First Thessalonians - some thoughts to share

by sd-7 8 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • sd-7

    In just this one letter, I found some very interesting thoughts. In the context of those who are Jehovah's Witnesses and claim that their religion is modeled after first-century Christianity, I think we are faced with a few questions and some real food for thought. Let's get right into it.

    The first thing I notice, in having read all 5 chapters, is the significant near-absence of the name Jehovah. The name Jehovah is mentioned--and even Jason David BeDuhn would say, inserted without basis in the earliest copies of the Greek text--3 times. Count them. One (4:6), two (4:15), three (5:2). Three times, in a letter of this length? How many times was the name Jesus Christ mentioned? 18 times. Eighteen. Six times more than Jehovah, even in the NWT. The old song book, in contrast, has songs devoted to Jesus--only HALF as many as are devoted to Jehovah. Based on the first-century Christian model, what is the real truth? God was referred to primarily as God the Father, the same way Jesus Christ himself referred to God during his ministry and during ALL of his prayers.

    Chapter 2, verses 3 through 9, are also revealing: "For the exhortation we give does not arise from error or from uncleanness or with deceit, but, just as we have been proved by God as fit to be entruted with the good news, so we speak, as pleasing, not men, but God, who makes proof of our hearts...Neither have we been seeking glory from men, no, either from you or from others, though we could be an expensive burden as apostles of Christ...It was with working night and day, so as not to put an expensive burden upon any one of you, that we preached the good news of God to you."

    Paul makes clear that error doesn't come into the picture with the message given to the congregations. Can the Governing Body make the same claim? The Proclaimers book itself demonstrates a long history of errors that were given as exhortation not just to those inside the congregation, but to many, many people outside.

    Secondly, Paul makes clear that he and his fellow ministers did not demand that their living expenses be met. Rather, they worked hard to take care of their own needs so as not to be an expensive burden on the congregation. True, no one 'demands' anything from a member of the congregation amongst Jehovah's Witnesses today. It's voluntary. However, when the travelling overseer visits, does he pay for his own expenses? Or is a resolution--consistently passed unanimously--provided to pay for his expenses? Would anyone in the congregation simply refuse to pay for his expenses on the basis of this scripture? Could they do so openly? Would there be no consequences if they did so openly? Maybe. But it's unlikely the elders would merely ignore such action. Any honest Witness has to admit this. (Intellectual intimidation on my part there--thanks, Rutherford!)

    I'll skip the whole 'rapture' issue, because it gets complicated. But it certainly contradicts any notion of an 'invisible presence' of Jesus Christ. Because Paul makes clear that those who "survive to the PRESENCE of the Lord" will be "caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air". If Jesus has been present since 1914, either this hasn't happened, or Russell & gang were not really anointed after all. Obviously, no Witness would accept that reasoning--either that Jesus is not present, or that Russell was not anointed. But either one or the other has to be true, or else this scripture is completely untrue.

    How about Chapter 5, verse 3? "Whenever it is that they are saying: "Peace and security!" then sudden destruction is to be instantly upon them." I came to realize that to suggest that this demands some specific, recognizable cry of 'peace and security' does not make logical sense. Reading this verse in its context, we can see that Paul says that the day of wrath comes as a thief. Suddenly, unexpectedly. The reason why Christians are not overly shocked when that 'sudden destruction' occurs is, not because they've been on pins and needles since some specific year (ie. 1914, 1874, or since 'the generation of anointed ones'), but because they were CONSTANTLY AWAKE spiritually, not worrying about some random calculation or what this sign or that sign means. They are generally alert, focused on the Christ. They haven't stopped working and sold all their stuff and stood on a mountain or something like that. They have maintained a balanced, reasonable awareness of the nearness of Christ's presence--which, from the apostles' viewpoint, 2,000 years ago, was very near then. Notice too that the apostles did not endeavor to lay out a specific timetable for the end; they merely encouraged faithful Christians to keep their senses, just as Jesus asked them to do.

    I notice also that very little detail is given as far as comments on 'organizational procedure', as is common in letters from the Society's headquarters. Nor does Paul micromanage their lives and try to tell them if they should accept a Saturnalia bonus or something like that. He just encourages them not to fornicate and to keep loving their brothers. Basically, love God, love your neighbor, done. | That's what I call Nextel-style Christianity.

    In reading the Bible itself, it does become clear what Christianity is about. People need to open their eyes to the Bible's message, not through someone else's literature, but through the pages of God's Word alone. A lot more can be learned that way. I won't lie--I do think that Jehovah's Witnesses publish a lot of good material, so far as they stick to the direct message of scripture. I just think that we must also recognize that it is possible to understand as much of the Bible as any human can--without Jehovah's organization in mind. Holy spirit is not bound up in a particular group of people who figure it all out for us. That's not a personal relationship with God; that's relationship by proxy. Outsourcing one's conscience is at the root of much of mankind's problems to begin with.

