Jump to content
The World News Media

TrueTomHarley

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    8,201

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    406

 Content Type 

Everything posted by TrueTomHarley

  1. TrueTomHarley
    Don't want no railing. Don't want no frothing. Zip Zero Nada hehehe :))))))
  2. TrueTomHarley
    I'll get a lot of mileage out of this one. @AlanF will pounce on every single word. And I'll paste him over each one, the opinionated oaf. Look, we have destroyed JWI's thread and he has started another one. I messaged him that (tentatively) I would not go there. I would not have gone here except that Alan is so obnoxious that he draws people in. He's been the ruin of many a poor boy, and Lord I know I'm one. Ann and many others make parallel points on the subject, but because they are all reasonably civil, nobody feels they must do battle with them. I have learned my lesson. (tentatively) I will not mess with JWI's other thread. (probably) @The Librarian is right. You can't destroy every thread by kicking every dog that barks at you. Not if you want to get very far. Rodney King said it best: 'people, can't we all just get along?' The Beatles said it second best: we must 'come together.' This thread is a goner, and it will die a quick death if no fuel is heaped on. But there is yet (some) hope for JWI's new thread. Let know one trample upon it, at least not for 42 months.
  3. TrueTomHarley
    This is such a strange comment, because the post has nothing to do with Trump. Nonetheless, one cannot but notice the parallels. The President does rib his enemies all the time. It always goes over their heads and they accuse him of telling 'lies.' Is it a deliberate ploy to try to hang him with his own literal words or are they just plain stupid? Darned if I know. But they look like absolute fools when they, say (this one I'm just making up, Alan) say he lied when he called someone out for crying crocodile tears, since they know the man is not a crocodile. Or maybe they don't look like fools, because they relate only to each other, and they all think it is vital to point out that distinction. What a screwy world! Alan is just like these yoyos. How many times has he accused me of telling a lie? He harps on it. It very obviously is not a lie (that Wolff spoke to no one of importance). Granted, it is an exaggeration. But it is very hard to believe anyone does not clearly see the remark for what it is, excepting only someone who prides himself on being dense. He even managed to insinuate I was racist!!! Me! Lovable TTH - who is unfailing nice to all people, with minor permissible caveats, whereas he is unfailingly offensive, condescending and nasty. I mean, C'mon! Does he not remind you of those big dumb animals with horns that rams its fellows to prove who's the man? (to that extent, he does prove evolution) As far as I am concerned, Trump v Hillary is a godsend for Christians because it brings into stark relief 2 Timothy 3:1-5 - that endless list of negative traits. It used to be if you cited it and your listener didn't agree the verse is fulfilled now more than ever, there was not much you could do about it - it is subjective. But now its fulfillment is so obvious. It used to be people would scream at each other till the cows come home over God/no God, or medicine/alt medicine or various other sideshows that could be ignored by the average person. But with Trump/hate Trump, almost everybody is drawn in and 2 Timothy 3 becomes the yeartext for this entire system of things.
  4. TrueTomHarley
    !
  5. TrueTomHarley
    It would hardly do to break an axle due to a pothole while fleeing to the city of refuge - while the AOB is closing in swinging a truncheon. So I liked that bit about keeping the roads in good repair. i liked even more the modern day application of keeping the roads open today. Since the accidental manslayer's counterpart must flee to where he can get spiritual help, the latter should keep the roads open. If they are known to be 'difficult people' with 'personalities' (let the reader use discernment), it is rather like a pothole that the supplicant may break an axle on. There is such a thing as homophobia in the truth. Our definition would differ from that of the LGBT world, who think that failure to be cool with their lifestyle is homophobia. It is not our definition. However, were there an elder who was known to absolutely rail and froth over gay things, out of proportion to anything else - and then a Christian committed such an act - well, it would be tough going to that elder, wouldn't it? The latter hadn't kept his road in good repair. It's just an example. To our credit, this type of elder is rare. I can't, off the top of my head, think of one. Our people keep things in perspective, whereas there are fundamentalist churches which seem almost solely devoted to anti-gay crusades . One could expand the application of roads to include any elder, about anything, who is known to be rough, or opinionated, or derisive (say - AlanF would make a good elder, I think! NOT!) even of just a person or two, or who is nursing a grudge over something. There would be plenty of potholes on that road. I would think twice before I drove it. If you have the time, I have the ears. There are places where the prophets say the Jews hadn't kept the law for decades, other than the picayune stuff.I can easily picture the cities of refuge being established, but not necessarily made use of during those times.
