JW.org Says Apostates are "Mentally Diseased"

[JW Insider]

On 11/10/2019 at 9:43 PM, Witness said:

Because of the act of shunning, wouldn’t you say that all four in our house are considered, “apostates”?

It sounds like a lot of JWs are treating all of you as if you were all apostates.

I've seen situations in households that sounded similar where the persons who were not disfellowshipped were still associated with as a way to continue to keep tabs on other persons. I've see situations where the non-disfellowshipped members had the exact same views as the disfellowshipped but family members continued to associate with the non-disfellowshipped ones as a means to continue having the semblance of some kind of family: especially to see children, grandchildren, etc. Also, I have seen cases, and this includes one of my now deceased uncles, who was baptized young, and disfellowshipped when he left as a teenager. Long before I was born, he would say stupid and terrible things about JWs and Jehovah, just to get a rise out of my mother and grandmother (his sister and mother). But over the years he settled down, got married, raised kids, took good care of his wife and his share of taking care of his mother and other elder aunts and uncles of his. But he couldn't come back to the JWs if he wanted to, because he was now an "affirmed" atheist/agnostic with no interest in religion - but no interest in speaking out against religion, either. By the time I was growing up, we never went out of our way to visit him and his family, but they were often over at my grandmother's house.

So, a disfellowshipped person, who is now an atheist and who doesn't focus on JWs is somewhere near the middle of this spectrum.

Some of the groups on the spectrum therefore include:

• JWs in good standing who apostasized from other religions.
• Former JW's who were not DF'd, but who drift away because they have no interest in speaking out against JWs. These would not really be distinguishable from those who drift into inactivity for unknown reasons.
• Former JW's who were disfellowshipped and or who left because they couldn't live up to moral standards.
• Former JW's who were disfellowshipped for any known reasons but so long ago that a kind of unwritten "statute of limitations" has run out, especially for purposes of associating with family and relatives.
• Former JW's who were "stumbled" by something they saw, or experienced: abuse, 1925, 1975, changed teachings, etc.
• Former JWs who didn't want to be disfellowshipped, but who were "cast out of the synagogue" because they felt a conscientious need to speak out against one or two specific teachings or practices. (Those who did not "push" away but who were "pushed.")
• Former JW's who speak out against specific teachings or practices, but for whom their confusion is chalked up to a mental illness they have no mental capacity to overcome. (I'm talking about an obvious mental illness handicap of some kind, not merely an accusation.)
• Those DF'd for apostasy, but who we never hear from again.
• Those DF'd for apostasy, but who continue to make noise against JWs.
• Those NOT DF'd for apostasy, but who make a lot of noise and accusations specifically against JWs

Then we also have a category, of those who are truly apostate, but who are not found out and remain in full association. Perhaps they find ways to undermine fellow JWs or manipulate, sometimes in a more subtle way, perhaps by a haughty attitude, perhaps by giving them a bad reputation in the way they take advantage of others. Some may find semi-anonymous settings in which to create contentions, and make strong judgments to "curse" others. Some may get away with their own immoral practices and defend themselves in ways that draw in the vulnerable. These are like the rocks/reefs in Jude 1:12:

When these people eat with you in your fellowship meals commemorating the Lord’s love, they are like dangerous reefs that can shipwreck you. They are like shameless shepherds who care only for themselves. They are like clouds blowing over the land without giving any rain. They are like trees in autumn that are doubly dead, for they bear no fruit and have been pulled up by the roots. (New Living Translation)
 

There are some who do speak up and offer false or confusing teachings, or maybe even true teachings but in a way that creates disorder and confusion.

We should remember that there were those who would speak up in the early Christian congregation with a saying or a bit of knowledge or a tongue, or a translation for someone who had been moved to speak in a tongue. Not all of these bits of knowledge would make sense to everyone. Paul knew that. John knew that. Not everything would build up. Sometimes the utterance would be worthless, or worse, might appear to have been from a demonic spirit. These gifts were causing confusion, and Paul wished to bring some order to the congregations. Ultimately, a simple solution was apparently implemented. If it promoted Jesus Christ as Lord, let it stand.

