TrueTomHarley

Whatever happened to old Charlie, anyway? Did he ever get off KP duty?

Betty Crocker reached for the parsley 
“You can’t touch that, it’s cake” restaurant manager Rook shouted.
”It’s not a cake until you mix the ingredients,” she replied.

No. That's Nuke.

The reason much criticism of churchmen is worthless is that their beliefs dictate their scholarship, not the reverse.

No. It is Methuselah who lived the longest.
:))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Ooh. I just read Sreck’s prior response, which humanizes him. Alright, I’ll take back some of the )s, about 20 ot them.

Call me Ishmael. For many years I sailed onboard the Pequod with the crazed Captain Rook in his maniacal search for Moby Geddon.
"Captain, whale sighting dead ahead!" seawoman Anna shouted out. "Maybe you're wrong!" Rook muttered and shoved her so violently that she toppled overboard, petticoats all aflutter.
"Captain Rook," seaman JWI stated. "My calculations indicate a 78% probability of the while whale's proximity within 23 cubits. Of course, accuracy is necessary, but if you triumverate the trifecta intersect, the conclusion is justified. Look, if you will, at page 673 of 'Nautical Nocturnal Habits of Northern Hemisphere Mammals' that I brought from my private library, which along with others, explains why the entire ship lists six degrees. It clearly indicates (see chart) that...."
"Gag this fellow, and get him out of my sight!" roared Rook.
Moby Geddon breached and the consequent splash soaked every square inch of the vessel. "Captain!" seaman Goneaway shouted, "I sense the whale is near!" "Liar!" Rook shouted. "Throw him in irons below!"
"I'll handle that gladly sir, hehehehe ))))))" seaman Srecko responded.
Moby Geddon breached again and this time its tail caught the stern of the Pequod and spun it like a pinwheel. "Captain!" seaman Truetom cried, "Surely the whale is near!"
"Throw him to the sharks for calling me Shirly!" Rook bellowed. "I'll have respect here, do you hear?!"
"Now hear this, you scurvy dogs! I have a great job offer in Port Zaire, the best I've ever had, and I mean to get there straightaway. Don't cross me, or I'll have you walk the plank like I did seaman Franz and Shroeder long ago!"
 

Call me Ishmael. For many years I sailed onboard the Pequod with the crazed Captain Rook in his maniacal search for Moby Geddon.
"Captain, whale sighting dead ahead!" seawoman Anna shouted out. "Maybe you're wrong!" Rook muttered and shoved her so violently that she toppled overboard, petticoats all aflutter.
"Captain Rook," seaman JWI stated. "My calculations indicate a 78% probability of the while whale's proximity within 23 cubits. Of course, accuracy is necessary, but if you triumverate the trifecta intersect, the conclusion is justified. Look, if you will, at page 673 of 'Nautical Nocturnal Habits of Northern Hemisphere Mammals' that I brought from my private library, which along with others, explains why the entire ship lists six degrees. It clearly indicates (see chart) that...."
"Gag this fellow, and get him out of my sight!" roared Rook.
Moby Geddon breached and the consequent splash soaked every square inch of the vessel. "Captain!" seaman Goneaway shouted, "I sense the whale is near!" "Liar!" Rook shouted. "Throw him in irons below!"
"I'll handle that gladly sir, hehehehe ))))))" seaman Srecko responded.
Moby Geddon breached again and this time its tail caught the stern of the Pequod and spun it like a pinwheel. "Captain!" seaman Truetom cried, "Surely the whale is near!"
"Throw him to the sharks for calling me Shirly!" Rook bellowed. "I'll have respect here, do you hear?!"
"Now hear this, you scurvy dogs! I have a great job offer in Port Zaire, the best I've ever had, and I mean to get there straightaway. Don't cross me, or I'll have you walk the plank like I did seaman Franz and Shroeder long ago!"
 

Call me Ishmael. For many years I sailed onboard the Pequod with the crazed Captain Rook in his maniacal search for Moby Geddon.
"Captain, whale sighting dead ahead!" seawoman Anna shouted out. "Maybe you're wrong!" Rook muttered and shoved her so violently that she toppled overboard, petticoats all aflutter.
"Captain Rook," seaman JWI stated. "My calculations indicate a 78% probability of the while whale's proximity within 23 cubits. Of course, accuracy is necessary, but if you triumverate the trifecta intersect, the conclusion is justified. Look, if you will, at page 673 of 'Nautical Nocturnal Habits of Northern Hemisphere Mammals' that I brought from my private library, which along with others, explains why the entire ship lists six degrees. It clearly indicates (see chart) that...."
"Gag this fellow, and get him out of my sight!" roared Rook.
Moby Geddon breached and the consequent splash soaked every square inch of the vessel. "Captain!" seaman Goneaway shouted, "I sense the whale is near!" "Liar!" Rook shouted. "Throw him in irons below!"
"I'll handle that gladly sir, hehehehe ))))))" seaman Srecko responded.
Moby Geddon breached again and this time its tail caught the stern of the Pequod and spun it like a pinwheel. "Captain!" seaman Truetom cried, "Surely the whale is near!"
"Throw him to the sharks for calling me Shirly!" Rook bellowed. "I'll have respect here, do you hear?!"
"Now hear this, you scurvy dogs! I have a great job offer in Port Zaire, the best I've ever had, and I mean to get there straightaway. Don't cross me, or I'll have you walk the plank like I did seaman Franz and Shroeder long ago!"
 

