TrueTomHarley

Finally! Something that I can agree with Witness on—assuming that she does not throw good sense completely to the wind. (as she does in other areas)

YEAH!!!
The old hacks are wearing out, becoming far too tiresome!
Time for fresh malcontents!

I would never denigrate human rights. I like those things. Life is easier when they are respected. But I prefer the term Golden Rule. It preserves all that is noble about human rights while discarding all that is pretentious. 
We are too short-sighted to properly use our human rights. Plus, our own bodies do not respect them, so can they really be called “rights?” In his day, Ronald Reagan was arguably the most influential person on earth. Ten years later, in the throes of Alzheimer’s, he didn’t know who he was. In this case, obedience to Christ will one day remedy this assault on our human right to unlimited life, limb, and health. Clearly this is the human right to focus upon, as we practice the golden rule.
Still, “human rights” is the buzzword today, not “golden rule,” so that is the game that must be played. It doesn’t always translate into a plus.
I wrote up an example some time ago. Mormons had succeeded in a California ban on gay marriage. In 2010, the ban was overturned and the judge sited a famous JW case:
“The reference by Judge Walker to West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette will have the Watchtower Society scratching their heads. “How did we help those wicked sons and daughters of Sodom and Gomorrah?” they will be asking themselves.
“To which I replied: “No they will not.”
“Well....... “It was never the intention of the intolerant Witness religion to grant any freedom of expression outside their own narrow view,” he asserts.
“Nor was it their intention to restrict any other group from benefiting from legal precedent they’ve established,” I replied.”
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2010/09/proposition-8-mormons-jehovahs-witnesses-and-joel.html
Noble though the concept of human rights may be, the Bible doesn’t necessarily embrace them. Does it celebrate the human right of unlimited free speech? Sometimes it celebrates shutting people up:
“It is necessary to shut their mouths, because these very men keep on subverting entire households by teaching things they should not for the sake of dishonest gain.” (Titus 1:11)
I have no problem acknowledging “apostates” get some credit for this. I said so with regard to the May 2019 WT that reproach for CSA falls on the abuser, not the one who reports it.
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/02/the-reproach-of-child-sexual-abuse-falls-on-the-abu.html
Everything in life is action/reaction, and the constant efforts of some of them have served to highlight an injustice. Once people leave the Christian organization, it is easy to lose track of them, and these “whistleblowers,” if they want to be called that, did not allow that to happen. In fact, for ones who stayed true in all other areas, they might afterwards resume their place and forever draw satisfaction from what contribution they have made. 
They rarely do, however. One of the most striking things about “apostates” is that they eventually throw EVERYTHING away. The unique combination of positive traits and beliefs that identify Jehovah’s Witnesses and Jehovah’s Witnesses alone—they discard it all.
 

I would never denigrate human rights. I like those things. Life is easier when they are respected. But I prefer the term Golden Rule. It preserves all that is noble about human rights while discarding all that is pretentious. 
We are too short-sighted to properly use our human rights. Plus, our own bodies do not respect them, so can they really be called “rights?” In his day, Ronald Reagan was arguably the most influential person on earth. Ten years later, in the throes of Alzheimer’s, he didn’t know who he was. In this case, obedience to Christ will one day remedy this assault on our human right to unlimited life, limb, and health. Clearly this is the human right to focus upon, as we practice the golden rule.
Still, “human rights” is the buzzword today, not “golden rule,” so that is the game that must be played. It doesn’t always translate into a plus.
I wrote up an example some time ago. Mormons had succeeded in a California ban on gay marriage. In 2010, the ban was overturned and the judge sited a famous JW case:
“The reference by Judge Walker to West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette will have the Watchtower Society scratching their heads. “How did we help those wicked sons and daughters of Sodom and Gomorrah?” they will be asking themselves.
“To which I replied: “No they will not.”
“Well....... “It was never the intention of the intolerant Witness religion to grant any freedom of expression outside their own narrow view,” he asserts.
“Nor was it their intention to restrict any other group from benefiting from legal precedent they’ve established,” I replied.”
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2010/09/proposition-8-mormons-jehovahs-witnesses-and-joel.html
Noble though the concept of human rights may be, the Bible doesn’t necessarily embrace them. Does it celebrate the human right of unlimited free speech? Sometimes it celebrates shutting people up:
“It is necessary to shut their mouths, because these very men keep on subverting entire households by teaching things they should not for the sake of dishonest gain.” (Titus 1:11)
I have no problem acknowledging “apostates” get some credit for this. I said so with regard to the May 2019 WT that reproach for CSA falls on the abuser, not the one who reports it.
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/02/the-reproach-of-child-sexual-abuse-falls-on-the-abu.html
Everything in life is action/reaction, and the constant efforts of some of them have served to highlight an injustice. Once people leave the Christian organization, it is easy to lose track of them, and these “whistleblowers,” if they want to be called that, did not allow that to happen. In fact, for ones who stayed true in all other areas, they might afterwards resume their place and forever draw satisfaction from what contribution they have made. 
They rarely do, however. One of the most striking things about “apostates” is that they eventually throw EVERYTHING away. The unique combination of positive traits and beliefs that identify Jehovah’s Witnesses and Jehovah’s Witnesses alone—they discard it all.
 

