Jump to content
The World News Media

How are we to understand the GB/Slave interpreting scripture, as the sole chanel, and at the same time accept that they can err?


Anna

Recommended Posts

  • Member
8 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

And as for the GB being leaders, i would say they are more like Dictators. 

Jesus knew it was coming.

Now there was also a dispute among them, as to which of them should be considered the greatest. 25 And He said to them, “The kings (elder body) of the Gentiles (those not anointed) exercise lordship over them, and those who exercise authority over them are called ‘benefactors.’ (GB)  26 But not so among you; on the contrary, he who is greatest among you, let him be as the younger, and he who governs as he who serves. 27 For who is greater, he who sits at the table, or he who serves? Is it not he who sits at the table? Yet I am among you as the One who serves.  Luke 22:24-27

They are called "benefactors"

"Benefactors" - A title of honor, conferred on such as had done their country service, and upon princes, equivalent to Soter, Pater Patriae. ("Father of the Country")

 I believe JWs will agree that the GB/"faithful and discreet slave" has done their "country service"; yet totally blind to their true identity as "dictators".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 16.3k
  • Replies 294
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Most Witnesses obviously want to live peaceful Christian lives and conduct ourselves in a way that pleases Jehovah God and Jesus Christ. None of us really want the job of being responsible to take a s

Hi Anna! Sorry for the delay in response. I am a little bit confused what you mean about complete obedience being in the minds of only some Witnesses. The Governing Body spells it out in their literat

Who is more loyal? This is a real conversation I had with a brother. He insisted I should follow some instructions in our congregation. I agreed but I also mentioned this arrangement was silly. T

Posted Images

  • Member
2 hours ago, JW Insider said:
  • (1950's-2013) The GB, especially since 1919, acts for and in expression of the FDS, which has included all the anointed since 33 CE., but which has been appointed over all Christ's belongings since 1919.
  • (2013-present) The GB, since 1919, is now the same thing as the FDS, which no longer includes all the anointed, but only the GB, and has only been appointed since 1919, but will not be appointed over all Christ's belongings until a future time when all of the anointed are in heaven.

With the above as the basis, we can now begin to see an issue with the explanation.

  • After arriving in 1914, Jesus was supposed to have appointed the GB as the FDS in 1919.

But the original parable is about Jesus appointing the FDS and then departing for an unknown amount of time.

  • If Jesus arrived in 1914, and appointed the FDS in 1919, then when did he depart?  Where did he depart to?

For a time, after 1916, Rutherford got very quiet about the 40 years of harvest running from 1874 to 1914, and, in fact, he changed those 40 years, and made them run from 1878 to 1918.  At the time, recall, 1914 was still considered an embarrassing, failed expectation. It had not yet been tied to any invisible presence [still 1874] or the start of Christ's Kingdom [still 1878], or the casting down of Satan. And the "first resurrection" was not yet tied to 1918; it was still 1881. So Rutherford would soon begin to speak of Jesus having "arrived" in 1918 for the inspection and cleansing of the Temple. In spite of a great European War in 1914, it was pretty clear to Rutherford that nothing Biblically significant had happened in 1914. That was supposed to be the final VISIBLE manifestation of an invisible presence that started 40 years earlier. After inspection, 1919 would be the new fresh start. In the early 1920's, Rutherford reaffirmed the chronology, including 1874, 1878, 1881, and 1914 in preparation for the sureness of his 1925 prediction. But he also said that there was more proof for 1925 than there had been for 1914.

So now we move onto the details. Luke says there are four classes of slave:

  • Faithful and Discreet who will be appointed over all belongings on the Master's arrival
  • Unfaithful Slave who will be beaten with greatest severity
  • Understanding Slave who didn't get ready and is beaten with many strokes
  • Misunderstanding Slave who gets beaten with few strokes.

