TrueTomHarley

This speaks to what non-biased journalists have pegged as JWs greatest problem—the religion is “insular”—and almost by definition, “insular” does not spill. 
The trick will be to shed the negative aspects of “insularity” without sacrificing its positive aspects. After all,  being “insular” and being the required “no part of this world” are practically the same. The very purpose of insulation is to separate what is desirable from what is harmful.
The verse I think of is 1 Corinthians 5:9-10:
In my letter I wrote you to quit mixing in company with fornicators,  not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world.”
The latter is impossible. The former is mandated. The trick will be to merge the two. 

Are you suggesting that Billy is out to destroy the GB? I never thought of that.

I have no idea. If he is, he certainly is not a typical one, that’s for sure.
I don’t think that he is mentally sound. That does not mean that he is stupid. But both oars are somehow not in the water. It is just too weird to be as outrageous as he consistently is, picking fights with everyone.
 

It depends upon what you mean by insult. Alas, you tend to take the slightest reproof (which I have given you) as an insult.
When Allan returned from one of his many banishments, I took the time to say (maybe someone with more patience than me can pull it from the pile) that he truly did bring much to the table, but he jeopardized his contribution by indulging his anger. ‘You cannot afford that luxury,” I told him.
He was somewhat of a prickly character—who can say what makes a person what he is?—but he seemed to take that counsel to heart. It was some time before he got into hot water again, and as stated, we got along well afterwards, even though our exchange was mostly through DM.
Had I ever rebuked him? No. Had I ever reproved him? Yes. 
Have I ever rebuked @JW Insider? Yes. Once, and he took it to heart. He said so, and I saw the difference that it made. It did not change his basic philosophy of telling whatever he has experienced. But once he stepped over the line to tell something (and no—it has nothing to do with CSA—don’t even go there, John) that would not be known otherwise—revealing a confidential matter that truly was confidential. 
And he has reproved me on different things, whether he knows it or not. Not quite a rebuke, but maybe that is coming someday.
Have I ever rebuked you? Nothing like I am going to. It is outlandish how you let yourself get carried away by your anger. To the extent people accept you as a genuine member of the faith, it makes for a terrible witness. I’m not sure that JTR does worse. In fact, I think he does better, for it is very clear that he is way way out there as a Witness. He does not pretend to be representative of them.

Well...I will lend you some support on something that seems to be important to you.
So many here seem to think that you are one of the Allans—he got all the way up to #30 something, advancing a number each time he got tossed out on his ear for getting too abusive (and he was right to object that others had been equally abusive and had not been disciplined, which @JW Insider pointed out even more than me, and on more occasions.)
I used to point out that Allan made a significant contribution here—he proved the resurrection.
I messaged him privately, or maybe he messaged me—I forget—and in the course of a very nice exchange, I gave him a copy of Tom Irregardless and Me, which he said nice things about, as well as nice things to me.
So I don’t think that he was you at all. Hear that, @Witness, @JW Insider, @James Thomas Rook Jr., @JOHN BUTLERand others? He’s not the same guy.
Billy is mean to me. Allan was not.

JTR never responded to this. After he had made the charge that: “I was the subject of a Congregational Committee Trial once, and the three judging me REFUSED TO TELL ME THEIR NAMES.“
He never responded. JTR always responds. His responses are as dependable (and often as smelly) as a bear pooping in the woods. 
He has responded to many other things in the interim.
It makes me think that I hit the nail on the head. If not directly on the head, then close enough. I strongly suspect his seemingly outrageous “mistreatment” that I have never heard of as happening anywhere before was somehow triggered by something outrageous on his part.
And here he is trying to portray himself as a victim.

I have no idea. If he is, he certainly is not a typical one, that’s for sure.
I don’t think that he is mentally sound. That does not mean that he is stupid. But both oars are somehow not in the water. It is just too weird to be as outrageous as he consistently is, picking fights with everyone.
 

