Posts by Gamaliel

12

Is James Pellechia G-Jobbing at Bethel?

by Dogpatch in

a friend just sent me this note, do you think it's him?.

i dug this up while investigating.

how can james pellechia (board director of the watchtower) hold fast to an oath of poverty, if he is owner of this company?

Gamaliel

Randy,

Must be a doppelganger. His email for the flooring company is [email protected].

There is a Nutrition Center in Westbury, NY (a few miles away) owned by a James Pellechia according to a home page directory
http://www.search.com/click?sl,marin.10.channel.77.1.0.James+Pellechia.0,http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Egeocities%2Ecom%2Fironbulljp%2Findex%2Ehtml and if that's his picture lifting weights, then he's been popping a lot of steroids since I last saw him. (The page doesn't say Pellechia but the email is [email protected].)

Seems like Pellechia's a pretty common name, (as is James) and this business in Huntington, Suffolk County on Long Island, potentially an hour and a half drive from Bethel. At any rate, as you know, the vow of poverty is important for tax status, but a lot of brothers don't sell their companies before going to Bethel, they just have other people run the day-to-day ops.

Keep up the good work. It certainly would be a "catch" to uncover a money scheme of some sort going on at the Pellechia level or above.

Gamaliel

41

The New World Translation

by MrsQ in

jw
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?.

Gamaliel

I apologize to anyone coming here thinking this is a futher discussion of NWT. It's a continuation of the discussion with scholar on 539/587/607. The only connection to the thread is that the scholarship behind the NWT has been identified with the scholarship behind the promotion of 607. This may have a bearing on the trustworthiness of their scholarship.

scholar,

Let's both of us try to do this with an open mind and without evading the main issues. What I'm trying to get at, scholar, is simply that the JWs would be standing on slightly firmer ground if they could point out that there are scholarly reasons for accepting 539 for reasons that are stronger than those they have used to support 587/6. I'm sure you'd agree with that statement, and probably have looked for such evidence. If you've found any such evidence, this would actually help your case a little bit in the eyes of JWs and exJWs, too. You have implied that such reasons do exist when you said: "I can assure that the lines of evidence for the acceptance of 539 and 586/7 are not identical. I have no problem accepting 539 but 586/7 is plainly stupid."

You did seem to say once that a weakness of secular scholarship was implied with the choice of 587 OR 586, but I think you understand that this is merely an accommodation of the two possible choices for the destruction event based, in no small part, on trying to merge it with Bible evidence which could allow for either of two years. But I agree that this argument could be a start. So I am trying to take it to the next possible level. If there is a scholar who accepts 539 and yet sees a possible range of not just 1 year (12 months) but say 3 years, or even 5 years, it might make an impact. It doesn't get us to 607, but we could look at whether these proposed adjustments tend to get us closer to, or farther from 607.

Naturally, since you clam 30 years' of study in chronology, and sign your name "scholar" and say 586/7 is clearly stupid, we would expect some reasons, any reasons. You said: "Let me assure that I am happy and secure in the knowledge that 607 is the only date that agrees with biblical and secular evidence. It is impossible to accept the other candidates but if you can then that is your choice."

That's quite a statement, if you can't back it up with anything specific. I finished re-reading the Aid book article on Chronology last night. Tonight, I'll re-read Jonsson's GTR reference per your recommendation. So far I've only skimmed the Insight article but will read it before Friday to see what else it offers.

But if you had a specific scholarly authority in mind, please tell me. We've already established that the WTS argument is simply that: 1) 539 is the accepted starting point. 2) 607 is 68 years before 539 and 68 is close enough to work out a 70 year desolation. We've also already established that Jonsson clearly believes that 587/6 is at least as well attested to with secular chronology as 539. So I'm afraid you've lost me as to which lines of evidence for 539 to look at in these sources.