  6. TrueTomHarley
    the thing is, i accomplished four tasks with that post: 1) friendly missive to you 2) slam at @AlanF, always a breath of fresh air 3) decriminalize my demerit from the Librarian and turn it into a virtue 4) plug my book
  7. TrueTomHarley
    As far as I am concerned, if his posts roam free, there are effectively no standards here, and one is disingenuous to say that there are. I will admit, though - it is very strange - that I am almost getting fond of the old pork chop. To his credit, he pretty well admits as much, in that he is not one to countenance anyone being censured.
  8. TrueTomHarley
    Why? Not exactly the same, but in The Hunchback of Notre Dame by Dumas ('dumb ass', per Shawshank Redemption) almost an entire chapter is devoted to 'ayslum'' Anybody, no matter how vile their deed, could flee to a section of the huge church and, as long as they stayed there, they were untouchable. They would not be turned over. I always thought - dare I say it? - that Friend's voice distracted in that it was so Shakesperian. I met him in our Kingdom Hall because he was friends with someone in the sister congregation. I was not happy to see him unexpectedly, because I had a part that night and I was insufficiently prepared. I needn't have worried. I had done these Q and A's before, and this part went smoothe. He sat in the audience like everyone else. He raised his hand for a question. I called on him and he answered like everyone else - not some uber profound answer from a Gilead instructor. Just a plain vanilla answer that any reasonably spiritual person might give.
  9. TrueTomHarley
  10. TrueTomHarley
    Allen, let me suggest that you use the ground rules here to improve your communicating skills. I mean it sincerely. You will only help yourself by doing it. As for me, I would really hate to see you gone, because when you are on, you are on! You post heavy stuff that occurs to no one else, and I value you for it. Even if you think it unjust, roll with it if you can. It really doesn't matter if it is unjust or not. Life is unjust, and Paul would have us use the reversals of life as 'discipline' which, if we reject, we are you-know-whats and not children. You have alluded to dyslexia. Maybe it is but the tip of the iceberg. Maybe there are other factors that affect your emotional control, for you do launch some zingers sometimes. All of us are packages. Only AlanF is a disembodied brain unimpeded by emotion. Work on your delivery if you can because you have some fine stuff and I want to see you continue offering it. Not long ago, I was given a disciplinary point for addressing @AlanF as a blithering idiot. I deserved it. I will take it in stride. I would not over-dramatize it because AdamF must have 100 of them, so they must be meaningless in themselves. I consider it a check, as in chess. It will benefit me to study it with a view of preventing a checkmate. Is the @The Librarian being especially hard on me? I don't go there. It doesn't matter if she is or not. She is helping me, whether she knows it or not, to improve my writing, and for this I am grateful. In not too long, I will release the ebook about Russia that I have been working on. Much of it was written here. At times, I already had stuff written, and I replaced it with material here - forged from the experience of explaining things before people who I know are going to try to shoot it down. Even if she was hard on you or me, it could be for a good motive. Witnesses have more or less sworn to communicate in a Christlike manner. Alan and crew renounced kindness long ago, so it may be that he is allowed 20 times the abuse as you or I. It is hard for me communicating with Alan because if I say "Help me out here. There is an expression: "______ happens" and I cannot think of the word' - everyone here will know I am joking. Except Alan. He will mock me for not knowing the word. Then when he learns I was just putting him on, he will call me a 'reprehensible liar,' which he has done - an epithet considerably stronger than 'blithering idiot' in that it imputes motive. This pretty much happened recently with pengajo, which I deliberately misspelled wondering if I could trigger his insatiable 'need' to correct. Like hooks in the jaw, it worked. You cannot do any play on words with him! Such as: THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO USE DISCERNMENT!!!!! YOU SHOULD PLAINLY STATE WHAT YOU MEAN WITH FACTS. I HATE TO THINK WHAT ALAN WOULD CALL YOU IF YOU WERE NOT ALREADY ON THE SAME PAGE. It is what it is, Allen. View it as discipline from which you can benefit. I miss you when you are gone.  Â
  11. TrueTomHarley
    He has returned! Fetch me the fattened bull. We are partying!
  12. TrueTomHarley
    Mark Twain said something like: when I was 16 my dad was so ignorant I could barely stand to have him around. But when I was 21, I was amazed at how far the old man had come in such a short time.
