TonusOH

Joined

• started 1 topics
• posted 3,323 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by TonusOH

• 
  32

  The Hubris of the Governing Body

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's difficult to comprehend how arrogant the members of the governing body must be to sanction much of the content that appears in their literature.

  they identify themselves as the 'faithful and discreet slave' - that alone requires an astonishing degree of pride.

  but what is even more amazing - arguably to the level of insanity - is the way they then use that phrase to elevate themselves above the rest of the organisation.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  In other words, Charles Russell believed that he wrote a better Bible than God did.
• 
  11530

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

  by Newly Enlightened in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  original reddit post (removed).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  pr0ner: It won't sustain.

  That's my thought as well. A desperate plea for funds to keep him afloat is not the same as a regular income stream. His only angle is to claim that he's the victim of a defamation campaign, but anyone who tries to learn more about it will quickly find out what really happened. He can't grow his support base that way. He might get an occasional cash infusion, but that game will get old after a while.

  And then, when the people who put cash in his pocket learn who he really is, they will add to the growing list of people who will want to warn others not to throw away their money.
• 
  11530

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

  by Newly Enlightened in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  original reddit post (removed).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  Only slightly passive-aggressive with his sales pitch...
• 
  11530

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

  by Newly Enlightened in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  original reddit post (removed).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  "If you are against printing out a PDF in the public domain if it is a copyrighted work"

  That's a curious use of the term 'public domain' in this context. Does he not understand what he is writing? Or is he deliberately trying to obfuscate the issue by using that term when referring to a copyright-protected work?

  What I'm asking is, was his comment better explained as stupidity, or malice?
• 
  170

  Staying in physically for all the benefits

  by Indoubtbigtime in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i wonder how many are like me staying pimo for the great association and gathering etc.

  also find it very interesting having a front row seat watching the collapse of borg.. im not wasting any more time or money on anything i don’t want to do like preaching and mostly just go on zoom .

  there is nothing i want to do that would be considered disfellowshiping sin, i’m married and want to live by bible principles but i have serious doubts that the gb were chosen by god and are his one and only spokesmen on earth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  indoubtbigtime: but these most people if they did ever show interest they would soon see it was all lies

  I have to disagree. The internet gives us an endless stream of information and discussion on topics like the moon landing, or evolution, or any other subject of controversy or conspiracy-theorizing. Many people seek out this information and can judge whether or not the story or the alternative is more rational or reasonable or believable, etc.

  It's been two decades since I read sites about the legitimacy of the moon landings, and I'm sure at least some of those sites are still out there. The information made me think that the landings did happen. Many conspiracy theorists either made false claims or ignored answers to their questions. I find that this is common with conspiracy theorists (I have a couple of friends who are convinced, to varying degrees, of a number of conspiracies).

  I've learned not to ask them to look for information, as they usually prefer to "ask questions" but they don't seem terribly interested in having them answered. They steer away from direct interaction with people who know the subject and can expose their ignorance, preferring instead to demand answers from people who simply aren't invested or interested in the topic, because they can point out the apathy as if it is the cause of their skepticism.

  I think this is why so many of us express a lack of concern over these issues. It's not that we trust the establishment. It's that we don't trust random strangers with fantastic stories and too little evidence. I don't have to trust one and distrust the other. I can distrust both.
• 
  32

  The Hubris of the Governing Body

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  it's difficult to comprehend how arrogant the members of the governing body must be to sanction much of the content that appears in their literature.

  they identify themselves as the 'faithful and discreet slave' - that alone requires an astonishing degree of pride.

  but what is even more amazing - arguably to the level of insanity - is the way they then use that phrase to elevate themselves above the rest of the organisation.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  And always remember- when they have to explain why they got something wrong, they will claim to be mere fallible men who never claimed to be more than that, and that sometimes people read too much into what is written. And the rank and file will accept this, because the penalty for talking back is to get dragged into a room by the elders and warned that you are skating on some very thin ice.
• 
  62

  Do you know of any church that KNOWS God?

  by the-MadJW in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i mean, the jws have many faults, as each of us have.. do you know any other group that does?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  Sounds like you already know what you need to do: if you believe that God exists and listens to prayer, pray to Him and seek answers.
• 
  39

  Is Russia Bluffing?

  by Fisherman in

  1. social
  2. current

  “supplies of offensive weapons to the kyiv regime would lead to a global catastrophe,” state duma chairman vyacheslav volodin said.

  “if washington and nato supply weapons that would be used for striking peaceful cities and making attempts to seize our territory as they threaten to do, it would trigger a retaliation with more powerful weapons.”.

  what is russia implying?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  LoveUniHateExams: You know there are people in the Kremlin who are more hawkish and nasty than Putin, right?

  I have no doubt that there are. I am guessing that they would not be seeking to replace Putin if he were to be pushing the nuclear option, assuming it is what they would also do. But I don't see where things work out for Russia if they use nukes. Who will they nuke? Ukraine? That would risk damaging or destroying the valuable land and resources that make the whole war worth their while. Europe? NATO would have no recourse but to respond, and respond forcefully. And such a move would likely force China and India (and any other nations) to get involved in some way, even if it's just to denounce them. The US? That's a good way to usher in the end of the world, one way or another.

  Being more hawkish than Putin doesn't strike me as a good way forward for Russia.
• 
  39

  Is Russia Bluffing?

  by Fisherman in

  1. social
  2. current

  “supplies of offensive weapons to the kyiv regime would lead to a global catastrophe,” state duma chairman vyacheslav volodin said.

  “if washington and nato supply weapons that would be used for striking peaceful cities and making attempts to seize our territory as they threaten to do, it would trigger a retaliation with more powerful weapons.”.

  what is russia implying?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  NATO has no reason to change anything at this point. They can drain Russian resources and weaken it by sending money and equipment to Ukraine. I don't think anyone sees Zelensky as anything other than a useful prop, and Zelensky probably realizes that as long as he plays his part 'correctly', the money and equipment will keep flowing and he will probably keep his position whenever the war ends.

  As for nukes, it really depends on how fatalistic Putin or Russia is. There is not, in my opinion, any outcome of the use of nukes that does not hurt Russia significantly. Whether it is direct war, economic war, or some combination of the two, there is no scenario that ends with Russia as a winner. If they can hold the territory they have gained, they might be able to force peace negotiations after a long enough time, so that even NATO countries would twist Zelensky's arm and demand he accept. So for Putin, there is only one realistic option, which is to win the war.

  For Russia, there is one additional option- get rid of Putin and see what kind of deal they can get.
• 
  9

  STOP criticizing the self-appointed Governing Body......

  by BoogerMan in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  .....you imperfect shower!!!.

  w74 2/1 p. 96 questions from readers - “in the case of those who will rule with jesus christ, jehovah god...“declares them righteous” and thus views them as being perfect, without sin, while yet in the flesh on earth.” (rom.

  8:33) .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  TonusOH

  What a mishmash. Jehovah declares them righteous, which means... what, exactly? With the GB, perhaps self-righteous is the correct term.

  Also, Jehovah "views" them as perfect? So, does God have an incorrect view of them? Or does this action confer perfection on them? And if they are 'viewed' as being perfect, then... any sin they commit is a direct rejection of God as their sovereign, isn't it?

  Anyway, it's a reminder that Fred Franz was a self-aggrandizing loon.