simwitness

simwitness

Joined

Posts by simwitness

  • Earnest
    14

    "The soul of the flesh is in the blood..."

    by Earnest in
    1. watchtower
    2. beliefs

    the reader's digest of september 2003 has an article on near-death experiences (pp.94-100).

    these involve people who have been clinically dead but have revived and reported a sense of consciousness during the period they were "dead".

    this has often been cited as evidence of life after death.

    1. kgfreeperson
    2. simwitness
    3. simwitness
  • simwitness
    simwitness

    In recent years some medical researchers have speculated

    was as far as I needed to read to realize two things:

    1. The Reader's Digest is _not_ worried about real research.
    2. That many, many people still speculate about what happens "when we die"...

    With this kind of research and "Scholarly" backing, is it any wonder that alot of Witnesses read the Reader's Digest?

  • Earnest
    14

    "The soul of the flesh is in the blood..."

    by Earnest in
    1. watchtower
    2. beliefs

    the reader's digest of september 2003 has an article on near-death experiences (pp.94-100).

    these involve people who have been clinically dead but have revived and reported a sense of consciousness during the period they were "dead".

    this has often been cited as evidence of life after death.

    1. kgfreeperson
    2. simwitness
    3. simwitness
  • simwitness
    simwitness

    In recent years some medical researchers have speculated was as far as I needed to read to realize two things: 1. The Reader's Digest is _not_ worried about real research. 2. That many, many people still speculate about what happens "when we die"... With this kind of research and "Scholarly" backing, is it any wonder that alot of Witnesses read the Reader's Digest?

  • refiners fire
    21

    What was Fullfilled in 1975?

    by refiners fire in
    1. jw
    2. friends

    as we all know, the lord jehovah causes expectation to arise regarding certain dates.

    these expectations have usually resulted in the members of the organization, erroneously, expecting the apocalypse to arrive on those dates.

    1914 was such a year.

    1. Amazing
    2. minimus
    3. cyberguy
  • simwitness
    simwitness

    Ahh, yee of little faith...

    My friends, you have forgotten that a most important prophecy was indeed fullfilled in 1975, one that even the watchtower misses in it's very importance.

    It seems that Christ himself was the propheseyer of this very prophesy, and that the watchtower bible and tract society sought to fullfill it even in it's own attempts to ignore it...

    Let see, how did that prophecy go??

    Watch out that you are not deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' and, 'The time is near.'

    And what were the instructions about these many?

    Do not follow them.

    And the world rejoiced as they realized the simplicity of this fullfilled prophecy, and the implications for all...

  • MrsQ
    41

    The New World Translation

    by MrsQ in
    1. jw
    2. friends

    can anyone give me an explanation of how the nw translation came about?

    who, exactly, were on this bible translation committee, and what were their qualifications?

    when was it first published?.

    1. AlanF
    2. libra_spirit
    3. simwitness
  • simwitness
    simwitness

    I am glad to see that scholar has chosen to continue his illfated 607 discussion here, but I want to comment on this first...

    Scholar said:

    You ask about the NWT which is without the slightestdoubt the finest translation ever made. The translation was produced by anointed brothers under the guidance of holy spirit. The translation however was not inspired by God and is not infallible but its accuracy is astonishing in pushing the boudaries of biblical scholarship.

    So, The translation was produced by "annointed brothers" under the "guidance of the Holy Spirit" but IS NOT inspired of god or infallible.

    Then I ask you scholar, what good does that claim do? Basically you have built up, and destroyed, your own argument for why it's "accuracy is astonishing"... jees... you just said it wasn't infallible! IMHO, if the "Guidance of the Holy Spirt" leave us with a fallible, and "non God inspired" translation, what good did it do? More or less, you just stated that a group of men did their best to create a "new" translation of the scriptures... Wow, I must state just how impressive that really is.

    How is that any better,. or worse, than other "translations"?

