"Obey" or "Be persuaded" at Hebrews 13.17 (page 2)

Wonderment

WireRider: "The people/former-people [of WT followers-?] can only see 2 or 3 times the WT/JW guaranteed the end of the world when you can prove on paper it was more then a dozen times -- but they cannot see those other worlds. How does that work?"

I am aware the WT Society did fail more than 2 or 3 times in their "end-of-the-times" predictions. The thing is that whether the WT failed 3, 10, 12 or more times does not change the fact that ‘Jesus is the only way to the Father,’ not a group of people claiming to be "the faithful and discreet slave" as the way to God. I think we can agree on that. Still, the subject of this post deals specifically with the meaning of the Greek word peithō ("persuade", "obey" in regards to those leading them) at Heb. 13.17, and any submitted comments on that are rightly welcomed.

Mephis

I think the question comes down to 'which Christians?' There was likely a very mundane reason for why Paul needed to have had a vision of Christ in order to claim a position of authority to anyone. And the hierarchy was present in 'orthodox' christianity very early. But other branches (eg Gnostics) don't seem to have followed that pattern - there's a good case to be made that the early church hierarchy was a direct response to the gnostic approach.

I've often wondered who is meant by 'leaders' here. If one takes a reading of this that it's something composed for Jewish Christians prior to 70 CE, then their leaders are the men in Jerusalem who claim to have authority from Christ himself. The phrase of vs. 17 is the same as in vs. 7. The leaders are those who gave the message to the believers. And if one accepts that Paul wrote this, those would be the very same men who sent messengers out to chase him for not doing what he's telling others to do here. If one, as many do now, view this as not being written by Paul then one gets the same point but a reinforcing of that direct apostolic authority which Paul later bought into with his vision. So I suppose really I'd personally wonder less about the phrasing of what's meant to be done and more about for whom it's done. The later interpretation placed upon this is obvious enough. But does that actually fit the context here? 1 Corinthians 11:16 (ignoring later addition possibility) suggests that people would cite other traditions of christianity when told to do something - even if it were an apostle doing the telling!

slimboyfat

Never knew this was such a live issue. Have you got a link to previous discussions?

Wonderment

Mephis,

You brought up some good points. Thanks!

Half banana

As a primary reason to start the JW beliefs, Russell thought he had cracked the date of "end times" by the Emphatic Diaglott's rendering of the word for presence... and look where that has lead us...

Nothing is ever going to be resolved by niceties of translation.

Wire rider , you have got the handle on the JW religion but can you supply sources for the $150 million heist by Rutherford?

Atlantis

WireRider:

Good job! You know you have won the debate when excuses are made such as:

but I fail to see the relevance of your comments

and

but I fail to see the relevance of your comments

Sounds like a broken record!

No matter what you tell them or even prove to them they will always come back with those excuses. Don't even waste your time. This is not the first time the same person has used those same excuses. Same old--same old!

WTUnderground!

Half banana

Mephis as I understand it, the early Jesuist christianity took its organisational structure directly from the pattern used by the earlier so called "pagan" religious cults. It would be appropriate to mention that they borrowed practically everything else including most doctrines, fables, imagery and ritual from the pagan christ cults as well.

In other words I think that the Gnostics were only one of many groups probably already using a traditional hierarchical ordering already of historical standing.

This included having a bishop (overseer) presbyters (older men) and deacons (lowly attendants to the material aspects of the church). As the numbers of believers for a particular cult grew then the importance of the management also grew and the bishop became the key man to make sure there was enough money to support both the welfare and feeding of the poor and the upkeep of the church building in a particular region.

Atlantis

Half banana:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As a primary reason to start the JW beliefs, Russell thought he had cracked the date of "end times" by the Emphatic Diaglott's rendering of the word for presence... and look where that has lead us...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good point! Not to mention that Russell did not accept many subjects in the Bible in the first place.

WTUnderground!

Mephis

Half banana,

it depends what we mean by 'traditional hierarchical ordering'. We may be at cross purposes here? I'm not so much looking at who handles the money and the title they get, but more at who gets to say 'jump' with interpretation of doctrine, if that makes sense?

There's several instances of gnostics being condemned from the 'orthodoxy' for not respecting hierarchy, even that of the traditional apostolic authority. They certainly seem to be an interesting bunch in terms of authority. The main thrust of several arguments against them is that they claim apostolic authority via personal revelation (which is what Paul did) which they then used to justify doctrinal changes. In contrast to that, 'orthodox' christianity became much more rigid, much more authoritarian, in its approach to doctrine with the development of ideas such as a rigid canon of 'holy scripture' and the idea of apostolic succession (Peter the first pope etc.).

eg Tertullian, Against Heretics

"Differences of theology are of no

concern to them as long as they are all agreed in attacking

the truth. They are all puffed up, they all promise knowledge.
Their catechumens are perfect before they are fully instructed.
As for the women of the heretics, how forward they are! They
have the impudence to teach, to argue, to perform exorcisms,
to promise cures, perhaps even to baptize. Their ordinations
are hasty, irresponsible and unstable. Sometimes they appoint
novices, Sometimes men tied to secular office, sometimes
renegades from us, hoping to bind them by ambition as they
cannot bind them by the truth. Nowhere can you get quicker
promotion than in the camp of the rebels, where your mere
presence is a merit. So one man is bishop today, another
tomorrow. The deacon of today is tomorrow's reader, the
priest of today is tomorrow a layman. For they impose priestly
functions even upon laymen."

Iown Mylife

@wirerider It was me with the unlike, once again I hit the wrong one, sorry it won't reverse

Marina

"Obey" or "Be persuaded" at Hebrews 13.17

Share this