Has anyone heard of Rolf Furuli? He is supposedly an Elder in Oslo I think with a PHD in linguistics. Anyway, he is writing a new book on chronology in an attempt to disprove the accepted fall of Jerusalem as 586/87 and 'prove' the watchtower's 607bce date. Some JWs are claiming it will 'pull the rug' from under Olof Jonsson's work. However, I would think it's just going to be another 'half-scholarly' effort which will not stand up in the face of scrunity. Does anyone have a take on this?
Jehovah's Witnesses Defended
by greven 14 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Irenaeus
I understand Furuli's latest work is out now. I will find the address and post it. The guy's first book took a stance on linguistics that is way out of date. To put it in a nutshell, he argues that the word gives us basic meaning when most liguists would argue that the context in which a word is placed is what gives the nuanced meaning of a word. I guess coming from so far north does something to some people's brains. I am sure Carl Olof Jonsson will chew him up and spit him out. After all, Carl's work is not based on linguistic examinations - which in this case don't mean a heck of a lot - but on some 14 lines of inquiry.
There are several academics in univerities in Europe and the U.S.A. who are JWs. How they can remain such is beyond me. The majority who study the movement and its nonsense leave, but some continue to stick. One can do this in Catholicism because there are various levels of religiosity in that faith, but there is one level of intellectuality in Watchtower religion--a very low one based on the low level of intellectuality at Brooklyn.
-
Francois
I think Knorr was a complete idiot and latent homosexual. I understand that with every new group that came in to work the presses, etc., Knorr would get them all together in a big room some where and tell the newbies how to urinate without having to touch "themselves." That is a sign of a large sickness as far as I'm concerned.
He should have stayed with the family soup business.
-
cyberguy
His more recent book, "Three Dissertations..." probably wipes-out most of his previous works/arguments (which were not very good, in retrospect)! However, I'd still recommend (if any) his most recent book, "Three Dissertations!" (But his arguments in this latest book, are extremely sterile, obviously; he’s trying to avoid the Watchtower’s-equivalent of hell-fire damnation, i.e., being DF’d!)
Speaking straightforwardly, I’m not sure I’d recommend his latest book! He’s somewhat scholarly, but none of his books (especially the last one) come to a proper conclusion or give explicit direction! I like books that make arguments, but also tell me what I should do! Although he is, obviously, interested in raising questions regarding JW beliefs, his writings, although interesting, I find, give no clear direction!
-
Euphemism
I don't think that he's recanted his positions in JWs Defended, at least not most of them. Most of JWs Defended was devoted to topics such as the Trinity, the Divine Name, and suchlike; as far as I know, he still holds opinions similar (though perhaps not identical) to the Watchtower on those. He even had a recent public debate with Rob Bowman about the Trinity.