- The arrival of the master depicted in the parable of the faithful and discreet slave refers to Jesus’ arrival just before Armageddon.
- The appointment over all the master’s belongings occurs when Jesus arrives.
- The domestics depicted in that parable refer to all Christians.
- The slave was appointed to feed the domestics in 33 C.E.
- There are three other slaves as per Luke's account of the parable.
- All Christians have the potential to be included in those whom Jesus will declare to be faithful and discreet upon his arrival.
This fourth article from the July 15, 2013 Watchtower introduces a number of new understandings about the nature and appearance of the faithful slave of Mt. 24:45-47 and Luke 12:41-48. (Actually, the article pretty much ignores the more complete parable found in Luke, perhaps because elements of that account are hard to fit into the new framework.)
Among other things, the article introduces "new truth" for which no evidence is presented. Among these are the following key points:
- The slave was appointed to feed the domestics in 1919.
- The slave is comprised of prominent qualified men at headquarters when they act together as the Governing Body of Jehovah’s witnesses.
- There is no evil slave class.
- The slave beaten with many strokes and the slave beaten with few are completely ignored.
A 1919 Appointment
Paragraph 4 states: “The context of the illustration of the faithful and discreet slave shows that it began to be fulfilled…in this time of the end.”
How so, you may ask? Paragraph 5 continues “the illustration of the faithful slave is part of Jesus’ prophecy of the conclusion of the system of things.” Well, Yes, and No. Part of it is, and part of it isn’t. The first part, the initial appointment could easily have occurred in the first century—as we originally believed—without disrupting anything. The fact that we claim it must be fulfilled after 1919 because it is part of the last days prophecy is frankly hypocritical. What do I mean by hypocritical, you may ask? Well, the application we officially give to Mt. 24:23-28 (part of the last days prophecy) puts its fulfillment as starting after 70 C.E. and continuing onward down to 1914. (w94 2/15 p.11 par. 15) If that can be fulfilled outside of the last days, then so can the first part, the initial appointment part, of the faithful steward parable. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Paragaph 7 introduces a red herring.
“Think, for a moment, about the question: “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave?” In the first century, there was hardly a reason to ask such a question. As we saw in the preceding article, the apostles could perform miracles and even transmit miraculous gifts as proof of divine backing. So why would anyone need to ask who really was appointed by Christ to take the lead?“
See how subtly we've introduced the idea that the parable deals with an appointment of someone to take the lead? See also how we imply that it is possible to identify the slave by looking for someone who takes the lead. Two red herrings dragged across our trail.
The fact is that no one can identify the faithful and discreet slave before the arrival of the Lord. That is what the parable says. There are four slaves and all engage in the feeding work. The evil slave beats his fellow slaves. Obviously, he uses his position to lord it over others and abuse them. He may be taking the lead by force of personality, but he's not faithful nor discreet. Christ appoints the slave to feed, not rule. Whether or not he turns out to be faithful and discreet will depend on how he performs that assignment.
We know who Jesus initially appointed to do the feeding. In 33 C.E. he is recorded as saying to Peter, “Feed my little sheep”. The miraculous gifts of the spirit they and others received gave evidence of their appointment. That just makes sense. Jesus says the slave is appointed by the master. Wouldn’t the slave have to know he was being appointed? Or would Jesus appoint someone to a life-or-death duty without telling him so? Framing it as a question indicates not who is appointed, but rather who would live up to that appointment. Consider every other parable involving slaves and a departing master. The question isn’t about who the slaves are, but what type of slave they will prove to be upon the master's return—a good one or an evil one.
When is the slave identified? When the master arrives, not before. The parable (Luke’s version) speaks of four slaves:
- The faithful one.
- The evil one.
- The one beaten with many strokes.
- The one beaten with a few strokes.
Each of the four is identified by the master upon his arrival. Each receives his reward or punishment when the master arrives. We now admit, after a literal lifetime of teaching the wrong date, that his arrival is yet future. We are finally coming into alignment with what the rest of Christendom teaches. However this decades-long error has not humbled us. Instead, we presume to claim that Rutherford was the faithful slave. Rutherford died in 1942. Following him, and prior to the formation of the Governing Body, the slave would have presumably been Nathan Knorr and Fred Franz. In 1976, the Governing Body in its current form took power. How presumptuous is it of the Governing Body to declare themselves as the faithful and discreet slave before Jesus himself makes that determination?
The Elephant in the Room
In these four articles, a key piece of the parable is missing. The magazine makes no mention of it, not even a hint In each and every one of Jesus’ master/slaves parables there are certain common elements. At some point the master appoints the slaves to some task, then leaves. Upon his return the slaves are rewarded or punished based on their performance of the task. There’s the parable of the minas (Luke 19:12-27); the parable of the talents (Mt. 25:14-30); the parable of the doorkeeper (Mark 13:34-37); the parable of the marriage feast (Mt. 25:1-12); and last but not least, the parable of the faithful and discreet slave. In all of these the master assigns a commission, departs, returns, judges.
So what's missing? The departure!
We used to say the master appointed the slave in 33 C.E. and departed, which coincides with Bible history. We used to say he returned and rewarded the slave in 1919, which doesn’t. Now we say that he appoints the slave in 1919 and rewards him at Armageddon. Before we got the start right and the end wrong. Now we have the end right and the start wrong. Not only is there no evidence, historical or Scriptural to prove 1919 is the time the slave was appointed, but there is also the elephant in the room: Jesus didn't depart for anywhere in 1919. Our teaching is that he arrived in 1914 and has been present every since. One of our core teachings is the 1914/last days presence of Jesus. So how can we claim he appointed the slave in 1919 when all the parables indicate that after the appointment, the master left?
