the wt uses phi list ine.
the world says phil is tine.
i remember they had a pronunciation guide devised by a clergyman which is ok in as much as as we dont speak hebrew.
road to nowhere:
The WT uses phi LIST ine. The world says PHIL is tine.
It isn’t the case that Watch Tower uniquely says it a different way to ‘the world’. The pronunciation indicated above as “PHIL is tine” (/ˈfɪlɪstaɪn/, where ‘tine’ rhymes with ‘wine’) is the English pronunciation in most English speaking countries, and is also used in the US, but some United Stated dialects use “phi LIST ine” (/fɪˈlɪstin/).
so a quick little note about a few things that i recently learned.
if you ever had the yellow book of bible stories, there was the story of enoch, also repeated in other watchtower publications, about the angels fathering giants and being a menace on earth.
now if you look at the nicean bible, which is the wtbts selection of the bible, it mentions enoch twice and only has a very brief passage about nephilim and ben elohim.
Sea Breeze:
The book of Jasher is referenced in the bible
The Bible does refer to a 'Book of Jasher/Jashar'. However, the actual content of the book is unknown.
There was a spurious 16th century version and another 18th century forgery that purport to be translations of the lost book. They quote from various biblical books to try to sound authentic.
Fisherman:
I don’t think so because the book of Rev actually does speak about the future
So does Star Trek. It's still not actually a prophecy about the future.
a watcher:
Ukraine has nothing to do with Armageddon.
Correct.
There are still many prophecies in Revelation that need to be fulfilled before Armageddon comes. I believe Armageddon is at least several years in the future.
🤦♂️No. Revelation was about cryptic references to events that affected early Christians under the Roman empire during the first and early second centuries. Relevance to anything now, or to the future, is exactly zero.
stumbled on this video online.
looks like the entire wt library is online and available via login access.
read some comments and presenter was a bethel insider so he had special access.
The other publications would also likely be available (internally) as update packages for the Windows-based Watchtower Library application…
For example, when using the Publications Index on that version, if you click any of the shorthand references to an old publication, it responds by saying that the full name of the publication isn’t available in the library. This indicates that the term is actually linked to the unavailable publication rather than it not being a link at all.
did anybody else catch it?.
he said that people who come back in the earthly resurrection would be given a body "reasonably similar" to the one they had prior to death.. what the almighty hootch?.
"similar"?.
FFGhost:
He said that people who come back in the earthly resurrection would be given a body "reasonably similar" to the one they had prior to death.
Maybe ’paradise’ is located in Uncanny Valley.
there is another way to fellowship with your loved ones after disagreeing with the wt besides getting reinstated.
all you have to do is fling yourself off a boat and start drowning, says watchtower:.
"suppose, then, a member of a christian congregation boating on a lake were to see another boat containing a disfellowshiped person capsize, throwing the disfellowshiped one into the water where he struggled to stay afloat.
The Watchtower, 15 November 1952, page 703:
Being limited by the laws of the worldly nation in which we live and also by the laws of God through Jesus Christ, we can take action against apostates only to a certain extent, that is, consistent with both sets of laws. The law of the land and God’s law through Christ forbid us to kill apostates, even though they be members of our own flesh-and-blood family relationship.
there is another way to fellowship with your loved ones after disagreeing with the wt besides getting reinstated.
all you have to do is fling yourself off a boat and start drowning, says watchtower:.
"suppose, then, a member of a christian congregation boating on a lake were to see another boat containing a disfellowshiped person capsize, throwing the disfellowshiped one into the water where he struggled to stay afloat.
"Suppose, then, a member of a Christian congregation boating on a lake were to see another boat containing a disfellowshiped person capsize, throwing the disfellowshiped one into the water where he struggled to stay afloat. Could the Christian ignore that one’s peril, row away and feel free from guilt before God—inasmuch as the one in danger of drowning was disfellowshiped, viewed as “a man of the nations”? Certainly not. That would be cruel and inhumane."
From the same resplendent article:
But consider a less extreme situation. What if a woman who had been disfellowshiped were to attend a congregational meeting and upon leaving the hall found that her car, parked nearby, had developed a flat tire? Should the male members of the congregation, seeing her plight, refuse to aid her, perhaps leaving it up to some worldly person to come along and do so? This too would be needlessly unkind and inhumane. Yet situations just like this have developed, perhaps in all good conscience, yet due to a lack of balance in viewpoint.
So if the disfellowshipped (yes, Watch Tower, there's two Ps in that word) woman wants some attention from the congregation's "male members", she can just let her down her tyres rather than resorting to flinging herself off a boat.
which sentences are technically correct.
1 the watchtower keeps changing its doctrines.. 2. the watch tower keeps changing its doctrines.. 3. the watchtower society keeps changing its doctrines.. 4. watchtower keeps changing its doctrines.. 5. watch tower keeps changing its doctrines.. 6. the society keeps changing its doctrines.. 7. the watchtower organization keeps changing its doctrines.. 8. the watch tower organization keeps changing its doctrines..
JeffT:
Edited to add the significance to lawyers: You have to make sure you're suing the right entity. Put "Watchtower" where it should be "Watch Tower" and you run the risk of having your suit dismissed and doing the paperwork all over again.
Definitely, and it would not surprise me at all if the ambiguity between "Watch Tower" and "Watchtower" were deliberate for that reason. At the very least, they take advantage of that ambiguity in legal cases. For example, Gerrit Lösch's deposition stating that he has never been a member or employee of "Watchtower".
which sentences are technically correct.
1 the watchtower keeps changing its doctrines.. 2. the watch tower keeps changing its doctrines.. 3. the watchtower society keeps changing its doctrines.. 4. watchtower keeps changing its doctrines.. 5. watch tower keeps changing its doctrines.. 6. the society keeps changing its doctrines.. 7. the watchtower organization keeps changing its doctrines.. 8. the watch tower organization keeps changing its doctrines..
JeffT:
Unless you're a lawyer I don't see that it makes much difference. When speaking or writing in a more informal setting (like this board or a conversation with a non-JW) anything that is clearly understood to mean "the people who write this crap" will do.
The nature of the original request suggests he wants to write in a more formal setting somewhere else. Getting things correct for formal writing is not restricted only to lawyers.
