607 B.C.E. - Is it Biblically Supported?

[TrueTomHarley]

5 hours ago, scholar JW said:

I have Grammarly installed and wondering if this is the problem. 

I don't know Grammarly, but I don't think so. It's quirky. Trial & error (and saving stuff before you post - is that what Grammarly does?) will guide you through.

You can quote by highlighting a section & waiting for the quote button to appear. Or quote by copy and paste. 

There are various workarounds. Quoting from various pages I have only managed to work after a fashion. When editing, you also find not all options are open as were for the original.

Much as I hate to say it, probably JTR knows everything about everything on this topic, though no other one.

[Ann O'Maly]

14 hours ago, scholar JW said:

Boy I am trembling all over as I face the mighty juggernaut of Alan F but I have dealt with far greater minds than the pretender, Alan F.

Those 'greater minds' haven't benefited you any as far as scholastic honesty and integrity are concerned, unfortunately, even when your face is repeatedly slammed with the scriptural and historical evidence.

14 hours ago, scholar JW said:

 It seems that we are now in embedded with personalities so perhaps I should throw Emeritus Professor Michael Hasofer and his wife Atara into the mix who were converted to Orthodox Judaism because of Jehovah's Witnesses, its a fascinating story.

Well, that was a success story, lol.

Neil's heart-warming experience of how JWs helped an educated, professional couple convert to Judaism will doubtlessly be included in a forthcoming JWdotOrg Broadcasting production. You read it here first, folks.

The rest of your post is even sillier than your first paragraph so isn't worthy of comment.

10 hours ago, Anna said:

(By the way I can't read page 208 because I can't make it bigger @Ann O'Maly. Maybe that's  because of this glitch too....)

Tap or click on the image, then tap/click again, then swipe or Ctrl + to enlarge? Your browser may need a cache clear-out and relaunching?

[scholar JW]

True Tom Harley

Thank you for your advice. I have waited for the quote button and it does appear as required but when I post below it and wish to finish the section by pressing the Enter key it sometimes becomes altered. It is rather frustrating when you are dealing with a lengthy post especially when tired. I have a computer friend who I can arrange to come over and show him the problem shortly.

scholar JW

[scholar JW]

Ann O Maly

2 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Those 'greater minds' haven't benefited you any as far as scholastic honesty and integrity are concerned, unfortunately, even when your face is repeatedly slammed with the scriptural and historical evidence

Your opinion is simply bluster lacking substance.

 

3 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Well, that was a success story, lol.

Neil's heart-warming experience of how JWs helped an educated, professional couple convert to Judaism will doubtlessly be included in a forthcoming JWdotOrg Broadcasting production. You read it here first, folks

Yes and No. Their conversion had nothing to do with me for they related to us their experience in Hobart, Tasmania but the Hasofer's had always a deep and profound respect for the Witnesses. Regrettably, it was later after their deaths that we learnt that the wife had in fact been a baptised Witness which was never revealed to us.

8 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

The rest of your post is even sillier than your first paragraph so isn't worthy of comment

That is your problem. I can only state the facts of the matter the rest is up to you.

scholar JW emeritus

[Ann O'Maly]

3 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

I can only state the facts of the matter

From the 'Neil-Speak Glossary':

        Fact: /fakt/ : noun

        plural noun: facts

• a thing that is imagined to be true but bears no resemblance to objective reality.
• post-truth, Trumpian, 'alternative facts'. 
• also commonly known as 'BS'.

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

4 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

There are various workarounds. Quoting from various pages I have only managed to work after a fashion. When editing, you also find not all options are open as were for the original.

Much as I hate to say it, probably JTR knows everything about everything on this topic, though no other one.

I don't even know what "Grammerly" is.

I am of course going to look it up ....

I find it embarrassing not to know everything.

[TrueTomHarley]

3 hours ago, scholar JW said:

I have a computer friend who I can arrange to come over and show him the problem shortly.

Sorry. He is busy helping me today

3 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Those 'greater minds' haven't benefited you any as far as scholastic honesty and integrity are concerned, unfortunately, even when your face is repeatedly slammed with the scriptural and historical evidence.

If those greater minds are as unrelentingly unpleasant, condescending and just plain nasty as this fellow was, you frankly must wonder just how great can they be. 

