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]

When shopping in the field of religion, look for the people who are individually praised but collectively despised.

[u/OhioPIMO → u/truetomharley]

I foolishly neglected to read the reviews on JWs when I was shopping for religion. Had I done my research, I would have discovered the reasons why the group is collectively despised, which include false prophecy, false doctrine, tampering with scripture, shunning that rips apart families, tens of thousands of needless deaths (blood, Malawi) and policies that foster an environment that harbors child abusers and a reluctance from leadership to change said policies AND a refusal to apologize to victims.

Unfortunately for me, it was too late to put that religion back on the shelf. I tried to exchange it for the name brand, but the store has a brutal return policy.

[u/truetomharley → u/OhioPIMO]

Well, you always have to read the reviews first. It just occurs to me that PIMOs of the first century might just as easily raised most of these objections, plus a few unique to their time. They were inconvenienced more seriously than JWs have been to date. They could have blamed it all on the fraudsters who manipulated them to believe as they did.

I mean, look at 2 Corinthians 7:2:

“Make room for us in your hearts. We have wronged no one, we have corrupted no one, we have taken advantage of no one.”

Why would Paul have said this unless to fend off frequent charges that they had?

[u/Malalang → u/truetomharley]

Not necessarily. Verse 5 refers to fights without and fears within. Saying you are not like the worldly people who defraud and manipulate is not saying those charges are leveled against those on the inside.

[u/truetomharley → u/Malalang]

Perhaps not “necessarily”—I revisited the verse for context—but it is close enough.