And Paul was not a part of the governing body???? Am I hearing this correctly or are these people making things up?
Apostles were first governing body????
by NeverKnew 28 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Captain Obvious
They use the example of the meeting of the "apostles and the older ones" in Jerusalem about the issue of circumcision. They take this as an example of a first century governing body. I think it was called a Synod? Correct me if you like. The issue was IN Jerusalem centrally, as it was the Jewish Christians who were snubbing the gentile Christians because they had more skin on their ding dongs. the matter was settled in Jerusalem not because there was a governing body there, but because there were more Jewish Christians there.
Paul made it clear that he didn't need any man or men telling him what to do. He wasn't invited to that meeting, though he did write about it.
-
prologos
Wt writers have it totally wrong:
They say
there was NO Faithfull & Discreet Slave giving spiritual food in the first century, even with all the writing going on, but
There was a Governing Body, as is today, directing on a weekly basis, with all congregations in compliance.
It is the other way around.
lots of original spiritual food then,
only a one time , reacting to emerging issues synod recorded.
In Rev 2 also, 7 AUTOMOUS congregations reporting to Jesus directly.
Read your bible daily before writing.
-
hoser
I am confused about the current understanding. I think that the apostles were the governing body but not the faithful and discreet slave. The faithful and discreet slave conviently didn't show up until 1919 or thereabouts.
hoser
-
prologos
and of course the significant writing, Pauls' was done outside the auspices of the "governing body"
perhaps it is the same today and
Brooklyn/Patterson does not know it -
yet.
-
DATA-DOG
There was no GB in the first century. The WTBTS cherry-picked a convenient passage to support their hierarchy. As time has progressed, they have had to constatly shore up that false teaching, culminating in the current nu-light. They should have built thier foundation on Christ.
I would suggest watching The Channel of God series by arp7601 on Youtube. There are several parts, all are excellent IMO.
-
AndDontCallMeShirley
Agree with Data Dog. There was no first century GB.
Show me one scripture that says there was a standing, ruling authority (a GB) in Jerusalem before or after the circumcision issue. There is none. As Captain Obvious correctly noted, the only reason that group met in Jerusalem was because the circumcision issue originated in Jerusalem, so logically, that's where the problem needed to be fixed.
If there was a GB, why did Paul either, a) make his own decisions as to where and when he would preach next, or b) he got his next assignment from the local Christian cong., such as when the Antioch cong. sent him out? If a GB existed, and Antioch ignored them and acted independently, then surely the Bible would have noted the flagrant disregard for "god's organizational arrangement".
Additionally, if there was a GB, why did Jesus address the seven congregations in Revelation directly? Shouldn't he have gone through a GB first and had them relay his instructions? If a GB existed, and Jesus ignored them, then what does that say about the whole arrangement?
The idea of a GB in the first century is a blatant fiction (i.e. lie!).
-
The Searcher
If you read Paul's account at Galatians chapter 2:1-11, Paul makes several things clear - he was divinely directed to go up to Jerusalem to enlighten those "pillars" that circumcision was not required for Christians, because someone prominent in Jerusalem had sent spies down to Paul's congregation in Antioch to subvert this "corrupt teaching". Paul is not complimentary in his opinion of the "mature" ones in Jerusalem. Neither did a fictional GB direct Paul's ministry and territory. They merely finally concurred that Paul was directed by Holy Spirit regarding the circumcision issue, and persuaded the rest of the dissenters to become united in thiss 'new understanding'.
-
frankiespeakin
No hint of a corporate stucture among the apostles, they were just ordinary country folks. So no there was no type of governing Body CEOs,in the printing business back then, it took about 15 centuries for the printing press made a showing so I think we can reasonably conclude no GB to spearhead a great warning work message of serve God or your'e dead meat mass produced by some entrepeneuring group of followers who proclaim their rightful ruller ship after the Master Jesus Christ vacated the premisis and left them in charge.
-
DATA-DOG
If the modern day GB is the FDS, then how can the 1st century GB NOT be FDS?! How can the Apostles and older men [ spiritually mature ] of the 1st century be hand-picked by Christ, or be chosen by those directly picked by Christ to feed his sheep, serve on the first Governing Body, FEED THE SHEEP, but NOT be included in the FDS!?!?
If you believe the parable is also prophetic, then you cannot have it both ways. The 1st century Governing Body, some of which were taught directly by Christ, are NOT the FDS, but Rutherford is?!?!? It's ridiculous! Of course, they cannot change it to be a parable now, to do so would open the floodgates of partakers giving their two cents, and it would destroy their hierarchy. They want power and prestige. They are receiving thier reward in full.
An Elder gave a comment straight from the Walsh trial today. We must have unity, the Org requires it. We can't have everyone giving their ideas. ONLY the GB can interpret scriptures, only they are authorized to interpret God's word. Well, they sure suck at it. There was even a sentence in the WT study saying that the GB interprets doctrine. LOL!! One Elder said that he heard that a GB member make a comment about refinements. They apparently have robust discussions about nu-light! So because they sit around dickering and arguing about doctrine, they must be the FDS! The evidence is abundant!