    Now, on to your most basic, and consistent argument for accepting the 607 date:

    The society under the guidance of holy spirit and holy writ has determined that 607 is the only possible choice and we can all thank Jehovah and his Son for this amazing understabding.

    Is this the same "fallible" holy spirit, and not "God Inspired" that helped with the translation? Keep in mind that the "holy writ" that you speak of was translated by "fallible men" without Godly inspriation.

    So, when the Society finally fesses up and rethinks it dates and says it really was 586/7 for jerusalam's fall. What will you do then? Will you look back on this and think "wow, all those others were right after all"?

    (Of course, if this ever happens, they will have to adjust when they were proclaimed the "Faithful and Discreet Slave", but since moving it by 20 years puts it at 1935. But since that was when heaven was "sealed" it actually fits quite nicely. (another "non god inspired" but guided by the "holy spirit" proclamation).

    One last thing, Scholar... Please post your "3 column" line of evidence thing for proof of 607. As many times as you have told others to do it, I have never seen you post yours.

  • ros
    264

    Furuli's New Books--Attempt to Refute COJonsson

    by ros in
    1. jw
    2. friends

    i just heard that the norwegian watchtower apologist, rolf furuli, who esteems himself a biblical scholar of semetic languages, has completed the first of two volumes he plans to publish on the societys chronology, assyrian, babylonian, egyptian and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible.. title of this first volume is: persian chronology and the length of the babylonian exile of the jews.. i hear that although carl olof jonsson is not mentioned by name, or reference made to his book "gentile times reconsidered," it is nevertheless apparent that these volumes are an attempt to refute jonssons excellent study which has exposed the watchtowers 1914 date as total folly.. .

    the book can be ordered now from furulis new personal website:.

    http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/.

    1. Alleymom
    2. Alleymom
    3. caballoSentado
  • simwitness
    simwitness

    Scholar...

    You are the one suggesting that the word has a different meaning here than it does elsewhere. It is up to you to provide evidence to that affect beyond supposition and your "belief". The burden of proof is upon you, not I.

    In addition, As Marjorie has already shown, the evidence has already been presented that proves the other point (which is that malkut means kingship or reign, but not vassalage, and that there is atleast one other word that Daniel could have used if he indeed meant vassalage).

    You also state:
    SDA chronology has very little in common with WT chronology but is the foundation for the Jonsson hypothesis because of its many exegitical similarities. You express concern about my lack of definition, well, there is not much room for dogmatism in biblical chronology because there is very little consensus about such matters, An example would be that there is no agreement about the seventy years and the date for the fall of Jerusalem. So, you have big problems if ypu reject the straight forward WT chronology.

    If there is "no room for dogmatism in biblical chronology", then what business is it of the Watchtower's to require it's members adhere to a chronology that is not supported anywhere but in the watchtowser's literature?

    There is agreement, among many, about the fall of Jerusalem, it just doesnt agree with what the Watchtower claims it to be.

    I'll admit that I do not know the particulars about the "SDA Chronology", but I do know the roots of the organization, and they are common with the Watchtower's.

    Marjorie,

    I agree with your statements about "Language is Language"...but then, that's the simple way, isn't it?


    I'm not a scholar, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

  • ros
    264

    Furuli's New Books--Attempt to Refute COJonsson

    by ros in
    1. jw
    2. friends

    i just heard that the norwegian watchtower apologist, rolf furuli, who esteems himself a biblical scholar of semetic languages, has completed the first of two volumes he plans to publish on the societys chronology, assyrian, babylonian, egyptian and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible.. title of this first volume is: persian chronology and the length of the babylonian exile of the jews.. i hear that although carl olof jonsson is not mentioned by name, or reference made to his book "gentile times reconsidered," it is nevertheless apparent that these volumes are an attempt to refute jonssons excellent study which has exposed the watchtowers 1914 date as total folly.. .

    the book can be ordered now from furulis new personal website:.

    http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/.