Call me Ishmael. For many years I sailed onboard the Pequod with the crazed Captain Rook in his maniacal search for Moby Geddon.
"Captain, whale sighting dead ahead!" seawoman Anna shouted out. "Maybe you're wrong!" Rook muttered and shoved her so violently that she toppled overboard, petticoats all aflutter.
"Captain Rook," seaman JWI stated. "My calculations indicate a 78% probability of the while whale's proximity within 23 cubits. Of course, accuracy is necessary, but if you triumverate the trifecta intersect, the conclusion is justified. Look, if you will, at page 673 of 'Nautical Nocturnal Habits of Northern Hemisphere Mammals' that I brought from my private library, which along with others, explains why the entire ship lists six degrees. It clearly indicates (see chart) that...."
"Gag this fellow, and get him out of my sight!" roared Rook.
Moby Geddon breached and the consequent splash soaked every square inch of the vessel. "Captain!" seaman Goneaway shouted, "I sense the whale is near!" "Liar!" Rook shouted. "Throw him in irons below!"
"I'll handle that gladly sir, hehehehe ))))))" seaman Srecko responded.
Moby Geddon breached again and this time its tail caught the stern of the Pequod and spun it like a pinwheel. "Captain!" seaman Truetom cried, "Surely the whale is near!"
"Throw him to the sharks for calling me Shirly!" Rook bellowed. "I'll have respect here, do you hear?!"
"Now hear this, you scurvy dogs! I have a great job offer in Port Zaire, the best I've ever had, and I mean to get there straightaway. Don't cross me, or I'll have you walk the plank like I did seaman Franz and Shroeder long ago!"
 

I was only pithy because I thpilled the urine thample.

2025, but a Great Jubilee away from 1975, is only 7 years in the future. Moreover, seven is significant in its own right.
And don't forget, for those of you who like science, Isaac Newton the Granddaddy of Science, said 2060 gets the job done.
Truetom calls It: 2025.

