My lifelong practice of unwittingly worshipping men has come to an end.
Good for you. Enjoy your freedom.
Posts by zoiks
-
118School for Congregation Elders
by C.O.B.E.Beef ini attended the school late last year, and it was an emotional and mental rollercoaster for me.
i was already divided in my heart to say the least.
one of the instructors stayed in my home for the week, and my family genuinely enjoyed his company.
-
-
zoiks
-
41
2011-2012 Circuit Assembly program--"Let God's Name be Sanctified"
by Lunatic Faith innot sure if anyone has put this up yet.
i had it left in my door yesterday by the circuit and/or district overseer as my old cong.
is hosting this week.
-
-
zoiks
Not mention of the Lord and Saviour Jesus
Nah, they don't want that bum hanging around.
-
41
2011-2012 Circuit Assembly program--"Let God's Name be Sanctified"
by Lunatic Faith innot sure if anyone has put this up yet.
i had it left in my door yesterday by the circuit and/or district overseer as my old cong.
is hosting this week.
-
-
zoiks
I would join Shamus except I'm afraid of needles :'(
-
41
2011-2012 Circuit Assembly program--"Let God's Name be Sanctified"
by Lunatic Faith innot sure if anyone has put this up yet.
i had it left in my door yesterday by the circuit and/or district overseer as my old cong.
is hosting this week.
-
-
zoiks
Public Address:
Jehovah Will Sanctify His Great Name at Armageddon
This won't sound loony at all to the general public...
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
zoiks
Thank you for taking the time and for sharing with us, Alleymom.
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
zoiks
In the public edition, the jws will read paragraph one, speed read the rest and put it away with a ' well that's too deep for me' and a 'at least the governing
body understand it'.
Aussie, you have hit on what bothers me so much about this article. It's not the fact that they still cling to 607. It's the fact that they have put out these disengenuous articles basically to keep people from questioning too much. When I was first waking up to 'the truth', 607 was one area of question for me. The material that the WTS had put out up to that point was enough to slow down my exit. I had to re-read the stuff over and over again before I started to see the faulty reasoning and the holes in their arguments.
Most JWs will skim the article and assume that it's too deep for them, as you stated. The questioners and thinkers will probably at least be slowed down by the articles.
The WTS knows that all they have to do is perform a little sketchy amateur astronomy and the R&F will take their word over centuries of research and accumulated knowledge.
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
zoiks
outsmartthesystem and simon17 -
Yes, I just thought that the inclusion Babylonian and Julian dates together was something that could be carelessly skimmed over as a corroborating link.
It may be that the two dates do corroborate; the way that the whole article is written just bugs me. It comes across as smarmy.
-
14
Anyone Been To Burning Man
by designs inshould it be on the bucket list.
has anyone gone.. had a blast this summer going to the newport folk festival, it was on the bucket list.. .
-
-
zoiks
I have wanted to go to this for a while now. Bucket list material for sure.
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
zoiks
Very true, Ann. I read Johansson's critique of Furuli's work on the link that dozy provided, and it's pretty obvious that Furuli relies on wishful thinking and the omission of data.
One thing that bothers me is that they present the Nisan 9 vs. Nisan 8 error on the VAT 4956 as proof of 588 being its date. I can't find references to this elsewhere.
-
322
WT Nov. 1, 2011 (public) - When Was Ancient Jerusalem Destroyed - Part 2
by AnnOMaly inout now.. yes, yes, yessssss!
on p. 26-27 they talk about how the lunar positions on vat 4956 fit 588/7 bce!!!.
"clearly, much of the astronomical data in vat 4956 fits the year 588 b.c.e.
-
-
zoiks
Check this one out and tell me who the "researchers" were:
Because of the superior reliability of the lunar
positions, researchers have carefully analyzed
these 13 sets of lunar positions on
VAT 4956. They analyzed the data with the
aid of a computer program capable of showing
the location of celestial bodies on acertain datein the past.19 What did their analysis reveal?
While not all of these sets of lunar positions
match the year 568/567 B.C.E., all 13 sets match calculated
positions for 20 years earlier, for the year
588/587 B.C.E.Footnote 19:
19. This analysis was made with the astronomy
software entitled TheSky6. In
addition, the analysis was augmented
by the comprehensive freeware program
Cartes du Ciel/Sky Charts (CDC) and a
date converter provided by the U.S. Naval
Observatory. Because the cuneiform
signs for many of the planetary positions
are open to speculation and to several interpretations,
these positions were not
used in this survey to pinpoint the year intended
by this astronomical diary.Wait, so who were the researchers? Sounds like celebrated Watchtower scholars to me. And, they LEFT OUT "many of the planetary positions" because these are "open to speculation and several interpretations"? Err...