TrueTomHarley

How can you not like Coco? We all hope she keeps her head on straight, because that is not a given when operating in the stratosphere. But then, it is not a given anywhere.

1 hour ago, Bible Speaks said:

It's just my boobs aren't out. [edit - not those of Bible Speaks. I mean - not that his are. I mean - oh forget it!] And I don't have a cigarette in my hand, and I'm not making out with a guy.

Exactly

1 hour ago, Bible Speaks said:

"In the beginning, the clients would say, 'This is too much,' but over time, the ones I liked kept working with me. They'd say, 'It's not too much. Coco can still be Coco. She still gives 100 percent when she's on a photo shoot.'

Exactly

1 hour ago, Bible Speaks said:

I don't judge. My besties do Victoria's Secret. I just don't do it."

Exactly

It turns out that Mattress Mack is more generous than I realized. I had assumed he would have to somehow clean out his furniture store to make it a homeless shelter. Instead, he just opened the doors and let them flop down on any couch or bed they could find.

How can anyone not love this guy? He's in the right place and the right time, and he does not squander that opportunity. 

31 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

For some reason they brought one back

Maybe they will send it packing again someday.

1 hour ago, Albert Michelson said:

They don't stress that doctrine but it still is technically what they believe, look up the wt  references to genesis 2:4 

Come now - it is not a 'doctrine' every time they blow their nose, far less one you have to repeat. 

34 minutes ago, Albert Michelson said:

Yeah I haven't really done a sweep of all the doctrines to see which ones are type and anti-type still but I'm sure there are more than just the three that I listed.

You get almost as much bang for the buck, with no downside, saying "this reminds us of that." Isn't that a good way to do it, so as not to get certain people going?

It reminds me of when I once conducted the Watchtower Study and one of the titles for the review was 'How would you answer?' I used to point out that one could not go wrong here. Even if you said the most ridiculous thing in the world - well - that is how you would answer.

1 hour ago, Albert Michelson said:

Oh and  I always find it hilarious whenever the organization tries to claim that they've provided wonderful spiritual food throughout the years.  I don't know how anyone examining the material that the organization has produced could in good conscience call it good food. 

It is good food because it makes you nicer over the years. See? Aren't they all nice here?

Besides,

2 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

Don't get me started on all the other type and anti-type BS that The organization has pushed on people over the years

they changed that.

1 hour ago, Albert Michelson said:

Granted they're not fundamental doctrines

No. They're not.

Why harp on them, then? Who cares?

Well - I agree with the kid that Houston may be poorly designed, but no one has had to cope with 50 inches before and so there's not much to measure with.

Boy, that woman in the succeeding video is a ditz! - explaining at length cartoons that you can take in at a glance. Not to be unkind...but I am on a roll today.

14 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Then why did I get an "upvote" from you on the "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" Parody?

Oh for crying out loud! How do I know? And I'm not going to retrace it all so as to recall.

1 minute ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Willing to disfellowship someone, and EVERYONE for holding to TRUTH, when it was different from what he admitted in court, under oath ..... was false.

Well, then, why aren't you, the very ESSENCE of TRUTH, disfellowshipped? Somehow, they put up with you.

If you are to be believed, you go out in service. Why? - when you hate those who present the message so? Do you tell your students to cross their fingers at their baptism?

You go to congregation meetings and each convention. It must be pure hell for you, gnashing your teeth at every word. I don't mean to be unkind here, but....what kind of a loser does that? At the conventions, part of the delight is seeing and visiting with old friends. Who can you speak with? Doubtless there are some of your ilk, but by far - it was no contest -  the largest round of applause came after the line: "would you like to convey your greetings to Bethel?" Say - was that you I saw across the auditorium with smoke coming from your ears?

I disagree vehemently with @Albert Michelson, but I would never call him a loser. He doesn't like Jehovah's Witnesses. So he doesn't go to all their meetings. He does other things in life that presumably have brought him satisfaction. He is fighting valiantly for his point of view on this blog - it has caught his attention. But I never heard of him before, and am unlikely to hear of him again. He has a life. He is going to get back to it when this battle is done, whether he wins or loses.

20 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I remember when you refused to look at a youtube video of Kermit the Frog singing "Forever Young" I posted

In that case, it was just too juvenile. There is such a thing as adulthood, you know.

Thank you, @The Librarian. I would have put my post here had I known of it.

