Jump to content
The World News Media

AlanF

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,227

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

 Content Type 

Everything posted by AlanF

  1. AlanF
    Arauna said: Evidence? To be pedagogical, the phrase is "number crunching". And you do? Again you've presented no actual evidence -- only speculation. Speculation that I've largely debunked. I'm fully aware of the doctrines of JWs on this. Obviously you are not. Let's examine again what I quoted: "With thankful hearts we acknowledge God’s mercy and gratefully and willingly show our respect for Jehovah’s organization, for she is our mother and the beloved wife of our heavenly Father, Jehovah God."--"The Watchtower", May 1, 1957, p. 285 My reference to "Mommy" was obviously satirical, but like most satire contains real truth. What truth? That whatever JWs receive from "Jehovah's organization" in reality comes from a source owned by the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. You can confirm this yourself by looking at the copyright on the jw.org website, or in any Watch Tower publication. In JW doctrinal theory, the flow of organizational information is like this: Jehovah -> Jesus -> Angels -> Governing Body -> JW community In reality, it's more like this: Governing Body <-> Governing Body Helpers <-> various Watch Tower owned corporations like Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, etc. -> various JW officials such as elders -> individual JWs. The entire concept of "Jehovah's heavenly organization" is therefore a figment of the imagination of JW leaders, promulgated for some 100 years. I have always treated you with respect. Why? Because you're far above your JW kin in terms of reasonable discussion. Actually it's much harder to reason with someone who refuses to be reasoned with, like most JWs and certainly like most of the ones who post on this forum. These JWs consistently ignore most of what I write, because they're quite incapable of refuting most of it, except by quoting questionable sources like young-earth creationists. They quickly realize that to give a substantive answer they would have to do some real research for once in their lives, and they instinctively realize that that would be dangerous to their faith in Mommy. You mistake a solid refutation of your and the Watch Tower's claims for unreasonableness. You're invoking your Watch Tower training in this: "How dare you contradict Jehovah's organization!" Complete nonsense. Most of what I've written is exclusively from the Bible. And you're being hypocritical, because many of your source references are non-biblical. That's supported by the Bible itself and by secular history: the northern nation of Israel was deported by the Assyrians around 700 BCE and scattered. Where they ended up is anyone's guess -- and the Bible gives no information. You disprove your own claims: these people returned from Babylonia -- not from anywhere else. Pure speculation -- and contradicting what the Bible itself sayss. [ Lots of speculation and dicey prophetic interpretation deleted ] All of whom came from Babylonia. You mistake your own private speculations and interpretations for what the Bible actually says. AlanF
  2. AlanF
    Arauna said: I've already shown you why this was not true in Babylonia. Rather, there were settlements of all sizes throughout the realm. All were subject to the king of Babylon. Somehow you're confusing the fact that city-states were the norm in each individual "nation" in the Mediterranean region with the false notion that many of the cities in Babylonia and ruled by the king of Babylon were also semi-independant city-states. Completely irrelevant to the point at issue here. Sorry -- my mistake. It was allensmith28 who said that. However, your subsequent arguments about "city-states" supported his basic claim. AlanF
  3. AlanF
    TrueTomHarley gave as an example of an insult: Yes indeed, asking a True JW to provide evidence or proof is insulting. After all, the only evidence such a person needs is that God's infallible spokemen, the Governing Body, have spoken. AlanF
  4. AlanF
    TrueTomHarley wrote: LOL! The word is "pendejo". As in: Chinga tu madre, pendejo! You remind me of the JW elders I've heard correct someone's English with this: "Make sure your pronounciation is correct!" No, it's Foreigner's fault for having such a big chip on his shoulder that he's incapable of thinking clearly. Make me look bad? Actually what you've done is prove beyond any doubt that your concern is trivia -- not the topic of this thread -- that you're quite incapable of even participating in the topic of the thread. Yes, Spanish speakers have no concept of those things. AlanF
  5. AlanF
    Foreigner wrote: LOL! Can anyone get any more clueless? So says he who began the denigration. He's even so unthinking as not to realize he admits it: Foreigner's denigration of others' writing skills began before anyone poked fun at his own. And of course, he's too thick to realize that others' poking fun was a direct reaction to his hypocrisy and to his ignorance of the language in which he presumed to instruct others. Of course intelligent people make mistakes. But you did not simply make a mistake -- you castigated Jeffro for making "mistakes" that were only your own misunderstanding of English. And when you were corrected, not only were you too arrogant to admit your mistakes, but you doubled down on them and made nasty remarks. Here comes the completely ignorant result of Foreigner's chip on his shoulder. Yes indeed, Foreigner can see through our screens that we're white. Oh, please do go on to become a Witness -- you're perfect material. AlanF
