I have read you site with interest for several years now and have also been a witness for over 20 years. I have become increasingly discouraged by the way the congregations continue to delve pharisaically deeper and deeper into the congregation’s personal lives namely in the areas of recreation, entertainment and family matters. Do you feel it is appropriate for the Christian congregation to regulate or comment on specific entertainment choices? Do you feel it is appropriate to restrict from "privileges of service" those who choose what some would be questionable entertainment i.e. R rated movies, violent video games ECT..?

The problem you describe varies in degree from congregation to congregation—but it is a problem that affects every congregation. Some congregations, of course, are more liberal and others are more conservative—depending on locale and the make-up of the body of elders.

But true Christianity is not a rule-laden religion. That's what we fail to realize. Each Christian is entrusted to train his own conscience to be able to discern between right and wrong in such trivial matters. At Romans 14:1, Paul advised the brothers to "Welcome the man having weaknesses in his faith, but not to make decisions on inward questionings."

The duty of the elders, who are assigned to watch over our souls, is to help us train our consciences, while not making inward decisions for us. Unfortunately, the elders often try to take short-cuts and legislate certain values and standards for everyone in areas that should be matters for each individual to decide. Then, there is a system of subtle coercion in place for those who do not comply with the artificial standards imposed, such as withholding privileges as you described.

Ironically, making judgments based upon official Hollywood movie ratings, for example, leads us to accept the world's standards of right and wrong, which would seem to defeat the purpose of using discrimination in such matters.

Looking at the big picture, though, the matter of petty Pharisaic tyranny is just one of many things that will go by the wayside when Jehovah turns the world and the organization upside down during the conclusion of the system. Our faith in God's Word leads us to believe that eventually Jehovah is going to provide men who really do serve as a hiding place from the wind. Right now we are all in training until the "winds" actually begin to blow.

Several of the essays on your site deal specifically with what many would consider the "politics" of the world, and yet we as Witnesses are told by the Watchtower not to have anything to do with politics. In addition, Witnesses are strongly discouraged by elders and CO's to get involved in discussions about politics. Is there a reason why you have chosen to openly discuss political issues and governmental changes on your site, and if so, What is it that you want your readers to take away from those essays and commentaries?

Secondly, are there examples in the Bible of Jehovah's loyal ones paying as close attention to the politics of the world as you seem to do, or keeping an eye on governmental changes as part of "staying awake" to the times?

And finally, does Jesus' statement at Luke 21:25-28 play a role in why you spend time in covering such topics as politics and governmental issues?

There is a common saying that there are two things people don't like to discuss—religion and politics. Yet, religion and politics are two of the most important issues that affect our lives. The Bible does not condemn discussing either. What the Bible does condemn is becoming part of the world.  We could become part of the world if we sought to become involved in politics or false religion. However, it is possible to discuss political issues, and even hold certain political views without advocating them in a political way. Jehovah's Witnesses discuss religious issues, right? For example, does our discussing the doctrine of the Trinity mean that we are promoting the false doctrine of the Trinity? Obviously not.

Take Jesus, for example. Did Christ discuss political issues? Well, consider the occasion when Jesus was questioned whether it was proper for the Jews to pay taxes to Caesar. We might think of Jesus' response merely in terms of a religious issue, but really, the question posed to him was politically charged. Jesus took a stance on a political issue in favor of supporting the Roman imperial system in place, through the paying of taxes imposed, while also giving Jehovah exclusive devotion.

As for biblical examples of servants of Jehovah paying close attention to political matters, as the questioner worded it, please remember that some of God's pre-Christian servants were actually political rulers. Joseph, for one, was the appointed Prime Minister of Egypt. Daniel was a deputy ruler in both the Babylonian and Persian governments. Esther was the Queen of Persia and Mordecai was also elevated to a high position in the Persian government. Of course, all of that changed with the coming of Christ, in that no Christian servant of God can legitimately hold a position in any government, or be a political advocate of any particular political party of this world and at the same time serve as an ambassador or emissary for the kingdom of God. Nevertheless, the ancient prophets of God issued prophecies that deal with very specific historical developments germane to the political world. If we are going to be in a position to interpret those prophecies, we have to have some insight into world history and political affairs.

Take God's prophetic denunciations of the Egyptian world power for instance. Through both Isaiah and Ezekiel, Jehovah speaks to specific political conditions that precipitate the fall of Pharaoh. For example, in the 19th chapter of Isaiah Jehovah foretells that Pharaoh's counselors become foolish and are taken in by a deception, and consequently, their faulty counsel leads directly to the downfall of the Egyptian world power. The span of verses at Isaiah 19:11-13 read: "The princes of Zoan are indeed foolish. As regards the wise ones of Pharaoh's counselors, their counsel is something unreasonable. How will you men say to Pharaoh: "I am the son of wise ones, the son of kings of ancient time"? Where, then, are they—the wise men of yours—that they may now tell you and that they may know what Jehovah of armies has counseled concerning Egypt? The princes of Zoan have acted foolishly, the princes of Noph have been deceived, the keymen of her tribes have caused Egypt to wander about."

