Is The "Evil Slave Class" Still Viewed As JWs Have Taught Over The Years?

minimus

With the new understanding of the "FDS" , is the previous material regarding the "evil slave class" still current?

They say the evil slave had its beginning with the view of many that Russell was the Faithful Slave. Rutherford also accepted this view. The Society has said the evil slave IDOLIZED Russell and that is why they became the evil slave.

If the FDS came into existence after Russell's death and certain ones were idolizing Russell while he was still alive, how could these "Bible Students" be viewed as evil slave? The timing doesn't add up.

Finkelstein

I thought the meaning and expression was revised and expanded to mean anyone who was baptized or anointed as a JWS

but who became vocally against the organization.

And yes I think your understanding Minimus was pretty much correct.

minimus

But did the evil slave exist while Russell was alive? During his lifetime certain ones were said to be "idolizing" him. Because of that "idolizing", they were of the ESC.

Theocratic Sedition

You know something..........I have not the foggiest idea on what their past or current teaching of the Evil Slave is. Can't keep up on all this mess. So the old teaching was anyone who couldn't accept Rutherford and his predecessors composited the Evil Slave?

Finkelstein

Its hard to find clear thinking cohesive logic whithin this organization.

Nevertheless demeaning people is part of their strategy to hold on to their acquired power and control over people.

Religion can be such an evil game to play.

OUTLAW

Evil Slave = Apostate Anointed..

..................................OUTLAW

Finkelstein

I think the original thought came from Rutherford upon realizing he had so much opposition from when he took over

the WTS. and the proceeding years that followed. He proclaimed the WTS. was god's spiritually chosen organization in 1919

and then really started to throw as much dirt on to C Russell and those who had admiringly clung to him as a spiritually leader.

It was his turn to shine the spiritual Spot light on to himself and take it away from others, darkening their teachings as evil.

WIKI ....

In 1926 he discredited Russell's teaching on the importance of Christian "character development" or personal "sanctification" and a year later discarded the teaching that Russell had been the "faithful and wise servant" of Matthew 24:45–47, warning that the desire to revere men was a snare set by the Devil . In May 1926 Rutherford released his book Deliverance at the Bible Student's convention in Kensington , England later interpreting the event as the fulfillment of the 1335 days of Daniel 12:12.

At a 1931 Bible Student assembly in Columbus, Ohio Rutherford proposed a new name for the organization, Jehovah's witnesses, to differentiate them from the proliferation of other groups that followed Russell's teachings. Bible Students who opposed or abandoned Rutherford to form new groups were increasingly described as the "evil servant class" by The Watchtower, which said it was wrong to pray for those who were "unfaithful". Four years later the term "Kingdom Hall" was introduced for the local meeting place of congregations.

Bobcat

In the parable, the "evil slave" is the "faithful slave" - IF the 3rd class conditional, "if ever," proves true, which, from Jesus standpoint, may or may not.

In Luke 12:45 the phrase is, "But if ever that (Greek ekeinos, #1565) slave should say in his heart . . . "

Where there is no antithesis, such as here, where the focus is only on the "faithful and discreet slave," "that" takes on the meaning of, "Referring to the person or thing immediately preceeding or just mentioned." (AMG Word Study Dictionary) In this instance, it is the previously mentioned "faithful and discreet slave."

Matthew 24:48 employs what is thought to be an Aramaism saying, "But if ever that evil slave should say in his heart . . . "

Here, the text describes "that slave" (from Luke) as "that (ekeinos) evil slave." "Evil" anticipates what Jesus is about to say about "that slave," - "if ever" he does what Jesus next says concerning mistreatment of his fellow slaves and hanging out with drunkards.

I wanted to explain that first because this new WT explanation of the parable creates several new problems beyond the problems that their previous explanation had.

Leolaia has mentioned previously that the new explanation brings up the problem of, 'In what way did the "Master" leave in 1919?', which is implied in the parable by his putting "the faithful slave" in charge of feeding operations until the Master's return.

The context of the parable only brings up this "evil slave" in connection with AFTER the faithful slave is put in charge of 'feeding.' So if the Society is still going to maintain that the "evil slave" is a seperate class of persons, then, as far as the parable is concerned, they only come into focus AFTER this, that is, according to the Society's explanation, AFTER 1919. So they couldn't reasonably be people who break away in Russell's time. (Does "that evil slave" refer to a whole class of persons? Or just a handful at Brooklyn? And if so, who (post 1919)? Since we can name the few in charge at Brooklyn since 1919, we should be able to name the few who become the "evil slave.")

Of course, no one here is charging the Society with being reasonable. But this should be interesting to see.

Just as a point of personal opinion, I see the change in who "this generation" is (2008) and the release of the "Faith In Action" DVDs (2009ff, which give a lot of focus to these few in charge), as well as sly comments over the last couple of years concerning "the faithful slave" class in the WT pubs, and increased 'press time' given to the GB in recent videos and pubs, as all circumstantially related. To me, this has been in the planning on a much broader scale than just what was mentioned at this year's Annual Meeting.

And, of course, it all comes on the heels of the unexpected increase in Memorial partakers.

Take Care

Edited to add:

Also, the "evil slave" is around to be punished when the "Master" returns. So he couldn't possibly be just ones in the post 1919 time frame. He has to exist from whenever he shows up, post 1919, all the way to the end when the Master returns at Armageddon.

Further edited:

Also, if the GB is "the faifthful slave" ONLY when it acts as a group, must "that evil slave" only be such when it acts as a group? If so, which group is that? In what way did they act together? Yes, this is going to be real interesting!

problemaddict

Evil slave teaching isn't affected by the new FDS "understanding". It was post 1919 anyways. So nope, nothing new here.

Is The "Evil Slave Class" Still Viewed As JWs Have Taught Over The Years?

Share this