TrueTomHarley

As our brothers in Russia brace for their greatest trial, Mark Sanderson speaks to them on JW Broadcasting in Russian! Who knew?

Yes, of course he is our brother. But he is still putting on the Christlike personalty. I tried to counsel him about martial arts and he beat me up. Ouch.

Russian authorities know what their own constitution says. Tell them what they don't know. Perhaps how Bible education benefits ones, even us personally.

Here, Putin is routinely reviled by politicians and media. Respectful letters from ones who have every reason to gripe may make more impression than we realize.

This reminds me of the fellow who went to the doctor: "Doc, it hurts when I do this." Doc: "Don't do that" You don't even have to embrace everything, necessarily. You can simply acquiece that this is the understanding of such and such at present. Maybe it will change some day. It has before. Just stop your dissenting, bitching, whining, bellyaching, trolling, and let yourself be molded by the means God is using. You're willing to suffer divisions in your family? Just how far are you willing to go to prove yourself RIGHT!!!? The time you have to interact with loved ones is short. Don't fritter it all away in a pissing contest as to whose right. Perhaps I am not exactly on the same page as Allen, but I am close. In military terms, I believe the expression is "Loose Lips Sink Ships." If I disagreed with something the Governing Body was doing, I would not say it here. I probably would not say it anywhere. At the very least, I would not say it to anyone without the ability to address it, and I would be slow about doing that uninvited. Surely Sunday's study material on modesty has taught us how to behave. It is too easy to follow the example of the Western media: Expose and tear things down. It's the dream come true of a ten year old. They have no interest in rebuilding or replacing. That's someone else's job. Meanwhile, they'll look for more things to expose and tear down. It's good not to be that way.

I disagree. In most countries, if you taunt the king too much you risk your neck. But if you make it your aim to live quietly, as Christians do, won't they leave you alone? It is a different form of government, that's all. "What, you think we're so righteous here?" Trump said. If they tolerate interference less than is done here, there is yet no reason to think they are not genuine in their desire to provide stability and good government. At the drop of a pin, Western media and politicians will describe them in the most insulting terms. We need not play that game. Our perception of the king there need not be formed by the king here. Having said that, I've not been there. But most of those saying vile things have not been there, either.

When you are writing to the Russians about their proposal to ban Jehovah’s Witnesses, there may be a temptation to speak of legal and constitutional issues, for their recent conduct flies in the face of many of them. There may be temptation to observe that, surely, ISIS provides the template of what extremism is. But I suspect leaders there are aware of these things and, for whatever reason, have chosen to ignore them. Tell them something they don’t know. Tell them about eight million people, from every nation, who don’t know their Russian brothers personally, but care about them anyway. Let them ponder the significance of what if the whole world was like that. When they look to the outside world of international relations, all they see is bickering, bitching and bellyaching. Let them see another world. Convey that we are ordinary, decent people, the sort who appreciates government’s role to preserve social order and improve the moral fabric of persons within its borders, and that we everywhere cooperate with governments as they pursue such goals. I like the suggestion at jw.org to relate some practical way in which the truth has helped us personally. Imagine! An invitation from Bethel to write to high Russian officials about the proposed ban on Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a fine way for individual Christians, most of whom feel quite helpless, to ‘bring their gift to the altar.’

It is true i have not read Ann's memoirs as she would wish. But her conduct on the threads I have read speaks loudly enough. At the funeral of a certain apostate the other day the casket lid suddenly burst open. The deceased had just realized that there were some in the audience that had not heard her views..

Better to compare it to more recent letter writing campaigns, imo, and not Hitler. Hitler was doing unspeakable things to our people and many others. Russian officials, however, are probably only yielding to pressure from opposers in the house church. It's hardly a slam-dunk, but neither should it be thought of as a lost cause.

One can only assess people by how they have represented themselves. And you have written so prolifically on one issue and one issue alone that it seems safe to say nothing else really registers with you. At any rate, the organization that is most proactive in combating the things I said you had no problem with is the organization you do all in your power to destroy. Moreover, one is only 'banished' for 'life' if they choose to remain so. It is always possible to mend fences. It's just not possible to remove the fence, when that is your aim.