    1. Alleymom
    2. Alleymom
    3. caballoSentado
  • simwitness
    simwitness

    scholar also said:

    Of course in the NWT may well render malkut differently but I have not bothered to examine these examples because I do not believe it is important. My exegetical focus is on the uses of the term in Daniel. One must get that right before jumping all over the place and losing sight of the ball.

    Language is language... if you don't compare ALL of the examples you cannot possibly come up with a meaning for a word, or even the implications behind it. You are stating that "in this case, malkut means something that there is no other example of"... that's called special pleading... back it up with evidence that it was in fact used in that way elsewhere, or realize that it must have the same meaning as used everywhere else. Especially in light of the fact that there are other words that could have been used that do/did convey the meaning you think was intended here.

    A true scholar would realize this.

  • ros
    264

    Furuli's New Books--Attempt to Refute COJonsson

    by ros in
    1. jw
    2. friends

    i just heard that the norwegian watchtower apologist, rolf furuli, who esteems himself a biblical scholar of semetic languages, has completed the first of two volumes he plans to publish on the societys chronology, assyrian, babylonian, egyptian and persian chronology compared with the chronology of the bible.. title of this first volume is: persian chronology and the length of the babylonian exile of the jews.. i hear that although carl olof jonsson is not mentioned by name, or reference made to his book "gentile times reconsidered," it is nevertheless apparent that these volumes are an attempt to refute jonssons excellent study which has exposed the watchtowers 1914 date as total folly.. .

    the book can be ordered now from furulis new personal website:.

    http://folk.uio.no/rolffu/.

    1. Alleymom
    2. Alleymom
    3. caballoSentado
  • simwitness
    simwitness

    Scholar said:

    By the way I have no problem with SDA chronology as it was the source of my interest some thirty yeras ago and is probably the foundation of the Jonsson nonsense.

    You realize the folly of your statement, right? The SDA is an offshoot of the Millerites and other early Adventist groups Which include Charles T. Russell and the BIble Students (which of course, later became the Jehovah's Witnesses).

    So, The SDA chronology is not "probably the foundation of the Johnsson nonsense" but instead shares the same foundation as the Watchtower nonsense.

    Secondly, can you ever be definitive about a statement? Every answer you give is "probably" this and "maybe" that, and a lot of "it seems to be"... If you are such a scholar, you should atleast be able to use more definite terms.

    Apparently you need to go back to debate class and learn how to present your "facts" better. You have called to the carpet on every reference you've sited, and you have been proven wrong in each and every case.

    You've lost this round, as you have lost all others.

  • Amazing
    21

    New Illinois Sex Law - Its a Killer

    by Amazing in
    1. jw
    2. friends

    the governor of illinois just signed into law new legislation that says that anytime during sexual intercourse, if a woman (or man) says stop, then the other person must immediately stop ... or ... they can be charged with rape ... okay ... .

    so, i can see it now ... a partner is reaching orgasm and the other person says ... stop ... yeah ... okay, that's the law in illinois ... .

    oh, i understand the foundation of the law ... and i suppose it has its good purpose ... but ... .

    1. Lady Lee
    2. Mecurious?
    3. Mecurious?
  • simwitness
    simwitness

    IMHO, if the party of the second part decides they want to stop, the party of the first part will probably already be aware that there is an issue... I doubt the decision would be in the "thoes of passion".... it will have already been fairly obvious that the party of the second part is "not happy", and if the party of the first part is at all concerned with the 2nd parties feelings, they will stop.

    However, that being said, I forsee alot of he-said/she-said arguments, and a burden of proof problem.

    I thought you said "Don't Stop".
    But I said "Stop"!
    yeah, but it was preceded by "Don't"...

    Give me a break people, Yes, anyone can decide to change their mind at anytime, but we do not need more unenforcable rules for people that just want to "get even" with others to take advantage of.