  6. AlanF
    TrueTomHarley wrote: I agree, except that in Foreigner's case he's not being reasonable, since no one knows his race, and no one knew that his native language is Spanish until he himself revealed it. Nor will anyone know where he's from unless he himself reveals it. Clearly then, Foreigner's pulling "the race card" is due to his knowing he has no rational arguments. Obviously he has an inferiority complex and a big chip on his shoulder. It's a cussword/slur that can refer to anyone you don't like. AlanF
  7. AlanF
    Foreigner wrote: Ah, now pulling the race card. Racist? Not only do people on this board, like JW Insider and me, not know if you're white, brown, black, green, blue or purple -- we don't care. Let me clue you in: a language is supposed to be used in the way that the great majority of its native speakers use it. That is the definition of proper use. If you, as a non-native speaker, choose not to speak the way natives speak, or have not learned how to speak the way they do, that's your lookout. I already told you that on page 23 of this thread. Probably the equivalent of "dick" in English. You really take the cake as a hypocrite. It is YOU who started this little tiff about language. On page 23 of this thread, you castigated whoever you quoted (apparently Jeffro): << ... Daniel and others given as part of tribute along with some temple treasures.* (Grammarly indicates error in given to ARE given) ... Nebuchadnezzar takes exiles including Ezekiel, temple treasures, and temple utensils. Jehoiachin placed on throne. (Grammarly indicates error in throne to THE throne) Those who insult writings skills are ONLY fooling themselves!!!! >> You even emphasized your comments by putting them in red. Then on page 24 I tried to educate you a little about the various ways in which English is used, and commented that Grammarly deals only with one formal style. Given your obviously limited English (which is no sin, but arrogance about things you're ignorant of assuredly is) I commented: << LOL! Sez he who uses four exclamation points, and says "writings skills". Forgot to use Grammarly on this, eh? >> You've also made false statements about my postings and those of JW Insider, who has taken great pains to treat your false claims kindly. On pages 26 and 28 you said: << There’s too much ignorance thrown in the mix by AlanF, with his attempts to look smart instead of the biggest fool. When you act like a child, you will be treated as a child. Go play with your rattle, dear!!!!! >> You even accused JW insider of twisting words. As the 1950s Warner Brothers cartoon character Yosemite Sam said, "Hey, them's fighin' words!" Now you're whining and whinging about being taken to task for saying false, unpleasant and quite stupid things about other posters, and having your own words turned back on you. What are you, 12 years old? AlanF
  8. AlanF
    Every time you post, you display worse and worse ignorance. Hmm, let's see now: you think the Jews were deported before they were captured. Yeah, makes complete sense. AlanF
  9. AlanF
    Completely incoherent, as usual. More to the point: where did Jesus say anthing about 2,520? AlanF
  10. AlanF
    allensmith28 wrote: Launches into another bout of near-total incoherence: You seem to blathering that COJ and Franz failed to mention 3 instances of Jews being taken captive, but only mentioned 2. Let me disabuse you of that false notion. On page 207 of "The Gentile Times Reconsidered" (4th edition) COJ wrote: << Berossus gives support to Daniel's statement that Jewish captives were brought to Babylon in the year of Nebuchadnezzar's accession. >> Which of course is 605/604 BCE. COJ has a lot more to say about the taking of captives in 605/604. On pages 293-294 of GTR4, COJ quotes two scholars on the capture of Jerusalem and taking of captives: << ... the 597 date is one of the very few secure dates in our whole chronological repertoire. >> << ... the capture of Jerusalem in 597 (that date is now fixed exactly). >> COJ elsewhere mentions 597 BCE many times as the date of Jerusalem's capture and the taking of many captives. On page 149 of GTR4, COJ states that Nebuchadnezzar's: << ... eighteenth year was 587/86, during which Jerusalem was destroyed. >> And of course, COJ speaks in many other places about the Jewish captives that were taken in 587. Franz has virtually nothing to say about this, so once again you're talking out of your nether regions. Yes, anyone who knows anything about Neo-Babylonian chronology already knows about the dates given: << The exhibit is accompanied by a beautiful catalog, By the Rivers of Babylon,1 which describes the Al-Yahudu Archive and addresses the three waves of exile—in 604, 597 and 587 B.C.E. >> The destruction of Jerusalem occurred in the summer of 587 BCE, followed a few months later in 587 by the deportation of captives. What are you blathering about? Yes, the siege began in 589, lasted about 2 1/2 years, and ended in 587. Has your brain seized up? AlanF
