With them they had no religious contact or communion
I do dispute the comment. The Ethiopian eunuch was a proselyte who had just come from "worshipping at Jerusalem." It was impossible to have a proeslyte from among Gentiles without having religious contact with them. Jesus noted that the Pharisees would traverse dry land and sea to make one proselyte—from among people who were Gentiles.
Paul walked among the temples of Athens and went into Jewish synagogues and temples on many occasions to preach to and reason with those present.
I very much disagree with Barnes' quote, so you imagined incorrectly. There are direct statements that contradict Barnes, both in the Bible and in other writing of the period.
Death to the Pixies: was exegeting based on the context of Jesus' words
Jesus did not indicate secretly taking the matter before certain officials who would deal with it privately. If JWs "exgesis" led them to that conclusion would you disagree they are completely in error on the point? You seem to be inferring that their method is modeled after the Jewish system when such an inference is—quite frankly—a load of dingo's kidneys.
What you are failing to do is substantiate that the JW practice is derived from the Jewish practice in any respect, and you have not made a case for their method being Scriptural—you have made a beautiful case for their method being in harmony with Barnes opinion, which often directly contradicts the Bible (as in this case).
Would you further agree that nothing in the NT indicates resolving wrongdoing in that manner, from the death of Ananias and Saphira to Paul correcting Peter for separating from the Gentiles? If not, I daresay you have announced a compromise prematurely. While you claim I am arguing from silence, I am actually arguing from the incredible weight of evidence that wrongdoing was handled publicly by whoever happened to witness it or was motivated to correct it versus the complete lack of evidence that it was handled in private or that only a few select were qualified to do so. Galatians 6:1 refers, not to elders but, to anyone who considered themselves spiritually qualified to do so.
Since the JWs choose only the private method and do not use the public method, I would say you need yet to substantiate their method as being a Scriptural one. Any NT example will do. I can list you a dozen public ones, can you list even one secret one or one place where secrecy was instructed?
Death to the Pixies: I do not dispute the phrase "before". I dispute your meaning poured into the phrase. You appeal to the Greek for no reason really, as one can "rebuke" "In the presense of others" in the JW sense.
I certainly dispute that I was putting meaning into the word. Perhaps you have never studied out the other contexts in which this word is used in the NT? I am deriving the identical meaning from the word as that arrived at by Greek scholars. The fact that the rebuke is to be given "before" witnesses and for the purpose of causing them to understand what conduct was wrong and why.
Ephesians 5:11-13 makes the point perfectly clear. The purpose of reproof was specifically to expose wrong conduct to the light.
According to Thayer's Lexicon, the usage in 1 Timothy 5:20 is specifically "to find fault with, correct" and more specifically, "by word." I heartily disagree with your casual treatment of this instruction and to your overly cursory examination of the words used. There is no way the JW method meets the standard of "elegche" (the actual word used in this case).
Another translation may help you understand.
(BBE) Say sharp words to sinners when all are present, so that the rest may be in fear.
(YLT) Those sinning, reprove before all, that the others also may have fear;
(NIV) Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning.
(KJV) Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.
(ASV) Them that sin reprove in the sight of all, that the rest also may be in fear.
Just because they have planted something in your head does not make it so. A brief announcement during the Service Meeting does not constitute "reproof" or a "rebuke" in the sense of "elegcho" as used in the NT. I think it is rather silly of you to contend that there is even a scant possibility this would not include revealing the wrong committed, given the other uses of the expression "elegcho" and its variants in the Bible. The concept of "revealing" is an integral part of the word itself.
Of this word:
Friberg's: (1) in the NT, gener. as showing someone that he has done someth. wrong and summoning him to repent bring to light, expose (JN 3.20); convince, convict (JA 2.9); (2) in the sense of setting right reprove, correct (1T 5.20); in an intensified sense rebuke, discipline, punish (HE 12.5).
UBS Lexicon: show (someone his) fault or error, convince (someone) of (his) fault or error; show (something) up for what it is; prove guilty, condemn; rebuke, reprove
Combining what I know of 1 Timothy 5:20 with what I read of the examples provided in the NT of correcting wrongdoing, I don't really see how I could believe anything other than public correction is being described in that verse. Please explain under what theory you arrive at a justification of the JW method from this (or any other) verse.
Death to the Pixies: No-one has an authority in this case.
Beautiful! We have a point of agreement and Scriptural support.
Philippians 2:1-4—If, then, there is any encouragement in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any sharing of spirit, if any tender affections and compassions, 2 make my joy full in that YOU are of the same mind and have the same love, being joined together in soul, holding the one thought in mind, 3 doing nothing out of contentiousness or out of egotism, but with lowliness of mind considering that the others are superior to YOU, 4 keeping an eye, not in personal interest upon just YOUR own matters, but also in personal interest upon those of the others.
So if my "Boss" is Christ which of my "co-workers", i.e. Christ's brothers, is more equal than me and why? Was this written to the whole congregation or just to those beneath the others?
