TrueTomHarley

29 minutes ago, Witness said:

When an author does his research, doesn't he usually dig for his facts?  Don't be afraid to go to the link.  You'll recognize my experience.  

I did go to the link, and that’s why I thought that you were a man. The first thing to meet my eye was “Hi everyone....My wife was the first one to call me an apostate.”

If the wife called you an apostate, I figured that must make you a man.

(Uh oh. You do not have one of those types of marriages, do you?)

7 minutes ago, Witness said:

I'm sure that story is around here somewhere; you'll find it if you dig for it.   Better yet, go here.  https://www.facebook.com/groups/restorationofjacob/permalink/971646589675271/

Are you a man? I have always, for reasons that I cannot put my finger on, thought that you were a woman.

This is not at all like the Librarian, (that old hen) who I keep referring to as a woman though I know very well that she is a man. I truly thought that you were a woman.

And you keep dancing around my question: “Was there ever a time when you were happy with how kingdom interests were represented on earth?” Instead, you redirect it to a story of your “reawakening.” 

One does not expect an anointed of God to be so cagey in addressing a believer. Was there ever a time, in your estimation, that those responsible for the New World Translation, Bethel homes,  Watchower publications, and pioneer slips, did it right?

As long as none of these personas are confused with Dr. Bob “Hammer” Urabi, I am fine.

”Hammer” is one of mine.

On 4/20/2019 at 9:45 PM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

and cut off a complete finger, wrap it in one of the ceremonial towels, and slide it across the table, to the person you wronged.

 

The last time I played this game with someone who had offended me, I kept holding out until at last the idiot cut off his head and slid it to me.

36 minutes ago, Witness said:

 

When I found truth spoken by an actual “inspired” anointed one.

Mal 3:1-3; Rev 11:1-3; Matt 22:1-4; 25:6-10

 

And when was that?

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

The World Bank and the IMF [International Monetary Fund] are notorious for dangling money to these types of elite and elite-supporting leaders in an effort to gain leverage over their financial system and resources, which allows for many years of financial control through debt, debt relief, and a continual encroachment of Western corporations into a country's resources and future financial infrastructure.

In.a review of the movie Inside Job, I wrote the following:

As one senator (Ron Paul) pointed out, since the total bank bailouts eventually came to $17,000 per person, with no discernable economic benefit, you might have just given the money directly to the individual Americans. The results could hardly have turned out worse, and might well have turned out better. Debts would have been paid down, new purchases made, small businesses started. 

There is a reason that Big Business used to be counted in the triumvirate with religion and politics. 

9 hours ago, Witness said:

However, I’ll say it again, as straightforward and simply as possible.  Indeed, there will be a posse to come against the Governing Body to oust them. 

Will their rooms at Bethel be turned into public privies?

Was there ever a time when you were happy with how kingdom interests were represented on earth?

On 6/18/2018 at 5:11 PM, Bible.Truth said:

Here's the link to the actual article - it does NOT say we have stopped preaching.  Just the opposite, it  points out the dangers our brothers face there while continuing to

When the online study feature first appeared, a local brother said: “I think it means that we’ve been fired.”

I have been wondering when the organization would put it to some use. So far they have not specifically done anything with it. Here is an application I hadn’t thought of. It also works for persons who you find once and never again, also persons who other family members intercede for.

Me - I am looking forward to saying to someone: “I don’t want to study the Bible with you. Do it yourself” 

The timing and circumstances will have to be just right, of course. But I would not mind a scenario in which I escape from trying to spoon feed persons one elementary scripture at a time. Most can do the basics themselves, which permits the publisher to engage with them at a higher level, say that of application, or that of specific questions.

Frankly, I think it keeps us babes as well—always focusing on the basics. I’d rather farm that out to the extent possible and enjoy a ministry based on Bible 201, 301, and not necessarily just 101.

6 hours ago, Witness said:

I would pray for the power to open all eyes of those who revere the organization. 

Okay, lets suppose I and my posse storm Warwick, round up the GB, and send them packing.

Now what?

I think that JWI’s intentions are obvious - to demonstrate how modern printing methods improve upon typewritten lists.