That was intended. Also I believe the autism spectrum is very useful in helping to understand autism in its various forms. Math is also all the rage in schools today, but it doesn't mean we should reject it.
For those already suffering, it is much more practical to deal with symptoms. In the long run, yes, it is much more useful and revealing to put the emphasis on causes.
You might notice that I was just brainstorming about the various "levels" of benign and malignant apostasy so that we would think about the ways we judge others. I think it's revealing, and not necessarily in a bad way, that two persons can spout the same apostate views about the Bible or the Watchtower Society, and only one of them gets disfellowshipped. The other still says the same things but he will often get full association with his Witness family and relatives. I think it shows the desire to have a form of natural affection, which by definition is "natural." (2 Timothy 3:3). I think some of us are here are good Witnesses without many qualms at all about association (online at least) with those who have clearly apostasized.
On the "spectrum," so to speak, I actually spoke a lot about causes, and very little about the symptoms. Of course, I wasn't too specific about either, as I was just trying to come up with some sample categories to show just how the types can be all over the place, and sometimes our own treatment of persons, and the Society's treatment too, is necessarily inconsistent. 
And one of the points is that we have a personal responsibility to watch out for our spirituality, and can't just follow what others tell us to do in every case. Imagine the possibilities if some Witnesses showed a lot more love to persons in the @Witness household, who were not DF'd, and how this might result in a good Witness (no pun intended). Or imagine the possibilities if some Witnesses decided to associate with persons in the @Witness household without any concern to their own spirituality, and became "infected" with thought that resulted in doubt and a lack of faith. The point is that we are sometimes on our own, and must always be careful about anyone and anything that we associate with. Jesus associated with tax collectors, but we are also given a Biblical responsibility to treat some in the congregation as tax collectors, even some who might be called a brother.
Hard to say. Personally I think there is room for some individual conscience in a lot of areas that are currently matters of "legalism." This does not mean that anyone can expect to depend completely on their own conscience without appropriate counsel when it seems to affect their spirituality. But the GB have given a lot of thought to human rights, and have made a lot of progress in many nations of the world to defend right to assembly, right to our own religious practices, right to preach from door to door, right to "demand" blood alternatives, right to be seen as ministers, or as a legal religion.
To our long-term benefit, GB members have acknowledged human rights more and more in interviews about child abuse, child endangerment, education, corporal punishment (especially seen before judges in custody cases, presentations before the ARC, questions fielded by the "PR"/correspondence departments, etc). In a practical way, some of the practice hasn't caught up with the "human rights" rhetoric yet.

This has nothing to do with anything except it IS on the topic of the thread—mentally ill:
I just read a reference—and I have never heard the nickname before—to Kim Jung Mentally Il Un

The expression, I believe, is “fellowshopping.” They had disfellowshopped the old place out.

The expression, I believe, is “fellowshopping.” They had disfellowshopped the old place out.

