The apostle's Paul reproof...

by MacHislopp 5 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  MacHislopp

  Hello everyone,

  a small question:

  According to the following text, Paul , in Antioch relates a reproof that he
  gave to Peter and others because "they were not walking straight …"

  *** Rbi8 Galatians 2:11-14 ***

  11 However, when Ce'phas came to Antioch, I resisted him face to face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before the arrival of certain men from James, he used to eat with people of the nations; but when they arrived, he went withdrawing and separating himself, in fear of those of the circumcised class.
  13 The rest of the Jews also joined him in putting on this pretense, so that even Bar'na·bas was led along with them in their pretense. 14 But when I saw they were not walking straight according to the truth of the good news, I said to Ce'phas before them all: “If you, though you are a Jew, live as the nations do, and not as Jews do, how is it that you are compelling people of the nations to live according to Jewish practice?”

  So in few words the Scriptures testify that Paul…reproved Peter and the others , guilty
  of "…putting on this pretense .." in other words guilty of hypocrisy.
  Now these reproved ones, from what the WTS writes, were members of
  "….the existing governing body of the 1st century"!

  Something's wrong … along the line?? Members of the governing body reproved....??

  Agape, J.C. MacHislopp
• 

  Sunbeam

  It's quite simple really, MacH. The GB were, after all, merely fallible men. They got a bit overenthusiastic at the dinner table and, as a result, a few of the Christians decided (of their own accord) that they should change their eating habits.

  Fortunately, at just the right time, Jehovah God provided new light via Paul, who was able to clarify the situation.

  It doesn't mean that everything else they did should be doubted too. After all, they were the ones who had taught the new Christians everything they knew, so there was nowhere else for them to go.

  Hope this helps.

  Sunbeam (learning how to speak with forked tongue)
  xxx
• 

  anglise

  Right, not only were they reproved but the account of the meeting and what was said was written down and circulated for all to see.

  Nothing was behind closed doors.

  When will the r&f JW be accorded such treatment not only of local (and I dont mean personal private info) but things that the GB discuss and then have implemented that could then mean life or death to a loyal jdub.
• 

  ozziepost

  When will the r&f JW be accorded such treatment not only of local (and I dont mean personal private info) but things that the GB discuss and then have implemented that could then mean life or death to a loyal jdub.

  But when it came off the eighth floor (or wherever it is these days!) it was L A W !

  Cheers,
  Ozzie

  Freedom is not having to wear a tie.
• 

  MacHislopp

  Hello anglise,

  excellent observation!

  "Right, not only were they reproved but the account of the meeting and what was said was written down and circulated for all to see.
  Nothing was behind closed doors.
  When will the r&f JW be accorded such treatment not only of local (and I dont mean personal private info) but things that the GB discuss and then have implemented that could then mean life or death to a loyal jdub."

  I do agree 100% with your statement. I've always disliked, greatly , these kind of closed
  door meetings, hush hush, expecially when " dealing with appointed brother" guilty of
  very serious misconduct, unworthy… for any Christian!
  For ex. why not disclosing the reason why R. Franz was
  no longer a member of "the governing body "?

  Agape, J.C. MacHislopp
• 

  Loki

  Its been a while since I was "in", but I seem to remember the r&fJW being taken to a "back room" by the loving elders after a meeting, leaving the whole congregation wondering what they had done "wrong". These poor publishers would then get some strange looks and receive diffidence from their loving brothers once released. Never knew when an elder was in "trouble" though, did we (or their children, come to think of it)? No special privliges? Hah!