Witnesses Allowed To Freely Express Themselves?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's a simple fact.

  jw's cannot freely express themselves.

  they can't freely tell another about a doubt or a question that they might have for fear they could be exposed to the elders.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  ozziepost

  You seem to be puzzled by my appearance on this board and are still worried about my degrees. I thought I adequately explained the nature of my degrees and yet you are still puzzled. The letters I have sent in the past were directed to the Writing Committee and the replies were from the committee as shown by the letterhead. In addition, the reply was stamped with the initials AB with the accompanying date.

  scholar
• 
  113

  Why Aren't Jehovah's Witnesses Allowed To Freely Express Themselves?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's a simple fact.

  jw's cannot freely express themselves.

  they can't freely tell another about a doubt or a question that they might have for fear they could be exposed to the elders.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  ozziepost

  No that is not what happened at all. Jonsson went ahead and made public his views when he was asked to keep the matter confidential until the brothers had looked at it.

  scholar
• 
  113

  Why Aren't Jehovah's Witnesses Allowed To Freely Express Themselves?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's a simple fact.

  jw's cannot freely express themselves.

  they can't freely tell another about a doubt or a question that they might have for fear they could be exposed to the elders.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  hilary_step

  You are entitled to believe that the Jonsson hypothesis supports the biblical accounts but I believe that the opposite is true and Ii have several reasons for saying this. Rolf Furuli has now published his Oslo chronology which completely destroys Jonsson's nonsense and upholds a biased and scholarly approach to traditional chronology. You must study it carefully and you will be most impressed with its objectivity and scholarship which contrasts with Jonsson;s deception.

  scholar
• 
  113

  Why Aren't Jehovah's Witnesses Allowed To Freely Express Themselves?

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it's a simple fact.

  jw's cannot freely express themselves.

  they can't freely tell another about a doubt or a question that they might have for fear they could be exposed to the elders.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  scholar

  Benny Sikter

  I cannot comment as to why your letters were not responded to by the Society unlesss thet believed you were not sincere in your enquiries. I believe that the Jehovah's Witnesses are the true religion and are used by God as his representative Church in the proclamation of the Gospel. I believe you were foolish in abandoned a faith in which you were dedicated to serve the Lord.

  scholar