Forget everything else about this new understanding. If the Governing Body cannot explain from Scripture how Jesus appointed the slave in 1919 and then left, so as to return at Armageddon and reward the slave, then nothing else about the interpretation matters because it cannot be true.
What of the Other Slaves in the Parable?
As much as we’d like to leave it at that, there are a few more things that don’t work with this new teaching.
Since the slave now consists of only eight individuals, there is no room for a literal fulfillment of the evil slave—not to mention the other two slaves that get the strokes. With only eight individuals to choose from, which ones are going to turn out to be the evil slave? An embarrassing question, wouldn’t you say? We can’t have that, so we reinterpret this part of the parable, claiming it is only a warning, a hypothetical situation. But there's also the the slave who knew the will of the master and didn't do it and who gets many strokes. And there's the other slave who didn't know the will of the master so disobeyed out of ignorance. He's beaten with a few strokes. What of them? Two more hypothetical warnings? We don't even attempt to explain. Essentially, we spend an inordinate number of column inches explaining 25% of the parable, while virtually ignoring the other 75%. Was Jesus just wasting his breath in explaining this to us?
What is our basis for saying this part of the prophetic parable has no fulfillment? For that we focus on the opening words of that part: “If ever”. We quote an unnamed scholar who says “that in the Greek text, this passage, “for all practical purposes is a hypothetical condition.”” Hmm? Okay, fair enough. Then wouldn’t that make this a hypothetical condition as well, since it also starts with “if”?
“Happy is that slave, if his master on arriving finds him doing so.” (Luke 12:43)
Or
“Happy is that slave if his master on arriving finds him doing so.” (Mt. 24:46)
This type of inconsistent application of scripture is transparently self-serving.
The Governing Body Gets Appointed Over All His Belongings?
The article is quick to explain that the appointment over all the master’s belongings goes not only to the members of the Governing Body but to all faithful anointed Christians. How can that be? If the reward for faithfully feeding the sheep is the ultimate appointment, why do others who do not perform the task of feeding get the same reward? To explain this discrepancy, we use the account where Jesus promised the apostles that he would reward them with kingly authority. He’s addressing a small group, but other Bible texts indicate this promise is extended to all anointed Christians. So it’s the same with the Governing Body and all the anointed.
This argument seems logical at first glance. But there is a flaw. It is what is called “a weak analogy”.
The analogy seems to work if one doesn’t look too carefully at its components. Yes, Jesus promised the kingdom to his 12 apostles, and Yes, the promise applies to all the anointed. However, to get the fulfillment of that promise his followers had to do the same thing as the apostles had to do, suffer together faithfully. (Rom. 8:17) They had to do the same thing.
To get appointed over all the master’s belongings the rank and file anointed do not have to do the same thing as the Governing Body/Faithful Steward. One group has to feed the sheep to get the reward. The other group does not have to feed the sheep to get the reward. It doesn’t make sense, does it?
In fact, if the Governing Body fails to feed the sheep, it gets thrown outside, but if the rest of the anointed fail to feed the sheep, they still get the very same reward that the Governing Body miss out on.
The Very Troubling Claim
According to the box on page 22, the faithful and discreet slave is “a small group of anointed brothers…. Today, these anointed brothers make up the Governing Body.”
According to paragraph 18, “When Jesus comes for judgment during the great tribulation, he will find that the faithful slave [the Governing Body] has been loyally dispensing timely spiritual food…. Jesus will then delight in making the second appointment—over all his belongings.”
The parable states that the resolution of the question of who this faithful slave is must wait for the arrival of the master. He determines the reward or punishment based on the work of each at the time of his arrival. Despite this clear Scriptural statement, the Governing Body in this paragraph is presuming to pre-empt the judgment of the Lord and declare themselves as already approved.
This they are doing in writing before the world and the millions of faithful Christians they are feeding? Even Jesus wasn’t rewarded until he had passed all the tests and proven himself faithful to the point of death. Whatever their motive for making this assertion, it comes across as unbelievably presumptuous.
(John 5:31) 31 “If I alone bear witness about myself, my witness is not true.
The Governing Body is bearing witness about themselves. Based on Jesus' words, that witness cannot be true.
What Is Behind All This?
It has been suggested that with the recent growth in the number of partakers, headquarters has been receiving a marked increase in phone calls and letters from brothers and sisters claiming to be of the anointed—the faithful slave based on our previous interpretation—and plaguing the brothers with ideas for changes. In the annual meeting of 2011, brother Splane explained that brothers of the anointed shouldn't presume to write in to the Governing Body with ideas of their own. This, of course, flies in the face of the old understanding that claimed the entire body of anointed made up the faithful slave.
This new understanding solves that problem. Perhaps this is one of the reasons for it. Or perhaps there is another. Whatever the case, this new teaching consolidates the power of the Governing Body. They now exercise more power than the apostles of old over the congregation. In fact, their power over the lives of the millions of Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide exceeds that of the Pope over Catholics.
