JW Insider

I also enjoy reading the translations have 4 and sometimes 8 translations on the same page. I have two of these, one of each variety.

This is not so different from going to Biblehub or blueletterbible online. As you are reading and might be wondering about the words chosen, you can instantly click to see the passage in several additional translations, and if you are inclined, you can also click on the Strongs/Thayers/Gesenius style definitions, or read a commentary on that whole chapter.

I like the Catholic "New Jerusalem Bible" for the variety of footnotes. You might need a magnifying glass, however. I did.

To be or not to be. To die or not to die.

It's a bit like Shakespeare put it, except that Paul was not suicidal and had a lot more faith in the afterlife:

1. To be, or not to be, that is the question:
2. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
3. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
4. Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
5. And by opposing end them. To die—to sleep,
6. No more; and by a sleep to say we end
7. The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
8. That flesh is heir to: 'tis a consummation
9. Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
10. To sleep, perchance to dream—ay, there's the rub:
11. For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
12. When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
13. Must give us pause—there's the respect
14. That makes calamity of so long life.
15. For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
16. Th'oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
17. The pangs of dispriz'd love, the law's delay,
18. The insolence of office, and the spurns
19. That patient merit of th'unworthy takes,
20. When he himself might his quietus make
21. With a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear,
22. To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
23. But that the dread of something after death,
24. The undiscovere'd country, from whose bourn
25. No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
26. And makes us rather bear those ills we have
27. Than fly to others that we know not of?
28. Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
29. And thus the native hue of resolution
30. Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
31. And enterprises of great pitch and moment
32. With this regard their currents turn awry
33. And lose the name of action.

Quote

Then it shouldn’t be a surprise on how you attempted to twist the narrative to suit your own personal goals.

Please don't be offended if I call you "Allen." Your unique logic and phrasing is such a perfect match to Allen's that you can just consider it a compliment if you wish. Of course, I realize that Allen might not be your real name either, but it was the most utilized of the noms de plume. Right or wrong, please accept that I must conflate your arguments here with previous arguments made under other names, which I will call, "Allen."

So, it doesn't surprise me, Allen, that you claim the narrative was twisted. Allen always had a knack for doing something and then blaming that same thing on persons he tried to make adversaries of. And I can't blame you for trying to make an adversary of me. You may even think of me as your adversary. But I do not think of you as one.

I'm simply a person who had some experiences that I think are important to share somewhere out of a love for truth. Several people know of my experiences firsthand. My wife knows some of these experiences of mine, and even shared a few of them along with me, too. But in the congregation, as you know, we cannot always give the true and correct answer to certain issues, without hurting someone, or causing misunderstandings. Yet we are under obligation to speak truth, letting the light of truth shine. Since, to avoid such misunderstandings, we end up being silent in front of most persons, I choose this place--this forum--to speak truth. Perhaps hardly anyone reads it here, but at least I am documenting some experiences, expressing some opinions, and I feel better from the perspective of my Christian conscience, by expressing the truth. At least I am not hiding my personal experiences and opinions under a measuring basket.

I believe these experiences, especially, can be important in getting at the truth of several issues. Obviously you think these experiences are very important too, or you wouldn't spend so much energy trying to dismiss and discredit them.

I suspect that you actually know that my experiences are true, and you probably realize that some of the opinions I have shared about certain of our teachings are also true. I'm guessing this due to the way you appear to have no problem using obvious deceptions to deny and dismiss. You also rarely come up with any actual reasons in response. This game you are playing in trying to make something out of nothing here with the "money in the streets" is a good example. You just keep claiming something is wrong, but won't even attempt to point out any specifics.

I know my experiences are true, but I can't claim that my opinions are true, of course. But I can continue to express all of them honestly, looking for all the facts I can, in the hopes that others can help confirm or discount them based on their own experiences and their own reasons. This can help all of us evaluate each other's opinions. 

From you, unfortunately, I no longer expect that you will do much more than just say that I'm wrong about something, impute a bad motive, and then grasp at empty ideas, often just "strawmen" often claiming I said things that I never even spoke about.

