Pudgy

…

It is a fact that dogs cannot be wascist!

It is useless for a normal rational person to have a text conversation with you, because it is quite obvious you have no reading comprehension skills.
You have no idea what I’m talking about. You’re thinking is completely driven by a single minded agenda and is impervious.
Apparently explaining the basis of humor is useless on a totally humorous person who cannot mentally connect the dots.

You folks are just too ignorant to understand the joke …. or even have a conversation with.
All humor has to have a basis in truth, that’s why you didn’t “get” the nested inference.
“The “universal” plea for help, SOS”, which was instituted in 1905, was changed because the Japanese during WWII were luring American soldiers into ambushes with fake radio “SOS” pleas for help, and it was changed in various theaters of war to “Mullins” because the Japanese had trouble pronouncing the letter “L”, and it was obvious when they made a fake call for help to lure Americans into an ambush, they would use the word “Mullins”, which they would typically mispronounce as “MURRINS”, which was usually discerned to be a fake distress call and a lure to ambush.
In other war theaters and battlefields other distress calls such as “Pan Pan Pan”, and “Mayday Mayday Mayday”, or “TTT” was used.
 

American made film cameras used to go “click”, and Greek and Japanese film cameras used to go “crick”.
The Japanese cameras had  "JCII" stickers on the bottom,  which stands for "Japan Camera Inspection and Testing Institute." It was a small oval sticker that some Japanese camera manufacturers used to put on their cameras to indicate that the product had passed the quality standards set by the JCII. The JCII ensured that the cameras met certain criteria and were approved for sale in Japan.
The new digital smartphone cameras, all made in China, go “Good job … nice composition”, and send your metadata to Peking.
 

Well, during the 1970’s millions of highly intelligent people in their hearts believed Kermit the Frog was a real frog, albeit with a hand stuck up his butt.
 The word "amphibian" is a Greek word. It comes from the Greek roots "amphi" (meaning "both" or "on both sides") and "bios" (meaning "life"). When parsed, "amphi" refers to living on both hand and water, while "bios" pertains to life. So, "amphibian" literally means "both lives, meaning frogs can live on both water, and on hand.
Like the Japanese, who have trouble pronouncing the letter “L”, over time the expression arose … “ The frog and the hand are ONE.”.

American made film cameras used to go “click”, and Greek and Japanese film cameras used to go “crick”.
The Japanese cameras had  "JCII" stickers on the bottom,  which stands for "Japan Camera Inspection and Testing Institute." It was a small oval sticker that some Japanese camera manufacturers used to put on their cameras to indicate that the product had passed the quality standards set by the JCII. The JCII ensured that the cameras met certain criteria and were approved for sale in Japan.
The new digital smartphone cameras, all made in China, go “Good job … nice composition”, and send your metadata to Peking.
 

Well, during the 1970’s millions of highly intelligent people in their hearts believed Kermit the Frog was a real frog, albeit with a hand stuck up his butt.
 The word "amphibian" is a Greek word. It comes from the Greek roots "amphi" (meaning "both" or "on both sides") and "bios" (meaning "life"). When parsed, "amphi" refers to living on both hand and water, while "bios" pertains to life. So, "amphibian" literally means "both lives, meaning frogs can live on both water, and on hand.
Like the Japanese, who have trouble pronouncing the letter “L”, over time the expression arose … “ The frog and the hand are ONE.”.

No new light, just the elder's opinion, and not a very good one at that. It still stands that Jehovah will be the judge as he knows the reasons and circumstance.

First of all, i have to noticed this: WHAT sort of READERS would come to such idea to even ask such question?
Is it ADVISABLE for a C. MINISTER to give talk ...? ........ Good God!
Also, this question showed how JW's are under (influenced) general idea (of Catholic church) how suicide is consider as sin. Because God is Master of life and you have no right to end something what is given to you  (and to other people) as God's gift. Life belong to God, so He is only one who can give or take life. In such cultural-social environment, suicide is not viewed as something acceptable for member (or is in some black-grey zone).
Another thing, JW funerals talks are, in almost all cases, made in form to giving witnessing to non witness people. That is main reason for giving talk, and not so much about comforting of those who stay.     
i believe how many times, or almost always this questions are products of Bethel moves and strategy. Because, i can be sure how exist people who send some other letters/questions and such subjects not came under this section. Internet is place to ask unpleasant questions and to hear answers that is sometimes hard to accept.
 

