More and more lately when I have occasion to read any of the Society's publications or any postings here at this site which quote the Society's publications I find more and more lately that I become really irritated, annoyed, chafing, at the redundant phrase "anointed Christians." It just irritates the hell out of me. I don't necessarily understand the "why" of this annoyance only that I recognize that I have it. The word "Christians" literally mean "anointed ones" so that the phrase "anointed Christians" is really saying "anointed anointed ones." Just bugs me. Are there any phrases in the Society's literature that irritate you?
Example: "Can anything be done if an infirm anointed anointed one finds it impossible to attend the congregation's commemoration of the Lord's Evening Meal?
And another thing, in the post below about QFR regarding eating of the emblems, it says:
"In such a case, the body of elders can arrange for an elder or other mature Christian male to take portions of the emblematic bread and wine to that fellow believer." Why is it necessary for an "elder" to bring such emblems to such an anointed anointed one? Why can it not be a sister bringing it to a sister? Where in the Bible does it necessitate a "male" to bring such emblems? Jesus said wherever there are 'two or three' gathered together he is present. Did he say male to male or male to female?
The article also stated: "Such an anointed one [NOT anointed anointed one] can avail himself of a precedent in the Mosaic Law and commemorate it privately 30 days later." Why can it be commemorated PRIVATELY a month later and not PRIVATELY the month before? (Something's wrong with this picture.) If all JW's (partakers and OBSERVERS) are encouraged to attend in the first month, shouldn't the congregation be willing to gather together AGAIN a month later for an anointed anointed one to partake the second time around? If a congregation has only one anointed anointed one, and that anointed anointed one is sick or infirm and unable to attend in the first month , why do they all gather in the first month with no anointed anointed one present or partaking, but NOT gather together in the second month when the anointed anointed one is feeling a bit better and IS PARTAKING during the second month? Seems to me the congregation should be more than willing to congregate during the second month along with the anointed anointed one who is present and partaking.
This whole thing is just plain dumb.