Where in Scripture is there proof that Jesus intended there to be a worldly, that is human, authority over his sheep? An authority which has displaced him, because the Governing Body does not claim to be Christ's appointed channel of communication, even though he is the head of the congregation. No, they claim to be Jehovah's channel.
But really, who is to blame? Is it them for assuming this authority or us for submitting to it? From our Bible reading this very week we have this gem of divine wisdom.
(2 Corinthians 11:19, 20) . . .For YOU gladly put up with the unreasonable persons, seeing YOU are reasonable. 20 In fact, YOU put up with whoever enslaves YOU, whoever devours [what YOU have], whoever grabs [what YOU have], whoever exalts himself over [YOU], whoever strikes YOU in the face.
Brothers and sisters, let's just stop doing this. Let us obey God as ruler rather than men. "Kiss the son, that He may not become incensed..." (Ps. 2:12)
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by mdnwa on 2013-04-29 20:59:52
So when you say you believe "The domestics depicted in that parable refer to all Christians" do you believe that to mean all JW's or ALL Christians worldwide, even non JW's who strive to obey God and when possible tell others? So many times we're taught ONLY JW's will be saved but like to get your thoughts...
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-04-29 23:32:45
I mean all true Christians worldwide. Who they are is for Jesus to determine.
Comment by crazyguy on 2013-04-29 22:14:44
I believe the parable about the wheat and weeds proves that all that believe in christ are infact gods children just like 1john states and that when Jesus comes only he and the angels can see who is wheat or weeds. and i also believe the parable about the Faithful and discreet slave is much the same. Whom ever is trying to teach and guide christians accuratley are in fact this slave.
Reply by Chris on 2013-10-03 15:13:41
I just noticed your comment cg and I agree wholeheartedly. The Bible cautions that teachers will bear a heavier responsibility before God and why I think the man of lawlessness applies to the GB as well as the clergy. Indeed the fact that Jesus has not yet returned to appoint faithful and discreet slaves shows their claim of being "God's channel of communication" to be particularly presumptuous & pompous
Comment by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-04-29 23:33:13
I concur.
Comment by Steve on 2013-04-30 00:06:27
Meleti,
There are many issues with this new interpretation worth discussing. Luke 12 is by far the most difficult in my opinion, for Jesus' answer is simply nonsensical given Peter's question, if the interpretation is correct.
This being said, what perplexes me (and this relates to the previous study article as well) is how they had to be inspected to be chosen. If they were in fact anointed Christians, they were already chosen by that anointing. Assuming that nobody in Christendom had that same anointing, which is an assumption I'm confident they share, it was over before it began. They were chosen, no inspection necessary.
But I think it gets even more complicated. The text says the slave was appointed, not created. Yet they would have us believe that the slave did not exist until the inspection. This idea does not at all fit Jesus' words, for there would have been a slave who was faithful and discreet and found himself appointed at a given time. Russell, whom we are told was not part of this slave, would actually have been around through about 1/3rd of the inspection, if it started in 1914. How then could he not have been a part of the slave who was appointed if he was at that time the one leading the small group who was eventually chose?
SteveReply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-04-30 07:10:30
The structure of this new interpretation continues to crumble. Thanks for sharing, Steve.
Comment by theapologeticfront on 2013-04-30 10:23:38
It'd be curious to know if JW's are discussing anything AT ALL in their Kingdom Halls related to this new understanding, or if it is literally being blindly accepted by everyone with no questions.
I'm tempted to attend the meetings when this issue is discussed. But if not, recordings would be very helpful in seeing the thought processes.
MikeReply by on 2013-04-30 21:39:37
Another question to consider is why an inspection, god can read hearts, did Samuel have to go inspect or did god already know it was David he wanted and a 3 year inspection to boot ,?
Comment by JimmyG on 2013-05-16 23:08:14
Hi Meleti. Excellent review of this series of articles. Am I correct in saying that you are a current elder? You say at the end of this post that you want to continue to 'co-operate' with the Governing Body.
How would you feel about conducting the Watchtower study in your congregation for any one or all of these articles?
Thanks, Jimmy
Comment by Andronicus on 2013-08-03 13:01:09
I've attempted to discuss these articles with some of the brothers in my congregation but I get the feeling this is making them uncomfortable. I told one brother that the articles didn't make sense to me from a scriptural viewpoint and I would refuse to conduct the WT study if asked. I mentioned it would be going against my conscience to try and get the brothers to understand something I myself couldn't make sense of. I went through this with the "generation" doctrine, which articles I conducted back in the nineties, and which were replaced just a couple of years ago with reasoning and conclusions that bordered on the ridiculous. No more of this nonsense, I'm sticking to the Word.
