Do we need elders?

by ArgCampeon 11 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Makena

  Good one Brit! Who else would work so hard on all those fascinating Service meeting parts?

  Seriously, elders serve a purpose in a man made organization. I have served in the past with many humble, empathetic, self-sacrificing men - but unfortunately they were in the minority per my 40 years of association. Even the best did not always show good judgment, and personal agendas took precedence over Bible principles at times. Discipline meted out has at times destroyed lives - from personal experience. How can "untrained volunteers" really size up difficult situations? When lives are in the balance, can you really trust that in every JC holy spirit is there directing the proceedings?

  The question for me for ongoing research involves digging deeper as to what the "elder arrangement" (if any) was really like in the 1st Century? Is it possible really to know how the early congregations functioned? Russell did extensive writing on it, and others have since - lots of arguments for and against the changes that have taken place. How closely does the WTBS pattern itself on that model? What further morphing of that arrangement needs to take place? Is the "negative growth" in so many countries an indication that something is seriously lacking? Do we really need "organized religion"?

  Why do people in the Pacific Northwest ask so many questions?

  Makena - disallusioned, but searching, and in the meantime enjoying my Saturday mornings a lot more than I used to.
• 

  proplog2

  The scriptures you quote don't support an "elder" arrangement.

  The "elder" arrangement is a concoction of the Watchtower.

  Notice in 2Tim it says "THE overseer should therefore be..." It doesn't say "overseerS". There is one overseer just as there used to be chiefs over 10's 100's 1,000.

  In contrast Ministerial Servants are listed in the plural. So there would be one overseer and many ministerial servants.

  The New World Translation has a strange revision in the Titus description of Overseers. Look in your interlinear translation at 1Tim 3:2 It says "ho episkopos" - the overseer. Now turn in your interlinear translation to Titus 1:7 the Greek again says "ho episkopos" but the New World Translation renders this "an overseer" instead of "the overseer". This is obviously done to reinforce their changed belief that there are many "overseers" in each congregation. If you look in the older - 1961 version of the NWT it says "the overseer" at Titus 1:7. The version after the institution of the "elder" arrangement contains this little noticed revision. Kind of dishonest don't you think?

  The difference between overseer and ministerial servant is that the overseer had to be an exemplary teacher. Teaching is a "gift". Even James 3:1 says "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers".
  The Watchtower realizing this conflict came up with the idea that there are all sorts of "teachers" - some are good one-on-one - some are good teachers from the platform etc. In other words since they held out the goal of "all" brothers becoming elders/overseers they had to water down the qualifications of what really makes a good teacher.

  Kind of sounds like the warning of 2Tim 4:3 "For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, THEY WILL ACCUMULATE teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled." Accumulate - according to the dictionary means "to grow to be extensive in number". Too many chiefs not enough indians?

  The reason meetings are so boring is that "teaching ability" is no longer a real qualification for leadership. There is only one real qualification for leadership under the Elder arrangement - Field Service Time.

  The "elder" arrangement practiced by the Wathctower is a completely unscriptural organizational structure.