Jump to content
The World News Media

TrueTomHarley

Member
  • Posts

    8,155
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    403

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley reacted to Thinking in New Light on Beards   
    Some of these posts are as dumb as I’ve ever seen….
  2. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley reacted to xero in New Light on Beards   
    Soul patches and hair donuts should be grounds for immediate disfellowshipping and so should those with man-buns.
  3. Haha
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Anna in New Light on Beards   
    I’ve taken advantage of my new freedom to wear a skull & crossbones, eyepatch, and cut off my leg for a peg leg.
    To hear the crazies on the exJW site, you’d think it might happen any second.
  4. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Thinking in New Light on Beards   
    This reminds me of a TV show the GC philosophy professor cited. ‘You couldn’t be more wrong!’ one character insisted, which prompted the reply, ‘What do you mean, more wrong? Wrong is wrong! How can you be more wrong?’ But then he went on to reason that you probably could. You could be wrong about something for a fundamental reason. Or you could be wrong for a picayune reason.
    He then cited some survey indicating most people are satisfied with being ‘mostly right’ as opposed to ‘absolutely right.’ This seemed to disturb him, as his conception of philosophy is that it searches for ‘absolute’ truth. It sinks his entire endeavor, for I don’t think humans are capable of knowing ‘absolute truth.’ ‘Mostly truth’ will probably have to suffice. I am suspicious of those who insist upon more. As a hobby, it is okay, but as a discipline upon which consequences hang, no.
    There are too many things like ‘the sum of all positive natural numbers is -1/12.’ Sounds crazy, no? Yet it is deduced from human reasoning on concepts of infinities, specifically ‘divergent series of infinities.’ Because they can yield such weird results, they have tongue-in-cheek been called ‘of the devil.’

    You needn’t get overly technical on most things.
    A favorite line of mine is, “You don’t have to know everything.” It is not original. I read it in a context involving today’s failing schools. (Ours was a homeschooling family) But it packs a lot of punch. You don’t have to know everything. Yet most of contemporary society carries on as though you do.
    The Chesterton quote applies: 
    The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens into his head. And it is his head that splits.”
  5. Thanks
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Thinking in New Light on Beards   
    I’m not sure why not. As much belly-aching as there is about GB being ‘pharisaical,’ here we seem to want them to be Pharisees.
    Three things govern my thinking on fractions: 1) you shouldn’t have to be a microbiologist to serve God, 2) you can’t serve God when you’re dead, and 3) if they can’t figure it out, neither can I.
    I’m been surprised to find I am apparently in the minority in my position. This is why I queried about a breakdown of Bethelites regarding fractions but nobody seemed to know. ‘It’s not a cake until you mix the (minute) ingredients’ works for me but it is apparently the minority view.
    I was especially amazed that people could spin fractions as a money thing. It just made so much sense to me that blood is blood, yet fractions can be so minute as to liken them to those traces remaining when you drain an animal, that I never thought to go beyond that obvious comparison. ‘Eyeball it’ is what you said previously. To insist people go beyond that seems to me pharisaical.
    Beyond the dilemma to booze it up or not booze it up before the teetotalers (or alcoholics), this matter of fractions is the other ‘approved, (in the sense of being publicized,) use of conscience. We kind of gravitate to rules, even though we know rules quickly get out of hand. I think of the brother who quipped about the ‘Letters from Readers’ feature in those old Watchtowers:
    “I just read the question,” he said, “then skip to the bottom to see if I can do it or not.”
    He did quip. Honestly and truly, it was a quip. But there is also some truth in it.
     
