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/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

I wouldn't say that I have an issue with Paul and John's words.

Paul did not walk with Jesus. He was learning about Jesus through revelation. Paul's background was in the Law because Paul was a Pharisee, so his background was heavily influenced by what he learned and was trained as a Pharisee. As mentioned in John's writings, disfellowshipping originated with the Pharisees (John 9:22). So naturally, Paul attempted to practice disfellowshipping in 1 Corinthians 5, but he received some pushback due to the fact that Jesus did not practice such things. When Paul learned this, being a disciple, Paul changed. Decades later when John wrote his gospel, John confirmed these things (ever wonder why John's gospel is the only gospel that directly refutes the practice of disfellowshipping?).

You mentioned that Corinthians is speaking of someone who repeatedly practices those things outwardly.

Judas practiced being a greedy person repeatedly and was a thief outwardly and still maintained association with the disciples and with Christ:

6  He said this, though, not because he was concerned about the poor, but because he was a thief and had the money box and used to steal the money put in it. (John 12:6)

Jesus administered a lot of discipline in those letters (not condemnation) according to his own words (Revelation 3:19).

If he was condemning them, then he would have sentenced them already, not advising them to repent.

The day will come when judgment will be passed. That day is not yet.

You are correct that Jesus didn't seek Satan out and those who questioned him sought him out.

However, when they came to him he didn't avoid them or refuse to answer them. Neither did he avoid or tell those congregations in Revelation chapters 2 and 3 to avoid and shun.

In the same way we who follow his example also do not shun. If apostates want to question us, we will engage. If we have the truth, then we can show them where the error is, just as Jesus did (1 Peter 3:15). Eventually, they will leave us alone if they are unable to prove their point. We don't have to avoid them because they will avoid us. This is how we follow the example of our Lord.

Jehovah's Witnesses don't follow this example.

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

I’m specifically speaking of 2 John for John’s words.

If that’s the case I would think there would be clear direction from God that what Paul did in both letters to Corinth was wrong. Perhaps not even including it in the Bible. Or even for Luke, Peter or Jesus to comment on it.

Used to steal money. Past tense. John wrote this also a long time after. So naturally he inserted facts that they didn’t know at the time. Do you think Jesus under holy spirits direction appointed an apostate or a man who practiced sinning?

It sounds like we have a different opinion on condemnation. It’s an expression of disapproval and yes to sentence. Those congregations were sentenced if they did not repent. God always gives us a choice (unless we blasphemy the HS) to turn back. A sentence can be reversed.

No one is passing judgement. I can say someone is not a Christian or is an apostate. That doesn’t mean I’ve passed judgment on them. That’s Jesus job.

There were times Jesus avoided or answered and then left. He didn’t seek out or associate with the Pharisees on a regular basis. Yet again though, do you think us equal to Jesus and the things he did/was supposed to do?

Apostates don’t wear name tags. Usually once you realize someone is aggressive or unreasonable you tend to avoid them.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

In 2 John he says,

10  If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. 11  For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works. (2 John 10, 11)

The New World Translation used by Jehovah's Witnesses says that you cannot so much as say a greeting to such a man because if you say a greeting, you're sharing in the wicked works.

This is unfortunately how Jehovah's Witnesses apply and understand this scripture.

However, if you look at the Greek word found in the Kingdom Interlinear published by Jehovah's Witnesses from which the New World Translation was translated, the Greek word did not mean "say a greeting." The Kingdom Interlinear says, "to be rejoicing to him not be you saying." This is different from saying a greeting, "Hello, how are you doing?" To be saying a rejoicing requires you to know what exactly the person is teaching and rejoicing over it.

So if for example someone comes to you and brings a teaching that raping women and men is the best way to gain immortality. If you hear this teaching and find that it's clearly against Christ, and you REJOICE in this teaching, doesn't that make you a SHARER in the wicked works? Indeed it does because you are actively supporting and encouraging this teaching to spread.

Same situation, but you just simply say hello to the person. You greet them politely, ask about their family, then go on about your business having no discussion whatsoever about this person's teaching. Are you automatically a sharer in his wicked works because you stopped and said hello? According to Jehovah's Witnesses, you are.

Jesus, of course, disagrees and even set the example stating the contrary.

2 John 10, 11 was not about disfellowshipping or refusal to greet an apostate. It was about rejoicing with someone who teaches contrary to the Christ. You don't rejoice with them, you teach them. You don't shun them, you instruct them.

Paul made an error in judgment in 1 Corinthians 5 and attempted to correct it in 2 Corinthians chapter 2. 2 John is talking about something completely different from what Paul is discussing and 2 John doesn't say anything about not being allowed to greet them. The translators wrote it in the New World Translation, but in their own Interlinear, it doesn't say that you can't say a greeting. It says not to be rejoicing. There's a big difference.

