DespicableME

Please, first of all, for my understanding of your position on issue, give me definition what in fact means "to be spirit directed"???
1) How single person is spirit directed?
2) How  group of people is spirit directed?
3) How (in this case Watchtower inc.) Company is spirit directed?

Watchtower has made references that the Wild Beast of Revelation 13, is an organization.
Dan 7:23 states it is “diverse”, different, altered, changed, transformed.  It is not at all like the three previous beasts that God’s people suffered under.  Both its tactics and appearance are very different from the previous four beasts.
 It works on deceit.  Rev 19:20
Revelation 13:7 says, It was given power to wage war (spiritual war according to the Greek scriptures 2 Cor 10:3,4) against God’s holy people/saints and to conquer them. And it was given authority over every tribe, people, language and nation.
The beast has the authority to symbolically (because Revelation a book of signs, Rev 1:1) “kill” those who refuse to accept its authority. 
It has an “image” of being “spirit-directed”, given to it from a “false prophet”/second beast who appears to be “in Christ”.  Rev 13:11
“The second beast was given power to give breath (spirit; see John 20:22) to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed.”  Rev 13:15
Has any organization in the world “conquered” the anointed ones? Certainly not the U.N.  Is there any organization in the world that has the power to authorize the spiritual “death” of people from every tribe, language and nation when they refuse to acknowledge it as an image given by “spirit”?
There is only one diverse organization that has significantly conquered the saints and their companions; pushing the anointed into the far corners of the organization and out of sight from all others.  The Watchtower organization.
The elder body has been appointed on the basis of a few scriptures that they say, provides these men with the “breath” of Holy Spirit.  In reality,  they are the speaking “image” of Rev 13:15.   They have been given the authority over the saints/anointed ones and people from every “tribe, language and nation”, to disfellowship (consider them spiritually dead) any who refuse to revere and serve, the Watchtower organization.
Is “Jehovah’s spirit-directed organization” blessed by God?  
No.  It is the formidable foe against the remaining ones of the woman’s seed before the Kingdom arrives.  Rev 12:1-4; 2 Thess 2:9-12
“They will put you out of (expel you from) the synagogues (“congregations”); but an hour is coming when whoever kills you will think and claim that he has offered service to God.”  John 16:2
When individuals are disfellowshipped, their treatment received from other members of the organization is as if they are dead.  Many disfellowshipped ones have not sinned, but have recognized that Christ is their Head, and not men.  Matt 5:11; Mark 8:35 They refuse to acknowledge an organization based on deceit. 
 
 
 
 

I am sorry, Grey Reformer, but your text is too small for my 71 year old eyes to read, and I don't need anyone to "review" for your approval what is general and common knowledge. 
When I find my reading glasses, I will try again to go through your material ... but one thing I have learned over the years ... the probability of someone's words being valid and topically important DECREASES with the quantity of words used.
I agree with the need for disfellowshipping ... my objection is to the cruelty in HOW it is practiced, and that there is NEVER, EVER any "extenuating circumstances" that would legitimately call for mercy.

From an outsider standpoint of view, it would seem difficult to comprehend why God is patient. To a JW, it is as simple as understanding the structure in scripture. Therefore, the posted question is too conflicting to its meaning.

*** ws18 August p. 27 Patience—Endurance With a Purpose ***

We all want the new world to come as soon as possible. But we learn to be more patient when we think about how patient Jehovah has been with us. The Bible assures us: “Jehovah is not slow concerning his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire anyone to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9) So when we think about Jehovah’s patience with us, we will also be more patient with others. (Romans 2:4) What are some situations where we need to be patient?


 
Now, if you have a better reference from any other God other than the true God of Israel, I will be happy to review your evidence. Since the purpose of disfellowshipping is to keep the congregation clean. Therefore as the above subscribes, showing repentance is the key. Can someone simply say, I’m sorry, and then everything is forgiven? Can you do that in a court of law? Can someone simply tell the Judge, I’m sorry I hurt that person because I needed drugs so badly, and the Judge releases that person out of the goodness of his heart. How far are you willing to exasperate the question?