  6. Haha
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Thinking in New Light on Beards   
    Judging from your down-home profile photo, you’re used to them.
  7. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley reacted to Many Miles in New Light on Beards   
    No worries. He's right. I love my crickets. They sing me to sleep. Unless one's in the house. That's dog just won't hunt! He's gotta go! But them ones outside, they be fine by me.
    Now when the cicadas come out. They drown out my crickets and a soul can hardly sleep with all that noise.
    But crickets? They be fine!
  8. Thanks
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Thinking in New Light on Beards   
    It is only you that has fractionalized soul this way. This is why when you first gave your convoluted breakdown of ‘soul,’ I countered, ‘You wanna say that in English?’
    I learned, as first explained in the Truth book, that ‘your soul is you.’ Yes, of course it has prerequisites. When you start qualifying any noun you utter as the sum of many fractions, then I’ll acknowledge you have a point.
    Meanwhile, there is a timeline we operate on. We are finite beings and must take things as they come. We don’t have the luxury of overseeing the past, present, and future as though they are equally plain. Occasionally, to be sure, we get around that inconvenience by condemning yesterday’s things in the light of today’s standards, but most fair people recognize that as a cheap shot. Go back to the philosophy professor, the great donkey, who speaks of ‘temporal omniscience,’ how we can view all events as real, even those that haven’t happened yet—and God knows the idiot surmises his fellows draw from that. 
    Originally, blood was blood. Then, doctors began to separate it into ‘main components’ that might individually be transfused, and we said, ‘Who are you trying to kid? It’s still blood.’
    Then they said, ‘You ain’t seen nothing yet,’ whereupon they came up with so many additional components, most quite tiny, that the HQ brothers threw up their hands and said, ‘We can’t figure it out. Leave it for every individual to hash it out best they can.’
    You have already indicated the probable resolution with that form you cited several days ago. Things are settling down. It is only the hypercritical or vengeful who seek to keep them stirred up. Sure, it would be great to correct any missteps of the past. But that is the nature of the past: it is not the past when it first occurs, but is the present, and as such it is not so easily corrected. Best that is to be done in the overall world is to throw every such possible error into the laps of the lawyers, who will extract 1/3 of the involved wealth for their inconvenience in sorting it out.
  9. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley reacted to Anna in New Light on Beards   
    Now, now boys, behave!
  10. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley reacted to Anna in New Light on Beards   
    We don't need to worry about that.
    Each person will render an account to God for what they did or didn't do, or say or didn't say. Romans 14:12.
     
  11. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from xero in New Light on Beards   
    I think it indicates that people want a ‘king,’ somewhat like in Samual 8. They can’t handle subtle. They want a king.
    ’Alright, alright, we’ll give you king,’ says the visible org, ‘An entire Update to say ‘We don’t care about beards!’ That means you don’t have to either! Sheesh! We were trying to get away from that.’
    Seen from a different standpoint, I think those seeking the downfall of the earthly organization also resemble those Israelites who demanded a king. Those ancients couldn’t handle the seeming vagaries of judges popping up here and there. They wanted a king, with all the trimmings, that they could see strutting around at all times.Similarly, people look real closely into the GB, see it is composed of men who have all the differing idiosyncracies of the first century disciples and they can’t handle it. How can God’s direction come from such a human arrangement? They either want an undisputed miracle-backed single entity (which we all know is not going to happen today) or they want dissolution of the whole model, going back to a ‘Jesus and me’ model. This usually means a ‘Me and Jesus’ model, since it is personal disagreements over this or that policy that motivates the desire to sink the earthly organization. They either imagine the ‘Jesus and Me’ model will continue to safeguard the unity and doctrinal uniqueness of JWs or they think that the unity and doctrinal uniqueness is not worth safeguarding—they are content to let it evolve, just like in the natural world of competitive struggle and how good things supposedly come of that. ‘Guardians of doctrine? Don’t make me laugh!’ they say.
    My Bethel chum told me many years ago that it gets more challenging to see God’s hand as you get tighter with the organization. The friends in general will ooh and ahh over this new direction from God, and you will say, ‘Yeah….it’s only because so-and-so is too stubborn to……’
    This is where faith comes in. It is the divine/human interface. Fleshly eyes can only perceive the ‘Indisputable miracle-backed, controlled Prophet’ model or the ‘Jesus and Me’ model for congregation headship. It takes spiritual eyes to see that, if God is really worth his salt, surely he can move dedicated men to adequately serve as his conduit. The GB is screened by being anointed, further screened by a lifetime of full time service, further screened by intensive Bible training on how to work with others by implementing Bible principles.
    This training to work according to Bible principles, strive for unity, learn how to defer to one another, resist the temptation to run-over those with whom you disagree, produces good results. In individual congregations, elders periodically gather for such training in ‘elder schools,’ where they learn, among other things, that unity of the body is always the goal. This does indeed perform well, at least in my congregation, so I extrapolate it to others. (It might be different if my congregation was one of those basket-case Revelation 2 and 3 congregations) Though I am reliably informed (I can shake facts out if I want to but I usually refrain from doing it) that there is disagreement amongst our elders, you would never know it by the united front they display. Instead of shaking them down for disputes, I seek occasions to (genuinely) commend them for what they do.
    It is not healthy to ‘expose’ present disagreements. (not that I don’t lap it all up if I hear of them here) People thereafter pick their favorite horses, which encourages further division. Of course people are going to disagree. The thing that counts is for them to resolve disagreements and carry on unitedly. That is the evidence of having God’s spirit.
    Human traits will never disappear. ‘We have this treasure [of the ministry] in earthen vessels,’ but, being humble, God can work with such men as those comprising the Governing Body. Proud persons He can’t do much with other than squash them in time. ‘God is using imperfect people today because that’s all he has at the present time’ Mark Nourmair (approximately) says, not referring specifically to GB brothers. And, when the younger brothers fall to squabbling, the old-timer smiles, tilts back in his chair, and marvels, ‘It’s amazing what Jehovah accomplishes given what he has to work with.”
     
