Posts by slimboyfat

14

Voting thumbs up

by peacefulpete in

is anyone else having problem giving a thumbs up?

it has been happening for a long time.

i vote up , it appears, then disappears when i return to page.

Simon removed my up and down thumbs years ago when I gave a downvote to a post that said (to my best recollection, because it was ages ago) it was great Dawkins had survived a stroke because it means he can carry on telling theists that they are wrong. Apparently Simon interpreted that to mean I was against Dawkins being alive and that I didn’t deserve any more votes on the forum because of that. Perhaps you made a similar egregious error in your history and that’s why you lost your up and down thumbs too. 🤔

362

Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday

by slimboyfat in

for newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?

he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.

the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.

slimboyfat

For newbies, who was Carl Olof Jonsson?

He was a JW in Sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with Watchtower that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE, but instead place the event 20 years later. The reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for JW chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the Gentile Times, and the beginning of the Last Days, as JWs understand it. Jonsson decided to research the subject so he could go back to the householder and defend the 607 BCE date, but the more he researched, the more he realised that the 607 BCE date was simply wrong, not only by secular history, but also in terms of the Bible’s own chronology. Jonsson carefully researched the topic over years, consulting many experts, and compiled all his research into a detailed report that he sent to the world headquarters of JWs in Brooklyn. He hoped that when the Governing Body saw the evidence they would change their chronology. Instead of accepting the evidence the Governing Body dug its heels in and kept the chronology. Raymond Franz was compiling the Aid book at the time and included a lengthy entry on chronology, which was intended to refute Jonsson’s research by undermining confidence in secular chronology, but without making reference to Jonsson’s work directly. Raymond Franz later expressed regret that he played a part in rejecting the evidence that Jonsson had sent.

Instead of being thanked for his research and the sincerity of his appeal to the Governing Body, Jonsson was marginalised and eventually excluded from his religious community. He was accused of trying to promote sects. In reality Jonsson had shared his research with people he considered friends because he thought the information was important and he hoped for reasonable dialogue. Once outside the religion, Jonsson published his research as a book titled The Gentile Reconsidered: Have Jehovah’s Witnesses Been Wrong All Along About 607 BCE? Raymond Franz helped Jonsson publish and distribute this book that refuted the Watchtower date he had once defended. Jonsson went on to publish a second book, with his friend Rud Persson (pseudonym Wolfgang Herbst), titled The Sign of the Last Days - When? which, among other things, proved that Watchtower was wrong about there being an increase in earthquakes during the 20th century. This book apparently had some impact because Watchtower stopped making specific claims about an increase in earthquakes after this book was published. However Watchtower still maintains, contrary to Jonsson’s evidence, that wars, diseases, and famines typify our era in particular.

In the 1980s and 1990s a Norwegian JW named Rolf Furuli began circulating his own research which he claimed supported Watchtower chronology and refuted Jonsson’s research. Jonsson made some responses to Furuli generally pointing out that experts in ancient history did not accept his arguments based on readings from ancient sources in Akkadian and other ancient languages that are difficult to learn and interpret. Watchtower used some of the material Furuli compiled to restate their support for their 607 BCE date in a couple of Watchtower articles in 2011. Furuli was later disfellowshipped for disagreeing with the Governing Body on other matters in 2020 but still maintained that Watchtower chronology was accurate.

It had been said that Carl Olof Jonsson was in poor health for a number years and only kept in touch with a few friends including Rud Persson. News now arrives that Carl Olof Jonsson died on the 17th April 2023.

Watchtower faced a crossroads in the 1970s when it could have chosen to accept the detailed evidence Jonsson provided showing that their chronology had a faulty basis. They could have chosen to abandon 1914 at that stage and focus on other core beliefs instead, such as the identity of God and Jesus, the hope for paradise on earth, and peaceable good living until it arrives. Instead they chose to double down on their faulty chronology and crack down on dissenters. The result is that 1914 date weighs ever heavier round their necks as a growing reminder of their own fallibility with each passing year. Open discussion on Bible chronology, and other matters, remains unwelcome in the religion.

No doubt there may be details I got wrong in the above summary and I would welcome corrections.

