marcopolo... I'm not sure if you're asking "What Is A Cult?" so if you are, check this out:
The Faithful Steward and it's Governing Body
by Mickey mouse 51 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Narkissos
Para 10 of the article says that all of the annointed engage in the preaching work,yet Ephesians 4 v11 says "some as evangelizers " not all.
LOL. Very good point.
-
hamsterbait
"ONLY A SMALL NUMBER WERE USED TO WRITE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE"
Of course we know now that there is a whole "Body of Christian Teaching that have become part of the Bible " (ie Witchtower publications. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)
They are of course reiterating this point so we know that only the Gibbering Buddy is used by God to feed the flock at the proper time.
AS Dear SAint Freddie F of Brooklyn said - may his beloved bones rot forever - the other annointed not used this way are distributing food by supporting and promoting what they read in the Witchtower.
HB
-
hamsterbait
As for Ren's point on Acts 15:
Acts 21:25 - The Jerusalem brothers actually INFORM Paul of something he shoud have already known about. So what really happened. This is almost like the deceit during the 1916 power struggle at Crooklyn.
This shows hw the two accounts in AC 15 and 21 are fabricated by more than one writer.
The WTBTS has contradicted itself and lied and denied about so many things. Any sensible person would research very deeply before trusting them with the teachings they need for salvation.
HB
-
jonathan dough
Here's the problem. There is no such thing as the 144,000 annointed Jehovah's Witnesses. I believe I prove this at
http://144000.110mb.com/144000/index.html
The following is the introduction to this detailed treatise.
Introduction
This lengthy paper is written primarily for the benefit of those Jehovah's Witnesses who feel trapped by the Society's legalistic arguments and want out. Many are fearful of even glancing at these pages believing that something bad will happen to them, but what they really should be afraid of is not paying heed and the risk of committing an unforgivable sin. When the Pharisees attributed the source of Jesus' power to heal and drive out demons to satan rather than the Holy Spirit they blasphemed the Holy Spirit and committed what some argue is the only unforgivable sin (Matt. 12:22-32).
It is no great secret that the Jehovah's Witnesses attribute the Catholic and Protestant churches' authority to heal, exorcize and minister to the power of satan. But if the Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong, which they are, they are blaspheming the Holy Spirit; this includes all Jehovah's Witnesses who advocate these beliefs through the dissemination of Watchtower Bible and Tract Society literature related to these issues. Rather than dissuading continuous inquiry into the nature and scope of truth, the Bible encourages it for as the apostle Paul cautioned, "be sure of all things."
The Jehovah's Witnesses are hindered in their ability to see their way through the morass of Society literature by four things related to the method employed in analyzing Scripture. First, rather than weighing all of the evidence there is a strong tendency to be satisfied with any answer, argument or supporting fact no matter how weak. But anyone can come up with an answer or opposing argument; lawyers do it all the time. What really matters is whether it is the correct answer, the most valid argument. One must weigh all of the evidence, not just some of it.
Secondly, the Society's theories are laced with hair-splitting and often inconsequential distinctions. Just because the walls in the bedroom are painted green it doesn't automatically follow that the thief buried the treasure in the back yard. Related to this is a third tool used to shore up their doctrines, namely, they too often read things too narrowly which makes it easier for them to deflect criticism. And lastly, one is left with the unmistakable impression that they don't want their own people to really know what the Society is teaching because core doctrine is scattered all over the place resulting in a literary shell game; and great lengths have been taken to muddy the intellectual waters This creates confusion and contradictions to a surprising degree which leaves the reader to rely on the Society's "understanding." Consequently, what might appear to be the work of some lofty, divine will is in all probability the work of some very crafty lawyers, among others.JD II
-
Awakened at Gilead
My take on this subject from my Gielad experience:
-
marcopolo
which paragraphs the WT suggest that the GB is a CULT?
-
donuthole
Oh boy -- where to begin on this one? How about with their faulty historical application --
Paragraph 7 correctly indentifies that the nature of an "apostle" is one who is sent forth to proclaim the good news. Today we might more often use the term missionary. However the paragraph errs when it suggests that this missionary-like role was somehow displaced and "apostle" came to mean "office of oversight". If you look at the entire New Testament, the "office of oversight" is not exclusive to the apostles, as "overseer" is commonly used to apply to local elders.
In selecting a replacement of Judas the criteria was clear, it had to be someone who was with them from the beginning and was a witness of Jesus' resurrection together with the other apostles. Why? Because as an "apostle" such one would be "sent out" to preach the "good news" which included the message of the resurection of Jesus.
Paragraph 9 states the following, "Paul and Barnabas, under the direction of holy spirit, were sent out as missionaries by the Antioch congregation. They also became known as apostles, although they were not included in the original 12." This statement shows again that "apostle" was synonymous with "missionary". When Paul and Barnabas were sent out as "apostles" is wasn't to go to Jerusalem to be a member of some "Governing Body", rather it was to preach the Good News among the nations. Further Paul names other apostles in his letters outside of the 12, who were similarly invovled in this work.