(1 Corinthians 12:1-3) . . .Now concerning the spiritual gifts, brothers, I do not want you to be uninformed. 2 . . .  3 Now I would have you know that nobody when speaking by God’s spirit says: “Jesus is accursed!” and nobody can say: “Jesus is Lord!” except by holy spirit.

(1 John 4:1, 2) . . .Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired statement, but test the inspired statements to see whether they originate with God,. . .2 This is how you know that the inspired statement is from God: Every inspired statement that acknowledges Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh originates with God.

(Revelation 19:10) . . .For the witness concerning Jesus is what inspires prophecy.”

Because of the wide variety of persons both inside and outside the congregation to watch out for, I think a lot of the onus is on individual Christians to decide who is good or bad association for themselves. The apostate may feel himself under no obligation to stand off from us, so we have to "apostasize" from them, especially those who continue to associate. We "mark" them. But if they have not stood away from us, and still want to associate, then technically they might not even be "apostates" and we should not judge them so harshly. But if we feel they are not building us up spiritually, and we seem not to be able to offer them anything, then they can be to us like a man of the nations or a tax collector. We can therefore associate as needed, but always, as with anyone, we keep a view to how this association might build us up or tear us down, and therefore we are very careful of such associations.

When we use the expression, "they went out from us because they were not of our sort," we have to be careful that we are referring to the sort of people we should be. We should be the sort of persons who will continue to show love to all kinds of persons, even our enemies. We have to be careful that we have not become the sort who judge harshly, or who push people away just because we don't understand them, or because we are too haughty to be questioned.

 

[Arauna]

27 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

It seems that Moses jumped ahead of following God's instructions. It seems as if Moses was puttin

It was disobedience. He was told to speak to the rock.  The previous time jehovah told him to hit the rock..... so he did as he did the previous time.

 

 

 

 

Could not copy link-  apologies

This idea that one can apostacize from another religion is ludicrous. One can only apostacise from the truth. There is only one truth - you either have it or you do not.  

JWs do not teach immortality of the soul, hellfire, heavenly calling for everyone,  that kingdom is a condition of the heart, trinity,  hide jehovahs name.... and I can go on and on...... these are truths that others Christian denominations do not teach.

But I do agree that we should not judge too fast or harshly when people have questions....  always show love.

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

What is the point today? We have understood the scriptures, which refer to the nations on the earth for a 1000 years,  for 84 years.  So this proves that if these scholars had the Spirit of jah they would have understood it too!

I was just remembering how easy it is to criticize, and how it made us feel superior that we could make fun of the beliefs of others. I also remember how it struck me that the Watchtower had been teaching this same thing for about HALF of its existence (50 out of 100 years) when I first learned that Russell had defended another point of view from the Bible. According to you, if Russell had the spirit of Jah he would have understood it, too, but he never did. I don't judge him that harshly.

[Arauna]

2 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I was just remembering how easy it is to criticize, and how it made us feel superior that we could make fun of the beliefs of others. I also remember how it struck me that the Watchtower had been teaching this same thing for about HALF of it's existence (50 out of 100 years) when I first learned that Russell had defended another point of view from the Bible. According to you, if Russell had the spirit of Jah he would have understood it, too, but he never did. I don't judge him that harshly.

No I never would have expected Russel to understand everything as some people do.  Jehovah gives information as we need it.    This is why I do not critisize them as some people here on this forum do.  

 

[JW Insider]

50 minutes ago, Arauna said:

This idea that one can apostacize from another religion is ludicrous.

This is usually true in the common usage of the term, and in the majority of Bible uses, too. I was only going by the definition, and how it is used in ancient Greek and sometimes in the Bible.

*** it-1 p. 126 Apostasy ***
This term in Greek (a·po·sta·siʹa) comes from the verb a·phiʹste·mi, literally meaning “stand away from.” The noun has the sense of “desertion, abandonment or rebellion.” (Ac 21:21, ftn) In classical Greek the noun was used to refer to political defection, and the verb is evidently employed in this sense at Acts 5:37, concerning Judas the Galilean who “drew off” (a·peʹste·se, form of a·phiʹste·mi) followers. The Greek Septuagint uses the term at Genesis 14:4 with reference to such a rebellion. [(Genesis 14:4) 4 They had served Ched·or·la·oʹmer for 12 years, but they [[apostasized, LXX]] in the 13th year.