Forgive me, but I cannot read this expression “apostasy spectrum” without thinking of the newfound “autism spectrum” that is all the rage today, as moderns try to come to grips with the fact that, for whatever reason, autism is off the charts today, and so they try to normalize it.
In both cases—apostasy spectrum and autism spectrum—is not the emphasis on what is actually the least helpful? Is not the emphasis on symptoms, whereas it would be both more useful and revealing were it on causes?
With autism, there is vehement disagreement as to causes. Some suggested causes are thought absolutely taboo to the established world view, and so it is symptoms that dominate the discussion. Symptoms are easier than causes to get one’s head around. You can argue till the cows come home about causes, but symptoms are straightforward. Easier to talk about symptoms, therefore, even if less valuable.
So we can talk about the “apostasy spectrum,” and it is all very nice—I do appreciate the insight and work that has gone into writing of it, but it is more helpful to speak of the causes—for there is where one might do something so as to not fall victim to incessant and even bitter complaining.
Most discussions on this forum about congregation discipline consider it from the standpoint of human rights. As such, I will concede that some of them make valid points. But they will never make too much headway with the GB, I think, because the latter are primarily concerned with, as Tom Henry puts it, “God’s rights.” That expression is a little off-base because he is God—his rights are anything he wants them to be, It is better to speak of “God’s requirements,” the way Witness publications do.
God’s requirements are that there should be a people for his name that is absolutely separate from the world—“no part of the world.” This concern of his almost never factors in to discussions here—almost always it is “human rights,” and the unspoken assumption is that if human rights are cared for, God’s rights will be. It is a humanist view that prevails, divorced from spiritual concerns. 
In fact, observing God’s requirements will ultimately work out best for even “human rights” but we do not necessarily recognize that because we are short-sighted. We want what we want now. We are like kids in the car incessantly whining, “Are we there yet?” and at last father whirls around and says, “If you kids don’t stop crying back there, I’m going to stop this car and give you something to cry about!”
No, I think there will be little fundamental change on disfellowshipping because the GB dares not neglect “God’s right’s” to a people for his name separated from the world. Disfellowshipping is the wall to keep alien views out. That is not to say it will not be tweaked, and it is being tweaked. The word itself is not used in congregation announcements for many years. Associating with a disfellowshipped family member, while it may trigger counsel and may exclude one from being viewed as “exemplary” and thus ineligible for congregation office, will not bring the same sanctions as associating with a non-family disfellowshipped person. The situation of those baptized when young is handled by simply cutting them a bit more slack when they err. 
Human rights will never be the driving factor in the Witness organization. God’s requirements will be the focus. The whole concept of human rights is a bit pretentious anyway. For someone to be said to have “rights,” ought you not be able to DO something about it if those rights are violated? Yet, violated “rights” are the norm in today’s world. Even “holding people accountable” and making them “take responsibility” do little to close the gap. They are more media talking points than there are substantial reality. They are too feeble to get all hopped up about.
And yet when we focus on disfellowshipping HERE, we are primarily obsessed with “human rights.”

“Bless you, my daughter.”
Lord, spare us from condescending people.

After you have done all these things, say, “We are good-for-nothing doormats. What we have done is what we ought to have done.”
I love the (actual) expression. When you do as you should, you don’t go strutting around with chest puffed out. You downplay your own role. It is somewhat like the verse used in last week’s Watchtower study: 
“by God’s undeserved kindness I am what I am. And his undeserved kindness to me was not in vain, but I labored more than all of them; yet it was not I, but the undeserved kindness of God that is with me.” (1 Corinthians 15:10) 
It is the same, really, as Jesus’s saying. The gift is not his, but God’s. Still, he will not waste it, but will put it to good use. Afterwards he will say, “I am a good-for-nothing slave. What I have done is only what I ought to have done.”
It is hyperbole. The Master doesn’t really consider us “good-for-nothing.” Jesus used hyperbole all the time. It was one of the tools in his teaching toolbox. It has the added advantage that those of common sense and humility instantly get the point, and those without those fine qualities do not—they are more inclined to harp on the Lord thinking his people “good-for-nothing” and how that violates their human rights.
Sometimes I even think Trump’s tweets, with their numerous spelling errors, may—probably inadvertently, be taking a page from this playbook. Maybe they are just his form of “hyperbole.” When he tweets that North Korea has launched all its nuclear missels, people of common sense will run for the hills. People without that quality will run to their keyboards to point out that the idiot can’t even spell the word right.