Comment by Seven Shepherds, Eight Dukes—What They Mean for Us Today | Beroean Pickets on 2013-08-16 20:48:24
[…] the February Study Edition when dealing with the prophecy in Zechariah chapter 14, and again in the July issue when dealing with the new understanding of the faithful […]
Comment by A brother on 2013-09-24 20:40:52
To Christians living in 2013 CE what does it really matter in the end when the parabolic slave was appointed, 33 CE or 1919 CE. For the slave must surely be appointed. What is more important; is to know who he is? That he proves faithful to the appointment and does not turn from feeding to beating his brothers. Wasn't this the intent and the essence of the lords question? Personally my concern with this whole question is that for me Mt 24:45 is a parable not a prophecy. Scripturally my concern arises when I read the 3 parallel prophetic accounts. These three accounts all faithfully record the lords prophecy almost word for word and verse by verse up to a point where the lord concludes the prophecy with an unmistakable assurance that heaven and earth will pass away but not one letter of the prophetic word which he has just uttered will go unfulfilled. This statement for me marks the end of the prophecy. The remainder are a series of warning exhortations to faithfulness and to staying awake spiritually. Its interesting to note that from here on all three accounts; which up to this point had been so faithful to each other diverge and vary; the holy spirit allowing each writer to now record different aspects of the lords exhortations. Mt 24:45 falls into this area. I have never been comfortable accepting that 24:45 is a prophetic parable, the only one of its kind in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Does this mean that there is no faithful slave who is depicted by the parable? Paul answers this question for me. What is looked for in a steward is that he be found faithful. Who are these stewards primarily? Revelation identifies them as stars in the lords hand. These anointed elders care for and feed the members of the lampstands under their care; these as stars in the lords right hand encourage all Christians under their care to shed their light and be illuminators in this dark world. No central governing body dispensing order is depicted here. The stars individually and collectively are answerable as a faithful slave only to the lord. And its based on their performance that they receive their individual and collective reward. Again Paul confirmed this when he said the one who examines me is God. I patiently and optimistically look forward with faith to the revelation of this truth. It will come! Jesus words keep ringing in my ears; the pharisees have seated them selves in the seat of Moses therefore do what they say but not what they do. Patience my brothers patience. In our worship of the sovereign Lord Jehovah we must prove ourselves as cautious as serpents and as innocent as doves. We worship a loving God who is so deserving of praise. Feed his sheep.
Reply by A searcher for truth on 2013-09-29 07:09:57
Because "truth" really does matter.
Shall we go on believing a lie, and who are we to follow anyway?
The voice of someone (Governing Body) claiming to represent the almighty God, even bypassing Jesus himself who God himself personally approved of and appointed as the rightful King?
John 10
1 ¶ Truly, truly, I say to you, The one not entering through the door into the sheepfold, but going up by another way, that one is a thief and a plunderer.
2 But the one entering through the door is the shepherd of the sheep.
3 The doorkeeper opens to him, and the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name, and leads them out.
4 And when he puts forth his own sheep, he goes in front of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice.
5 But they will not follow a stranger, never! But they will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of the strangers.[LITV]
I for one will be doing my best to follow the voice of our Lord, Jesus and not that of an unauthorized stranger.
What did Jesus teach?
Well it is recorded in the four books of the New Testament, that is Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
All that we need to follow Jesus teachings are basically in these four books.
His words as recorded in these book are more or less God's thoughts and his way is God's way.
Jesus is described in both the book of John and the book of Revelation as the "Word" who was with God in the beginning of the creation of our particular universe, the one whom Jesus was involved in creating life throughout.
He is God's Creator Son.
The one who was there in the beginning of the creation of our universe and the one who knows the extent of the boundaries of this universe of which involves both space and time.
Psalms 2
10 ¶ Now, then, be wise, O kings; be taught, O judges of the earth:
11 Serve Jehovah with fear; yea, rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and you perish from the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little. Oh the blessings of all those who flee to Him for refuge!
Comment by Jude on 2013-09-29 01:29:23
I think we need to note the wording of Jesus' question at Matthew 24:45. He doesn't ask "who is the faithful and discreet slave . . .?". Rather, he asks "who REALLY is the faithful and discreet slave?" I think the use of the word "really" is significant and can offer some insight into understanding who the faithful and discreet slave is supposed to be. Consider another text where Jesus uses "really":
"And so Jesus went on to say to the Jews that had believed him: “If YOU remain in my word, YOU are really my disciples"" - John 8:31. Why the use of "really" here? Jesus was not speaking about determining the identity of his disciples but rather, the level of genuineness of their discipleship.
I believe the same could be true of Matthew 24:45. Jesus was not intending to indicate doubt about the future identity of the faithful and discreet slave. Rather, he was calling attention to the level of genuiness in proving oneself to be faithful and discreet, as if rhetorically asking his followers: "Will you REALLY be found by me as being faithful and discreet at my coming? See that you are and I will appoint you over all my belongings"
So Jesus' use of the word "really" indicates that he knew his audience already had an idea of who was supposed to be the faitful and discreet slave and he was now only rhetorically exhorting them to truly prove themselves to be so - in much the same way that his audience already knew the identity of his supposed disciples/disciples to be and he was exhorting them to prove themselves genuine by remaining in his word.
It is noteworthy that Jesus, before departing the earth, appointed Peter to "FEED my little sheep". I don't see how we can reasonably exclude Peter and possibly the first century apostles as being among the first members of the faithful and discreet slave.
Also, even if we assume that the faithful and discreet slave is supposed to be a limited group of brothers in a position of oversight, what makes the Governing Body so sure that there MUST be a faithful and discreet slave when Jesus comes? Read Matthew 24:45-51 very carefully and you would see that Jesus indicates two possible outcomes: that he will find the slave faitful and discreet and appoint him over his belongings, or that he would instead find an evil slave who did not live up to his responsibility. The existence of a faithful and discreet slave in the last days may thus by no means be a fait accompli. What if the faithful and discreet slave indeed started with Peter and over time became the evil slave in the personage of the apostate Catholic Church? What if beating the fellow slaves is a reference to the church persecuting true christians during the dark ages? What if eating with confirmed drunkards is a reference to the Church assimilating pagan teachings from the spiritually drunk pagan religions of the day giving rise to such things as christmas?Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-09-29 09:38:43
Thank you for sharing that with us, Jude.