On 4/19/2019 at 4:53 PM, Witness said:

By WT leaders’ rejection of God’s authentic spiritual Temple in Christ, they have rejected the “chief cornerstone”, replacing him with themselves as “keymen” who direct a counterfeit priesthood to rule over God’s authentic priests, effectively trampling down their existence.    

Specifically, what would you change were it in your power to do so?

9 hours ago, Witness said:

I would not “celebrate” the last meal Jesus had with his disciples, leading up to his death.   I would hope you wouldn’t either. 

Let me revisit this. 

Why would it be wrong to say ‘celebrate?’ It exactly fits. 

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/celebrate

Christ bestowed the greatest gift that can be given and he willingly offered his life in sacrifice so as to do it. Yes, of course it is proper to say ‘celebrate.’ 

Should I have said ‘Be kind to yourself, Lord. You will not have this destiny at all?’

Not to be mean, because you were not to me, but this smacks of a certain false piety to me, a certain sanctimoniousness, and a certain eagerness to harp over trifles. There is nothing wrong with the term so that you must correct it.

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

but the "sender" of the note only left first names,

JW......John Wayne was in Vietnam?

The same John Wayne who said: “If everything isn't black and white, I say, “Why the hell not?”

11 minutes ago, Witness said:

I would not “celebrate” the last meal Jesus had with his disciples, leading up to his death.   I would hope you wouldn’t either. 

I did. It’s an expression. I didn’t wear a party hat.

13 minutes ago, Witness said:

I gather with any anointed ones who desire to do so. 

Should that not be all of them? How many did you find? Did you observe it in a private home or a designated place of worship?

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Why get a dog or a cat? Well, big snakes gotta eat too, right?

Come on, Indiana! Show a little backbone, will you?

Okay, I get it. Religion is not a core concern with Russian State-controlled media, except for that of the Russian Orthodox Church—it perceives that its task is to guard “House Church” interests and to shoot down the “competition.” It is therefore okay to misrepresent, even to lie about, the other pathways of seeking God—especially those of the “new religions.” It does not harm the overall reputation of State-controlled media, so the thinking apparently goes, to deliberately cook up untruths about these groups and pass then off as “journalism.” I wonder.

The school guidebooks used by Jehovah’s Witnesses contain counsel points on ‘accuracy of statement.’ If you are speaking, and you make an error about even what is periphery to your point, someone will be sure to think: “Huh! He doesn’t know that?” From there it is only a tiny hop to “Maybe he doesn’t know anything else, either.” And here we are speaking only of a misstatement. We are  not speaking at all of a deliberate lie.

If you are a media outlet and you make a deliberate lie, doesn’t it call into question everything else you say about any other subject? Every so often there will be some report of a Christian refusing an instruction from his employer to lie, and getting away with it by pointing out: “If I will not lie for you, neither will I lie to you.” It is the same principle with faulty Russian reporting, I think. If they lie about such-and-such, who is to say that they will not lie about any topic they examine?

Russian State media—RT.com—told a whopper of a lie regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses some years ago. An RT journalist that I follow on Twitter encouraged me to select some stories more balanced, insisting that there were some. I turned down the offer. If you are trying to establish that Russian media is unreliable, it does not help your cause to point out that once in a while they do tell the truth on your topic.

Here is the example. I included it in the ebook Dear Mr. Putin - Jehovah’s Witnesses Write Russia:  See also the ‘safe’ version)

The three-minute 2009 video clip is entitled Jehovah and Out and the host is interviewing Audrey Zolovov of Russia Profile Magazine.11 The host asks why Jehovah’s Witnesses are targeted for possible ban because, after all, Russia is “pretty tolerant toward religion, isn’t it? I mean, the Hare Krisnas are operating on the streets of Moscow” and his guest says that ‘Well, he doesn’t really know.’ He agrees with the host that Witnesses are “annoying,” but also agrees that should hardly suffice as a reason. They do oppose blood transfusions, and that is very bad, but many fringe sects have similar disagreeable drawbacks. Maybe it is because they have a “very good organization.” After all, they are a “worldwide phenomenon,” he opines, as though expounding upon motive at a crime scene. He gives an example: several years ago, his wife went to a manicurist and he thinks that the manicurist must have been a “very important asset for that group because she had this captive audience for 40 minutes or so, while she was telling them about their religion. Of course, my wife stopped going to that manicurist as soon as she found out that she is being preached.” Of course! What loyal citizen would not? 