57 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

You REALLY SHOULD read the above partial transcript of the "Walsh Trial". posted by Albert Michelson .... as we saw with the Australian Royal Commission on Child Abuse No. 29, when those that govern us are required to testify under oath, and can be put in PRISON for lying

Like I really should watch CNN to learn the truth about Trump or Breitbart to learn the truth about Obama?

I'll choose what I choose to see in proper context, neither cherry-picked nor skewed.

If tiny sound-byte snippets appeal to you - I have never known you to post anything else - they do not to me. I prefer comments well-rounded, in appropriate context, and not thrust upon me by someone who so pleadingly and pathetically has an agenda. I'm not opposed to looking at things, and I have looked at things. I will just not allow opponents to focus the lens for me. I'll do that myself.

57 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

when those that govern us are required to testify under oath, and can be put in PRISON for lying,

Nobody is in prison, are they? You are trying to bake some acknowledged grains - even if they be more than grains - into a seven layer cake.

Please don't harp on this with me. There were two or three very long threads on this subject not long ago. I participated fully and you even threw in some cartoons. I don't want to re-invent the wheel throughout eternity. Go back and revisit those threads. Add to them if you think there is anything not covered.

I don't view this forum as your own personal courtroom, to cross-examine people at will. In any real courtroom, the judge eventually tells a lawyer to shut up when he does nothing but hurl accusations, repeat his same questions, and takes no note of the answers.

The story of the day – perhaps the story of many days if they can resist taking shots at Trump, is the furniture store owner who made his two stores shelters for displaced Houstonians. “Mattress Mack” McIngvale (don’t you love the guy already?), ever philanthropic, says the city has helped him through tough times and now he will give back.

The generous deed put “poor” Joel Osteen in a bad light, for he was roundly condemned the day before for not opening his mega-church to the homeless - it seats 17,000. One fellow on Twitter declared the score: Publicity Capitalism 1, Prosperity Gospel 0.

This is unfair. Why credit publicity capitalism? That is merely the tool employed. Mattress Mack credits his Catholic faith. “I was raised as a Catholic. I continued my Catholic faith throughout my life, trying to do the right thing,” he says.
A good deed is a good deed. Credit it instantly and unbegrudgingly. It doesn’t mean I’m going Catholic on anyone. It doesn’t mean I think the overall picture favors them. But a good deed is a good deed.

And before slamming Joel too much, one must ask what do Jehovah’s Witnesses do with their meeting places. I’m not worried here. Assembly Halls are invariably put to good use as distribution hubs for relief work, which starts almost immediately – its regular use is suspended for a time. Kingdom Halls are also put to good use, though regular use there is not suspended. Or is it? I don’t really know, having never been in that scenario, but I don’t think so. Witness families, however, are known for taking each other into their homes in a heartbeat.

As for Joel – look, I don’t care for the guy – does he ever wipe that smile off his face? - but neither do I want to take cheap shots. He did eventually come around. Was he shamed into it? Or would he have gotten around to it eventually, once access to his own building was made smoothe. You can’t depend on the media to relay things accurately – they are anti-religious. 

Nonetheless, Mattress Mack is the hero of the day. It’s not as though he had two cavernous buildings wide open. He must have had to have move his mattresses somewhere. Go there and buy one – take it off his hands. Or actually no. He would have just flopped his mattresses down and let people sleep on them. 

13 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

This might be a good place to put articles and thoughts of EVERY nature pertaining to the catastrophe in South Texas.

Or it might not be since you have already sullied it. If you could resist your infantile pissing on the Society for once....but you find it impossible to do that. I will start another.

https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/43931-mattress-mack-comes-through-in-houston/

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Not the first one. That could never be a Watchtower picture. I worked in the Art Department during my first few years at Bethel. There are several things wrong with this first picture. It would have been "blasphemy" to present a picture like that into any of the publications

Similarly, the one with the Witness bowler pumping his fist at a strike, the ten pins being ten - you name 'em - aspects of this system of things, is also a phony.

Gasp!! Is that woman wearing PANTS?!! Kick her over the edge!

7 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

How does that prove you have the true religion again?, or are we back to the warm feelies?

I do get warm feelies here. I don't think that's a bad thing. (I don't mean here, with @The Librarianand all; I mean in Jehovah's organization)

I am like most Witnesses who do not have to have every single duck lined up to declare this the truth. Actually, every duck is lined up, but I will concede there are a few chicks that have yet to straighten out and fly right - they being chicks.

