Who Really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave? And why did Jesus mention "everyone" in the parable?

[Juan Rivera]

On 12/26/2016 at 9:59 AM, JW Insider said:

In past discussions, the idea has been brought up that there is nothing wrong with identifying persons who will use their particular gifts or ministries to take the lead and to teach, and this is still appropriate in congregations of any size, including the "world-wide congregation" as long as that lead is not intended as a way of creating a kind of tribunal or to create governors of our faith. For practical reasons, to keep peace in a congregation, there is always a need for some to take the lead and some to serve as shepherds. In a teaching ministry such as we strive for among Jehovah's Witnesses, we would expect some to focus on making sure that we can speak in agreement by looking closely at our teaching. 

 

On 12/26/2016 at 3:10 PM, Anna said:

On 12/25/2016 at 5:57 PM, Witness said:

Suspicions confirmed.  

Mark 10:42-45; 9:33-37,42

 

 

 

 

I know. You've got to blame someone right?

@JW Insider I'm going thru all the comments on this thread but it will take me a while. My preliminary judgment is that I don't think "practical" covers the role and office of those taking the lead.

We all agree Jehovah , being omnipotent, could have done it in any way he saw fitting.  He could have set up His Congregation such that it had no hierarchy (brothers taking the lead), and each man was guided entirely by the holy spirit through his own reading of the Bible. But that seems entirely unfitting to human nature. As @TrueTomHarleyhas commented in some of his writings.  We are social/political beings by nature, and our nature is expressed in societies, as Aristotle explains in his Politics. From the family, to the local community, to the state. Just as marriage has a head of the home, and a company has one CEO, and our country has one president, it seems quite strange that for any other community hierarchy it's a necessity,  but not when it comes to Jehovah's family (the congregation).

@Anna In regards to the suspicions @Witness mentions, the Scriptures teach and speak of the importance of the strong helping the weak. That is the purpose of the hierarchy, that those who have God given authority, might serve those entrusted to them. The worldly (fallen) notion of authority is one of domination and tyranny, but that's not the way Jehovah has created hierarchy in the family, and in the Congregation. Of course a tyrant does not serve those whom he rules. But tyranny is an abuse of government, not it's proper use. The true ruler of any society serves that society through his leadership. Hence, when Jesus says that the Apostles should not “lord it over” them, as the Gentiles do, Jesus is not contrasting leadership in the Kingdom with the way leadership in the state should be (as though civic leaders should not serve those whom they lead). Jesus is instead contrasting leadership in the Kingdom with the way leadership in the state often is, tyrannical. 

Also, I don't see a contradiction between Christ being the head of the Congregation, and the Governing Body being the head of the Congregation, so long as we are very clear that the word ‘head’ is being used in two distinct senses. Christ or ultimately Jehovah, is the head of the Congregation, because He is the Congregation’s source, life, highest authority, and end. But the Governing Body is the representative of Christ, under His authority but acting in His authority as steward of the Congregation until Christ returns. So the Governing Body is the head of the Congregation in a different sense than Christ is the head of the Congregation. The Governing Body is subordinate to Christ. But Witnesses are subordinate to Christ by being subordinate to the Governing Body, as Jesus said, “Whoever listens to you listens to me. And whoever disregards you disregards me also. Moreover, whoever disregards me disregards also Him who sent me.”(Luke 10:16) If it were true that no one could speak for Christ without undermining Christ’s unique authority, this verse could not be in the Bible. This verse (along with others) shows how Christ’s delegation of authority in His Congregation does not undermine His unique authority, but allows others to participate in it, in a subordinate way.

 

[Juan Rivera]

On 12/26/2016 at 3:03 PM, Anna said:

I can understand why we thought that the evil slave came from the ranks of the faithful slave. At first glance the scripture does suggest that this could happen, so then when the schism came after Russell’s  death, that became a logical conclusion. And then with the apostasy in the early 80’s at Bethel, the scripture could be applicable again.  

I can also get the new understanding as per WT 2013. In fact, in my mind, it places even more responsibility on the GB/Slave as “His words here are actually a warning directed to the faithful and discreet slave”. For that reason I do not feel this “new” teaching is trying to somehow avoid the potential for suspicion or questioning the GB. In fact it is saying that theoretically it is possible, albeit not realistic. I know that sounds like an oxymoron, but if the whole of the GB/slave became apostate, that would defeat the purpose of the role Jesus assigned the GB/slave in the first place. Although of course if that did happen, Jesus would find a way around that. But why complicate things, instead, going back to what I mentioned earlier, it is a grave warning to the GB/Slave. I think that makes more sense.

I had a discussion with a Witness  in regards to your point and this is what he said:

When I first came into the truth, I believed that the organization would likely follow the pattern of Jehovah's people in the past and eventually apostatize, but through my study of and familiarity with the Bible, I came to understand that the modern congregation will not, in fact, apostatize.

The modern Christian congregation has been prophesied to exist at the time of Armageddon, thus, the organization will not apostatize. (Revelation 7:9, 10, 14, 15; 21:1-4) The organization may cease to exist as a legal body by decree of the nations, but as a people, we will not apostatize. When the anointed are taken from the Earth, those of us who remain will have the publications that have already been printed to rely upon so that we may continue to hold our faith united.

Then, in the thousand years, we will have the 144,000 kings and priests to help keep us in check. Though that is not to say that many will not be turned aside by their own bellies, (Romans 16:17, 18) but, for the most part, Jehovah's people will remain faithful, enough so that a great crowd survive Armageddon into the 1000 year reign. So we can be confident that the organization will never apostatize.

This is also in line with the prophecy about the modern organization which states, "Instead of the copper I will bring in gold, and instead of the iron I will bring in silver, instead of the wood, copper, and instead of the stones, iron; and I will appoint peace as your overseers and righteousness as your task assigners." (Isaiah 60:17) That seems pretty clear that we become more refined rather than apostatize.

The apostasy in the second century was foretold by Paul. (Acts 20:29, 30; 2 Thessalonians 2:6-8) There has been no such apostasy foretold regarding the last days. In fact, Jesus himself is to "do away with him at the manifestation of his presence." (2 Thessalonians 2:8) That is, he will completely annihilate all apostate religion at the tribulation. (Revelation 18:1-8) As I mentioned the legal entity of the organization may also be done away with at that time, but Jehovah's people as a whole will not be done away with as with all the other religions. We will endure the tribulation, but they will not.