[From ws3/18 p. 14 – May 14 – May 20]
“Be hospitable to one another without grumbling.” 1 Peter 4:9
““The end of all things has drawn close,” wrote Peter. Yes, the violent end of the Jewish system of things would come in less than a decade (1 Peter 4:4-12)” - par. 1
True, with Peter writing sometime between 62 and 64 CE, the start of the end of all things relating to the Jewish System of Things was only 2 to 4 years away in 66 CE when the rebellion against Rome resulted in a Roman invasion of Judea that culminated in the complete eradication of the Jews as a nation by 73 CE.
“Among other things, Peter urged his brothers: “Be hospitable to one another.” (1 Pet. 4:9)” - par. 2
The full verse adds “without grumbling” and the prior verse talks about having “intense love for one another”. In context then this would suggest the early Christians were having love for one another and showing hospitality to one another, but the love needed to be stronger, more intense; and the hospitality provided without grumbling.
Why was this necessary?
Let us briefly consider the context of Peter’s letter. Were there any events that occurred around the time of writing that might have contributed to Peter’s counsel? In 64 CE, Emperor Nero caused the Great Fire of Rome which he blamed on Christians. They were persecuted as a result, with many being put to death in the arena or burnt as human torches. This had been prophesied by Jesus in Matthew 24:9-10, Mark 13:12-13, and Luke 21:12-17.
Any Christians who were able, would doubtless have fled Rome to surrounding towns and provinces. As refugees, they would have needed accommodation and provisions. So, it was likely that it was hospitality to these refugees—these strangers—that Paul was referring to, rather than to local Christians. Of course, there was risk involved. Offering hospitality to persecuted ones, made the resident Christians even more of a target themselves. These were indeed “critical times hard to deal with” and those early Christians needed reminders to display their Christian qualities amid those stressful, turbulent times. (2 Ti 3:1)
Paragraph 2 then goes on to say:
“The word “hospitality” in Greek literally means “fondness for, or kindness to, strangers." Note, however, that Peter urged his Christian brothers and sisters to be hospitable to one another, to those whom they already knew and associated with.”
Here, the Watchtower article is claiming that despite the use of the Greek word for hospitality referring to “kindness to strangers”, Peter was applying it to Christians who already knew one another. Is this a reasonable assumption, given the historical context? If Peter's focus had been on showing kindness to those already known to one another, he surely would have used the correct Greek word to ensure that his readers understood him properly. Even today, English dictionaries define hospitality as “friendly, welcoming behaviour towards guests or people you have just met.” Note, it does not say “friends or acquaintances”. We should, however, concede that even in a congregation of Christians, both then and today, there will those who may be closer to the definition of strangers than friends to us. Hence, showing hospitality to such ones, so as to get to know them better, would be an act of Christian kindness.
Opportunities to Show Hospitality
Paragraphs 5-12 then discuss different aspects of how we can show hospitality within the congregation. As you will see, it is very organization-centric. Not once is showing hospitality to a new neighbour or new workmate who perhaps is having a difficult time even hinted at.
“We welcome all who attend our Christian meetings as fellow guests at a spiritual meal. Jehovah and his organization are our hosts. (Romans 15:7)”. - par. 5
How interesting that it is not Jesus, the head of the congregation, nor even the local congregation members, who are the hosts, but "Jehovah and his organization." Does this tally with what Paul says to the Romans?
“So welcome one another, just as the Christ also welcomed you, with glory to God in view”. (Romans 15:7)
Of course, if Jesus is our host, so is Jehovah...but the organization? Where is the scriptural basis for such a statement? Replacing "Jesus" with "Organization" in this case surely amounts to an act of presumptuousness!
“Why not take the initiative to welcome these new ones, no matter how they may be dressed or groomed? (James 2:1-4)” - par. 5
While this suggestion is admirable based on the principle in the scripture—and for many congregations a very important reminder—who was James actually talking to? James admonishes:
“My brothers, you are not holding to the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ while showing favouritism, are you?” (James 2:1)
James was addressing the early Christian brothers. What were they doing? It seems they were showing favouritism to the richer brothers over the poorer ones based on how they were dressed. He reasons by saying, "If so, do you not have class distinctions among yourselves and have you not become judges rendering wicked decisions?” (James 2:4) Clearly, the problem was between brothers.
Did James insist that both the rich and the poor dress the same way? Did he stipulate a dress code to be followed by both men and women? Today, brothers are expected to be clean shaven, and to dress in formal business attire—a suit, plain shirt and a tie—while sisters are discouraged from wearing formal business attire such as a pant suit, or pants of any sort.
If a brother were to sport a beard, or refuse to wear a tie to the meetings, or if a sister were to dress in pants of any sort, they would be looked down upon, viewed as weak or even rebellious. In other words, class distinctions would be made. Is this not a modern-day variation on the situation that James was addressing? When Witnesses make such distinctions, are they not turning themselves into “judges rendering wicked decisions”? Surely this is the real lesson from James.
Overcoming Barriers to Hospitality
The first barrier comes as no surprise: “Time and Energy”.
After stating the obvious—that witnesses are very busy and “feel that they simply do not have the time or energy to show hospitality”—paragraph 14 urges readers to “make some adjustments so that you will have time and energy to accept or offer hospitality”.
How exactly does the organization suggest that busy Witnesses can make time and energy for showing hospitality? By reducing time spent in field service? How often have you driven by the home of an elderly brother or sister, or an ailing member of the congregation, and felt guilty that you didn't stop in for an encouraging visit, because you had to get your field service hours in?
What about cutting back on the number or length of congregation meetings? Surely we could reduce or eliminate the weekly "Living as Christians" meeting which has little to do with the Christ and living as a Christian, but much to do about conforming to the Organization mold and mode of conduct.