There is someone online (not Jack) who is doing his darndest to stir up trouble over this, mostly by cherry-picking statements and presenting them without context. I wrote up a post on it on my blog and here:
It is ever the pitfall of zealots that they are so eager to prove a point that, in their haste, they will grab something that proves just the opposite, yet continue to gloat as though have found the smoking gun. Such was the case when atheists at Friendly Atheist tore their hair out over “some truly horrific advice to women in abusive relationships,” from the December 2018 Watchtower magazine. They were to stay in them no matter what!
Well, that does sound truly horrific and there were many who immediately condemned the scoundrels who would give such a vile command. Others went to the article first, where they discovered that it says nothing of the sort. 
IsnÂ’t this just atheists depriving women of the right to choose? It is ironic because they generally claim to be champions of that right. The article makes clear that a woman always has a choice, that she need not be railroaded into an action just because it is societally popular.
Some leave amidst these very trying circumstances. Some stay. Either action works from the congregation’s point of view. They have the right to choose. How is that the Watchtower ‘urging them to stay with an abusive mate no matter what,’ the accusation of the atheists? If a woman wants to try to salvage a marriage, what business is that of theirs? It may be an unwise decision, or it may be the best decision she ever made, but either way, it is her decision.
Given the staggering cost of family breakup, emotional, mental, financial, and long-lasting damage to the kids, if a woman decides to stick it out more than athiests approve, with a view towards salvage, who is to say she is crazy? Possibly reading this post are veterans of two, three, four, or more failed relationships who wish they had put more effort into a given one. If she pulls it off, she has gained something very good.
These are not short-term hookings-up that we are speaking of, latching on to some loser that you cut loose as soon as you see what he is. These are marriages of years or decades’ duration. In some cases, they never used to be abusive but they have become so due to who knows what factors? Dignify the woman as having the judgement to decide, based upon history, pressures affecting her man, and factors only she might know, as to whether he should be jettisoned or not.  If the lout has to go, he goes. Just don’t let some third party push you into it. The choice is always hers.
It is as though the grumblers cheer at the breakup of a marriage, oblivious to the damage left in its wake. It is as though they would prevent one from trying to repair theirs. Let her try if she wants to, or even put up with one far from ideal, if that be her choice. Sometimes when you are between a rock and a hard place, you donÂ’t assume or let the atheists tell you that the hard place is really a bed of roses. It isn't always that way. I mean, it is not exactly as they will be around to repair the damage, is it?
Okay, granted, they like marriage over there in the JehovahÂ’s Witness world. Until fairly recently, everybody did, and considered family the bedrock of society. Witnesses consider it a divine institution. That doesnÂ’t mean others have to, but surely it means Witness women should be allowed to. They let their view be bound by biblical injunctions. Adultery is the one acceptable ground for ending a marriage, but even then, it does not have to be; it is always possible for the innocent mate to exercise his or her right of choice and forgiveness.
Several decades ago the Witness organization took note, as did all of society, of the increasingly visible ne’er-do-wells who, while they might not be unfaithful, were nonetheless ugly to live with. It took another look at 1 Corinthians 7, a chapter that deals with marital matters, and sometimes people are surprised at how it says a husband and wife both owe each other sex (no, not ‘on demand’ – don’t even go there) and should not be depriving the other of it. Specifically, they looked at verses 12 and 13: “If any brother has an unbelieving wife and she is agreeable to staying with him, let him not leave her; and if a woman has an unbelieving husband and he is agreeable to staying with her, let her not leave her husband.” 'Maybe a marriage mate’s conduct says he is ‘not agreeable,’ regardless of what his words say,' they reasoned.
For some time, therefore the guidance for women (or men) in not-so-hot marriages is that there are three conditions that any one of which might justify separation sans tongues clucking: if there is extreme physical abuse, if there is willful non-support, and if there is absolute endangerment of spirituality. It is at once apparent that much in is the eye of the beholder, so from time to time Watchtower publications revisit the subject, so that congregation members are guided by what they signed on for in the first place, and not unduly influenced by what is all the rage elsewhere. If the bad egg must be fried, let him fry. A woman always has that right. But she neednÂ’t feel railroaded into that choice by a flood of outside pressure.
Any Witness woman knows this, because she has read and considered the entire article, not just the cherry-picked paragraph, and she has taken into account how it fits into her overall framework of knowledge. You almost begin to think what causes the steam to emit from atheist ears is another possible benefit of the woman’s forsaking her right to leave: Maybe the ‘unbelieving’ husband will become a believing one. How is that a bad thing?  If the guy makes it as a Jehovah's Witness, he will have made significant inroads against what makes him such a loser in the first place. 
Read the entire article here.

 

2025, but a Great Jubilee away from 1975, is only 7 years in the future. Moreover, seven is significant in its own right.
And don't forget, for those of you who like science, Isaac Newton the Granddaddy of Science, said 2060 gets the job done.
Truetom calls It: 2025.

Don't mind the upvote.
I was very keen for the end to come in 1975 after learning the truth in 1971. My first shepherding call was from a brother who explained at length why he had cancelled all his insurances.
But this view only lasted for a few months because, (as I've previously stated), I was put wise by a very influential and respected brother who said he was not part of the 1975 club, as no man could possibly know the day or hour. Because this individual had made quite an impression on me in many other spiritual matters, I felt his reasoning to be pretty sound at the time, because I could never get my head around the date oriented mentality. It always made me feel uneasy, like something that you thought you ought to believe because of the sparkly eyed assertions,  but that just didn't have any substance. Now of course, I know better.
But there was no shortage of those who wanted to believe it although the platform promotion was consderably less intense where I was than in the USA. I can understand the "once bitten, twice shy" view of some skeptical ones today. And it's the same with the nodding, knowing heads today. They still make me feel uneasy. I just find the whole topic embarrassing. The best advice I ever got on this whole area was something an old missionary brother used he say to me in his heavy Scottish  accent "Your Armageddon came the day you dedicated your life to Jehovah, laddie. You can't take it back you know." or something like that.
Scripturally, 2Tim.4:2 seems most relevant here regardless of which area of the ministry it applies to: "preach the word, be at it urgently in favorable season, in troublesome season" and also Gal.6:10: "Really, then, as long as we have time favorable for it, let us work what is good toward all,"

Such ones are called sheep (figuratively) and or of the same flock, of the same Shepherd, who is the one who represents God and those under him via instruction and the like.
As for excommunication, I wouldn't call it eating our own, mainly if you use what was entrusted the right way vs. the wrong way, and according to the article I posted several times before, 2 out of the 3 ways are incorrect while one is correct, with the focus being on Christendom and or the Church, for excommunication is a Church Disciplinary Action in of itself.
Not all of them, some try to do there best, but on the other side of the spectrum, they are down right nasty to the core, after all, Earthly Jerusalem sought to kill the Christ, even going as far as to turn people against him and so forth, and such ones allow themselves to be blinded by the Devil, and so forth. The Jews were not too friendly with their counterparts either, for instance The Samaritans. As for others, clearly misguided and or astray, hence the term, lost sheep, for even if we are talking about a literal sheep also, who ends up getting lost, it would not even know where it is going, etc.
But yes, a flock of sheep to watch over is not easy, mainly if you are just one man, and possibly having a dog that is of "Sam Sheepdog" type level to help you a bit.
 