This of course matches the parable of the talents where a master makes appointments to various servants, and a NWT cross-reference points us to Matthew 25:

(Matthew 25:14-30) . . .“For it is just like a man about to travel abroad who summoned his slaves and entrusted his belongings to them. 15 He gave five talents to one, two to another, and one to still another, to each according to his own ability, and he went abroad. . . . 19 “After a long time, the master of those slaves came and settled accounts with them. 20 So the one who had received the five talents came forward and brought five additional talents, . . . 21 His master said to him: ‘Well done, good and faithful slave! You were faithful over a few things. I will appoint you over many things. Enter into the joy of your master.’ 22 Next the one who had received the two talents . . . 23 His master said to him: ‘Well done, good and faithful slave! You were faithful over a few things. I will appoint you over many things. Enter into the joy of your master.’ 24 “Finally the slave who had received the one talent . . . In reply his master said to him: ‘Wicked and sluggish slave, . . . 29 For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance. But the one who does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. 30 And throw the good-for-nothing slave out into the darkness outside.. . .

It ends with an idea similar to the way Luke ends the parable of the faithful and wise steward:

(Luke 12:48) . . .Indeed, everyone to whom much was given, much will be demanded of him, and the one who was put in charge of much will have more than usual demanded of him.

In fact, we have a situation in several parables (marriage feast, where the idea is always that the Master makes an appointment over some of his belongings to his servants, and then the master departs to travel abroad, and then the master returns (at a time they didn't expect) and the Master judges those slaves.

Another short one is in Mark (the doorkeeper), where Jesus gives authority to his slaves, to each one his work.

(Mark 13:34) It is like a man traveling abroad who left his house and gave the authority to his slaves, to each one his work, and commanded the doorkeeper to keep on the watch. 35 Keep on the watch, therefore, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming, whether late in the day or at midnight or before dawn or early in the morning, 36 in order that when he comes suddenly, he does not find you sleeping.

Back when Jesus departed in 33 to travel abroad, these parables made more sense. After all he assigned persons like Peter to "feed his little sheep" in 33 CE and then departed. He then returned in 1914 or 1918 for an inspection (of the Temple) and judged a group as ready for a greater assignment. But now Jesus arrives in 1914, to makes an assignment, but remains present to arrive later to make a judgment and greater appointments over all his belongings. Obviously the whole thing was turned into a mess in order to twist 1914 and 1919 into the mix, but it doesn't work anymore, because Jesus never departs after making the assignments.

And of course, in the Watchtower version, we have now eliminated the evil slave as a non-existent hypothetical, even though Jesus always considered two three or four or even more slaves, each one according to his work. The Watchtower avoids Luke's version altogether because it might require thinking about who is represented by the non-existent hypothetical second slave who gets punished severely, and the third non-existent hypothetical slave who gets many strokes, and the fourth non-existent hypothetical slave that gets few strokes.

But here's the most indiscreet part:

No one is declared the "faithful and wise servant" until after that judgment by Jesus. None of them were supposed to presumptuously claim that they were already to be identified as that slave and that any chance of becoming evil or punished is only hypothetical or non-existent. It's up to Jesus to make that judgment when he returns.

And of course this points up another major flaw when we claim that this final judgment as faithful results in appointment over all his belongings. At this point, the Watchtower explains that we are no longer talking about the FDS anymore, but the time when ALL the anointed, the GB along with the other 143,966 anointed, are equally appointed over all his belongings at the same time. (With no concern over who those other classes of faithful, less faithful, and unfaithful servants might have been.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
36 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

What are you suggesting, these men have NO desire to do God’s work? They have NO desire to obey God? You think the GB aren’t worthy because society has made it harder for them to concentrate solely of spiritual matters rather than be dragged in to social conflicts? We are supposed to be supportive and uplifting to them. Where’s the faith on that? Doesn’t scripture mention that as well?

Quite the opposite. I stated that I think the GB have a desire to do God's work and to obey God, and that they are worthy of double honor (especially as they work hard in speaking and teaching). They have reached out for the office of overseer, and as the scripture I quoted states, they are therefore desirous of a fine work. This is their goal, as I stated:

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But I think we have excellent reasons to accept the current Governing Body members as qualified overseers, and they therefore deserve respect, double honor, deference, benefit of the doubt, and our willingness to follow their leading example, and, as we see how their conduct works out, to imitate their faith.

Somehow you decided that this means they are not worthy?

My concern was that a few of these men, evidently, have also succumbed to some ideas, based on doctrinal traditions that have been handed down to us since at least Rutherford's time. Those traditions include trying to maneuver 1914 into Jesus' parables even when it becomes clear that it won't work. They have therefore cornered themselves into making a declaration of their own righteousness and faithfulness in a presumptuous manner rather than faithfully and discreetly waiting upon Jesus to make that judgment.

