DespicableME

I'll go along with this, with the caveat that you can overdo it with regrets and apologies. This is because most demands for apologies hide a greater agenda. We see it all the time in political matters. Admit to a fault and the immediate refrain is that you have declared yourself unfit and should be fired. Nor is admitting to a course ever enough in the event of not being fired. The fault is brought up repeatedly, ad infinitum. I almost think that people don't want the apology they demand, because then their mission is torpedoed by success. They get around it by continuing their attack anyway. 
In the case of some policies, an apology is immediately met with a "Well, what are you going to DO about it?" If the response is not exactly what the critic demands, the apology is dismissed as just empty words, the 'regret' no more that a lying attempt to manipulate public opinion. It is a crazy world we operate in today, and anyone in his or her right mind ought to be ecstatic at the prospect of coming out of it.
The enemies of Jehovah's Witnesses have succeeded in doing what Jehovah's Witnesses alone could never do: place Jehovah's name on worldwide center stage in (at present) three key areas. The one most unnuanced and instantly evocative of sympathy is the persecution of them in Russia, which has grabbed the attention of connected ones that we find difficult to grab.
The other two battlefields are not what we might have chosen, but that does not mean that the battle should be run away from, or that it will not be won. It is enough to state that this or that policy indeed has a down side, and then to call attention to its upside. It will divide people, but that it not a bad thing. It is exactly what Paul at Hebrews 4:12 says the truthful message should be expected to do.
The kickback over 'shunning' can be won. In many cases it is from those like Saul who keep kicking against the goads. In some cases it has nothing to do with disfellowshipping, a term that hasn't been heard in the Kingdom Hall for a dozen years or so. People do a 180 from previously held deeply moral views and find that those who hold the course lose interest in associating with them, even if they be family members, yet no announncement was ever made. When an announcement is made, it is that 'so-and-so is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses.' Who would ever say that he is, when he does/says things directly contrary to what he once did/said? People hear such an announcement and respond as they see fit. 
To be sure, Christian counsel based on Bible principles shapes how one responds to such announcements, but we make no bones about being guided by loyalty to Jehovah. The provision may tweek some; I think it already has, but the general principle is clearly found in the Bible. Suffice it to say that, minus such tools of last resort, no group has succeeded over time in preserving the morality that members have voluntarily signed on for. It becomes an issue of choosing between serving God or man, and we don't mind things being framed that way.
The child abuse matters indeed have a real downside to them. Though opponents expand the charges into as many different areas as they can, the essential reality is that, due to being 'insular,' allegations and actual instances of child sexual abuse were handled within the congregation arrangement, and thereafter many participants declined to go 'beyond the law' and also report to outside authorities. Once again, adjustments have been made by the theocratic organization. Perhaps more will be forthcoming, but it will never be enough to satisfy determined opposers. 'Insular', which sounds bad, is mostly just another word for 'separate', which is a biblical imperitive. Separateness usually leads to some degree of insularity. Admit it, settle up where need be, and move ahead.
Christians are to be separate from 'the world.' There is no question as to this. The world doesn't like it, because it reads in such a course a judgement, for example, as Jesus stated at John 3:19. It is as is written at 1 Peter 4:4: They are puzzled because 'you do not keep running with them into the same low sink of debachery,' but they figure out the proper course in a hurry, and 'go on speaking abusively of you.' So be it. Let it be a matter of being very public about Christians staying separate. "Water's just fine here in the low sink!" the ex-Witnesses and the media taunt. 'What's wrong with you, saying it is not?'
God's name is front and center, put there by our opponents as much as by us. In each case it is accompanied by what Jesus told his disciples to expect: 'They will lyingly say every sort of wicked thing about you' (Matthew 5:19) for belonging to the 'cult' that is 'everywhere spoken against.' (Acts 28: 22)
We can't choose our battles but we can fight them. Every one of them can be turned into a positve witness, even as we acknowlege there has been a downside, even a serious downside. Meanwhile the truth flows like the gushing widening river from the throne. It can be run online from the Lett's dorm room, if need be, as the online lessons convey what might take the individual Witness a year to convey.
Let those who have left Jehovah's way take responsibilty for the overall world they have chosen. Is it only with the congregation that there is a downside? When they see mayhem and malevolence on TV, let them embrace it. It's what they have chosen. Let them join pundits in declaring the skyrocketing anxiety levels that have become a staple of life 'a crisis of mental health', as though there was in reality nothing to worry about.
 

