Governing Body: Does it show loyalty or disloyalty to question the GB?

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, J.R. Ewing said:

I believe TrueTom has finally defined the position here. It's NOT about him. It's also, NOT about anyone here. It's about applying scripture with its proper understanding, that intellects can err with their understanding. That's why God Choose those that are worthy to sanctify him, NOT JWinsider, TrueTom, Anna, etc.

With respect to you, J.R.Ewing, in my case, it is just me participating in an online discussion. I'm not trying to set forth any new understanding. I am not imagining I have Anyone's commission.

I am certainly not trying to set the Governing Body straight. Whenever I mention them, it is always to defend them and to try to get some characters off their backs.

So far as I am aware,  I am obedient to theocratic counsel in all respects, with the exception of just being here - since our direction is that it is wise not to hang out where they roll out the red carpet for apostates. However, I am no more guilty of this than anyone else, and I don't interact with them other than to occasionally knock them over the head with a brick.

None of the Witnesses here are typical. The typical one will apply theocratic direction on online association. Those here fall into two or three categories, from what I have seen. 1.) the new and/or naive, who think the internet a fine place to make friends, 2.) those who are disillusioned, perhaps over some injustice they have encountered, 3.) those who have chaffed at counsel.

Perhaps I can be a positive influence to these ones. When I write, it is partly (not solely) with that motivation. I probably shoot myself in the foot with frequent attempts at humor, but I have a taste for humor and I think  it is a reasonable way to respond to the absurdity that is to be found here.

[Anna]

I'm afraid JWI will find it difficult to find a good enough "sparring partner" who has enough knowledge on the subject to be able to stick to the issue at hand without resorting to attacks on the person's intentions instead of sticking to the subject. Facts and truth are facts and truth no matter who presents it. If we are not able to defend our view in a scholarly and scientific way, presenting counter evidence using available archeological material, then why even get involved in a discussion such as this?  I know I can't. I just don't have enough time to devote to research that is necessary to be able to argue with anything that JWI has touched on regarding the secular aspect relating to Bible chronology. In fact I don't even have much time to research the scriptures pertaining to this subject, never mind Babylonian astronomical diaries and such.  But I have been able to see some valid scriptural arguments being presented by JWI and I think it's OK to say "well, your reasoning might just be right". Is it going to change anything about how I view Jehovah, Jesus or our brotherhood? NO.

I am very well aware that casting doubts on 1914 automatically disqualifies 1919 and the appointment of the faithful slave. I am very well aware that a different interpretation regarding parousia, the sign, Generation etc. will automatically call into question whether we are really living in the last days. So what? I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist over it. Does that change our commission to preach? It shouldn't because aren't we all hoping that Jehovah is going to step in and bring relief to mankind, whenever that may be? To preach about God's Kingdom which will do just that, it is our commission, and we don't stop until the Kingdom is ruling over the earth. Should any of this change our attitude and view of those who are in "charge" and call themselves the faithful slave? I don't see why it should. Someone has to be in charge, we can't all be chiefs. So far, this arrangement has worked pretty well. There are many more arguments I could go into, but I don't think that's necessary. All I know is that those who have left Jehovah's organization, (or if you just want to call it Jehovah's Witnesses) and still believe in God, they have reverted back/or adopted most of Christendoms ideas. That tells me a lot and enough to convince me that we are the true religion, with all our flaws and imperfections.

[Anna]

5 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

to receive God’s Holy Spirit to dispense spiritual food with prayer and insight, given by GOD?

And yet there have been mistakes. This cannot be because GOD gave wrong insight can it? So it must be that GOD gives holy spirit, but it is up to the individual whether he actually follows it or not to get the correct insight!

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

8 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

With respect to you, J.R.Ewing, in my case, it is just me participating in an online discussion. I'm not trying to set forth any new understanding. I am not imagining I have Anyone's commission.