Reply by smolderingwick1 on 2013-09-29 12:39:45
The term “really” is a qualifier. It searches for a result after inspection. Another example was Jesus words at Luke 18:8—“Nevertheless, when the Son of man arrives, will he 'really' find the faith on the earth?” It wasn’t a collective question, nor was it asked in expectation of an answer. “Really” simply searches the heart of each one, just as the persistent woman before the unrighteous judge that Jesus used to illustrate taking our individual grievances before Jehovah's appointed judge.
So when the appointment is made (of whoever) over all of our master’s belongings, it will not be some surreptitious interpretation of scripture we already know. It will be an apocalyptic fulfillment—not so much to bring death and destruction but tribulation to all upon the return of Christ when he begins meting out true justice (so much better than any earthly judge or hierarchy of men).
It will be what Revelation finally reveals after all these centuries—bringing both joy and grief depending on how we’ve built our own spiritual houses, i.e. our hearts. While theological dogma now rules, it will only be when Christ arrives that truth will prevail along with all its promised fulfillments.
This is my present belief. But knowing that belief changes and adjusts, only when fulfillments take place will the day star rise in our hearts.
sw
Reply by A brother on 2013-09-30 05:00:56
Brother Jude I enjoyed the point you raised about the Lords question 'who really is' and it is a qualifier pertaining to the future just as brother smolderringwick says. it pertains to all with the heavenly calling who receive the lords appointment which is there for all to assume in different capacities . Even the domestics have the stewardship of the sacred secret.
I would be pleased to hear your comments on the following.
1 the lords prophecy ends at Mat 24 :35 and similarly at the same place in all three accounts.
2 Since the parable is given in form of exhortation its indirectly given to all. In Luke the lord gave that parable in response to Peters question - Are you saying this to us or to all? The parable was obviously intended to convey the thought that it was applicable to all. And as you say the word really seems to imply this. Besides Jesus later said 'what I say to you I say to all'. That much to me at least is clear. How is it said to all if the steward is representative of appointed elders? Because all men have the God given invitation to reach out for the office of overseer. Its an office to which all should aspire. As a Shepard of the flock one would feed the sheep by teaching them, for that is a primarily function of elders in the congregation. The apostle Paul was both an apostle and an elder, when confronted by elders from Jerusalem, he did not use the power of his office to force them - (fellow elders) - into subjection - although these elders were clearly in the wrong. He decided instead to take the issue to Jerusalem from whence the trouble makers came. Besides it was clearly a Jewish issue, one to which they, the Jewish brothers, would be more familiar with than the gentile elders in Antioch. What I have learned from Paul by studying him over the years - is that once Paul became a Christian - Paul made it his business to learn everything he could about what the lord said and did when he was on earth. Connecting what he learned about the lord with his extensive knowledge of Jehovah's laws and principles which he had learned in Judaism. Besides his visions and the direction of the holly spirit which must have given him a formidable insight. Anyway it has always seemed logical to me that when Paul said besides what is looked for in a steward - he was connecting this statement to both parables - the one in Mat 24:45 with the one in Luke12:42 were the slave is called a steward. In his writing to Titus Tit 1: 7 Paul specifically states - for an overseer must be free from accusation as Gods steward. Here only the appointed elder is called a steward this would exclude the unappointed brothers. Again in 1 Cor 4:1 Paul is talking to elders and includes himself in as a steward. And in verse 2 Paul again make the connection to the parable by stating - besides (this word besides seems similar - to a by the way or as we know) what is looked for in stewards in this case (from those with a stewardship - the elders in verse1) is that a man be found faithful (referring back to the parable - when the lord comes) In Luke 16:2 the slave is asked by the lord to hand in the account his stewardship. In Heb 13 Paul speaks of elders as those who will render an account.
In ICo 9:17 - Eph 3:2 Col 1:25 Paul refers to his receipt of a stewardship.
Revelation then goes on to show the importance of the stewardship that elders assume in the Christian arrangement. They are held n the lords right hand and placed ver the lampstands.
