TrueTomHarley

Moreover, reading the excerpts of Ray's book provided here, one gains the impression of a tolerably decent man who, nonetheless, takes himself too seriously, and goes weak-kneed when matters of human organization go awry, lifting his conscience above those of all others, as though he alone is concerned about the suffering of others and everyone else thinks it is a big joke. To be crude, (something I always try to avoid) you have to have BALLS driving any vehicle with a few million passengers. You will invariably hit some potholes. Some will cause damage to your undercarraige, and you can be sure not all passengers will refrain from second guessing you, especially when you think yourself that maybe you could have avoided that pothole. I wouldn't last five minutes with such responsibility. It would have been no shame on Ray to merely have stepped aside yet remained in the vehicle, for outside there are only yoyos trying to make the journey on roller skates and pogo sticks. I will even allow that he did not anticipate that every villainous hater of God's organization would lionize him as a modern-day Joan of Arc. Nonetheless, it has worked out that way.

I shouldn't do it. I really shouldn't. Admin will get mad. Even the Librarian may not be able to save me, and she might even get fed up in trying. She is so tired of my sticking an automobile muffler in the philosophy section of her card catalog just to mess with her mind, which....let's face it...at 89, has seen better days. Even fine Eoin will be upset, wasting bytes. No, I shouldn't do it. On the other hand, we are on this stage for only a short time. What the hell I found especially refreshing the following part of JTR's comment, just following 'scroll down:' Why do I go after JTR? He is not the only offender. He has much worthy competition. It gets so old for big babies to carry on and on and on about ones who have RUINED THEIR LIVES! There's no end of things that will ruin your life. In fact, life itself ruins it, for when the clock runs out in this "version of death we call life" (Bob Dylan) after our 80+ (hopefully) years, off to the grave we go, regardless of whether we were geniuses or fools. Why do these characters never even mention the central hope of everlasting life in a new system of things? Forgive me if I speculate it is because they barely believe in it anymore, so they rage at blips of the past, which are sometimes quite serious, trying to spin a villainous conspiracy out of each one. 'Real life' of 1 Timothy 6:19 be damned, they seem to say. THIS is the real life. For crying out loud, if your life is RUINED, suck it up and start a new one! Or these whiney characters who WILL NOT COOPERATE and who insist cooperation is evil if it in any way results in being told what to do, as though the BRAVE FOUNDING FOREFATHERS WHO DIED ON THE HILLS AND HALLS OF IWO JIMA were not told what to do, and whose notion of Christianity is a motley collection of loose cannons, each positively oozing in love for everything and everybody, except ones they don't like. They are boundless in their joy and love and peace, until it turns out that one favored Trump and the other Hillary, at which point they assassinate each other. 'Daring and self-willed, they are not afraid to speak abusively of glorious ones' says 2 Peter. No, they certainly are not. Who are the 'glorious ones' they are not afraid to speak abusively of?

This I quote only to get attention. It has nothing to do with anything, least of all, JW Insider. Having indulged Eoin and me with the identity of who runs this place, (it is 'Admin!' is that not somewhat like the answer to who is the true God?....why, it is 'The LORD!' - doesn't that make you feel all warm and fuzzy?) I now wonder if I will be indulged if I ask the relationship between the players. For example, does the Librarian and Admin know each other from back in the day? Or what about JW Insider? Even some I regard as villains, such as Witness - did she once hang out with the crowd? O'Maly is a wild card (probably not), as is Anna (maybe). JTR is almost certainly not. (but you never know) And I haven't even begun to get my head around Queen Esther; she completely confuses me, but we seldom cross paths. It peaks my curiosity. As Sherlock says, 'it's Game On,' though he does not add 'as time permits.' I even begin to imagine I know what makes certain ones tick - of the white hats, the black, and the gray. As for me, I have no connections to anyone. My words are those of Sergeant Shultz: "I know nottthhhhiiiiiiiigggg." And for whatever it's worth, I've yet to read Ray's book or visit posts about Australia. There is hardly a need, since it seems most everyone else has. Moreover, I readily accept that people can screw up, so 'scandals' involving such interest me little. I go for the overall picture. I get the facts distilled by certain ones here, which I guess I should say I appreciate, since it spares me from plowing though acres of turds in search of a few diamonds. I avoid the bile.