Definitions of 'wisdom' differ. I think he would gag on the one James supplies at 3:17, to say nothing of Proverbs 11:2. 

 

[JW Insider]

17 minutes ago, allensmith28 said:

Don't you think there is some misdirection here? I will sacrifice my number 28 by saying, between you and Anna, I have had my account BANNED. yet AlanF's remains, by is that?

I obviously don't have any say in whether people are banned or not. I got a message from a moderator on two different occasions in the last two years asking whether I thought that you had gone too far with insulting and abusive speech and should be banned. My answer was always that you should NOT be banned, because the Internet is a rough and tumble world. Banning someone rarely does any good on the Internet anyway, as there are a million and one ways to get around it: make new accounts, map an account to a different IP address, use temporary email addresses that various services create to make this easy to accomplish, etc., etc. 

Any who venture into the world of Internet discussion forums must learn quickly that public statements will result in public ridicule even when those statements are right. It's up to mature people to distinguish right from wrong, even where someone's use of language might offend us. It's not always a pleasant experience for some, but as @scholar JW has indicated, he found this particular exchange enjoyable. It's an acquired taste. Expressive language, filthy imagery, even taboo words actually have their place in dialogue. I think it was pointed out that even the Bible does this, and the NWT 2013 Revised version explains in several of its footnotes that it has cleaned up some of this filthy or insulting imagery that appears in the original Hebrew manuscripts of the Bible.

 

[Anna]

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

5 hours ago, scholar JW said:

I have a computer friend who I can arrange to come over and show him the problem shortly.

Sorry. He is busy helping me today

And then he's coming to me!

[Anna]

5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Your browser may need a cache clear-out and relaunching?

I will try that. Thanks.

[JW Insider]

29 minutes ago, allensmith28 said:

Them you must admit, there is a double standard, at least for me. Therefore, it's unfair to ALLOW such imagery and to have mine BANNED by the say of others when others won't say the same for the same filthy imagery!

I don't admit that yet. But this is a definite issue to watch out for, and it's easy for a double standard develop.

That's because the biggest reason to avoid banning people for as long as possible is that no moderator has time to look into all aspects of a conversation or "level of insult" in order to treat all sides fairly. I have others who create or share memes, for example, and I know that what is truly funny often includes that which makes us uncomfortable. Still, I have been much more offended by many of the statements and memes from others on this forum than having you tell me that I'm some kind of apostate who will be destroyed forever. (Also it's been a long time since you tried to say that in any direct way.) 

But it means that you will always carry the historical baggage of a time or two when you or one of your "doubles" appears to lose your temper. This is wrong, too, when there is no such thing as a fresh start, and you end up being told that you are walking on eggshells, so to speak.

However, I personally see a huge difference, so far, in the AlanF, scholar_JW dialogue. There was never a moment when this escalation seemed out of place or unexpected. It was not about temper. It was always about honest directness. Insult was part of the "style" right from the start, and it was accepted. In your case, I grabbed a few screenshots before they disappeared, and often purposely re-quoted some of what you had said so it wouldn't get lost, because I thought it was so over-the-top, but also out-of-place, and it lashed out at the person in abusive ways that wasted a lot of dialogue space when it was supposed to be about the topic. I think it was that combination that drew so much attention to your own style and drew many complaints from people who actually were on your side doctrinally, but didn't like the way in which you created an abusive, rabid image. Even so, you were allowed to go on for months without any repercussions, as far as I could tell. I think the moderators felt it was a matter of patience. (I get the feeling that there must be "real" moderators who also consider what is good for the site overall, and know that certain types of abusive behavior result in members leaving, and other types of colorful language and imagery are just considered part and parcel of argumentation.)

So, all in all, I don't believe you should have been banned, but even less so in this particular case do I think that AlanF should be banned. Even this particular reference to the word "excrement" refers to his opponent's argument, not the person himself. Also when the person himself is mentioned, it because of their own claims they make about themselves and of course, their method of argumentation. When a person asks to be judged on their own merit, they have to expect that judgment to be forthcoming.

[Anna]

52 minutes ago, allensmith28 said:

I will sacrifice my number 28

Lol! You Crack me up!