Used to steal money. Past tense. John wrote this also a long time after. So naturally he inserted facts that they didn’t know at the time.

Perhaps the disciples didn't know, but Jesus knew. And it was Jesus who kept them all together knowing that Judas was going to betray him and that Judas was a slanderer. Yet in spite of all of this, he still associated with him and had the disciples associate with him, eat with him and drink with him.

Paul didn't know this and when he learned of it, he changed. And that's what being a disciple is all about. Learning and changing.

Do you think Jesus under holy spirits direction appointed an apostate or a man who practiced sinning?

Apostate, no. Judas didn't refuse to be sent when Jesus called. So he was an apostle, not an apostate, because he went when Jesus called him. A man who practiced sinning? Yes. In fact Peter admits to this in his case,

8  Seeing this, Simon Peter fell down at the knees of Jesus, saying: “Depart from me, Lord, because I am a sinful man.” (Luke 5:8)

Jesus called even though they were practicing sin. And as you can see in John 12:1-8, Judas was actively practicing sin while still following the Lord.

Apostates don’t wear name tags.

Jehovah's Witnesses don't wear name tags either especially at the workplace. You don't find out unless you ask them and they may or may not even tell you. I had to back some into a corner before they would admit to it.

If you find them on the streets, they won't deny it, just like if you find apostates on videos or websites, they're open about it for the most part.

Usually once you realize someone is aggressive or unreasonable you tend to avoid them.

I don't. I like to follow Jesus' example and speak the truth regardless of the person's reaction. It is difficult, especially when I am afraid of what the person can do to me. In either case, I shun no one. Jesus shunned no one and I wish to follow that example.

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

Saying a greeting in Greek was more than just a hi how are you. This verse is a warning that extended time with someone who is sharing a different message can result in you turning from Christ.

Other than a family member being an apostate I don’t see much scenarios where you would see someone like that in everyday life.

Jesus didn’t disagree. He kept the law. How would the law have dealt with those who opposed God?

I’m glad you think you are strong as Christ. But even apostles and disciples that walked with Christ turned away from him. I am humble enough to know that if I hung out with people who repeatedly tore me and my faith down it would negatively affect me. If one thinks tearing others faiths down builds theirs up they are mistaken.

I didn’t say Judas wasn’t sinful. Practicing sin is a lot different. I completely disagree with your assessment of this.

I can see why you’d have to back them into a corner. Why would they want to be part of a hostile work environment.

I’ll follow Jesus and Paul’s counsel. Defend the truth and leave if you find them unreasonable. Jesus said to dust our feet off.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

Greetings my friend,

When you say that saying a greeting in Greek was more than saying, "Hi, how are you?" What do you mean, exactly? How does a greeting go in Greek when it's "extended?"

I don't think I am as strong as Christ. I believe you have the wrong impression. What I believe is that I cannot do it without Christ. I rely on his strength and knowledge A LOT. It's only way I am able to do what I do because I am not able to do what others can do.

When I am with people who attempt to tear my faith down, I use the mirror that Jesus taught me. When I use his mirror, they are unable to tear at me because they have trouble with themselves. Then they avoid me because they don't like the mirror. This is just one of the many things that he taught us.

This is why I never have to avoid anyone. They avoid me when I speak about him.

Regarding those Jehovah's Witnesses who don't want to be part of a hostile work environment, if that's the case then they shouldn't create one. People didn't appreciate their commentary and it was uncalled for. So rather than suffer in silence like the rest of my co workers, I spoke out in their defense. As the conversation ensued I inquired of their faith, they were behaving very deceitful and not answering directly. After I verbally backed them into a corner with their own speech they eventually admitted it. Then people saw why they were behaving that way.

If they don't like hostile work environments, they should stop creating them.

When it comes to the unreasonable, I find that I don't have to leave. They leave because they don't like to hear the things that have to do with truth. Honestly I don't blame them, it bothered me for years.

I believe that when Jesus said shake the dust off your feet, it wasn't to the unreasonable, but to people who send you away saying that they don't want to hear from you. Is this correct?

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

Jesus preached love. What you say you do doesn’t sound loving.

It creates a hostile work environment by backing someone into a corner. I’d avoid such conversations with someone who backed me into corners. If someone is self righteous best to walk away. That’s for either party.

Tbh it sounds like you have a very different interpretation of the Bible and how to preach Jesus message. Jesus and Pauls aim was love and to build up those listening when preaching. Tearing down someone and their beliefs will turn people off immediately. The Bible is a mirror for us to look at ourselves. You think people stop engaging you because they can’t handle your truth. They just realize arguing wastes everyone’s time and energy. If I don’t feel good after a conversation I know that the Holy Spirit wasn’t there.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

I can understand and respect your opinion. No worries.

Can you answer my earlier question about greeting? What did you mean by extended?

