by FaceTheFacts 46 Replies latest jw friends
Having just finished reading the GTR (4th edition), I've compiled my notes and observations and am composing a comprehensive review/analysis of many sections. So my question: Would anyone be interested in reading and/or participating in a discussion about a number of Jonnson's viewpoint? Be assured, it will be of substantial merit and not the typical superficial and remiss arguments you perhaps expect from someone who is a JW.
All thoughts welcome :D
*viewpoints
Yes, here's my thoughts....I'm 99% certain this is Nanana/ Recovery / Still Recovery / Ethos back for more for the 5th or 6th time.
Still counting time are we?
Hi FaceTheFacts...
There was a recent thread started by Ethos attempting to deal with the JW's 607BCE dogma. He kind of disappeared after not really answering any questions. I think the biggest problem with his approach, which he probably thought was his strength, was that he attempted to attack aspects independently of others to try to make certain aspects seem plausible in isolation but avoided looking at the big picture.
How would you approach the issue differently to Ethos?
To be honest, I'm a little put off by the name "FaceTheFacts." It sound more than a bit confrontational, and pre-supposes that you have facts we need to "face."
Cedars
WMF I tend to agree. As I mentioned in FTFs intro thread, my radar is activated. The syntax and modus operandi have my spidey senses tingling.
He'll no doubt swing in with ad hominem 'I start a thread and all you do is attack me' presently.
FTF I haven't read the book, have been trying to obtain a copy. Please enlighten us with your thoughts and comments. I'd love to learn more.
tagged
Why is this even about Jonnson? Jonnson's viewpoints followed rather than preceded the majority opinion in archeology.
Why is this even about Jonnson? Jonnson's viewpoints followed rather than preceded the majority opinion in archeology.
Jonsson is simply a convenient scapegoat for lazy JW apologists who can't be bothered attacking all the individual researchers who originally determined the various lines of evidence. Back in reality, Jonsson just compiled existing research.
See also 'thought-terminating cliche'.
I had never even heard of Jonsson when I did my own research on the subject.
This book exposed 3 things that made me wake up...
1) The Watchtower has forcefully given itself credit for 2,520-year (7 Times of Gentiles) calculation when, in fact, this calculation was made at least 50 years before the Watchtower even existed. In the 2010 DVD Faith In Action, Anthony Morris even states "The fact that they (the Bible Students) were able to pinpoint that year is just phenomenal." What he doesn't mention is that John Aquila Brown was peddling this 7-Times calculation 50 years before the Watchtower was even founded and that several religions were looking at 1912, 1913, 1916, 1917, etc. as the year for Armageddon. The Bible Students chose October 1914 but then latched on to WWI (which started in July 1914) as proof that they were right. Right about what?
2) Jeremiah 25:11 unambiguously mentions 70 years of servitude. It also mentions the word "desolation" but DOES NOT say how long that desolation would last. However, the Watchtower has chosen to completely ignore the word SERVITUDE and substitutes it with the word desolation so that their false doctrine about 607-1914 will at least make some sense. They do this because they know that there was no servitude after 539 since Nabonidus and his son Belshezar were killed in that year. I hate to state the obvious, but that would mean 68 years of servitude (2 years short of 70).
3) The Watchtower has a long history of taking secular sources completely out of context to prove that they are right about this 2,520-year speculative calculation. They do this despite Jesus' reminder about speculating on things that are under God's jurisdiction (see Acts 1:7).
Jonsson hit the nail on the head with this book.