    That's all for me. Take care.


  • sd-7

    Oh! I didn't realize this entry was so long! I'm sorry...I'll be more careful next time.


  • PSacramento


    Well said and quite correct.

    I would add that 1st Thessalonians is considered one of the earliest letters ever written by Paul, that itis one of the earliest examples of Christian writings and how they viewed their faith, It think itis dated typically 30-50 AD.

    You are correct in your view that Christians are to keep constantly and consistently aware that the second coming can come at any time and it will came WITHOUT warning and in regards to Paul stating here, as he does elesewhere in other letters, that he never troubled anyone to "take care of him" and that he worked for his wages, Paul is making it clear that not only did he "pay his own way" but that it is an example to follow.

    Work ethic is christian ethic - a honest days pay for a hnonest days work.

    You won't find any mention of clergy being a "profession" in Paul's writings and even though he mentions that a preacher does deserve his wages for his work, he makes it clear that it is NOT beneath anyone to actuall work for a living AND preach the word of our Lord Jesus.

    I don't think Paul would be a fan of full time pioneers or missionaries, at least not in the sense that they ONLY preach and don't actually work for a living.

  • donuthole

    Certain congregations provided for Paul's traveling expenses, a consideration he called robbery. He suggests that extralocal workers have a right for support but he refused such to set an example. Thus, whenever he settled in an area for an extended time he worked to support himself and his ministry. A salaried clergy as we have today was unknown at the time. This practice started with the Roman Empire paying a salary to the Christian bishops in the same manner they had provided for the pagan priests.

  • Perry

    I think each congregation should read these scriptures and decide how they want to handle the specifics.

    What the Bible Says About Paying Pastors:

    1 Timothy 5:17-18
    Elders who do their work well should be respected and paid well, especially those who work hard at both preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, “You must not muzzle an ox to keep it from eating as it treads out the grain.” And in another place, “Those who work deserve their pay!”(NLT)

    As we see in 1 Timothy 5, all ministry work is important, but preaching and teaching is especially worthy of honor because it is the core of Christian ministry. Paul backed up his point in the verse above with Old Testament references to Deuteronomy 25:4 and Leviticus 19:13 .

    1 Corinthians 9:9
    For the law of Moses says, “You must not muzzle an ox to keep it from eating as it treads out the grain.” Was God thinking only about oxen when he said this?(NLT)

    Again, Paul refers to this expression of "not muzzling an ox while it is treading out the grain." Even though many times Paul chose not to accept financial support, he still argued for the Old Testament principle that those who serve full time to meet the spiritual needs of people, deserve to receive monetary support from them.

    1 Corinthians 9:14
    In the same way, the Lord ordered that those who preach the Good News should be supported by those who benefit from it.(NLT)

    In verses such as Luke 10:7-8 and Matthew 10:10 , the Lord Jesus himself taught the same precept, that spiritual workers deserve to be paid for their service.

  • Perry

    Thank you for that analysis SD-7

  • Out at Last!
    Out at Last!

    SD-7- Post 187 of 187 Since 7/31/2009 Oh! I didn't realize this entry was so long! I'm sorry...I'll be more careful next time. Don't worry, yours are not near as long as other ones on here recently. Do your research and write your conclusions. Maybe some will benefit from your example and remember they are not writing a novel, or the latest issue of the watchtower. Thanks

  • sd-7

    Perry, donuthole--good points. I think there probably is some basis for the needs of a travelling minister to be met. I guess I was calling into question how that is done in some cases. Although Jesus said for a time that his disciples could be compensated with food and the like for their ministry, just before his death, he advised them to take up their own food pouches, right? Just a thought.

    I know my analysis wasn't perfect; I'm still re-learning the Bible, after all, and sometimes my thoughts aren't exactly accurate or complete. Guess I'll have to live with that. It sucks.


  • donuthole

    SD-7 -

    It stands to reason that congregations would support the needs of extralocal workers. As Jesus and his disciples traveled there was a company of women that provided for his needs. When he visited Judea he stayed in the home of Simon the Leper in Bethany. When Jesus sent the twelve out as apostles (itenerant ministers) he said that they would be able to depend on the hospitality and lodging of those they were proclaiming the good news to support their needs. I think his later instruction to take a purse has to do with changing attitudes and hostility to the good news that later times would bring.

    There is an early instructional document called the Didache which is dated late first/early second century that contains these instructions for itenerant ministers.

    "And let the apostle when departing take nothing but bread until he arrive at his resting-place; but if he ask for money, he is a false prophet."

    Again there was no salaried local senior pastor as we have today. Even the support that was given to extralocal workers was along the lines of basic food/shelter. Note what Paul wrote in his letter to his co-worker Timothy "But having sustenance and covering, we will be content with these."

Share this