At the non-Witness church, they neglect to teach what happens to the dead / the hope for those who have died. They like the 'immortal soul' model. When an infant dies, they say it's because God has an opening in his beautiful garden and only your baby can fill it. Surely you'll be comforted by that! What's that? You're not? Tough. Ann has no problem with this. At the non-Witness church, they neglect to teach the reason for evil and suffering. When people reel from atrocity, they say 'Shit happens. God works in mysterious ways. Had you voted another political party, it may not have been that way. Ann has no problem with this. When war breaks out, the non-Witness church resumes its unfailing role as cheerleader. Could the World Wars have been fought without clergy herding parishioners on both sides into the war machine? Could Hitler have gotten off the ground without enthusiastic backing of the church? Even to have said 'no' probably would have stopped him in his tracks Presumably, Ann does have at least a slight problem with that and would think criticism appropriate, but it must be respectful. It must be polite. Don't be vitriolic. Even on her self-proclaimed cause of safeguarding children, Ann is conflicted. Does she have a problem with children being deluged with violence and perversion aimed at them as entertainment? Does she have a problem with children targeted with 24/7 advertising, even employing AI to do it? Does she have a problem with an adult world that profits from loading students up with tens of thousands of dollars of debt, crippling their future freedoms? She doesn't seen to, because she strives with all her might to take down the organization most proactive in safeguarding their youth from these things. How tiresome Ann is as she ignores everything to flail away at her single-focus issue - take down the 'org!' "the dog has returned to his own vomit," Peter writes. "Wow! Vomit! How cool is that?!" apostates say. "Let's roll in it!"

Yes, of course I follow, Ann. Leave it alone. It's but icing on the cake of persecutors. I never said it was the prime reason. The NPR story [not me] stated: “Dvorkin says that the Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christian because they don't believe in the divinity of Christ." What do you expect his further rationale to be? 'Fine reason to leave them be, they're nice people'? or 'All the more reason to drop a ton of bricks on them'?

There was also a suggestion somewhere that our people are acting so as to safeguard assets for any place they or individual elders may have erred. Even the word 'cynical' was used. Oh? And everyone else approaches the bench with wallet opened: "Here, Judge, help yourself! Take as much as you want!"? Regardless of the merits of any case, pedophilia or otherwise, lawsuits today are the premiere growth industry, which in itself says much about this system of things. From 'Tom Irregardless:' "At any rate, early in 2010 a Portland, Oregon jury determined the Boy Scouts of America was responsible for the above gross sexual abuse of a child, and assessed a judgment of $18.2 million in damages. That was said to be the largest such verdict in American history on behalf of a single plaintiff. "Eighteen million is a lot of dough. What’s one person ever going to do with it? But it plays into that uniquely Western notion that money is the way to compensate for anything. Sometimes I think much anti-West sentiment is stirred up through that mindset, especially among nations where family ties are strong. Some foreign national is killed through Western action. “Gee, that’s a shame,” is the response, “oh well, here’s some money.” Who can forget the French peasant in Tale of Two Cities who wasn’t satisfied with the silver coins tossed from the coach of the aristocrat which had run down his child? "Possibly one can argue that, if money truly is the god of society, anything short of a huge monetary penalty will have no effect. You can’t shame or guilt anyone, so the theory goes, since we have ridden ourselves of those concepts. A representative of the plaintiff’s legal team stated afterward his belief that the Boy Scouts have undertaken a truly noble and important task in mentoring young boys, for which they are to be commended, and it was his sincere hope that the $18 million judgment will impress upon them the need to do it better. Now, that is an American sentiment if ever there was one. I guess I’d be more persuaded if that team plowed their one-third of the award back into charitable causes, perhaps even the Boy Scouts themselves, with the stipulation that it be used for anti-pedophile purposes. And maybe they did. Do you think so?" I'll even put a crass link for the book here: I've already written this stuff. I'm not going to reinvent the wheel. Where I live, a local legal team is running non-stop ads: "After my accident, Friskem and Goode got me $5 million, 35 times what the insurance company said." That comes out of the fatcat insurance company's pocket? Of course not. It comes out of my neighbors' pockets. They celebrate with me at my bonanza with the insurance company. Then they open their insurance premium bills. Whatever Bethel may be doing with contributed funds is well over my head. But they are the 'faithful steward.'

"In 1987, I came to the United States to pursue doctorate studies at Texas A&M University. I was aware that in America, many people believe in God and read the Bible. Also, I had heard that the Bible contains a lot of practical wisdom, so I thought I should read it." It was no more complicated than that. Later, a Witness visited Dr. Fan Yu. and offered a Bible Study, which he and later his wife accepted. He tells his story in the Awake magazine, #3, 2017. He was a mathematician. When he reexamined evolution, which he had absorbed because from an early age people told him to absorb it, he dismissed it on the basis of probability alone. That's what you do. You find some essential component of evolution, the odds of which could happen accidentally are greater than the number of atoms of the universe, and proceed from there.

