Who Really is The Faithful and Discreet Slave?

by Recovery 207 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  sabastious

  Well that's what we have the entire inspired Bible for. Just because something is not explained directly and completely in the context of the original statement, it does not imply that an explanation not contained in the original statement is false. That's a weak and misleading argument especially when we consider that there are many situations in the Bible where the original context did not explicitly explain the meaning/application of a statement/prophecy.

  The verses in question are a parable and are designed to be interpreted for the purposes of epiphany. The Watchtower interprets the parable wrongly by applying it to a single group of men. It's the Watchtower that ignores the "entire inspired Bible" when interpreting the parable. They simply use it to create and enforce power. When they were called out to Victoria Australia for not complying with the "Working With Children Act" they sent a represenative that informed the Victorian court that the Faithful and Discreet slave were not a legal entity and essentially not real. This is because even THEY know that their interpretation of the parable is bunk and a means to control their populace.

  If the faithful slave is describing a group of faithful people why is there a distinction between the faithful slave and the domestics? If there are basically two fundamental classes, why does the parable carry the differentiation between the responsibility of the faithful slave over the domestics? Why is the slave appointed over the belongings and not the domestics? How could all of Jesus' faithful ones be appointed over all his belongings from the time there were first faithful slaves until his arrival (which as you affirm is more than 2,000 years later)?

  Think of a cafeteria, there are servants and then there are guests. The "faithful slaves" are people who have taken it upon themselves to lead and teach in due season. They are not appointed, they are just slaves taken from the domestics who are given food to serve to the people. No single group of people or single man (Charles Taze Russell for instance) can be possitively identified as fulfilment of this parable.

  Since the faithful slave represents all faithful followers of Christ, these two class would exist from the time of Jesus' arrival in the first century, not just during his coming. Verse 48 proves this when it says: "But if ever that evil slave should say in his heart, ‘My master is delaying'.." So the 'evil slaves' would exist BEFORE the Master returned.

  This makes sense to me, but like I said there is no identifying the faithful slaves, that's why the question is left open ended. Only when the master returns is the faithful slave successfully identified and rewarded. However the given criteria can still be used to ascertain the likely role that preachers of the Gospel would fill if the master returned.

  This is exactly my point. How could the faithful slave represent all faithful followers of Christ and at the same time have the responsibility to feed the children of God at the proper time? Is every so-called Christian feeding the children of God? Your own interpretation debunks itself.

  Well, let me rephrase. The pool that the slaves are taken out of is the entire human population. They are taken FROM the domestics which signify everybody who didn't choose to take a leadership position in regards to the Gospel. The faithful slaves see a need and fill it, but they are not identified by any particular group or sect.

  The rest of your statement is just rhetoric and opinion. I can't help but notice you pushed your viewpoints and your interpretation, instead of what the Bible tells us. Isn't it interesting JW's can prove who the faithful slave is from the scriptures yet the opposers can only offer up what they think the interpretation is without using a single scripture?

  I didn't push anything, I answered the question you posed. The JW's cannot prove that the faithful and discreet slave is the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses and like I said there is written proof that they believe it's all a bunch of crap. They are not interested in Bible truth they are interested in money and power.

  -Sab
• 

  moshe

  The no-name slave sure were proud of themselves in 1984 with their prediction-- and so were all the unnamed elderly 1914 generation JWs on the cover (most were living at Bethel). Today, We know their names and when they ALL died. So much for Jesus feeding them their ideas and they in turn providing the "meat in due season" that the obsequious JWs have lapped up. Honesty demands that JWs reject the pompous WT leaders who continue to falsely claim divine direction and in turn demand total obedience from JWs.

  Thanks to jwfacts-dot-com--

  
• 

  Recovery

  Start by reading the passages before and after that one(*).

  Have done so numerous times.

  They are all about being prepared, about not knowing the day and time.

  Well everything in Matthew 24 is in answer to this question in verse 3: "Tell us, When will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?”
  Now read the "faithful servant" passage, staying mindful of that context.

  Okay

  What is that passage about? Is it an abrupt change in topic to identify a ruler of the faithful, immediately followed by a return to the previous topic? Or is it consistent with the other passsages in Matthew 24 and 25, a warning to always be ready because you never know when the time--your time--will come?