So far your references have shown me exactly what you implied they wouldn't show me: that the lines of evidence for 539 are exactly of the same type as the lines of evidence for 587/6. (Accepting certain astronomical calculations and accepting the regnal lengths of certain kings.) So far there is no type of evidence for or against 587/6 that would not be just as applicable for or against 539. There is no justification for accepting an astronomical or regnal calculation that helps one over the other.

So again I ask you: Can you give me one line of evidence for 539 that is different from a line of evidence for 587/6? If you can't then you are admitting that a "scholar's" 30 years of study in the field of chronology cannot support 607 over 587/6. Until such evidence is found and shared the Watchtower's credibility is being incredibly damaged.

Gamaliel

4

40-Year-Old Child Abuse Document Could Rattle Catholic Church

by SYN in

.

very interesting articles...what do you guys think about this?.

.

Gamaliel

It's going to take another copy or two of the same document, or some bishops to admit to knowing of the document under oath, to claim that the document was used in the way the lawyer says it was. Seems quite believable though knowing what we know about WTS dishonesty, and religious dishonesty in general.

Gamaliel

41

The New World Translation

by MrsQ in

jw
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?.

Gamaliel

scholar,

I can assure that the lines of evidence for the acceptance of 539 and 586/7 are not identical.

Then please do (assure me of this). What IS the evidence for 539? Is is astronomical? Is it based on ancient tablets? Is it based on some scholarly authority who accepts 539 but does not accept 587/6?

Give me at least one line of evidence for 539 BCE.

Gamaliel

Edited to add: SWITR.JW!

264

Furuli's New Books--Attempt to Refute COJonsson

by ros in

jw
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/.

Gamaliel

Alleymom,

A tremendous thanks for those last two posts especially. It's impossible to see how anyone can understand this and still focus on a scribal error or translation error here and there. When a body of evidence is so overwhelmingly coherent -- and even interlocking -- it provides for easy identification and correction of its own set of anomalies.

I don't know if anyone has seen Furuli's book yet, but I expect that, at the very least, an apologist who intends to be (or appear) thorough will end up clarifying the fact that there IS a body evidence to maneuver around. If he minimizes or ignores any major lines of evidence he risks fallout from academia.

Gamaliel

41

The New World Translation

by MrsQ in

jw
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?.

Gamaliel

scholar,

Once again you dodge the issue as you do not know the identity of the committee only relying on gossip, hearsay and speculation.

I don't get this. I have no issue to dodge here. I'm just saying that if you dared ask around you could find even elders among JWs who would tell you that Gangas was on the NWT Committee. If you would still call those JW elders liars, or tell them you think that Gangas was lying, that's up to you. I personally don't have any reason to care any more if Gangas or Schroeder were lying. It's not my issue -- I was just trying to give Gangas a good excuse. I agree that it is technically gossip, hearsay and speculation -- even when first-hand -- but it is also a matter of trust. Even if a member of the GB or an elder has lied to you before, and may lie to you again -- it doesn't mean they are lying all the time. That's just silly.

It is similar to your lack of evidence for 586 or was it 587. No, it is 586, no that is wrong it is 587. I will stick to the Bible and 607

I understand your embarrassment over this issue, and in truth, I actually understand what you are going through. I was there for a while myself. It's the exact same problem that caused Russell and Rutherford to say about 606 BCE, 1799, 1874, 1878 and 1881 that "we could not change them by even one year," and that these were "God's dates, not ours." (actually Rutherford was also including 1925 in that particular claim). It took the WTS over 50 years to admit those dates (just listed) were wrong. Therefore, no one expects most JWs today to see it very easily, either. It would be like "going against God" according to the above-mentioned attitude of the men who promoted them.

"[L]ack of evidence for 586 or...587" is a very dishonest expression, since you yourself cannot find 607 in the Bible. You are well aware that JWs keep it because they believe there is evidence for 539. It's the EXACT SAME LINES OF EVIDENCE you accept for 539 that also gives 587/6 (instead of 606/607). That is how I knew that you would studiously avoid those five simple questions I put to you twice in the "Furuli's attempt" thread. If you truly believed there was no evidence for 587/6 then you are admitting there is no evidence for 539, either. The ironic part of the expression, "I will stick to the Bible and 607" is that you have repeatedly ignored and/or denied the Bible evidence in the current thread about "Furuli's attempt".