Finally with regard to my initial statement in previous posting. The truth per se does matter, but past truth is history and to that extent it is irrelevant to issues of the here and now, At least not that relevant that one needs make a federal case over it. Who the slave is; is by far a more important question than when he got his appointment. Particularly when we know he must exist at this time. There are truths and there are truths. For example an idol is nothing, that's a truth but if my brother is stumbled by my insistence on the truth ( by eating the cheaper sacrificed meat on sale at the market ) I will put my personal rights according to my truth aside and if necessary I will not eat meat at all. Truth does not override love or obedience. In fact Christians have managed to serve God even though they were only in possession of partial truth for centuries. The truth about dates fall into this category. With regard to dates what I find amazing is that to some a wrong date or a wrong expectation is a crime. Yet despite their having the beneficial guidance of the holy spirit even the apostles developed wrong expectation. It would clearly appear that to the God of truth wrong expectations are not lies. Paul wrote to the Romans Rom 16:20 For his part the God who gives peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. Rev. To show his slaves the things that must shortly take place - On face value is 1900+ years shortly? Could you blame Christians in first century if they expected these things to happen soon perhaps in their life time and told other that? Would you conclude from that that they weren't whom they said they were. servants of the God of truth. During the dark ages how many false statements and outright lies were concocted by Christians - we can't say so called Christians here - because back then there weren't many Christian religions from who one could choose. Is God a God of truth? yes! yet many Christians back there had to worship God with half truth and lies. Was their worship unacceptable though sincere? was it acceptable to the God of truth? Why even God rendered certain understanding a secret. Revealing that at is appointed time many would search and the true knowledge would become abundant. a progressive truth is revealed here. As long as Christians sincerely adhered to the basic truth available to them then at the time the God who can read hearts must be pleased with such ones. Haven't you ever read in the scripture; were you called a slave, you are the lords free man, where you called a free man, you are the lords slave. Please go and learn what that means. I did not write these comments to you brother Jude and brother smolderringwick . I wrote then for any one who is making an issue over dates and times to cause divisions and to some extent using the truth as an excuse for badness. Those who set them selves up as defenders of truth and teachers of lies, those who were prophesied to come by the lords brother in the book of Jude. Men who indulge in dreams, who speak abusively of glorious ones, murmurers, complainers about their lot in life proceeding according to their own desires and whose mouth speak swelling things, These must turn up in the last days as ridiculers, proceeding according to their own desires, these are the ones who make separations, animalistic men not having any spirituality. These would do well to consider that warning.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-09-30 08:22:34
Dear A Brother, you say that it "pertains to all with the heavenly calling" but they you speak only of men. What of our sisters?
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-09-30 08:25:23
A Brother, I look forward to your response to my question raised in this comment:
http://meletivivlon.com/2013/08/16/seven-shepherds-eight-dukes-what-they-mean-for-us-today/#comment-4663
Comment by Jude on 2013-09-29 14:19:49
One last point I wish to make: Does Jesus appoint the faithful and discreet slave over the domestics? Or does Jesus judge his appointed slave as having been faithful and discreet at the very end when he comes?
In other words when does the term faithful and discreet apply to the slave - at the time of initial appointment? Or at the very end when - if - Jesus judges him as being faithful and discreet?
Just because Jesus calls the slave by his final label at Matthew 24:45 does not mean the slave is initially appointed with that label. Remember: Jesus also said: "But if that evil slave . . ." in reference to the possibility of his appointed slave later - future to his initial appointment - falling away. Jesus obviously would not have appointed an evil slave. In the same vein, his use of the term faithful and discreet slave necessarily refers to the slaves FINAL status in Jesus' eyes.
That being the case, I don't think it is discreet to preempt Jesus' judgement by claiming to be the faithful and discreet slave before he finally pronounces judgement on you as having been such. It would be like an athlete proclaiming himself as the winner of a race before the race is over and he is judged the winner.Reply by Jude on 2013-09-29 14:24:00
Final final: There is a contrast between rank and file Jehovah's Witnesses being unwilling to declare themselves as "saved" (by using the argument that he that endure to the END is the one that will be saved and thus we cannot really say that we are saved until the end) and the Governing Body's willingness to proclaim themselves as being the faithful and discreet slave before the end when Jesus makes that judgment.
Comment by A brother on 2013-09-30 06:22:18
My dear brother Jude I agree in principle with much of what you say. And I don't believe, again in principle, that it is wrong for one to search the scriptures in the pursuit of truth. The bible and its author our heavenly father encourages it. My son if you will listen to my voice and search for wisdom as for hidden treasure. Its what we do with that truth once we have found it that concerns me. We should not use it to tear down but to up build. Otherwise the truth may serve a wrong purpose and in the hands of some the wrong interest. Using the truth to arrive at a wrong conclusion. I would like too speak with you on this matter further. Please read what I said above and if you like give me your view. And please don't misunderstand my comments on truth I would never consider truth as something to be taken lightly that is not what I mean. Some of what I write could be twisted and miss interpreted to say what I'm saying. Thanks
Comment by emilyjeff on 2013-09-30 18:36:47
The obvious conclusion upon reading the post “Who Really is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?” is that this appointment by Jesus of the slave did not occur in 1919 but is in the future when he returns. There is no Biblical support of the claim that the current 8 members of the Governing Body become that Faithful Slave when they act together. The real problem that needs to be addressed is that if you are a baptized Jehovah’s Witness you have no choice but to accept whatever the Governing Body decides to publish as the “truth. That brings up the subject of obedience. Who are we to be ultimately obedient to? The Bible makes it clear that “We must obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29 Unfortunately, the organization demands complete, unquestioning obedience to their version of the “truth.” The penalty for not playing the game by their rules is severe, possible loss of family and friends.
Obedience when taken to the extreme can lead to devastating results. The quote below is not meant to compare the Governing Body to what happened in Nazi Germany but to show what is possible when blind obedience to our leaders takes precedence over our God given conscience.
This is Adolf Eichmann’s defense at his trial (held in Israel in 1961):
”I cannot recognize the verdict of guilty. . . . It was my misfortune to become entangled in these atrocities. But these misdeeds did not happen according to my wishes. It was not my wish to slay people. . . . Once again I would stress that I am guilty of having been obedient, having subordinated myself to my official duties and the obligations of war service and my oath of allegiance and my oath of office, and in addition, once the war started, there was also martial law. . . . I did not persecute Jews with avidity and passion. That is what the government did. . . . At that time obedience was demanded, just as in the future it will also be demanded of the subordinate.”