I think your astute encapsulation of my modus operandi is just about right when you include my bracketed edit. I suppose one could make a semi-scriptural case for holding back and another for not holding back. My conscience tells me to not hold back, but I still hold back on some topics, and only "spill the beans" where those topics have already been brought up by others elsewhere. I'm sure I've said it before, but one of my primary concerns is the natural tendency to defend what we don't really know. This can end up making the defender ultimately look like a fool to someone who knows better, or has seen the strength of the evidence. But worse, it can lead someone to engage in dishonest dialogue.
If I don't know something about a topic, I am very grateful for those who have tried to tell what they have learned publicly, even if it is difficult to find. But there are several topics about which our natural tendencies have already made some of us look like we don't care about truth as much as sustaining an assumed reputation. Some of the same "defenders" don't realize they are creating a reputation of caring more about reputation than about truth. This affects discussions of WTS history, chronology, child abuse, and a host of other topics, most of which get blown out of proportion by opposers. But some get blown out of proportion by JW defenders.
Why choose an "obscure" Internet outpost such as this? My own parents, for example, learned about the "U.N." fiasco and said they talked to a friend about it who said that it never happened, nothing like it ever happened, and it was all apostate lies. Well, for many, my parents included, they could manage to go from here to the new system and they need never know any better, and it's unlikely they will spread what they think they know beyond a very small circle of friends. And if they do, it will be in good conscience. I have personally spoken to the embarrassed and penitent brother initially behind the fiasco, along with a couple of his friends, and I think I know something about this situation which should also mitigate some of the embarrassment, but can also honestly admit what happened.
I don't need to look for the largest audience. I only need to do just enough to clear my conscience in "not holding back."

Though I was initially mortified that one describing himself as brother would give away the fort, spilling dirt here and there (and alas, Allen the Terrible seems never to have gotten over it), I am gradually coming around to his way of thinking. I like the model of the Christian who has seen dirt, but nonetheless stays loyal despite it. It is the essence of the talk: Acquiring a Heart of Wisdom, which I used to love to give and which is seldom done well. In this case, JWI chooses to spill, not in Grand Central Station, but in some tiny backwater channel of the internet run by an arthritic hackeyed has-been of a librarian (the old hen) and he makes his posts so long that the stupid people will get bored and move on.
I am going there myself, spilling dirt to some degree, and already have gone there in No Fake News but Plenty of Hogwash:
After studying one book seemingly written for no other purpose other than to harp on dress and grooming and harangue about field service, the conductor said to me: “Tom, why don’t you comment? You know all these answers.” It was a turning point. He was right. I did know them all. It was time to stop sulking. From the circuit overseer on down, they had stirred up major chaos in the family. They had been heavy-handed and clumsy - but never malicious. And it had never been Jehovah. I had read of ill-goings-on in the first-century record. Congregations described in Revelation chapters 2 and 3 were veritable basket cases, some of them, but that did not mean that they were not congregations. Eventually things smooth out. Eventually 1 Timothy 5:24 comes to pass: “The sins of some men are publicly known, leading directly to judgment, but those of other men will become evident later.” “Later” may take its sweet time in rolling around but it always does roll around. Should I stumble when it becomes my turn? I’d read whiner after whiner carrying on about some personal affront or other on the Internet. Was I going to be one of them? 
...Recovery didn’t happen overnight, for I have a PhD in grumbling. Indeed, I was so good at it that few noticed I grumbled, for I had never left the library – I had only strayed from the same page. Now it was time to get on the same paragraph. Was that book truly a dog? They’re not all dazzling flashes of light, you know, for the treasure is contained in earthen vessels. Or was it the conductor? Or was it me? No matter. If life throws you for a loop, you thank God for the discipline and move on. ‘For those whom Jehovah loves he disciplines, in fact, he scourges everyone whom he receives as a son,’ the Bible says. Tell me about it. ‘Half of those at Bethel are here to test the other half,’ the old-timers said. Yeah – tell me about that, too. 
What I will never be is a reporter taking on the mission of telling Bethel what it is doing wrong, as though I knew or felt I could assume the responsibility. Even of most of the supposed JW supporters on this forum, it is mostly a matter of discussing the degree to which they are wrong. I won't go there. I will take it as a given that since they are human and follow in the footsteps of the first century congregation leaders, of course they will make mistakes here and there. Nobody should expect otherwise.
Though JTR will gleefully seize upon the nugget of dirt and throw away all context, usually imputing the most vile motives to those in authority that he disagrees with, I have come to think that it doesn't matter. They will, and do, make up dirt anyway. Might as well give them some John Wayne True Dirt.
I don't consider myself above the theocratic organization, much less authorized or interested in 'exposing' their missteps, and I could care less about wonkish things.  If a video is posted of something confidential, I don't go there. Not everything not made public is the smoking gun. To be sure, I may eventually go there if something becomes absolutely crucial, as it did with the confidential memos Shiwiiiiiiiiii posted, because I eventually inserted them into the Money chapter of Dear Mr. Putin, with the observation that each one of them was entirely what you would expect given the Bible verses used to justify them in the first place. And when JTR excitedly posts video for me to see, I seldom go there. What is this obsession with allowing ones' enemies to serve up your menu for you? Didn't he get the sense of Thomas Jefferson's counsel not to argue with entrenched idealogues? Now, if JWI posts it for me, that is a different matter.
However, I like the idea of suffering setbacks in life, even some in the context of theocracy that would not have happened outside of it, and recovering from it rather than evangelistically broadcasting every little petulant beef about anyone or anything that ever did one wrong, an inconvenient truth that makes the internet so tiresome. Nobody would ever say that there is not more 'peer pressure' within God's organization than outside of it, for example. Peer pressure in the Christian context is generally a good thing, as persons 'exhort one another to love and fine works.' But occasionally it runs amuck. 
The downfall of Western life today is that it is exclusively focused upon the rights of the individual as a near sacred quest, and any mention of a 'greater good' is met with a "Whoa! That sounds like Stalin talking!" Not everything can be about the individual. You know the pendulum has swung too far in the individualist direction, to the point of upending the planet from which it is suspended, when that happens.
 