In the matters of the heart, as you know, we are in accord, and meant NO disrespect, with the inclusion as you, yourself stated: “Look, it's not about me”.  I understand the offshoot humor your balance to the otherwise incorrigible, unreachable, and unrepentant can become cumbersome. This is a goal for those who enter this forum that doesn't understand the criticism of the Watchtower by “active Witnesses” and as you stated are “new and/or naïve” to bible understanding by a website that “boast” of being friendly toward witnesses, but have the inclination of hiding their true motives behind such “hatred” manifested by as you quoted, for being “disillusioned, perhaps over some injustice they have encountered”. There is NO justification to remain committed to change anyoneÂ’s doctrine (faith) for feeling slated.

Romans 12:17-21New International Version (NIV)

^17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. ^18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. ^19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”^[a] says the Lord. ^20 On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
    if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”^[b]

^21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

 

Romans 2:5-11New International Version (NIV)

^5 But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God’s wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. ^6 God “will repay each person according to what they have done.”^[a]7 To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life. ^8 But for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger. ^9 There will be trouble and distress for every human being who does evil: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile; ^10 but glory, honor and peace for everyone who does good: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. ^11 For God does not show favoritism.

However, there is a bible based implication for those that believe, they have every “right” to think of justifying, their apostasy driven rhetoric, or defending someone’s apostasy.

Hebrews 6:4-8English Standard Version (ESV)

^4 For it is impossible, in the case of those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, and have shared in the Holy Spirit, ^5 and have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the age to come, ^6 and then have fallen away, to restore them again to repentance, since they are crucifying once again the Son of God to their own harm and holding him up to contempt. ^7 For land that has drunk the rain that often falls on it, and produces a crop useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. ^8 But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed, and its end is to be burned.

 

0ne only needs, remember the Proverbs.

Proverbs 4:13-27New International Version (NIV)

^13 Hold on to instruction, do not let it go; guard it well, for it is your life.^14 Do not set foot on the path of the wicked or walk in the way of evildoers ^15 Avoid it, do not travel on it; turn from it and go on your way.^16 For they cannot rest until they do evil; they are robbed of sleep till they make someone stumble.^17 They eat the bread of wickedness and drink the wine of violence.^18 The path of the righteous is like the morning sun, shining ever brighter till the full light of day.^19 But the way of the wicked is like deep darkness; they do not know what makes them stumble.^20 My son, pay attention to what I say; turn your ear to my words.^21 Do not let them out of your sight, keep them within your heart;^22 for they are life to those who find them and health to one’s whole body.
^23 Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.^24 Keep your mouth free of perversity; keep corrupt talk far from your lips.^25 Let your eyes look straight ahead; fix your gaze directly before you.^26 Give careful thought to the^[a] paths for your feet and be steadfast in all your ways.^27 Do not turn to the right or the left; keep your foot from evil.

After all, what is the difference between this worldly illustration of apostasy, to the unintellectual displayed of apostasy, here?

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

4 hours ago, Anna said:

And yet there have been mistakes. This cannot be because GOD gave wrong insight can it? So it must be that GOD gives holy spirit, but it is up to the individual whether he actually follows it or not to get the correct insight!

These mistakes you speak of, are they "proven" facts, or opinions such as yourself. However, I don't see why the contradiction of your words since you just mention,

" I am very well aware that casting doubts on 1914 automatically disqualifies 1919 and the appointment of the faithful slave. I am very well aware that a different interpretation regarding parousia, the sign, Generation etc. will automatically call into question whether we are really living in the last days. So what? I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist over it."

This seems to imply that's exactly what you are doing!

[The Virginian]

You're doing fine, @JW Insider. Just fine.

[Anna]

This is getting scary. Now Allen Smith is the VIRGINIAN!!!!

[JW Insider]

On 8/10/2017 at 1:16 AM, Anna said:

This is getting scary. Now Allen Smith is the VIRGINIAN!!!!

Nah! I'm sure Allen's already reached his limit of personality "states." I'd bet it's close to Erie* but not Scary.

*Erie: the Lake, not the "state" of eeriness. [In other words, someone who has already stated that he lives near Lake Erie.