However, in the Christian Greek Scriptures it is used primarily with regard to religious defection; a withdrawal or abandonment of the true cause, worship, and service of God, and hence an abandonment of what one has previously professed and a total desertion of principles or faith. The religious leaders of Jerusalem charged Paul with such an apostasy against the Mosaic Law.

[TrueTomHarley]

5 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

16 hours ago, Arauna said:

Billion Christian's on earth in various denominations whom ALL think they are going to heaven to be with jesus to rule over whom?

I am not sure do they want to "Rule"...... or just to be in Paradise with him. :))

According to the Book, those who go there are to “rule.”

with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.” (Revelation 5:10) 

It is a meaningful verse to me. It shows the purpose of the heavenly hope. It shows the silliness of all persons thinking they are going there.

5 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

I am not sure do they want to "Rule"...... or just to be in Paradise with him. :))

Well—maybe they just want the perks, not unlike the hordes in government today.

[Arauna]

On 11/9/2019 at 6:40 AM, Tom Henry said:

Can certain past understanding be revised, yes they can. Especially to accommodate what is happening in the world.

 

Further examination with respect to understanding, the

Agreed.  The clay and iron mentioned in the feet was correctly understood before....... but the current acrimony between conservatives who are the far right  and the far left (which has been high-jacked by extreme new ideas) is irreconcileably divided.   This is happening in Canada, USA, Europe, Australia and UK. One can gain better insight into a situation as time passes. 

The UN Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 gives me deeper insight regarding their ( UNs) future plans for the world.  How they are forcing LGBTQ onto most societies by means of UNESCO is more evidence that we are heading very quickly to collapse of morality.  Their plans for the environment gives us insight how far things have progressed regarding the ozone of the earth and biosphere.  176 nations have given over their autonomy to the UN by means of these agreements.  It will just be a matter of time for them to claim they can bring peace and security.

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Well—maybe they just want the perks, not unlike the hordes in government today.

The more typical saying from people in Christendom who learn about the possibility of heaven is something like this: "I don't care if the Lord just wants to use me as a doormat, I just want to be with Lord because I love him."

[TrueTomHarley]

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Therefore, at the benign end of the apostasy spectrum are those who realize that apostasy can be a good thing, by definition,

Forgive me, but I cannot read this expression “apostasy spectrum” without thinking of the newfound “autism spectrum” that is all the rage today, as moderns try to come to grips with the fact that, for whatever reason, autism is off the charts today, and so they try to normalize it.

In both cases—apostasy spectrum and autism spectrum—is not the emphasis on what is actually the least helpful? Is not the emphasis on symptoms, whereas it would be both more useful and revealing were it on causes?

With autism, there is vehement disagreement as to causes. Some suggested causes are thought absolutely taboo to the established world view, and so it is symptoms that dominate the discussion. Symptoms are easier than causes to get one’s head around. You can argue till the cows come home about causes, but symptoms are straightforward. Easier to talk about symptoms, therefore, even if less valuable.

So we can talk about the “apostasy spectrum,” and it is all very nice—I do appreciate the insight and work that has gone into writing of it, but it is more helpful to speak of the causes—for there is where one might do something so as to not fall victim to incessant and even bitter complaining.

Most discussions on this forum about congregation discipline consider it from the standpoint of human rights. As such, I will concede that some of them make valid points. But they will never make too much headway with the GB, I think, because the latter are primarily concerned with, as Tom Henry puts it, “God’s rights.” That expression is a little off-base because he is God—his rights are anything he wants them to be, It is better to speak of “God’s requirements,” the way Witness publications do.

God’s requirements are that there should be a people for his name that is absolutely separate from the world—“no part of the world.” This concern of his almost never factors in to discussions here—almost always it is “human rights,” and the unspoken assumption is that if human rights are cared for, God’s rights will be. It is a humanist view that prevails, divorced from spiritual concerns. 

