TrueTomHarley

Just now, AlanF said:

Your buddy Arauna seems to think it's 6,000 years, being a young-earth creationist.

Take it up with her, then.

18 minutes ago, AlanF said:

And remember that close to half the country believes the earth is only 6,000 years old.

The dopes. It is 7500 if it is a day.

57 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

It is very discouraging when the GB is chasing away more people than I could gather in a thousand lifetimes

No. You are preoccupied with this, and @4Jah2me lives and breathes it. But anyone else takes into account that there is no sizable organization on earth where CSA is not an issue, and no one that is not being sued—and in most cases, it is the leaders who are the abusers, something very rare with JWs, whose leaders are just accused of not reporting.

Don’t misunderstand. I would rather that even that were not so, but it is considerably less serious than the leaders being the abusers. Most people can get their heads around that, out of 8 million people, not every single one will be blameless—especially since CSA is the scourge of the planet. Most people can also get their heads around clergy/penitent confidentiality, even if it is being legally reinterpreted, same as they have understood doctor/patient and lawyer/client privilege. I say the following only because I am addressing you, JTR, and I know your political leaning: Most ordinary Americans cannot quite get their heads around quid-pro-quo and if you explain it to them they are not quite sure why it is the huge deal Trump’s opponents make it out to be.

We’ll see how it turns out. It may be something to the Witness organization’s lasting shame. Or perhaps a sense of proportion will, in time, assert itself.

I do sometimes wish that there was a little more PR pushback from them. At present there is only a “we abhor child sexual abuse.” True enough, but in the face of court actions and vehement accusers, reporters go to where they can get a story. They can get one from accusers, but nothing specific from the defense, so they naturally gorge themselves on what the accusers have to say. That’s what reporters do.

There is a limit to how much you can malign people. The decency of Jehovah’s Witnesses is well-attested. They are not flower-selling robe dressers but they are neighbors and coworkers. True, they eat Bible sandwiches, but they are honest, industrious, law-abiding, and harmless. Usually when there are laudable people, it is understood to be because of their leaders, not despite them.

You hang out here too much, JTR, with people who are obsessed over this, in some cases people who are fervently hoping for an outcome detrimental to JWs. “Can’t see the forest for the trees” is the pit some fall into. Again, because of your political leanings—it is like media whipping people into a frenzy over Trump day after day, praying that every tiny development proves to be the torpedo that sinks him. From the moment of his election this has been the case—even from before his election. Close one Mueller investigation with not much to show for it, and immediately open another. 

At least half the country concludes that it is his enemies grasping at straws. 

24 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

When's Armageddon My Harley ?  Ten years time I reckon

It is five weeks away. That is when the JW schedule of weekly Bible reading hits Revelation 22, and it would be too inconvient to make them start all over again at Genesis.

8 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Most everyone in the world is familiar with the concept that Trump is a criminally insane, inept, wannabe politician 

Of course! Half the country knows this. And the other half does, too.

He just may win again, you know. And a ton of celebrities who swore that they would leave the country will again have to second-guess their words.

48 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Obviously you know as much about electromagnetics as Donald Trump does about running a country.

That’s Alan’s fourth completely irrelevant reference to Trump—a political taunt that is guaranteed to fall flat amidst an apolitical audience. Knowing this (because he knows everything), why does he do it?

BECAUSE HE IS SUFFERING FROM TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME!

And who is (as far as I know—I have seen it nowhere else) the originator of that term? JTR!!!!

Buckle up for the ride!!

By continually inserting Trump where it is absolutely unnecessary, irrelevant, and even off-putting to those who he would like to convince, Alan shows that he is a leftist. He is without a doubt a close ally-in-spirit (even a “double-portion” of spirit!) of Steven Hassan, the David Splane of anti-cultists, originator of the BITE model of “mind control”—Behavioral, Informational, Thought, and Emotional Control! 

Mr Hassan, the man stupid enough as a youth to join the Moonies—the robe-dressing, flower-hawking Moonies! and now, having quit them, writes that even the most intelligent people [read: himself] can be misled into a cult—and he expands the C-word into ever more frontiers, including Jehovah’s Witnesses, and beyond.