"Who are they? (Genuine question)" Eoin asks. "Corporate propaganda." I think that says it all. I appreciate the frankness. The Librarian, who is not necessarily the same, though he may be, added his site to hers and came under her umbrella, in order to ease up on the hassles of running a site himself. It's practical logistics. This is the Grand Overlord, the Overlord of Overlords, who yanked me from the thread he or she assigned me to in the first place. The poor and stooped (but never stupid) Librarian, old sentimental hen that she is, pleaded and pleaded in my behalf, for after all, I am her pupil, even if a bad one - but it did her no good. To be sure, I had it coming. I was mean to certain ones. Frankly, I appreciate knowing the rules, even if they are not the 'rules' on my own blog, which doesn't get near the traffic of this one. In my opinion, anyone observant of Watchtower counsel on association has a screw loose to be here. As it turns out, I do. Plus, an 'extenuating circumstance' or two, which I have previously mentioned. As near as I can see, that is true of other frequent commenters, even if those of some I think are not noble. Perhaps ones more observant of theocratic counsel in this regard, (for I am exceptionally observant in all other regards) will cut me some slack for being a 'bad boy' in view of my 'reasons,' but I would never be critical of them if they did not. The site was here long before I stumbled across it, billed (disingenuously?) as a forum for JWs, and it will be here long after I leave, if I ever do. Hopefully, the unusual takes and sense of humor I bring will continue to be seen as 'adding value,' particularly now that I refrain from coming after certain ones with a Howitzer. There are far more apostates (some are probably just opposers - which are not the same) around here than I ever dreamed there would be when I stumbled on board - I was initially surprised to find any. I can't make myself be nice to them. I just can't. (I can with opposers) Hebrews 6:6 comes to mind. But approaching the forum with the tools that are mine, I manage to 'coexist," as the bumper sticker says. (I would make all the special characters if I knew how and had the time and interest)

Well....it's true. But bits and bytes are cheap. I do apologize to you, though. You are engaging with a slightly different aim and approach, and I allow myself to be distracted sometimes. I appreciate your bringing all of your talents to bear. Sometimes I must limit my participation in this or that thread (not this one) rather than 'shooting from the hip.' If I am not prepared to follow comments reasonably closely, which I often am not - sometimes because I regard them as blowhards, sometimes because I simply do not have the time, sometimes because I don't want to go the way of Jehosaphat, sometimes because I really ought be doing other things - I ought not intrude with flippant remarks of which I am not prepared to follow through. Though sometimes I throw in remarks just to see where it goes. Sometimes it goes places. Other times it dies an instant death.

I haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about.

I did not look at the video - is it a trap? I will get to it, though, most likely.

I'M SORRY I STILL CANNOT MAKE SENSE OF YOUR POINT!!!

Oh, stuff it. Your inference was clear as day. If you didn't mean it the way any reasonable person would take it, then your writing skills still need a LOT of work. You can do that when you're sharing from your heart of hearts. However, let me restate it, for I do not want to give the appearance of minimizing it. Perhaps the pain caused by child sexual abuse is not overstated - I'll walk that one back. But, in that case, the pain caused by myriad other evils is understated. Maybe it must be that way. Maybe if you processed all the pain of all the evil and compared it with the little progress in its alleviation, without the Kingdom hope to counterbalance it, you would go insane. So to preserve sanity, persons reserve their outrage for the one evil that appears solvable.

"Wait, this one belongs somewhere else in the Dewey Decimal system," frets the Librarian - the old biddy, hunched over her cards. Well - yes, I guess it does. At least it is not 'TrueTom vs anyone' (yet)