I have no idea. If he is, he certainly is not a typical one, that’s for sure.
I don’t think that he is mentally sound. That does not mean that he is stupid. But both oars are somehow not in the water. It is just too weird to be as outrageous as he consistently is, picking fights with everyone.
 

I have no idea. If he is, he certainly is not a typical one, that’s for sure.
I don’t think that he is mentally sound. That does not mean that he is stupid. But both oars are somehow not in the water. It is just too weird to be as outrageous as he consistently is, picking fights with everyone.
 

It depends upon what you mean by insult. Alas, you tend to take the slightest reproof (which I have given you) as an insult.
When Allan returned from one of his many banishments, I took the time to say (maybe someone with more patience than me can pull it from the pile) that he truly did bring much to the table, but he jeopardized his contribution by indulging his anger. ‘You cannot afford that luxury,” I told him.
He was somewhat of a prickly character—who can say what makes a person what he is?—but he seemed to take that counsel to heart. It was some time before he got into hot water again, and as stated, we got along well afterwards, even though our exchange was mostly through DM.
Had I ever rebuked him? No. Had I ever reproved him? Yes. 
Have I ever rebuked @JW Insider? Yes. Once, and he took it to heart. He said so, and I saw the difference that it made. It did not change his basic philosophy of telling whatever he has experienced. But once he stepped over the line to tell something (and no—it has nothing to do with CSA—don’t even go there, John) that would not be known otherwise—revealing a confidential matter that truly was confidential. 
And he has reproved me on different things, whether he knows it or not. Not quite a rebuke, but maybe that is coming someday.
Have I ever rebuked you? Nothing like I am going to. It is outlandish how you let yourself get carried away by your anger. To the extent people accept you as a genuine member of the faith, it makes for a terrible witness. I’m not sure that JTR does worse. In fact, I think he does better, for it is very clear that he is way way out there as a Witness. He does not pretend to be representative of them.

All the same, you are not he, and that was my sole point. 
He was very nice to me. You are mean to me. That clinches it from my point of view.

Well...I will lend you some support on something that seems to be important to you.
So many here seem to think that you are one of the Allans—he got all the way up to #30 something, advancing a number each time he got tossed out on his ear for getting too abusive (and he was right to object that others had been equally abusive and had not been disciplined, which @JW Insider pointed out even more than me, and on more occasions.)
I used to point out that Allan made a significant contribution here—he proved the resurrection.
I messaged him privately, or maybe he messaged me—I forget—and in the course of a very nice exchange, I gave him a copy of Tom Irregardless and Me, which he said nice things about, as well as nice things to me.
So I don’t think that he was you at all. Hear that, @Witness, @JW Insider, @James Thomas Rook Jr., @JOHN BUTLERand others? He’s not the same guy.
Billy is mean to me. Allan was not.

All the same, you are not he, and that was my sole point. 
He was very nice to me. You are mean to me. That clinches it from my point of view.

Well...I will lend you some support on something that seems to be important to you.
So many here seem to think that you are one of the Allans—he got all the way up to #30 something, advancing a number each time he got tossed out on his ear for getting too abusive (and he was right to object that others had been equally abusive and had not been disciplined, which @JW Insider pointed out even more than me, and on more occasions.)
I used to point out that Allan made a significant contribution here—he proved the resurrection.
I messaged him privately, or maybe he messaged me—I forget—and in the course of a very nice exchange, I gave him a copy of Tom Irregardless and Me, which he said nice things about, as well as nice things to me.
So I don’t think that he was you at all. Hear that, @Witness, @JW Insider, @James Thomas Rook Jr., @JOHN BUTLERand others? He’s not the same guy.
Billy is mean to me. Allan was not.

I would still think it over beforehand.
 
I doubt that is so.
You can always blow away a chipmunk with your sharpshooter.