@JW Insiderhas listed the main ducks, and he has appended a few more. In response to someone asking why I remain a Witness when bad things happen in the organization, I have written some additional reasons:

https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/42302-why-remain-a-witness-when-bad-things-happen/

Each of these desirable tenets is rare today. The combination of them in one faith is unique to Jehovah's Witnesses and that is why I have chosen the faith and am not likely to leave, especially for the greater world described in the last post. If you think your glorious freedom to engage your critical thinking without check has resulted in such a wonderful world, you are welcome to remain there.

When one has assembled the jigsaw puzzle and reproduced the box cover mountain vista, you are not easily put off by the critic who insists you have it all wrong. This is especially true if his own puzzle lies unassembled in the box.

2 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

( except for big independent thinking idk what that is)

'Big Independent Thinking' is a clumsy term I devised on the spot to supplement the other 'Bigs.'  It is simply the stupid memes that catch on as wisdom, but invariably fall apart, often causing great harm. Here is an example from a book that the domineering @The Librarianrefuses to stock in her library, though it should replace at least half the rubbish she has sagging the shelves:

I found another atheist on the internet. This one was also raised a Witness, as was Brian. He too, was still a kid. It’s unbelievable! In his heady days of breaking break free!!!!!!!!!! he gushed on about his newfound ‘rationalism’ for the benefit of everyone else:

"Rationalism for me means a life of pure freedom. ..... But this means that this life that you’re living now is the most precious thing you’ll ever have. .... Because there is no Big Daddy to appease or suck up to, or be afraid of, you should be nice to people because it’s nice! You should treat people like you want to be treated! You should not steal or murder because it hurts people, and hurting people is wrong. Always. No one needs a god to tell them this.....Being a rationalist....If you say something irrational or realize the error in your own thoughts, a red flag immediately raises. .....rationalism is a worldview with no drawbacks, and only positives. It encourages honesty and truth.....It promotes interest in the common good..."

The idiot! The young naïve idiot! Why does he leave? Because he wants to go where there is no Big Daddy to suck up to! It doesn’t occur to him that with the gamut of human governments, the casinos that are world economies, the health woes that lead straight to death, he will do so much sucking up that God and the Governing Body will seem like doddering indulgent grandparents in comparison....‘C’mon, Tom, don’t be so hard on him! That’s the nature of inexperienced youth. They make mistakes.’ ...Agreed. All is forgiven. But what about the experienced liars that have misled him?

How lofty and soaring his words of rationalism sound! How much crap they are in reality! ‘The Toxins Trickle Downward’ (Economist, March 14, 2009) examined fallout from the financial crisis triggered by the misdeeds of those at the top of finance and government. Credit markets were now closed to the third world poor, commodity prices vital to their survival had collapsed, and remittances from citizens working abroad had dried up. The World Bank reckoned the crisis would account for 200,000 - 400,000 African lives lost, all children.

People at the top had used their “pure freedom,” to grind others into the dirt, and not to “treat people like you want to be treated!” (an exclamation mark, no less; oh, the joys of rationalism!) They were not “nice to people.” They “hurt people,” even though “hurting people is wrong.” Not only did they “hurt people” – they killed them, two to four hundred thousand of them!” All children! Plainly, we do need a “Big Daddy to appease” and a “god to tell us how to live.”

If you had had a son or daughter high up in the banking world back then, who was devising the complex financial instruments that would ultimately ruin us all, even killing the poor, you would have carried on about how well Junior was doing for himself, how respected he was in his career, and so forth. You wouldn’t have said ‘too bad he killed a few hundred thousand in Africa.’ You wouldn’t even have known about it. There is sufficient disconnect in this world’s construction so that the players on top can remain oblivious to the havoc they wreak below, oblivious to any need for soul-searching, until Eisenhower comes along and rubs their noses into it like the German mayor and the concentration camp.

The failure of human rule could not have been shown in more stark relief as in that article, with consequences so directly traceable to the human wisdom running the show. Russian President Vladimir Putin was both blunt and harsh: “Everything happening now in the economic and financial sphere began in the United States. This is not the irresponsibility of specific individuals but the irresponsibility of the system that claims leadership.” In 2016 America, all that remained was to Photoshop Putin with horns, gleefully pecking at his keyboard, doing his level best to hack the American election, but it was he who nailed it about unrestrained greed.