In fact, observing God’s requirements will ultimately work out best for even “human rights” but we do not necessarily recognize that because we are short-sighted. We want what we want now. We are like kids in the car incessantly whining, “Are we there yet?” and at last father whirls around and says, “If you kids don’t stop crying back there, I’m going to stop this car and give you something to cry about!”

No, I think there will be little fundamental change on disfellowshipping because the GB dares not neglect “God’s right’s” to a people for his name separated from the world. Disfellowshipping is the wall to keep alien views out. That is not to say it will not be tweaked, and it is being tweaked. The word itself is not used in congregation announcements for many years. Associating with a disfellowshipped family member, while it may trigger counsel and may exclude one from being viewed as “exemplary” and thus ineligible for congregation office, will not bring the same sanctions as associating with a non-family disfellowshipped person. The situation of those baptized when young is handled by simply cutting them a bit more slack when they err. 

Human rights will never be the driving factor in the Witness organization. God’s requirements will be the focus. The whole concept of human rights is a bit pretentious anyway. For someone to be said to have “rights,” ought you not be able to DO something about it if those rights are violated? Yet, violated “rights” are the norm in today’s world. Even “holding people accountable” and making them “take responsibility” do little to close the gap. They are more media talking points than there are substantial reality. They are too feeble to get all hopped up about.

And yet when we focus on disfellowshipping HERE, we are primarily obsessed with “human rights.”

[Guest Tom Henry]

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Imagine yourself as Lawyer who defending innocent person. But what if you are so clumsy and unprepared and from time to time looking in a bottle. How this can help your client - God? 

I think how God can defend self much better than human will and would do it for Him. An at last, according to Bible that work (defending Fathers rights) Jesus already finished very successfully.

The common definition can only be applied to mental illness or mental disorder. Once again, these definitions are “behavioral” (uncontrollable) in extent. Mentally diseased is an “implied” condition (controllable). Perhaps psychology is not understood by many, however, it should make a difference with those not willing to focus on the true intent of the Watchtower articles. I wouldn’t expect them to.

With respect to the comment above. I do agree, God is capable of defending himself better than humans. Unfortunately, humans tend to argue the very existence of God and the authority God places on earth for “all” of us. There should be no doubt to any Christian, God holds structured governments within secular and spiritual. We should always remember, we are servants not to argue with the ones God has given authority over us. 2 Thessalonians 3:3

In that, God will defend us as loyal servants.

It only becomes a conflict when humans allow the deceptive nature of the God of this world influence us to mentally think otherwise. To use that influence as a distraction. 1 Corinthians 10:13

Therefore, I don’t believe witnesses have used Bible knowledge as a tool for superiority. What witnesses do take comfort on, they are willing to take time from their personal lives to have an exact knowledge of Bible Truth. That is not a simple task, and they do not need to feel ashamed for it.

On the internet, people don’t realize, many of the information posted by other religious groups have a history with Jehovah witnesses as former members. The same can be said about the information posted by Bible Students.

1 hour ago, Arauna said:

The UN Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030 gives me deeper insight regarding their ( UNs) future plans for the world.  How they are forcing LGBTQ onto most societies by means of UNESCO is more evidence that we are heading very quickly to collapse of morality.  Their plans for the environment gives us insight how far things have progressed regarding the ozone of the earth and biosphere.  176 nations have given over their autonomy to the UN by means of these agreements.  It will just be a matter of time for them to claim they can bring peace and security.

We as witnesses understand the collapse and the catastrophic nature humans are headed toward. Scripture states to stay alert and keep on the watch.

The real focus should be on spiritual advancements and how to apply them in our daily lives. We have full control with that, while we cannot control the other.

 

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

 is something like this: "I don't care if the Lord just wants to use me as a doormat, I just want to be with Lord because I love him."

After you have done all these things, say, “We are good-for-nothing doormats. What we have done is what we ought to have done.”

I love the (actual) expression. When you do as you should, you don’t go strutting around with chest puffed out. You downplay your own role. It is somewhat like the verse used in last week’s Watchtower study: 

“by God’s undeserved kindness I am what I am. And his undeserved kindness to me was not in vain, but I labored more than all of them; yet it was not I, but the undeserved kindness of God that is with me.” (1 Corinthians 15:10) 

It is the same, really, as Jesus’s saying. The gift is not his, but God’s. Still, he will not waste it, but will put it to good use. Afterwards he will say, “I am a good-for-nothing slave. What I have done is only what I ought to have done.”