His current book is: “The Cult of Trump—A Leading Cult Expert Explains How the President Uses Mind-Control.” A review of it begins with: “Can’t understand why a loved one would vote for Donald Trump? Let the experts who spend their lives studying cults help break it down.” Of course! It is completely inexplicable otherwise. Only cult delusion can account for such a vote.

When you think that half the country has fallen victim to cult influence and mind-control, it is strong evidence that you have drunk too much of the Kool-Aid yourself!

(Note to @The Librarian: This would be good to start as another topic. I don’t do so partly because I am not sure people would follow, but mostly because I would want the comment or two from the people who triggered the remark to head the new thread. I do want to cooperate with you—I really do, but there are those drawbacks that I don’t know how to get around. You could give me the broad powers that you gave JWI to split up existing threads. But it would not be a good idea because I would do it only for those I cared about, whereas JWI will do it for everyone. I would not make a very good administrator.)

9 minutes ago, AlanF said:

First, WHY ARE YOU POSTING IN BOLDED CAPS? Don't you know that that's a sign of derangement?

Better people than you have tried to break him of that habit. He responds with larger fonts.

10 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Yes, Arauna and I already 'discussed' that. What's your point, Einstein?

It starts already.

3 minutes ago, Anna said:

[JTR vs AlanF]   Please place your bets here

YEAH!!!!

9 minutes ago, AlanF said:

TTH's doing these things is yet another instance of lying. Here he is also lying by omission, by failing to clearly state what I have repeatedly and clearly said is my beef with these clowns: lies, misrepresentations, failure to respond to crucial points of argument, general hypocrisy, etc.

C’mon, Jimbo. Don’t take that one lying down. Stick up for me. Remember how you said you had my back when that apostate thug at Twitter threatened me? Same now, please. Need a little help, here.

Even though you have said that you don’t mind, I will even hold off calling you ‘the ol pork chop’ for a time—or even a time, times, and half a time. @James Thomas Rook Jr.

9 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

ALANF: IT'S OBVIOUS YOU KNOW NOTHING .....BUT ... having Narcissistic Personality Derangement ... you think you do know ... about everything. You are wrong.

Oh, boy, this is gonna be GOOD!

The voice of @admin is seldom heard in this neck of the woods. But the last time he chimed in it was to thunder: “Geez, you guys are a piece of work!”

What could I tell him? That we’re not?

GASP!   “Northernmost town in the world?”

We know who lives there.

SANTA CLAUS!

So it is HE who is gathering data on us!

It is HE who pulls off the most sinister ruse of all time, under the guise of children’s beneficiary!

EVERYONE except some religious oddballs has let this agent into their homes each year with open arms! They’ve done so for over a century, at least!

Dropping off presents takes two seconds. What does he do with the REMAINDER of his time, rummaging through file cabinets while sugar plums are dancing through our heads? And we even leave COOKIES for him, little suspecting that he is planting his own cookies on our hard drives!

It is the mother of all conspiracy theories revealed!  

3 minutes ago, Matthew9969 said:

But thanksgiving is over, now jw's can feel free to enjoy their post thanksgiving dinner as thousands of jw's will be cooking turkey today and secretly enjoying their own thanksgiving holiday. 

Relax. They’ll all be DFed by the weekend.

11 hours ago, AlanF said:

On the other hand, TrueTomHarley and Arauna scream bloody murder when I give them back what they first gave me. Do you have different standards for me and them?

Today’s quiz for all forum contributors:

Name two participants (one who has been sent packing) who both are hypersensitive to the slightest disparaging remark (or even disagreement) and at the same time are completely oblivious to their own nuclear abuses?

Hint: Both names begin with “A.”

GASP!  You don’t think THAT’S the hidden alias connection we have all been missing, do you?

(Nice, gracious @Arauna who....yes.....when pushed long enough gets a tiny bit sharp, but is NOTHING like the abuse from the “A”s

And blessedly pleasant TTH, who occasionally lets loose with what for him qualifies as a swear word: “loon.” That saint? Mean? There ought to be a law.)

