simwitness

Joined

• started 9 topics
• posted 266 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by simwitness

• 
  108

  "SCHOLAR" and UNFINISHED BUSINESS

  by Gamaliel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scholar,.

  back on october 7, you said:i will respond to your response to the historical blunder made by franz and jonsson as alleged by me in a couple of days.. .

  (the post was http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/59355/901501/post.ashx#901501 the thread was wts chronology(oslo hypothesis) from vicar;trinity college fellow,cambridge.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  simwitness

  scholar...

  Remember, you are the one making the claim that there is a "special" connection between the two.. I am just questioning your reasoning. Nothing more. You are the one required to prove your point, as I have no point to prove.

  I have already stated that I do not have access to the work in particular.

  Earlier in this thread, Gamaliel posted what appears to be the relevant passage from the book, and it clearly showed that the gentile times would occur within the seven times... that was the extent of the connection, that one would occur during the other.

  Does that mean that we are to "associate mentally" these two times so as to make them equals? Are these two times to be considered the same? Is that the connection you want out of them? That is the connection that the WTBS infers in thier writings.

  Is this the relevant passage to which you refer? Was Brown any more, or less, inspired than the WTBS writers? Why should we put any additional weight to this writing? Furthermore, you have stated that other's made a mistake when referencing the WTBS reference to this writing, and that proved them to be "un-scholarly". Not only have your "specific reasons" been shot down, but you have proved yourself to be very "un-scholarly" in your approach.

  When questioned, you fall back on non sequitor and ad hominum attacks instead of explaining your position.

  Wether or not the two times are connected is, technically, irrelevant at this point. You are attempting to discredit individuals based on interpetations of thier writings, which is in turn interpeting others writings. You pick meaning of words so as to make them so vague, while ignoring the obviousness of the writers intent.

  Who's more correct when talking about Brown's connection of the two times? The WTBS or others? At this point, I say who cares... interpeting a dead mans interpetation of a passage in the bible seems like a collosal waste of time to me.

  In short, scholar, you are unable to deal with facts.

  Have a pleasant day.
• 
  108

  "SCHOLAR" and UNFINISHED BUSINESS

  by Gamaliel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scholar,.

  back on october 7, you said:i will respond to your response to the historical blunder made by franz and jonsson as alleged by me in a couple of days.. .

  (the post was http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/59355/901501/post.ashx#901501 the thread was wts chronology(oslo hypothesis) from vicar;trinity college fellow,cambridge.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  simwitness

  scholar,

  I have read them, and yet you still haven't made any sense... In an earlier posting, you stated that your reasons were being ignored. Since you have been answered point by point by others, I failed to see where they were ignored. I was assuming that if you would repost them, we would all be able to understand precisely the point you are making.

  I do not have access to a copy of Brown's work, but I will take at face value the postings by others that refer to it. It would appear that you are over connecting the connection. "To associate mentally" the two times is a far cry from what you have been suggesting in your ealier posts.

  If I have to read Brown's work in order to see that "Jehovah's Organization is one of truth", was he a memeber of the organization? Should I listen to the rest of his work?

  I "associate mentally" the "Watchtower Bible and Tract Society" with an "abusive cult", does that make it a fact? or even the right association?

  And, finally:

  Jehovah's Organization is one of Truth!

  That specifically precludes the WTBS as a member of that organization. It's been well documented the number of lies that are contained within the WTBS publications, new and old. They can't even be honest when it comes to their own history.
• 
  108

  "SCHOLAR" and UNFINISHED BUSINESS

  by Gamaliel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scholar,.

  back on october 7, you said:i will respond to your response to the historical blunder made by franz and jonsson as alleged by me in a couple of days.. .

  (the post was http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/59355/901501/post.ashx#901501 the thread was wts chronology(oslo hypothesis) from vicar;trinity college fellow,cambridge.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  simwitness

  scholar:

  You give me the name of the person that you or your agent spoke to in the Writing Department and I will phone that person

  What should his name matter, dont't all in the Organization believe exactly the same things? Isnt all of the writing department led by the "Holy Spirit" such that any answer given, from anyone, would always be correct?

  If you are having trouble with the word 'connect' then I suggest that you consult a good dictionary.

  No one here has had any issue with the word connect, But many of us are still wondering exactly what you mean by the word connect.

  Again I ask you to state, as concisely as possible, your "Three Reasons", and to also explain how they have not already been addressed. Remember, just becuase you dont agree with the response does not mean that your reasoning has been ignored.