  Well the entire chapter of Matthew 24 is about Jesus' presence and the conclusion of the system of things. There is definitely more involved with Jesus' presence than just being ready because you don't know the day nor the hour. That is a ridiculous line of reasoning and you know it.

  The Watchtower interpretation only makes sense in isolation. It does not fit when the passage is read in context.

  Actually the WT's interpretation makes perfect sense when we consider the context. Surely, Jesus' would provide a spiritual feeding program for his followers during such turbulent and gruesome days. Jesus is Head of the Congregation isn't he?

  So again, we have another post that has yet to scripturally provide a better explanation than that provided by JW's.
• 

  King Solomon

  Sheeze, peepol, It's not a prophecy, it's a PARABLE.

  Parables are teaching devices, hypothetical scenarios designed to TEACH some principle, serving as a short moral story.

  It's like if I told you one of Aesops Fables, and you asked, "who IS the boy who cried wolf supposed to be?"

  Don't be that derp!!
• 

  sabastious

  So again, we have another post that has yet to scripturally provide a better explanation than that provided by JW's.

  It appears you are suffering from confirmation bias. The explanation by the Governing Body is not subscribed to even by the Governing Body. What does that say about that particular interpretation's validity? Anyone can make a claim, but not everyone can back it up.

  Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses. People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about gun control, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

  A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people's conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

  Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in military, political, and organizational contexts.

  Actually the WT's interpretation makes perfect sense when we consider the context. Surely, Jesus' would provide a spiritual feeding program for his followers during such turbulent and gruesome days. Jesus is Head of the Congregation isn't he?

  God takes care of his children under all circumstances. The food stream was never interupted. The "food" is a reference to manna in the Exodus story. "God feeds his people in times of distress" through risen prophets is the general message being conveyed. You simply stating that the GB has the superior interpretation of the scripture doesn't make it so. Convienently this particular explanation creates an incredible amount of absolute power and hands it to the men in Brooklyn. How convenient. It's North Korea in religion form.

  -Sab
• 

  DATA-DOG

  If you believe the scriptures then ANYONE has to chance to be an FDS. It is an individual opportunity. You can also be a slave who is not faithful or discreet due to ignorance, or one who KNOWS what to do but does not. The JW application of the FDS is a myth. The rank and file equate the FDS with the GB despite the official doctrine which states the GB " represent " all the FDS class. So the FDS is a myth used to gain unquestioning loyalty from the rank and file. Any who claim to be anointed are not really of any account or listened to unless they are Elders or CO's or high ranking. There are specific articles stating that " anointed " ones do not claim to have special insights or more knowledge than local Elders. Of course these articles apply to any non-GB or non-high ranking JW who claims to be anointed. The GB of course have special spiritual insight that normal anointed do not. This way no pesky upstart anointed ones can upset the corporate apple cart by pointing out non-biblical teachings coming from the GB. They have had 130 years to develop an amazing system and complex system of deception.
• 

  moshe

  Surely, Jesus' would provide a spiritual feeding program for his followers during such turbulent and gruesome days.

  uhh, calling the stuff that comes out of the WT writing department food, doesn't make it so-- (GB-governing body)

  
• 

  moshe

  We had a good example of what happens to followers who lap up the unverified "meat in due season" they got from their humble teacher, Harold Camping.

  They even copied the same playbook the WT leaders used for over 100 years- saying the first failed date was an 'invisible" fulfillment! It was still going to happen, but in October! The WT leaders do it better- they moved the failed 1914 generation forward another whole 30 year generation- and the JWs all took it up the keester with a smile- hahhaah.

  
• 

  tootired2care

  Assuming for the moment that the bible is true. I've always thought it was just a challenge to anyone to pick up the torch and prove they have what it takes to be a good provider (peddler of the Tyranny that god offers). The WTS has tried and failed, so the question is who is going to try next?
• 

  Recovery

  The verses in question are a parable

  Yes we know that. Jesus is known for his great parables, many of which had literal, serious implications for his followers. What is your point?

  and are designed to be interpreted for the purposes of epiphany.

  Well thanks for your opinion but my question was asking for a better scriptural explanation of the parable.

  The Watchtower interprets the parable wrongly by applying it to a single group of men.