  13. TrueTomHarley
    For the record, Ann, when I reproduced FakeJW's words, I did not edit out his specific reviling of you. Perhaps I should have. I apologize for that. One gets carried away sometimes. ("kumquat": better wash that mouth of yours out with soap! see what you have unleashed?)
  14. TrueTomHarley
    They may not be tap-dancing to your tune, but they appear to be doing not that badly overall. Yes. I positively hate it when they make me look like a donkey. Before speaking with certain characters, one must concede that they will have the final word. It is either that or trading barbs with them for the rest of one's life, for they will never ever ever ever give up. And when they run out of things to say, they will simply recycle their first remark. Nor am I necessarily done with that thread. You are not the only yo-yo, you know. It is among the reasons Bro Morris agrees with the Bible and says speaking with apostates is not a fine thing.
  15. TrueTomHarley
    Because they are plagued with guilt over being so smart and wish to level the playing field.
  16. TrueTomHarley
    No matter how many vile filthy despicable horrendous nasty ugly scandalous scurrilous things Foreigner may say about AlanF......there will always be a few he forgot to mention and I will have to help him out. C'mon. Poor, lowly, salt-of-the-earth Foreigner, disadvantaged in every way compared to AlanF, who has likely seen hardship that Alan cannot imagine, contributes to this discussion more meaningfully than I - and Alan slams, bullies, mocks, insults him until he finally loses it and launches a tirade of bad words - and I am to be put out over the bad words? Okay, I am, somewhat. But after listening to Alan, Foreigner is like Robert Frost. Full Disclosure: I am (GASP!) @allensmith28!!!
  17. TrueTomHarley
    Do you mean to tell me this has all been much ado about nothing? @Shiwiiiand his friends have been blowing up this balloon as if experiencing orgasm for months, even years. Even JTR, who now acts as though he knew it all along, did all he could to suggest the Witness organization was the very Mecca of pedophilia. And now, it all comes to this? JW children are the safest of all? Can it really be? I need some smart people to weigh in on this.
  18. TrueTomHarley
    See? The problem is not with Africans or anyone else currently coming to the U.S. The damage was done long ago. Maybe the current crop can teach the one with 40-60K tenure some manners, or better yet, some humility.
  19. TrueTomHarley
    I think that has typically been the case of persons anywhere - JW or not, religious or atheist. Historically, people have not been in a hurry to air their dirty laundry. Reality TV has changed much of that. Probably also a factor is that more and more families are absolute train wrecks and people are just acclimating to it. The very reason there is a phrase called "skeletons in the closet" is that persons once succeeded in keeping them there. These days people have become accustomed to them stampeding like cattle through Dodge City. Is it George Bernard Shaw who said: "if you cannot get rid of the skeletons in your closet, see if you can make them dance"? I think I would not challenge that Witnesses have had a greater adjustment than many in learning to let those skeletons roam, since their reputation is that of applying Bible morality and they are reluctant to see that reputation tarnished. But, as you say, if there were one per congregation per two-decade period (your figures - not mine) that would add up. What will happen will happen. It is the classic example of getting slammed for doing the right thing - investigating abusers for punishment and protection of other congregations. Have mistakes been made? I wouldn't doubt it. @Shiwiii is wetting himself pointing to one of them. (to what degree it is a mistake, or if it is a mistake at all, I do not know. Suffice it to say, however, that we got stuck with a real rotter, who caused a lot of harm) Could Shiwiii do it better? THAT is an entirely different question. And it is one impossible to answer because, to my knowledge, no one else has ever tried. Everyone else has a policy, usually through neglect, but perhaps also by design, of knowing as little about their congregants as possible. That way, you can't get left holding the bag if anyone is outed. Every time you turn around, a pedophile is outed. Never do we hear of his religious affiliation. It is our own fault for attempting to keep a morally clean congregation - a "people for his name." Pedophiles are as common as hens' feathers - we have certainly learned that. It is even more so when the statute of limitations is forever. Anthony Morris said it best: we were all a little naive when pedophilia burst upon the scene.
