See Part 1, Part 2, Part 3

In this age of fierce independence, it will not be surprising to find that the sheepfold model described by Jesus is unp0pular. Many don’t want the shepherds to be shepherds. They want them to be guidance counselors encouraging the sheep to ‘be all that you can be.’ Such is not the shepherd’s job. His job is to shepherd.

It is not that the sheepfold model does not frustrate me sometimes. It does. But I do my best to work with it because it is Jesus’ model. The present GB are just doing their best to fulfill their role as the human shepherd. When the sheep start shaking at the wires and the shepherd nudges them back, I say, “Well, that is what you would expect the shepherd to do.”  When a sheep starts to act in a way that you would not expect a sheep to act and refuses to be tamed, I say, when the shepherd ejects it from the pen, ‘Well, that is what you would expect the shepherd to do.’ If the shepherd even reads a false positive of rebellion into a sheep, I say, ‘Well, doctors read false positives all the time. Let the sheep sit in the penalty box for a time and then it can get back in the game.’ Tough love is no more of a crime than is unconditional love.

Since the sheepfold model is Jesus model, and I accept that, it is not for me even to say what I sometimes find ‘frustrating’ about it. It is enough to sing the song, ‘You can’t always get what you want.’ However, sometimes Newton’s law enforces itself that an object in motion tends to stay in motion. At this point, I have been in motion for a few paragraphs. Probably the grumblers cited would not disagree with their remarks being rephrased as ‘The shepherd sure does nanny a lot.’ Can it backfire?

We all know that a great way to get someone to do something is to tell them they should not. It is just human nature. Are we “at war” with a certain element? Usually, the first thing done in war is reconnaissance of the enemy. Ought we not help out a brother when he’s gotten himself into a spot because “he shouldn’t be there?” We don’t say the same when our bull has fallen into a pit, nor when our child is playing in the street, nor when we are reading up on Elihu helping Job out of a jam. I get it that David wants to stay mum as all day long his enemies speak against him. I get it that Jesus says ‘wisdom will prove righteous by its works.’  But perusing any policy to the nth degree has its drawbacks, too. Analyzing enemy action in order to devise a response is a significant part of any war. It never seems to occur to anyone that doing so might benefit a soldier and not be like drinking poison.

Every virus wants to hijack the cell so as to spit out copies of itself. I do get the doctor trying to make those cell walls ironclad. But the body has an immune system too. That immune system may even be weakened if it does not have a thorough workout from time to time. It is all very well to avoid the toxic climate where harsh criticism prevails and forgiveness is unheard of—the very attributes that have ground the overall world to a standstill. It is all very well to cancel your subscription to the Sinai Gazette over its feature series (that they seem to have made into their mission statement) on Moses’ foreign wives. But the one who reads it through, getting madder and madder, and is forming a rebuttal on account of the Gibeonites who may read the story, might be doing something useful indeed.

If I get into nice chatty sessions with some lout who is intent on working ill, then I think I would be transgressing that Bible counsel to avoid those who stir up dissension: “Now I urge you, brothers, to keep your eye on those who create divisions and causes for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid them.” (Romans 16:17) But if the person says something derogatory and I know 100 new people will read it and possibly take it to heart, I do not feel in violation for once, succinctly, and with respect, pointing out what is wrong about the comment. To do otherwise just strikes me as cowardly, a violation of ‘always be ready to make a defense to anyone who demands a reason for your hope.’ I don’t do it for him but for whoever might be reading him. If the answer is nobody, or even just his buddies, I won’t do it. To avoid contact under any circumstances just strikes me as though the Witness attorney in court declining to cross-examine an apostate, for fear he will be saying a greeting to such a one.

It saps my desire to engage in the ministry if I can’t address what makes people resistant to it. It is like “withhold[ing] good from those to whom you should give it if it is within your power to help.” (Prov 3:27) It is almost a parallel to not speaking for fear your remark will bring reproach, whereas the abuser has already brought the reproach, and your speaking may do some good to readers who don’t know the truth of the matter. Often, it is not a matter of correcting a flat-out lie, but of supplying the context that changes everything. I do get it, though, that one ought do it with discretion and sparingly. It can get toxic, hypercritical on the one hand, juvenile on the other, as though adolescents mocking out teachers. Forgiveness is unheard of. As these are the very qualities that have made the overall world cease to function, nobody should be encouraged to do it, just not all but forbidden. Every virus seeks to hijack the cell and force it to spit out copies of itself. If apostates had their druthers, every JW would be hashing out their beefs 24/7.

to be continued: here

******  The bookstore