 
*** w16 November p. 12 Organized in Harmony With God’s Own Book ***

MAINTAIN CLEANNESS, PEACE, AND UNITY

14 We can contribute to the spiritual cleanness of the congregation by following the direction found in God’s Word. Consider the situation in ancient Corinth. Paul had poured himself out preaching in that city, and he loved his fellow “holy ones” there. (1 Cor. 1:1, 2) But how troubling it must have been for him to have to address the problem of sexual immorality that was being tolerated in that congregation! Paul directed the elders to hand the immoral man over to Satan—in other words, to disfellowship him. To preserve the congregation’s purity, the elders needed to clear out the “leaven.” (1 Cor. 5:1, 5-7, 12) When we support the elders’ decision to disfellowship an unrepentant wrongdoer, we help to maintain the cleanness of the congregation and perhaps move the person to repent and seek Jehovah’s forgiveness


In this world, everyone who is guilty is innocent. That's what they want people to think. Are there innocent people? maybe in a real court of law. Does that mean a judicial committee holds the same standards as an outside court of law? NO! the Elders are there to see if unchristian conduct deserves having a person disfellowshipped. If the conduct goes beyond a judicial committee's capability? the affected party is duly notified to seek legal compensation through due process.

O.K. ... let's do exactly THAT!Are Wrongly Disfellowshipped People Automatically Reinstated?
Answer:
The way that disfellowshipping is handled today has only one purpose ... to maintain the powers structure of the Governing Body.
If a person was disfellowshipped for being right ... he is NOT automatically reinstated ... the fact that he was right makes his crime ESPECIALLY grievous.
This is reality ... where the "rubber meets the road".
 

How about that. You took the words right out of my mouth. Before anyone can honestly criticize someone’s doctrine, they need to understand the principles of scripture. Perhaps, “James” will eventually learn scripture the correct way, by not making erroneous claims that can be corrected by true Bible knowledge.

If you did, you would understand the context of Matthew 5:3-12 with the emphasis on verses 10-11. Something Jehovah Witnesses have endured and will continue to endure from hostile sources.

So, let’s bring back the posted question without further deviation from someone’s personal opinion on other matters.

The problem is, that Grey Reformer is too lacking in general knowledge of what has been going on around him (or her) to reform anything.
Before you can fix a problem ... you have to know there IS a problem.

Since you were absolute about your comment, I was hoping to see some concrete evidence on your claim. It turns out to be bluster from the opposition. Let me know when your guardian angel decides to let you in on God’s plans, directly.

Meanwhile, when submitting proof. It would be well advised to understand the context.

I will let the Watchtower's hypocritical teachings answer it for you.
 

You mentioned the Watchtower is not spirit directed. I’m not after your personal opinion, show me the proof. So, start from there. I will be no more than happy to review your submission.

Where to start.  
Who are the anointed ones, and why must they obey those not anointed - the elder body?  

Then, can you kindly prove this organization is not spirit directed since you seem to be absolute with your remark? Many religions believe in the same. Does that mean none are? Are you suggesting you are? Even though you seem to break Jesus commandments of love, and causing strife? It appears, that you are above God’s law to make such a statement.

How can one person believe in one thing, while doing the contrary? Maybe, while making comments that can’t possibly be appreciated by any Christian, there could be a more practical relation to the truth.

Either way, please provide this overwhelming evidence you seem to have, that the Watchtower is not spirit directed. I would enjoy seeing such proof.

As for secrecy. Other than former witnesses and present outsiders that make such false claims, please proved proof that Elders judicial system is done in secret, even though the congregation is eventually made aware of, peoples Christian conduct, and how the ARC was able to receive documents from the branch office by the congregation Elders. Perhaps, you might not understand the meaning of the word secret.

What does that prove, if his views were wrong? Are Witnesses supposed to follow a wrong instrument of God’s Truth?

