How the Governing Body Solved Another Problem

by Cameron_Don 29 Replies latest jw friends


    Not even Simon Peter the Rock was faithful and discrete enough until Judge Rutherford came along...

    HOLY S***!!! When you look at it that way you see how freakin crazy it is!!! Rutherford believed that CTR was the faithful steward, so Da' Judge could not have been because he was not teaching spiritual TRUTH at the proper time! Even Jesus could not have been a faithful and discreet slave! Oh wait! What's this???


    When answering the apostles' question concerning his future presence and the conclusion of the existing system of things, Jesus Christ included a parable, or illustration, dealing with a "faithful and discreet slave" and an "evil slave." The faithful slave's master appointed him over his domestics, or household servants, to provide them their food. If approved at his master's coming (evidently from some trip), the slave would be rewarded by being placed over the master's entire property.-Mt 24:3, 45-51.In the parallel illustration at Luke 12:42-48, the slave is called a steward, that is, a house manager or administrator, one placed over servants, though he is himself a servant. Such a position was often filled in ancient times by a faithful slave. (Compare Ge 24:2; also the case of Joseph at Ge 39:1-6.) In Jesus' illustration the steward is first assigned only to the supervision and timely dispensation of the food supplies to the master's body of attendants, or servants, and later, because of his faithful and discreet handling of this ministry, his assignment is widened out to embrace supervision of all the master's holdings. Regarding the identification of the "master" (Gr., ky′ri·os, also rendered "lord"), Jesus had already shown that he himself occupied such a position toward his disciples, and they addressed him as such on occasion. (Mt 10:24, 25; 18:21; 24:42; Joh 13:6, 13) The question remains concerning the application of the figure of the faithful and discreet slave, or steward, and what his dispensing food to the domestics represents.Commentators often view this as a general exhortation to any and all who have individual positions of responsibility in the Christian congregation. The requirement of faithfulness in discharging responsibility clearly applies to all such. (Compare Mt 25:14-30; Tit 1:7-9.) Yet, the impossibility of each and every one of these individuals being placed over "all" his master's belongings at the same time, the time of the master's arrival, is obvious. This, however, does not require that the "slave" prefigure only one particular person who would be so privileged. The Scriptures contain examples of the use of a singular noun to refer to a collective group, as when Jehovah addressed the collective group of the Israelite nation and told them: "You are my witnesses [plural], . . . even my servant [singular] whom I have chosen." (Isa 43:10) Similarly, the figure of the unfaithful "evil slave" could apply to a collective group in the same way that "the antichrist" is shown to be a class made up of individual antichrists.-1Jo 2:18; 2Jo 7.Those forming the Christian congregation are referred to by the apostle Paul as "members of the household of God" (Eph 2:19; 1Ti 3:15), and the same apostle shows that 'faithful stewardship' among such household members involved the dispensing of spiritual truths on which those becoming believers would 'feed.' (1Co 3:2, 5; 4:1, 2; compare Mt 4:4.) Whereas this was a prime responsibility of those appointed as 'shepherds' of the flock (1Pe 5:1-3), the apostle Peter shows that such stewardship of the divine truths was actually committed to all the 'chosen ones,' all the spirit-anointed ones, of the Christian congregation. (1Pe 1:1, 2; 4:10, 11) Thus the entire anointed Christian congregation was to serve in a united stewardship, dispensing such truths. At the same time the individual members making up such composite body, or the "domestics" making up the "house" of God (Mt 24:45; Heb 3:6; Eph 2:19), would also be recipients of the "food" dispensed. (Heb 5:11-14; compare 1Co 12:12, 19-27.) Expanded responsibility would result from faithfulness maintained until the master's promised 'arrival.'-Mt 24:46, 47; Lu 12:43, 44.

  • insearchoftruth4

    Ok, ok ok, I get it now, from 1919 till now, the FDS is the GB with Greenleas, Chitty and some other FLAMERS. What about Rutherford, was he one of the nastys?

  • suavojr

    Now it will be easier for them to distance themselves from the problematic 1914 date coming to its 100th birthday plus an on-going problem of more JW's claiming to be part of the 144,000.

  • Splash


    You forgot one more little snippet

    Joh 21:15 He said to him: "Feed my lambs."

    Joh 21:16 He said to him: "Shepherd my little sheep."

    Joh 21:17 Jesus said to him: "Feed my little sheep.



    So Peter was " feeding " the sheep with spiritual " food " when they needed it according to Christ's command. Peter was faithful and discreet, and a slave of Christ. He was not the FDS of the prophecarable/ parablophecy, yeah, yeah!! Thats the new word! PARABLOPHECY!!

    That make perfect sense now! Peter was just a lowly disciple and Apostle, and an actual inspired Bible writer but not part of the FDS according to Watchtower parablophecy.. You know what else makes sense... All the Great Crowd are domestics along with the 144,000. It used to be that only the 144,000 were domestics. Christ is the mediator for the 144, now there are just more domestics according to the GB. So who gets Jesus as their mediator???

  • jwfacts

    It solves a problem but creates others.

    45 “Who then is the faithful and wise servant, whom the master has put in charge of the servants in his household to give them their food at the proper time? 46 It will be good for that servant whose master finds him doing so when he returns. 47 Truly I tell you, he will put him in charge of all his possessions.

    Mat 24:45 makes it sound like the servant was put in charge and remained in charge until the master returned, so the new defn is convenient for a religion that sprung up out of nowhere, but does not align with what Jesus actually stated.

    Further, the new definition adds even more prominence to the year 1919. Any thinking JW has to wonder how 1919 is arrived at, and not 1914, or even 1918. The Watchtower reasoning behind 1919 is completely illogical.

  • BigE

    Recall that they claim to be following the first century pattern. If the slave wasnt appointed until 1919...... Where is the pattern?

  • Refriedtruth

    Brilliant bookmarked

  • cantleave


    People should be leaving in their droves after being fed this BS. But alas, they are not. It just goes to show how easily we can deceive ourselves.....

  • designs

    The Wt. has taken multiple positions on when the 'anointed' go to heaven in relation to the Tribulation Pre Mid and Post GT. This is a common variance in christianity and you see something similar with the New Covenant and when it starts- some see it starting at Pentecost and others think it has not started yet and will not until after the Second Advent. This seems to be where the Wt. is having difficulty. The Bible can be interpreted in just about scenario that a human can imagine (as evidenced by the multiple views expressed by the christians here). Concurrent with the multiple views of the Second Advent and when 'christians' get their coveted ruling status comes the need for heirarchy now. The GB has figured out what the Orthodox and Catholics and Protestants figured out centuries ago- How To Rule and How Keep Power.

Share this