It is hyperbole. The Master doesn’t really consider us “good-for-nothing.” Jesus used hyperbole all the time. It was one of the tools in his teaching toolbox. It has the added advantage that those of common sense and humility instantly get the point, and those without those fine qualities do not—they are more inclined to harp on the Lord thinking his people “good-for-nothing” and how that violates their human rights.

Sometimes I even think Trump’s tweets, with their numerous spelling errors, may—probably inadvertently, be taking a page from this playbook. Maybe they are just his form of “hyperbole.” When he tweets that North Korea has launched all its nuclear missels, people of common sense will run for the hills. People without that quality will run to their keyboards to point out that the idiot can’t even spell the word right.

[JW Insider]

7 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Forgive me, but I cannot read this expression “apostasy spectrum” without thinking of the newfound “autism spectrum” that is all the rage today

That was intended. Also I believe the autism spectrum is very useful in helping to understand autism in its various forms. Math is also all the rage in schools today, but it doesn't mean we should reject it.

7 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Is not the emphasis on symptoms, whereas it would be both more useful and revealing were it on causes?

For those already suffering, it is much more practical to deal with symptoms. In the long run, yes, it is much more useful and revealing to put the emphasis on causes.

7 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

So we can talk about the “apostasy spectrum,” and it is all very nice—I do appreciate the insight and work that has gone into writing of it, but it is more helpful to speak of the causes—for there is where one might do something so as to not fall victim to incessant and even bitter complaining.

You might notice that I was just brainstorming about the various "levels" of benign and malignant apostasy so that we would think about the ways we judge others. I think it's revealing, and not necessarily in a bad way, that two persons can spout the same apostate views about the Bible or the Watchtower Society, and only one of them gets disfellowshipped. The other still says the same things but he will often get full association with his Witness family and relatives. I think it shows the desire to have a form of natural affection, which by definition is "natural." (2 Timothy 3:3). I think some of us are here are good Witnesses without many qualms at all about association (online at least) with those who have clearly apostasized.

On the "spectrum," so to speak, I actually spoke a lot about causes, and very little about the symptoms. Of course, I wasn't too specific about either, as I was just trying to come up with some sample categories to show just how the types can be all over the place, and sometimes our own treatment of persons, and the Society's treatment too, is necessarily inconsistent. 

And one of the points is that we have a personal responsibility to watch out for our spirituality, and can't just follow what others tell us to do in every case. Imagine the possibilities if some Witnesses showed a lot more love to persons in the @Witness household, who were not DF'd, and how this might result in a good Witness (no pun intended). Or imagine the possibilities if some Witnesses decided to associate with persons in the @Witness household without any concern to their own spirituality, and became "infected" with thought that resulted in doubt and a lack of faith. The point is that we are sometimes on our own, and must always be careful about anyone and anything that we associate with. Jesus associated with tax collectors, but we are also given a Biblical responsibility to treat some in the congregation as tax collectors, even some who might be called a brother.

7 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Most discussions on this forum about congregation discipline consider it from the standpoint of human rights. As such, I will concede that some of them make valid points. But they will never make too much headway with the GB

Hard to say. Personally I think there is room for some individual conscience in a lot of areas that are currently matters of "legalism." This does not mean that anyone can expect to depend completely on their own conscience without appropriate counsel when it seems to affect their spirituality. But the GB have given a lot of thought to human rights, and have made a lot of progress in many nations of the world to defend right to assembly, right to our own religious practices, right to preach from door to door, right to "demand" blood alternatives, right to be seen as ministers, or as a legal religion.

To our long-term benefit, GB members have acknowledged human rights more and more in interviews about child abuse, child endangerment, education, corporal punishment (especially seen before judges in custody cases, presentations before the ARC, questions fielded by the "PR"/correspondence departments, etc). In a practical way, some of the practice hasn't caught up with the "human rights" rhetoric yet.