TrueTomHarley

In hindsight I spoke too sharply to @admin. I apologize to him. He is our host after all. I appreciate it that he puts up with us.

When you cite Jehovah's Witnesses, you are citing almost the only example you could cite that disproves your point. Categorically, they will not be kill or be maneuvered by the national king into killing. How bad can they be? Is it? I'll even call you on this. The general reality is that social media is more apt to spread hate than resolution. Religion, however, at its best, will spread love in a way that your technology could not even dream of. And what is this idiocy of 'fear-based religion?' Methinks you are in danger of drinking too much of the Kool-Aid yourself. How often in Scripture is the expression 'Fear God' or 'Fear Jehovah?' Almost 40. I counted. It is 'fear' in the same sense children used to routinely fear their parents, out of love and respect, fear of displeasing them, with 'punishment' only a background concern. Increasingly the ones to be feared are the 'anti-cultists' who expand the definition of a PEJORATIVE word so as to cover people they don't like. Under the guise of 'protecting' them from ideas they don't want heard, their Russian soul-brothers have gone so far as to arrest them and steal all their property. If you must carry on about 'this technology,' consider this paragraph from a book from (blush) a favorite author of mine as to how the Witness organization has used it: "In recent years, the Watchtower organization even offers its own programming through a JW Broadcasting streaming channel, a refreshing and most unusual alternative to mainstream TV. Members of the Governing Body thus repeat the pattern they are known for with any new technology: They eye it with suspicion. They advise caution. They know that when the thief switches getaway cars, it is the thief you have to watch, not the dazzling features of the new car. They follow the thief for a time. Convinced at last that they still have a bead on him, they examine the car. They circle it warily, kicking the tires. At last satisfied, they jump in with both feet and put it to good uses its inventors could only have dreamed of." Tom Irregardless and Me

You know, you may have a point. I have looked closely at these times and I can tell that they don’t want to applaud. They REALLY REALLY DON’T want to applaud. But then they notice an elder glowering at them and sweat breaks out on their brow. In some cases, they pee their pants. In the end, even though they hate the thought, they clap and clap and clap. Sometimes their hands turn to mush and the paramedics have to haul them away for first aid. I mean, it is possible to overplay the paranoia card, John. They applaud because they liked the program and appreciate the work of those that put it together.

Apostates and loyal ones unite! At last we have found common cause! Let us band together and beat up @admin, who presumes to break up our riotous party! If we want to ruin his website, what's that to him? I will even be gracious and concede that you guys won a round. You correctly predicted that he would 'lose it' on a weekend. I could have sworn it would have been on a weekday. Probably admin knows that not one Witness he sees here on these controversial threads is a typical Witness. They are all 'rouge' to one degree of another, myself included. They all have their own individual reasons for being here, as do I. None of them are heeding the Witness organizations' preference not to engage in disputes with determined opposers. Witnesses are encouraged by their organization not to dispute. 'Put your version of truth out there, and if they reject it, they reject it.' Whatever one may think about Witnesses, one must concede that they endeavor to present their message with dignity, whether it be door-to-door, their website, or the recent innovations of 'cart witnessing.' The dignity all shreds when they come here and similar places (there are actually very few where both sides mix together - you can take a bow for hosting I think the most prominent one) which is why the organization prefers they stay away. There is a WT study today that I am sure Jack Ryan will start a thread on, if he hasn't already, about internet sources reporting on Witnesses and how it is best not to get carried away by what they may say, since they generally present 'distorted facts,' the germ of which is not untrue, necessarily but 'distorted.' It will be Jack's turn to 'lose it' over this. is the Watchtower wrong not to comment specifically on this or that news report? Many charge that. But since polls consistently show that trust in the media is abysmal and that people take for granted that they are often inaccurate, they tend to say 'why go there?' They encourage their people to 'persuade,' but not 'debate. They encourage them to follow the example of Jesus, who routinely did things that would infuriate any devotee of debate. He continually answered questions with counter-questions. He raised many a straw man argument. ('gaining context', it used to be called) He spun complex parables that he rarely explained. Let the heart figure it out. What! Is it cheap entertainment we are speaking of? Jesus said religious truth would be 'the pearl of great price' that you must 'exert yourself vigorously' to lay hold of. He didn't say it was a fine thing to sit on your butt and wait for the 'winner' of a debate to toss it to you. Debate invariably focuses attention, not on the merits of any given idea, but on the skill of the debater. In debate school, one is taught to argue both sides of a given argument. That fact ought to suffice to assess 'debate' as a way to arrive at truth. You would never know it from here, but the best way to uncover how most Witnesses feel about their governing arrangement is to attend a Regional Convention. The line that invariably brings down the house with applause is: 'Would you like to send your greetings to the brothers in Bethel?'