5

Jesus Christ was cool with Bethelites not being baptized, even after picking Watchtower in 1919 as the one true religion.

by was a new boy in

bethel service qualifications and requirements:.

those who apply must be dedicated and baptized for at least a year.

how many of these guys were drug off the streets, looking for a job, just to stay alive?

slimboyfat

Is that really Fred Franz opposite Knorr? Can his face be enhanced too? And I wonder who he was sitting next to. Is Hugo Riemer in the same row? I think he was Franz’s roommate at the time. If that’s Fred Franz opposite Knorr, I wonder if those two were already friends at this early stage. In any case, they are pretty far away from Rutherford at the head of the table.

5

Jesus Christ was cool with Bethelites not being baptized, even after picking Watchtower in 1919 as the one true religion.

by was a new boy in

bethel service qualifications and requirements:.

those who apply must be dedicated and baptized for at least a year.

how many of these guys were drug off the streets, looking for a job, just to stay alive?

slimboyfat

It’s funny Knorr should be against Christmas, because he was born in Bethlehem. 🎉

13

What is Greg Stafford up to these days?

by slimboyfat in

you may have been wondering: what is greg stafford up to these days?

lots of interesting things, is the answer.

exposing the false trinity doctrine, of course, but keeping on top of other issues too.

slimboyfat

The basic assumption seems to be that the Bible gives an accurate history of the past, including a reliable chronology. From that assumption springs the idea that the 10,000 years date must be wrong. The fact that the site is near where some think Mount Ararat was located, and that the site includes many depictions of animals is too good a set of circumstances for someone who is already inclined to take the Bible account seriously to miss making a connection. If the Bible is correct that Noah existed and saved animals on an ark then the next thing is to say that he could also have built the Göbelki Tepe site. I think Watchtower has at times suggested that Noah could have employed workers to help him and his family build the ark. Perhaps Stafford is reasoning that, if Noah could hire help for the ark, then he could have hired help to build Göbekli Tepe too. What I am not sure about, and maybe I just missed it in the video, is what function does Stafford think this site performed, and why wasn’t it mentioned in the Bible? Was it a kind of holding bay for the animals before they went on the ark? Why was that necessary?

There is another JW apologist who has attempted to link Noah’s flood with the ‘younger dryas cataclysm’ that has piqued the interest of some in recent years. I forget his name or the name lf his book right now.

98

Better off PIMA than POMA or POMO.

by ExBethelitenowPIMA in

the situation is many of us are pima and all putting on a front, sometimes saying something we don’t fully believe.

or at least are actually agnostic about but a hope that it’s true.. but it can be useful if someone is really going through a hard time or has something they are very worried about, to say things like well let’s hope there is not much longer of this old system.. this can be useful in an awkward situation where you just don’t know what to do or say.

it’s a little bit of hope that can help when there is nothing else.. my agnosticism just means i won’t look back over decades thinking i wasted my life.

slimboyfat

That’s your opinion. I don’t know why this thread or its topic should be exempted from epistemic humility that acknowledges human limitations.

Evolution might be a crappy interface for something that goes far deeper.

https://youtu.be/nM_FOUCpJ3I

98

Better off PIMA than POMA or POMO.

by ExBethelitenowPIMA in

the situation is many of us are pima and all putting on a front, sometimes saying something we don’t fully believe.

or at least are actually agnostic about but a hope that it’s true.. but it can be useful if someone is really going through a hard time or has something they are very worried about, to say things like well let’s hope there is not much longer of this old system.. this can be useful in an awkward situation where you just don’t know what to do or say.

it’s a little bit of hope that can help when there is nothing else.. my agnosticism just means i won’t look back over decades thinking i wasted my life.

slimboyfat

You think what is ridiculous? That humans probably don’t perceive every aspect of reality that might be needed to provide a fully accurate picture?

I think it’s ridiculous to assume that humans are fully capable of perceiving reality. No other creature does, as far as we know. Why would humans be the one exception? It’s not “rational” to suppose that we do. It’s more like wishful thinking, a nice story to tell ourselves because we don’t want to accept we may not be equipped to answer basic questions about reality. Simply exclaiming ridiculous doesn’t help.