Death to the Pixies: You still have not forwarded an argument on what a reasonable expectation of recieved knowledge in this Post-apostolic time is, or for any time for that matter. The job could still be done without a full revelation/identification in place. Since you are just giving opinion, I have little to reply to.
I never attempted to make an argument for a particular method or against another method. If you read that into my reply you must have misunderstood the specific context I placed my remarks in. You denied the relevance of the 2nd question, I only attempted to establish the relevance of the second question. I do not have to have an alternate method that I am actively proposing for you to be capable of answering for a religion's teachings, do I?
You have declined to answer a very relevant question, and I think many people here understand exactly why the question is relevant. That you do not seem to grasp why it is an important question (especially in the context of my reply) indicates that you are still very much enthralled by their baseless dogma "'changing light' = 'brighter light'". Let me try rephrasing the question into two questions:
In 2006, Jehovah's Witnesses teach that Jesus chose the fledgling Bible Students as his representives on earth.
In 2006, they teach that the anointed at any given period of time comprise a class of people through whom (as a class) God communicates as his sole channel of communication to all mankind.
(1) Is it possible for me to be part of God's sole Channel of communication to all mankind without even knowing it and why do you so answer?
(2) If the true anointed have always been God's sole Channel of communication to all mankind, why did Jesus need to inspect all religions that claimed to be Christian in order to find the anointed and why would he need to choose them (persons who already were his brothers, adopted sons of God) in 1919 as his representatives?
If that helps you to understand the relevance, I am glad we cleared that up. Again, this thread was not for me to espouse my views, but an opportunity for you to support their views (if possible) from the Scriptures. So far, I hope every lurker who is currently a JW is reading this thread.
Not to distract from the necessity imposed by these two unanswered question, I will put forward a perfectly workable solution to the problem of communication from God.
John 14:15-17, 26—“If YOU love me, YOU will observe my commandments; 16 and I will request the Father and he will give YOU another helper to be with YOU forever, 17 the spirit of the truth, which the world cannot receive, because it neither beholds it nor knows it. YOU know it, because it remains with YOU and is in YOU...26 But the helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, that one will teach YOU all things and bring back to YOUR minds all the things I told YOU."
John 16:7, 12-16—"Nevertheless, I am telling YOU the truth, It is for YOUR benefit I am going away. For if I do not go away, the helper will by no means come to YOU; but if I do go my way, I will send him to YOU...12 I have many things yet to say to YOU, but YOU are not able to bear them at present. 13 However, when that one arrives, the spirit of the truth, he will guide YOU into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own impulse, but what things he hears he will speak, and he will declare to YOU the things coming. 14 That one will glorify me, because he will receive from what is mine and will declare it to YOU. 15 All the things that the Father has are mine. That is why I said he receives from what is mine and declares [it] to YOU. 16 In a little while YOU will behold me no longer, and, again, in a little while YOU will see me.”
1 John 2:26-29—These things I write YOU about those who are trying to mislead YOU. 27 And as for YOU, the anointing that YOU received from him remains in YOU, and YOU do not need anyone to be teaching YOU; but, as the anointing from him is teaching YOU about all things, and is true and is no lie, and just as it has taught YOU, remain in union with him. 28 So now, little children, remain in union with him, that when he is made manifest we may have freeness of speech and not be shamed away from him at his presence. 29 If YOU know that he is righteous, YOU gain the knowledge that everyone who practices righteousness has been born from him.
I say the spirit can work on individuals directly without need of a human organization. Of course, my viewpoint is based directly on what the Scriptures state while you claim I argue from silence, whereas your view is based on a human Corporation's re-interpretation of Scripture (in 1918 and again in 1952) that conveniently allowed them to maintain stranglehold authority they could not have otherwise enjoyed.
My view won't change tomorrow, but if Jehovah's Witnesses suddenly announced that Theo Jaracz is the Faithful and Discreet Slave they would expect adherents to at the very least pretend to believe it. I have great freeness of speech, do you?
For instance, is there any reason why you might not want someone reading through the things you have posted here? If so, why?
What authority they claim does not actually resonate with you, otherwise why would you be here? Something feels wrong about their exercise of authority to every single JW and JW apologist that comes to this forum—even if they only come to read.
The fact is, J.F. Rutherford wrested control of the company from those Russell left in charge and the core of individuals who pulled off the coup have been the ones to authorize ALL "authority" in the organization that has been handed down ever since. The Faithful and Discreet Slave (as currently identified) have no authority over anyone or anything.
I hope you choose to answer these two questions.
(1) Is it possible for me to be part of God's sole Channel of communication to all mankind without even knowing it and why do you so answer?
(2) If the true anointed have always been God's sole Channel of communication to all mankind, why did Jesus need to inspect all religions that claimed to be Christian in order to find the anointed and why would he need to choose them (persons who already were his brothers and already were adopted sons of God) in 1919 as his representatives?
Respectfully,
AuldSoul