Uh oh. The overlords have their heads in their hands and are crying. 'Don't we have a day job we can back to?' they are asking each other. So lets go back to a previous point. Someone said that the Australians were miffed that a GB didn't appear at their second hearing. Were they? If so, should they be? The Australian commission has authority in Australia, and nowhere else. Why should not the response be to send our own people who have authority in Australia alone? Seems to me representatives from the Australian Branch should do just fine. Everyone wants to talk to the top guy, assuming all underlings are orangutans. Our people are united. It isn't our fault if the world is carved up into 200 separate entities. What if they all insisted upon meeting the top guy? No. People overseeing the territory they oversee should be enough. Send more if you want. But it shouldn't be expected. ....SIGH!!!....the LIBRARIAN will YYYEEEEEELLLLLLLLLL!!!!! at me, and i will 1. have to 2 AGREEE!!! with HERR that 3 I am FOUR! behaving BADLY by IMITATING a certain APOS**TATE who 5. INSISTS on absurd and bombastic styyyylllling. 6. I CAN'T HELP IT!!!!! GILL TEE as Charged!!!!!!!!!! There. Try to make some sense out of that. I'll take the hit, if need be. Maybe this thread needs be split into several new ones. If so, name them after Anna, not me. Oh, and now for some JTR-esque graphics: I mean, C'mon. Some of these characters are firing off statements that are barely coherent. I should be able to do it, too.

No. I don't believe that. I don't believe one can have meaningful discussions with apostates (and I'm not saying that you do). You can reason with the surly neighbor. You can reason with the person who hates Jehovah's Witnesses' guts. You can reason with one who has left the faith, for sometimes they reassess. You cannot reason with apostates. They're easily smart enough, but they have no interest in reasoning. They have only interest in persuading. How many apostates have you seen budge one iota here? Imagine yourself a one-time Mormon. For whatever reason, you left the church 10 years ago. And yet you spend huge amounts of your time trolling the comments of your one-time fellow Mormons, trying to shake them from the religion. Are you one who can be reasoned with? I say, blow them out of the water, until the overlords say you cannot, and if they should say that - well, that also tells you something. Expose their motives. Expose their bizarre obsession with ruining the faith of others without offering any substitute. I mean, as World War III breaks out, can't you imagine Ann (has she been on this thread or just the other one?) upset that the Australian commission has to desist from questioning our people? Of course, your indignation must be controlled. For one brief moment, Allen gave reign to wrath, and it's back to Bible 101 for him! But he will gain a refresher certificate (I know, because I have a few of them) and then he will be back for more battles. Or maybe he will move on to other things. Either way, he will be fine, and I am glad to know he is around.

Did the post say anywhere that no other group was being given a hard time? Nonetheless, 'banned' is different than 'targeted.' We have been 'targeted' for a long time. Only now might it escalate to 'banned.'

“I was just a boy when Stalin exiled my family to Siberia merely because we were Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is sad and reprehensible that my children and grandchildren should be facing a similar fate. Never did I expect that we would again face the threat of religious persecution in modern Russia,” says Vasiliy Kalin, as Russia petitions the Supreme Court to ban Jehovah’s Witnesses. Of course, it’s all going to go against us eventually in this system of things. When Jesus said his followers would be hailed before courts, it wasn’t so that they could receive ‘good citizenship’ plaques. When Jesus himself was dragged before Pilate, he didn’t sweet-talk his way out of it, did he? It’s all the doings of the ‘house’ church. Many countries have house churches, who agree to be strictly subservient to the state. Russia, once officially atheist, found they could not stamp out the urge to worship, so they settled on the house church, which they seek to harness as a force for national unity. “What can we do for you?” they ask the house church. “Take out the competition,” is the reply. Putin doesn’t care, most likely. It’s not his thing. “Give the house church what it wants,” he reasons. “That way I keep them out of my hair.” After all, he has a country to run. It was just that way with Pilate, who tried to get Jesus off, but in the end, gave in to fanatics. ‘What are they saying about me, here?’ said Paul to the Jewish leaders in Rome. ‘Are they digging up any dirt on me?’ But there was no internet in the first century, and snail mail was snail mail. “We have not received letters about you from Judea, nor have any of the brothers who came from there reported or spoken anything bad about you. But we think it proper to hear from you what your thought are, for truly as regards this sect, we know that it is spoken against everywhere,” they told him. (Acts 28:21-22) It is a mark of true religion today. Depend upon it to be “spoken against everywhere.” Surely, the house church make Russia look like utter fools on the world stage. You cannot view jw.org, banned in Russia and Russia alone, and think for one moment that it is extremist. One would think that ISIS would have taught the Russians what extremism is. Still, while we hate persecution and we pray for our Russian brothers under trial, persecution does often turn out for advancement of the good news. “Why are they making trouble for the Jehovahs?” some people ask. “They’re nice people.” "In their literature, there are some very harsh statements and very insulting statements about other faiths," says Alexander Dvorkin, a former Russian Orthodox priest who now teaches the history of religion and cult studies at St. Tikhon University in Moscow. "Of course, every religion has the right to criticize other faiths, but that should be done in a non-insulting manner, especially if you are talking about [my faith] the faith of the majority." (brackets mine) The reason you can and should criticize other faiths is that, as any non-religious person knows, religion has historically served as chief cheerleader of war and killing. That’s why a growing number of persons would like to ban it. “Dvorkin says that the Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christian because they don't believe in the divinity of Christ.” (from NPR) Got it? It’s also violence at the hands of Trinitarians. A more intolerant bunch you will never see.