Is it possible that RT.com can celebrate grownups behaving as such babies? Even if the Witness woman was tactless, something which is not alleged, an adult learns over time that there are many of such people encountered in life, and that you can handle them by making polite banter and if they become overly insistent, by telling them to shut up. You don’t send your husband to RT.com where he can relate how you escaped, only by the skin of your teeth, from an encounter with a scary monster like the one that would devour Caleb and Sophia. The Witnesses not only spoke to his wife while she was “captive,” but they also do “lots of these things.” As though conscious that his own complaint is silly, he further explains that the Witnesses have “a very very bad image, both in the media and among the public in general.”

In seeming determination to further that “very very bad image” and even add another “very” to it, the conversation takes place against a backdrop of crazies doing the most whacky things—bizarre cultish rites, pugilistic bare-chested fighting scenes, children in lock-step: very very weird scenes that have nothing whatsoever to do with the interview. Nor do they have anything to do with Jehovah’s Witnesses, as their most virulent critics, indeed, anyone who knows anything about them, will instantly attest. Will RT.com really treat its audience with such contempt? Are they working to cultivate stupidity among ones they seem to regard as a herd for them to direct? Or did they give no pre-thought to it. Is it an anomaly, and the producer merely said to an underling: “Hey, we’re doing a story on the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Run down to the lunatic bin in the storeroom and fetch some footage for me. Anything will do.” And will the Russian government outlet really treat the name of God with such contempt: “Jehovah and Out,” as in “Over and out?”

Ah well. It was some time ago. Maybe they have learned their lesson. Sigh...no.

ERR News is the English-language service of Estonian Public Broadcasting, run by a fully independent editorial team. On April 12, 2019, they told of “two employees of state-owned Russian TV channel Russia-1, entering Estonia on French and Italian Schengen visas, [and using] hidden cameras to gather material they then used to ridicule and demonise Jehovah's Witnesses. The Estonian Ministry of the Interior reacted by issuing a five-year entry ban....”

Furthermore, “trying to influence society by means of harassing different minorities is an integral part of the Kremlin's playbook. Jehovah's Witnesses are "persecuted and outlawed in Russia....The Russian state media occasionally make efforts to come up with an explanation for this fact. This typically includes reports where members of this religious minority are taunted, ridiculed and demonised.”

The clandestine reporters “entered a gathering of Jehovah's Witnesses in Tallinn without telling them who they are, and what they are planning to do. The material they gained at this gathering as well as at another, similar one in Finland was then used for Russia-1's news programme, Vesti, and aired on 29 November 2018.”

So Estonia kicked them out of the country for five years. That is what you do with liars. Good for them! They know what sanity is. The AP and the Washington Post picked up on and ran the story the next day.

I admit to not being expert on what media is state controlled and what isn’t, and what is the overlap. RT.com is state controlled. There are also others. This example caught by Estonia is apparently one of the others. I also get it that this is for local consumption only, not international consumption. Such shoddy “journalism” is instantly recognized for what it is internationally, but State media appears to feel it has every right to manipulate the gullible local public.

Will that happen with impunity? Time will tell. It may backfire on them. It morally should. It’s too bad. This writer finds RT.com to offer a refreshing contrast to Western media, which so often runs in a herd. But if they bend the truth so readily on their non-core concerns, who is to say they will not bend it on the core ones? One would think that if they want to safeguard their reputation, not only would these two journalists be fired, but more importantly, whoever put them up to it, as well—and the chain of command apparently reaches pretty high.

It is little wonder that Russia seeks to disconnect its internet from that of the rest of the world. Among the advantages to them will be to keep such slippery deeds hidden. However, does not that step alone disqualify it as a credible journalistic source?

https://news.err.ee/929589/iss-ministry-issued-schengen-entry-ban-against-russia-1-employees

What were your arrangements for celebrating the Memorial last night?