This is just a false step that our brothers have taken, presumably before they were aware of it. Many Witnesses have noticed this. I would assume that thousands have noticed this and are therefore concerned. In fact, I now think that the GB themselves are aware of this doctrinal conundrum and have begun trying to extricate themselves. The first step is admitting that it is presumptuous to declare a specific group or class as Jehovah's "sole channel." Then admitting that many of the doctrines through the years have been false, and that even current doctrines and procedures are subject to error.  And if we are aware of a false step, our responsibility is to say something.

*** od p. 193 Part 2 Jehovah’s Righteous Requirements ***
25. In addition to confessing his own sins, each person has what responsibility regarding serious wrongdoing by others that could threaten the spiritual or moral cleanness of the congregation?
“If someone sins because he has heard a public call to testify and he is a witness or has seen or learned about it and he does not report it, then he will answer for his error.”—Lev. 5:1.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I see no evidence that the Governing Body is trying to "extricate" themselves from the 100 and more years of failed false prophesy, and all the arrogant presumptuousness that accompanies their brazen self-aggrandizement,

I think, JWI that your considered assessment is a hopeful fantasy ... until they openly and completely and unambiguously make a full and public written apology for all the harm they have caused over the last at least 60 years with their arrogant and transparent manipulations for the sake of power and money, and real estate.

.... and put into effect policies and procedures for it not to happen .... again, and again, and again, and again, as we have watched for half a century.

.... and fer crying out loud .... throw those atrocious "Telly Awards" in the trash.

Nothing is more embarrassing than watching a con-man that is not good at it....

... and get those Caleb and Sophia dolls out of Tight Pants Tony's Office!

2019-07-02_000629.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

  First of all, there is nothing to disagree with on any of those questions because the answer is given only with Scripture, not interpretation of those Scriptures.

Sorry but I will have to disagree with you there since the question itself points to the interpretation doesn’t it?

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Not one of the questions mentions "the generation," nor 1914, nor 1919, nor 1922, nor the United Nations, nor the "great crowd," nor the "other sheep," nor the "anointed," nor the meaning of at least a thousand different prophetic interpretations.

You are right. Perhaps this might be a clue that these subjects are not as important as some might suggest. They definitely are not included in the section "elementary Bible teachings" which form the first part of the questions, but some are mentioned elsewhere in the book, such as the anointed and other sheep.  I  know for sure @James Thomas Rook Jr. only agrees with about 15% of the interpretations made by the GB and yet he remains a part of the congregation as far as I am aware.

I realize it seems like I am contradicting myself since I said that one " should have all those "own opinions on scripture" cleared up, otherwise one wouldn't get baptized as one of JW since one of the requirements is to agree with all 100 questions asked in the "organized book", but I did not necessarily mean these questions are about specific doctrine which one has to agree with, but rather that one agrees with the fundamental teachings and recognizes Jehovah's Witnesses as the true religion, which would take care of "own opinion on certain scriptures". All this of course could be covered under the umbrella that we recognize the GB/FDS as dispensing spiritual food therefor whatever it dispenses we agree with as the truth....well..... truth at the time o.O. This is basically goes back to the header topic I raised.

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

*** od pp. 201-202 Part 3 Jehovah’s Arrangement of Things ***
12. What is the Governing Body of the Christian congregation, and what role does it fill today?
“Some men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers: ‘Unless you get circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.’ But after quite a bit of dissension and disputing by Paul and Barnabas with them, it was arranged for Paul, Barnabas, and some of the others to go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem regarding this issue.”—Acts 15:1, 2.
“As they traveled on through the cities, they would deliver to them for observance the decrees that had been decided on by the apostles and the elders who were in Jerusalem. Then, indeed, the congregations continued to be made firm in the faith and to increase in number day by day.”—Acts 16:4, 5.
“Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? Happy is that slave if his master on coming finds him doing so! Truly I say to you, he will appoint him over all his belongings.”—Matt. 24:45-47.

Of course when I was going through the questions in the 80’s there was no mention of the  FDS applying exclusively to the GB. We know this has been a recent change as is evident in the 2015 version of the book.