“Why, then, do you look at the straw in your brother’s eye but do not notice the rafter in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Allow me to remove the straw from your eye,’ when look! a rafter is in your own eye?”

14 hours ago, Witness said:

Okay, it originated with AlanF and Arauna repeated it.  I do not keep up on AlanF and Arauna's involved conversations. 

The answer to this problem with be for @The Librarian (that old hen) to throw EVERYTHING into one master thread, and then you will not be able to keep up even with your own material. Let us see if you will then say as you have with the WT: “Who needs organization?” Because it is not perfect, she eliminates it.

Hmmm. One way to adapt (short of leaving) if the Librarian DID go ahead with her nefarious scheme would be to forget all about following the master thread, which would be a 24/7 project, and just tick off a few names to follow—a few allies, and one or two villains such as Agent Jack, who reliably keeps me up to date on controversial things but otherwise keeps his personality largely at bay. 

It might not be a bad thing at all, though it would change the nature of participation. Certain individuals who (I admit it) affect me like waving a red flag before a bull would be cut out of the picture. They would cry about their free speech being cut off, but I would respond that the Librarian has formed a culty wall....how did Jack put it?....to cordon them off. Yes.....it might be something I could adapt to, especially if a little of that punctuated equilibrium kicks in.

If @The Librarian follows through on her plan for one master thread....

A typical conversation in the new system:

”Say, what ever happened to that semi-apostate website, the WNMF? Did Allen Smith ever succeed in his scheme to take it out?”

”He didn’t have to. The Librarian did his work for him. She eliminated all threads but one, and so much energy focused into that one that the whole site blew up like a supernova!”

”Did any good come out of the change?”

“Well, yes. All those who contended with JWs that because an organization is imperfect it should be destroyed came to see the result of total chaos.”

“Ah, here comes the Librarian herself (that young hen) fresh from the resurrection.....Ms Librarian, do you have any regrets in funneling all writing into one master thread so unwieldy that nobody could find their way around in it, and they abandoned it in droves?”

”Absolutely not! There are rules! Mathematics is not the same as geology, which is not the same as history! These naughty pupils were deliberately mixing them all up, and I only did what I had to do. They thanked me for it later!”

”What was the end of the matter?”

”Well, everybody left except for Alan, and he was itching for a fight. So I readmitted AllenSmith and the two of them battled it out all the way till the new system! They were both pretty evenly matched in insult-power.”

2 hours ago, John Paul said:

Then why is it in an open forum? This justification makes no sense.

A privately-owned website is what I should have said, not a private website.

1 minute ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I remember when the Bell Telephone Company was called "Ma Bell".

I canceled my account when they did that and reverted to tin cans connected by string.

2 minutes ago, AlanF said:

TTH's failure to reveal what he clearly knows is the source is, as usual, thoroughly dishonest.

It’s not dishonest at all. It is a very old expression, seldom heard anymore, and I don’t keep track of minutia. Besides, Jehovah’s organization is known to be heavenly with an earthly component. WT is only the earthly component. It is you who are dishonest.

1 hour ago, John Paul said:

So, if witnesses use that term, I suspect they are referring to the spiritual Jerusalem, not the watchtower.

John is right here, and i misspoke it would be mother in the sense of Jerusalem above. I wouldn’t swear that no one ever said ‘Mother Watchtower,’ but if so, it would be most rare.

1 hour ago, Witness said:

Okay, it originated with AlanF and Arauna repeated it.  I do not keep up on AlanF and Arauna's involved conversations.   It was Arauna's mention of it, that I remember seeing.  Nonetheless, many, especially elders, have referred to the organization as "mother".  AlanF is not far off base in using it, at all.  

Mother is not inappropriate, for the reasons you say. Old-timers still use it from time to time. AlanF made it Mommy as a deliberate taunt.

1 hour ago, John Paul said:

Just because a person makes and effort to expose a wrong perception about an organization in which they serve God under, doesn't give anyone a right to remove someone. 

