45Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them food at the proper time? 46Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. 47Truly I say to YOU, He will apoint him over all his belongings.
If you take this text to be literal and prophetic, as JW's do, you can establish the following:
1.) Jesus names a slave to give food at the proper time (only)
2.) When Jesus arrives and sees that the slave is indeed giving food at the proper time, then
3.) Jesus appoints that slave over all Jesus' belongings.
You can also observe that:
1.) The slave being named over all Jesus' belongings is contingent on the slave feeding the domestics at the proper time
2.) It is only the slave that was feeding the domestics that is named over Jesus' belongings.
Am I missing something? Would you say that is an accurate portrayal of Matthew 24:45-47?
Based on the above observations, along with JW's interpretation, it is safe to say the Faithful and Discreet Slave ran all the way from early 1st Christianity down to Russell, and that Russell was the Faithful and Discreet Slave, then Rutherford, then Knorr, and now the Governing Body? Remember, the slave is only the slave when it feeds the domestics. The only ones I see that fit that description are the people I mentioned above.
45Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them food at the proper time? 46Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. 47Truly I say to YOU, He will apoint him over all his belongings.
If you take this text to be literal and prophetic, as JW's do, you can establish the following:
1.) Jesus names a slave to give food at the proper time (only)
2.) When Jesus arrives and sees that the slave is indeed giving food at the proper time, then
3.) Jesus appoints that slave over all Jesus' belongings.
You can also observe that:
1.) The slave being named over all Jesus' belongings is contingent on the slave feeding the domestics at the proper time
2.) It is only the slave that was feeding the domestics that is named over Jesus' belongings.
Am I missing something? Would you say that is an accurate portrayal of Matthew 24:45-47?
Based on the above observations, along with JW's interpretation, it is safe to say the Faithful and Discreet Slave ran all the way from early 1st Christianity down to Russell, and that Russell was the Faithful and Discreet Slave, then Rutherford, then Knorr, and now the Governing Body? Remember, the slave is only the slave when it feeds the domestics. The only ones I see that fit that description are the people I mentioned above.
Any comments would be appreciated.
You're kidding right? Does'nt it matter if the 'domestics' get fed proper food'?? Did any of them provide proper food at the proper time???
45Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them food at the proper time? 46Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so. 47Truly I say to YOU, He will apoint him over all his belongings.
If you take this text to be literal and prophetic, as JW's do, you can establish the following:
1.) Jesus names a slave to give food at the proper time (only)
2.) When Jesus arrives and sees that the slave is indeed giving food at the proper time, then
3.) Jesus appoints that slave over all Jesus' belongings.
You can also observe that:
1.) The slave being named over all Jesus' belongings is contingent on the slave feeding the domestics at the proper time
2.) It is only the slave that was feeding the domestics that is named over Jesus' belongings.
Am I missing something? Would you say that is an accurate portrayal of Matthew 24:45-47?
Based on the above observations, along with JW's interpretation, it is safe to say the Faithful and Discreet Slave ran all the way from early 1st Christianity down to Russell, and that Russell was the Faithful and Discreet Slave, then Rutherford, then Knorr, and now the Governing Body? Remember, the slave is only the slave when it feeds the domestics. The only ones I see that fit that description are the people I mentioned above.
Any comments would be appreciated.
The faithful slave encompassed all of the anointed in the first century, from the mother of Jesus (who never held any sort of teaching position that we read about) to Paul and Barnabbas to Dorcas, (who served in her own humble, loving way but not as a teacher) to Phillip and his daughters who prophesied, to Lazarus and his sisters, noteworthy as Jesus friends and from the resurrection account, but not noted later on as in any way 'special.'
As a group, they were the 'slave' which was responsible for feeding. This did not mean that each individual had to be directly doing the 'feeding.' The 'slave' as a group fed the 'domestics' which are the anointed as individuals, both in the first century, and at the time that the Master arrived to take kingly power.
Slave-- anointed as a group
Domestics--anointed as individuals
Belongings---The kings earthly subjects, and all the material belongings under theocratic control and being used for the increase of his kingdom as it is being preached worldwide
“People are not disturbed by things, but by the views they take of them.” ― Epictetus
Life is like photography, you need a clear lens, and the picture you get depends on what you focus on.
Attaching to (choosing not to let go of) your own painful interpretations of events, ideas, people, etc. results in 'self-created suffering.'
Anger stems from irrational beliefs about others, anxiety stems from irrational beliefs about yourself.--- http://www.amazon.com/The-Brain-Mechanic-Maximize-Emotional/product-reviews/0757315569/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
Thanks for the response, GTBHS. My real concern is that I don't see where the interpretation you give fits with what the bible is saying. Do you have any cross-reference texts in mind?
I would say that this is an instance where the Bible asks the 'reader to use discernment' and that will be unclear to anyone who doesn't meet certain criteria.
There are prerequisites to understanding certain things, like this very brief scripture that the Bible doesn't elaborate on in 'cross references.'
The criteria would be, in part, that one is viewing the Bible as a whole in relating to it's overall theme, which really is the coming of the Kingdom. Another 'prerequisite' would be accepting who the anointed are, and the part they play in the kingdom. Another would be accepting that the kingdom was established in 1914. If these 'prerequisites' are in place, then the identity of the faithful slave just sort of falls into place for you. While they didn't have all the details of everything 'right' (which is understandable, since we had to unsnarl ourselves from Christendom's teachings) they were preaching God's kingdom, and at a time when the world was looking to set up the League of nations as 'the political expression of God's kingdom on Earth.