Because it is a significant sub-theme of the New Testament. There is no NT writer that does not deal with it. Two entire chapters are devoted to it. Jude was about to write a bland letter that would have entered the dustbin of canon history, but “I found it necessary to write you to urge you to put up a hard fight for the faith that was once for all time delivered to the holy ones. My reason is that certain men have slipped in among you who were long ago appointed to this judgment by the Scriptures; they are ungodly men who turn the undeserved kindness of our God into an excuse for brazen conduct and who prove false to...” and so forth. One having regard for the Bible can easily make the case that the genuine successor of first-century Christianity will also have voracious apostates, as they did. If they existed then in droves, why not today? Either that or the opposition melted away because Christ succeeded in transforming the world. But that hasn’t really happened, has it? Possibly they have moved on, but the overall state of the world does not make clear that having ‘moved on’ is for the best. Gadgets have improved, granted, but an overall sense of well-being? Whether ‘keeping up’ in the sense you mean is a good thing is highly debatable. Furthermore, if you think this is so horrible, show me the civility in the greater political world. Be sure not to miss the ‘gentleman’s disagreement’ involving the Supreme Court today. Show me the love-in between GOP and DEMS, or medical vs alternative, or atheist vs religious person, or scientist vs metaphysics. And make sure to tell me how the Russians and Chinese are allegedly hacking into Western computers so that say a friendly ‘hello.’ it could be argued that you are missing the most significant development of all time, as you lambaste those debating issues of eternity in favor of those squabbling over matters that will only be personally relevant for the few decades until they die. End of rant. Having said that, I can easily see how this could drive a guy nuts. Just for the record, I think some participants here are barely sane. I won’t say that I have never used the word ‘apostate’’ but I try to be sparing with it, in favor of such words as ‘opposer’ or ‘detractor’ And I often deliberately try to defuse super-intense threads with what I hope passes for humor. I stay primarily because I benefit by testing out lines that I know will be thrown back in my face & refine my own writing thereby, like a scientist studying data. I’ve been able to write a book absolutely unique in several ways in this manner. A writer not only needs a muse. He also needs a villain & there are villains galore here. It is pretty rough on those who don’t speak the lingo, though. I do appreciate that. I hope that you take it in the right spirit when I jokingly put you entering the annual Conference of Internet Magnificents, casually mentioning your traffic so as to impress the big boys, only to be told ‘Big Deal. They’re all religious nuts. Come back when you have people who are in touch with reality.’

No you don’t He is even wrong here: ’Tom's next statement is so much a blanket statement that i would have thought it was beneath him.’ If it was really a blanket, it would be on top of me. A lot of things are that way with our apostates: completely upside down.

Okay, we have reached the point where discussion starts to fragment and can go in that direction for a time until the Librarian (the old hen) looks up from her bottle and charges over to scream at her pupils turned unruly. Let’s branch into something closely related about our ‘apostates.’ While they may not be lazy, they certainly are deceitful. They push for all it is worth the idea that all you have to do is disagree with the GB and you will be expelled! Well, what do they disagree with them ABOUT? It’s amazing how many of them go on to embrace the homosexual lifestyle or become activists in this or that aspect of the greater world, newly determined to fix whatever they think is wrong with it. Essentially, they don’t like the idea that Christians should be separate from the world. That is being ‘insular’, they charge, which has become the greatest of all sins. It’s not exactly a ‘gentleman’s disagreement’ that can’t even be tolerated, as they charge. In fact, many of Jehovah’s Witnesses disagree with this or that aspect of theocracy. But they also put it in perspective. They know that in any organized arrangement there will be some things that don’t go your way. They also are modest enough to know that maybe it is they themselves who are wrong. We are, after all, being taught by Jehovah . Everyone knows from Day 1 God does not run it as a democracy.

I almost expect a certain chainsaw character to post a cartoon that he thinks is hilarious about these things happening in that setting, until the senior one of them cautions that HQ might find out. It would be a new low for him, but only by a matter of degree.

Even there they were not heedless of personal appearance, and it’s not because they were terrified of the GB, either.

When they offer to release you from the concentration camp if you will but renounce your faith and you tell them no, it means you are bold. it also means you are unafraid of actual extermination, let alone the silly things that you whine on about. Don’t go there, John. They are bold. Someday you might learn from them.