The 2011 film ‘Inside Job’ expressed dismay that no “specific individuals” were brought to justice: Charles Ferguson (film director): “Why do you think there isn’t a more systematic investigation being undertaken?” Nouriel Roubini (professor, NYU Business School): “Because then you will find the culprits.” Culprits and regulators alike belonged to the same social set and were members of the same country clubs; they had no desire to turn on one another.

Humans were not designed to rule themselves. It’s not an ability they have, the same as they cannot flap their arms and fly. Whether through greed, ignorance, pride, cowardice, or some mix of the four, the record of human rule aptly illustrates Jeremiah’s words:

I well know, O Jehovah, that to earthling man his way does not belong. It does not belong to man who is walking even to direct his step. (Jeremiah 10:23)

Apologies if I cut off the sentence wrong.

2 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

Well once again "world" is just a term that  The organization uses in order to create a sense of separation and us versus them.

The Bible uses the term. The organization simply picks up on it.

2 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

I know for a fact that had I remained in the organization the sense of regret I would feel would be far greater and the sense of wasted time and a wasted life would be crippling.

Oh give me a break. How meaningful can life be in a system where ISIS, dementia, cancer, or simple human greed can snuff it out in a second? "Sayanara!" your longtime employer sings out, as he packs up for overseas. "Dust off that resume, why don't you?  And that family and financial obligations you have? FUGEDABOUDIT!" It is as Solomon says: he's seen footmen on horses and kings slogging though the mud. Of course you can get some satisfaction out of life today. More power to you if you have. But many ultimately find it is like chomping down hard on cotton candy - though it looked substantial, there was nothing much there.

The thing you are orgasmic about is that you have chosen a place where no one can tell you what to do. Fine. I think it's a poor trade-off but there's nothing to stop anyone from choosing it. Yet by immersing oneself in 'the world' (I am not reformed from saying it) you are likely to find that manipulation from human scheming in the form of Big Government, Big Business or Big Independent Wisdom ultimately take such a toll that the Governing Body will look positively like doddering and kindly old grandparents in comparison.

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I made it as a reaction to the tens of thousands of Bethel Layoffs and Special Pioneers being "shown the door" in the "Red October" Meltdown of 2015, after many years, and sometimes a lifetime of faithful service to the Corporation.

Had they not been "shown the door," then you would have bitched about them living a life protected from the wild, where MEN have to struggle EVERY SINGLE DAY for existence, and one MISSTEP means INSTANT DEATH!!!

You're not the easiest guy to satisfy.

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

None of those ideas ever occurred to me, and since I am the one who created the edited graphic.... I ought to know.

Did you also create the child baptism one with the misspelled word? Look, I have misspelled many a word here, as it is a here-today, gone-tomorrow thread. But if I were to design a graphic for posterity, I would get the spelling right.

I could design graphics, too. For example, I could picture the ten who jumped from the plane during a choppy flight. Eight are far below, with shoots open, and when the land they will resume their prior life. But two have grabbed hold of a wing, and, with tangled hair, sleet, fumes and dead birds slapping them in the face, they are desperately trying to unfurl a banner for the remaining passengers, who are barely noticing: "Jump off before it's too late! Join us!"

I could do that. But it is simply too juvenile. This from me, the guy who wears out his welcome clowning and who even kidnapped @The Librarianto make a point. (but handed her back - holy moly! that woman is obnoxious)

On 8/4/2017 at 3:19 PM, b4ucuhear said:

Thanks for caring enough about your brothers and sisters to share what has helped you.

I'll stretch the following into a ninth reason, though it is arguably a subset of the post above. It's a reflection upon the August broadcast that focuses on Genesis 3:16

  “…your long will be your husband and he will dominate you.”  

From the broadcast: "When God said that Adam would dominate his wife, God was not indicating  his approval  of the subjugating of woman by man. He was simply foretelling the sad consequences  of sin on the first couple. So abuse of women is a direct outcome of the sinful nature of humans, not a part of God’s will . Right down to our day, rarely have women been afforded the dignity that God wants them to receive. However, Jehovah makes clear in his word the Bible that women and men have equal standing before him. In fact, he indicated that women would play a vital role in the outworking of his purpose." 
 

I am reminded of @SuziQ (or is it @SuziQ1513?) commenting with resignation and even some anger that this 'is a man's world.' It is - and men have historically been jerks. When women enter into positions of leadership and people ask the question: 'do they really think they can do as well as the men?' that is not the right question to ask. The right question is: "How can they do worse?"