I have quoted this excerpt not to condemn or infer that the Governing Body is in any way comparable to those leaders of Nazi Germany but just to sound a warning that unquestioning obedience can lead to a lack of individual responsibility. We know that each of us will be judged individually for we read at Romans 2:6 “God "will repay each person according to what they have done." We have the obligation as Christians to test what we hear and see to make sure if it is backed up by the Scriptures. I think we should follow the advice from Acts 17:11:“Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.“
I salute you Meleti, for pointing out what should be obvious: “Brothers and sisters, let’s just stop doing this. Let us obey God as ruler rather than men. “Kiss the son, that He may not become incensed…” (Ps. 2:12)Reply by Jude on 2013-10-01 12:31:33
Amen!
Reply by StillHaveFaith on 2013-10-02 23:06:45
Re: The real problem that needs to be addressed is that if you are a baptized Jehovah’s Witness you have no choice but to accept whatever the Governing Body decides to publish as the “truth... Unfortunately, the organization demands complete, unquestioning obedience to their version of the “truth.” The penalty for not playing the game by their rules is severe, possible loss of family and friends."
I noticed an article on HuffPo and I couldn't help "connecting the dots" as I read certain portions of it:
When Organized Religion Becomes a Cult
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eliyahu-federman/when-organized-religion-become_b_3996139.html
Excerpts from above article:
"The distinction between cult and religion lies squarely in how those leaving or those wanting to leave are treated."
"What distinguishes religion from cults is the ability to question without being shunned and ability to reject dogmatic tenets without being shunned."
"Many religions make exclusive claims to truth...The harm stems from a system that shuns and ostracizes adherents that don't accept their exclusive claims to truth. That is where conventional religion becomes a potentially harmful cult. Forcing people to conform by using the subtle threat of social alienation is a form of coercion."
"Any religious community can become a cult. It's not about how faith is expressed in a community but more importantly how people are treated if they want to leave and disbelieve."
"In order to prevent crossing the line from religion to cult, communities need to purge themselves of dogma, intolerance and ostracizing those with different beliefs, so their adherents have true choice on how to live their lives."
Please forgive me if this post offends anyone here. I am posting this only as "Food for Thought"....
Comment by theapologeticfront on 2013-10-03 15:48:33
Hi all-
My apologies if this is out of bounds, but I was hoping for some input. I have a JW who is willing to engage me in a formal written debate on this very topic. We've finalized the conditions but now need the debate resolution. I want to cover 1919 and everything that directly relates to the new FDS understanding.
With that said, what would a good debate resolution/proposal be for this?Reply by Observer17 on 2013-10-04 09:05:10
Sounds very interesting!
I would be happy to help out, where I can.
If you would like to talk, privately...please write me at Observer17@netzero.com
Or, we can discuss matters here, if you like or if it is more convenient for you.
Either way is fine with me.
If our dear spiritual brother you speak of, is truly sincere, I believe you may have a unique "golden opportunity" to assist him spiritually, since the new understanding of the F&DS (released in the July 15th, 2013 issue, is one that is going to be fiercely challenged and debated by many, many thinking Jehovah's Witnesses, for many years to come.
I guess I should know, since I personally have over 50 years, active association & affiliation (going back to the 1950s) with the Jehovah's Witnesses organization, holding virtually every position within the organization itself, from Elder, Ministerial Servant, Regular Pioneering, serving where the need was greater, a member of the "Great Crowd" of Kingdom Preachers, and later, serving as an "anointed" brother of Christ too. (My health of late, has prevented me from doing much these days, so I have a lot of time on my hands, staying at home, at the computer. I'm not able to walk very well and get around because of my health.) Also, I have had many years of intimate experience with numerous travelling overseers (COs & DOs), a few missionaries serving in foreign countries, as well as many, many Bethelites serving at world headquarters in New York.
So, if I can be of assistance, please let me know.
Observer17@netzero.com
Reply by smolderingwick1 on 2013-10-04 16:26:24
While I am a little less than 50 years baptized on the Canadian side, so did I serve as elder, regular pioneer, Bethel worker, and presently doing little else but research, I am currently accessible at smoldering_wick@hotmail.com.
Reply by Christine on 2016-12-21 09:27:44
I found this when preparing for the conversation on the FDS. It relates to the 607-537 time line which is the basis for 1914 and so much more. It should give the JW plenty to consider (that's a BIG understatement, by the way). http://savedfromthewatchtower.blogspot.com/2008/11/1914-part-i-607-bc.html. When you lay out the calculation for the JW, it's pretty difficult to overlook.
