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]

In the past months, there have been quite a few study articles with regard to the GB/Slave. I am trying to get an overall  understanding of 2 particular WT articles on this one topic, so that two quotes from the WTs harmonize. 

Today's WT study (Nov 2016) p.15 par.9:  "Some may feel that they can interpret the Bible on their own. However, Jesus has appointed the ‘faithful slave’ to be the only channel for dispensing spiritual food. Since 1919, the glorified Jesus Christ has been using that slave to help his followers understand God’s own Book and heed its directives.’"

And

WT Feb.2017 p.26. par.12 " The Governing Body is neither inspired nor infallible. Therefore, it can err in doctrinal matters or in organizational direction. In fact, the Watch Tower Publications Index includes the heading “Beliefs Clarified,” which lists adjustments in our Scriptural understanding since 1870".

It seems that the key to making sense of these 2 seemingly opposing quotes is in the above paragraph if we continue reading: " Of course, Jesus did not tell us that his faithful slave would produce perfect spiritual food".

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, Anna said:

In the past months, there have been quite a few study articles with regard to the GB/Slave. I am trying to get an overall  understanding of 2 particular WT articles on this one topic, so that two quotes from the WTs harmonize.

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 specific position on all doctrinal matters and setting priorities for organizational direction in our overall global ministry. But we can be thankful that among Christians, there will always be a few that will take the lead in those heavy responsibilities.

The very desire to take the lead in such matters seems like an assignment that only someone who is very brave or very foolhardy would take. It seems that, from a worldly perspective, only the most haughty among us would reach out for such an important job. Yet, we know some of these brothers very well from either personal acquaintance, or perhaps they were Circuit and District Overseers in our congregations. Perhaps we worked alongside some of them in a Branch Office. We get to know their personalities from presentations, speeches, and broadcasts. We see them interact with each other at some events.

All in all, the majority of them seem to be good, God-fearing, humble men who want to do what is right, the same as the rest of us. We don't get the idea that any of them "schemed" to get to this position. We know that the guidelines for elders apply to them just as they apply to congregation elders. And it's my opinion, but I see a certain stability and faithfulness to worthy goals among all of them. 

Now it's easy to say good things about these men, and that's my point. When these men were mostly chosen only from a certain similar mold, there was not a large "pool" for these "gifts in men" to be chosen from. In the past, most had been chosen from a limited bureaucratic background. At the point when there were 17 GB members alive at the same time, most (but not all) had the ability to give a good talk, but at least half of them were seriously lacking in Biblical expertise, and at least half of them had very little experience even in the door-to-door field ministry for the last 40 years of their lives. We should not have been surprised that certain kinds of flaws showed up among these men so that several were dismissed, and a lot of politics and scheming was known to go on among those who remained.

But the current group, especially after the death of Theodore Jaracz, have been chosen from a much wider pool of candidates. These men have made more progress in the last 20 years than in the previous 100 years. They are managing a much bigger, and smoother operation, with millions and millions more persons in their care. Doctrinal changes over the last 20 years have been steady and clearly beneficial overall. The quality of the publications and the website has improved greatly. It's reach is enormous. 

I've already stated my opinion that the GB are not the equivalent of the "faithful slave" from a Biblical standpoint. But that's not the point of discussion here. These men, the GB, who have taken the lead for doctrinal and prioritized the organizational and ministerial direction have taken on an important and necessary assignment. They admit that they aren't perfect. Of course, that statement is meaningless, because such a statement almost always is used with the intention of meaning "perfect, for all practical purposes." But they don't leave it at that. They admit that they have made serious errors in doctrine and leadership. they admit that the spiritual food they produce and distribute is not always perfect.

So, with that said, I think one way of looking at the overall picture is to see these men in the position of keeping order. They take the lead at the "highest" level, not because they think that you must think that all these doctrines are perfect. They do it because it keeps order and harmony. They do it by taking a stand on certain doctrinal matters and setting organizational priorities. Sure, they may do some of this by majority vote, but ultimately they make choices. This is part of remaining organized in any organization and not falling into chaos. Going off in many directions is inefficient. Even trying a certain direction that proves untenable has a certain value if it's caught early enough, and there is humility to change.