Yes and no.
Yes, in that you can reach a point, per your own judgement, where you say: 'I've pretty much done all I can do as a teacher. The public Bible studies at the Kingdom Hall represent your best path forward at this point.'
No, in that you don't write anyone off. You can visit forever if you see fit, bringing specific points, bits of encouragement, or invitations, to your student's attention. You just may feel free to ratchet down your attention for a given person, but you never have to vacate entirely unless you want to.

That is just plain SILLY!
It's "Aluminum Foil Hat" silly!
That is correct ... and that is Reality, as it exists on the ground ... where the "rubber meets the road".
64 MILLION LETTERS TO TRY AND GET A GOVERNMENT TO CHANGE ITS POLICIES ... IS POLITICAL ACTIVISM.
YOU are the one playing with words ... to take what is actually the case, and pretend that it does not apply in THIS case ... and it DOES.
The FACTS are either one of two things ... and cannot be a third thing.
The past Presidents of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Russell, Rutherford, and Knoor (whom I have seen in person) did in actual fact swear allegiance to the Constitution of the United States, and swore to defend it, in their heart of hearts, without reservation, or mental evasion .... OR ... to get a Passport, they Swore under Oath before God... and LIED .... lying under oath before man and God to the United States State Department, and each of their Passport applications were fraudulent ... AND they lied SPECIFICALLY before God by their signing that crystal clear and unambiguous oath.
There is no third choice, unless you are agenda driven irrational, and borderline (?) insane.
MEANWHILE ... the Brothers and Sisters in Malawi were being tortured and killed because Bro. Knoor, who signed an oath of allegiance to the United States Constitution, before God and man, refused,  when there  was only ONE political party in Malawi at the time, to  let them buy a 25 cent National ID card. (foreigners were exempt from that requirement).
I lived through those times, when it was all going on, as contemporary news !
I REMEMBER IT !
 
 

Sure ... I do the same thing, completely of my own initiative ...Any JW I refer to as Brother  or Sister. I also capitalize the first letter of "holy words", such as Justice, and similar words.   It also helps to differentiate between a family brother or sister.
I break the "rules of grammer", according to the amount of honor I attribute to something.
That being said, I do maintain, entirely due to the book "1984" by George Orwell, the capitalization of "Big Brother", which I see as a VERY important philosophical concept to "Grok" ... which is another capitalized philosophical concept, of major importance.