Without those criteria in place, I don't think it can work in one's mind at all.
This is one reason I have avoided the whole 'GB 1918 thread.' Partly because it was worded very badly as a question, and partly because there has to be a foundation on which to understand the identity and role of the 'slave.'
“People are not disturbed by things, but by the views they take of them.” ― Epictetus
Life is like photography, you need a clear lens, and the picture you get depends on what you focus on.
Attaching to (choosing not to let go of) your own painful interpretations of events, ideas, people, etc. results in 'self-created suffering.'
Anger stems from irrational beliefs about others, anxiety stems from irrational beliefs about yourself.--- http://www.amazon.com/The-Brain-Mechanic-Maximize-Emotional/product-reviews/0757315569/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
Again, I appreciate your response. Let's leave out the modern FDS then. Let's go back to Jesus's time. How do you know, for example, that Mary and those you mentioned were part of the slave?
I know I brought up modern times, but if the slave existed all throughout the beginning of true christianity, then in biblical times it should be easy to identify.
The faithful slave encompassed all of the anointed in the first century, from the mother of Jesus (who never held any sort of teaching position that we read about) to Paul and Barnabbas to Dorcas, (who served in her own humble, loving way but not as a teacher) to Phillip and his daughters who prophesied, to Lazarus and his sisters, noteworthy as Jesus friends and from the resurrection account, but not noted later on as in any way 'special.'
How do you arrive at this understanding? How do you discern, for example that Dorcas was part of that slave? Is there a hint in scripture? I'm really trying to understand.
I'm tired tonight, I work early in the day, so I'll get back to you, okay? Just wanted you to know.
“People are not disturbed by things, but by the views they take of them.” ― Epictetus
Life is like photography, you need a clear lens, and the picture you get depends on what you focus on.
Attaching to (choosing not to let go of) your own painful interpretations of events, ideas, people, etc. results in 'self-created suffering.'
Anger stems from irrational beliefs about others, anxiety stems from irrational beliefs about yourself.--- http://www.amazon.com/The-Brain-Mechanic-Maximize-Emotional/product-reviews/0757315569/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
The faithful slave encompassed all of the anointed in the first century, from the mother of Jesus (who never held any sort of teaching position that we read about) to Paul and Barnabbas to Dorcas, (who served in her own humble, loving way but not as a teacher) to Phillip and his daughters who prophesied, to Lazarus and his sisters, noteworthy as Jesus friends and from the resurrection account, but not noted later on as in any way 'special.'
So today, the "slave" can be whomever the GB says it (they) are?
Talk about manufacturing your own oracles whose "prophesies" JWs are bound to obey. What a perfect, ultra-controlling set-up.
The faithful slave encompassed all of the anointed in the first century, from the mother of Jesus (who never held any sort of teaching position that we read about) to Paul and Barnabbas to Dorcas, (who served in her own humble, loving way but not as a teacher) to Phillip and his daughters who prophesied, to Lazarus and his sisters, noteworthy as Jesus friends and from the resurrection account, but not noted later on as in any way 'special.'
So today, the "slave" can be whomever the GB says it (they) are?
Talk about manufacturing your own oracles whose "prophesies" JWs are bound to obey. What a perfect, ultra-controlling set-up.
Jesus instructed Christians to go forth and make disciples, Matthew 28:19, 20, teaching them. He used the term 'feed my sheep' with Peter to refer to this same teaching work. John 21:15-18 He must have meant more than just the Christians that were present when he ascended, because he said, "I am with you all the days until the conclusion." So there would have to be some of the 'group' entrusted with the teaching-feeding work 'all the days until the conclusion' for Jesus to be 'with.' This 'with' of course was not physically 'with', as Jesus was about to ascend to heaven.
But he left the Christians 'in charge' of the feeding-teaching work. They all had different roles in the group, but as a group, they were doing the work Jesus commanded.
In the parable, the Master leaves for a time, to take kingly power. He leaves a 'slave' in charge, until he returns. They carry on while he is away, and are found to be feeding the sheep, called 'domestics' in the parable, and are entrusted with further responsibility.
Do you see the parallel I am drawing?
I will stop here so that you can direct me with further questions.
Note on Kemmer's comment---I see your difficulty. It seems like "hey, they self-identify as the ones 'left in charge.' NICE!" But think about it...who but the ones 'left in charge,' the ones Jesus promised to 'be with,' would be able to identify the ones 'left in charge?' There's really no way for it to work BUT for them to self-identify. editing to add---the knowledge of who the slave would 'really be, would be 'spiritual food' and who but the ones 'left in charge of' dispensing spiritual food, would be able to discern it?
Though it did take a while, because Bro. Russell and all the ones he associated with really wanted to know exactly who the slave 'really' was in their day, but that couldn't become really clear until later on, just as the identify of the 'great crowd' couldn't be clarified until the time for the gathering of the great crowd.
“People are not disturbed by things, but by the views they take of them.” ― Epictetus
Life is like photography, you need a clear lens, and the picture you get depends on what you focus on.
Attaching to (choosing not to let go of) your own painful interpretations of events, ideas, people, etc. results in 'self-created suffering.'
Anger stems from irrational beliefs about others, anxiety stems from irrational beliefs about yourself.--- http://www.amazon.com/The-Brain-Mechanic-Maximize-Emotional/product-reviews/0757315569/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1