  12. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Anna in New Light on Beards   
    I think it indicates that people want a ‘king,’ somewhat like in Samual 8. They can’t handle subtle. They want a king.
    ’Alright, alright, we’ll give you king,’ says the visible org, ‘An entire Update to say ‘We don’t care about beards!’ That means you don’t have to either! Sheesh! We were trying to get away from that.’
    Seen from a different standpoint, I think those seeking the downfall of the earthly organization also resemble those Israelites who demanded a king. Those ancients couldn’t handle the seeming vagaries of judges popping up here and there. They wanted a king, with all the trimmings, that they could see strutting around at all times.Similarly, people look real closely into the GB, see it is composed of men who have all the differing idiosyncracies of the first century disciples and they can’t handle it. How can God’s direction come from such a human arrangement? They either want an undisputed miracle-backed single entity (which we all know is not going to happen today) or they want dissolution of the whole model, going back to a ‘Jesus and me’ model. This usually means a ‘Me and Jesus’ model, since it is personal disagreements over this or that policy that motivates the desire to sink the earthly organization. They either imagine the ‘Jesus and Me’ model will continue to safeguard the unity and doctrinal uniqueness of JWs or they think that the unity and doctrinal uniqueness is not worth safeguarding—they are content to let it evolve, just like in the natural world of competitive struggle and how good things supposedly come of that. ‘Guardians of doctrine? Don’t make me laugh!’ they say.
    My Bethel chum told me many years ago that it gets more challenging to see God’s hand as you get tighter with the organization. The friends in general will ooh and ahh over this new direction from God, and you will say, ‘Yeah….it’s only because so-and-so is too stubborn to……’
    This is where faith comes in. It is the divine/human interface. Fleshly eyes can only perceive the ‘Indisputable miracle-backed, controlled Prophet’ model or the ‘Jesus and Me’ model for congregation headship. It takes spiritual eyes to see that, if God is really worth his salt, surely he can move dedicated men to adequately serve as his conduit. The GB is screened by being anointed, further screened by a lifetime of full time service, further screened by intensive Bible training on how to work with others by implementing Bible principles.
    This training to work according to Bible principles, strive for unity, learn how to defer to one another, resist the temptation to run-over those with whom you disagree, produces good results. In individual congregations, elders periodically gather for such training in ‘elder schools,’ where they learn, among other things, that unity of the body is always the goal. This does indeed perform well, at least in my congregation, so I extrapolate it to others. (It might be different if my congregation was one of those basket-case Revelation 2 and 3 congregations) Though I am reliably informed (I can shake facts out if I want to but I usually refrain from doing it) that there is disagreement amongst our elders, you would never know it by the united front they display. Instead of shaking them down for disputes, I seek occasions to (genuinely) commend them for what they do.
    It is not healthy to ‘expose’ present disagreements. (not that I don’t lap it all up if I hear of them here) People thereafter pick their favorite horses, which encourages further division. Of course people are going to disagree. The thing that counts is for them to resolve disagreements and carry on unitedly. That is the evidence of having God’s spirit.
    Human traits will never disappear. ‘We have this treasure [of the ministry] in earthen vessels,’ but, being humble, God can work with such men as those comprising the Governing Body. Proud persons He can’t do much with other than squash them in time. ‘God is using imperfect people today because that’s all he has at the present time’ Mark Nourmair (approximately) says, not referring specifically to GB brothers. And, when the younger brothers fall to squabbling, the old-timer smiles, tilts back in his chair, and marvels, ‘It’s amazing what Jehovah accomplishes given what he has to work with.”
     