  The June 15, 2009 Watchtower comments: "It (Spiritual Israel) came into existence with the outpouring of God’s spirit at Pentecost 33 C.E. Thereafter, all spirit-anointed Christians became part of the nation that now served as the slave class appointed by the Master, Jesus Christ. " Doesn't sound like the WT interprets the parable applying to a "single group of men" and even if they did interpret it as such, you still have not proven them scripturally wrong for their interpretation yet you so forthcomingly pronounce it as wrong.

  It's the Watchtower that ignores the "entire inspired Bible" when interpreting the parable.

  Not at all. There are over 70 scriptural references in just 4 paragraphs of information under the heading "Faithful and Discreet Slave" in the Insight Book, page 805. Yet you have still failed to provide just one scriptural reference for your interpretation and yet the WT is the one ignoring the Bible? Who really is ignoring the Bible sabastious, you or the WTS?

  They simply use it to create and enforce power

  Thanks for your opinion, but I'm still waiting on that scriptural refutation of JW's interpretation of the FDS.

  When they were called out to Victoria Australia for not complying with the "Working With Children Act" they sent a represenative that informed the Victorian court that the Faithful and Discreet slave were not a legal entity and essentially not real. This is because even THEY know that their interpretation of the parable is bunk and a means to control their populace.

  Well I would never read in a Watchtower where the anointed claim to be a legal entity. I don't see how thousands of anointed Christians who have various responsibilities all over the world could be considered a 'legal entity'. Just because something isn't considered a 'legal entity' does not mean it doesn't exist. What type of reasoning is that?

  Think of a cafeteria, there are servants and then there are guests. The "faithful slaves" are people who have taken it upon themselves to lead and teach in due season. They are not appointed, they are just slaves taken from the domestics who are given food to serve to the people. No single group of people or single man (Charles Taze Russell for instance) can be possitively identified as fulfilment of this parable.

  Well that's funny because the Bible clearly says the faithful slave is appointed by the Master, Christ Jesus. So your interpretation definitely could not be correct since 'people take it upon themselves' to feed the children of God and are not actually appointed to do so by the Head of the congregation. I don't know which faithful slaves you're following. You say no single group of people can be positively identified as fulfillment of this parable, yet you earlier stated that the FDS represents all faithful followers of Christ (one group of people). You are contradicting yourself.

  This makes sense to me, but like I said there is no identifying the faithful slaves, that's why the question is left open ended.

  According to your interpretation the faithful slaves are faithful followers of Christ. Jesus said "All will know that you are disciples if....", "you will recognize those men by their fruits".. and so forth yet you are saying there is no identifying Jesus' faithful followers?

  Only when the master returns is the faithful slave successfully identified and rewarded.

  The faithful slave is providing proper food at the proper time before the Master arrives. Since Jesus appointed the slave before he arrives (again), then the slave would have to already be identified.

  However the given criteria can still be used to ascertain the likely role that preachers of the Gospel would fill if the master returned.

  Yes. Why don't we examine some of that criteria? I've yet to see you use or quote a single scripture. Moreover, you've failed to prove that JW's interpretation of the parable is wrong, so I'm not really sure if you can even provide 'criteria' that would be used to ascertain the likely role that preachers of the Gospel would fill.

  Well, let me rephrase. The pool that the slaves are taken out of is the entire human population. They are taken FROM the domestics which signify everybody who didn't choose to take a leadership position in regards to the Gospel. The faithful slaves see a need and fill it, but they are not identified by any particular group or sect.

  Please provide scriptural references to backup these statements. Otherwise, are you just going to continue throwing out your own private interpretations of how the parable is fulfilled? Again, not a single scripture quoted or referenced.

  I didn't push anything, I answered the question you posed

  No you did not. To answer the question, one would have had to provide scriptural support for a better interpretation than that of JW's. You didn't quote a single scripture so how could you possibly have answered the question?

  The JW's cannot prove that the faithful and discreet slave is the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses

  JW's don't believe the FDS is the Governing Body. You cannot even accurately represent what we teach yet you claim we are wrong. You have done nothing but eject your own private interpretations of what the parable meant and have failed to provide the scriptural presentation/refutation alluded to and asked for in the original post. You cannot prove the faithful and discreet slave interpretation by JW's is incorrect and therefore you did not answer the question satisfactorily. You tried but failed miserably.

  and like I said there is written proof that they believe it's all a bunch of crap. They are not interested in Bible truth they are interested in money and power.

  Sure, sure, sure! Who am I to argue against the private scriptural interpretations and mighty Biblical arguments of the mighty sabastious?