Why won't they announce the reason for disfellowshipping or disassociation?

[Witness]

3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I don't like to make it personal.

 When the urge hits you to make it personal, you write in the third person.  I guess that makes it less personal. 

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, tromboneck said:

TTR...this guy is playing you like a drum. He is not for real. You are quite pollyannish. (I mean that in the nicest kind of way)

I don't think so. Which guy do you mean?

Having said that, it really doesn't matter. If you leave a record of loyalty to Jehovah, slapping back hard at villainous reasonings, and even people when they make themselves synonomous with them, also not chit-chatting with determined enemies of the truth as though they were chums, yet not saying vile things yourself, and even showing some kindness and empathy wherever the situation might warrent it, I'm not sure how you can go wrong, even if the guy is phony.

There was someone here who said he was a brother coping with homosexual tendencies some time ago. He painted himself very distraught. I think he said he had contemplated suicide at one time. I spoke with him at some length, as did several others here. But I always thought he could be just putting us on. It doesn't matter. If you sketch a character convincingly enough, you provide good opportunity for dealing with such a character, whether you are real or not.

It's not like I feel I'm being Perry Mason here, you know. Nothing here is real, necessarily. Real or not, people provide a good opportunity to develope communication skills appropriate to both friend and foe.

If you mean John, I don't think I've been gullible. Why would you think I have been? But even if I have, it hardly matters. I certainly mess with people's minds enough when I determine they are up to no good. If I am to stay here I must have that liberty. If someone turns the tables on me now and again, why should I complain? But I don't think it of John. He struck me as genuine, though you never know.

 

[TrueTomHarley]

15 minutes ago, Witness said:

you write in the third person.

When I bring in folks like @Vic Vomidog, @Dr. Adhominem  Dr. 'Hammer' Urubi, and @Top Cat O'Malighan, I can almost write in the tenth person.

[A Nice Guy]

35 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I certainly mess with people's minds enough when I determine they are up to no good

That's true. He does.

[JOHN BUTLER]

My personal opinion is, that if a person will not use their real name on a forum then they are not quite as genuine as they could be. That's just my opinion of course. As for me i have nothing to hide and I certainly do not use any forum / page / FB or any other means to 'wind people up' deliberately. Yes sometimes i can be a bit unfair or rude, for which, when i calm down i will apologise. But i' m totally upfront and try to be as  honest as possible. Concerning the JW Org and my personal experiences, there are things i would love to say here, but they are much too personal involving my direct family, so i have to hold back on many things... That does not help in some ways as i could use personal experience as perfect examples, but i will not sacrifice my family just for that reason.

As for @tromboneck which appears to mean Trombone Neck, and gives the impression that this person loves to stick their neck out, or, be very loud in their opinion. I've only read their last two comments and if that is their general attitude well so be it,  but it is not very upbuilding is it ? 

As for @TrueTomHarley he is kind enough to bear with me on many occasions and has been very helpful in this way. I think we have agreed to differ on many things but his opinion has been a great help to me.  Thank you Tom.

As for all this second person and third person stuff, all beyond me. The scriptures say let your Yes mean Yes and your No mean No and anything beyond this is a sin. So that is one reason i do not hide behind sudonims. In my opinion (I'm using this IMO a lot lately) it is best to be truthful about who i am. Then others can have their own opinions of me, but at least they will know I'm not hiding behind a make believe character. Have a good day everyone. (I have a vintage pram /buggy/ baby carriage, to build, so i'll go my way and build it). 

[TrueTomHarley]

There! You see, @tromboneck? I win.

I didn't know you were still around John. You'll note I did not flag you. Yes, the second and third person would be beyond you. I have a few alternate personas and I bring them in every now and then, mostly for comic relief, that I'm not sure anyone appreciates other than me. But I need that outlet. I am playing here. If I actually thought I was patiently reasoning wiht "apostates" - as though thinking that the elders struck out but I know how to convince them - well - no way. That would be hugely presumptuous and not too obedient. But if I can make my own world, I can get around it. And I get to hone my writing abiltiy, which these days, is my sole gig.

That is not to say that when I interract with persons here that I am not being genuine. I am. But with some characters, it doesn't matter if they are real or not. If the persona sketched is realistic, it is just like the "phony" householder in a service meeting demonstration at the Kingdom Hall. It is an opportunity to improve reasoning abiltiy. Even beyond that, efforts are not wasted. Someone may come along later or be reading at present whose circumstances fit or are close enough to the one I am interracting with, that they are being addressed, even if I don't know of them.

As for John, he did something I have never seen anyone do here. He went from calling me a tool of the devil to offering me a heartfelt thanks. I'm not (overly) naive. I know he did not "come around." But I offered counsel intended to benefit him and he picked up on the spirit of it, if not the advice itself. I hope things work out for he and his family. People never yield on the internet, in any field, not just religion, and he did in a substantial way. Good enough I appreciate it. 

The only people that give up is some among US, who say 'you know the master IS delaying, so I'm going to beat my fellow slaves who misled me' or 'Actually Demas has a good point about the present system of things - I do kind of miss it - and here is an argument that gives me cover to follow his course.' These persons too, I hope to influence for the good in some manner.

 

[Space Merchant]

And here I am criticizing Matthew previously for bringing back a dead thread that has met its resolve more than 750+ days ago, but it would seem it has been succeeded by the other thread spilling over to this one thus making the present day comments unrelated to the main topic itself by a huge margin.