Much as I hesitate to offer observation to Allen because he knows more than I do on most things: on the internet, you assume up front that everyone is a liar. It's icing on the cake if it turns out otherwise, and you never know for sure, because they are digital bits. Through participation in one thread and reading this one, I get an idea of who is who. But I don't know any of it. Nor does anyone know if that guy in the blue shirt and goofy hat is really me. Nor do I assume the overlords here are Witnesses; if they are, they certainly are avant-garde Witnesses. They're all liars, or potential liars, on the internet. It's only those you personally know that you can be sure of. I have an entire circuit full of people that like me, and I them. I know who they are, or can readily find out. If I want association, I go there. If I want to brawl, I come here. I'll keep coming here, because sometimes I like to brawl. (or share something light somewhere else) But it's hardly fine association as can be had among real people. And I don't offer suggestions to God's organization as to how to conduct itself because no one has asked me. Anyone here who asks me doesn't count.

One would think that ISIS would have taught Russia what extremism is.

In the midst of a rebuke as sharp as I can make it, a well-deserved rebuke IMO, Witness picks out and responds to the fact I didn't refer to her in the third person. She doesn't retaliate. This speaks well for her. Would I do as much? We're not friends and we're not going to be, so long as she dedicates herself to tearing down what I and my people are building up. Nonetheless, this little tweet personalizes her. But then, following this remark, she appends eight scriptures. Look, if my own people append eight scriptures out of the blue, i will not read them unless they have given me a reason to. Why should I? I've nothing against scriptures, but I'd rather read them in orchestral form, as part of routine Bible reading, where I can get everything in context. Why doesn't Witness straighten out and fly right. Her people have nothing to show for themselves beyond myriad comments on the threads of others. My people have gathered and unified eight million persons. (a million for each verse Witness cited) Why doesn't she try to mend fences. Does she think someone did her dirty long ago?

In your haste to insult me, did you miss that I thought it, but I did not say it? Have you ever held back from saying something you thought? Or am I missing something? For otherwise, your comment makes no sense. Oh. Unless you are referring to the Librarian. But perhaps she and I have a deal that you don't know about. Do you think it possible that there are some things you do not know? After all, assuming she is a sister, she puts up with astounding abuse from those who hate the organization God uses. I mean, surely for every person I insult, you insult twenty.

Years ago I called on a man and placed a set of magazines. I called on him again and placed another. But then I called back and he said he no longer wanted them. His wife was allergic to newsprint. “Look, just tell me you don’t like them,” I thought. “Lots of people don't. I can live with that. 'Allergic to newsprint!' What a stupid excuse! Now I’ve heard them all.” The man and his wife moved away. But some time after that I met them at a District Convention. By then, Bethel had switched to a higher-grade paper and he and his wife had made rapid progress. They’re probably in the circuit work now that Bethel has gone digital. A fine newsprint sample below. Don't you agree? (I can already picture this one resurfacing from time to time)

Of course you are correct, Arauna. I refer only to how his photo was immediately redirected to one of child sexual abuse. it seemed not right to me.

Well - how do you persuade a four year old, whose every instinct is to trust adults, that nobody, but nobody is to be trusted,, that at any time, any one of them might prove to be their worst nightmare come true - a nightmare that they cannot possibly envision? How do you do that without terrifying the child, their generation already being far more anxious than ones preceding. I think our video does it better than yours. But it's arguable. That puts me at a disadvantage, for you well know that I don't like to argue. You are correct that ours makes no allowance for mommy or daddy being the abuser. I wonder if a child ever really recovers when that is the case? It all must be put into a greater context. Everything about JW training and life serves to strengthen families ties, lessening chances of such abuse. Many things promoted in the greater world are destructive to families, increasing the chances of abuse.