James Thomas Rook Jr.

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

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/

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

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.

I "talk" with my brother, Robert, on the telephone about politics .... well.... he talks .... and I listen.
My brother, who lives about 250 miles away, hates Donald Trump with a salivating and spittle, foaming at the mouth passion, and nearly goes into stroke-mode lambasting him, at which time I cannot get a word in edgewise.  After about 45 minutes he slows down, and I can hear his wife in the background telling him to calm down, Robert, calm down, calm down.
Today he called, and I casually mentioned he seems to have a dilemma .....as currently it seems Bernie Sanders, avowed true believer Socialist and Communist, who got married in Moscow, seems to be the front-runner for the Democrat Primaries going on, and may be the Democrat Party Candidate for President of the United States!
I told him ... "Hey Robert ... it looks like you have a choice between Bernie Sanders, and voting for Donald Trump, to keep the USA from going Socialist !"
Even though he was on the phone, I thought I heard the "AAAAAAGGGGGHHHH!," outside my house.
 

In many court cases world wide, the WTB&T Society has represented, under oath, that all Jehovah's Witnesses are ordained ministers, and are therefore clergy.
... even the newly baptized 8 year old girl, who thinks "clergy" is some kind of nasal congestion.

Everyone is equal ........ but some are more equal than others.

TTH:
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prevents the government from making laws which regulate an establishment of religion, prohibit the free exercise of religion, among other things.
What this means is that if inside any particular religion they want to believe that God is a flying spaghetti monster, and call their people Giraffes, and slaughter goats and bathe in the blood, or play with snakes  ... the government is FORBIDDEN to interfere with that ... unless ... unless it is against public policy, and is a clear and present danger.
The Governing Body has declared that all Jehovah's Witnesses are ORDAINED Ministers of the Gospel ... a practice I believe was started during the Vietnam War to try and get Draft deferments. At least it was in place when I reported to the draft board in 1965 at the Armed Forces Entrance and Examining Station (AFEES), in Richmond Virginia, and a legal theory that I presented to those from my community who interrogated me in the Draft Board conference room with, if memory serves, 12 people whose job it was to classify me as to my Draft status.
I understand what you are saying, TTH and MOST of it is true, but that is COMPLETELY beside the point.
If you claim to be a hippopotamus, and you are RECOGNIZED as an ordained  hippopotamus,  don't be surprised that you are not allowed to book a room at the local Hotel.
Further, if you claim to be a hippopotamus, the by extension, your children are hippos,  you cannot without being a hypocrite deride anyone for looking at you, and looking at your son or daughter, and observing correctly that you are not.
Particularly ... and most importantly, if the culture of your religion has declared that "hippopotamusity" is a "snare and a racket", and that organized herds of hippos are "Babylon the Great", and that their "ordained" leaders are agents of Satan.
As a teenager, and in my early 20's, my best friend growing up used to Pioneer, and he bragged to me that he could go into prisons almost any time he wanted to "minister" to the inmates there by representing himself as "clergy", which I thought was "juking" the system.
Later, he and my first wife ran off together ... but I digress.
The Governing Body has repeatedly represented themselves to Courts as ministers, and to get special legal privileges, by representing themselves as clergy.
BUT ... you and I have read NOTHING about this in any of the Society's publications .. and heard NOTHING about this at the Kingdom Hall or at any Assemblies or Convention .... while at the SAME TIME telling us that the GB and Elders, and Branch people and we ourselves here at the bottom of the food chain ... ARE ALL EQUAL. (Let's all hold hands in a circle, and sing the Pepsi song).
Either we ARE all equal .... or we are NOT.
If we are in reality (gimmee a break!) then the newly baptized 8 year old girl is not only an ordained minister ... but is entitled to the legal privileges of "clergy", because she is in fact a "clergy person"
Either we ARE all equal .... or we are NOT.
THAT is what we have represented as fact ....under sworn oath before God in courts of law ... when  JWs demand the rights of "Clergy".
So ... on one hand we declare inwardly that we are NOT clergy, despicable agents of Satan as they are, perverting the Word of God, but are all equal ordained ministers at the Kingdom Hall ... from the Governing Body, all the way down to the little 8 year old baptized Sister ... and to the courts we declare that we ARE clergy.
Either we ARE all equal .... or we are NOT.
I guarantee that any rank-and-file Jehovah's Witnesses of my generation that heard that would be ashamed, and nauseous at the very idea that we shared legal privileges with the "serpents and vipers".
According to that ... the little 8 year old Sister has the legal right to be privy to people's secrets of every sort, confessed to her, and is legally protected from divulging those secrets to ANYBODY, if she so decides to do so.
You can't have it BOTH ways.