‘People who think the most bold of thoughts have no difficulty conforming to the outward norms of society.’ Nathaniel Hawthorne Nobody thinks thoughts more bold than Jehovah’s Witnesses. He didn’t say it but I think the converse is also true: Those who declare their independence over such small matters are usually the most conformist of all on large ones.

There was a series of tweets from former Jehovah’s Witnesses hoping to stir up discontent with present ones. The politics involved are likely not of interest to the general reader so I pass over it here. Suffice it to say that it is that way. It turns out that when the Watchtower organization oversees disaster relief they afterwards suggest to ones that happen to have insurance that they might donate whatever insurance might pay out to the Worldwide Work relief fund itself. Why this should infuriate the ex-Witnesses I’ll never know but infuriate them it does. To me, it seems only just that those who do the disaster rebuild should receive the insurance monies if there are any. I could be wrong but I suspect insurance companies will love it that way; the work gets down promptly and without haggling over amount. However, the more important question to be raised is, if the Watchtower doesn’t get the insurance money, who does? The more I looked at these tweets the more I came to feel that I was looking at encouragement to commit insurance fraud. With that backdrop, here are some of the tweets. I have excluded irrelevant ones as well as those from opposers calling me an a*****e. Apparently, a recent shipment of relief supplies was destroyed and that is how the topic is introduced. I will reproduce a few tweets which may or may not interest the reader, all in italics, and then return to the main point. I am TTH. Others I will refer to by their initials. Everything is captured in screenshots. EDL: The donations from local Jehovah's Witnesses caught fire - but the article fails to mention that JW donations and disaster relief is ONLY ever for other JWs. JWs only support their local community by preaching to them, never with practical help. TTH: Yes. They cannot do everyone because they are near exclusively volunteers using vacation time. The best they can do is set an example for others to imitate so that they will not be beholden to astronomically wasteful agencies. CF: Interestingly enough, WT usually pressure any JW’s they help to “dontate” the insurance payout they get back to WT to “thank” them. TTH: ‘Pressure is a subjective term. However, if they do the work voluntarily at no cost that certainly would not be an inappropriate way to acknowledge it. Many people have no insurance at all, especially in the case of flooding. It is something immaterial to JWs. They do not check beforehand. SL: Agreed, the WT does not do the work on the understanding the insurance cash will come their way… For a brief moment, I thought I had found an ally, but it was not so: SL: I've given up my time in my JW past to do this work and it's lovely to feel you are helping someone in need. In my experience few, if any, feel the need to solicit thanks from a victim of disaster let alone "suggest" the insurance money comes one's way. CF: To clarify - it’s not the individual JW’s helping who do this. It’s something that happens afterward, organized via the branch and handled by the elders. Most JW volunteers never even know this has happened. JR is putting together an article that exposes multiple instances of WT leaning on JW’s after a relief effort to hand over the insurance money. I was getting a little fed up at this point. In three tweets combined, I said: TTH: Tell him to not ignore the end result: distressed persons quickly having life & property restored, vs waiting weeks or months for relief that will only come if they are adequately insured, insurers sometimes being known to weasel out of full coverage when they can. Tell him also to spotlight the atheist and opposer agencies that do the same for their people so that they do not find themselves sh*t out of luck when insurance or build execution proves inadequate. And make sure he tells of the premier agency in the Haiti earthquake, squandering practically to the penny the half billion dollars donated. (I linked to a Propublica article detailing breathtaking incompetence in America’s chief relief agency and (alas) even exaggerated some, for they didn’t waste all of it, just most of it.) I am looking forward to this article, confident John will not forget these things. Someone made a snotty comment about Watchtower making a lot of money off their volunteers and the insurance companies. I replied that it was in return for doing exactly what the insurance company wanted done The former Witnesses turned bitter opponents work tirelessly to stir up discontent in those loyal. They do a great deal of talking amongst themselves, but present Witnesses are their target audience. While the Watchtower organization may well afterwards make the suggestion, I doubt very much that they ‘pressure’ anyone because the idea of simply pocketing both work AND insurance payment would never occur to most Witnesses. And even if they were to ‘pressure’ anyone, it would clearly be for their own good; otherwise they would be committing insurance fraud, and the insurance companies are very good at sniffing such things out. Say they succeed in finding some Witnesses who are outraged that the Watchtower Society should mention money after they have restored a person’s life. What are they recommending these ones do? Are they recommending that they say to their Christian brothers, who are generally on the scene long before relief comes by any other way, “Brothers, no. Don’t bother. I am afraid that the organization may afterwards mention money. I will wait instead for the insurance company to pay and hope that the amount is enough to restore what I have lost and that when the harried contractors at last get around to it they will not in their haste do a half-assed job.” I don’t think so. I have never heard that advice from these characters or anything even approaching that. What the opposers appear to be doing is encouraging disgruntled ones, if they can find any, to accept the Watchtower’s help and then refuse any suggestion that they sign over an insurance check. What, then, will they do with the insurance money? Give it back to the insurance company? Again, I don’t think so. Why have they been paying premiums for all these years? No, they are encouraging them to keep the money, perhaps to thereafter spend on a new car, overseas vacation, or college tuition. Look, this may be an overgeneralization, but this illustrates exactly why people who are Jehovah’s Witnesses should think twice before they leave the faith. I see these former Witnesses on Twitter. Some excoriate Trump and some excoriate Obama. They once had unity. Moreover, they cavalierly float an idea that would shock most Witnesses: take the money and run. What is wrong with these characters? I mean, who would propose repaying the work of volunteer rebuilders with closed fists, and who would propose chiseling the insurance company out of their money at the same time? There is such a thing as hating so much as to lose all decency. My bet is that when insurance companies do sign over checks to the Watchtower, they find it a pure joy, knowing well how difficult customers can be when under extreme pressure. Jerod Kushner said with Jehovah’s Witnesses a handshake deal means something when he bought some of their Brooklyn property. Even arch-enemy Barbara Anderson says that, overall, they’re very nice people. Look, possibly what they are advocating is not illegal. Perhaps it is just astonishing mean and ungrateful. Either way they look very small as they focus their unreasoning hatred to cripple the most effective disaster relief program the world has known. Parts 2 and 3, which will follow, are not specifically on matters of insurance and can be skipped by those interested in those matters alone.