The paragraph goes on to mention that Barnabas and Paul's "appointment was confirmed by the governing body in Jerusalem". This is a huge twist and though the paragraph cites the book of Galatians it makes me wonder if the writer of the article has even read it. Specifically in Galatians 1:15-17 Paul makes very clear that when he received his calling from Jesus Christ he DID NOT GO UP TO JERUSALEM TO SEE THOSE THAT WERE APOSTLES BEFORE HIM.
The first two chapters of Galatians is basically a defense of Paul's apostleship against the apparent pillars of the congregations Jerusalem (who he names as Peter, James, John ). Paul is saying that he received his calling to preach the good news to the Gentiles directly from Jesus and that Jerusalem had nothing to do with it. He further states that he returned to Jerusalem 14 YEARS AFTER he was acting as a missionary, to share with them the work he was doing among the Gentiles and to help settle a matter where those in Jerusalem were causing trouble for Gentile converts (mainly regarding circumcism). Now think about that, the so-called "governing body" in Jerusalem didn't confirm his appointment for FOURTEEN YEARS. It is laughable to suggest that they held some kind of authority or rather he was seeking their approval. Rather what actually happened was that they acknowledged the work he was doing among the Gentiles and gave him their blessing. Now this is just my feeling on the matter, but I don't doubt had the pillars of Jerusalem told Paul they disagreed with his apostolic ministry that he would have ignored them and continued on considering how he claims to have personally rebuked Peter for shunning the Gentiles in Galatians 2. Also note who Paul lists being in Jerusalem in Galatians 1 & 2. He speaks about seeing only Peter (not the other 12) and then fourteen-years later Peter, James (not one of the 12), and John, later in his final trip to Jerusalem before his arrest he deals only with James, the brother of Jesus. So you have to ask, if there was a central "Governing Body" in Jerusalem made up of the 12, where were they?
The paragraph concludes saying "shortly after that, Paul had a part in dispensing spiritual food. He wrote his first inspired letter." So here the paragraph ties "dispensing spiritual food" with writing a letter that became a book of the Bible. (Interesting enough scholars place Galatians as the first "book" Paul wrote. If so this meeting with the "pillars" of Jerusalem really made an impression.) According to the Watchtower then, dispensing "spiritual food" in the first century involved writing what later become accepted as the New Testament. Think about this, if the Watchtower is correct, during all of his preaching as an apostle, Paul hadn't been dispensing "spiritual food", it was only on those limited occasions when he was writing Bible books. This is important point that will be touched on in the next paragraph.
Paragraph 10 attempts to show that only a fraction of the "spirit-begotten Christians" were involved in overseeing the preaching and work and preparing spiritual food. It further points out that only eight men were used to write the 27 books of the Bible. Once again it wants to link "preparing spiritual food" intimately with writing Bible books, disregarding any other teaching and preaching work accomplished by these men. I'd also like to again point out that the primary writer of the New Testament canon was the Paul of Tarsus. As was already shown, he wasn't hanging out in Jerusalem as part of some central "governing body", but rather was a traveling missionary. In fact his "books of the Bible" consist of letters to the various congregations he had preached the good news to, as well as those who had assisted him preaching activity. So if the Watchtower were correct, the "spiritual food" being published in the 1st Century was not coming from the Governing Body in Jerusalem, but when a traveling missionary, who only visited Jersusalem on a few unique occasions.
In this we also have to ask what about the other apostles? The ones that didn't write Bible books and the ones that were inexplicably not around whenever Paul visited Jerusalem to deal with the issue of Gentile Believers? Were they not fulfilling their responsbility as a "faithful slave"? Historically, we do not know exactly what became of the 12 apostles. After the opening chapters of Acts the Bible is silent on the matter outside of Peter. Traditionally it is accepted that the remaining apostles preached the good news throughout the inhabited earth as missionaries. Some of these traditions are stronger than others, for instance is quite likely that Thomas carried the good news to India. Regardless, the notion that these twelve apostles remained in Jerusalem as a Governing Body is severely challenged.
So you read an article like this and it makes you wonder why it is being written. If I had to guess it is to shoot down the notion that any of the "anointed" outside of the central "Governing Body" have authority or obligation to provide "spiritual food". However, if you look at this strictly in a JW context, there would be more Biblical evidence for some brother outside of Bethel in the missionary field providing "spiritual food" independent of Governing Body.
-
PSacramento
We need to remember that the apostolictic line died with the last apostle, after that it was carried on by the elders and members of the congregation.
No one had a superiour position over another, Jesus made that very clear and when things needs to be discussed, the whole congregation met - Apostles ( untill there were none left), Elders and the rest of the congregations.
Since the current GB or the WT doesn't have any tracebale lineage to these 1st and 2nd century followers of Jesus, they have no claim on being anything other than the heads of an organization, along the lines of the Vatican council, though one can argue that the Vatican has at least TIES to the early elders and apostles.
-
donuthole
It is to my intense shame that I can still think like a JW. In reflecting on this article I'm surprised that the GB didn't go all the way and reassign the identity of the FDS strictly to the GB, who feeds the domestics (the other anointed little flock) and received Jesus' belongings (the other sheep). The only problem would be that the GB didn't really exist until the 70/80's and the FDS was selected in 1918 according to the JW timeline.