  So, for the benefit of all, please restate your reasoning. Obviously, we don't "get it".
• 
  108

  "SCHOLAR" and UNFINISHED BUSINESS

  by Gamaliel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scholar,.

  back on october 7, you said:i will respond to your response to the historical blunder made by franz and jonsson as alleged by me in a couple of days.. .

  (the post was http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/59355/901501/post.ashx#901501 the thread was wts chronology(oslo hypothesis) from vicar;trinity college fellow,cambridge.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  simwitness

  Scholar:
  
  You stated:
  
  [QUOTE] When I wrote to Jonsson and Brown I gave three specific reasons that plainly demonstrated that a connection of these times is plainly evident to the reader.[/QUOTE]
  2 Requests:
  
  1. Please state those three specific reason's here.
  2. Please comment on how the earlier replies by AlanF, etc... ignore those reasons, or fail to address them.
  
  Drop the rhetoric and deal only with the "facts" at hand, as a true scholar would.
• 
  108

  "SCHOLAR" and UNFINISHED BUSINESS

  by Gamaliel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  scholar,.

  back on october 7, you said:i will respond to your response to the historical blunder made by franz and jonsson as alleged by me in a couple of days.. .

  (the post was http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/59355/901501/post.ashx#901501 the thread was wts chronology(oslo hypothesis) from vicar;trinity college fellow,cambridge.).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  simwitness

  Scholar: Please succinctly state your SPECIFIC points that you claim others are ignoring. Also, You're loaded and accusational language is not helping your case.
• 
  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. 
• 

  simwitness

  Gamaliel,

  Very nicely summed up.

  Thank you.
• 
  54

  The Holy Bible proves its inspired accuracy again...

  by Derrick in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  again and again the holy bible has proven its inspired historic accuracy.

  check this out:

  http://channels.netscape.com/ns/news/package.jsp?name=fte/biblicaltunnel/biblicaltunnel

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  simwitness

  I have been enjoying this thread, as I do all threads were alanF, littleToe and others debate freely a topic, but I would like to address my thoughts on the questions, or "facts" that Derrick posted:

  All scripture is inspired of God and beneficial to all. The Holy Bible was written by men who freely gave themselves to the task of its writing because God inspired them.

  The "Holy Bible" as we know it today was not written by men. It was compiled by men. The "Holy Bible" is a collection of independant stories/writings. The stories/writings that were used were written by men, and later determined, by men, to be inspired. It is my opinion that those "inspired men" that wrote the various books were doing it as a cause to history, or the passing of stories, and had no inclination that there writings would outlive them to gain the status of "inspired of god" writings.

  Beyond that, one has to truly qualify what "inspired" means, and what that qualification to a writing gives it. I have heard many an inspired story, by many people.

  What still amazes me about this "collection of inspired stories" is what is left out of it. We have writing attributed to actual apostles/disciples (Thomas) that was left out. Who are we to say that those writings are of less inspiration than those that were included? Why were some of Paul's letters placed as inspired and included while others were not? Were you aware that the book of Revelation was debated on as to it's inspiration? What was the goal of the Nicean council when it voted on the canon? what happened to the dissenters? Who formed the council and for what pourpose?

  Do you really think that the person that wrote the scripture "All Scriptures are inspired..." was really reffering to his OWN writings? Or even other writings that were floating about at the time?

• The global flood was not a local event. Water covered all landmasses worldwide, drowning all except Noah, his family and the life they brought aboard the seaworthy vessel. God inspired Noah and his family to build this vessel and they carried this project our as an act of faith. (Yes, I agree that Christians need faith in the things unseen until revealed as reality.) If anyone has seen the movie "Waterworld" (well worth renting IMO) the flood in the days of Noah was that catastrophic and worldwide of an event.

  The Global flood was a non-event. If the story serves any pourpose it is about putting faith in god and his abilities. But face it, if God was all that powerful, would he really have needed to drown the evil? Couldn't he have just waved his hand and "poof" the evil was gone? The story serves as a warning to those that don't listen to "God's spokesperson" (in this case Noah) that they will be punished for not listening to a hard to believe story.

And anwer this for me, please. Exactly how are we to determine who God's Spokepserson is? By their (the person's) word alone? This is exactly the reasoning that has enslaved men to the church for centuries.

At some unknown point in time God's glorious kingdom will reign supreme over the entire universe and through spacetime, and those who insist on following Satan and his demon angels will be destroyed.

Great, well that all nice to believe in. Personally, I think God would want me to worry about what I do in the here and now, and not be spending all of my time worrying about "some unknown point in the future". Isn't that the real poiint of the parables?