Indeed. But, an easy way for the orthodox church to influence the Kremlin to remove an opposing church that doesn’t advocate the killing of another human being through a political process. (I.e. a political pawn) Which governments are at play?

So, there is no hatred from the Watchtower toward the Russian Federation, other than having to put up with the mandates of earthly governments as they come to change. If you study history? You will find the same prospects in Jesus time.

Although, the topic of conversation is “appreciation” to a certain person. I have no stomach to poke fun at a person due to his outer appearance or the way he conducts himself in public with mannerisms. That is more telling of others than “Lett” himself. A given fault of humanity, especially those that don’t study scripture as they should. 1 Samuel 16:7

That is just plain SILLY!
It's "Aluminum Foil Hat" silly!
 

Funny conclusion, in my opinion!
"It's politically correct to hate on Russia these days."
But many US companies making big money in Russia. Watchtower is also US Company.
Maybe WT is just first on Russian list of US companies that have to be stopped to operate in Russia. :))))) Have to wait to see.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2016/08/03/headline-halah-t/#40025a795f99
https://www.amcham.ru/eng

Of course, letter writing has nothing to do with a political agenda. That irrational idea is a knee-jerk reaction to cover a false statement and it has sinister implications written all over it.

Just as Russia used the Watchtower as an excuse to actually retaliate itself against the United States because of its sanctions. The Watchtower became a pawn in a governmental chess game.

I never said it was for a misguided purpose. I can't say I really agree with the purpose, but that was not a concern of mine at the time. My question was more about whether the book would be re-set (in new molten lead linotype) or whether it would be redone for offset printing, and perhaps even an upgrade to the artwork. Also, we had a set of proofreading changes that were not exactly the kind that that the proofreading department could just fix without permission. (And this has an expensive trickle-down effect on the other language editions.) They would be tied in with editorial decisions.
A few month later, for the updated "Truth" book (1968 edition vs the new 1981 edition), several references to 1975 and the probable imminent end in the 1970's, had to be removed and replaced with new content, but this was a more obvious editorial decision, not a proofreading decision.)

Many sincere brothers now are quick to defend the mistakes of the past by saying that the number of little ones who were stumbled was actually a good thing. We've seem multiple comments on this forum that make that claim. As the misguided logic goes, with 1975, for example, it was a kind of test that only stumbled those who were serving Jehovah with a date in mind.
To be fair, I think all this talk about the importance of obedience to men is a mistake. It is not hooked to anything so tangible as a calendar date so fewer people will be stumbled outright. But more people will be disheartened over time without being able to put their finger on exactly why. In my opinion it will be because they probably anticipated that association with fellow Witnesses would continue to enhance their love for Jehovah God and Jesus Christ in an overwhelmingly positive, uplifting, encouraging and heartwarming way.
In this case, perhaps the brothers in the lead feel that they need to cover all the bases, and prepare us for unknown possibilities. The problem, in my opinion, is that this emphasis on the importance of obedience to men has now been associated (e.g., summer conventions) with a kind of future "fear-mongering" about the conditions we can expect during the great tribulation. It creates an even heavier load by making us overly concerned about the next day, when we would prefer to think that seeking first the Kingdom would have freed us from such anxiety, throwing our burden upon Jehovah, knowing that Christ's load is light, and his yoke is kind.
(Matthew 6:33, 34) 33 “Keep on, then, seeking first the Kingdom and his righteousness, and all these other things will be added to you. 34 So never be anxious about the next day, for the next day will have its own anxieties. Each day has enough of its own troubles. But this makes it appear to serve the exact same purpose as 1975. This time, by associating these unspecified ways in which we will need to show obedience to men with a certain level of fear-mongering about the great tribulation, we will pay more than the usual attention to men. It should have the effect of ratcheting up the activity and anticipation by making the end seem even more imminent.
It reminds me of an experience at Bethel when I once had an opportunity to question Brother Franz about his plan to have us study a 1973 book a second time in 1981.
*** km 11/80 pp. 1-3 par. 5 Part I—Congregation Meetings ***
CONGREGATION BOOK STUDY: In January we will start studying the book God’s Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached. This 416-page book, published in 1973, contains vital information that is even more apropos now than when it was first released. Think of the hundreds of thousands of new ones who have been baptized since it was first published. My question was about whether we needed a new edition to change some inaccuracies, or whether it would go into print using the old press plates. His response was basically that we needed no update to it because "this is what the publishers need right now." [The book was basically a history of the Watchtower Society wedged into what are now half-obsolete explanations of Matthew 25.] But his idea was that it would somehow make people appreciate the Society, its place in our time, and therefore raise the level of activity.
So ultimately I think that the pendulum will swing the other way again, and there will be a kind of retraction of this method of making the end seem so imminent as a way to raise activity levels. The Bible indicates that this method can backfire.
(Proverbs 13:12) 12 Expectation postponed makes the heart sick,. . . Langston Hughes agreed:
*** g94 5/22 p. 27 Put Humor Into Your Life ***
Poet Langston Hughes once wrote: “Like a welcome summer rain, humor may suddenly cleanse and cool the earth, the air, and you.” Oh wait, not that one, but his famous one: "What happens to a dream deferred?"
Of course, those who become disheartened (over the current emphasis) will likely be "chalked up to" the fact that this served as a test to get rid of those who were not worthy. For most, including myself, the overall context of these "changes" is not as bad as I just represented it, since the overall point is not to fear men, but to expect Jehovah to come to our aid when the trouble seems completely overwhelming. But unfortunately, I fear that even the perceived combination of emphasis on "obedience to men" and "fear-mongering" will combine to create a new kind of burden that will not appear to reflect the true spirit of Christianity. 