  20. TrueTomHarley
    It is true that this one has in some ways blown up in our faces. (Let us leave unchallenged, for the moment, your 'thousands.') In a way it is an byproduct of doing what the Bible tells Christians to do: keep the congregation clean. Reports of wrongdoing (of all types) are looked into with a view of applying discipline to the proper degree and, in the case of pedophiles, ensuring that one cannot slip out of one congregation and into another undetected - as they can in any other church. The "practical" solution, though it means shortchanging the God who expects a clean people, is to do what most do: Preach to them on Sunday and let that be the end of it. If they apply it, they apply it. If they don't, they don't. That way when a pervert is nabbed, they are never associated with any particular religion (unless they are clergy), since the church's policy, like that of Sergeant Shultz, is "I know notttthhhhhiiiiiiggggggggggggg!" I'll take Jehovah's Witnesses any day, even IF their efforts to keep their congregations clean has resulted in some legal trouble.
  21. TrueTomHarley
    This is all very good as far as it goes. However it is all selfish if it stops there. It is all ME ME ME - "what do I get out of it." As it turns out, it is not about us. It is about the sanctification of God's name. We benefit as that sanctification takes place. But we are not the centerpiece of God's attention. Moreover, by refusing to get "practical," one easily sees how your brand of Christian becomes part and parcel and cause of what makes life for many today a "hell on earth." Yes, it is good to sidestep that bit of "ridiculousness." Paper it over with a "God works in mysterious ways" as your brand of Christian slaughters one another and other populations in war! No wonder people go atheist! Jehovah's Witnesses embrace all of what you say, as a part of the truth. But they also know that there are yet greater principles at play and they know the application of Bible principles now brings major benefits. It is not enough to wait for 'heaven' to make us all nice. We can learn to be nice now. A good place to start is to not dive into the divisiveness of this world's politics.
  22. TrueTomHarley
    Hey, does anyone remember that Twilight Zone episode where the driver strikes and kills the kid? -obviously and accident. His wife remarks over dinner how horrible it is that the unknown driver did not turn himself in, and is puzzled by her husband's agitation. His car begins to haunt him. It wakes him up out of a sound sleep with blaring horn. (as a child, it was spooky as all get-out!) He tells his wife the next morning that he will walk to work, since the car has been acting funny. She is amazed to see the garage door open, and the car follows him - he panics and falls. The car stops inches from crushing his head. The passenger door opens. He gets in and it drives him presumably to the police station to confess. The car is the avenger of blood!!
  23. TrueTomHarley
    I could not agree more. Punctuation, however, is a different thing - for that is deliberate. hehehehe :))))))))) (I say - 'Go for it!' - the moron) I know of only one person who does that. And it is not Foreigner.
  24. TrueTomHarley
    I also notice that Harrison Ford has taken up flying again in Trabzon, Turkey.
  25. TrueTomHarley
    Maybe we finally have this City of Refuge thing down pat after yesterday's study article. The way the Law had it, the accidental manslayer had to flee to one of the six cities of refuge, where his case would be heard. If the 'avenger of blood' (closest relative of the deceased) killed him before he got there, he was guiltless. He might simply have lost it. Or he might figure there wouldn't have been an accident if the fellow had been more careful or not neglected safety. (aspects of safety on the job were also considered, as in 'What can we learn from this?') BUT some have said that he could not do otherwise. He MUST put the killer to death. It is not his prerogative to overlook or forgive, because principles greater than just a matter between two humans come into play. Still, it is hard to believe that a man, bereaved himself, would HAVE TO put to death someone, maybe a close friend or even a relative, who had accidentally taken a life. How does the following work as a compromise? The killer MUST flee to one of the cities of refuge - that much is clear. Why couldn't the avenger of blood take his sweet time in his 'pursuit' - or even walk there with him, if he was really a close chum? Our minds are skewed by the picture in the Watchtower decades ago of the manslayer running for all he is worth with the avenger hot on his heals. Who is to say it was always (or even usually) like that? The death was an accident. The city of refuge was a place where one might live a normal, productive and rewarding life. It was not a prison. But suppose the manslayer refused to go there, insisting he didn't have to, insisting he was 'guiltless' because he didn't mean to do what he did? THEN he would be put to death, not just for the accidental killing itself, or even primarily, but for the greater crime of thumbing his nose at God, for it is his arrangement. Put to death BY WHO becomes secondary. Maybe the avenger of blood. But if the avenger simply couldn't find it within himself to do it, it is hard to believe there would not be a posse or something to help him out or even take it off his hands. Of course, if the real sin is thumbing one's nose at God, the avenger would probably be incensed over THAT and would possibly 'rise to the occasion' on that count, whereas the death itself he would be willing to forgive. Does it work?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.