Taking a stand means that we will sometimes discover we took the wrong stand, but it also has an advantage in making our beliefs transparent. If a doctrinal stand is taken, our thinking is clearer on it, and contradictions show up more easily. It would be easy to be 100% accurate by taking a less dogmatic stand on many things. But this makes it harder to test whether we are thinking correctly and reasonably on some of our beliefs.

I think that it could be like those logic puzzles, like they do for LSAT tests, where you get 5 to 10 clues, and have to figure out, for example, where everyone lives and what they do, what they drink, and the color of their house:

• Bill is a plumber who drinks whiskey and lives in the green house that is next to a corner house.
• John is not a carpenter, and he drinks soda and lives in either a red or blue house that is two houses from Sally's house.
• etc. etc. etc.

Sometimes you get to a point where you just need to take a stand and say that John must be in a blue house, for example, even if you don't know for sure, so that you can properly test if it works. (Actually, Sudoku was probably a better example, come to think of it.)

So, we can have doctrinal claims that are still in the middle of such testing. We took a stand, and it clarifies our position so that it can be more clearly tested. It can work for both trivial and important matters like: whether Moses wrote all of the first five books of the Bible himself, or whether Galatians was written prior to 1 Corinthians, or whether the "other sheep" are Gentiles or "spiritual Gentiles."

If we (as an organization) take a stand, it should be faster to get to a point where we can take a consistent stand on all important matters of doctrine and teaching. This assumes that haughtiness and love of tradition don't get in the way of change. And that gets back to having the right kinds of personalities taking the lead.

[ComfortMyPeople]

9 hours ago, Anna said:

It seems that the key to making sense of these 2 seemingly opposing quotes is in the above paragraph if we continue reading: " Of course, Jesus did not tell us that his faithful slave would produce perfect spiritual food".

Anna, I think your question is a very valid one. Let me share with you this point: Antioch congregation and Peter.

Quoting partly (some comments and emphasis added) from *** w78 6/15 p. 7

“When Barnabas and Paul brought this letter [from Jerusalem, resolving the circumcision issue] back to Antioch, there was great rejoicing in the congregation. —Acts 15:3-31.

It may have been after this that Peter visited the Antioch congregation and freely associated with uncircumcised Gentile believers. But, then, when certain Jewish brothers came down from Jerusalem [perhaps, again, teaching about the obligation of circumcision -Acts 15:1 -], Peter withdrew from associating with Gentile converts and spent time exclusively with Jewish brothers. Even Barnabas got unbalanced and did the same thing. But all responded properly when Paul reproved Peter, making clear how wrong such a course was. —Gal. 2:11-14.  

Well, it was clear that these two prominent brothers err in their judgment seriously. What I’ve never heard is the fact, I believe, that perhaps this was not a matter of declining some invitations for lunch. Imagine you’re a gentile sister in the middle of that congregation. You feel so happy because have the chance to preach with so valuable brothers, Paul, Barnabas and, imagine, Peter is going to visit your congregation. More speeches, more opportunities to preach with, perhaps, the most famous of the apostles.

As soon Peter arrives you make arrangements to go to some visits with him, he agrees and you enjoy listen his conversation. Later, you also enjoy hearing him giving speeches in the “kingdom hall.” But as you know, as soon the jews brothers arrived, Peter began to ‘withdrew from associating WITH YOU.’ Next congregation meeting arrives and you can feel the tension. The apostle Peter takes the word and you start to hallucinate. He’s is trying to justify his actions, even with scriptural basis, as the brothers from Jerusalem did: (Acts 15:1) ‘began to teach the brothers: “Unless you get circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”’ Thank goodness Paul had the courage to resist him!

So far so good. I mean this is very known. But what happened 15 years later approx.? God inspires Peter to write his letters. Now theses letters arrive to Antioch y you are in the middle of the meeting, listening their reading. Now, you have two options.

1. How is supposed follow the advice in the letters from this man that everyone in the congregation knows committed a manifest judgment error? How is it possible God continues to use him?

