No Governing Body in Paul's day

by The Searcher 9 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  The Searcher

  The given understanding of the Bible account at Acts 15 regarding the circumcision issue is that a "governing body" resolved the issue. Is this assertion based on Scriptural evidence?

  While Jesus walked the earth, some of his Apostles were contentious with each other regarding who would be superior to the others. Equality was clearly not on their minds.

  Did this attitude persist after Christ returned to heaven? These questions are answered when Paul's words at Galatians 2:1-9 are examined closely.

  Verse 1:

  Paul speaks about going up to Jerusalem "after fourteen years". For a "district overseer" like Paul, fourteen years is a long time to ignore a "governing body"!!! The truth is, it was the Holy Spirit who directed Paul, not a group of men. What impelled Paul to go and see these elders in Jerusalem?

  Verse 2

  tells us:

  Because of a revelation by Jehovah's Holy Spirit! Why did Jehovah "reveal" something to Paul and not to a "spirit-anointed governing body"?

  Verse 4

  Because false brothers had been brought in by some in Jerusalem, apparently to cause problems to Paul's ministry of teaching the nations. Also, they were spying on Paul, trying to subvert him and bring him under control of men in Jerusalem. Exactly who brought these ones in is not known, but whoever it was, they must have had some authority and prominence within the Jerusalem congregation in order to do so.

  Clearly, there was corruption within the ranks of the men in Jerusalem, and Paul, along with Barnabas and Titus were directed by the Holy Spirit to go up to Jerusalem and sort this out.

  Verses 5, 6 & 9

  show exactly how Paul viewed some of the men in Jerusalem - not as a God-appointed governing body, but rather as self-seeking men. Note his words -

  "to these we did not yield", "those who seemed to be something", whatever sort of men they formerly were", "to me, in fact, those outstanding men imparted nothing new".

  If these were God's anointed governing body, Paul would have been directed by Holy Spirit to yield.

  Paul describes them as men who seemed to be something - in other words, not what they appeared to be.

  He also made it clear that he was not impressed by their past histories - perhaps their association with Christ - because he stated that they told him nothing new!

  He refers to them as "outstanding" men, but it is evident that he did not consider them as such.

  He describes Peter, James and John as "ones who seemed to be pillars", thereby indicating that he had reservations.

  Galatians 2:11

  reveals further evidence that Peter was not viewed by Paul as part of a "governing body". No one in Jerusalem could "govern" Paul's understanding.

  Verse 9

  says "they gave me and Bar´na·bas the right hand of sharing together". This does not indicate that they were directed by a governing body as to their ministry. (the Spirit had already done that) It simply highlights the fact that "joint participation, or sharing together, was also denoted by a handshake or grasping of another’s hand". (it-1p.

  217)

  By examining Galatians 2:1-9, it becomes very clear that Jehovah used Paul to resolve the dispute about circumcision, not a "governing body" whom Paul clearly had to stand up to when given divine direction. The term Governing Body neither appears nor is implied in the Bible.
• 

  moshe

  Nicely done.
• 

  Disillusioned Lost-Lamb

  Nope, no mention of a worldwide brother hood or a unified (organized) religion either.
• 

  Terry

  The Jehovah's Witness Governing Body has made certain that specific teachings have been taught as True Doctrines of the True Faith only to turn around later and change those True Doctrines of the True Faith to something different.

  If holy spirit were leading them to these teachings we must ask: which time were they led? When it was wrong, or, now that it is presumably right?

  The Watchtower Society refers to these changes by calling them "adjustments" as though it were a sharpening of a fuzzy focus. Yet, changing a doctrine to its opposite is hardly that. An opposite teaching repudiates the one it replaces! This means one is determined FALSE in order that the newer one be TRUE.

  If Jehovah or Jesus were actually directing this Governing Body to "govern" (or "control") the teachings from one thing to its opposite, would it not

  change the definition of TRUTH into "Whim" instead? A sudden change of mind that is unexplained is a "Whim".

  When 1925 was publicly "marked" as the year of resurrection for ancient faithful men of old and later repudiated, this was "Whim". It was never

  E-X-P-L-A-I-N-E-D as to how the wrong conclusion was allowed to pass by the attention of holy spirit guidance, Jesus Christ approval and Jehovah soverign direction!

  The same could be said of the huge publicity campaign targeting 1975 as the "end of six thousand years of human history". It went unexplained how

  the year could be so important that it was the center of JW attention only to fade into silence.

  Was Jehovah not paying attention when he directed the Governing Body to publish the error? Was holy spirit asleep at the wheel? Was Jesus off ruling some other corner of the universe?

  If 1925 and 1975 needed to be taught, believed, published and embraced obediently we must ask what was TRUE about the TRUTH contained in those messages that the very opposite became reality instead?