  13. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley reacted to JW Insider in New Light on Beards   
    Thanks for your concern. I didn't mean to give the impression that I had any medical ailments that I know about. I'm 66 and my body aches a bit more after a hard day's work, but I have no diseases that I know about. 
    I have been sleeping in very dry air this winter and I have a sore throat that I get about 1 out of 3 winters. My voice gets so low (bass) that I start singing "Old Man River" from Show Boat about 100 times a day.
    Ironically I also got a nose bleed last night, very rare for me, and even more ironically I could taste and smell the iron when bits of it trickle into the back of my throat and I spit it out. I typed a couple of long posts last night with my head tilted back and a tissue stuffed into my left nostril. I couldn't even see the screen as I typed.
    Another bit of medical disclosure. I have been a near-vegetarian for almost a year now, still having milk and cheese, and making a once-a-week exception for fish, and about a once-a-month exception for an egg or two. I love the new international flavors I had never tried before. I have nothing against meat, but I'm on this diet because my wife is on a very similar doctor-recommended diet and it seems to be helping her quite a bit.  
  14. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from JW Insider in New Light on Beards   
    I think it indicates that people want a ‘king,’ somewhat like in Samual 8. They can’t handle subtle. They want a king.
    ’Alright, alright, we’ll give you king,’ says the visible org, ‘An entire Update to say ‘We don’t care about beards!’ That means you don’t have to either! Sheesh! We were trying to get away from that.’
    Seen from a different standpoint, I think those seeking the downfall of the earthly organization also resemble those Israelites who demanded a king. Those ancients couldn’t handle the seeming vagaries of judges popping up here and there. They wanted a king, with all the trimmings, that they could see strutting around at all times.Similarly, people look real closely into the GB, see it is composed of men who have all the differing idiosyncracies of the first century disciples and they can’t handle it. How can God’s direction come from such a human arrangement? They either want an undisputed miracle-backed single entity (which we all know is not going to happen today) or they want dissolution of the whole model, going back to a ‘Jesus and me’ model. This usually means a ‘Me and Jesus’ model, since it is personal disagreements over this or that policy that motivates the desire to sink the earthly organization. They either imagine the ‘Jesus and Me’ model will continue to safeguard the unity and doctrinal uniqueness of JWs or they think that the unity and doctrinal uniqueness is not worth safeguarding—they are content to let it evolve, just like in the natural world of competitive struggle and how good things supposedly come of that. ‘Guardians of doctrine? Don’t make me laugh!’ they say.
    My Bethel chum told me many years ago that it gets more challenging to see God’s hand as you get tighter with the organization. The friends in general will ooh and ahh over this new direction from God, and you will say, ‘Yeah….it’s only because so-and-so is too stubborn to……’
    This is where faith comes in. It is the divine/human interface. Fleshly eyes can only perceive the ‘Indisputable miracle-backed, controlled Prophet’ model or the ‘Jesus and Me’ model for congregation headship. It takes spiritual eyes to see that, if God is really worth his salt, surely he can move dedicated men to adequately serve as his conduit. The GB is screened by being anointed, further screened by a lifetime of full time service, further screened by intensive Bible training on how to work with others by implementing Bible principles.
    This training to work according to Bible principles, strive for unity, learn how to defer to one another, resist the temptation to run-over those with whom you disagree, produces good results. In individual congregations, elders periodically gather for such training in ‘elder schools,’ where they learn, among other things, that unity of the body is always the goal. This does indeed perform well, at least in my congregation, so I extrapolate it to others. (It might be different if my congregation was one of those basket-case Revelation 2 and 3 congregations) Though I am reliably informed (I can shake facts out if I want to but I usually refrain from doing it) that there is disagreement amongst our elders, you would never know it by the united front they display. Instead of shaking them down for disputes, I seek occasions to (genuinely) commend them for what they do.
    It is not healthy to ‘expose’ present disagreements. (not that I don’t lap it all up if I hear of them here) People thereafter pick their favorite horses, which encourages further division. Of course people are going to disagree. The thing that counts is for them to resolve disagreements and carry on unitedly. That is the evidence of having God’s spirit.
    Human traits will never disappear. ‘We have this treasure [of the ministry] in earthen vessels,’ but, being humble, God can work with such men as those comprising the Governing Body. Proud persons He can’t do much with other than squash them in time. ‘God is using imperfect people today because that’s all he has at the present time’ Mark Nourmair (approximately) says, not referring specifically to GB brothers. And, when the younger brothers fall to squabbling, the old-timer smiles, tilts back in his chair, and marvels, ‘It’s amazing what Jehovah accomplishes given what he has to work with.”
     