In our congregation, I would just assume that you have a very different personality. You probably feel that you are doing what you are doing to protect others from apostasy, while I feel that I do what I do in order to protect others from being so easily swayed by questionable teachings.

So, here we are at a kind of impasse. If you were in my congregation, however, I suspect we would both be working toward the same end, trying to protect the morals and morale of the congregation. We'd be trying to find encouragement and love among one another, under similar circumstances. For example, we had two funerals in the space of two weeks which allowed many opportunities to bind up the broken-hearted. We have several sick elderly persons. One just had a stroke (actually something they call a series of little strokes) and it has left the sister with blurred vision and difficulty getting back on her feet. She's still at the hospital. A group of us went to see her twice this week, and many others were there too. I think we all felt better after the visit. Persons my age (as young as me, lol) are afflicted with Parkinson's, cancer, RA, diabetes, etc.

But on the brighter side, there's also a congregation wedding planned for May, and I have my own anniversary in June, and my wife and I are visiting my parents again in June/July. My daughter is pregnant with her second baby girl, due in May, and we are all planning on pitching in as much as we can. Both my parents "auxiliary" pioneered this month. I didn't, even though it's much easier to do this month, but I still found plenty to do "in the work of the Lord."

I have also found that I was able to get a young brother into a fairly well paying job that started last month.  I give free lessons to a couple of persons who recently graduated (high school), trying to teach them a computer language. It's a language that I never even used myself before I retired,  but it's very powerful, and easy to learn and pretty easy to teach. (You probably know about it yourself, having been in Tech before. It's called "Python.")

I'll admit that I haven't been nearly as active in field service as in the past, and I find it more and more difficult to start a Bible Study. I've had 12 at the same time in the past, and several have become dedicated and baptized over the years. I must admit that if I focused completely on doctrine that I would easily talk myself out of starting another Bible Study with anyone. So I admit a spiritual danger, and after "stepping down" I am just as active, but it feels a little more secular when it's not things I would count time for.

But meetings, prayer, study, meditation and finding opportunities to show love are always there.

But this new situation of mine motivates me to share my experiences and my opinions here all the more, not less. The more open we can be with our own opinions, in good conscience, then the easier it is to be able to study with persons, and have actual discussions about doctrines, without being dogmatic about controversial or questionable doctrines. It gives us more opportunities to follow the scriptures and focus on the more important things -- especially when we can say honestly that we aren't absolutely sure of this or that, but we definitely know about the importance of the kingdom hope, God's eternal purpose, God's sovereignty and the universal challenge to it, the reason for wickedness, the earthly paradise, the importance of the fruits of the spirit, moral cleanliness, encouraging one another, and loving one another.

Since you've "pulled me aside" on this part of the forum, I am more apt to tell you more personal information about my "profile" and "status" rather than engage in the points of discussion you are raising. I can tell that on this particular matter you seem to have very little interest in the truth of it anyway. I don't want to further shame you or embarrass you over the many things you have said that have no basis in truth. If you truly think any of those points are important to discuss, then we can bring them back to a place on the forum where other persons are more apt to weigh in with opinions and corrections.

The only thing I'll say here in connection with those points you tried to make is that most of them make no sense to me. When I take my best guess at what they seem to mean, they reveal a very unchristian, unloving and deceptive attitude on your part. The only clear statements that were perfectly understandable were the following:

Quote

I have visited this site many times. I have seen Allen Smiths comments to be direct and truthful. I also see when you were challenged, the owner protected you.

I found several of Allen's comments to be direct and truthful when it came to others. I found most of his comments to me to easily proven to be untruthful when they were direct, but they were very rarely direct. I happen to know for sure that you have no evidence that I was protected because I never was. I still have no idea who the site owners are, and what their status is or was in their congregations, if any.

I happen to know that you, Allen, were protected for a while, until so many of your blowups became so emotional that they resembled "word salads" of cursing and name-calling and judgmental condemnations of specific people. I actually believed for a short time that you might be an apostate who was just trying to give the impression that JWs were unthinking cult members who might just start attacking persons whenever they were cornered with reasonableness.