2. Well, Jehovah has forgiven him. So, the same should I do.

I’m not sure if you’ll find these comments meaningful. Nevertheless, it still remains an important point: Peter’s letters were inspired, GB not. But, for now, my time is running out, I’ll try later.

[Witness]

On 1/15/2017 at 4:19 PM, Anna said:

It seems that the key to making sense of these 2 seemingly opposing quotes is in the above paragraph if we continue reading: " Of course, Jesus did not tell us that his faithful slave would produce perfect spiritual food".

 

I believe this only makes sense from a human perspective.

 

Is Jesus flawed? Is he not Truth? “I am the Way, the Truth, the Life” John 14:6

If he is Truth, would anything coming from Christ be flawed or half-truth, or imperfect, or misleading? All that Jesus has, and is, comes from God.

“I and the Father are one.” John 10:30

 

Is God flawed?

 

“He is the Rock, his works are perfect,
and all his ways are just.
A faithful God who does no wrong,
upright and just is he.” Deut 32:4

 

“Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows.” James 1:17

 

The scriptures give us the answer; men make excuses to cover the motives behind their actions.

 

“For I know this, that after my departure SAVAGE WOLVES WILL COME IN AMONG YOU, not sparing the flock.”

We can see that these appear among the congregations, AND ARE ANOINTED ONES as verse 30 shows:

Also FROM AMONG YOURSELVES men will rise up, speaking perverse things, TO DRAW AWAY THE DISCIPLES AFTER THEMSELVES. Therefore watch, and remember that for three years I did not cease to warn everyone night and day with tears.” Acts 20:29-31

 

As Witnesses try to juggle with the above two conflicting statements, 2 Cor 11:3,4 sheds light on where JWs place their devotion, which undoubtedly is the GB and the organization.

 

“But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. 

For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the Spirit you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough."

 

By the GB stating that Jesus didn’t promise perfect spiritual food, they are preaching a Jesus other than the Jesus preached by the apostles, thus drawing away, those who accept the GB’s flawed teaching, to follow “after themselves”.

 

Jehovah’s Witnesses, why do you put up with it?  Rely on the scriptures, Anna, not on man's excuses. Isa 2:22

 

The rest of John 14:6 – “No one comes to the Father except through me.”

 

WOLVES IN SHEEP'S COVERING: http://4womaninthewilderness.blogspot.com/…/wolves-in-sheep…

[Anna]

5 hours ago, Witness said:

Rely on the scriptures

We do rely on the Scriptures.

[Shiwiii]

On 1/15/2017 at 7:03 PM, JW Insider said:

Taking a stand means that we will sometimes discover we took the wrong stand, but it also has an advantage in making our beliefs transparent. If a doctrinal stand is taken, our thinking is clearer on it, and contradictions show up more easily

I completely agree with you and your thinking, but is that what has been done thus far? I mean, to proclaim something as dogmatic then to reverse oneself over blood,blood fractions, the resurrection of Adan and Eve, when the "faithful and discreet slave" was appointed over whatnot.  

On 1/15/2017 at 7:03 PM, JW Insider said:

So, we can have doctrinal claims that are still in the middle of such testing. We took a stand, and it clarifies our position so that it can be more clearly tested.

Can it really be tested? I mean, in the examples above, if you disagree with certain things the "infallible" gb says, what happens to you? Lets say you don't agree with their blood stance? You need it and take it, what happens to you? you didn't agree then and you don't now......I guess you are just not a jw, right? Disfellowshipped, shuned, etc.  if you do not adhere to what the "slave" says, then you are an outsider.....even though they admit not being perfect in their interpretation of scripture. that's not testing.....that's tyranny. 

[Witness]

19 hours ago, Anna said:

We do rely on the Scriptures.

When we rely on the scriptures we see the perfection of God and Jesus.  We see how men can throw out a statement NOT based on scripture, (“Of course, Jesus did not tell us that his faithful slave would produce perfect spiritual food" - a blame put on the Son of God) and it is accepted as if it came from scripture.  

If your child said, "my mother didn't tell me not to give this moldy, loaf of bread to my brother"...who is to blame for doing so?  The mother?

 Whatever we are taught by Christ comes from the Father.

