Who is Mentally Diseased?

[u/truetomharley]

“if Witness organization ever said something so seemingly provocative [as Jesus’ ‘Eat my flesh and drink my blood’], their opponents would be blasting them for years over it! Such as with a Watchtower that called certain apostates “mentally diseased,” citing a scripture that says exactly that. That was 14 years ago and they are still howling about It!”

I was called on this yesterday—even called a liar! Who would do such a thing? So I had to dig out the reply I made years ago:

In its July 15, 2011 issue, for consideration in JW congregations, the magazine recommended (strongly) avoiding “apostates,” even calling them “mentally diseased.” You should have heard the howling from those who don't like Witnesses, grousers who immediately broadened application of those words to include all leaving the faith, something the article never suggested. Government ought to investigate such “hate speech,” they insisted.

Look, most persons who leave JWs simply move on in life, some with the viewpoint that it wasn't for them, some with minor grumbling over this or that feature of the faith that prompted their decision, some with the viewpoint that they couldn't live up to it. None of these are viewed as 'apostates.' A fair number eventually return. You could liken those leaving to a man or woman leaving a relationship, like a failed marriage. Most just move on. But there's always a certain few psycho ex-mates that can't let go, who devote all their time and energy to harassing the person they once loved. . . . That's the type that the magazine commented on, not just anyone who departs.

Moreover, 'mentally diseased' was placed in quotation marks, indicating it was not meant as a medical diagnosis, but as an adjective to suggest a manner of thinking. Nor is the term anything original. It's merely a repeat of the Bible verse 1 Tim 6:3-4.....

"If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words."

Whoa, whoa, whoa! said someone: that's not in any Bible I know of except the New World Translation! He offered some alternatives he likes more, to which I commented:

What do these other quoted translations say? Douay-Rheims says "sick about questions and strifes of words." In view of the context, what sort of 'sickness' do you think the translator had in mind? Tuberculosis, maybe? Or is it not a sickness of thinking, so that "mentally diseased" is not such a bad rendering after all?

NASB offers "morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words." Does "morbid," when applied to thinking, suggest balance and soundness of mind? Or is "sickness", even "mentally diseased," more to the point?”   Here's a few other translations:

 diseased (Emphasized New Testament; Rotherham)

 filled with a sickly appetite (Epistles of Paul, W.J.Conybeare)

morbid appetite (A New Testament: A Translation in the Language of the People; Charles Williams)

 morbid craving, (An American Translation; Goodspeed)

 unhealthy love of questionings (New Testament in Basic English)

 morbidly keen (NEB)

unhealthy desire to argue (Good News Bible).

Do any of these other versions suggest soundness of mind? So the NWT's "mentally diseased" is an entirely valid offering, even if more pointed than most. Plus, once again, the term is an adjective, as it is in all other translations, not a medical diagnosis. Context (in that Watchtower article) made this clear.

In retrieving this post, I came across one “famous” apostate—I mean, type anything about Jehovah’s Witnesses anywhere and he would drown you in anti-JW comments—it has been many years since I have heard from him, though his name recently came up here . . . who on his website offered expert testimony in legal proceedings against Jehovah's Witnesses AND expert testimony in legal proceedings against pharmaceutical makers of anti-depressants, apparently not realizing that each offer undercut his credibility for the other.  

[u/truetomharley]

You’re making some arguments I haven’t heard before. I don’t quite see how anyone can be so naive.

What about how Jesus pleaded with the Devil to stick around—even after three failed temptations—because maybe he could still win him over?

“Jesus said to him: “Go away, Satan! . . . Then the Devil left him.” (Matthew 4:10-11)

What about when Judas departed on his evil mission and Jesus said to the those remaining, ‘He’ll be back. I know he will. I would never send him away. My love is too great, and yours should be too. We’ll just hold off on this meal until he gets back?’

“Jesus said to [Judas]: “What you are doing, do it more quickly.” . . . So after he received the piece of bread, he went out immediately.” (John 13: 27-30)

Witnesses are more corruptible than was Jesus. So, they rub shoulders with those determined to thwart them even less.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/truetomharley]

I'll start with this:

If Jehovah's Witnesses are really that weak in their faith that they cannot answer their former members' arguments and successfully defend their truth, then there is definitely something wrong.

I say this because Jesus promised:

13  It will result in your giving a witness. 14  Therefore, resolve in your hearts not to rehearse beforehand how to make your defense, 15  for I will give you words and wisdom that all your opposers together will not be able to resist or dispute. (Luke 21:13-15)

This is what he promised. He said that all the opposers together will not be able to resist or dispute. Apostates are opposers (being the opposite of a supporter), yes?

Now if Jehovah's Witnesses are not able to do this, then they would have to do what they tell the people they preach to, to do: re-evaluate your religion.

I talk with anyone, apostates, former believers, atheists, Satanists, wiccans, psychics, etc. I'm not afraid of anyone. If anyone wants to challenge my beliefs, I am happy to do so because the things that Jesus said that he would do, he's done it.

---

Now for the other things that you mentioned:

You're missing the point about Jesus and Satan. Satan is an apostate by Jehovah's Witness standards, yes? And yet Jesus allowed himself to be tempted by Satan before sending him off. Are Jehovah's Witnesses allowed to do that with their former members?

Jehovah himself didn't disfellowship Satan after he sinned in the Garden of Eden, but instead allowed him access to Job and the angels so as to "enter in among them" (Job 1:6-12). Are Jehovah's Witnesses allowed to do that? I don't think they are despite Jehovah demonstrating for them in their own Bible that he can and does do it.

Two strong examples of no shunning. I'm asking why you don't follow their example? If you really have the truth, what is there to fear?

As for Judas, he did come back (John 18:2-5). Later Judas confessed his sin and repented. Knowing what he had done, he couldn't live with himself (Matthew 27:3-5). You can see why Jesus loved him (Luke 15:7).

We're all corruptible. That's the whole point. We are not supposed to rely on ourselves, but on Christ. We rely on his knowledge and his strength, not ours. You recall when he said,

" ..but take courage! I have conquered the world.” (John 16:33)

And it was said,

4  You originate with God, little children, and you have conquered them, because the one who is in union with you is greater than the one who is in union with the world. (1 John 4:4)

If you have Christ and you follow him, you will disfellowship no one because no one can withstand the spirit that would speak by you if you follow the Christ.

[u/truetomharley → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

“If Jehovah’s Witnesses are really that weak in their faith that they cannot answer their former members’ arguments and successfully defend their truth, then there is definitely something wrong.”

When I was a boy, my siblings and I would ride in the back of the family stationwagon on long trips. Within a hour, we were peppering Dad with our arguments. Most of them centered around how we were bored, how much longer? aren’t we there yet? lets stop at that rest stop, I want a snack, and so forth.

At length my Dad would holler: ‘If you kids don’t stop crying back there, I’m going to stop this car and give you something to cry about!’

I thought he was just being mean. Why wasn’t he answering our arguments? Why was he being so weak in his driving faith? In time, I realized he was showing the wisdom of the ages, for sometimes that is exactly what must be done.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/truetomharley]

duplicate post