  15. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley reacted to JW Insider in New Light on Beards   
    The fact that we as Christians are not under law does not mean that we would break just any law or advocate that anyone else would break just any law. I think we all have a proper aversion to eating or drinking blood and for me this includes avoiding any meat that hasn't been properly drained of its blood. 
    Of course, when we say "properly drained" there are probably a variety of methods and I don't care to look into them too closely. Whenever I do, I end up being vegetarian for a few months. But I can look at meat and pretty much tell if it seems reasonably bloodless to me. I can't imagine that any meat eating Christians or Jews had methods that were so much better at squeezing out anything more.
    I suspect that Paul thought Christians would use their best judgment (visually) and wasn't concerned that anyone should try to make rules about how best to butcher animals. For the most part, even among gentiles, there was a lot of natural aversion to eating/drinking blood, except for certain pagan rituals which, as Christians, they would already be avoiding. 
    I've always thought this was important testimony, too. For those who haven't seen it, I'll include it here:
    CHAP. IX. . . . . But to us, to whom homicide has been once for all forbidden, it is not permitted to break up even what has been conceived in the womb, while as yet the blood is being drawn (from the parent body) for a human life. Prevention of birth is premature murder, and it makes no difference whether it is a life already born that one snatches away, or a life in the act of being born that one destroys; that which is to be a human-being is also human; the whole fruit is already actually present in the seed. With regard to banquets of blood and such like tragic dishes, you may read whether it is not somewhere stated (it is in Herodotus, I think) that certain tribes had arranged the tasting of blood drawn from the arms of both sides to signify ratification of a treaty. Something of the same kind was tasted also under Catiline. They say that among certain tribesmen of the Scythians also each dead person becomes food for his own relations. But I am wandering too far. On this very day, in this very country, blood from a wounded thigh, caught in a palm of the hand and given to her worshippers to drink, marks the votaries of Bellona. Again, what of those who, by way of healing epilepsy, at the gladiatorial show, drain with eager thirst the blood of slaughtered criminals, while it is still fresh and flowing down from the throat? Or what of those, who dine on bits of wild-beast from the arena, who seek a slice of boar or stag ? That boar in the struggle wiped off the blood from him whom he had first stained with gore; that stag wallowed in a gladiator's blood. The paunches of the very bears are eagerly sought, while they are yet gorged with undigested human flesh; thus flesh that has been fed on man is forthwith vomited by man. You that eat such things, how far removed you are from the feasts of the Christians! . . . Your crimes ought to blush before us Christians, who do not reckon the blood even of animals among articles of food, who abstain even from things strangled and from such as die of themselves, lest we should in any way be polluted even by blood which is buried within the body. Again, among the trials of the Christians you offer them sausages actually filled with blood, being of course perfectly aware that the means you wish to employ to get them to abandon their principles is in their eyes impermissible. Further, how absurd it is for you to believe that they, who you are assured, abhor the blood of beasts, are panting for the blood of man, unless perchance you have found the former more palatable! . . .  
  16. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley reacted to Thinking in New Light on Beards   
    Each must do what they feel is right…..and I’m sure it was a nightmare for the apostles and the James's of the time to explain what was and wasn’t acceptable in their worship…we just look at those  scriptures differently…I guess I didn’t realise just how different we looked at things …
    besides all that…I sincerely hope  you will be okay with your health and I mean that…I really hope things improve for you so you don’t even have to consider the above…..and nobody can judge what another does…and you should know by now I wouldn’t…..🤗
     
  17. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley reacted to ComfortMyPeople in New Light on Beards   
    I would say that Paul, in the aforementioned texts, is alluding to eating meat previously offered to an idol in a pagan temple of worship. Meat that was sold in the temple itself, and the income from the operation financed said place.
    Paul says that the Christian with a weak conscience thinks that he is contributing to false worship, but the strong one only thinks that he is paying for a service: receiving food. That is, he does not make a donation to promote something idolatrous.
    In other words, I don't find that Paul even remotely addresses the issue of whether or not the meat was bled. That idea was not under consideration in the context we are talking about. I believe that if the Christian suspected that this was the case (that the meat contained blood), his conscience would prevent him from eating it. But that point is not discussed in those verses.
     