This is what the Lord says—
    your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel:
 am the Lord your God,
 who teaches you what is best for you,
 who directs you in the way you should go.
 If only you had paid attention to my commands,
    your peace would have been like a river,
    your well-being like the waves of the sea.  Isa 48:17,18

Can any JW honestly be at peace when reading the two conflicting statements you have posted here?

 

 

13 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

 if you do not adhere to what the "slave" says, then you are an outsider.....even though they admit not being perfect in their interpretation of scripture. that's not testing.....that's tyranny. 

Tyranny -  unlimited authority or use of power, or a government which exercises such power WITHOUT ANY CONTROL OR LIMITS.

"The beast (organization) I saw resembled a leopard, but had feet like those of a bear and a mouth like that of a lion. The dragon gave the beast his power and his throne and great authority"  Rev 13:2

"Then I saw a second beast, coming out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb, (GB) but it spoke like a dragon." (speaking deceitfully)  Rev 13:11

"The second beast (GB) was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast (spirit-directed organization), so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. (disfellowshipped)"  Rev 13:15

A dual power of tyranny.

 

 

[Evacuated]

 

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

This is the question here.

As has been explained on many occasions, the GB/Slave is spirit-directed and not inspired. This means that guidance from Jehovah is provided whenever required. He keeps the the earthly part of His organisation on track....................when nececessary. In other words, if Jehovah has not intervened, then He is happy with the current progress.

In the past, Paul wrote more letters than those collected in the Bible canon as "inspired". References are made elsewhere in the inspired scriptures to "other" writings which are not inspired such as those utilised by Ezra and by Moses (in the compilation of Genesis). Even the quotations from the Septuagint translation (not inspired) become part of the inspired word despite them differing in wording from Hebrew copies. So if this is the case with inspired writings, (that Jehovah choses what He wants to be considered as having been produced under inspiration), then I have no problem with the concept of an information channel being guided or directed (though not inspired) by Him on occasion. Or that information provided by that channel on occasion could be in error.

I have illustrated this before as the difference between me following directions to drive a car and me being driven by someone else. I might chose a different road from an assigned driver, especially if unfamiliar with the route, but there is no need for intervention if I am heading in the right direction, unless I am going completely off course, e.g. I might take a wrong turning, but as long as I correct myself there is no need for intervention. Let's say my journey is being GPS tracked so my course can be seen at all times. There is no need for intervention unless those tracking feel it is absolutely necessary.

Sadly, the real rub here is around the fact that the Governing Body has presented themselves as "the faithful and discreet slave", the sole channel for the dispensing of spiritual food in these last days. We all know the account about Korah, Dathan, Abiram and On and the 250 at Numbers 16. So, unfortunately, it is rather a case of "if the cap fits...........".

 

[Witness]

The Body of Christ and its power under Christ is buried under layers of Watchtowers, thus JWs are clueless as to what it comprises.  I was.  If the Body was working in unison with all anointed “slaves” attending to the needs of the congregations, what would happen?

“For I want you to know how great a struggle I have on your behalf and for those who are at Laodicea, and for all those who have not personally seen my face,  that their hearts may be encouraged, having been knit together in love, and attaining to all the wealth that comes from the full assurance of understanding, resulting in a true knowledge of God’s mystery, that is, Christ Himself,  in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.”

  I say this so that no one will delude you with persuasive argument. (" Of course, Jesus did not tell us that his faithful slave would produce perfect spiritual food".)

“See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ. For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form, and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule and authority”

Further on, Paul allows us to see why the Governing Body has failed in organizational direction:

 ”Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize (all  anointed ones will be determined at Christ’s coming to be considered faithful and discreet – or not.)”  Matt 25:21; 1 Cor 4:8

“by delighting in self-abasement (“having a humble opinion of oneself”)

 “and the worship of the angels, (of themselves; anointed ones are God’s “messengers” Heb 12:22,23;1:6,7; John 1:51; Rev 14:4;22:3,4)”

“taking his stand on visions he has seen,

inflated without cause by his fleshly mind,  

and not holding fast to the head,(CHRIST) from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments,

grows with a growth which is from God”

Through these scriptures we see the necessity of the anointed being united with no superiority over another.  Through this wholeness in Christ, he supplies his Holy Spirit, and it is for the benefit of everyone.  The GB and the elder body, have stifled all possibility for the anointed sanctuary of God to stand up on behalf of the congregations.  Dan 8:11;11:31;12:7

The one who has been given the assignment to intervene is Christ, the Head of the Body; and most assuredly, he will intervene.  Matt 24:27,30,31;Rev 12:7; 6:16,17

As for all in the congregations,

If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world,

 why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as,  “Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!” (which all refer to things destined to perish with use)

—in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men?  These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence.