  What source of authority could the Governing Body or anointed leadership or "faithful and discreet" slave point to to JUSTIFY such errors being taught as TRUTH leading to eternal life??

  It went without any explanation at all!!

  When "New Light" comes along no explanation is given how the "Old Light" got inserted in the pipeline in the first place.

  What was the process, for example, that made Governing Body members vote "Yes" on wrongly interpreting Romans 13:1 as--not the Governments of the World--but, as being Jehovah God and Jesus Christ?

  What was the process for that same Governing Body members to vote "No" on the same interpretation?

  How could it be explained that so-called false religions of Christendom had it right all along when Jehovah's spirit did not reside with them??

  There are never any answers given. Why? Because the teachings of the Governing Body are mere WHIMS.

  They are not adjustments which sharpen a fuzzy understanding into a clear understanding. They are guesses and wrong interpretations based

  on faulty reasoning eventually refuted by circumstance which repudiate them.

  Old men making things up tell gullible people what to think and how to act all around the world.

  Some of the things these old men teach lead to people dying or losing their loved ones unnecessarily.

  Why? Because they are defrauding people with false claims about their own power and authority.

  There is no GOVERNING BODY which channels Jehovah's true teachings. There are only phoney claims.

  Those who claim to be "anointed" by holy spirit have no special insight, understanding, clearer interpretation or jurisdiction over truth.

  How do we know?

  We know because they have PROVED IT by being wrong again and again without explanation!
• 

  Simon Morley

  Galatians only makes sense after you stop being a JW. Look at the facts:

  Three years after his conversion he travels to Jerusalem not to meet with a governing body, but to simply meet James and Peter. Now if there was a GB you would expect that Paul would be asked to make sure you check in with us and only do what we tell (command) you to do. It is then 11 years until he comes back to Jerusalem for the reasons TS states above.

  Now a parody:

  Two years after the death of Jesus, following his being born again, Pollock went to Dallas in 1997, where the internet states he was healed of his blindness and baptized by a well known JW called Anders. Anders chats about Jesus (as there are no writings about Jesus in 1997). Anders baptizes Pollock a few weeks later, not at an assembly (as the Governing Council, Sanhedrin in New York state as a rule) but in Lake Lewisville, nearby Dallas. In 2001 he tries to visit some people who knew Jesus in New York and they get along fine, agreeing to keep in touch. Meanwhile the Governing Council, Sanhedrin dismiss him as being “mentally diseased” and then ask a CO to look into what Anders did in Dallas. Anders gets publically reproved and a local needs talk is given stating that baptisms must only take place at authorized festivals called assemblies and that the BOE should have gone over the questions for baptism with Pollock first from the OM book, an oral law book. After all, the Governing Council, Sanhedrin claim divine authority or so is said but nothing is written at this point, just stories passed from one to another about Jesus’ life and ministry.

  For the next 11 years Pollock starts asserting that he received enlightenment not from any person, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. Pollock claims almost total independence from the Governing Council, Sanhedrin in New York revealing much “new light” on scriptural application and interpretation.

  In 2011, a close friend, Barney (who he had differences with in the past) who is in Arlington VA, tells of some problems with the Governing Council, Sanhedrin “interpretation” of the oral Law of Christ that is putting hardship on the Arlington congregation. Arlington is where followers of Christ were first called Christians and they are proud of that. The Arlington congregation like what Pollock says and trust him. They also have a lot of respect for Barney and ask them to go the Governing Council, Sanhedrin to set the matter straight. Rather than listening to Pollock and Barney they dismiss Pollock as not being a real Christian because his baptism is not valid, but in a kind way suggest he submits his concerns in writing. Meanwhile the local CO in Arlington is informed of Barney’s association with an apostate and that he should deal with this on his next visit. He contacts the BOE to round up all those who have been murmuring against what the Watchtower stated and make sure that the congregation understands that what is written by the Governing Council, Sanhedrin is without question. Pollock makes strong arguments backed up by scriptural references and historical background.

  Pollock begins his own writings in 2012 using the internet and a website to help the congregations he starts and frequently visits to keep in touch. Paul helps many congregations though this website to deal with numerous problems, recommendations, suggestions, interpretation of the Law of Christ, etc. He writes over a dozen major pieces that have a profound effect since the first account of Jesus emerged in 2002 written by Matty a friend of Jesus, 16 years after the death of Jesus in 1995. At the same time three others start writing accounts of Jesus including one of the friends Pollock visited in New York in 2001. Another person, Jim who was Jesus half brother, and recently became a Christian also starts writing as does another half brother of Jesus.
• 

  Crisis of Conscience

  Bookmarked
• 

  isaacaustin

  The Searcher, if there was actually a governing body present in Acts 15, it makes me wonder why Paul was not disfellowshipped and shunned as an apostate.
• 

  Simon Morley

  Isaacaustin:

  Precisely! everything Paul did would be grounds for disfellowshiping today.