[TiagoBelager]

The term "governing body" is a legal term, defining within the Christian system a body of men who are charged with responsibility for making sure that the Christian congregation is protected from sectarianism, from those who would create dissension through private interpretation. In the first century, such oversight was per force carried out in a time-costly manner because a congregation in a distant region might have to wait months for the arrival of envoy(s) dispatched with a letter from the governing body, or a letter from its duly commissioned deputy, the apostle Paul, who was approved by the governing body for his work (see Galatians 2:9, 10). The letter might detail corrections that should be implemented, decrees that must be observed to protect the unity of God's people (e.g., 1 Cor. 11:10, 16). 

So, Yes! A decree is a judicial/juridical term, and implies that a governing body had approved it and had dispatched men to deliver it to the congregations (see Acts 16:4). Surely we will not say that the pillars in the Jerusalem congregation, which included more men than just the group of the twelve, were in violation of Jesus' exhortation so that by that violation the men of the governing body issuing decrees had their position in that body because they had gone against the spirit of Jesus' words that "all of you are brothers!" And neither has the Congregation's present-day governing body violated the spirit of Jesus' words. 

[SuziQ1513]

On August 12, 2017 at 3:33 PM, J.R. Ewing said:

Would it be any different with thinking the things made up here, deserve the same sarcasm? but we both know, Right! A!

Too bad this deception needs revision.

Dear Mr Ewing:

With all sincerity, I have to ask why are you here at this site if you think deception exists?    This post has more wind than Chicago and Wyoming put together.  Your bitterness is all too apparent and I have yet to see a suggestion as to where a sincere person might find an organization that has pure truth without contamination of human imperfection.   I believe Jesus (I'm not sure you believe he existed) was the only one who could claim he taught and acted purely.   Knowledge puffs up but love builds up and this can be seen clearly in our organization.    Case in point:.  Recent convention the fire alarm was accidentally pulled by a baby -- yes you read that correctly.  It was Friday during the last 10 mins of the last talk of the day.  3900 people calmly and curteously left the building in 5-6 mins.   While we waited outside, we enjoyed visiting, there was no bad attitudes, of course no one was smoking or swearing.   When we returned the talk was resumed and we finished with a song and prayer.  Can u believe it, 3900 people returned for 10 mins of a talk, song and prayer.  The Fire Marshall was amazed and wished he had a video of it because he stated it went perfectly.  The  next few days they had sisters sit by the alarms in the building to prevent another mishap (I was one of them).  Now I'm looking at this fire alarm and wondering how on earth could a baby pull it.    Well it's as high as I light switch and is a simple pull down action, it's bright red.  If someone was holding the baby in just the right position, it would be natural for them to reach for it.   I'm sure when they built the building they didn't anticipate a baby pulling the alarm but they had the best intentions since the alarm did work.  I'm sure next year there will be revisions to the alarms.  

So what does this have to do with the windy topic (yes I'm aware I'm adding more wind)? I believe the  GB did not intend to deceive but we're making the best effort to understand scripture at the time.  I was around in 1973 and what I remember is they said "it would make sense if the end came " in 1975 not as it was a fact.  I became a JW, not because of a date,  because they deepened  my love for Jehovah, Jesus and his word.  Because of what they taught me, I'm a better person, I have wonderful fridends and a clear purpose to my life  

So, please Sir, would you express to us your deepest love, who do you associate with and what brings you joy and purpose to your life..  I would very seriously like to know so I can evaluate if there is something better I should look at. 

Yours truly

[JW Insider]

3 hours ago, TiagoBelager said:

The term "governing body" is a legal term, defining within the Christian system a body of men who are charged with responsibility for making sure that the Christian congregation is protected from sectarianism, from those who would create dissension through private interpretation. In the first century, such oversight was per force carried out in a time-costly manner because a congregation in a distant region might have to wait months for the arrival of envoy(s) dispatched with a letter from the governing body, or a letter from its duly commissioned deputy, the apostle Paul, who was approved by the governing body for his work (see Galatians 2:9, 10). The letter might detail corrections that should be implemented, decrees that must be observed to protect the unity of God's people (e.g., 1 Cor. 11:10, 16). 