@TrueTomHarley @Srecko Sostar The Sheep will always be found as long as the Shepherd seeks the one sheep, as spoken of in the parable in the passage, and be brought back to the fold. So in a way, if the sheep does go away, some effort will most definitely be made.
I also like to point out the cross-references for this verse too, which is in more detail from Luke's account (The Gospel of Luke)
Luke 15:3-7 - [3] So he told them this parable: [4] “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost, until he finds it? [5] And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. [6] And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.’ [7] Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance. As well as from Peter,
1 Peter 2:25 - For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.  

‘She could sing about a good for nothing man and still make it sound as though church’ is the best tribute to I have heard.

Of course. It is not automatic, though. Such ones have gone on to other things. What are you going to do, search the globe for them?
If they have not gotten too carried away with their own brilliance, they can apply for reinstatement, and providing that that is the sole hangup, yes, they will be reinstated.
This is not rocket science. It happens all the time. The Witness organization is very open about it. Many times they have adjusted a viewpoint to coinside with what somebody else years ago said. Alas, often that 'somebody else' is long gone. I think it was on a recent monthly broadcast. John says they went out from among us 'because they were not of our sort.' Part of being 'of our sort' is acquiescing to the theocratic direction that they signed on for. 
Look, if you want to belong to some outfit where everyone can have an epiphany and then become livid at everyone else for not falling into line, be my guest. I'll stay where there is a measure of sanity.

Of course. It is not automatic, though. Such ones have gone on to other things. What are you going to do, search the globe for them?
If they have not gotten too carried away with their own brilliance, they can apply for reinstatement, and providing that that is the sole hangup, yes, they will be reinstated.
This is not rocket science. It happens all the time. The Witness organization is very open about it. Many times they have adjusted a viewpoint to coinside with what somebody else years ago said. Alas, often that 'somebody else' is long gone. I think it was on a recent monthly broadcast. John says they went out from among us 'because they were not of our sort.' Part of being 'of our sort' is acquiescing to the theocratic direction that they signed on for. 
Look, if you want to belong to some outfit where everyone can have an epiphany and then become livid at everyone else for not falling into line, be my guest. I'll stay where there is a measure of sanity.

s
subtle ... subtle ... on SO MANY levels ....
Let me give you a one sentence synopsis of everything TTH said, above ...
"If you sing to pigs, you just ruin your voice .... and irritate the pigs !"
 

@TrueTomHarley, It's the end of the service year. If you rush, you might be able to get this experience into the next Yearbook. ?

When the job has been fully accomplished I will tell them to cut it out.

I guess I would be happier with all these shunning threads if they started with:
"Well, we know how vital it is for worshippers of Jehovah to stay separate from the world, but ..."
Or:
"Well, we know how Christians must 'touch nothing unclean,' but...."
Or:
"Well, we know how God is a jealous God who hasn't exactly been cool in the past when his ancient people got too cozy with the nations, but....
However, they are framed that way. Always it is framed as a matter of individual rights, as though toeing the line in that regard cannot help but make God happy.
I don't think it works that way.
As much as you want to avoid causing upset to people, surely God fits in there somewhere. It is not a 'What is good for General Motors is good for God.' It ought always to be a "Let us make sure it is good for God, and then we'll see what we can do about not ruffling the feathers of General Motors.'

I'm ready!

Even as reached for my camera, before I had touched it, it shattered.

The links below:
There are those who are clearly mocking the faith, those who know that birthdays is pagan or celebration of birth, someone pointed out that Jesus told us to remember his death, some JWs are in the mix, and there are some people who are more concerned that no birthdays = boring when they do not know, others say it is better to get a random gift every other day then a single day.
Yahoo has gone full on search and destroy because some of these sections had a couple hundred comments, I think some have been blocked and or deleted.
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/serena-williams-explains-why-she-120900089.html https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/serena-williams-isn-apos-t-220400016.html https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-serena-williams-won-apos-121000483.html https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/serena-williams-won-apos-t-211500422.html My favorite comments thus far:
Thomas - Or CHRISTMAS ... because with her money ... who needs a Holiday or Birthday !!!
Wise!to Thomas - She made her money! Make yours
Other than that, if you have others who also see that birthdays are pagan and or anything pertaining to Traditions of Men, why include them in the church? This I do not understand with some people, mainly to those who say Jesus was born on December 25th, it ikes me, mainly when a Trinitarian says it.