Don't think it is new light. Don't be disturbed by anything you hear. Start doing research.  It is easy when you are on the computer.
People in the organization always used to think one would not get a resurrection if they committed suicide. However, please read  the powerful statement mentioned at the end of this answer to a question from readers (in 2002). Go to the article and read it in full. Continue to do research.
 
*** w02 6/15 p. 30 Questions From Readers ***
Questions From Readers
If someone commits suicide, would it be advisable for a Christian minister to give the funeral talk?
….
Any future prospect for the dead is in the hands of Jehovah, and no one is in a position to say whether the deceased will be resurrected or not. The minister can concentrate on the Bible truths about death and offer comfort for the bereaved." End Quote
 
Underscoring = mine
 
 
 

…

When I was a boy, I heard my father give the Society's hour talk on the book of Job about 10 times. The talk spent a good portion of the time showing that Behemoth was a hippopotamus, and Leviathan was a crocodile.
Of course, very little time was spent on the fact that the book of Job also says the following about the Behemoth, which is not at all true of a hippo:
(Job 40:15-20) 15 Here, now, is Be·heʹmoth, which I made as I made you. . . . 17It stiffens [or, sways] its tail like a cedar; The sinews of its thighs are woven together. 18 Its bones are tubes of copper; Its limbs are like wrought-iron rods. 19It ranks first [or, "it is the beginning" -- NWT footnote] among the works of God; Only its Maker can approach it with his sword. 20For the mountains produce food for it, Where all the wild animals play.
The little tail of the hippopotamus does not move or sway like a cedar. It was hardly the beginning of God's creative works. The mountains do not produce food for it. Creatures much more terrifying than hippos have been caught and hunted by man for centuries. When we know what Behemoth is we can then understand why it is tied to the creation of man (cf. "which I made as I made you"), and why it is said to be "first" among God's creative works. Another curious thing about "Behemoth" is that it is a plural word. If it is a type of "plural of majesty" (as in Elohim, or "God of Gods"), then it could mean something like, "Beast of Beasts."
The Leviathan is even less like a crocodile than Behemoth is like a hippo. Note:
(Job 41:1-34) . . .“Can you catch Le·viʹa·than with a fishhook Or hold down its tongue with a rope?  . . . 7 Will you fill its hide with harpoons Or its head with fishing spears?  8 Lay your hand on it; You will remember the battle and never do it again!  9 Any hope of subduing it is futile. The mere sight of it would overwhelm you. 10 No one dares to stir it up. . . . 12 I will not be silent about its limbs, About its mightiness and its well-formed body. 13 Who has removed its outer covering? Who will enter its open jaws? 14 Who can pry open the doors of its mouth? Its teeth all around are fearsome. 15 Its back has rows of scales Tightly sealed together. 16 Each one fits so closely to the other That no air can come between them. 17 They are stuck to one another; They cling together and cannot be separated. 18 Its snorting flashes out light, And its eyes are like the rays of dawn. Flashes of lightning go out of its mouth; Fiery sparks escape. 20 Smoke pours out of its nostrils, Like a furnace fueled with rushes. 21 Its breath sets coals ablaze, And a flame shoots from its mouth. 22 There is great strength in its neck, And dismay runs before it. 23 The folds of its flesh are tightly joined together; They are firm, as though cast upon it and immovable. 24 Its heart is hard as stone, Yes, hard as a lower millstone. 25 When it rises up, even the mighty are frightened; Its thrashing causes bewilderment. 26 No sword that reaches it will prevail; Nor will spear, dart, or arrowhead. 