Back when national policies elevated the pursuit of cheap oil sometimes over the interests of ordinary people, a certain human rights person pushed back. "We can always get more oil," he said."but human lives are irreplaceable." This prompted a pragmatist to observe that, really, it was just the opposite. Oil was in finite supply. People were not. It is that way with the pedophile endemic. It pushes emotional buttons to the extent that even rational people lose it. Even JTR, rationalism personified in his own eyes, likens child sexual abuse to first degree murder. He has picked one of the few comparisons he could pick that is not valid. Why doesn't he liken first degree murder to terrorism, for example, which is valid? Or to today's nuclear foreplay between nations? Or to the economic system that enriches a thimbleful and drives the vast majority into poverty? Everyone tells us that grinding poverty triggers much violence. I resist accepting pedophilia as the vilest of all evils. It has no end of worthy competitors, for this system of things is not exactly a romp in the park. However, it IS easy to get one's head around. I suspect that accounts for much of it's status as #1 Evil. "We may not be able to do anything about terrorism, or nuclear foreplay, or economic theivery," people say, "but by God, we can stop people molesting our kids!" But, in fact, they can't even do that. I wish them well in trying. I truly do. It's a noble cause. But so far it has proven to be like shining a light on roaches. They don't cease being roaches by doing that. They just go somewhere else. So, while the sexual abuse of children is indeed a great evil, it is just one of many, and I slam back with vigor those who use it in an attempt to malign a religion they cannot stand. The facts do not support their zeal in using the issue to further their interests. Sometimes in my heart of hearts, I think that the emotional devastation wrought by abuse is surely overstated. Not that it is nothing. Far from it! But people can and do recover, as they can and do from atrocities they encounter in other aspects of life. As observed before, ancient Greece is the bedrock of Western civilization. The sexual abuse of children was an enscounced staple of that society. How did they ever survive to become 'our' mentors of democracy? People my age will remember how suddenly the outcry over child sexual abuse burst upon the scene, triggered mostly by scandals in the church - unheard of one day, public enemy #1 the next. And then, as zealots always do, they reach back in time to judge yesterday's people by today's standards. In recent years, the American founding fathers that lodge in JTR's house have been vilified for owning slaves. Yet, when time travel is invented, the morals police of today will give them a friendly wave as they race back in history to bring the real slimeballs, the pedophile pervert pillars of ancient Greek society, back in leg-irons.

Why would not autism be counted as a modern day plague? Depending on your source, (I cite the most extreme for dramatic effect) what was once 1 in 10,000 has become 1 in 29. You can reduce the numbers on both ends, especially the first, by tricks of semantics....'autism' vs 'autism spectrum,' for example. But the disparity is still astronomical. Given that autism victims do not die, but instead usually require lifelong care, it is but another 'plague' that will bankrupt society, even apart from its human cost.

I wonder how Shiwiii feels about Christmas. Should that, too, be avoided or embraced per individual conscience? How does she feel about tobacco? Same way? What of recreational drugs, which edge ever closer to normalization and legality? Or for that matter, ANY position that the Governing Body has given direction on? Is it birthdays alone that get under her skin, odd, since she has departed for greener pastures, or is it but one of a host of items that get her riled?

Well, if he's going to post it, he's going to post it. I suspect you (or I) will not be able to talk him out of it. Even the Librarian is afraid of him.

"What we've got here is a failure to communicate." ... Cool Hand Luke When I spoke of being tactful with salt-seasoned words, the audience I was referring to was the Russian government, which has misconstrued Jehovah's Witnesses as political. 'Don't feed into it' is what I'm saying, since we want them to treat us better, not worse. How you treat the avant-garde folks here is entirely up to you. My words to O'Maly were seasoned with fire and sulphur. It's not exactly the circuit assembly here, is it?

Despite commenting on this thread, I only skimmed it. If heat built up, I don't know about it. It is hard for heat not to build up when discussing the Trinity too for long. I wasn't being critical of you for engaging in the discussion for as long as your like. I have done it myself. I just don't do it anymore. It wears me out. So that means the following excerpt is tongue-in-cheek: "All computers enjoy getting Tom Pearlsnswine going. I understand the appeal. I do it myself. If I am returning to the car after a long and productive return visit, I will nonetheless say to Tom Pearlsnswine upon entering: “I can’t believe that person won’t admit that Jesus and Jehovah are different!” I pretend not to notice as he reddens – you should see him! You can almost see the steam coming from his ears: “You kept me waiting an hour to argue the Trinity?!” I didn't really agree to disagree with O'Maly. Instead, I went after her (and her chums) with such ferocity that the same admin who assigned me to that thread pulled me off it, hurled me into the abyss, and the entire thread with it. I have a Scarlet A (abuse) to show for it, and I wear it as did Hester Prynne (hers was for adultery) from The Scarlet Letter. Like Hester Prynne, it fades in its initial shamefulness, and eventually is taken by some as 'angel.'

"My Bethel friend used to tell me how visiting speakers from the hills would rail on about the wickedness of the big city. It made him squirm - ‘New York City is our home,’ he’d say. He and his wife maneuvered forever to land a magnificent, if stamp-sized, apartment in the Sliver Building – housing is on a seniority basis. We joined them there for wine and cheese after a day sightseeing. Unwinding with a breathtaking view of Manhattan beneath them – ah, what a life! But they were soon transferred to Patterson where they would look out their window and see cows."