I understand what you are going through, honestly.

Gamaliel

85

To Those With Ears to Hear...

by AGuest in

to that he said, "the reply is not yours to make; it is mine.

his reply was that, "have i not told them?

so, then i asked how it was that i was speaking directly to the father, and not to the son, as i usually do.

Gamaliel

This is just so amazing! I just got interrupted with a phone call from watching MIB II on HBO and after the call I just decided to turn the TV off and check what's going on online. I read this thread first and it's like I'm still watching MIB II.

Gamaliel

64

Subliminal Images in Watchtower Literature

by BornAgainGirl! in

subliminal images in watchtower stuff:.

http://watchtower.observer.org/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=subliminalimages and there are many more than this.. what i want to know is - why?

what purposes do these images serve?

Gamaliel

seven,

I'm not really that sensitive. I was pretty new to the stuff myself (teenager) and of course I thought I was better than I really was, but I honestly would've appreciated pointers by a professional at the time. In the real world I often spent more time on diagrams, graphic art, realistic styles and typography until I got a little more sure of a style. I love the 3-D stuff, but never got to do much with it. My current company bought me 3D Studio when it was $2,999. But after Max came out they didn't upgrade anymore and it's now unused on an old slow computer (and stuck to a dongle).

In addition to Photoshop and Illustrator, I still get to do some Flash, Painter and Bryce and play with some simpler 3-D tools. But it's not my primary job any more. For a few years I've managed a group of web developers. But please let me know if your website comes back up, I especially love good 3D-based images.

Gamaliel

64

Subliminal Images in Watchtower Literature

by BornAgainGirl! in

subliminal images in watchtower stuff:.

http://watchtower.observer.org/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=subliminalimages and there are many more than this.. what i want to know is - why?

what purposes do these images serve?

Gamaliel

seven006,

Thanks for a very well written piece on this subject. I've seen many of your posts and didn't realize your background. We probably know/knew several of of the same people. Many would take a bit of offense that you lumped all but two of the 1984 group as unprofessionals, however. Of course, I know you were right, but I was able to work professionally on several college textbooks immediately after Bethel, and had sold a couple paintings and painted signs professionally when I quit school (at 16).

Of course there are extremely unlikely, but still possible explanations for ghost images and unwanted overlayed pictures that can happen accidentally in the darkroom or with a freshly reused but partially damaged offset plate, but the probability is miniscule and too many other people would still have to see it before it makes it out to the trucks. If an image was truly meant to be subliminal all of Bethel would know about it, and what kind of subliminal effect would it have if everyone was looking at it?

I know these images are sacred cows for a lot of people, in fact one of the subliminals actually looks like a sacred cow, literally. Thanks for adding your voice to the fray,

Gamaliel

41

The New World Translation

by MrsQ in

jw
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?.

Gamaliel

scholar,

Well, maybe that was the original intention, but don't dig a hole for yourself unnecessarily. In Gangas' case, at least, I can't see what difference it would make allowing him to just honestly admit it because the question would naturally have come up and it could have sounded like unnecessary evasiveness for him to say "I really can't answer that."

More cynically, I'd think that after a few years working at the height of Bethel bureaucracy, I'd bet most GB members could hardly distinguish the difference between truth and deceit anymore. For example, I was once (or twice) asked to lie to other Bethelites who heard about fines that the WTS was receiving for not having all our pollution controls in place for emissions from the factory buildings. I was asked to say: "Well, all factories produce about the same amount of pollution as we do, it's just that we're under closer scrutiny." It might have been at least partially true, of course, but it becomes second nature to tell partial truths when we believe we're "defending such a great cause." I have no doubt that anyone who looks can easily see that you have done that regularly in your 607 posts, too.

Gamaliel