1 Tim 3:1-10 promotes an organisation

besty

speaking with a hardline friend (oxymoron alert) tonight he used the above verse as proof that jehovah needs a hierarchical organization - otherwise why stratify the membership?

any refutation?

cheers

besty

R.F.

God doesn't NEED an organization.

Christians don't NEED an organization to attain salvation.

For ones that want to become leaders within the Church they must accept they are accountable to God. That's why those requisites are named.

No one NEEDS an organization to attain salvation. As we look through Paul's epistles his concern was for the building up of the Body of Christ. Ones taking leadership roles needed to be examples. That's why those things are named for one desiring to do so.

Anyone that says you NEED an organization to gain God's approval are missing the entire point of what Jesus himself, the apostles, and others preached.

besty

for the avoidance of doubt and to make it easy:

1 Timothy 3:1-10 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)

Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society
[NIV at IBS] [International Bible Society] [NIV at Zondervan] [Zondervan]

1 Timothy 3
Overseers and Deacons
1Here is a trustworthy saying: If anyone sets his heart on being an overseer,[a] he desires a noble task. 2Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him with proper respect. 5(If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God's church?) 6He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil. 7He must also have a good reputation with outsiders, so that he will not fall into disgrace and into the devil's trap.

8Deacons, likewise, are to be men worthy of respect, sincere, not indulging in much wine, and not pursuing dishonest gain. 9They must keep hold of the deep truths of the faith with a clear conscience. 10They must first be tested; and then if there is nothing against them, let them serve as deacons.

dust

Mark 9:38-40.
It's fine to be organised so one meets others, but one shouldn't monopolise God/Jesus/whatever.

Gopher

Notice, nowhere is the word "organization" actually used in that passage (or anywhere else in the Bible).

Narkissos

There is little doubt, imo, that the whole point of the Pastorals (1-2 Timothy-Titus) is about organising the church in a (relatively) hierarchical way, to promote an early form of "orthodoxy" and repress doctrinal and practical deviations (heresies). So I would readily grant your "hardline friend" that, in the author's mind, God wanted (if not needed) an "organisation" for Christianity.

However, it is also clear that the organisation of the incipient "great church" was nothing like the WT's "theocratic centralism" -- it's quite possible the author would have welcome the concept but the fact is it was not a possibility back then.

More importantly, perhaps, this is definitely not the only voice in the NT. Johannine Christianity, for instance, obviously cringed at such a pattern of organisational and doctrinal authority -- "you don't need anybody to teach you," (1 John 2:27)

LennyinBluemont

These verses don't mention who decides those who qualify. Does each decide for himself? It also doesn't mention that anyone has any authority over another, which is necessary for a hierarchy. "You are all brothers." That's the statement I always thought of when I meditated on the hierarchy of authority in THE org. So somebody's an overseer. So somebody's a deacon. Where does it say anywhere that either of them can tell me what to do, especially in areas not specifically addressed in scripture?

ozziepost

G'day besty:

Sounds like a typical dub thought but wrong nonetheless.

Perhaps you could ask your "oxymoron friend" to do something new, read the scripture in context, in context of the whole letter and in context of the time in which it was written.

Ask him what was the situation of congregations that Paul was writing to?

Also point out that being organised does not call for "an organisation". I'm sure he could appreciate that his mother/wife/evrybody needs some organisation in the home but that doesn't mean the home is an organisation in the style of the WTS. And that's how the christians were meeting, in homes. Not for them the palatial Kingdom Halls with sound systems, set times, and set programs. That becomes clear from the Pauline epistles where Paul advises order in their gatherings, people talking at will.

Still, at these gatherings they needed someone to lead, someone else to care for the "widows and orphans" and so on.

Incidentally, if he's so keen on applying 1 Timothy 3, perhaps he could ask his congregation why the MS don't do what their first century counterparts did - or would that look like "good works" to him?

Anyway, suggest your friend reads up, not just from the "Insight" volumes!, but read historically and from bible commentaries - he'd certainly learn something of what the situation really was, just as I have.

Cheers, Ozzie

timetochange

I don't think there's any reason to be paranoid about the word "organization", many of us live and work within entities that would be considered organizations. The early church was indeed organized but it was not ruled as such. The problem with the Watchtower is not that it's an organization but rather that it is an oligarchy. It is ruled by a small group of people who believe they sit in Jesus place and are authorized to send out a lightning bolt or two to keep the sheep in order. The faithful and discreet slave was to dispense food no where is he given rulership or governing power. That belongs to God and in turn to his Son.

ozziepost

By way of a P.S.:

Another favorite line by the dubs is, Jehovah has always had an organisation, so he must have one now.

Of course this is far from the truth for through much of human history Jehovah did not have anything remotely like an organisation, Not only that but Jesus never founded one, in fact there was little in the way of organisation for many years after, but still for the dubs it sounds good, eh?

What they're really meaning is that they need the WTS or "organisation™" for their salvation, for their access to God and so on. That is blatantly blasphemous for nowhere is that ttaught in scripture. Rather those "in Christ" are saved, not in an organisation. Those "in christ" don't need to perform works to earn their salvation - they are already saved. Why, you can't be saved twice! Nor can you be half saved - you either are or aren't. can we imagine those in the time of 1 Timothy 3 being told to turn in their field service reports and anyone who didn't was branded irregular or even inactive?

1 Tim 3:1-10 promotes an organisation

Share this