I'm in full agreement that the term  "governing body" is a legal term, and for us it is a body of men who are charged with responsibility for making sure that the Christian congregation is protected from sectarianism. I think that's a pretty good description of their primary purpose. And of course, they absolutely try to protect or guard the current doctrines from dissension through private interpretation. But many times this private interpretation has already been incorporated into the body of doctrines. Obviously, we had about 100 years of privately interpreted "type-antitype" doctrines that were beginning to be removed around the years 1999-2002. Over 120 of these doctrines were removed in one sweeping move between the end of 2014 to the beginning of 2015. (3/15/2015 Watchtower). So the charge of the Governing Body can sometimes be to guard private interpretations. And we are happy to have very few of these remaining.

FWIW, I appreciate very much what they are charged to do, and the heavy responsibilities that they are appointed to take on.

Paul was approved for his work, just as you say, but Paul also went to great pains in Galatians to show how for at least 14 years he was NOT approved by the "governing body" of Jerusalem (Gal 2:1; 2 Cor 12:2). The way in which the apostles wrote letters that included "decrees" to be observed, however, is not necessarily applicable to the "Governing Body" of today. That's because the activities and writings of the first century apostles became the foundation of the Christian congregation. And even then, these were directly appointed by Jesus, so that Jesus was still the only true cornerstone of the foundation of the congregation.

(1 Corinthians 3:11) 11 For no one can lay any other foundation than what is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

(Ephesians 2:19, 20) 19 So you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens of the holy ones and are members of the household of God, 20 and you have been built up on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, while Christ Jesus himself is the foundation cornerstone.

Unless the Governing Body wishes to begin teaching that they are also apostles, there is no direct parallel to the idea of the current Governing Body also issuing decrees. I know you didn't say that directly, anyway, but the implication is there. But I should add that don't see anything wrong with the current Governing Body issuing something akin to "decrees." And these are often directly related to unity of teaching, consistency of preaching, setting priorities for various ministry efforts, preventing dissension, correcting error, protecting from sectarianism, etc. -- all the same things you mention. The difference is that we should question them, and study these "decrees" carefully, and never consider them to be at the same level as Jehovah's Word the Bible.

Just something interesting here, I noticed that one of the decrees you mentioned was in 1 Cor 11:16 which says:

(1 Corinthians 11:16) 16 However, if anyone wants to argue in favor of some other custom, we have no other, nor do the congregations of God.

This is actually one of the places where we can get the idea that the current Governing Body should be welcoming questions that argue in favor of a different custom on some subjects for which the Bible has not provided a guide. (<-- @Anna -->) Notice that Paul appears to expect that on most subjects, anyone might wish to argue in favor of another viewpoint. He never says this is wrong or out of place. He wanted things to be orderly, of course, and in those days they used Jewish synagogues as meeting places, but the Christians allowed men and women to learn together, which was not a custom of the Jews in those places. Therefore, while a man could ask a question, he wanted the women to go through their husbands at home. This made perfect sense when we consider the prejudices of the societies under which they wished to spread the good news without hindrance. But there might be another custom that would work in a different place and time, one could argue. In this case, Paul implies that these questions have already come up, and "we have no other" alternatives to offer, nor do the other congregations.

3 hours ago, TiagoBelager said:

So, Yes! A decree is a judicial/juridical term, and implies that a governing body had approved it and had dispatched men to deliver it to the congregations (see Acts 16:4). Surely we will not say that the pillars in the Jerusalem congregation, which included more men than just the group of the twelve, were in violation of Jesus' exhortation so that by that violation the men of the governing body issuing decrees had their position in that body because they had gone against the spirit of Jesus' words that "all of you are brothers!" And neither has the Congregation's present-day governing body violated the spirit of Jesus' words. 