I think several postings above this one Sreko Sostar did provide standard definitions.
The problem with people making their OWN definitions ... is that people make their OWN agenda driven definitions, to fit their distorted world view, and call good, evil ... and call evil, good.

Definition of politics https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/politics
1a : the art or science of government b : the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy c : the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government 2: political actions, practices, or policies 3a : political affairs or business; especially : competition between competing interest groups or individuals for power and leadership (as in a government) b : political life especially as a principal activity or profession c : political activities characterized by artful and often dishonest practices 4: the political opinions or sympathies of a person 5a : the total complex of relations between people living in society b : relations or conduct in a particular area of experience especially as seen or dealt with from a political point of view     By point 5a in explanation we are all involved in this process, as human living on Earth. By point 3a in particular group (WT JWorg) exist also political activities that is focused on events within society (members) and on other side how this religious group have to deal whit person outside of WT society (WT as Company and JW as religious body of members) In general use inside JW members, word "politics" are clearly viewed, i believe, as activity that is specific mainly or most for politicians and government that lead some country. JW members, in general, don't see how would even word "politic" be something that can be used in vocabulary of WTBT Society or JW congregations for internal affairs. This word sounds to much worldly to JW members, like sort of blasphemy. Even among  ordinary people in society (non JW) word "politics" have mainly negative connotations, especially when they looking how politicians acting.   

No ... not really ... petitions to God prayer is trying to influence God.... NOT politicians.
 

Heh, JW letters was addressed to Russian Government, Mr Putin, Medvedev and all other political characters that are in "position to changed" Court decisions. So, how can you considered that as Neutral colored letters? When involved at least two parts of governing,  political and judicial power. 
What JW consider as it is more powerful?   8 000 000 x i do not how many prayers in the day to JHVH ... or 8 000 000 letters of pray to Putin and Medvedev who "serve to Gods enemy, devil"? :))))