My only point was that it matters little how you or I intend something to be taken. What matters is how our audience does take it. It is a encouragement to use words seasoned with salt, that's all. Of course I do not. We are on the same team.

Hard nosed

By any chance, does the Watchtower's time & temp &Read the Bible Daily sign stay up as an item of historical significance? You can't remove a shingle around here if it has been deemed historical.

Tempting though it may be to say such things, in the light of what has happened, Russia would regard this statement itself as being 'political.' Seen through their eyes (which we should always try to do with anyone....okay, almost anyone) their intransigence is not totally baseless. Emily Baran's book details how all the typical religious reasons accounted for atheistic Soviet Russia persecuting Jehovah's Witnesses. But there were additional ones. The Communists regarded us also as a political movement disguised as a religion. If that seems paranoid, consider that such views were held during the cold war, the most paranoid of times, when anything from the West (like Brooklyn) was held in deep suspicion by the East, and vice versa. Early JW works occasionally picked up on Western terminology, such as 'iron curtain,' which the Soviets themselves would never use. Too, the Soviets got stuck being 'the king of the north,' who puts trust in 'the god of fortresses.' The book of the 1930's, 'Government,' lambasted Soviet communism as 'doomed to fail.' Of course, it said the same about democracy, for its point was the inferiority of all human government, not one in particular, but atheistic Russia could hardly be expected to pick up on the nuances, and they didn't. These days the antagonism against us is mostly stirred up by the Church, as it always is. But the latent distrust of Witnesses from the political days has never vanished. Indeed, even during the 25 years of Jehovah's Witnesses operating as a 'legal' religion there, the government has never acknowledged the mass deportations of our brothers to Siberia in the 40's and 50's. So while there are some here who 'spill' more than I would, even assuming I had stuff to spill, they are not the ones who will get us into hot water with Russia.

While I admit this glorifies myself, not God, it also fits perfectly. Therefore I can probably insert it without the Librarian, that old hen, going anal the way she does about hawking a book other than the dull works of pedantry she herself has placed on her library shelves. From 'No Fake News but Plenty of Hogwash:' Here are the top news stories of 2016: 1. Trump won. 2. The other side blamed Putin, who 3. Got mad..... 5. Jehovah’s Witnesses (my people) moved their headquarters from Brooklyn Heights, where they had been for over 100 years, to way, way out in the sticks. 6. Jerod Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, bought their old building. Video of him saying nice things about Witnesses appeared on jw.org. I had no idea who he was at the time, but when I found out, I worried anew. See - I caught a heavy dose of news each day while I was writing, and it irritated me, but I stuck with it – how else would I learn about the snowfall outside my window? Now, no one is capable of total non-bias, but they are capable of trying. I’m not used to the referee leaning on the scales – it never used to happen. But when I would grouse about the media, which I did a lot, some took it as support for Trump! I could picture the Watchtower sign going down, a Trump sign going up, and fellow Witnesses, who weren’t paying overclose attention saying: ‘how did Tom manage that?’..... ...I looked diligently for that interview with Jared Kushner who bought the Bethel building, and it is no longer there. It’s too bad because he says nice things about us, such as how a handshake deal means something with the Witnesses. I don’t know for certain why it was removed, and just possibly it hasn’t been, for it was never a headline – maybe it’s still buried as an addendum somewhere. But the Watchtower will go to great lengths to establish that they are absolutely apolitical. In this era of rabid politics, one can depend upon some yoyo coming across the video of Kushner touring the building he would soon buy and take it as proof that Jehovah’s Witnesses had struck a deal to erect Theocratic Trump Tower.

Nice as newbie N is, he will get his head handed to him on a platter if he does not explore the nuances here before putting in his loyal comment. Ah, well....that's the mark of a newbie. I have misread things far more myself. 'Toto, something tells me we're not in Kansas anymore.'

I loved that part.

I will not, for I can already spot a dissimilarity. Pedophile victims survive. First Degree Murder victims do not. Moreover, pedophile victims frequently recover. This is especially true when we are dealing with the non-violent, non-rape pedophilia which hysterical persons lump all together as one with the more infrequent predator sort. Ancient Greece, as you well know, with all of your 'founding father' comments, is regarded as the cradle of Western civilization, the first glimmerings of democracy. The sexual abuse of children was a staple of life among those perverts. Had it been First Degree Murder, instead, there would be no Greece and hence no Western civilization deriving from it.