“Bless you, my daughter.”
Lord, spare us from condescending people.

Forgive me, but I cannot read this expression “apostasy spectrum” without thinking of the newfound “autism spectrum” that is all the rage today, as moderns try to come to grips with the fact that, for whatever reason, autism is off the charts today, and so they try to normalize it.
In both cases—apostasy spectrum and autism spectrum—is not the emphasis on what is actually the least helpful? Is not the emphasis on symptoms, whereas it would be both more useful and revealing were it on causes?
With autism, there is vehement disagreement as to causes. Some suggested causes are thought absolutely taboo to the established world view, and so it is symptoms that dominate the discussion. Symptoms are easier than causes to get one’s head around. You can argue till the cows come home about causes, but symptoms are straightforward. Easier to talk about symptoms, therefore, even if less valuable.
So we can talk about the “apostasy spectrum,” and it is all very nice—I do appreciate the insight and work that has gone into writing of it, but it is more helpful to speak of the causes—for there is where one might do something so as to not fall victim to incessant and even bitter complaining.
Most discussions on this forum about congregation discipline consider it from the standpoint of human rights. As such, I will concede that some of them make valid points. But they will never make too much headway with the GB, I think, because the latter are primarily concerned with, as Tom Henry puts it, “God’s rights.” That expression is a little off-base because he is God—his rights are anything he wants them to be, It is better to speak of “God’s requirements,” the way Witness publications do.
God’s requirements are that there should be a people for his name that is absolutely separate from the world—“no part of the world.” This concern of his almost never factors in to discussions here—almost always it is “human rights,” and the unspoken assumption is that if human rights are cared for, God’s rights will be. It is a humanist view that prevails, divorced from spiritual concerns. 
In fact, observing God’s requirements will ultimately work out best for even “human rights” but we do not necessarily recognize that because we are short-sighted. We want what we want now. We are like kids in the car incessantly whining, “Are we there yet?” and at last father whirls around and says, “If you kids don’t stop crying back there, I’m going to stop this car and give you something to cry about!”
No, I think there will be little fundamental change on disfellowshipping because the GB dares not neglect “God’s right’s” to a people for his name separated from the world. Disfellowshipping is the wall to keep alien views out. That is not to say it will not be tweaked, and it is being tweaked. The word itself is not used in congregation announcements for many years. Associating with a disfellowshipped family member, while it may trigger counsel and may exclude one from being viewed as “exemplary” and thus ineligible for congregation office, will not bring the same sanctions as associating with a non-family disfellowshipped person. The situation of those baptized when young is handled by simply cutting them a bit more slack when they err. 
Human rights will never be the driving factor in the Witness organization. God’s requirements will be the focus. The whole concept of human rights is a bit pretentious anyway. For someone to be said to have “rights,” ought you not be able to DO something about it if those rights are violated? Yet, violated “rights” are the norm in today’s world. Even “holding people accountable” and making them “take responsibility” do little to close the gap. They are more media talking points than there are substantial reality. They are too feeble to get all hopped up about.
And yet when we focus on disfellowshipping HERE, we are primarily obsessed with “human rights.”

According to the Book, those who go there are to “rule.”
with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.” (Revelation 5:10) 
It is a meaningful verse to me. It shows the purpose of the heavenly hope. It shows the silliness of all persons thinking they are going there.
Well—maybe they just want the perks, not unlike the hordes in government today.

You call yourself astute?
If you would use the head God gave you and focus, you would note that one GB member is eating a lot to be big as an elephant, one is stretching his neck like a giraffe, another growing stripes like a zebra, yet another shrieks like a macaw, and so forth. 
Look, everyone knows this. Why do you come to the table so ill-equipped in knowledge?
”My, what wolflike teeth you have, grandma”
”All the better to control you with, my dear.”

