Furuli's new e-book: "My Beloved Religion - And The Governing Body"

[Srecko Sostar]

7 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Some of his comments and analyses of scripture echo what 'apostates' have banged on about for decades. I'm particularly thinking of his conclusion here:

"The “faithful and discreet slave” refers to any Christian who is
faithful and on the watch when Jesus comes as the judge in the
great tribulation. It does not refer to a class that gives spiritual
food during Christ’s presence." - p. 72.

 

It is interesting that some biblical passages are so “soft” that they can be shaped and reshaped so successfully. The existence of a large number of Christian interpretations and ideologies / religions proves this. 

[The Librarian]

I wonder if he just copied Fred Franz' viewpoint?

See also

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

20 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Usually you have to read a book before you comment on what it proves

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolf_Furuli?fbclid=IwAR1hVDMbNLhaYsVijFkSQinHVUTf8N9iSM0LgwjSXiz-jIwqTM2ZDfq-nno

I think his Wiki page showing his previous works gives enough evidence of his use of higher education and the first red.it link gives a clue as to content of this book. But Tom only quote half and then avoids the true point of it all as usual. 

 @Ann O'Maly 

"The “faithful and discreet slave” refers to any Christian who is
faithful and on the watch when Jesus comes as the judge in the
great tribulation. It does not refer to a class that gives spiritual
food during Christ’s presence." - p. 72.

I think I'd go with what God's word says on this one....  Matthew 24 v 45 

“Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?

I love your choice of words here.  Quote "  what 'apostates' have banged on about for decades. "

I think the truth is, that it is nice to have different viewpoints. 

[scholar JW]

Hi Ann

How are you and I hope you are well. I received from Rolf a free copy of his latest book yesterday morning and I replied to him forthwith with some of my own observations over the last few decades. Like Rolf I share his scholarly endorsement of 607 BCE and the doctrine of the Gentile Times based on Daniel 4 and the Lukan text- Luke 21:24 his now public position certainly adds some validity to the authenticity of the 607 BCE Chronology despite the criticism of current scholarship.

Since our many online discussions of 607 BCE in relation to the chronology and nature of the 'seventy years' of Jeremiah a recent published article adds some weight to our current and traditional interpretation of the 70 years as opposed to view of our many critics. The article is titled 'The Reception of Jeremiah's Prediction of a Seventy-Year Exile' by Steven M Ruse in the Journal Of Biblical Literature, 2018 Vol.137,No.1, pp.107-126. This article is the most recent published article on this subject and has much emphasis on the exilic aspect of the seventy years as opposed to the view of a solely Babylonish servitude or domination of Judah. Enjoy!!!!

scholar JW emeritus

[TrueTomHarley]

22 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

I received from Rolf a free copy of his latest book yesterday morning

Grumble grumble grumble

[JW Insider]

7 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Did anyone expect this bombshell? I certainly didn't! 😆

This has taken me totally by surprise. A friend informs me that he also brings up the issue of higher education and disfellowshiping offenses.

If some kind of break were to happen at all, I expected it from a conscience issue, concerning his chronology.

[scholar JW]

JW Insider

Chronology has nothing to do with Furuli's latest bombshell for his views on WT Biblical  Chronology are firm and well established as is mine thus his current stance in some sense creates a distance, a freedom from any alleged bias working as a truly independent scholar working in the pursuit of Truth.

scholar JW emeritus

[JW Insider]

33 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

Chronology has nothing to do with Furuli's latest bombshell

Yes. I am aware. I'm just surprised, especially after reading and studying and discussing his last two books. I am aware of your stated position about them.

33 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

for his views on WT Biblical  Chronology are firm and well established as is mine

I doubt that his views on chronology are firm. He gives plenty of evidence that he does not really believe they are firm. They are definitely not "established" in the least, except as weak theories he could never honestly defend. About all he ever established is that he was "clever" but incapable of dealing with the necessary issues related to chronology. Even amateurs like myself have had no trouble seeing through the scheme.

33 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

as is mine

😊

33 minutes ago, scholar JW said:

thus his current stance in some sense creates a distance, a freedom from any alleged bias working as a truly independent scholar working in the pursuit of Truth.

Interesting. Perhaps he is in the process of sacrificing his association with Witnesses so that he will be the first non-Witness scholar in history to claim that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE.

I have another theory as to what he is doing, much less interesting, but in total keeping with the evidence he has already documented about his ego, personality and track record. I'll see if it makes sense after reading his book (tomorrow).

[Witness]

 

 

[Space Merchant]

10 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

"There was no governing body in the first century CE. Therefore,

the present Governing Body has no legacy and should be

dissolved." - p. 135.

That is an odd statement. There was actually a governing body of Christians in the 1st century, but certainly far different from today's religious leaders. Even during those times, there as been others as the latter grow old and die and others take their place.

[Arauna]

11 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

FDS doctrine

???  I am not American and my first language is not English so I naturally never get the acronyms. 

[Arauna]

8 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

have to read a book before you comment

True, and even if it accuses, regardless of him being a scholar, without sufficient proof it is without substance. 

So detractors on the forum should not be so ecstatic ...... he does apparently urge brothers not to leave....... an idea which is abhorent to them .