27 It regards iron as straw, Copper as rotten wood. 28 An arrow does not make it flee; Slingstones turn into stubble against it. 29 It regards a club as stubble, And it laughs at the rattling of a javelin. 30 Underneath, it is like sharp fragments of pottery; It spreads itself in the mud like a threshing sledge. 31It makes the deep boil just like a pot; It stirs up the sea like an ointment pot. 32 It leaves a glistening wake in its path. One would think that the deep had white hair. 33 There is nothing like it on the earth, A creature made to have no fear. 34 It glares at everything that is haughty. It is king over all the majestic wild beasts.”
Do crocodiles snort out fire and sparks from their nostrils? Do their eyes shine brightly? Does lightning go out of its mouth? is it like a furnace inside, so that its very breath sends a flame that can set coals ablaze? Does it really stir up the deep seas like a cauldron? Looking again at the New World Translation it's hard for me to believe, now, that I ever thought this was a crocodile.
Of course, part of the problem is that Witnesses, like many fundamentalist religions, too, do not want to see "fabulous" creatures in the Bible. It opens up the Bible to ridicule if it refers to "real" dragons and unicorns and beasts that seem never to have existed. Yet the idea appears even more "fabulous" if we read from some other translations, or more especially, the "Septuagint" LXX era translations, which would have been based on Hebrew manuscripts from as early as 400 BCE, rather than the NWT which is based on Hebrew manuscripts from as late as 1100 CE.
Here are some of the quotes from Job in the LXX: http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/28-iob-nets.pdf
Job 40:15-23 But look now you are familiar with "monsters" [Behemoth]; they eat grass like cows. Look now its strength is in its loins, and its power in its belly's navel. It stood up its tail like a cypress, and its sinews have been interwoven. Its flanks are flanks of copper, and its spine is cast iron. . . . This is the chief of what the Lord created, made to be mocked at by his angels. But when it went up on a steep mountain, it brought its gladness to the quadrupeds in Tartarus. . . . If there is a flood, it will never take notice. {*It trusts that the Jordan will tumble into its mouth.}
Job 40:25-41:26 [Masoretic 41:1-34] And will you catch a dragon [Leviathan] with a fish hook? . . . And do nations feed on it, and do the Phoenician races divvy it up? And a whole fleet, gathered, cannot carry the mere skin of its tail. {and its head in fisherman's boats}. But you will lay a hand on it, though you remember the battle that is waging in its body, and let it happen no more! . . . Who will uncover the front of what it is wearing? And who could enter the plate of its cuirass? Who will open the gates of its face? Fear is all around its teeth. Its inwards are bronze shields. . . . Light shines forth at its sneezing and its eyes have the look of the morning star. From its mouth proceed flaming torches, and fiery braziers are being cast forth. From its nostrils smoke of a furnace burning with the fire of coals. Its soul is coals, and a flame proceeds from its mouth. . . . Its heart is solid like stone, and it stands like an unyielding anvil. . . . It makes the deep boil like a caldron and regards the sea as a pot of ointment and Tartarus of the deep as a captive. . . . There is nothing else on earth like it, made to be mocked at by my angels. Everything high it sees, and it is king over all that are in the waters.
The basic idea remains in modern translations, but there is some evidence that the Masoretic text (which the NWT is based upon) has often cleaned up what was thought to be embarrassing to medieval rabbis in the intervening centuries. The references to "Tartarus" [see Greek mythology] are curious, especially due to 2 Peter 2:4. But the additional references to Leviathan in the Hebrew Scriptures are just as striking.