57 minutes ago, Jack Ryan said:

There were plenty of press releases and breaking news stories about Russia. But nothing about ARC, Montana, or the Netherlands.

Of course. I am shocked and outraged by this.

 I am doing my best to make up for it:

5 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

For me, "Bob and Alice, pioneers in a city in Estonia  ..... " .... just does not cut it for me.

Very well. Bob and Alice Goodenov, pioneers in a city in Estonia, caught the two Russian journalists, actually named people, so you know they are credible, recording a congregation meeting to see if there was any way they could rearrange things to make JWs look nuts, and blew them into Estonian intelligence, who banned them for five years.

https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/forums/topic/78948-estonia-cancels-visas-of-russian-television-journalists-over-a-discriminatory-film-about-jehovah-witnesses/

Another way to look at it is that it is the play that the HQ brothers are following, not the actors in the play. You don’t have to know the names of the actors to follow the play. It can even be a distraction if you do.

Best regards,

One person who writes in the United States 

13 minutes ago, Anna said:

s for Sophia's ice cream; do you think Sophia will never have any ice cream again in her life? Obviously she will, as will real children.

I could be wrong but I think Jack has a video of Caleb and Sophia swilling liquor at the store, and he is wetting himself with glee at the thought of posting it.

If he does, I will counter with my video of TM III dumping his ice cream cone in the trash so he can put still another dollar in the contribution box.

12 hours ago, JW Insider said:

He was obviously not trying to disguise himself.

This is true and it lets the air out of the balloon of these morons.

Whenever I buy my liquor, Jack or Srecko, were they to chance to see me, would think they had met Groucho Marx.

47 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

I think TTH was referring to how Paul collected information by using all the people's viewpoints. I don't think TTH was in any way comparing himself to the Apostle Paul as the Kid seems to imply. 

Could it be that John is going to be my pal today? Yes! He picked up on the gist of the remark completely. We’re allies!

Tomorrow it may be a different story.

7 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

However, I made several attempts to revert the topic back to the silliness that is the post, to begin with.

Why on earth would you do that? If it is silliness to begin with, why dignify it by taking it seriously?

7 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Yet, people like TTH an author thinks it’s ok since he uses this forum as feedback and research for material on his next book.

Now you’ve got it! 

7 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Instead of using his own intelligence to gather information for his next book

You know, it just makes for a dull book when you do it that way.

Is it just me? What are the letters to the Corinthians? Did Paul just gather information for his next book? Clearly, he capitalized on what those Corinthians had said, or what had been said about them, rather than cook up some speech detached from their needs.

“For the disclosure was made to me about YOU, my brothers, by those of [the house of] Chloʹe, that dissensions exist among YOU. What I mean is this, that each one of YOU says...” (1 Corinthians 1:12)

“YOU men already have YOUR fill, do YOU? YOU are rich already, are YOU? YOU have begun ruling as kings without us, have YOU?” 4:8

“Now concerning the things about which YOU wrote....”  7:1

Most of the Greek scriptures consist of interactions with various congregations & we benefit by eavesdropping. That’s all I’m doing—imitating a pattern laid out by others.

4 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Therefore, TTH, your view doesn't hold water on why the money is on the street. However, I don't care why the money is on the street.

I haven’t actually made any comment about this. However, since I am being drawn into it anyway, let me clarify this nonsense once and for all. 

This photo is not from Venezuela at all, but it is in one of the southern US states & is in fact a falled bank heist on the part of @Top Cat O'Malighan. His getaway car was hit broadside by @Vic Vomidog, flying at an unusual rate of speed because some Bethel hotshot and been spied with a can of beer, a special meeting of the Apostate Society had been called so as to see how to spin it, he was the Keynote speaker, and he was running late.

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

And of course some pretend they don't actually 'need' alcohol but that it's just 'nice to drink'  Um ..... 

I don’t drink anymore, you know.

(Of course, I don’t drink any less, either.)