Unfortunately, we have no scriptural reason to say that it was a "Governing Body" who had approved these "decrees." Just because the body of elders at Jerusalem had more persons than just the 12, doesn't mean that the influence of the apostles was not important here. We do not even know for sure if any of the original apostles of Jesus were themselves literate and were able to write the gospels and letters we have attached their names to. We believe that Mark wrote for Peter, we even believe that Paul may have had a secretary due to eyesight issues or some other reason. The book of Matthew does not say it was written by a disciple named Matthew. In fact, all the gospels are anonymous, with names only added in later traditions. We know that if John wrote the book of John that the book of Revelation might be by a different John if we were to go by the style of Greek. But if these apostles used amanuenses then this could explain the differences. The main point however, is that we get the view of the apostles through the Christian Greek Scriptures, and it is also in this way that the apostles and prophets of the first century made up the foundation of the congregations. Therefore, we can just as well get the view of the apostles through those who worked with them, Barnabas, James (Christ's brother), etc. And, for all we know, these men were also counted as apostles, or sent-forth ones. Besides the reason for the decree in Acts 15 and therefore in Acts 16:4 was necessary as a way of apologizing for the mistake that Jerusalem had been making as they were trying to put a burden on Gentiles that was far above the burden that was put upon Jewish proselytes. We don't even have proof that this particular decree was intended to continue after enough Gentiles in the congregation could question it's continued value. There could have come a time after it became obvious that the Jewish Christians with weak consciences had matured and were no longer stumbled by the fact that the Gentiles needed no form of Jewish custom to follow.  (We do have evidence in 1 Cor 8 that Paul did not always follow the decree himself, implying that some of the items on that decree might have been a right fit for the circumstances of the current congregations at that time.)

I don't believe they were in violation of Jesus' exhortation. Jesus had asked the apostles to stay behind in Jerusalem likely because questions like this would come up among the Jewish congregations that they could deal with better from that city, where Jews continued to travel in and out of until 70 CE. It made it more efficient to build up Jewish Christians all over the world from a single place, and the body of apostles would be better equipped to follow the idea of "to Jews I became a Jew" (1 Cor 9:20) while a Roman citizen like Paul could focus on Gentiles (to Greeks I became a Greek).

[Guest J.R. Ewing]

2 hours ago, SuziQ1513 said:

Dear Mr Ewing:

With all sincerity, I have to ask why are you here at this site if you think deception exists?    This post has more wind than Chicago and Wyoming put together.

Dear, SuziQ1513

With all sincerity, I have to ask why YOU! are here at this site knowing that deception exists? This post has more wind than Chicago and Wyoming with all of Canada put together.

Perhaps you should direct your bitter insulting statement to one that is truly deserving of it. I can count many that fit your bill here. Perhaps reading the Watchtower literature will aid your confusion of 1975 as many witnesses were, with their own private expectation, and now draws modern criticism by many calling themselves witnesses but are liken to worldly views, making them NOT part of GODS plan for his new kingdom. Generally, I would expect troubling answers from young witnesses that weren't part of that generation. The Watchtower ended, having to explain the erred expectation that some witnesses perceived, NO  different from any other expectation perceived by enthusiastic people. I believe, some of that expectation can be found with some surrounding Jesus that wanted him to establish an earthly kingdom, even though, that was never his intent.

So, perhaps it will make more sense, once you rely on GOD to aid your confusion, as it has not helped the regular commentators here, with their off-putting humor, such as the one rendered by you and reading past post, you appear to be one. I can understand "Pete" not having full control of his own, but, the truth is the truth.

2 hours ago, SuziQ1513 said:

So, please Sir, would you express to us your deepest love, who do you associate with and what brings you joy and purpose to your life..  I would very seriously like to know so I can evaluate if there is something better I should look at.

 

I would venture to say the same with the kind of response you advocate. My association first and foremost is the allegiance to GOD himself. The association I can proudly say is decades in service to GOD through the Watchtower. I can say with sincerity that I am a witness free of defamation and slander with no derogatory content toward the Watchtower. So, that "love" you speak of is lacking, simply by your own comment. However, you might ask one of your own JTR, what he is doing here since you asked me. I expect the same sarcasm directed to him in your response to love. You should look for something further, it's called honesty.

Sincerely,