@BroRando, If you are a Witness you should really take this matter up with the Watchtower Society / the Branch / the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses.
The idea has come up before and the Watchtower explained that it is people who are unfamiliar with Greek who believe as you do. The Watchtower explains that it is nearly the opposite of the way you have tried to explain it. I'll highlight some of that Watchtower article for those who are interested in the Biblical and grammatical evidence:
*** w77 5/15 p. 319 Questions From Readers ***
To a person unfamiliar with the Greek language it might seem that there is a significance indicated by the fact that first the word is spelled theon and next theos. But the difference is simply a matter of complying with the Greek grammatical case used.
John 1:1 reads: “In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God [τὸν θεὸν, literally, the god], and the Word was a god [θεὸς].”
Greek has five cases—nominative, genitive, dative, accusative and vocative. How a word is spelled can vary depending on the case in which it is used. Take, as an example, the definite article “the.” In the masculine gender “the” is respectively written in the first four of these cases: ὁ, τοῦ, τῷ, τὸν, in the singular number.
Similarly, in John 1:1 the word theos is spelled in accord with the particular case being employed. In the first instance (“the Word was with God”) it is in the accusative case and thus is spelled θεὸν But in the second occurrence it is in the nominative case, and so it is spelled θεὸς. The spelling of theos does not of itself indicate the person or position of the one designated, as 2 Corinthians 4:4, 6 illustrates. In verse four Satan is identified as θεὸς, “the god of this system of things,” and in verse six the Creator is designated θεὸς. The spelling is theos in both verses, for the nominative case is used in each. So the fact that theos is spelled differently in its two occurrences in John 1:1 does not show any difference in meaning; “god” is the meaning in both instances.
You believe the Watchtower is wrong here, and I agree with the Watchtower here. Your argument is with the Watchtower. Ask them about it and you can just tell us what they said when you told them they were wrong.

Oh rats!
oh rats!
I was going to ask CHATGPT to take some of your previous post and make a mashup of insane absurd meaningless gobbledygook, but alas, you beat me to it.

I think your evaluation of the “aha!”courtroom moment is a delusional fantasy on your part …. like walking down the main concourse of Disneyland, with the fountains, paying $140  for a ticket, seeing in your mind “The Happiest Place on Earth”, and with so much invested, your quiet unhappiness is supressed.

My apologies @Pudgy I remember you do not click on links.  The accurate scripture is: "Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations in My Name," (Hebrew Matthew 28:19)
This fits how the Disciples of the First Century Baptized from supporting scriptures.
Peter said to them: “Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the free gift of the holy spirit.” (Acts 2:38) “With that he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they requested him to stay for some days.” (Acts 10:48) “But when they believed Philip, who was declaring the good news of the Kingdom of God and of the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were getting baptized.” (Acts 8:12) We do not need outside sources to tell us what would be the correct view. However, there is plenty of evidence mounting.
Quoted from Article Entitled  "The Baptismal Formula"

I think your evaluation of the “aha!”courtroom moment is a delusional fantasy on your part …. like walking down the main concourse of Disneyland, with the fountains, paying $140  for a ticket, seeing in your mind “The Happiest Place on Earth”, and with so much invested, your quiet unhappiness is supressed.

Ummmm, read the title of this thread again, try it without the prosecution lenses on.
 

A "word salad" is a term used to describe a type of language or speech that is incoherent and lacks meaningful or logical connections between words and phrases. It refers to a jumble of words, often random and disorganized, which do not form coherent sentences or convey any comprehensible message.
Word salads are typically associated with certain medical conditions and psychiatric disorders, most notably with schizophrenia, where they can be a symptom of disorganized thought processes. People experiencing a word salad may produce speech that appears nonsensical, with words and phrases thrown together without clear syntactic or semantic structure.
It is important to note that word salads can be distressing and challenging to understand for both the affected individual and those around them. When encountered, it is essential to approach the situation with empathy and seek appropriate medical attention if it is indicative of an underlying medical or mental health condition.

… Perfect example of a “Word Salad”.
What does that even mean?

i Have no idea what you are talking about. What is a VBS, a sophis, and “another little due”?

i Have no idea what you are talking about. What is a VBS, a sophis, and “another little due”?

i Have no idea what you are talking about. What is a VBS, a sophis, and “another little due”?

…. written like a true analog based vacuum tube computer Ai.
A humorless stain on an underpowered circuit board.