Anger over mistreatment has caused women to cast aside traditional norms in search of new ones, and redefining roles has reached the point where a happy and lasting male-female relationship is all but impossible. The comment from the broadcast shows that Bethel is no part of the mistreatment of women.

However, it also shows that it is. One of the things I like very much about the Governing Body is that they do not package Bible lessons for the masses below. They package it for themselves first, and from there it cascades down to the masses. They are ever conscious that they can and do fall short and so they feed themselves a diet of spiritual food to remedy that as much as they feed others. They earnestly want to live up to Jehovah's high standards, the same as they want everyone else in the congregation to. Busy as they are, they read the Bible daily there, just like the Israelite kings were told to.

The leaders of most organizations start 'high.' They are long accustomed to privilege and money. In many cases, they have never known anything else. But the leaders of Jehovah's organization start "low," - lower than most of those they will later lead. They bring to the table a life of full-time service in the lowliest of venues, some having served in third world countries that few other leaders would deign to set foot in. They typify the 'through the dust' flavor that the word 'minister' is derived from. 

Their reliance on God's word set's them in very good position to lead the worldwide flock, though occasionally it blinds them. Or does it? For example, they routinely refer apostates as 'bitter.' They don't really know if they are or not by experience. They take their own counsel and don't hang out with them. Instead, they just read the Book of Jude's description and assume it must be so. And who's to say it's not so, at least in the main? The ones that you come across on the internet hardly seem baskets of joy.

On 8/4/2017 at 3:19 PM, b4ucuhear said:

Thanks for caring enough about your brothers and sisters to share what has helped you.

I bought a car from a private person for a significant chunk of money. You always worry when you do this. How to you know that you are not simply buying someone else's headaches?

That concern was alleviated by examining the paperwork. The man had every maintenance receipt neatly and sequentially folded, all from the same dealership, and each spaced  5000 miles apart. Since he had scrupulously maintained the car, I bought it without blinking an eye.

It's amazing how many will maintain material things, even becoming obsessive over it, but will not maintain themselves. And when they do, they confine it to maintaining their physical selves and not their spiritual selves, which is more important. I usually duck out of those 'what is your favorite scripture' games because it changes depending on the context. But overall, Matthew 5:3 ranks right up there and I use it in service all the time:

"Happy are those conscious of their spiritual need, since the Kingdom of the heavens belongs to them."

All of us have a spiritual need. But we are not necessarily conscious of it. Failing to recognize and care for it, a person gets sicker and sicker, like one deprived of vitamins, without ever knowing why. This is the eighth reason I have remained with Jehovah's organization. It tirelessly provide maintenance for our being. It steers clear of the pitfalls that ensnare most churches - slobbering over the latest offerings of human wisdom, honing in on politics, preaching 'prosperity gospel' As I write, the televangelist Joel Olsteen is taking considerable heat for not opening his 16,000-seat mega-church - it once was a stadium - to persons displaced from the Houston flood. "Jesus promises us peace that passes understanding," he tweeted. "That's peace when it doesn't make sense."

Nothing makes sense during hard times for those who consume this world's rational or spiritual wisdom. I'm grateful to Jehovah's organization for ever keeping the focus on spiritual things that do make sense.

On 8/4/2017 at 3:19 PM, b4ucuhear said:

Thanks for caring enough about your brothers and sisters to share what has helped you.

I think I'll add as the seventh one how the truth has preserved my marriage, and the older I get the more I treasure a solid family - with its ups and downs - rather than a string of failed relationships. Feeding on the wisdom of this system of things, you are almost guaranteed the latter. This is due to basic flawed assumptions on the nature of men, the nature of woman, and the nature of marriage.

For example, there is the 'soul mate' fallacy. I'll acknowledge a soul mate sounds good, but is there really such a thing? The notion leads to disillusionment when you invariably find that your wife/husband is less of a soul mate than you initially thought. What course remains but to search for your true soul mate? There is little encouragement to work through issues, and when there is, there is almost no encouragement to stick with it. However, working with the Bible's definition of love will make you a better person over time. It is like exercising a muscle. In contrast, too much focus on a 'soul mate' does nothing but make you a shallow person, whose preferences must be catered to.