There should be Kingdom Halls on every street corner, like gas stations, only more so.

You call yourself astute?
If you would use the head God gave you and focus, you would note that one GB member is eating a lot to be big as an elephant, one is stretching his neck like a giraffe, another growing stripes like a zebra, yet another shrieks like a macaw, and so forth. 
Look, everyone knows this. Why do you come to the table so ill-equipped in knowledge?
”My, what wolflike teeth you have, grandma”
”All the better to control you with, my dear.”

There should be Kingdom Halls on every street corner, like gas stations, only more so.

Hi, there are only a few JWs who believe so - unlike millions - almost 1 Billion Christian's on earth in various denominations whom ALL think they are going to heaven to be with jesus to rule over whom? 

"Better use of dedicated funds" is a phrase I hear frequently. Isn't that more appropriate? "Saving" money implies hoarding it up somewhere. I think we are more in the business of using resources aren't we?. Compare Matt.25:24-27 😊

There are actually two men whose name is a type of tree. Both are pseudonyms, the specific trees are different, and one was chosen as a tribute for the other. I think the two have been confused with one another here.
Tree 1 has the hatred for the elders,  but not to my knowledge, any unpleasant family history. Tree 2, the one named in honor of Tree 1, is the one with the dysfunctional family history. I don’t quite remember the specifics, but I don’t think it was anything wildly shocking—perhaps an authoritarian father on his wife’s side, or step father—something like that.
Tree 1 is the one who banned me from his website. Never from Twitter, where I did answer him a few times, and he was without exception (once he discovered that his initial hope that I was about to jump ship was wrong) insulting, taunting, and ridiculing.
Tree 2 blocked me from the moment I first responded—not disrespectfully (though also not half-heartedly)—to his article that was published in a major magazine.
References to both are in “TrueTom vs the Apostates!”
Tree 1: https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/are-we-looking-at-encouragement-to-commit-insurance-fraud-part-2.html
Tree 2:  https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/04/he-has-blocked-me-i-think-that-says-it-all.html
I have a different type of a tree in my front yard—a ginkgo tree. It is one of the few (perhaps only) deciduous trees that come in male and female variety. The male tree is fine. The female stinks in the fall. 
“The sarcotesta [fallen ginko tree fruit] has a strong smell that most people find unpleasant.” - Wikipedia
We call ours a ****ball tree. People think that is crude, but then they stop by for a whiff and wonder what took us so long to name it.
Otherwise, it’s an outwardly beautiful tree.
Why it is MY tree and not one of THEIRS I’ll never know.
 

There are actually two men whose name is a type of tree. Both are pseudonyms, the specific trees are different, and one was chosen as a tribute for the other. I think the two have been confused with one another here.
Tree 1 has the hatred for the elders,  but not to my knowledge, any unpleasant family history. Tree 2, the one named in honor of Tree 1, is the one with the dysfunctional family history. I don’t quite remember the specifics, but I don’t think it was anything wildly shocking—perhaps an authoritarian father on his wife’s side, or step father—something like that.
Tree 1 is the one who banned me from his website. Never from Twitter, where I did answer him a few times, and he was without exception (once he discovered that his initial hope that I was about to jump ship was wrong) insulting, taunting, and ridiculing.
Tree 2 blocked me from the moment I first responded—not disrespectfully (though also not half-heartedly)—to his article that was published in a major magazine.
References to both are in “TrueTom vs the Apostates!”
Tree 1: https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/are-we-looking-at-encouragement-to-commit-insurance-fraud-part-2.html
Tree 2:  https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/04/he-has-blocked-me-i-think-that-says-it-all.html
I have a different type of a tree in my front yard—a ginkgo tree. It is one of the few (perhaps only) deciduous trees that come in male and female variety. The male tree is fine. The female stinks in the fall. 
“The sarcotesta [fallen ginko tree fruit] has a strong smell that most people find unpleasant.” - Wikipedia
We call ours a ****ball tree. People think that is crude, but then they stop by for a whiff and wonder what took us so long to name it.
Otherwise, it’s an outwardly beautiful tree.
Why it is MY tree and not one of THEIRS I’ll never know.
 