It’s a private website. The old hen can remove anyone she pleases.

1 hour ago, John Paul said:

What's makes you think, you're not more mentally diseased than that person?

I don’t know that I have said that I am. But I have so far not outraged her so that she should hurl me into the abyss.

49 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Naturally, we know that Arauna and most of her fellow JWs will never read the book. That's their lookout.

I doubt I will. But I have read one of Sean Carrol’s books and one of Carl Zimmers—I forget the titles just now, but I will look them up should you insist.

16 hours ago, John Paul said:

Have you complained to the librarian about AlanF just like others apparently have about Allen smith?

AllenSmith was a loon. He may or may not have been a Witness, but he had serious issues of self-control and unrestrained anger, not to mention misperception, I don’t blame @The Librarian a bit. If his congregation elders got reports of his carrying on in field service as he carried on here, they would have very strong counsel for him.

Sigh.....they might not. They might not know what to do. Contrary to what many seem convinced of here, the Witness organization does not send people anywhere. Rather, they coordinate the efforts of those who choose to cooperate with the preaching work.

I think one thing that Allen demonstrated is that he is not real big on cooperation.

To be sure, he is not the only one given to extreme unpleasantness.

Forgive me if I belabor this point, Ms. @The Librarian

It is important to me not to be seen as an ingrate. I’m not. I am very grateful to you and this site. It is important to me not to be thought of as if trying to draw readers away or trying to sabotage this site. I’m not.

Come, now. I write several hours per day, producing material persuasive on controversial topic that few Witnesses tackle, and then intermix it with generous amounts of hogwash to come up with reasonings that I have never seen before—and ought I just give it to you?

Actually, I do give it to you. Controversial posts I put here at the same time that I put them on my own blog. So you must not begrudge me if I link back to posts there. If they are also here, and I can find them, I would link to them here.

I don’t have to write here as much as I do. I have made some very long comments lately, and I’m sure I will put them somewhere else someday. They don’t have to be here in the first place. I like the instant feedback that I get and I like the thought of pulling my weight on your site, but it does not have to be. Let me know publicly or privately if you would like to see a change. I do not want to thwart you.

41 minutes ago, Witness said:

“Mommy Watchtower" is Arauna's phrase, Allen. 

This is AlanF’s taunt, Witness. He has said it innumerable times and now Arauna has adopted it once or twice in her replies.

There is no way that you could not have known this.

1 hour ago, John Paul said:

Vic has been seen in JW.net is opposition to the Org in a very ugly way. What does that say about the owner of that account?

The “owner” knows nothing about it, and Vic has breathed life into himself if that is the case. He is a 100% concoction of mine who first appears in the brilliant ebook Tom Irregardless and Me, which I would link to except the Librarian will get mad.

1 hour ago, AlanF said:

It's painfully clear that Arauna, despite her blustering overconfidence, is an especially unclear thinker. This appears in her posts in many ways, such as responding to things that were never said, all manner of sidestepping and ignoring of arguments, bringing in non sequiturs of various sorts, and even outright lying.

Just say that you disagree with her. Why can you not do that? Everyone else does. When she responds in muted kind, it is only after you have goaded her with ten insults.

1 hour ago, AlanF said:

with hypocrites like TrueTomHarley complaining that my detailed debunkings are too long, and hypocrites like Arauna complaining that I don't respond at all, with both of them hypocritically failing to respond to most of the content of my posts.

Just say that you disagree with them. Why can’t you do that? Not everyone who doesn’t see your point of view is a hypocrite.

1 hour ago, AlanF said:

Arauna has also complained that I've not answered her challenges, but anyone who reads my careful and detailed responses knows that's not true. 

There are other things to do in life, you know.

Look, it is not the length. JWI has been just as long. It is not the content. JWI also carries on about some things that I would not carry on about. It is not the myriad quotes that you wish to “debunk.” JWI has also....well, no, he hasn’t done that, at least to that extent. But that is your personal preference. God knows that I indulge enough of mine here.

It is the unrelenting hostility and contempt toward those taking another view that raises the red flag. If you would drop that, I would leave your posts unmolested. I know how to live and let live.