  11. AlanF
    Oh dear! The incoherence is deafening! Forgotten about Grammarly, have we? AlanF
  12. AlanF
    Ann O'Maly wrote: Yes indeed! Thanks for posting this. I've skimmed more of the relevant sections. They expand on the above excerpts. Clearly, the captives played a larger part in agriculture than I gave them credit for. Nevertheless, my basic point stands in opposition to Arauna's speculation: farming was not something important enough to many of the Jewish captives to prevent them from dropping everything and beginning immediate preparations for the Return as soon as they realized that Babylon's fall would allow their release, or they heard of Cyrus' Edict. After all, various sources, including the above, and the Bible itself, indicate that the Jews in exile had become so comfortable that a large fraction -- probably the majority, since the Bible refers to the Returnees as a "remnant" -- remained in Babylonia. Only those with a particularly strong religious zeal would want to uproot themselves and go back to a nearly desolate land. AlanF
  13. AlanF
    So you're the one who so nefariously changed allensmith28's URL to make him look so stupid. AlanF
  14. AlanF
    Nana Fofana wrote: So what? All the commentaries you cited are from the 16th to 19th centuries. A great deal has been learned since then, in particular about what "the 70 years" of Jeremiah meant. This borders on incoherent. Try expressing yourself clearly. No, they were largely wrong, as the Watch Tower is wrong and as I have repeatedly demonstrated by quoting and commenting on the Bible rather than citing ancient legends. The comments you quoted failed to account for Jeremiah 27. AlanF
  15. AlanF
    Arauna wrote: We are not just talking about city-states -- but apparently you are. Note the exchange that resulted in our little sideshow here: Arauna: However, I believe getting in the last wheat harvest while preparing must be noted. AlanF: Wheat harvest? The Jews and other captives lived in the cities, like Daniel, and were generally business people. They were not farmers. Again, where is your evidence? My clear implication was that farming was not something important enough to most of the Jewish captives to prevent them from beginning immediate preparations for the Return. Next post: Arauna: They just lived in cities?? LOL Get real AlanF... it was not 2017 AD …..but 537 BCE. AlanF: I didn't say "just". I said this: AlanF: << The Jews and other captives lived in the cities, like Daniel, and were generally business people. They were not farmers. >> AlanF: Probably I should have said, "The Jews lived mostly in the cities". This is based on the common understanding among historians that it was mostly the elite Jews who were deported. . . AlanF: People who live "in towns and villages" are also known as people who live in cities in the Bible, since in OT usage a "city" can mean what we today call a village of a few dozen people. Clearly, then, I meant that most captives lived, not out in the country where farming is done in a big way, but in small villages, towns and larger cities where farming is not the major part of human activities. That is why they could easily begin preparation for the Return immediately. You can talk about "city-states" all you like, but is not what I spoke of or meant. AlanF
  16. AlanF
    Now you're compounding your lunacy by lying. This is the URL you originally posted on page 26 of this thread: http://www.biblehistory.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html Somehow you left out the "-" in "bible-history" and got a different website from the one I posted. Naturally, you're too looney and arrogant to acknowledge that your LOL post was based on your own incompetence. AlanF
  17. AlanF
    Completely looney people can hardly be accused of lying when they muck up as badly as you have. AlanF
  18. AlanF
    Yep, completely looney. AlanF
  19. AlanF
    Arauna wrote: As I said above, this is entirely irrelevant. That scattering occurred a hundred years earlier, and those Jews were not part of the Return from Babylon. Once again: Wrong. The cause of the deportation of Judah was the Jews' failure to submit to Babylon. The cause for God's giving Babylon 70 years of supremacy in the Near East was the wickedness of the inhabitants. Totally wrong. By that time the 10 tribes were scattered to the four winds. Need I remind you of what the Bible says? Wrong on the dating. Daniel and a few others were taken in 605/604. A lot more were taken in 597, and another batch in 587 and afterwards. Like I said: what of it? I said nothing about court gossip. I described Daniel and others possible notification that big things were in the works -- hardly gossip. Yes, and to where? To the close vicinity of Babylon. You don't know the Bible at all. As I said, Daniel and a few others were taken in 605/604. In early 597 Zedekiah was made king, and that was when Jeremiah received God's word pleading with the Jews to remain