Your turn will come, buster.

That’s what Slow Joe said. But Davey the Kid went on to never give a bad talk in his life. Then he built a Kingdom Hall. Then another. Then he built an Assembly Hall. Then he tired of running a cleaning business. He combined college course with credit for life experiences and became a psychotherapist. His dying words to me were (and this is the only part I’m making up): ”You can do it, Tom. You can take out the big lout JTR. Remember, he uses chain-saw logic. Distract him a little, and he will cut off his own arm.”

Jehovah’s Witnesses have always claimed with absolute certainty that Armageddon is just a few years away. 140 some years later, it still hasnÂ’t happened. What makes them think itÂ’ll still happen? Â DidnÂ’t the Red Sox win the championship in time?

Alright alright, so it is. But it is also like what Slow Joe said to Davey the Kid after the latter delivered an absolutely stellar talk: The tough-as-nails counselor said: “So...I am giving you a ‘G’..............but next time it may not BE that way.”

I fear you have been smoking it yourself

She will. ThatÂ’s all that really matters.

And how many pages and pages did it take for you to finally admit that I was exactly right about Sarah and the Terminator? If you didn’t obfuscate so much, you’d have an answer to every one of your petulant questions by now. Do you think that you are the only one? If someone so much as farts at Bethel, Jack starts a thread on it, and I have to answer that, too, don’t I? And don’t forget my latest project: upvoting @Annaand then downvoting her for the same comment on another forum. And then I have to deal with John demanding why I am doing it? Is he crazy? It is like the eggheads at (disgraced) Bill Cosby’s old high school running around saying ‘Why is there air?’ Only the gym teacher knew the answer. ‘There’s air to blow up volleyballs and footballs and basketballs!

I’m on it. It may take a while, though.

Hey, you know what might be fun? Let’s upvote @Anna for a comment on this forum and then downvote her for the same comment on another forum!

Yes. It was that anatomical anonomy that gave him an instinctive feel for his work, a modern-day survival of the fittest.

This suggests that admin or someone might start a new thread dedicated to the urban legend of whether Gordon Lightfoot truly had light feet or not. He did not. However, he is related to a real estate magnate who truly did have square feet.

I am a little worried that admin or someone will start a topic entitled ‘Why TrueTom did not leave Jehovah’s Witnesses.’ Then I will feel obligated to write pages and pages and pages of pure brilliance and I simply do not have the time.

Do you mean the court whose demand was overturned by a higher court as overreach, so that, in reality it was more like the thief becoming annoyed with his target for wasting time forking over the goods? Wasn’t this answered before? Yet you barrel on as though it never was. No wonder some here think you are unbalanced and I have to restrain them.