The need for a GB or FD slave?

avidbiblereader

The whole teaching of needing a FD slave hangs on one scripture that really isn't that clear; however in looking at the scriptures how would you/they explain the texts below from the Bible, whether they would classify you as a domestic or fellow anointed or other sheep?

Hebrews 8:10-12

10 “‘For this is the covenant that I shall covenant with the house of Israel after those days,’ says Jehovah. ‘I will put my laws in their mind, and in their hearts I shall write them. And I will become their God, and they themselves will become my people. 11 “‘And they will by no means teach each one his fellow citizen and each one his brother, saying: “Know Jehovah!” For they will all know me, from [the] least one to [the] greatest one of them. 12 For I shall be merciful to their unrighteous deeds, and I shall by no means call their sins to mind anymore.’”

Matt 23:10 10 Neither be called ‘leaders,’ for YOUR Leader is one, the Christ

From the NLT verse 10 states And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah

abr

Carmel

Frankly the scripture sounds to me there is no need for a "leadedership" telling people how to believe. Hence, no clergy, IMHO. carmel

Amazing

Hi Abr,

St. Paul was quoting partially from Jeremiah 31:31, I believe ... I don't have a Bible handy.

The fact that there exist "smallest" to the "greatest" in the verse you quote indicates some level of distinction in status. So, the GB might twist it to suit their existence. However, you are quite right about not needing what the JWs call a GB or the larger FDS group. However, the earliest Church was run by local Bishops. Some of these were in greater prominence than others. St. Peter was Bishop of Antioch before moving to Rome and becoming Bishop of Rome. St. Ignatius became Bishop of Antioch, as wel held in high esteem because he was personally groomed by St. Peter.

But, the Church did, and still does, consider "councils" of leaders to have weight and authority. The Council at Jerusalem in Acts is an example the Church considers as the basis to come together to decide matters of faith and morals. The First Ecumenical Council at Nicaea is an example of how the Church copied this example in Acts. It is supposed to be a rare event, attended by leading Bishops of various Holy Sees like Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, etc. After the schism between Rome and the Eastern Church in 1054, these Ecumencial Councils have not been held. Unfortunately, the Pope in Rome (yes there are Popes of other Holy Sees) has taken on too great a power role, and as such he will have to adjust this should the Catholic Church fully reunite with the Eastern Orthodox.

I am saying all of the above because even these great and large historic Churches limit the power and control of their leaders and the role of any ruling council. These Churches would never use the verse in Matthew about the "faithful and wise servant" as the basis to form an ever ruling body that constantly publishes rules and laws and directives. They have always applied ths verse as a parable regarding the conduct of individual Christians.

Jim Whitney

avidbiblereader

Hi Jim,

Thanks for the follow up post. I agree with you and there can be no doubt in any org, religion, company, ect that there are going to be those who are more prominent than others and this certainly was the case with the first century and the apostles. What always amazes me is the fact the apostles never pointed to themselves but alway the Christ and the need not to put men on pedistals or give them undo attention. Interesting about the first century and there convening in Jeruselem over circumsion,

The apostle Paul in Gal Ch 1 and then later in Ch 2, the apostle Paul didn't have any contact with the "governing Body" as the witnesses see it for 3 years after his conversion and only then did he see James and Peter, and then had no contact with them for 14 additional years but and apparently from the context didnt get their approval of his message to the Gentiles which goes against everything the Witnesses teach about needing to be connected to the GB. But again thanks for your insightful reply and have a wonderful day.

abr

some-xjw-guy

People seem to have forgotten that spirituality is a natural thing, this appears particularly prevalent in the Christian tradition. (but to be fair, it may very well be because of the sheer number of people involved)

What I've found is there is a clear difference between a religious leader and a spiritual leader, the former adheres to a belief system (even if it is someone that has some influence in its structure) and the latter is simply a living example, and the teachings flow out of the way they live their life, not the other way around. This is someone who doesn't try to gain followers but they find him or her, and they are not so much attracted by the teachings but rather by the way it's presented, since that is just another reflection of who they are. From this perspective, analysis of the belief structure is just rather mechanical and clumsy. One might find that the spiritual teacher in fact "agrees" with a lot of the teachings, but it isn't a result of collecting ideas and trying to fit them into a logical structure - it is just naturally true for them.

some-xjw-guy

By the way, clearly many will see the possibility of a charismatic leader in this picture, which of course is quite true in a sense. But whether someone abuses that relationship is a different matter, as with a relationship with any kind of intimacy I suppose.

compound complex

Greetings ABR,

Please see Ray Franz's comments on the fiction of the FDS class:

www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/125950/1.ashx

CoCo

Amazing

Abr,

Excellent points you made about St. Paul. Today it is still similar in Catholicism. Mother Teresa, for example, did what she did without Papel approval. In fact, to continue she had to fight Rome. Were she a JW, she would have been DFd for not agreeing and working with the GB.

It is odd that Fred Franzs would see that the Jerusalem Council was not the basis for a GB, and yet he went along with a GB being created. Well, we know that the GB is not about truth, but about power and control.

Jim W.

The need for a GB or FD slave?

Share this