on their land by submitting to Babylon. They had another decade to submit before Nebuchadnezzar came against them again because Zedekiah refused to submit. So most of the Jews could have avoided deportation. Yes, all of which occurred between 589 and 587 BCE. Once again, this desolation was contingent on the Jews failing to reform and submit. Jer. 9 is part of a larger plea given by God through Jeremiah for the Jews to reform, or else. In Jer. 7:3-7 God says: << Reform your ways and your actions, and I will allow you to keep residing in this place. . . For if you truly reform your ways and actions; if you truly uphold justice between a man and his neighbor; 6 if you do not oppress foreign residents, orphans, and widows; if you do not shed innocent blood in this place; and if you do not follow other gods to your own harm; 7 then I will allow you to keep residing in this place, in the land I gave to your forefathers for all time. >> Oh yeah, you don't believe the Bible. A prophecy made in Zedekiah's 10th year, while Jerusalem was under siege. By then it was too late for God to show mercy and let the Jews remain. Again you don't know the Bible. AlanF
  20. AlanF
    allensmitth28 wrote: I'll let readers decide if you're looney, a liar or just plain stupid. I posted this link: http://www.bible-history.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html This is shown in the red-outlined URL in your page copy of my post. You somehow managed to change it: http://www.biblehistory.com/map_babylonian_captivity/map_of_the_deportation_of_judah_treatment_of_the_jews_in_babylon.html Using your changed URL, you then marched out to left field. LOL! AlanF
  21. AlanF
    Arauna wrote: Wrong. You keep shooting from the hip. In the OT, a city doesn't have to be significant to be called a city. Note Genesis 4:17, for example: << Afterward Cain had sexual relations with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Eʹnoch. Then he engaged in building a city and named the city after his son Eʹnoch. >> How many people do you think inhabited Cain's city right after he built it? Note Genesis 19:4-5, for example, and the story of Lot: << Before they could lie down to sleep, the men of the city—the men of Sodʹom from boy to old man, all of them—surrounded the house in one mob. 5 And they kept calling out to Lot and saying to him: “Where are the men who came in to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we may have sex with them.” >> How many men do you think surrounded Lot's house? From "Strong's Comprehensive Concordance of The Bible", entry for "city" in the "Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary" section, p. 88; entry 5892: << `iyr: a city (a place guarded by waking or a watch) in the widest sense (even of a mere encampment or post). >> From the Brown-Driver-Briggs "Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament", p. 746: << `iyr ... city, town ... 1. city, town, abode of men Gn 4:17 ... >> From "Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament", Vol. XI, p. 55: << The settlements to which `ir refers range in size from small refuges to fortified cities. >> Continuing to be mostly wrong: Again continuing to be mostly wrong, and unsupported with source references: Irrelevant. That scattering occurred a hundred years earlier, and those Jews were not part of the Return from Babylon. And? More or less as I've said. AlanF
  22. AlanF
    allensmith28 said: LOL! I posted no such nonsense. YOU posted it. Either you're completely looney, or a pathological liar. AlanF
  23. AlanF
    Arauna wrote: And? I posted the URLs along with the quotations. Can't you read? What of it? Right. No problem for my argument. You've lost the thread, my dear. See if you can get back on track: your denial of my argument that news of Cyrus' coming Edict could easily be spread among the captive Jews in plenty of time for them to get ready for a Return Journey in either 538 or 537 BCE. You continue to ignore this, but focus on a tiny piece of my argument. There was one root cause for the 49 years of the Exile: the Jews failed to humbly submit to Babylon. -- Jer. 27. The root cause of the 70 years of Babylonian supremacy was God's displeasure with the wickedness of the Jews and the nations round about. He forced them to serve the king of Babylon, as opposed to being independent. Whether they served on their own land or in captivity/exile depended on their submission to Babylon. AlanF
  24. AlanF
    So says someone too ignorant to answer the least of my challenges. AlanF
  25. AlanF
    Arauna wrote: Wrong. They ended in October, 539 BCE when Cyrus' armies conquered Babylon, called the king of Babylon to account by killing Belshazzar and taking over his empire, and installed the Persian empire as ruler of the Near East -- all of which events are described clearly in the Bible. But you don't actually believe the Bible -- you believe Mommy Watch Tower. You've failed to cite a single scripture to support your claims. Rather, you've just made bald assertions. Your description of events is essentially correct, but your conclusion directly contradicts Daniel 5, as I have repeatedly shown. Correct. AlanF
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.