SOMEBODY is being conned ... either the courts ... or us.
There is no third choice.
Either we ARE all equal .... or we are NOT.
You can't have it BOTH ways.
 

Since the time that the supposed Hunchback of Notre Dame swung from the bells in the bell tower, CLERGY has been afforded special dispensations by the civil authorities.
Even the civil authorities are in many governments referred to as "ministers".
In Richmond Virginia, circa 1965 Pioneers, those who spent 100 hours a month in the ministry .... and BEFORE the idea was promoted that we were "ordained" ministers .... and LONG before the GB started promoting the idea that those involved in lawsuits were "Clergy", these Brothers WERE granted exemption to military service with a "4-D" classification as "Ministers of Religion"
I WAS THERE AND SAW IT.
I was threatened with five years in the Federal Penitentiary, and when I told them I was ready to go ... I got the "I-O" classification, and exemption as a conscientious objector.
 

It seems that you are trying VERY hard to divert the conversation from the real issue.
Your question has NOTHING to do with facts.
My opinion on what you asked about is completely immaterial.
How about this ..... I get an opinion from you about what I posted first?
 

I will take that as a refusal to acknowledge reality as it REALLY exists.

TTH: Your humor has been legendary for some time now .....
You have TRULY (Tom), become a legend in your own mind.

Just convince some idiot that what remains IS the original work and she is golden.
 

Seems like the application is more like the lack of value that a foolish person might recognize in some very good counsel. Pearls and swine. That's not so different from his application. You can make it work among the brothers, but it sounds much more like our relationship with some in the world for whom we need to shake the dust off our feet.

TTH wants nothing of the sort.

