Jeffro

Joined

• started 46 topics
• posted 6,784 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Jeffro

• 
  38

  "A Jehovah's Witness"

  by NotFormer in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a very certain distinctive of jws is how they refer to themselves.

  "one of jehovah's witnesses".

  it's one of those coded jargon thingies.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Rattigan350:

  I am not 'a' anything. Israel was a people, Christians are a people. not 'a' anything.

  Wow 🤦‍♂️

  Cult mindset overrides basic grammar rules.
• 
  14

  Cedar Point Ohio 🙄🙄🤦🏻‍♂️

  by xaminewt in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i started doubting the organization when i was 15. i spent the next 12 years doing in-depth research involving numerous emails with bible scholars and scientists.

  i finally left the organisation 3 years ago.

  technically i was never actually a jw as i was never baptised, so i’m not being shunned.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  It’s just a plain old ‘Texas Sharp shooter’ fallacy. And not a very good one because the League of Nations was founded in January 1920 anyway, not 1919.
• 
  38

  "A Jehovah's Witness"

  by NotFormer in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a very certain distinctive of jws is how they refer to themselves.

  "one of jehovah's witnesses".

  it's one of those coded jargon thingies.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  blondie:

  It is an unwritten rule that it is proper per the WTS to use "one of Jehovah's witnesses" rather than "A Jehovah's Witness."

  Yep. They do love their jargon. Within the denomination they like to pretend that it’s just individuals with personal conviction about ‘the truth’ that they’ve found through ‘personal Bible study’ and not micromanaged by a corporation. Which is of course a farce. But when legally registering a denomination, it doesn’t work to say they’re just individual ‘witnesses of Jehovah’ (an unverifiable superstition rather than a coherent group). There’d be nothing to register.
• 
  38

  "A Jehovah's Witness"

  by NotFormer in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a very certain distinctive of jws is how they refer to themselves.

  "one of jehovah's witnesses".

  it's one of those coded jargon thingies.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Rattigan350:

  Everyone says 'One of Jehovah's Witnesses' because it sounds right.

  This suggests you live in a JW bubble.

  NotFormer:

  While writing this the thought came to me about when that self-descriptor first came into being: was it part of the initial name change by Rutherford, or was it a later development?

  It was Rutherford’s intention that JWs be seen as ‘witnesses of Jehovah’ (I.e., ‘Jehovah’s witnesses’) rather than simply naming his group in the typical sense. The name change was primarily to distinguish his group of Bible Students from the various Bible Students groups that had separated from the Watch Tower Society’s control after 1917. The ‘w’ was not capitalised in JW literature until the 1970s (except in headings). Hence the term ‘one of Jehovah’s witnesses’ is jargon intended to convey that they ‘really’ are ‘witnesses of Jehovah’ (in an outdated legalistic sense tied to Rutherford’s background as a lawyer).

  Outside of that superstitious usage, it is correct and common for the term ‘Jehovah’s Witness’ to function as a singular noun in reference to an individual member or as an adjectival modifier in reference to the denomination.

  ‘Jehovah’s Witnesses’ is the plural form for a group of members, and saying ‘they’re Jehovah’s Witnesses’ is analogous to ‘they’re Catholics’. Somewhat ambiguously (likely intentionally), the singular form of the denomination name is also ‘Jehovah’s Witnesses’, and saying ‘they’re members of Jehovah’s Witnesses’ is analogous to saying ‘they’re members of the Catholic Church’.

  The ambiguity arising from the same term used for both the denomination and its members occasionally results in tedious disputes about incorrectly assumed ‘correct grammar’ (but ignores correct verb-noun agreement and the function of compound proper nouns).
• 
  38

  "A Jehovah's Witness"

  by NotFormer in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a very certain distinctive of jws is how they refer to themselves.

  "one of jehovah's witnesses".

  it's one of those coded jargon thingies.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  
  

  🤦‍♂️
• 
  38

  "A Jehovah's Witness"

  by NotFormer in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  a very certain distinctive of jws is how they refer to themselves.

  "one of jehovah's witnesses".

  it's one of those coded jargon thingies.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Vidiot:

  the first is technically more correct from a grammatical POV

  No, it’s not. Would you say “Bob’s Burgers are a tv series” just because ‘burgers’ is a plural? The correct verb is is when referring to a compound proper noun as the name of a singular entity, in this case a religious denomination.

  It is only technically correct to say “Jehovah’s Witnesses are…” when referring to a group of JW members rather than the denomination itself.
• 
  18

  Another Sad Shunning due to homophobia by J.W's !!

  by Phizzy in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Sea Breeze:

  For some reason the Mayo Clinic has this to say about gay men:

  ‘For some reason’? The same page on the Mayo Clinic website says:
  

  Concern about homophobia and the stigma sometimes associated with homosexuality may prevent some gay men from getting routine health care.

  Which is why they are at higher risk of mental health issues and sexual health issues. So maybe if religious jerks weren’t jerks so much, victims of homophobia wouldn’t have so many issues.
• 
  18

  Another Sad Shunning due to homophobia by J.W's !!

  by Phizzy in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Rattigan350:

  No one is afraid of homos

  Wrong as usual. There is literally a traditional classification of ‘gay panic’ as a defence for violence against perceived homosexual advances.
• 
  299

  Who told the first lie?

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?

  god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.

  in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  Me earlier:

  But we may never know what prior or contemporary alternative versions of the flood story in the Epic existed, originally as oral traditions only.

  (I am aware that there are some other known Sumerian flood stories separate but related to the Epic of Gilgamesh, but because I was in a hurry on mobile device I was considering them the same basic family of flood stories as it wasn't worth the elaboration.)
  
• 
  299

  Who told the first lie?

  by nicolaou in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this is a continuation of the discussion which sprang from an unrelated topic.. so according to genesis, who told the first lie?

  god told eve that if she ate from the tree of knowledge she would die that very same day.

  in response to that statement the devil told her she would not die.. eve ate from the tree and did not die.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Jeffro

  I know the Jews didn't invent the Flood, but who did? We cannot say. It is fuzzy.

  Separate civilisations have developed local flood stories (often presented as ‘global’), some related to this one and others that are entirely independent (despite the tedious JW claim that they all got the story from the Bible one). But we may never know what prior or contemporary alternative versions of the flood story in the Epic existed, originally as oral traditions only.