I lived through that time too, but I did not pay a lot of attention to it as I was too young.  However, a friend helped me to dig up a WT from 1975 that seems to make a distinction between an oath binding one to a person, and an oath to a country.
Here are a few excerpts:
......."Thoughtful Christians weigh the matter in the light of Bible principles before taking any sworn oath. In doing so, they find that some oaths are Scripturally unacceptable. For example, in the days of the Third Reich, every German soldier was required to take this oath: “I swear by God this holy oath that I shall render unconditional obedience to the Führer of the German Reich and people, Adolf Hitler, the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, and that as a brave soldier I shall be prepared at all times to risk my life for this oath.” A person dedicated to Almighty God cannot bind himself unconditionally to a sinful human, for Jehovah exacts “exclusive devotion.”...........Hence, despite severe persecution, faithful Christian witnesses of Jehovah in Germany would take no oaths binding them to Adolf Hitler......
..........A true Christian, then, would not take an oath that would involve him in the controversies of the world or that would subject him unquestioningly to the will of another human. But what if a nation required that such an oath be taken by those desiring to become citizens? Could a person dedicated to God take an oath of that kind with mental reservations, reasoning that sex, age or other factors would make it unlikely that what had been sworn would ever be required? The individual must decide, but it would not be Christian to make a false oath of any kind, even if refusal to do so resulted in being denied the rights of citizenship.........
........A citizen of the United States of America who desires to travel abroad will find the following oath on a passport application: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations, or purpose of evasion: So help me God.” If an applicant finds this objectionable, he is permitted to strike this oath from the passport application, and he will not be denied the document on that basis"...........
Awake 1975/7/22 page 27-28
Interestingly this was written during the presidency of Nathan Knorr. 
edit:
In addition this is what the proclaimers book  ch 29, page 674 had to say:
In Malawi, there is only one political party, and possession of a party card indicates membership. Although the Witnesses are exemplary in paying their taxes, in harmony with their religious beliefs, they decline to buy political party cards. To do so would be a denial of their faith in GodÂ’s Kingdom. Because of this, late in 1967, with the encouragement of government officials, gangs of youths throughout Malawi launched an all-out attack on JehovahÂ’s Witnesses that was unprecedented in its obscenity and sadistic cruelty. Over a thousand devout Christian women were raped. Some were stripped naked before large mobs, beaten with sticks and fists, and then sexually assaulted by one person after another. Nails were driven through the feet of the men and bicycle spokes through their legs, and then they were ordered to run. Throughout the country their homes, furniture, clothing, and food supplies were destroyed.
Bellow are the translated contents of the card. I cannot verify the correctness of the translation as I do not speak Chichewa

 

 

I was there, and paying attention.
I know better.

Fear because of Armageddon.
Fear because if you did anything "wrong", someone could find out.
Fear of "worldly" people trying to get too close to you or invite you anywhere.
Fear to even let your closest friends know all of your secrets.
Fear of your sexual desires and of "slipping up".
Fear because if you had a judicial committee, you were going to have to talk about very personal business in extreme detail.
Fear that you didn't make enough hours.
Fear that you will never marry because there aren't enough dateable brothers or sisters in the religion, or because you don't feel dateable.
Fear because you've gone to the elders about things that have happened to you, or that deeply concern you and no one helps, everyone just says leave it in Jehovah's hands.
Fear of having "improper" thoughts. The deep fear that sets in when you have any thought that questions the organization or the Bible, and the way your brain is trained to push any thoughts out before you've actually had a chance to process them.
Fear because if you leave you will lose all of your family and friends. I remember thinking sometimes, what if all of this isn't true? What if I'm just wasting time in this life, putting everything on hold for a paradise that will never come. I had so much anxiety and depression, and I knew so many other Witnesses that did and still do as well. Many also drink A LOT. Or isolated a lot. So many were living double lives. The religion of fear.
It's no wonder so many JWs have anxiety and depression
-  Redo_Undo
 

There are plenty of ways that elders and sisters and children in the congregation can "take the lead." Those with specific responsibilities should take the lead in the conduct necessary to meet those responsibilities. In Romans, the entire congregation, children included, are asked to take the lead:
(Romans 12:10) 10 In brotherly love have tender affection for one another. In showing honor to one another, take the lead. This is not specifically an extension of the role of older men. This is also about how the apostles would take the lead in honoring a sister, or a sister would take the lead in honoring an apostle. Or a young child would honor their parents, or the parents would honor the child. The honor goes to one another, so it is obviously based on respect for the dignity of each one of us, based on Christian conduct and love. We should be willing to die for one another if necessary.
(Luke 22:25-27) 25 But he said to them: “The kings of the nations lord it over them, and those having authority over them are called Benefactors. 26 You, though, are not to be that way. But let the one who is the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the one taking the lead as the one ministering. 27 For which one is greater, the one dining or the one serving? Is it not the one dining? But I am among you as the one serving. On the issue of the submission mentioned in Hebrews 13:17, note that the NWT crosses this to Ephesians 5:21 where, again, we are to be submissive to one another. There is an order with respect to responsibilities, but wives are honored in that the husband should have the attitude and willingness to give up his life for his wife, just as Christ had that much love for the congregation.
(Ephesians 5:21-26) 21 Be in subjection to one another in fear of Christ. 22 Let wives be in subjection to their husbands as to the Lord, 23 because a husband is head of his wife just as the Christ is head of the congregation, he being a savior of this body. 24 In fact, as the congregation is in subjection to the Christ, wives should also be to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as the Christ also loved the congregation and gave himself up for it. The idea of Hebrews 13:17 is probably better linked to 1 Th 5:12, about showing respect (honor) for those doing the work required to preside and teach and admonish. Still, this is all in the context of people doing their part in serving others based on their gifts and abilities. Those older men, especially, who teach must work harder to prepare material that meets the needs of the congregation. They are watching the congregation as a good shepherd would for areas of weakness and danger and areas where more encouragement and good examples are needed. Since they are working to meet the needs of the congregation, the congregation would do well to be obedient and submissive, as this is directly related to the upbuilding and encouragement of both the overseers and those who are being watched. Humbly following good admonition brings joy to those doing shepherding work and brings joy to those following the admonition. It's another form of mutual encouragement that helps to build up the congregation.
(1 Thessalonians 5:11-15) 11 Therefore, keep encouraging one another and building one another up, just as you are in fact doing. 12 Now we request you, brothers, to show respect for those who are working hard among you and presiding over you in the Lord and admonishing you; 13 and to give them extraordinary consideration in love because of their work. Be peaceable with one another. 14 On the other hand, we urge you, brothers, to warn the disorderly, speak consolingly to those who are depressed, support the weak, be patient toward all. 15 See that no one repays injury for injury to anyone, but always pursue what is good toward one another and to all others  