JWI wants nothing of the sort.
But if you are going to do one of these things where you go on an attack with false "facts" again, then someone ought to point out at least a couple of them. First of all, you are conflating the Bible Students and the JW's if you think that the cross and crown was a view noticed "since 1950." The cross-and-crown pins were declared to be objectionable as early as 1928. The English Watchtower got rid of the symbol from its covers in 1931. The pin was objectionable because it was religious jewelry associated with Russell and the Bible Students, not because it showed a cross. The WT still taught that Jesus died on a cross up until about 1936.
Remember that the English name for the "Bible Students" still associated with the WTS was changed to Jehovah's Witnesses in 1931. Some Branches with the delay due to language translation lagged behind with the new name "Jehovah's Witnesses" and their redesigned Watchtower covers. (The Branch in Spain still had the cross-and-crown on their tablecloth design until 1932, and their Spanish Watchtower redesigned the covers in 1932.) Recall that in Germany the usual name was still Bibelforscher (Bible Students) from 1933 and beyond, and was used so much in Germany that many people didn't recognize that the Bibleforscher were the same as the Jehovas Zeugen (Jehovah's Witnesses) even after WWII. In fact, many of the Bibelforscher in concentration camps were not Jehovah's Witnesses but were Bible Students no longer associated with Rutherford and the Watchtower Society.
So this cross-and-crown change had nothing to do with the 1950's, even though a bit of confusion might still have occurred in the mind of outsiders about the Bible Student name up until then, as this Watchtower experience shows:
*** w92 6/1 p. 30 After Buchenwald I Found the Truth ***
In 1954, I was visited by two of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and I subscribed to the Awake! magazine. . . . During the discussions that followed, I remembered the Bibelforscher in Buchenwald who were so true to their faith. Only then did I realize that these Bibelforscher and Jehovah’s Witnesses were one and the same people. Thanks to a Bible study, my wife and I took our stand for Jehovah and were baptized in April 1955.
You have made this statement several times, seemingly forgetting that it is the Governing Body who have declared that the Watchtower erred in interpretation of scripture. You are so blinded in your anger against anyone who might admit this simple truth, that you are inadvertently claiming that the GB are opposed to the truth and seeking their own independent understanding. I don't believe they are opposed to the truth, nor do I think they are seeking their own independent understanding.
After 1929, Jehovah's Witnesses (since 1931), not just the Bible Students, believed that Romans 13:1 did not refer to the secular authorities:
*** w50 11/15 p. 442 par. 12 Subjection to the Higher Powers ***
On the clergy interpretation of Romans 13:1 has been based the Roman Catholic doctrine of the “divine right of kings”. Man-made governments since the flood of Noah’s day stem from Nimrod’s government at Babel or Babylon.
Since 1962, Jehovah's Witnesses now understand Romans 13:1 to refer to the man-made governmental authorities. As you have tried before, you try to be slick with your opposition to the truth of such matters, and as usual, it has led you to attempt some wordplay again. You try to divert with your wordplay to make it ambiguous about "why true witnesses understand the authority is God and Christ as inscribed by scripture."
Let's try to keep the facts straight:
*** w96 5/1 pp. 13-14 pars. 12-14 God and Caesar ***
As early as 1886, Charles Taze Russell wrote in the book The Plan of the Ages: “Neither Jesus nor the Apostles interfered with earthly rulers in any way. . . . to offer no resistance to any established law. (Rom. 13:1-7; Matt. 22:21) . . .  This book correctly identified “the higher powers,” or “the superior authorities,” mentioned by the apostle Paul, as human governmental authorities. (Romans 13:1, King James Version) . . . .
In 1929, . . . it was felt that the higher powers must be Jehovah God and Jesus Christ. . . . Looking back, it must be said that this view of things, exalting as it did the supremacy of Jehovah and his Christ, helped God’s people to maintain an uncompromisingly neutral stand throughout this difficult period.
In 1961  . . . the words used not only in Romans chapter 13 but also in such passages as Titus 3:1, 2 and 1 Peter 2:13, 17 made it evident that the term “superior authorities” referred, not to the Supreme Authority, Jehovah, and to his Son, Jesus, but to human governmental authorities. In late 1962, articles were published in The Watchtower that gave an accurate explanation of Romans chapter 13 . . . .
It was correct in 1886, under Russell, until it was changed due to what Rutherford "felt" about it in 1929. Finally in 1962, it was changed back to Russell's correct view so that it was an "accurate explanation" again. So this had very little to do with "Bible Students" as you tried to imply. I was referring to "Jehovah's Witnesses from 1931 to 1962.
Just a side note: For some reason the Watchtower added that "it must be said" that moving from a correct explanation to an inaccurate explanation of Romans 13:1 "helped." This makes one wonder why we no longer need the "help" of an incorrect explanation. Is it because we will no longer need to maintain an uncompromisingly neutral stand throughout any more difficult periods in the future? That can't be the real reason.
The real reason is clear. It was a mistake. We can be humble about it, instead of trying to use weasel words and other ambiguous wordplay to try to avoid being humble. We can't keep trying to give the impression that we avoid honesty to avoid admitting a mistake. It makes us look haughty. It makes us look like we are opposers who oppose the truth.
(Proverbs 12:17) . . .The one who testifies faithfully will tell the truth, But a false witness speaks deceit.
 

Billy downvoted about a hundred or so of my posts in the last day or so, that I posted over the past year or so.   I got copies of each post downvoted in my email, yesterday.
I enjoyed reviewing what I had said.
When he does that, does EVERYBODY get a copy of what he down votes, or just the person being down voted.?
After about 70, I got bored, and realized how Adolph Hitler got people to agree with him, no matter what he said or did..
Billy appears to think EVERYTHING the Watchtower has ever said, or written, is the Word of God.
This collective body of thought is only best guesses ... assuming the very best of motives, and no interest in keeping money and power, and building an Earthly empire of rank and privilege. beautiful buildings, and the adoration of many millions of Jehovah's Witnesses, and an unlimited expense account.
My rough guess is that 85% of everything that they have ever said is self aggrandizing drivel, and flat wrong .... but then again, what I did learn from "The Truth" over the past 60 years ... that precious 15% ... has made my life better, and kept me from getting killed or incarcerated, and given me three magnificent children, so there is that!
...and of course, there is a great joy and satisfaction of actually know the REAL truth about who the Creator of the Universe is !
Holding to THAT Truth has allowed me to swim with sharks without being eaten alive.
I think it was American Patriot Nathan Hale who said "My Country, right or wrong ... but my Country".
I am inclined to share those sentiments about the truth, in "The Truth".
What should I do  ? ... wait until it's perfect?
That does NOT include supporting or agreeing with the 85%, as BillytheKid46 does.
... and defending the indefensible.
 