Fortunately, you were the only person acting that way, and enough other reasonable voices were making it obvious that this was not the case with most Witnesses. Even so, I thought you should remain because it gave an opportunity for other Witnesses to prove their reasonableness. One of the admins wrote to me out of the blue and asked my opinion on whether you should be removed and I said absolutely not, that you brought a lot of value to the forum. But I still think most of that value was when you were addressing others, because somehow you never seemed reasonable when discussing anything with me, even things that it turned out you and I were in agreement on.

I should let you know right up front that I had likely already figured out where @Hankulan Tunani was coming when that name first popped up in this forum a few months ago. It was pretty easy based on the topics and patterns of style that left me with maybe a 99 percent assurance that I knew why this persona appeared, and who was being represented. Now that you have picked the same name (with a hyphen, this time @Hankulan-Tunani ), even before I read the content of your post, I couldn't help but predict that you would be continuing some of the same themes in support of and in defense of BTK, and a parallel attempt to put blame on me. 

Again, however, I don't mind at all when someone challenges anything I have done or said. I also agree that I have made mistakes here on the forum, and I was happy when they were pointed out. I have admitted these mistakes, will continue to do so, and hope more of them will be pointed out whenever I make them. Further, I should admit that I have no plans to share most of the 500 or so pages that I had kept in my files from Bethel. It's not that I believe that anything in our organization should be hidden from others. But there are certain items where sharing them would not be loving. For example I have two sets of Gilead Class Notes, and although I do not believe there should be any information that is only given to Gilead students, I believe that those who were invited to Gilead might feel slighted that their special privilege was being belittled by sharing a large part of it with everyone who had never been invited. Every now and then I have referenced Gilead Notes here but only for a single point at a time, here and there, when a related question arises.

That said, I can still try to address your points. You said:

Quote

I believe the attitude of attempting to justify the reason why the money ended in the street as though worthless currency can be irrelevant to be just left in the street, was somehow a point you were dogging to legitimize.

Please correct me if I misunderstand, but basically, it appears that you think I was trying very hard to attempt to justify or legitimize the reason the money was in the streets, even though the reason was not considered as relevant as the "fact" that it was thrown into the streets. I think this is exactly correct. Besides, I was not trying to justify it or legitimize the incident or the reasons for it. I merely agreed that the Snopes article is correct in that it fits all the known evidence, and no one has tried to provide contemporary evidence to the contrary, whether pro-Maduro or the opposition.

Quote

Where do you see your own fault in the matter? I believe frustration runs deep both ways. If you had agreed, then why did you find it a need to press the issue?

No. There is no frustration at all about the matter from this direction. I'm satisfied and happy that we have a good understanding of this incident, and can learn from it. I agree with my own mother too that Ezekiel is partially fulfilled by such incidents, and I agree with the Watchtower that we can expect a specific, larger fulfillment more specific to the meaning of the prophecy in context. The fulfillment, as you point out, is really irrelevant, even if the reasons behind the specific incident in question came about due to economic sabotage from both inside and outside, and the vicissitudes of a heavily oil-dependent economy, and several other complex reasons. I think BTK must have thought that these particular complex reasons somehow would have spoiled the connection to Ezekiel and he didn't like the idea that these images have come to us as part of an obvious propaganda campaign to discredit the current regime, right or wrong.

As you point out now, that particular reason should not have mattered, and it should not have been necessary for him to get so worked up about those particular reasons as if they negated his overall point. They never did. I still agree with the overall point.

But that was no reason for BTK to begin dismissing the evidence, make new claims that are quite different from the evidence and the reality of the specific incident. For some persons who had made an inference that the photo could have been fake or photoshopped, I dumped a bunch of hundreds over my lunch to show that there was no need to think the photo itself was faked. It showed just how easy it is to create propaganda with money, too.

I don't know the reason BTK wanted to push for the possibility that my burrito might have been some kind of drug paraphernalia, but I thought it was funny enough to respond to. I think he was just grasping at any straws to try to discredit whatever it was I was saying even though he probably agreed with me 100 percent at one point.

