Prophecies and 'end' (page 3)

EliJah

Well, I have read beliefs of the W.T.S. and they seem to have quite a few good answers to many questions. I still do not understand the faithful and discreet slave belief.

What is the origin of the faithful and discreet slave?

EliJah

It was originally a slave, in the person of Charles Taze Russell. After his death, Rutherford took the mantle but eventually began to teach that it was a class of people. That teaching is not founded on Scripture as far as I can tell. No Witness has been able to substantiate Scripturally that the Faithful and Discreet Slave is a class.

The insidious nature of this teaching is not readily apparent to a new student. As a student studies, they are taught to rely on that Slave instead of and as a replacement for the Bible and Christ.

Although most Witnesses never really think about it in these terms, that is the effect of their "educational program." For instance, most Witnesses would not believe there was anything wrong with the following expression:

"Jehovah's organization today is a modern day ark, into which he is ushering all sorts of flesh for salvation."

I have heard similar comments from the platform, comments in the Watchtower study, and in conversations with Witnesses. This thinking is based on information from the "Slave":

w71 7/15 p. 446 Circumcised in Heart and Ears
There is a remnant of this Zion class still on earth, representing God's organization. This is where he invites those to come who realize their need for a place of safety, similar to the provision God made at the time of the Flood. He then provided the ark, wherein he "kept Noah . . . safe with seven others."

No true Jehovah's Witness that I know would think of wondering whether Christ had been supplanted by an organization as God's means for salvation. Not only has that been changed, the need for a personal relationship with Jesus has been perverted into a need for a personal relationship with a corporation.

In my opinion, insidious doesn't begin to touch describing how vile this treachery is.

Respectfully,
OldSoul

EliJah

45 “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time? 46 Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. 47 Truly I say to YOU , He will appoint him over all his belongings.

48 “But if ever that evil slave should say in his heart, ‘My master is delaying,’ 49 and should start to beat his fellow slaves and should eat and drink with the confirmed drunkards, 50 the master of that slave will come on a day that he does not expect and in an hour that he does not know, 51 and will punish him with the greatest severity and will assign him his part with the hypocrites. There is where [his] weeping and the gnashing of [his] teeth will be.

Well it seems to me that there is ony one slave based upon the scriptures above. Notice how it mentions fellow slaves apart from the one slave in verse 49.

And also, why does it ask "who really is the faithful and discreet slave"? Is this a hidden mystery from God? Thanks for your reply :)

EliJah

jamesd2004

thanks everyone again for the replys...many thanks! :)

OldSoul

EliJah,

I believe anyone can make themselves a faithful and discreet slave, just as anyone could say in his heart, "My Master is delaying."

James2004,

You are welcome! Come back and visit for tips on reasoning with your JW classmates.

Respectfully,
OldSoul

jamesd2004

oldsoul are you babtised? what are ur beliefs if u dont mind me asking?

james. :)

OldSoul

JamesD2004,

Yes. I am baptized. I will be happy to discuss my beliefs by Private Message with you, if you like.

Respectfully,
OldSoul

peacefulpete

The Wt uses the Faithful and Discreet Slave parable so as to justify it's claim to authority and doctrinal superiority over others. However by reading the parables themselves anyone without that indoctrination would in fact draw a very different understanding. Read the Luke 12:35-48. There the author of Luke uses the F&DS parable in a very different context. Matt slips it in his expansion of Mark 13 in an apocalyptic context. Luke places it alongside another parable involving Master and slaves, in fact directly connects the two parables with Peter's question. This means the author of Luke understood the parable to be a teaching tool not a prophecy. The slave in both Matt and Luke has choices to make, be conscientious and dutiful or lazy and abusive. The rewards being a promotion or a beating. The Wt isolates Matt 24:45-47 as referring to a class predestined to be a governing/legislating power over the modern congregations, and the balance of the parable as referring to "apostates" that is, those who do not accept the governing of the first class. This division and application is even less natural in Luke, which is why they almost always refer to Matt 24.

As has been discussed many times here they have shot themselves in the foot by making changes in interpretation of the surrounding context of the F&DS parable in Matt 24. They changed their spin of the words of verse 47 many times over the years (check older indexes). Either they have received the "appointment over all things" already as the power of the modern "Governing Body" or they yet await this appointment when they go to heaven. It's a problem either way. If they interpret the words, "appoint over all things" as when they go to heaven then they have pulled out their one verse that legitamizes their power over every JW.

Because they have recently felt it necessay to adjust their take on verses 40-44 as being yet future (judgement at Armagedon), verse 45 really sticks out as anachronistic, it should mean that no designation of "faithful" or "evil" has been made much less any "appointment over all things".

To sum up, the parable was not intended by either writer of Matt and Luke to be a prophecy let alone be a proof text for a bunch of old guys in NewYork to direct a cultlike adventist church. It seems very clear the author's message was that the slave in the parable is every Christian, who being faced with a delay of the return of Jesus, (note that this parable is not in Mark, the first to be written) was to continue speading their religion rather than become involved in vice.

Prophecies and 'end'

Share this