 

It is OBVIOUS to me that Jehovah does not consider warfare to be murder ... and I have no wars planned, or any murders planned .... I am just trying to understand the theocratic legal principle of WHY?.
As far as I know ... no nation on Earth considers warfare to be the same as premeditated murder, either ....  although it is premeditated killing of humans.
They are using the same criteria that Jehovah God established millennia ago .... and which will be used at Armageddon.
OTHERWISE....
Jehovah God would be a murderer.
See the problem?
 

On November 24, 2019, the Sweden Ministry of Culture concluded that Jehovah’s Witnesses “contributed to maintaining and strengthening the fundamental values upon which society is based.” It allows them to receive state funding for religious communities. The same happened in Norway a month later.
https://jw-russia.org/en/news/2020/02/33.html

WHY .... doesn't Jehovah God consider warfare ... murder?
It seems clear to me that Jehovah allows civil governments to run their own affairs as they see fit, and even has no objection to them judging and executing wrongdoers ... and even commands us to be in subjection to these governments, as even the very worst of them are better than anarchy.
People generally misinterpret the scripture that say " Thou shalt not kill." where the scripture more actually says "Thou shalt not murder".
There is a very real difference.  A sovereign government, executing a wrongdoer is implementing the political will of that government ... whether it be a government the size of a continent .. or an extended family sized tribe of Jewish sheepherders living way out in the middle of nowhere, living in tents, governed by a patriarch.
I have not been able to find in the Bible where actual warfare, committed by any sovereign group, is considered to be murder ... either by the perpetrators of the war, or the defenders of the war against them, except in the case of "war crimes" against non combatants and other cases.
Did you know it is legal to drop napalm on civilians in war, from an aircraft ... but not from a flame thrower from a soldier on the ground?
....but I digress.
Even people that warred against the Jews  were not considered murderers..... they were considered warriors.
I am working on getting this all straight in my mind now ... as there seems to be a profound truth buried in this stream of thought, somewhere, but I cannot get it to crystallize, or perhaps it is approaching 3AM, and I am too tired to think about it.
But whatever it is that is ... what profound basic principle that I am missing ...is based on having a correct answer  as to WHY ... WHY does God NOT consider warfare to be murder.
I suspect when I figure it out, it will be like driving down a road in a southerly direction, thinking you are going North ... and then you see that landmark or sign that indicates you are really going South ... and that feeling you get when your whole frame of reference rotates in your head, like the world just rotated 180 degrees.
It's like deja vu, and geography, combined.
Perhaps my premise is faulty, but I don't think so.
Please feel free to destroy my premise, or my stream of thought, or my conclusions.
I try to be "loyal" to whatever is true, and not an agenda of defending an agenda.
Knowing "WHY?" things are the way they are, is the key to good philosophy.
Bad philosophy will waste our lives, which are pitifully short.
 
 
 
 

It is odd, but not at all inappropriate, and certainly not illegal to yell " CINEMA !! "... in a crowded Fire Station..

It is odd, but not at all inappropriate, and certainly not illegal to yell " CINEMA !! "... in a crowded Fire Station..

Given my newfound resolution, I am exploring whether I feel that there any value whatsoever in starting threads on this open JW forum. I am not sure that there is. The ones who object are not doing any more than they have done from Day one, but just rubber-stamping what they have said many times in the past—they get me worked up to no purpose. I do like to keep my finger on the pulse of what the opponents are up to, and I have benefited in some cases by seeing where they are coming from—still there are many many ways of keeping up to date.
I mean, when you repeatedly see such remarks as “dear old Elder Tom because he is deliberately using thousands of words to say what could be said in two sentences,” I have to bite my tongue every time so as not to scream, “the problem is that you are too stupid to read more than two sentences!” Or as when he commends Witness, though saying some of her thoughts were “over his head,” not to hit back with “anything is over your head!” Who needs the aggravation?

Jesus is that source of truth, and does not produce bad fruit. We as humans must try to imitate Jesus and follow to the best of our ability. But even a piece of good fruit has flaws when you look at it too closely.
You appear to be interpreting this statement as if it is saying:
(Matthew 5:48) . . .You must accordingly be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
But this is mitigated by another statement from the same Sermon on the Mount:
(Matthew 6:14-15) . . 14 “For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; 15 whereas if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
If everyone must be perfect, and can never produce bad fruit, then what's the point of asking for forgiveness of our trespasses?