Please tell me how this accomplished.  To think that the organization is spirit-directed belittles God's power in light of its failed teachings.  You do realize there are a plethora of failed teachings, don’t you?
Is God and Jesus too weak to provide direction with clarity?  Are they responsible for the vagueness in teachings that are the historical trademark of the organization?

Yes, but Ray Franz left behind two very detailed biographies of his experiences and observations .... which at least one is available on Amazon.com, or, with a little searching, you might be able to get either or both off the Internet for free in PDF or EPUB format. 
You should research these things for yourself, and not rely on others,  whose information may be distorted by being second-hand information.
Waterboarding is very effective, in most cases, and has the advantage that it does not leave any documentable  marks ....
By not allowing any representation, witnesses, recordings, or notes in disfellowshipping trials, completely secret ... the Society does not need to waterboard anyone to avoid any tell-tale evidence of iron fists in a velvet glove. 
For it's intended purpose, without ever showing mercy of any kind, the system works perfectly, now.
 

I don’t recall, with your implication, when the Watchtower used Gestapo tactics. However, it wouldn’t have mattered, since Ray took his error in understanding to his grave.

Although if you have proof of such atrocities by the Watchtower, feel free to post them.

I wonder how many Catholic churches allow for the teachings of Sharia Law. So, let me know when the Watchtower starts to use waterboarding.

This is true at the GB level ... except for Ray Franz .... who WAS disfellowshipped, for having lunch with his landlord and employer, back in his home town, and recalled from his" sick bed" to Bethel to be interrogated.
However, at the "bottom", there is a continuous awareness that unless you say exactly the right things, in exactly the right way, with exactly the right words, you are subject to being called into "Room 101", and run through the wringer. (Old WWII washing machine reference.)
...and if you give any expression whatsoever to any legitimate grievance ... it is at best considered sedition ... and at the worst .... treason.
It is ESPECIALLY grievous ....  if you are right.
 

That depends on what you mean, new light. 1914 stands as it always has. Therefore, no one that I can think of has been disfellowshipped for an error in their of opinion they might have. There are former witnesses that have challenged the Watchtower doctrine by authorship and have been disfellowshipped, but only at a cost of them being wrong in their understanding.

However, the Watchtower is run by God’s Holy Spirit, not individual men as many former witnesses now contend, regardless of how that view is made by obscured opinions.

No, they had not been dfd for knowing the truth. They had  been DFD for not obeying WT leaders and their explanation what is the truth. "1914 generation" and "generation"  WT explanations versions  from then until today are questionable, and by that to be called "truth" is not recommended. By that DFD members, who had been in disagree with past, old  explanation/s, and  had "advanced explanation" that was later WT put in legal use, are not in benefit in no way.       

The way that disfellowshipping is handled today has only one purpose ... to maintain the powers structure of the Governing Body.
If a person was disfellowshipped for being right ... he is NOT automatically reinstated ... the fact that he was right makes his crime ESPECIALLY grievous.

Since the Organization has received "new light" regarding the 1914 generation, and completely changed their view on this, does this mean that all the former Jehovah's witnesses who were disfellowshipped years ago for the same view the organization is now teaching will automatically be accepted into fellowship again? Were these Ex-Jw's in fact disfellowshipped for truth and knew things that the governing body did not?
 

I'll link to it in the next couple days. Sounds like no one is really pushing for it at the moment, and that's not why I brought it up. I brought it up to show the kind of story that can be exaggerated too far on one side and minimized to the point of dishonesty on the other side. And of course, the exaggeration through a form of reductio ad absurdum is just another form of minimization. (e.g. "shoving aside the Vatican" or Chris Christie's "[yeah right] I actually was the guy working the cones out there." But you are basically right that it started out as nearly nothing (information access), except that it got out of control pretty quickly. And when the folks in Writing who were in on it saw some potential future advantages, they didn't back down, but just dug in their heels a bit harder and kept up with the requirements for their particular NGO membership. (The requirement that Writing could most easily meet was publishing an article in Awake! once or twice a year to give publicity to various U.N. initiatives, like UNICEF, for example.)