  It was not until 49 AD that Matthew started to write his Gospel account - so Paul singlehandedly sets up christian congregations and sets them up without a governing body as can be seen with how congreagtions in Antioch do not seem to worry about Jerusalem until there are problems with a bit of Judaism creeping into the congregations.

  That is wholly understandable as Jerusalem is still the centre of Jewish faith and it would be hard not to want to simply get along with non christian Jewish family members.

  Interesting that Paul used letters (which were likely copied) as this was a quick and effective means of communication - what would he used today - likely email, blogs and this website!
• 

  leaving_quietly

  BTTT

  Preface to my comments: WT would have us believe that Paul went up to Jerusalem to get a decision on the matter of circumcision from the first century "governing body". The Searcher did a nice job of dispelling that, however, I wanted to add a few more observations based on Paul's first-hand account in Galatians 2.

  Gal 2:2 - And I laid before them the good news which I am preaching among the nations, privately, however, before those who were outstanding men, for fear that somehow I was running or had run in vain.

  Ok, comparing Galatians to Acts, we can see that Paul went to see the "outstanding men" (or "influential men" as some translations say), which turned out to be "the apostles and older men". However, contrary to my belief prior to yesterday when I read this, he met with these "privately". The multitude of the congregation was not involved. (Paul did meet with the congregation earlier, but this was a private meeting. With the entire congregation they "recounted the many things God had done by means of them" Acts 15:4.) Why privately? He explained: "for fear that somehow I was running or had run in vain." Not "running ahead", no, but simply so that his efforts to explain what he was preaching to the Gentiles was not wasted on everyone. 'First, let's get the "outstanding men" on board, then we can bring it to the rest.' Acts 15:5 states "some of those of the sect of the Pharisees that had believed rose up from their seats and said: “It is necessary to circumcise them and charge them to observe the law of Moses." This happened when Paul was meeting with the entire congregation, for verse 6 says: "And the apostles and the older men gathered together to see about this affair." So, verse 6 is where the private meeting begins.

  This was a huge AHA! moment for me. This, coupled with Galatians 2:4,5: "But because of the false brothers brought in quietly, who sneaked in to spy upon our freedom which we have in union with Christ Jesus, that they might completely enslave us— 5 to these we did not yield by way of submission, no, not for an hour, in order that the truth of the good news might continue with YOU."

  As The Searcher already mentioned, false brothers were brought in, however in the Acts account, you may recall that "there was no little dissention". The false brothers were among the "outstanding men" in that private meeting, such that Paul had to say "we did not yield by way of submission, no, not for an hour" (must've been a lengthy meeting!)

  So, what I get from these two accounts is that Paul, 17 years after being blinded by the Lord (the first three he spent in Arabia, then Damascus before going to Jerusalem to meet Cephas and James, then another 14 before he returned to Jerusalem a second time) gets a revelation to go to Jerusalem because of this issue that false brothers were bringing to him. His point of going? He was going, not to have them make a decision, but instead, to tell them how things are by revelation of Christ. (This is where WT teachings greatly differ... the apostles and older men were not making a decision... Paul was letting them 'catch up' on the teachings of Christ, and he knew it was going to be a real challenge.)

  Of course, after all of this, they agree and write the letter to the congregations saying as much.

  Let's wrap up:

  1. Those in Jerusalem were "outstanding men" (or "influential men") and never called a "Governing Body", or even a "council"

  2. False brothers snuck in (or, as Gal 2:4 say "were brought in"... by whom, I wonder?), trying to subvert Paul's teaching

  3. Paul, by way of revelation (Gal 2:2) went up to Jerusalem, essentially to straighten them out, but in a private meeting

  4. The "outstanding men" argued a lot over the issue because the "false brothers" were among them

  5. Paul did not back down (even bringing Titus, an uncircumcised Greek with him)

  6. The "outstanding men" finally came around to Paul's way of thinking (really Christ's way of thinking)

  Bottom line: no governing body in the first century existed to make a decision regarding circumcision. No, Paul was there to help the ones making the accusation (those false brothers, and anyone they could have influenced, even the apostles) understand the real teachings of Christ, that circumcision was not a requirement. He was there to adjust their thinking.
• 

  leaving_quietly

  One more thing... the letter they wrote (Acts 15:22-29) was an apology letter!!!

  "Then the apostles and the older men together with the whole congregation favored sending chosen men from among them to Antioch along with Paul and Bar′na·bas, namely, Judas who was called Bar′sab·bas and Silas, leading men among the brothers; 23?and by their hand they wrote:
  “The apostles and the older men, brothers, to those brothers in Antioch and Syria and Ci·li′cia who are from the nations: Greetings! 24?Since we have heard that some from among us have caused YOU trouble with speeches, trying to subvert YOUR souls, although we did not give them any instructions, 25?we have come to a unanimous accord..."