Let no one read into these remarks that my wife and I fight like cats and dogs. We do not. But there have been times.... Is it not that way with any marriage? The truth has preserved my marriage and thereby made me a better person. Following contemporary wisdom would have destroyed it long ago, most likely. A certain relative belongs to 'the American Dream Church.' - a 'me and Jesus' church. They have put their three kids though college and all have fine jobs. They had fine careers themselves and lived in a most comfortable house. But the marriage grew cold and while the last youngster was yet it school, it blew up and dissolved. Studies indicate that when a marriage dissolves after the kids have left home, it nonetheless affects their marriages for ill. Most likely it is because they say: "if my parents could not do it, what chance have we?"

Distressed that they cannot hold together a marriage to save their lives, 'science-rationalist' people take comfort in the cavemen of evolution and spin their minus into a plus: "Toward the end of the twentieth century, career types were disheartened to realize they couldn't hold a marriage together to save their lives. But they didn't want to be disheartened, they wanted to feel good about themselves. So it became essential to come up with a explanation and, above all things, that explanation had to totally absolve them from responsibly, blame or guilt....all antiquated notions unfit for modern humans. Again, the cavemen delivered!

"You see, those cavemen had to spread their seed if they wanted to win the survival game, so it was no good staying in one relationship. You had to move on! But you'd better not move on too quick. No, you have to hang around four years, to ensure that your toddlers don't get eaten by predators! After that, the woman can ensure it while you go in quest of the golden waist hip ratio. Again, the evolutionary psychologists, who are taken seriously and not laughed off the planet as they ought to be, assert that this behavior got locked into our genes, to be passed on to progeny.

"I don't much care for this notion, but recent discoveries seem to support it. Out in the wilds somewhere, anthropologists have recently unearthed fossils of Yabbadabba Man, a boring ancestor if ever there was one. Fred Flintstone and Barney Rubble are thought to be members of this species. They had one or two kids apiece and just hung around afterwards plunked in front of the TV, until even their own wives got fed up with them and tossed them out on their ear, though alas, too late in life for them to start anew and spread their seed. As you might expect, that bunch died out.

"Then there was Slambang Man, another recent find. These Romeos were forever moving on in search of shapelier babes. They each had hundreds, maybe thousands of kids, but they left them all to predators so they could go out carousing, and every last one of them was eaten. This species, too, died out, though they are eternally reborn with each new generation."

It does nothing but get worse. The very nature of the sexes is being redefined today, as well as the interaction between them. California, I just read today, may soon include a X designation on forms that have, since the beginning of time, contented themselves with an M or and F when questioning sex. 

Today's young people, sold down the river by foolish thinking masquerading as wisdom, have virtually no chance of forming a lasting relationship. I am grateful to Jehovah's organization for not allowing this to happen within the Christian congregation.

10 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

It doesn't exist. It's a false dichotomy. The world is everyone and guess what, it's full of wonderful people

I will partially agree on this one. It's true. Not everyone is the guide leading the blind men into a pit. Some are merely the blind men.

We have a video of someone who left the truth and came back, cautioning others to not do it. "The world will chew you up and spit you out," he says. I don't care for that video. It is not true. Sometimes 'the world' chews you up but does not spit you out. Sometimes it spits you out but does not chew you up. A prime example of the latter lies in the hospital geriatric wing, where a relative works as a nurse. She tells of people experiencing severe letdown at the curtain call, who look around and say (not literally) "is this all there is?" These are not losers. These are persons who have had successful careers and have raised caring families. But as the end draws near and their bodies ungracefully fall apart, they say "is this all there is?"

Why anyone would throw away the freedom derived from Bible knowledge for the petty freedoms this world has to offer is beyond me.

10 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

and it's also filled with a$$holes just like the organization.

You know, I kind of like this guy. He does not hide what he is. He is not like one who comes in positively cooing love for God and all his witnesses, if only...if only....it does not come out at first....if only they would assassinate those leaders of theirs. I can't stand people like that.

10 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

and it's also filled with a$$holes just like the organization.

It reminds me of my ill-advised aborted experience at the apostate website. There was one idiot who would give only short 'sound byte' comments, always with insulting graphics, and whenever he mentioned Jehovah's Witnesses, he would 'dollar-sign' every 'S'. Okay. Got it. He thinks we should be like John, subsisting on honey and locusts. In time, whenever I referred to him, I would dollar-sign every 's' within a two millimeter radius. (this is not to call AM an idiot - believe me, the two are poles apart in presentation, though there is some overlap)

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

It would be wonderful if questions during a meeting were more like:

• ...
• "Would someone like to offer a Biblical reason why this proposed doctrine might not be correct?"