Nice comparison. In material sense we can compare Jesus and Widow to some level. Before, until he came to age 30 Jesus making jobs and perhaps earn some "money" ( ohhh this money issue again :))))). Was he and his family poor or "middle class" Jew people. Guess he have simple (in material way) life, modest family.
How contrary in compare to nowadays religious leaders (even WT leaders about whom you hold back to make any comments)  who making big, expensive and modern worshiping centers, headquarters and handle with millions (currency).   
 

Russel, as 2. President of WT, and in fact Founder of WT Company and Bible groups in purpose to reform their own old belief system, or as you using term Restoration, to restore faith in  Bible mirror, was man who belonged to several religion groups, Protestants as i think, and because he was not satisfied with no one of them, made something, that became one more religion in protestant atmosphere. Or restoration atmosphere as you explain.
Sometimes those, who are bible scholars  in WT, using verses like this: 
Proverbs 4:18 NWT  But the path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established.
to explain why errors in WT theology occurs from time to time and by that have justification for evolution in restoration process that happened continually. In such process, that last more then 140 years now, doctrines, instructions, teachings, ideas sometimes took opposite forms and shapes then before. And all of them were been, as they claimed, firmly established by Bible and with guidance of Spirit. This transformation or restoration were done in first place in early days of Russel and as such took place in new born religion aka Bible Students.  
But transformation and restoration continue, especially after Russell dead, when new Reformer, new Restorer became President and established new religion, new by name aka JW, but also in theology and management of Company.   
I think how all of them in those time as many of them today forget to consider (ok many would mention Daniel book or some other old Prophets, but if we want to look in so wide context will be lost, and my memory are not so good, ahahahah)  this verse:
1 Corinthians 13:12 NLT  12Now we see things imperfectly, like puzzling reflections in a mirror, but then we will see everything with perfect clarity.All that I know now is partial and incomplete, but then I will know everything completely, just as God now knows me completely.
Because many bible scholars want to believe that this future time of clarity, completeness and perfection about Gods word, Bible and understanding, are NOW, they all are very sure about their theology.
I think how all of them failed. More then 2000 years of failure. And even Restoration need own brand new restoration. No Bible verses about. Find them by yourself :)) greetings. 
 

Thanks for these last sentence in your comment. :)))) Despite our disagree on some subjects i am glad that i met you in this forum. I see you love what is sincerely and good and such things.
 Of course you can not escape from your inside impulse  to  put on my nose so many times that Glasgow issue, but hey, we are all imperfect, even you  :))))  so i will not put some Bible verses about that, you already know them :)))

@TrueTomHarley... I wasn't aware that he was spamming links to his own websites to gain traffic? I'll I've seen him do is behave irreverently, disrespectfully and anti-JW.  Anti-religion in general sometimes.

As Sherlock Holmes used to say "The Game is afoot!!"
Remember the ending scene of the classic movie, available on Youtube, "Bambi Meets Godzilla"?
Bambi Meets Godzilla (1969, HQ).mp4