The Librarian (that old hen) apparently banned AllenSmith in all his permutations—far more than mine (and I got the idea from him). Several have decried that banning. I don’t. That is not to say that I would do it myself, but he DID get ugly on many occasions. I don’t blame @The Librariana bit—even though he ostensibly was on my side. Or was he? Speculation was floated by many that he actually was an opposer seeking to make JWs look as nasty and intolerant as possible.

Same with you. Conduct yourself with some decorum. We may never interact, because I don’t like you. But I will not feel any reason to send Vic Vomidog after you. There are many others here of your persuasion. They are not stupid or at a loss for words, and I do not send Vomidog to take a bite out of them. They know how to behave.

15 minutes ago, admin said:

No. Google came up with a fix from their side for which I am sure they are not happy about.

Good. I hoped they would.

15 minutes ago, admin said:

I can ask the developers if they have some ideas on threaded replies again... but why do I doubt it?

The Librarian gets mad if I like to my blog too much. Most of my posts on controversial matters I have also posted here, word-for-word. I would gladly link to them here, and not on my blog, if i could find them. The closest option I see here is a “Content I Started” tab, which includes every comment on any thread I started. If there was one with just the headings themselves, that is the tab that I would use.

She may think I am trying to swipe her participants—it is a reasonable concern. I am not. My comment section expires quickly, I have made it non-existent where that is an issue, and I do not allow much commentary in the first place, certainly not debate. I cite my posts there and not here only because I find it easier to do so.

Why would they not be happy about a fix that they came up with themselves?

29 minutes ago, The Librarian said:

I am creating this thread in response to all the non-sequitur replies all the other threads get. 

I will try to not care if someone responds with a Turkey recipe or True Tom spams us again. 

This is me throwing up my hands. Officially.

Abort, abort! It’s not too late! Go back to the old. It is time for you to retire your card catalog and move on into the present.

(OR make JWI assign a Dewey Decimal to each comment and run them in parallel that way.)

PS...Does @adminstill think it’s all going up in flames at the end of the year?

You may want to reflect—probably you have already—that while opposers would love such crisp organization—see how 4Jah2Me complains that he cannot get his questions answered—JWs who consider themselves loyal to Jehovah’s organization may not share that enthusiasm. For them, the theme of this forum will be: “Okay, let us accept as a given that the Witness organization is full of BS. Let us open the door that the elders have closed,” 

With a clear insistence of staying “On Topic!” these “loyal” ones can be expected to depart, and then you will have just one more “apostate” website that is a dime-a-dozen, rather than the largest one—the only one that I know of—where there is free give-and-take. I will not patiently stay and “debate” those who oppose, because the organization prefers that we not, and I respect their wishes. I am pushing it as is, but I will not flagrantly violate them, One huge thread negates that concern, but it also makes the entire forum an unwieldy mess.

Seriously, Mr. Librarian. It is not so bad as it is, even if if violates your sense of order. The fix might well prove to be the monkey wrench that renders the whole machine into a pile of scrap.

18 minutes ago, The Librarian said:

Maybe there should only be one thread... called Jehovah's Witnesses .... and we have ONLY one singe topic for everybody?

Let's try that....

I'll ask the @admin if we can start a club like that and freeze this one.

This is just your librarian sense of order kicking in. Far more preferable is the current system, where the topic is adhered to for a time, and even revisited, than a giant-magamall site where nobody will be able to keep up.

10 minutes ago, The Librarian said:

Could I have the address to your blog again? I seem to have misplaced it.... in EVERY SINGLE THREAD ON THIS SITE!

Look closer. It’s in there.

(sorry)

Still, many posts on controversial things I have also posted here, word for word. (Not this one about the Twilight Zone, but you must admit it does perfectly fit in with JTR’s comment.) I have no problem retrieving them from your site, and not mine, but I can not find them so easily on yours. The “Content I Started” tab includes all comments on those threads, even AlanF telling me that I suck. If I readily find a list of my headings, I would link from their. Sorry, ma’am, I really am trying to comply