Historically, it would seem that Nebuchadnezzar's conquest of Egypt was pretty straightforward. Yet, the scriptures indicate that Pharaoh's inept counselors were responsible for the nation's overthrow. What political ineptitudes may have led to Egypt's downfall may never be know. However, an examination of the prophecies directed against Egypt leads us to conclude that they apply primarily to the United States of America. (See essay: Doom of the Anglo-American Dyad) That being the case, unless we are content to allow God's prophetic Word to remain shrouded in mystery, we must consider how it is that the key-men of the American Republic have been deceived and become foolish. In order to do that it is necessary to examine the current political issues of the day having to do with globalism and nationalism and other related issues.

As for the third part of your question concerning Luke 21:25-28; where we read in part: "there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth anguish of nations, not knowing the way out because of the roaring of the sea and its agitation, while men become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken."

I am not sure if I follow your line of reasoning. The "anguish of nations" Christ foretold, and men becoming "faint out of fear," are future developments. No doubt, such a global calamity will come about due to the use of weapons of mass-destruction.

There are key political developments taking place even now, which have made the use of such weapons in the future more or less inevitable. For instance, the Bush administration's preemptive nuclear war policy is a reversal of the United States long-held policy that nuclear weapons will only be used defensively. So, in that respect the prophecy of Luke the 21st chapter does have a bearing on the focus of this watchman.

How do you know what are the qualifications or the standard to get to be one of the 144,000 anointed Christians, who will get to rule with Christ? In other words who are the anointed Christians as of now? Is there any way of knowing this?

There are no basic qualifications, other than a person has to know fundamental Bible truths. Other that that, the anointing depends entirely upon Jehovah's choosing. At Romans the 9th chapter Paul wrote: 'What shall we say, then? Is there injustice with God? Never may that become so! For he says to Moses: "I will have mercy upon whomever I do have mercy, and I will show compassion to whomever I do show compassion." So, then, it depends, not upon the one wishing nor upon the one running, but upon God, who has mercy.'

As for who the anointed are at this point, only they know for sure.  That's why Paul also wrote in the 8th chapter of Romans about an ultimate "revealing of the sons of God." Apparently at some point in the future, concurrent with the final sealing, Jehovah will provide some sort of miraculous manifestation in connection with each approved son and daughter—perhaps similar to the occasion when, immediately before he was martyred, Stephen's face shone like an angel's before his persecutors.

Has anything come of all the letters that you've written to the society? Has the society decided to take any "action" against you? The congregation? Are you still considered to be in "good standing"?

The NGO mailing campaign reached over 6,000 congregations in North America and every branch office in the world. Tens of thousands of online readers have also been presented with the open letter. So, there are many elders and others who have been exposed to the facts regarding the Watchtower's apostasy. What ultimately becomes of it remains to be seen.

As for any judicial action taken against me, no, there was none. I am still in good standing in the congregation. Apparently, the Watchtower's Legal department advised that they not take any judicial action unless I was spreading the NGO affair among the local publishers, which I wasn't and do not intend to.

If there truly are ones of the anointed, and even "regular folks" who have been wrongly disfellowshipped (of which I have no doubt), how is it then that we are still expected to ignore them or act as if we do not know them? Treat them as the society says the bible says to treat them?

In the 1st Century Jehovah allowed anointed persons to be abused by elders and others in the congregation. It has always been part of Jehovah's purpose to allow his servants to be tested in all respects, disciplined and refined.

Peter asked his fellow believers why they were puzzled at the "burning" among them, as though some strange thing had befallen them. Paul, too, apparently personally faced burning persecution directly from the "superfine apostles" in the Corinthian congregation. They evidently went so far as to call Paul before a judicial committee for some unspecified supposed sin. That is probably why Paul wrote at 1st Corinthians 4:3, saying: "Now to me it is a very trivial matter that I should be examined by you or by a human tribunal."

In 3rd John, the apostle wrote of a certain ambitious presiding elder, Diotrephes, by name, who threw brothers and sisters out of the congregation who accepted the apostles. Yet, it is apparent that God allowed such outrages to go on, primarily, we would assume, in order to provide certain of his people the privilege to demonstrate their integrity under persecution from fellow believers, so as to provide Jehovah with a complete answer to Satan's taunts.

I personally knew an anointed sister back in the 80's who was hounded out of the congregation by a particularly rabid elder. He slithered around building a case against her and then presided over the judicial committee that disfellowshipped her. However, in her case the Watchtower Society overturned the decision on appeal and the humiliated elder was forced to rescind her disfellowshipping.

But, whatever situation befalls us, we simply need to keep in mind that it is all apart of the larger theatrical spectacle being played out before angels and men. As for whether we chose to associate with an anointed person who has been disfellowshipped, that would be a personal matter. However, if a person did not do so discreetly then they too would be subject to disfellowshipping.

Is the use of hypnosis a bad thing to be used as a treatment for a problem or to resolve a smoking habit?