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

If anyone had studied the verses in Matt 24:45-47 carefully, along with the Watchtower's explanation, I would think it should have been obvious to them that the Governing Body cannot currently claim to be that faithful slave of Matt 24:45. So the question itself, when applied to the Scripture, would only go so far as to indicate that the Governing Body, like all good Christians, would only HOPE they are faithfully participating in fulfilling a role of a faithful and discreet slave. 

Perhaps this will be something that will be re-worded one day.  However, it applying to all Christians has it's draw back, since how can all Christians be made masters of Christ's belongings? I suppose this is another subject.

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

The reason, of course, has already been explained, but I'm always willing to explain again.

If you can explain it concisely I would be happy 😃

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
38 minutes ago, Anna said:

I  know for sure @James Thomas Rook Jr. only agrees with about 15% of the interpretations made by the GB and yet he remains a part of the congregation as far as I am aware.

Yeah ... I don't expect much from people, and less from people getting free money.

What they do or do not do does not affect the TRUTH, that I could not have learned anywhere else, and has been a blessing to me my whole life .... keeping me out of the hospital, prison, and the graveyard. Knowing the TRUTH has set me free, and KEPT me free.

..but I can completely do without Caleb and Sophia, and nutso stuff like the "overlapping generations", which is so transparently completely fake, and completely contrary to ANYTHING Jesus taught.

..... ad 85 percentum.

Manufactured Theology .jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

 @Anna  So here you do go back on your word, well as you spoke it to me anyway. I think you were being slightly sarcastic to me, so I had to laugh when I read you latest comment, which seemed to go back on all you'd said to me. 

Quote " I realize it seems like I am contradicting myself since I said that one " should have all those "own opinions on scripture" cleared up, otherwise one wouldn't get baptized as one of JW since one of the requirements is to agree with all 100 questions asked in the "organized book" "

Yes completely contradicting yourself Anna. 

Of course when I was going through the questions in the 80’s there was no mention of the  FDS applying exclusively to the GB. We know this has been a recent change as is evident in the 2015 version of the book.

That's a good one to show Tom as he thinks there hasn't been important changes made. Like i say, breach of contract in the real world. 

Quote Anna " I  know for sure @James Thomas Rook Jr. only agrees with about 15% of the interpretations made by the GB and yet he remains a part of the congregation as far as I am aware. "

Yeh now that is what I call hypocrisy big time.   I mean a person could remain a Catholic with those principals. A Catholic could say 'You know like, i really dig the pope and the Catholic religion, but i don't believe half of what they say, but I'll stay Catholic anyway'.   

That is how stupid JW's sound when they stay physically in but spiritually / emotionally out. But I've said before, we all know why they do it. It's that Blackmail of losing everyone and everything. It frightens some people too much. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
22 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

That is how stupid JW's sound when they stay physically in but spiritually / emotionally out. But I've said before, we all know why they do it. It's that Blackmail of losing everyone and everything. It frightens some people too much. 

YOU ARE MAKING A GENERAL STATEMENT THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO ME, ON ALL POINTS.

... and there is no hypocrisy on my part.

No one has EVER accused me of being "Brother Watchtower", nor have I ever been, or represented myself as such.

If I was "two faced", my head would have a LOT more hair!

dt940828shc0.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But the original parable

There seems to be an assumption here that all of Jesus parables on faithful and unfaithful slaves apply to the same set of circumstances and must weld together into one big picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

No one is declared the "faithful and wise servant" until after that judgment by Jesus.

The description at Matt.24:45-47 shows that the slave met his qualification prior to inspection, hence his initial appointment. Self-estimation does not have to be vainglorious (compare Rom.12:3). Otherwise it would be improper to assume one could act on Galatians 6:1.

If you doubt  the Governing Body's application of this scripture to themselves, that is fair enough. That is a question of personal understanding. There is nothing wrong in airing doubts, (with due regard for the audience of course). But as you are publishing  a flawed argument to say that they are wrong and are misleading others, regardless of how it is euphemised, then this is more serious. It becomes a matter of personal opposition regardless of the suggestion that 1000s think this way. You are not skating close to the fence here, you are actually in "no-mans land"! (No apolgiies for mixing metaphors).

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • chan

      chan 0

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • BTK59

      BTK59 139

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.