98

Better off PIMA than POMA or POMO.

by ExBethelitenowPIMA in

the situation is many of us are pima and all putting on a front, sometimes saying something we don’t fully believe.

or at least are actually agnostic about but a hope that it’s true.. but it can be useful if someone is really going through a hard time or has something they are very worried about, to say things like well let’s hope there is not much longer of this old system.. this can be useful in an awkward situation where you just don’t know what to do or say.

it’s a little bit of hope that can help when there is nothing else.. my agnosticism just means i won’t look back over decades thinking i wasted my life.

slimboyfat

There are different kinds of agnosticism. Weak agnosticism says that we don’t know but one day we might find out. Strong agnosticism says we don’t know and we will never find out.

Evolution has been proved by humans applying their rational mind to available evidence. Yet there is no reason to suppose that the human mind is equipped to make a final determination about the world in itself. We would not imagine that a chimpanzee has accurate models in its head for things such as how weather comes about or how food grows, although it probably thinks something about those everyday experiences. It probably doesn’t even have a conception that its perception is limited, even though it appears to be very limited from our perspective. Similarly we as humans don’t know what we don’t know, and we don’t know which of our perceptions and deductions about reality are not only wrong, but miss the point entirely. The only way to avoid this conclusion is to assume that humans are uniquely equipped to understand reality in its fundamentals and to explain why that should be the case. If there is a key aspect of reality that requires perceiving the world in terms of extra dimensions that we can’t perceive, or colours outside our spectrum, or echolocation which bats have and we don’t, or yet other aspects of perception that we entirely unaware of, then we may be missing something fundamental about reality which entirely changes the picture of how we came about. When you really think about it, the idea that there aspects of reality that humans don’t have access to is actually more likely than not. We can see the limitations of the creatures around us but we cannot see the limitations in ourselves because we can only perceive using our own limited perception.

98

Better off PIMA than POMA or POMO.

by ExBethelitenowPIMA in

the situation is many of us are pima and all putting on a front, sometimes saying something we don’t fully believe.

or at least are actually agnostic about but a hope that it’s true.. but it can be useful if someone is really going through a hard time or has something they are very worried about, to say things like well let’s hope there is not much longer of this old system.. this can be useful in an awkward situation where you just don’t know what to do or say.

it’s a little bit of hope that can help when there is nothing else.. my agnosticism just means i won’t look back over decades thinking i wasted my life.

slimboyfat

Evolution has been proven.

That is, using the human mind, which is the product of evolution, if evolution is true. And if evolution is true then the human mind evolved for its survival advantage not for its accurate representation of reality. But an accurate representation of reality and survival advantage are not at variance with one another, you might say. In fact research suggests there probably is a difference between the most accurate representation of reality and the perception with the greatest survival advantage. That being the case, the human mind cannot be expected to perceive reality correctly. That being the case there is no reason to suppose that an evolutionary understanding of human development is correct since it itself is the product of the human mind which is adapted for survival not for accuracy.

This leaves us with two options: 1) the human mind perceives its evolutionary history accurately because reality was intentionally constructed in such as way that humans could draw accurate conclusions, or 2) humans do not perceive reality accurately and cannot suppose their inferences, including evolutionary theory, are accurate.

I suspect that option 1 is the case, scientist Donald Hoffman makes the case for option 2.

https://youtu.be/UWHYThrfRYU

13

What is Greg Stafford up to these days?

by slimboyfat in

you may have been wondering: what is greg stafford up to these days?

lots of interesting things, is the answer.

exposing the false trinity doctrine, of course, but keeping on top of other issues too.

slimboyfat

You may have been wondering: what is Greg Stafford up to these days? Lots of interesting things, is the answer. Exposing the false Trinity doctrine, of course, but keeping on top of other issues too. See this video where he argues that the much talked about Gobekli Tepe site in Turkey is not 10,000 years old, as archaeologists have claimed, but was in fact the site where Noah kept the animals that were saved in the ark. Very interesting!

https://youtu.be/JOVOmYuDGAw