Quote

That is a question for those that agree with your explanation. It seems the idea of worthless money in the street from past JW members happen to come true. The reason for that money on the street is irrelevant.

Exactly right. So why do you think BTK pressed the issue in the way he did?

Quote

There is plenty of blame to go around. It’s time to take responsibility for their own actions, rather than having an issue placed one someone’s shoulder when there is plenty of blame to go around.

I agreed with the statements that were obviously correct, and when someone decided to try to discredit statements I made that were correct, I simply explained further why they were correct. That is a difficult thing for some to accept, so they begin lashing out with outrageous claims about drug paraphernalia, stating that what is true is somehow false, claiming that someone who agrees with their mother is out to discredit their mother, calling people AH, etc., etc. I'm sure you've noticed a history of this type of behavior from the same someone who claims to be a good Christian Witness.

I don't actually think it's a lot of different people who are to be blamed for this, because I still think that AllenSmith who did the same thing, and BTK are the same person, along with a few other names he uses to instigate "fights" in others.

Of course, it's pretty obvious that you are really hoping that some of this blame would stick upon others, including me, for continuing to hold to the truth of the matter while someone else was trying to discredit the truth by any means he could muster. I would accept that blame if there were any evidence. But even you, here, have only claimed that I doggedly attempted to justify or legitimize a side of the story, a side of the story that I am still sure is quite true. I see no reason to be blamed for expressing an opinion that the truth about a matter is true, even if someone else insists that what's true might be false. None of us should feel any blame for standing up for a truth, no matter how small or irrelevant. 

Quote

I agree that no one should bring worldly attitudes and posturing to this forum. That should include worldly views of apostasy. I believe you have a lot to answer for as well.

I'm glad you agree about worldly attitudes and posturing. I also agree that no one should bring worldly views of apostasy. I bring a very scriptural view of apostasy to this forum, and I'm sure that is also difficult for some to deal with.

So sorry you were having health trouble. Certainly hope all is better. Much love back at you.

I don't know Paul Grundy, but he is the author of jwfacts.com. I'm surprised it is just one person. jwfacts comes up in Google searches a lot when I look up a topic. I have not read too many of the articles there, but the ones I have read have been very accurate and well-documented. I'm a bit of a "nit-picker" so I read articles closely and I have seen a few mistakes. I recommend that everyone do their own research and not just rely on things I have said, or anyone else has said.

Yes. That is no doubt true. Another reason to let them say it in their own words. No reason that anyone should have tried to put words in their mouth.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/423624-douma-syria-russia-attack/

Strange indeed. I've never even seen it depicted on TV or movies, although have read about it. Edited to add: The design of the Y-shaped water-witching stick, as I've seen it, provides for the maximum ability create wild movements of the stick with only subtle movements of the palm/wrist.

Never used this suggested feature of writing on someone's profile. I suppose you get a notice that I responded even if I don't add @TrueTomHarley

Thanks.

The "best answer" feature works in forums where 10+ different people answer a question that requires some expertise, and the one with the most expertise can bubble up. I think that questions here are often intended to start a dialogue, and the best ones go one for several pages. No one is really looking for the single most "expert" sounding answer, they are usually looking to see how the idea was responded to by some and whether the answers, in total, produced a reasonable discussion. Taking any one answer out of the sequence makes it difficult to follow the conversation or dialogue.

There are a few exceptions, but these tend to be questions with fewer answers anyway, and therefore the best answer is already somewhere on the same page as the question.

So I don't know exactly what to suggest, except maybe to default to "Sort by date" and then have a message that might say: "Sort by votes to find best answers." Even that option might only be available when there have been some votes.

But that's the complicated way to do it. For 95% of the topics, just defaulting to "sort by date" would be sufficient. In the topics I've read it is almost never used. I'm almost afraid that when people start using it more often it can be abused, too. I think it would usually be used as a way to highlight most interesting, most intriguing, most important, or "most agreeable to voter's way of thinking." Most of the posts that people would vote on are, in my experience, not even intended to answer the original question, but just to share some additional information.

From what I can tell, the URL was changed a bit, but it looks like you have already located it: