TrueTomHarley

Well, it doesn’t entirely fit, but the speaker yesterday drew the following contrast between knowledge and understanding:
Knowledge: a tomato is a fruit
Understanding: Don’t put it in a fruit salad.

Does he want to eliminate the requirement that Christians refrain from wars? Is that what he is driving at?
I should take the time to figure out myself whether he is advocating that, I know, but he is not being particularly transparent, he is distracted by answering a number of dubious characters, I am always waiting for the other shoe to drop with him in the form of a staggeringly disrespectful cartoon or quote, and I am up to my ears in my own projects. Other than that, I have no excuse for not having deciphered this more accurately.

Does he want to eliminate the requirement that Christians refrain from wars? Is that what he is driving at?
I should take the time to figure out myself whether he is advocating that, I know, but he is not being particularly transparent, he is distracted by answering a number of dubious characters, I am always waiting for the other shoe to drop with him in the form of a staggeringly disrespectful cartoon or quote, and I am up to my ears in my own projects. Other than that, I have no excuse for not having deciphered this more accurately.

You idiot, the three examples you’ve given are all clergy—those in leadership capacity. Exactly my point. With JWs it is almost never those who would correspond to clergy—it is the ordinary member. The printing presses will run dry if they ever attempt to report on members of the other denominations—but they never will because hardly anyone other than JWs tried to do anything about the CSA problem. 
And there is Srecko giving you a ‘thanks’ for the ridiculous comparison you made. Silly as you may be, he does not here give evidence that he is any smarter.

Cats go crazy with the red pointer ones. I’ve seen cats climb halfway up a room wall trying to catch that dot.

A report on the torture of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia and 4Jah attaches an laughing emoji to it. What a nasty piece of work he is.

A report on the torture of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia and 4Jah attaches an laughing emoji to it. What a nasty piece of work he is.

See how the report is about Jehovah’s Witnesses being tortured in Russia and @4Jah2me attaches a laughing emoji.
What a nasty piece of work he is.

A report on the torture of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia and 4Jah attaches an laughing emoji to it. What a nasty piece of work he is.

Isabella reports—this is the second occasion of it—Jehovah’s Witnesses being arrested and detained in Russia—and subjected to torture.
With an active and prolific hate campaign being waged against Jehovah’s Witnesses online, it is reasonable to think that it indirectly instigates persecution of them in Russia—even escalating to arrests in which torture is applied, as in this case. It is reasonable to think that it indirectly instigates the torching of two Kingdom Halls in the United States during 2019, both of which burned to the ground.
Many groups are harassed in Russia, but it is Jehovah’s Witnesses who are head-and-shoulders the primary target. Why? It boils down to Jesus’ words: “If you were part of the world, the world would be fond of what is its own. Now because you are no part of the world...for this reason the world hates you.” (John 15:19) It is no more complicated than that. Hatred against Witnesses may be cloaked as reports from a “whistleblower” or complaints of those who would advocate freedom from “mind control,” but at root the motivation is simply disturbance that ones should choose to be “no part of the world.” No villain on TV ever says, “I am the villain.” Instead, he paints himself the wronged one with a righteous score to settle—and the program director strives so that we all see it that way. We must not be obtuse.
From TrueTom vs the Apostates!—“The book Secular Faith - How Culture Has Trumped Religion in American Politics attempts to reassure its secular audience through examining the changing moral stands of churches on five key issues. The book points out that today’s church members have more in common with atheists than they do with members of their own denominations from decades past. Essentially, the reassurance to those who would mold societal views is: ‘Don’t worry about it. They will come around. They always do. It may take a bit longer, but it is inevitable.’ Jehovah’s Witnesses have thwarted this model by not coming around.”
What is Secular Faith is saying is that churches have ceased being “no part of the world”—and having done such, are not hated, since “the world is fond of what is its own.” Jehovah’s Witnesses, and almost they alone, are yet remaining “no part of the world”—and that is why they are hated. That is why they have “apostates” who are off the charts in expressing vitriol. “Apostates” (within the Christian context) can be expected to proliferate in direct proportion to how the main body stays separate from the world. As such, Jehovah’s Witnesses should almost be proud of theirs, for in them they are validated. A religion that has made its peace on the “five key issues” of Secular Faith—what’s to apostatize from?
Anti-Witnesses scream “Cult!” like patrons scream ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theater. Are Jehovah’s Witnesses a cult? To the extent they are, it is because the Bible is a cult manual. The behavioral, informational, thought, and emotional “control” that anti-Witness activists complain about are no more than people living by the Bible, living peaceably in this world while they look to the righteous new one to come, the one the Bible describes as “the real life.” (1 Timothy 6:19)
I am not even sure that Witnesses should run from the word. It may be well to point to its origin. It is the same origin as ‘cultivate’—which denotes ‘caring for something’—and in a religious sense it refers to ‘caring for the matters of the gods.’ Okay. I’ll take it. Jehovah’s Witnesses ‘care for the matters’ of God. They trigger opposition from ones who don’t want them to do that. They trigger opposition from those who have crossed over to embrace various aspects of the world—the world that Jesus says not to be part of.
This is clear in the testimony of one witness testifying for the prosecution in the Russian trial that would ban the JW organization. She complained of “complete and total control of life by the Administrative Center.” Asked to give an example of this, she reported her expulsion from the congregations after she “began her close, but not officially registered, relations with a man.” She wants to violate, within the congregation, the Bible sanction of ‘sex only within marriage.’ The Witness organization does not allow it—and she spins it as “complete and total control of life,” hoping to get the Russian Justices riled up.
Look, it is fine to adopt the standards of the world so long as one goes there to do it—don’t bring it into the congregation. She signed on for such Bible-based standards, now she wants to change them—and when thwarted in that attempt, she seeks to get the organization that got in her way banned at the Russian Supreme Court! It is no more than revenge. It is no more than insisting the standards of the greater world be accommodated in the Christian congregation.
Disfellowshipping itself is a last-ditch attempt at discipline, when all else has failed, to ensure that a member not bring standards of the world, no matter how commonly accepted, into the congregation. Is it harsh? It certainly can be spun that way, but as ought to be clear by considering Secular Faith, no denomination can obey Jesus’ direction to remain “no part of the world” without it.
Among the reasons Christians were viciously persecuted in the first century was that their rituals were said to include cannibalism—historians report such. Obviously they did not, but from where might the charge originate? Might one look to the following passage in the sixth chapter of John, which begins by quoting Jesus?
“I am the bread of life. Your forefathers ate the manna in the wilderness and yet they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that anyone may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread he will live forever; and for a fact, the bread that I will give is my flesh in behalf of the life of the world.
Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying: “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I will resurrect him on the last day.”
When they heard this, many of his disciples said: “This speech is shocking; who can listen to it?”...Because of this, many of his disciples went off to the things behind and would no longer walk with him. So Jesus said to the Twelve: “You do not want to go also, do you?” Simon Peter answered him: “Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life. We have believed and have come to know that you are the Holy One of God.”  (6:48-69)
What of the ones who did not “come to know” that Jesus was the Holy One of God? What of the ones who “went to the things behind and would no longer walk with him”? Did they thereafter leave their former co-disciples to worship in peace? Or did some of them draw from these words proof that Jesus would recommend cannibalism to his followers? Historians advance the notion seriously. And if some advanced the notion, might there not have arisen ones in the congregation who pinned the blame on Jesus himself, for uttering the words that got the persecution rolling; ‘what a blunder!’—I can imagine some saying (though not in his presence).
It makes me think of the uproar over CSA within Jehovah’s Witnesses today. They are comparatively successful at preventing it—nobody, but nobody, has gathered every single member on earth (at the 2017 Regional Conventions) to consider detailed scenarios in which child sexual abuse might take place so that parents, obviously the first line of defense, can remain vigilant. But the world has little success at preventing CSA, so it focuses on punishing it after the fact. Constantly we read of individuals arrested over CSA allegations. The one detail that never accompanies such reports is that of the individual’s religious affiliation or lack thereof. Yet with Jehovah’s Witnesses, that detail is never lacking. Why? 
Plainly, it is that the Witness organization attempted to do something about child sexual abuse—they did not just close their eyes as is typical of groups today, be they religious or not—and now liars are trying to spin it as though they love the stuff. Jehovah’s Witnesses are well-known as a religion that “polices its own.” It is an attribute that used to be viewed favorably, but now in the eyes of critics, it is spun as intolerable “control.” Those taking the lead in the Witness organization thereby came to know of individuals accused of CSA, and their “crime,” if it be one, is in leaving it up to affected ones themselves to report rather than “going beyond the law” to do it themselves. Time will tell how vile that sin is found to be, but it plainly falls far short of actually committing the CSA themselves, which is the pattern elsewhere. 
As with Jesus and his remarks that can, in the scheming of dishonest ones, be spun into encouragement of cannibalism, so the JW policy on CSA is spun by similarly dishonest ones to indicate that the organization is determines to nurture and protect it, whereas nothing could be further from the truth. Three times before the Australian Royal Commission, Geoffrey Jackson of the Witnesses’s Governing Body pleaded for universal, mandatory reporting laws, with no exceptions—if that could only be done, it would make the job of the Witness organization in policing its own without raising the ire of those outside the congregation “so much easier.”
Continuing his cross-examination, Justice Angus Stewart said: “Leaving aside the question of overriding mandatory law from the civil authorities...” I almost wish that Brother Jackson would have interjected at this point, “I wish you would not leave it aside, for it would solve the problem.” The greater world cannot make a dent in preventing childhood sexual abuse, and so it puts the onus on those who are trying to do something about it. Alas, our best lines invariably occur to us too late—had Brother Jackson picked up my line, it probably just would have got their backs up—and then (gulp) he would have looked at me with displeasure.

The online hate campaign against JWs is indirectly—in some cases even directly—responsible for their persecution, even with torture, as in the above story.
I have submitted a separate post on it:
 

I liked him as governor—especially when he chided some colleagues to “not be girlie men”—in other words, step up to the plate on some issue or other. Turns out, though, that there were a lot of girlie men in California and they took issue with him.
But my favorite celebrity turned governor was Jessie Venture of Minnesota. The bumper stickers read: “My Governor Can Beat Up Your Governor.”
They asked Jessie about them. “Yeah, I’ve seen them, and they’re true, too. I’ve been to those governor conferences. I’ve looked those guys over. There’s not one of them I couldn’t take!” 

Five dreary months have passed since Hurricane Dorian lay waste Abaco and Grand Bahama, and daily in the local press we hear and read of persons being dissatisfied with the pace of hurricane reconstruction.
#However, I am sure that at least ninety-five if not one hundred per cent of those who were adversely affected by the hurricane were members of churches and paid collection or tithes on a weekly or monthly basis. Consequently, it is not unreasonable to think that these churches would assist their parishioners or their congregants in some meaningful way.
#When disasters have occurred in our country, and especially since hurricane Andrew, I have been impressed by the work done by the denomination of Jehovah’s Witnesses who quickly mobilised members of their organisation, both local and foreign to expertly repair and replace their places of worship and the homes of their members.
#From personal knowledge I am aware that homeowners have only to provide building supplies, if they have the means, and volunteers, at no personal remuneration, assist in making the homes habitable.
#Surely the other denominations have members who are carpenters, masons, electricians and plumbers who are willing to devote some of their spare time to assist their members in this way?
#For, whilst repairs generally are proceeding at a snail’s pace, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have successfully repaired homes and their Kingdom Hall in Marsh Harbour will be ready for their annual Memorial service in April this year. All through the unselfish work of volunteers.
http://www.tribune242.com/news/2020/feb/13/unselfish-volunteers/

I’m only vaguely recalling it. It seems that Arnold tipped the plane to throw the bad guy perched on the nose off balance after signaling Jamie to hang on. I do this myself when cantankerous householders throw themselves on the hood of my car. Works like a charm.

What?! You got me going on that movie for nothing?! 
Hasta la vista, baby! I’ll be back.

He signaled his DAUGHTER to hang on, and the terrorist rolled across the wing, and got hung up on a missile, which was fired through the building to a helicopter on the other side.
True Lies (1994)_ Final Fight Scene.mp4

or why CC would downvote this. Is he running himself for office and I have overlooked him?
I mean, I can imagine 4Jah saying, “oh dear, it looks like TTH knows something besides jw.org bible,” but why CC would have anything to say......

I’m only vaguely recalling it. It seems that Arnold tipped the plane to throw the bad guy perched on the nose off balance after signaling Jamie to hang on. I do this myself when cantankerous householders throw themselves on the hood of my car. Works like a charm.

What happens when you use it to divide by zero? Most would return an ERR message, but I had one that would simply start running through all the numbers, as though trying them all.

Arnold peeking through the skyscraper window behind the wheel of his Harrier Jet and the bad dude realizing that it just might mean trouble.

They have a weak field of candidates, imo. I can’t imagine how they would expect a Sanders or Warren to take the country, as hostile to business as they are, and given the fact that in a capitalist country outright hostility to business will only go so far. 
Biden looks like he is not doing so hot, and is famous for shooting himself in the foot, anyway. A favorite cartoon of mine—published just after he made some gaffe at the very onset of another Presidential campaign, pictured all the contestants revving their engines at the starting gate, and his car alone was already flaming out. After a brief and maybe longer than usual honeymoon, the press would soon start ridiculing his faux paus almost as much as they do with Trump.
Pete—I just don’t think a man with a husband is going to win the approval of the majority—I could be wrong on that, but it seems too much baggage to carry. Plus, can a guy who has only served as a small-city mayor really have the experience to run the country?
Bloomberg may charge and win acceptance, but then there is the very opposite of what the Democrats try to portray as their capital strength—diversity. The guy is richer than Trump and every bit as white.
My guess, based on early results and admittedly too little background into, is that it will be Klobuchar. 
And I must admit, I find it almost impossible to picture you with a brother who hates Trump. If I had to recalculate when @JW Insider described himself as a nerd, I think I may have to purchase a brand new calculator in your case.

Around here there are quite a few that do just the opposite—focus on return visits—and you know the challenge of finding return visits home. It drives me nuts, and I am adamant not to be part of a large car-group, sometimes even a van, doing it. Occasionally I am outmaneuvered and when that happens I lose all interest in the ministry, take the back seat in the van, and nap or compose a blog post.
I would think so. The only way I could get my head around it was to read it was in a different country.
The concluding speaker told how a cop had said, with regard to some pretty obnoxious protestors, “Why don’t you just pop them one?” As to the one of the military monitoring mealtime, I had just about concluded that it was an urban legend—I had a Mormon tell me something similar about his people—but then Shultz told me where it was published. 
We all get better at handling challenging situations as we age ourselves. Running into the clergyman is another—or a group plainly immersed in conversation and directly in your path. One fellow eyed me cautiously as I approached. He was lugging heavy boxes from a moving van. “You look like someone that wants to talk about the Bible!” I said jokingly. He laughed so hard he nearly dropped the box.

TTH wants nothing of the sort.

I have already told my story on this forum. How I was interrogated when I became an American citizen.  My interviewer was hostile  because I requested for the clause to defend USA to be omitted.
I did not push bible verses on him.  I had already determined that he was a great patriot and replied accordingly.  I said that I have such great respect for life because this is all we have from God - our life is precious.   I answered that it is a pity that some people have given everything they have to the country they love and are fired when they have emotional issues due to deployment. Some do not receive all the medical care they need (this was the case at the time) and I added that they come home in body bags and the press is not allowed to honor them in death by photographing their return.  
The day he gave me my citizenship he was all smiles when he congratulated me.
My father also fought in North Africa, Italy, went to Japan with the Americans and fought in Korea.......  these people do not like war to be glorified. 

For whatever it’s worth, If I see evidence of military service at someone’s home, I will ask about it. When there is a plaque that a son or daughter is a proud Marine or Navy or Army member, I’ll make the point that you cannot have anything but respect for someone willing to lay his life on the line for what he believes in. If there is some old fellow who identifies with any branch of military service, I’ll hear him out. Everyone has a story to tell, but nobody wants to hear it. I’ll hear them out—providing I’m not keeping an entire car group waiting as I do so. 
If someone’s flag is all wrapped up around the flagpole—the way the wind will do that—I’ll unwrap it while waiting for them to answer the door. And if I see a flag flying in tatters, I get mad—if you’re going to do it, do it right.
I think of that experience—it was published in one of the old yearbooks, I think, of the teacher, for some sort of a civics lesson, telling a Non-Witness and a Witness child to salute the Canadian flag. The first did. The second did not. Next came the direction to spit on the flag. The first did. The second did not. “Why don’t you spit on the flag?” the question was asked, “you didn’t salute it.” The answer was that the flag was a national symbol and as such should be treated with respect, even if not given an act of worship that Witnesses consider a salute to be—the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that way as well. But maybe more telling is the “patriotism” of the first child, who salutes on command and spits on command.
There is often a vague mutual respect between members of the military and members of Jehovah’s Witnesses, each of whom recognizes that the other is not rabble and is amenable to discipline. They also recognize about each other that neither harbors racism—people rise and fall independent of race (speaking of the American military here—I’m not in position to testify as to other nations). And it was at the 1958 Divine Will International Convention in New York City (Yankee Stadium & adjacent Polo Grounds) that the U.S. military sent observers to report on how it was possible for Witness volunteers to provide a full-course meal to their quarter-million conventioneers within a short noontime interval—this as related in a Special Report on that event that can be googled and downloaded. (this info supplied by B.F. Shultz, the researcher who is never wrong, who is lauded for “almost a fanatical attention to detail.”)
Since Jehovah’s Witnesses are politically neutral and will not wage war, one might surmise that any encounter with a militarily aligned householder will prove disagreeable, and this can happen. But it doesn’t have to happen, and usually does not by approaching the person with respect and reference to the above points. Often it can be worked into conversation how odd it is that an individual is serving his country with great feeling and sacrifice, yet if he were in any other country, he would feel exactly the same way with regard to that country—and isn’t it strange that the earth should be divided up that way? Many military and especially veterans are mellowed with their service. I wouldn’t want to go up against a General Patton, who wanted to shoot anyone sitting out the fray, but most are more reflective. My own father, who was a WWII vet and who left religion as a young man and never returned, commented  (to my surprise) on the small town square war memorial of the hamlet we were passing through, “They shouldn’t do this—it just glorifies it.”