    (1 Corinthians 10:25-28) 25 Eat whatever is sold in a meat market, making no inquiry because of your conscience, 26 for “to Jehovah belong the earth and everything in it.” 27 If an unbeliever invites you and you want to go, eat whatever is set before you, making no inquiry on account of your conscience. 28 But if anyone says to you, “This is something offered in sacrifice,” do not eat because of the one who told you and because of conscience. 
     
    So the question was whether or not the meat was offered in a pagan sacrifice, not the blood it might contain.
    I think so, but I may be wrong.
  18. Haha
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Anna in New Light on Beards   
    Yeah, it’s pretty much like I bless everyone here…No Exceptions!!…but not necessarily the dumb things many of them say.
  19. Like
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Pudgy in New Light on Beards   
    Yeah, it’s pretty much like I bless everyone here…No Exceptions!!…but not necessarily the dumb things many of them say.
  20. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from JW Insider in New Light on Beards   
    Because they tried to do it gradually and it didn’t work:
    https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2023/12/beards-get-the-green-light.html
    I did my very best to reassemble all—the good, the bad, and the ugly—stopping short only at the ridiculous.
  21. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from JW Insider in New Light on Beards   
    Almost anything can be open to such an interpretation if you’re willing to stretch enough. How many things are there among a sizable group of people that have zero financial impact? If you have cynicism running through your veins, anything can be framed as primarily motivated by the money that is ‘the root of all evil.’
    Even in more plausible scenarios in which money might be a factor, how does that become a bad thing? Are mobsters the only people who use money? Don’t good and honest people do it too? Did Jesus condemn stewards for being wise in managing resources? Even one who was a bit slippery he managed to praise. It’s good to take money into account. It doesn’t always correlate with wickedness. More often it correlates with good, plain, beneficial common sense, so that you are foolish if you ignore it.
    To constantly harp on money, even in plausible situations (which I agree with you, the above two situations are not) —doesn’t it become a ‘You hypocrites! Which one of you has a bull falling into a pit on Sabbath who will not immediately pull it out?’ type of scenario? Anyone here who gets a hole in his wallet who will not immediately stitch in up?
    Now, time for my Bible reading: 
    “If you build a new house, you must also make a parapet for your roof, so that you may not bring bloodguilt on your house because of someone falling from it.”
    And Pudgy the Muttite said: “Bloodguilt, schmoodguilt! I’ll tell you why Moses is saying this! $$$$$$$$$!! What! He thinks I was born yesterday?”
  22. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Pudgy in New Light on Beards   
    Because they tried to do it gradually and it didn’t work:
    https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2023/12/beards-get-the-green-light.html
    I did my very best to reassemble all—the good, the bad, and the ugly—stopping short only at the ridiculous.
  23. Haha
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from JW Insider in New Light on Beards   
    Yeah. Not a bad answer—though you didn’t exactly suffer in silence like our Lord.
    Occasionally I muse that my blog may also be read by someone who matters and goes on to make some great change on its account.
    It may have just happened. My blog is all my personal writing. It has modest traffic. I’m happy with 70- 100 hits a day, which is more or less average.  In a recent 2-day period, however, it logged over 60,000 hits.
    I was unsure what to make of this—or even it was a good thing. What gives?
    Then I figured it out. It was @Many Miles, no doubt, downloading everything so that he could ponder over the weekend and realize the error of his ways.
    If only it is followed up by an equal number of orders for my books, which are advertised with each post . . . 
    https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com
  24. Haha
    TrueTomHarley reacted to Pudgy in New Light on Beards   
    Obama would bow so low to Saudi royalty it looked like he was searching for a lost contact lens.
  25. Upvote
    TrueTomHarley got a reaction from Pudgy in New Light on Beards   
    Oh, don’t mind Pudgy with his bellyaching over no apologies. 
    This is the same Pudgy who, along with his cohort Rush Limbaugh, used to heap scorn on President Obama for embarking on worldwide Apology Tours.
    I am sympathetic to difficulties he has encountered. But it doesn’t justify a lifelong Character Assassination Tour of people who even he acknowledges are in the main good and honorable men. (Or is that the local elders he says that of?) And, surely, his own hardheadedness and inflexibility has had something to do with it.
×
×
  • 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.