Posts by slimboyfat

56

Signs You Would Like To See At Watchtower Convention

by Brokeback Watchtower in

i think gb loesch has made some pretty bold statements that could be put in quotes with his picture attached could be a real killer!.

believe and obey only the faithful slave, don't believe any negative comment about us in the press believe only us.. google: child molestation watchtower bible and tract society, klick on wikki.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/jehovah%27s_witnesses%27_handling_of_child_sex_abuse.

slimboyfat

A sign that states: “This is a sign of the times!”

”Millions now dying have never lived”

”Better to have questions you can’t answer than answers you can’t question”

”Shunning - it’s what we do!” Circuit Overseer, England 2018

”Everyone knows there are mistakes in the Bible” - Watchtower 1927

”I made an ass of myself” JW leader JF Rutherford on predicting the end in 1925

”No one should be made to choose between his beliefs and his family” Awake! 2009

”overlapping generation” - are they having a laugh?

Watchtower in decline - will the last person out the door turn off the lights?

“Tight pants are designed by homosexuals to see your junk” - highlight from previous convention talk by Anthony Morris

“When Watchtower needs to beg for money it means Jehovah is no longer blessing them” - Charles Taze Russell, Watchtower founder

3

Did Ray Franz every sign any of his books?

by blownaway in

i know he shipped his own books early on, but did he sign them?.

slimboyfat

He shipped his books until the end, as far as I’m aware. I bought 400 of them and he sent them in mail bags himself.

332

The most successful teaching of Jehovah's Witnesses and an amazing new book on the divine name

by slimboyfat in

jehovah's witnesses have had to revise their chronology and various doctrinal interpretations due to events and scholarly corrections.

but the one teaching where they have been consistently ahead of the curve is the importance of jehovah's name.. .

i'm going to run through a (necessarily selective) timeline of jw events and scholarly publications that demonstrate the phenomenal success of this teaching in the last days.

slimboyfat

Has anyone else read this book and got any thoughts on it? Personally I think it’s the best book this century! I’m glad Earnest pointed it out to me.

21

Robert H. COUNTESS and John 1:1 in the NWT

by Wonderment in

robert h. countess and john 1:1 in the nwt, part iirobert h. countess made the case in his book that the nwt ‘formulated their own principle’ on the article.

under summary and conclusions, he stated: “chapter four’s conclusions regarding the handling of [theós] indicated that nwt’s translators poorly understood the greek article, and that their principle [theós]=‘a god,’ [ho theós]= ‘god’ is not legitimate.” (p. 92) is countess conclusion correct?this is what the nwt actually said after observing that both moffatt and goodspeed rendered john 1:1c in their translations as “divine.” “careful translators recognize that the articular construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, whereas an anarthrous contruction points to a quality about someone.” in making this statement, the nw translators also had in mind the grammar by dana & mantey, in which they stated: “when identity is prominent, we find the article; and when quality or character is stressed, the construction is anarthrous [without the article].” (p. 138) also: “there are no ‘rules’ for the use of the article in greek, but there is a fundamental principle underlying its significance – as we have seen in the foregoing section – and this gives rise to a normal usage.” (ibid, p. 141) nowhere did the nwt ever affirmed that this meant [theós] without the article is always equivalent to = ‘a god,’ and [ho theós, with the article is always to be understood as = ‘god.’ even the wts would have to agree with countess that such principle is “not legitimate.” colwell first published his book in 1982, and by then the watchtower had made their position clear enough.

in 1975 the wt wrote: “this does not mean, however, that every time an anarthrous noun occurs in the greek text it should appear in english with the indefinite article.

slimboyfat

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6276841381822464/most-successful-teaching-jehovahs-witnesses-amazing-new-book-on-divine-name

21

Robert H. COUNTESS and John 1:1 in the NWT

by Wonderment in

robert h. countess and john 1:1 in the nwt, part iirobert h. countess made the case in his book that the nwt ‘formulated their own principle’ on the article.

under summary and conclusions, he stated: “chapter four’s conclusions regarding the handling of [theós] indicated that nwt’s translators poorly understood the greek article, and that their principle [theós]=‘a god,’ [ho theós]= ‘god’ is not legitimate.” (p. 92) is countess conclusion correct?this is what the nwt actually said after observing that both moffatt and goodspeed rendered john 1:1c in their translations as “divine.” “careful translators recognize that the articular construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, whereas an anarthrous contruction points to a quality about someone.” in making this statement, the nw translators also had in mind the grammar by dana & mantey, in which they stated: “when identity is prominent, we find the article; and when quality or character is stressed, the construction is anarthrous [without the article].” (p. 138) also: “there are no ‘rules’ for the use of the article in greek, but there is a fundamental principle underlying its significance – as we have seen in the foregoing section – and this gives rise to a normal usage.” (ibid, p. 141) nowhere did the nwt ever affirmed that this meant [theós] without the article is always equivalent to = ‘a god,’ and [ho theós, with the article is always to be understood as = ‘god.’ even the wts would have to agree with countess that such principle is “not legitimate.” colwell first published his book in 1982, and by then the watchtower had made their position clear enough.

in 1975 the wt wrote: “this does not mean, however, that every time an anarthrous noun occurs in the greek text it should appear in english with the indefinite article.

slimboyfat

That would be great Wonderment. Yes the divine name has been my special interest for nearly two decades now. I’ve read a lot about it, which probably means I should know more than I do. Have you managed to read the book on the divine name by Frank Shaw. It’s the best discussion of the topic there is in my opinion. I made a thread about it a few months ago.

76

Posters You Miss

by minimus in

jw
friends

anyone that you miss from this site, dead or alive??.

i miss farkel, blondie and a host of others!.

slimboyfat

Rapunzel for sure.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/users/29691/Rapunzel

And the Dutch poster, I can’t remember his name.

Not to mention wobble and oubliette

Ninja too

And Naeblis

26

A ridiculous thing I found in the old young people’s book

by Addison0998 in

it was in some book for young people that i found going through the watchtower library when i was doing research for old publications, i cannot believe this lunacy, i feel so bad for the teenagers at the time who had to try to take this seriously, but they’re not a high control religion or cult though, anyways here is is : .

if you sleep in a room alone and you find that you seem to feel special stress in this direction at night, you may be able to arrange matters to share a room with another member of your family.

also, you may find it helpful to sleep on your side rather than on your back or face down.. 18 another thing that may be helpful is to see to it that your clothing does not unnecessarily cause friction with the sexual organs.

slimboyfat

Like I was saying the other day, I’m sure I read somewhere that Raymond Franz wrote this book. I’d need to find that confirmation, but interesting if so.

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

slimboyfat

I appreciate the protein and all the other angles on proof. But let’s not forget the main point that evolution is a fact. I agree that evolution is probably a fact. That’s what I’m talking about.

This is good epistemology because evolution is one of the best reasons for believing in God.

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

slimboyfat

How can we understand any of it without God as an objective guide? Or to put it another way, if there is no God then how can we be confident that any of our perceptions are accurate?

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

slimboyfat

To me an interesting thing about evolution is that it indicates there is probably a God. Because if it wasn’t for God how we would understand the mechanism of our own understanding? Genesis says we are made in God’s image. It seems to fit the reality the more we understand.