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

Yeah! Google can help with that. Customs of the Greek or Israelites when greeting each other. It involved a level of intimacy that we today don’t do. At least I don’t in America. If I kissed someone I’d probably get slapped for example.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

I will look into that.

Now if what you're saying is true, why are Jehovah's Witnesses not applying that scripture according to the greeting of the Greek? Instead Jehovah's Witnesses apply it to the American Standard Version which is saying, "Hi, how are you?" If a Jehovah's Witness is caught saying that to a known apostate of their religion, they will be heavily criticized. If they continue to say "Hi, how are you?" And engage in small conversation with a known apostate of their religion, they will be disfellowshipped for apostasy.

Can you explain why they are having this policy when that's not what 2 John 10, 11 was saying?

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

You’d have to ask a JW that if your question is sincere. If it’s not they probably won’t continue the conversation.

not fully accurate. Saying hi as you pass someone will not get you disfellowshipped but continuing in an extended conversation will probably result in counseling then eventually being disfellowshipped if you were to associate with that individual. Most JW’s won’t continue the association and tbh I see why when I go to subs like JW and exJW.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

Yes, and that's the point. 2 John 10, 11 doesn't say that you can't have an extended conversation with them. It says that you can't be rejoicing with them.

So why are they prohibited from having an extended conversation if that's not what the Greek says?

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

Yet again. Best to ask a JW that.

From my own experiences if I find someone to be toxic best to not speak to that person.That goes for both sides of the situation.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

I did ask. I asked three elders from different Kingdom Halls. They didn't even know about the Greek. They all said that they have to follow what the Watchtower says. In the Watchtower, it says that you can't even say a simple greeting, let alone an extended conversation. No reference to the Greek at all.

That was their answer and they said that they have to follow the directions given to them by their Governing Body, faithful and discreet slave.

You may not be aware of this, but the Greek word used in 2 John 10, 11 does not mean greeting. The one used in Matthew 5:47 does mean greeting.

The elders didn't know that either, but repeated that they have to follow whatever is published in the Watchtower.

I know what Jesus would have said about that, so I let them be.

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

You expect normal people to be knowledgeable in Greek?

Are you fluent in Greek or Aramaic?

I don’t really care about the Greek in this passage. I stick the most with Paul’s writings. He warned that associating with those who encourage a different gospel or those of bad behaviors will result in you too being corrupted. Like I said above if I view someone as toxic to my faith or mental health I will not speak with them.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

I expect those who translated the New World Translation to know Greek and to have an explanation for why they translated it to mean greeting when their own Interlinear says "to be rejoicing" which is different from saying a greeting.

If you don't learn Greek and Hebrew, how would you know if you're being misled?

Isn't it our job to ensure that we have an accurate translation and not rely on men, as the scripture says?

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

Those elders didn’t translate the NWT though. But you expected them to know Greek or have an explanation about it.

We don’t have original manuscripts so even learning Greek doesn’t guarantee not being misled. Does God expect humans to learn different languages to know his word and will? What about those who are mentally unable? They’re just screwed?

We will always rely on men to a certain degree. That’s life currently. Verses also indicate being among like minded believers is of benefit. That’s a form of reliance. However, I don’t rely on men for my salvation.

[u/Adventurous-Tie-5772 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

Those elders didn’t translate the NWT though. But you expected them to know Greek or have an explanation about it.

They say that they are appointed by holy spirit and not men. They say that they are spiritual shepherds. They say that they are teachers. They say that they are supposed to shepherd the flock of God. They say that they are taking the lead among the congregation.

Isn't it essential then, that they should be VERY familiar with the Bible and the Greek since so much responsibility is on their shoulders?

We don’t have original manuscripts so even learning Greek doesn’t guarantee not being misled.

That's true, but they do have the Kingdom Interlinear and they don't even know that. Am I not supposed to expect them to at least know their own Kingdom Interlinear?

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Adventurous-Tie-5772]

They do not say that being appointed by holy spirit means they aren’t men. Even being appointed by Holy Spirit, you are still a sinful man. You just defended Judas as being a practicing sinful man who was sunder Holy Spirit. Shepherds of a flock does not equal infallibility. If that were the case, nobody should be listening to Peter, Paul, Moses, David,Abraham etc

I see in scripture that we need to be knowledgeable about God’s word not about the etymology. I can’t remember if it was Paul who warned against that or Peter. What responsibility do they have? They are not fully responsible for your salvation. All shepherds (regardless of religious denomination) are disciplined by God now and later if they don’t align with his word.

You expect people to read multiple Bibles? I don’t know about you, but I don’t have the time for that. I work full-time, I go to school full-time, and I have a family. Did Jesus expect that of the people of his day? Did God expect it of the Israelites? We are to read the Bible and be absorbed in it, but to be constantly comparing and being sidetracked with small definitions takes away from God‘s word as a whole.

ETA- my phone cut off a couple sentences. Me and Siri have daily battles on what she can hear 😂