There are actually two men whose name is a type of tree. Both are pseudonyms, the specific trees are different, and one was chosen as a tribute for the other. I think the two have been confused with one another here.
Tree 1 has the hatred for the elders,  but not to my knowledge, any unpleasant family history. Tree 2, the one named in honor of Tree 1, is the one with the dysfunctional family history. I don’t quite remember the specifics, but I don’t think it was anything wildly shocking—perhaps an authoritarian father on his wife’s side, or step father—something like that.
Tree 1 is the one who banned me from his website. Never from Twitter, where I did answer him a few times, and he was without exception (once he discovered that his initial hope that I was about to jump ship was wrong) insulting, taunting, and ridiculing.
Tree 2 blocked me from the moment I first responded—not disrespectfully (though also not half-heartedly)—to his article that was published in a major magazine.
References to both are in “TrueTom vs the Apostates!”
Tree 1: https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/are-we-looking-at-encouragement-to-commit-insurance-fraud-part-2.html
Tree 2:  https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/04/he-has-blocked-me-i-think-that-says-it-all.html
I have a different type of a tree in my front yard—a ginkgo tree. It is one of the few (perhaps only) deciduous trees that come in male and female variety. The male tree is fine. The female stinks in the fall. 
“The sarcotesta [fallen ginko tree fruit] has a strong smell that most people find unpleasant.” - Wikipedia
We call ours a ****ball tree. People think that is crude, but then they stop by for a whiff and wonder what took us so long to name it.
Otherwise, it’s an outwardly beautiful tree.
Why it is MY tree and not one of THEIRS I’ll never know.
 

There are actually two men whose name is a type of tree. Both are pseudonyms, the specific trees are different, and one was chosen as a tribute for the other. I think the two have been confused with one another here.
Tree 1 has the hatred for the elders,  but not to my knowledge, any unpleasant family history. Tree 2, the one named in honor of Tree 1, is the one with the dysfunctional family history. I don’t quite remember the specifics, but I don’t think it was anything wildly shocking—perhaps an authoritarian father on his wife’s side, or step father—something like that.
Tree 1 is the one who banned me from his website. Never from Twitter, where I did answer him a few times, and he was without exception (once he discovered that his initial hope that I was about to jump ship was wrong) insulting, taunting, and ridiculing.
Tree 2 blocked me from the moment I first responded—not disrespectfully (though also not half-heartedly)—to his article that was published in a major magazine.
References to both are in “TrueTom vs the Apostates!”
Tree 1: https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/are-we-looking-at-encouragement-to-commit-insurance-fraud-part-2.html
Tree 2:  https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/04/he-has-blocked-me-i-think-that-says-it-all.html
I have a different type of a tree in my front yard—a ginkgo tree. It is one of the few (perhaps only) deciduous trees that come in male and female variety. The male tree is fine. The female stinks in the fall. 
“The sarcotesta [fallen ginko tree fruit] has a strong smell that most people find unpleasant.” - Wikipedia
We call ours a ****ball tree. People think that is crude, but then they stop by for a whiff and wonder what took us so long to name it.
Otherwise, it’s an outwardly beautiful tree.
Why it is MY tree and not one of THEIRS I’ll never know.
 

This requirement is in harmony with a suggestion from Ronald J Sider in his book, “The Scandal of the Evangelical Concience” in which he explores the question: “Why are Christians living just like the rest of the world?” Their conduct is so shocking that it should “drive us to our knees in repentance,” he says.
The specific remedy that he offered was: “Make it harder to join.” So he does not agree that just saying you have a personal relationship with Christ is enough. 
This is just one of four proposed remedies he offered. As it turns out, Jehovah’s Witnesses employ them all. And yes, they do go a long way in cleaning up the mess of words not matching deeds that afflicts the evangelical world. I wrote about it here:
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2007/12/four-suggestion.html