yeah, and there was a follow-up article that said that her parents weren't convinced. they were threatening possible legal action...
doogie
JoinedPosts by doogie
-
49
Sciavo autopsy
by rebel8 init can't possibly be that no one posted this news on the forum yet, can it?
i can't find a thread.
here's the story.
-
-
-
12
The JW decisively false concept of Armageddon.
by greendawn inthe jws have a certain understanding of armageddon and the immediate period prior to it that is completely false.
for example there is no reason to believe that they (or anyone else) are doing a pre armageddon preaching separating work but to the contrary given their anti christ behaviour they are clearly not fit for this purpose.
so the end can't be near.
-
-
doogie
i can think of a couple...
-
11
2 Chron 22:2...what the heck?
by doogie inok, hopefully someone with a handle on the original biblical languages can help me out here.
i was reading some information another poster on the board sent me, and in it, he mentions an odd situation shown in 2 chronicles 21:20 - 22:2he was thirty-two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in jerusalem; and he departed with no one's regret.
they buried him in the city of david, but not in the tombs of the kings.
-
-
doogie
(According to the BHS there is still another variant by the Vetus Latina, "16 years").
kind of hurts the whole concept of an 'intact' bible surviving to our time. who knows what other portions are copyist errors.
i saw an apologetic's site that said that any discrepancies or errors in the bible are obviously copyist errors because of course, we know that the original manuscript could not possibly have included any errors (since it was from God)...
-
11
10 Reasons Why Beer is Better than Jesus
by Tashawaa in10. no one will kill you for not drinking beer.. .
9. beer doesn't tell you how to have sex.. .
8. beer has never caused a major war.. .
-
-
doogie
9. Beer doesn't tell you how to have sex.
speak for yourself. maybe you're drinking the wrong beer.
-
11
2 Chron 22:2...what the heck?
by doogie inok, hopefully someone with a handle on the original biblical languages can help me out here.
i was reading some information another poster on the board sent me, and in it, he mentions an odd situation shown in 2 chronicles 21:20 - 22:2he was thirty-two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in jerusalem; and he departed with no one's regret.
they buried him in the city of david, but not in the tombs of the kings.
-
-
doogie
thank leo.
i had checked the KJ, Amplified and one other one. i'm glad i checked before i emailed my mom...
-
11
2 Chron 22:2...what the heck?
by doogie inok, hopefully someone with a handle on the original biblical languages can help me out here.
i was reading some information another poster on the board sent me, and in it, he mentions an odd situation shown in 2 chronicles 21:20 - 22:2he was thirty-two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in jerusalem; and he departed with no one's regret.
they buried him in the city of david, but not in the tombs of the kings.
-
-
doogie
2 Kings 8:26 says that Ahaziah was 22 years old when he began to reign. all bibles that i've checked are in agreement with that.
i assume that Fred just doctored up the 2 Chr verse to resolve any discrepancy.
am i right? huh? huh?
-
11
2 Chron 22:2...what the heck?
by doogie inok, hopefully someone with a handle on the original biblical languages can help me out here.
i was reading some information another poster on the board sent me, and in it, he mentions an odd situation shown in 2 chronicles 21:20 - 22:2he was thirty-two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in jerusalem; and he departed with no one's regret.
they buried him in the city of david, but not in the tombs of the kings.
-
-
doogie
ok, hopefully someone with a handle on the original biblical languages can help me out here. i was reading some information another poster on the board sent me, and in it, he mentions an odd situation shown in 2 Chronicles 21:20 - 22:2
He was thirty-two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem; and he departed with no one's regret. They buried him in the city of David, but not in the tombs of the kings. And the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah hi youngest son king in his stead; for the band of men that came with the Arabs to the camp had slain all the older sons. So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned. Ahaziah was forty-two years old when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem.
so, obviously this present some problems, because Jehoram had to have fathered Ahaziah 2 years before he (Jehoram) was born.
here's the problem:
i went and checked the NWT and 2 Chr 22:2 says that Ahaziah was 22 year old...not 42! this resolves the discrepancy because Jehoram would've been 18 when he fathered Ahaziah (which is definitely a bit more plausible than -2).
EVERY OTHER BIBLE I'VE CHECKED SAYS AHAZIAH WAS 42 YEARS OLD, NOT 22...
is the original text ambiguous so that 22 years can be acceptable, or is this blatant dishonesty on the part of the NWT?
-
763
Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?
by Little Bo Peep inhello all, i've been reading your site for a couple of years now, and have found, for the most part, it to be very helpful.
i must say, at first i was very "scared" at what i might find, but contrary to what i grew up learning, there is a "wealth" of information outside of the watchtower organization.
i haven't attended meetings for about two years now, and like many i've read about, have spent many hours researching, telling myself "i'm not wrong for searching", and doing more research.
-
-
doogie
HS:
i hear ya. i've been following these threads (with considerable effort) and it was more an observation than a challenge to scholar itself.
i've had conversations with my elder/pioneer/PO dad and he's admitted that he has had doubts about the historical integrity of the WT's chronology and the bible in general. but he just says that he believes that the JWs are god's org so he'll follow them no matter what. it's nauseating, but at least he's an honest cultist. scholar wants it both ways... historical integrity and divine revelation. not possible (and any upstanding JW would agree that it's irrelevant to their beliefs).
-
763
Daniel's Prophecy, 605 BCE or 624 BCE?
by Little Bo Peep inhello all, i've been reading your site for a couple of years now, and have found, for the most part, it to be very helpful.
i must say, at first i was very "scared" at what i might find, but contrary to what i grew up learning, there is a "wealth" of information outside of the watchtower organization.
i haven't attended meetings for about two years now, and like many i've read about, have spent many hours researching, telling myself "i'm not wrong for searching", and doing more research.
-
-
doogie
1) Can you present one credible source, without an Adventist agenda, who agree that Jerusalem fell in 607BCE?
you know, the correct, WT approved answer is pretty easy: NOthey pride themselves on the fact that their chronology is unique (which of course is somewhat debatable) and provided from heaven only to them. i think it's interesting that scholar goes to such lengths to apologize the WT's interpretation. if their chronology is provided to a large extent by 'spirit direction' there should be no way to justify it (otherwise its a manmade interpretation) and there should be no need.
scholar, the answer is no. admit it with pride just like the other non-scholar JWs.
-
138
The verdict is in! Michael Jackson is . . . . . . . . NOT GUILTY!
by nicolaou inthe full list of charges faced by michael jackson at his child abuse trial.
count 1: conspiracy to commit child abduction, false imprisonment and extortion between 1 february and 31 march 2003. not guilty.
count 2: lewd act upon a child between 20 february and 12 march 2003. not guilty.
-
-
doogie
(yawn)