Each JW, each anointed one within the organization needs to ask themselves why they submit  to teachings and opinions of men; men who have transgressed their covenant in Christ. Luke 22:20

 Colossians 2 appears to have great prophetic meaning for all within the Watchtower.

 

 

[JW Insider]

3 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Sadly, the real rub here is around the fact that the Governing Body has presented themselves as "the faithful and discreet slave", the sole channel for the dispensing of spiritual food in these last days. We all know the account about Korah, Dathan, Abiram and On and the 250 at Numbers 16. So, unfortunately, it is rather a case of "if the cap fits...........".

(Numbers 16:1-3) 16 Then Korʹah the son of Izʹhar, the son of Koʹhath, the son of Leʹvi, got up together with Daʹthan and A·biʹram the sons of E·liʹab, and On the son of Peʹleth, of the sons of Reuʹben. 2 They rose up against Moses along with 250 Israelite men, chieftains of the assembly, chosen ones of the congregation, prominent men. 3 So they gathered together against Moses and Aaron and said to them: “We have had enough of you! The whole assembly is holy, all of them, and Jehovah is in their midst. Why, then, should you exalt yourselves above the congregation of Jehovah?”

Eoin, You are evidently presenting one of two ideas:

1. Are you saying that Moses pictures the Governing Body and those who speak against the Governing Body as being the sole channel for dispensing spiritual food in these last days are like Korah?

2. Are you saying that Moses pictures Jesus as the sole channel for dispensing truth in these last days, and that the Governing Body is like Korah for wanting to set themselves up as an additional sole channel for dispensing spiritual food?

[Evacuated]

 

11 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Are you saying that Moses pictures the Governing Body

Not really going for the "picture" approach.  It's just too rigid a framework for me.

What I am saying is that, regardless of human opinion (and there is no shortage of that), Jehovah (through Jesus of course as the Head of the Congregation) has seen fit to provide a shepherding arrangement for those who wish to serve Him in these last days. This appointment of the "faithful and discreet slave" is a principal aspect of this shepherding arrangement. And He will ensure that, despite human imperfection and/or human error on the part of that "slave", no lasting detriment will come to those who work within HIS arrangement. He allows humans to "work out their own salvation" on the basis of his word AND the application provided by the slave for the most part, only intervening or "directing" by means of His spirit when absolutely necessary.

However, it will not go well for those who choose to disrespect Jehovah's arrangement or way of doing things and that includes their attitude to those whom Jehovah assigns shepherding responsibility. He counts that as personal disrespect regardless of the undermining effect such disrespect might have on the trust of others. 

There are lessons we can draw from the series of incidents recorded in the account in Numbers 16. This is because of similarities we can see when comparing the situation then with now. The appropriate lessons relate to the position we take. which is why I say "if the cap fits".....

 

[Shiwiii]

15 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

In other words, if Jehovah has not intervened, then He is happy with the current progress.

So you are saying that he is happy with the way the wt handles child abuse?

He is/was happy with those people who died from not having organ transplants? 

16 minutes ago, Eoin Joyce said:

...that includes their attitude to those whom Jehovah assigns shepherding responsibility.

This has not and cannot be proven whom he has appointed for anything, yet. No where in the Bible does God speak out and establish a governing body to do anything. 

 

 

question:

12 hours ago, JW Insider said:

2. Are you saying that Moses pictures Jesus as the sole channel for dispensing truth in these last days, and that the Governing Body is like Korah for wanting to set themselves up as an additional sole channel for dispensing spiritual food?

Answer:

21 minutes ago, Eoin Joyce said:

which is why I say "if the cap fits".....