Well this tends to be expected from necro-posting, ah well.

As for the secondary topic, pertaining to what I explain to Matthew about forum rules, if you get blocked to a topic without notice it is refereed to as a shadow block (referred to as a Shadow Ban as well as stealth banning, ghost banning), when you can't post at all with out being notified about when and why this happens - but every forum and or community has a different phrase for it, but it is what it is.

@JOHN BUTLER Not everyone tends to use their real name on the internet, even if they did, out of the bunch there is a common person that stalks so and so on the internet in order to steal information and or account, or in the mindset of silly persons nowadays, they will troll said use to no means end.

Other then that, I had assume that a resolve has been met in the other thread, but if one were to continue on about said topic, there was literally an identical thread regarding the same topic - instead of Nicole, the author is John.

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, Space Merchant said:

As for the secondary topic, pertaining to what I explain to Matthew about forum rules, if you get blocked to a topic without notice it is refereed to as a shadow block (referred to as a Shadow Ban as well as stealth banning, ghost banning), when you can't post at all with out being notified about when and why this happens - but every forum and or community has a different phrase for it, but it is what it is.

 

Who is this masked one so learned in the ways of science and internet?

I half expect that one day he will take off his mask and I will hear: "Truetom, (or JB or AS or anyone active on this thread) I am your father!"

My upcoming book on persecution in Russia is a week or two away. My next one will be entitled: "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Unitarians But Were Afraid to Ask"

[TrueTomHarley]

I really don't know much about Unitarians except that @Space Merchant does not seem like a typical one. But then again, maybe there are no typical ones and they are like ice crystals - no two are the same. He sure knows a lot of stuff. I sure am glad he hangs around. He sure supplied some good info.

[Space Merchant]

3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I really don't know much about Unitarians except that @Space Merchant does not seem like a typical one. But then again, maybe there are no typical ones and they are like ice crystals - no two are the same. He sure knows a lot of stuff. I sure am glad he hangs around. He sure supplied some good info.

Not all Unitarians are the same,and ironically, we are separate from each other for there is basically different denominations within the Unitarian faith. Other then that majority of us who know our bibles are not fans of the Trinity Doctrine and we believe that God is one and true, and his chosen Christ, the Son, the man named Jesus, is the one of whom he sent, the one of whom he has exalted, we respect others who are on the same path as us and do not try to butcher the scriptures as the Trinitarians and Gnostic do as well as others who try to make God into something that he is not.

Other then that, I know plenty, as well as the views of others, and as some already know, I am not a fan of uninspired scripture added to the King James, Christians who are dishonesty and or oblivious to what is true, those who believe God is a 3 in 1, etc.

But yeah, not all of us Unitarians are the same.

[Space Merchant]

4 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

I'm starting to get the impression they don't think Jesus had a pre-human existence?  But I'm afraid to ask that and  other things, yet am kyrioser and kyrioser about.

Depends on which Unitarian is which. There are some who do not believe Jesus pre-existed, and there are some who do - it is no red pill, blue pill situation.

3 hours ago, Nana Fofana said:

Yep I surely do agree with that.  'Cept bein a Jw an thereby amongstest the most lowliest of humankind and prey to them unfortunate folkways ov the lowly'n'smallminded, natcherly I would try to 'draw a bead on'im' so ta speak, get him classified as tew his 'nominals' as regard beliefs, an then stereotype him in a most prejudice fashin, an all'a'that, jess lak you'd expeck!

http://ncbf.homestead.com/Did_Jesus_have_a_Pre-Human_Existence.pdf

Now accordin'ta this'un hyere^ he's a-callin the pre-human existence believers as 'arians' so I reckon we liable to have th'SPLC  down awn air hides nexx!  Itz no rest fur th'wicked an rednecked, that I know!  thx

Prey? Your typing has started to break throughout your sentence.

With that last comment, there is a huge difference in an Arian and a Semi-Arian, as well as a Subornationist, last I recall, I refuted 2 individuals here regarding Arian based worship, for instance, showing total religious worship and servitude to the Son and not the Father, things of that nature, a minor thing makes the difference and since there is already a thread with what I said, I do not feel the need to repeat myself.

Lastly, you just posted a mere pdf, not realizing how many Unitarian groups even exist, which one are you talking about? I can tell you right there the majority is Universal Unitarianism and they are not the type to agree with the rest of the tribe (other Unitarians).

 

anyways, if I may add, I recommend getting a new keyboard if that is the cause of your questionable typing, if not, your current may be needing of a good cleansing - but if you are joking around, I remain unfazed.

That being said, some of us are basically Non-Trinitarians, which as as simple as it gets.

 

[JOHN BUTLER]

My goodness this is all tooooo much for a Sunday morning.  Surely it's simple enough  :-

Almighty God is the Creator of the heavens and the earth. Whether you wish to call Him Jehovah, Yahweh, Yehovah or some other name.

Jesus Christ was formally The Word as a spirit person in heaven before he was transferred to Mary's womb as an 'embryo' / foetus to be born as a perfect human.

The holy spirit is God's 'active force' / useable power, which he uses to get jobs done. 

And sin must therefore be passed on through men not women, otherwise Jesus would have inherited the sin from Mary. She was a virgin of course but would have inherited sin from her parents.

Good morning all