Comment by Love Kindness | Beroean Pickets on 2014-02-06 10:58:45
[…] coming in 1925. We have given false hope to millions based on flawed chronology. We have given undue honor to men, treating them as our leaders in all but name. We have presumed to alter the Holy Scriptures, […]
Comment by Morning Worship Part: The “Slave” Is not 1900 Years Old | Beroean Pickets on 2015-06-13 08:01:38
[…] slave Jesus appointed to feed his flock. (For a full discussion of this interpretation see: Who Really Is the Faithful and Discreet Slave? Even more information is available under the category Faithful […]
Comment by “We Want to Go with You” | Beroean Pickets - JW.org Reviewer on 2016-03-20 16:37:52
[…] To reinforce this, the Governing Body cites Re 2:2. I guess they are really depending on Witnesses not to use their thinking ability, because that verse doesn’t apply to partaking of the emblems. It applies to men who appoint themselves as apostles over us. Is there a group of men who have taken upon themselves the mantle of leadership over the Christian congregation as if they were the modern-day equivalent of the Twelve whom Jesus appointed? Re 2:2 tells us what to do: “…put to the test those who say they are apostles, but they are not…” It then calls such one “liars.” So there is a Biblical precedent for calling a man a liar if he has exalted himself to a position he never received from Jesus Christ. (Read an analysis of the Governing Body’s position here, then what the Bible really says about the subject here.) […]
Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2016-03-20 17:48:59
I have read this many times and it has contributed to an undermining of what faith I had. However, try this. Accounts such as the minas, talents etc involve Jesus leaving in 33 CE. He returns in 1914 and by 1919 (I agree this actual date is a bit weak) decides the rest of Christendom are a failure and sees the Bible Students. They are in the right place and trying to do his will. He picks them and appoints them. They are not yet the faithful and discreet slave, but they will be if they prove faithful, just as others chosen in the past would have inherited the promises to them if they had not blown it. Will they prove faithful and discreet ? That is the question. Faithful to God's word. It is the question I am seriously asking. Only time will tell if they really prove true to the talents they have been given. And each of us have to render an account to God.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2016-03-20 19:48:19
I do not wish to undermine faith in Jehovah and in Jesus, but faith in men is another matter. Consider this article: "We Want to Go with You". Examine the scriptural evidence. If the Governing Body has convinced eight million people to preach a different good news to that which Paul spoke of at Galatians 1:6-9, can they really be considered faithful and discreet?
Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2016-03-21 08:13:34
Do not worry about undermining my faith in Jehovah and Jesus. If your articles undermine my trust in the Governing Body, then it is their failure to be open and candid on the scriptures which is doing the undermining, and my searching through your site which is revealing so much. What ever happened to the candour which we so proudly point to in the Bible ?
Comment by The Wanderer on 2016-12-27 18:30:56
Of course, this week is the reminder of how we must believe whatever we are told by the Leaders. AL you have to do is read the whole account (s) without chapters and verses and you get the full story. It's one conversation. I'm pretty sure Jesus wasn't changing thoughts in the 8-10 minutes it took to speak Matt. 24 & 25. To look at, what they call new light, makes Jesus out to be a disjointed nut. I don't think so.
Comment by Who Is Leading Jehovah’s People Today? | Beroean Pickets - JW.org Reviewer on 2017-04-29 13:38:28
[…] While it is true that the aforementioned Watchtower article did explain this, it did not provide any scriptural evidence to support the explanation. (See Who Really Is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?) […]
Comment by John Butler on 2018-02-20 14:04:24
February 2018, and I've only just read this. I agree with every word. But here we are in February 2018 and still it all goes on as usual. Now of course we have the Earthwide problems of the child Abuse / pedophilea whihc the GB seem to petend doesn't exist. The GB are withholding all the info' from the Supreme Court of California and it's costing the Org a small fortune. So Who really is the faithful and discreet slave ? Not the Governing Body of the JW Org that's for sure. How would Jehovah / Yahweh, and / or Jesus Christ work through such a self centered bunch of wicked slaves. By the way the GB are treating the 'domestics', Org members, it is obvious that they are a wicked slave who thinks the 'master' cannot see them.
Comment by Edward Leach on 2018-07-02 04:04:12
I believe 100% everything this article said..I'm one of Jehovah's witnesses and I refuse to believe in man made predictions ,dates ties and seasons..Jesus told his disciples not be concerned about dates and times because it is not in our jurisdiction but only in his father's authority Acts 1:7
The watchtower society has body challenged Jesus words and pushed ahead
I will only preach the good news of God's kingdom as instructed by our Lord and saviour Matthew 24:14
The watchtower society wouldn't recommend we go door to door teaching 1919 because the householder could easily refute such a thing by saying " it's not found in God's word"
No..what witnesses do, is they wait til a person is baptized and then threaten them with disfellowshiping if they do not conform with everything they teach
This is like what the Pharisees did I Jesus day .they would throw people out of their synagogues if they didn't conform to their teachingsReply by Joshua Nicholls on 2019-07-09 12:11:20
I'm a witness and have come to the conclusion that the GB does not speak for Jehovah and they in themselves said in an article "we are neither inspired not infallible we may at time err doctrinally" I'm not sure what to do now I want to obey the command of our Lord Jesus but and in unsure of what to do since I'm still technically not disassociated or disfellowshiped.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2019-07-14 09:35:59
Joshua, if you continue to study and acquire knowledge and follow that up with constant prayer for guidance, then the holy spirit will show you what you must do.
Comment by Anonymous on 2018-09-14 21:12:26
Jesus said “come and take life’s water free” ..... not... join us and lose your life if you leave the organization...he is my Father... he will never leave me nor I him....I trust only him...
Comment by Ryckewaert on 2019-03-14 15:47:47
How does it have to be understood since you made it clear it is not pointing to JW .?
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2019-03-17 20:01:12
I'm not sure what you are asking?
Reply by ajc on 2020-05-09 13:01:32
The person seems to be asking who is the faithful & discreet slave if it’s not JW. Idk, just my interpretation of the question.
Comment by Question 12 of Stay Faithful Through the Great Tribulation | Jlue's Weblog on 2019-08-20 12:30:02
[…] Beroean Picket […]