Last I checked, they had not hacked into my bank account to take anything.
It is others who try to do that, and that is why a simple command on my computer may takes seconds, even minutes to execute, due to security measures in place to thwart the theives.

Because it creates a whole different set of problems when,  at the computer monitor, you throw vegetables !
 

Okay, time’s up. I am not rescinding that part of how judicial committees are superior to the world’s system of justice, even if you give me 100 likes.
I mean, you must really really really give them a run for their money, if you are even the slightest bit there as you are here. Yes, maybe they should exert superhuman effort to discover that beneath your incendiary manner, there lies a loveable fuzz ball. However, I have exerted such effort and even i could not swear that it is the case.
I mean, with me........
”A better adjudicator.you never will find.
If I was a griper
who’d seen it all,
being hailed by opposers
both great and small,
would I start weeping like a cesspool overflowing?
or carry on as if my home were in a tree?
Would I run off at the mouth, not knowing where I’m going?
WELL, WHY CAN’T JTR...
be like ME?”
 

For the life of me, I don’t know why anyone would ever downvote a comment.
I can easily see why one would upvote, but to downvote?
It is like booing and hissing the villains when they appear on the stage. They’re villains. That is understood. Why the need of all the theatrics to boo and hiss?

Since all these parables are explained in the context of working for kingdom interests—largely, in the preaching and disciple-making activity, I think this line translates into the “wicked” slave refusing to do that work and throwing it back in the Master’s face, as though to say:
”You want disciples? Then get off your lazy rear end and make them yourself!”

The trick is not to deny that Jehovah’s Witnesses are a cult.
The trick is to say that they are if and only if the Bible is a cult manual. If you accept the first bit of nonsense, then you must also accept the second.
Srecko has done that, I think.

Okay, time’s up. I am not rescinding that part of how judicial committees are superior to the world’s system of justice, even if you give me 100 likes.
I mean, you must really really really give them a run for their money, if you are even the slightest bit there as you are here. Yes, maybe they should exert superhuman effort to discover that beneath your incendiary manner, there lies a loveable fuzz ball. However, I have exerted such effort and even i could not swear that it is the case.
I mean, with me........
”A better adjudicator.you never will find.
If I was a griper
who’d seen it all,
being hailed by opposers
both great and small,
would I start weeping like a cesspool overflowing?
or carry on as if my home were in a tree?
Would I run off at the mouth, not knowing where I’m going?
WELL, WHY CAN’T JTR...
be like ME?”
 

It is only because of the quick wording that the message might be taken that way. He scribbled it hastily to a handful of close people that he thought he knew well, people who would not take offense at his quirky way of phrasing matters. 
He had no idea that Jack was among them and was going to go squealing with it like a two-year old to the WorldWideMedia forum so that 1984-obsessed people could hoo-haw over it.
“How can the shepherd say to the Master that he doesn’t know where the sheep are?” one elder put it.
 

Re making interest by way of bank or stock market:
(Matthew 25:24-27) 24 “Finally the slave who had received the one talent came forward and said: ‘Master, I knew you to be a demanding man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you did not winnow. 25 So I grew afraid and went and hid your talent in the ground. Here, you have what is yours.’ 26 In reply his master said to him: ‘Wicked and sluggish slave, you knew, did you, that I reaped where I did not sow and gathered where I did not winnow? 27 Well, then, you should have deposited my money with the bankers, and on my coming I would have received it back with interest.
 
Jesus acknowledged the bankers' work (and the methods they use to get interest). If the bankers gamble with your money (in the stock market  - every single bank [international development bank and commercial bank] has a department that invests in stocks) and make interest you don't usually complain and ask how the interest was made and wherein they invested your money.  You put out your hand and take the interest.  It is like what Paul said:
(1 Corinthians 10:25, 26)" 25 Eat whatever is sold in a meat market, making no inquiry because of your conscience, 26 for “to Jehovah belong the earth and everything in it.” 
 

What an accusation!! Have you no shame?