I don't know the story of this. Of course, many have thrust it at me, but I have accepted someone's take that it amounted to little more than taking out a library card so as to get access to some writings. 'Oh, no, it's far MORE than that!' I have been told, as though they sat at Kofi Onnans right hand, shoving aside even the Vatican, but the prospect of secretly calling shots with the wild beast seemed so ridiculous that my interest tanked. I figured either it was a valid move that was misunderstood, or it was the clumsy move of some brother who is peeling potatoes in the Bethel kitchen for penance and will be for the thousand years. If you like, in the spirit of telling all that has been told innacurately everywhere else, I'd like to know of it, either here or through DM or through a link to where you probably wrote of it long ago.

I'll be nicer to him.

Yes. There are contradictory motives for apologies, and contradictory reactions to apologies. We need to consider what is the right thing to do in each case. Some people apologize without apologizing as in "I take full responsibility for the failures (or a particular failure) that occurred during my time in office."  But just don't try to make them accountable in any way. I'm reminded of H.Clinton's Benghazi, or the TEN different "Benghazis," some much larger and more deadly, at various U.S. embassies under G.W.Bush.
Depends on many factors: the mood, the Zeitgeist, the economy, the efficacy of the corporate propaganda machine (aka "the news"), etc. For example, Pope Francis is visiting Ireland in the middle of the worst mood of Catholics in Ireland ever. Ireland is still majority Catholic, yet a majority of Catholics in places are now voting for same-sex marriage, abortion, divorce law changes, etc.  And attendance at churches has fallen precipitously. Media outlets that used to be supportive of the Church are saying out loud that they are waiting for more than the usual apologies and prayers offered up in an attempt to heal the mood. It's not just sexual abuse, which was rampant in Ireland and was covered up through the Vatican, too. It was forcing unwed women to give up their babies, violence against women at "nunneries" and other abuse issues which keep getting turned up. Some say (NPR yesterday, for example) that every single family in Ireland has been affected in some way.
It's a good thing it happened during a time when the U.S. and other Western European powers were salivating to find civil rights abuses in Russia. The world hardly gives a second look when things like this happen to groups and religions in Africa, India, Indonesia, etc. Things have to become very deadly to get attention elsewhere (as in Myanmar/Burma)
You have a point, but I think those that kick up the biggest fuss about shunning around here, at least, are those who were shunned by their families over doctrinal disagreements. Moral issues are not such a big deal, when a person has chosen a lifestyle that keeps them away from natural and free association with relatives. Some fade into a separate life after a non-scriptural divorce, for example. Some give some evidence that they know better, might return someday, or even wish they could associate but just keep too many worldly associations and habits. After some length of time, I've seen these persons visit their Witness relatives and associate at weddings and funerals and large family gatherings as if nothing happened. But it's not that often, and the Witnesses aren't going out of their way to associate.  
But I do see a bigger difference when the reason was doctrinal. Even bringing up the name of the person is rare or hushed or forbidden. They are still treated worse than those who left for moral reasons. And the feelings on the side of the person who is shunned for "apostasy" must hurt them much worse than we can imagine, if they believe they were only standing up for truth, or left for the "right reasons." When they still want to show love to their families, see their children, grandchildren or parents or grandparents, but their families don't want to see them it is the Witness who has "no natural affection." To them, the only reason they are treated badly and without any respect, in their opinion, is sometimes because they stopped believing something that was wrong anyway, and there was probably a time when they were too vocal about it, or too invested in the "truth" of what could turn out to be a minor issue. But even if they don't feel strongly any more about the particular issue, they can't conscientiously recant what they think is a Bible teaching. And if they have become atheists, they can't very well answer any of the questions correctly that could bring them back into association. I think this is the kind of "violence" that JTR is sometimes referring to, and it's something about which we should have more sympathy and empathy.