If you don't mind, I want to go home after two hours. I don't want each meeting to be like a discussion of the WorldNewsMedia forum.

Albert, you make altogether too many statements complaining of sinister intentions at Witness headquarters. It borders on paranoia. To me, it indicates you have spent too much time hanging out with the wrong type of people and drinking in their wisdom.

3 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

Um freedom and intellectual honesty. 

No. Please. Don't go there. We are, to a great degree, who we hang out with. It's intellectually flattering to think otherwise. But it's also nonsense. That is why some god-awful style will come along and within 5 years we're all wearing it, wondering how we ever thought those geeky styles of yesteryear did anything for us. We run with the herd not just on small things like styles, but on all things. It's well to give thought to who you hang out with.

3 hours ago, Albert Michelson said:

Um freedom

It would be nice if you didn't go there, either. For the sake of the piddling little freedoms that you gain by leaving the Witness faith, none of which ultimately amounts to a hill of beans, you throw away freedoms which are truly significant.

I'll concede, though, that if you were baptized young and later left on bad terms and you find yourself shunned by family because of it, that is not a good place to be. I can empathize with that. Having said that, it is entirely possible for a person baptized young who later decides to leave to do so without triggering shunning. I know several who have done it. Fade. Drift away. Or just tell a few that you don't want to do it anymore. There are some anti-Witness factions who encourage such ones to go out with a splash - tell them all off at the Kingdom Hall! By following their advice, you virtually assure that you will be shunned. Few governments will smilingly see their citizens declare them illegitimate, and it is no different in Jehovah's organization, which is often called a 'nation,' and is more of a nation in many respects than political nations on the globe.

I don't want to get into here whether it should be that way. The point is, it is. Thus, shunning is easily avoidable. One wonders why any outfit - often atheists do this - would recommend such a confrontation, knowing the disruption it will bring on a family. Of course, the lack of 'shunning' doesn't mean palling around as usual, and one who leaves often finds they lose all their Witness friends anyway, and even family, though not in so formal away.

The Witness faith is like the man who found the pearl of high value, and sold everything he had to secure it. Most people today would consider this fellow a fanatic. Jesus indicated his was the example to follow. So if you leave the faith, you'll find most Witnessed lose interest in hanging out with you. Like in most things, people seek out common interests. Just look how many families have been divided over Trump and Hillary. Do you really think that when Kathy Griffin holds aloft the mock, bloodied head of the President, her Republican dad (if he is) says: "that's my lass! She speaks her mind! It won't affect Thanksgiving dinner, though."?

Is it a good idea to allow Witness kids to be baptized at 10? It's a good thing for those who will remain. It's a bad thing for those who will afterwards decide to leave (with a bang). If only you could tell who was who in advance. Contrary to your dark accusation that JWs rope them in as young as possible so as to hold them hostage (sheesh) my son wanted baptism at age 10 and the elders told him to wait. His feelings were hurt over it, but he was baptized the next year. If you find something good, it is never considered wrong to 'dedicate' yourself to it at a young age. Successful businesspeople and even entertainers do that, to say nothing of athletes. I've never heard one criticized for it.

25 minutes ago, Albert Michelson said:

In reality most witnesses get baptized with a cursory understanding of the doctrines

Use of the word 'most' is subjective - I do not think it is 'most' - though it is certainly true anywhere that new ones do not know as much as older ones. It's not just in the field of religion. It is everywhere.

GB counsel doesn't encourage people to be shallow. It encourages them to go deep. But people do that at their own pace and sometimes not at all. You don't have to be a theocratic Rhode's scholar to be baptized - you just have to know and agree with the basics. Surely the fact that you cannot (usually) get baptized for close to a year should allay your concern - unless that concern is unallayable.

29 minutes ago, Albert Michelson said:

most that I knew who had been in for upwards of 40 years still barley knew what the organization taught

This is also subjective, and I do not agree with it. I suspect there are some concerns that are important in your eyes that most Witnesses do not know much of, but that is not the same thing.

But this is quibbling. You're main concern i'll speak to later. Unfortunately, I am in and out. A five minute comment I can make anytime, but if there is something that deserves more thought, I want to give it that thought. Start a separate thread on it. Seriously. It's a subject in its own right, and this thread is on something else. The threadmeister can always yank it back on topic and there will be nothing you or I can do about it.

Having said that, I've been known to hijack a thread or two in my tenure.