The second barrier mentioned is: “Your feelings about yourself”.
Paragraph 15 thru 17 mention how some are shy; some have limited income; some don’t have the skills to cook a nice meal. Also, many feel their offering cannot match what others may be able to provide. Sadly, it does not offer a scriptural principle. Here is one:
“For if the readiness is there first, it is especially acceptable according to what a person has, not according to what a person does not have.” (2 Corinthians 8:12)
What matters is our heart motivation. If we are motivated by love, then we will happily minimize time spent on organizational requirements in favour of showing hospitality to our brothers and sisters in the faith, and also to those on the outside.
The third barrier mentioned is: “Your feelings about others”.
This is a tricky area. Philippians 2:3 is quoted, “With humility consider others superior to you”. This is the ideal. But understandably, considering some as superior to ourselves when we know what sort of person they really are can be a real challenge. Therefore, we would need to use a balanced approach to applying this fine principle.
For instance, there is a big difference between being hospitable to someone who perhaps upset us with a remark, and someone who upset us by defrauding us or abusing us—verbally, physically, or even sexually.
The last three paragraphs deal with how to be a good guest. This, at least, is good counsel; particularly the reminder not to go back on one’s promise. (Psalm 15:4) Many have the habit of accepting invitations only to cancel at the last minute, when they get what they consider a better one as the paragraph states. It is also a good reminder to respect local customs so as not to offend, provided they do not conflict with Bible principles.
Overall the article is discussing hospitality, a commendable Christian quality, with practical points as to how to apply it. Sadly, as with many articles, it is heavily slanted to filling organizational needs rather than displaying the quality in a true and proper Christian manner.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by LaRhonda T. on 2018-05-13 12:39:52
I remember being told by my Grandmother that when in doubt, just let kindness be your guide...Made sense then, makes sense now!
Reply by Robert-6512 on 2018-05-13 16:37:30
I recall one of the GB (I think it was Barr) being attributed with a saying, "the kind thing to do is usually the right thing to do". On its own, that is a fine sentiment and there is nothing wrong with that. But, not content to have a nice saying from a GB member and let it go at that, WT decided to make this a doctrine, and declare that "the kind thing to do IS the right thing to do", no longer attributing it to Barr but implying that the Bible itself taught this doctrine, and then framed it in absolute terms.
(I have a feeling, but with no way to prove it, that elevating Barr's pet saying to a doctrine was a way to appeal to Barr's pride and vanity, for reasons unknown but possibly improper.)
I would never argue against kindness per se, but to say that kindness is ALWAYS the right thing is incorrect. The world of Noah's day who drowned in the flood would not, in their last dying moments, conclude that they were being treated with kindness. Yet, as a manifestation of God's perfect justice, a clearly "unkind" act against those people was unquestionably the "right" thing to do.
Kindness is the right thing to do when it's appropriate, but that isn't all the time. If your child is disobedient, rebellious, out of control and engaged in self-destructive behavior, that is not the time to be kind, but to be decisive and disciplined.
As usual, WT spews out these nice-sounding platitudes without rigorously researching and vetting them to ensure their scriptural soundness. In other words, they promote the teachings of men instead of the commands of God.Reply by Leonardo Josephus on 2018-05-14 04:11:33
Better is “If you are not sure or in doubt, do the loving thing”.
Reply by Robert-6512 on 2018-05-15 13:31:48
How do we know that the "kind" thing is NOT ALWAYS the right thing to do?
Peter: Be kind to yourself, Lord.
Jesus: Get behind me, Satan, for you speak, not God's thoughts, but those of men.
Case closed.
Comment by wish4truth2 on 2018-05-13 17:05:21
GREAT ARTICLE! We are learning all these warnings applied to first century Christians not us today (so called last days)as the Watchtower has taught!s much to re learn! can't get enough. more more!
Reply by Robert-6512 on 2018-05-13 18:39:09
Maybe they have the right stick, but at the wrong end. Maybe these are the last days of WT. One can dream ...
Comment by Astoriaboy on 2018-05-14 00:16:47
The organization may be the host, but the brothers in the congregation end up footing the bill for everything. From Pioneer Schools to the outrageous covering of expenses for Circuit Assemblies and Special Assembly days, to speaker hospitality. What does the organization actually pay for? Enough is enough!
Reply by Psalmbee on 2018-05-14 02:51:31
I can't think of anything that the Org has ever paid for with it's own money,because they have never had any of "their own" money. It's a sad thing but the members pay to be guided (owned) by the GB and they pay dearly and not just with money!!
Reply by Leonardo Josephus on 2018-05-14 04:08:45
The Org also nabbed most of the congregation funds a few years against, on the basis that they would then be responsible for the major maintenance costs on those halls. This was followed a little later with a letter implying that they would be quite happy if the congregations wish to meet those costs. Nothing of a major nature has happened locally, so it will be interesting to see who actually pays for it. I know what and why I was asked to vote for when the money was sent out, so it will be interesting to find out, if anyone gets round to the updating that was considered important some 4 to 5 years back.
Reply by Lois on 2018-05-14 07:46:05
Has anyone verified the transfer of ownership to the org.? There should be a new deed recorded to transfer the property from the congregation to the org. I checked in my location and the property is still in the name of the congregation. Just wondering...
Reply by Bobcat on 2018-05-20 11:15:33
Hi Lois,
The "deed" is accomplished by having the owner congregation adopt a set of "Articles of Association" which say that if the owner congregation is dissolved the title would go to the WT after all debts are paid off.Reply by Lois on 2018-05-21 19:15:39
I thought that another possibility would be that if the Kingdom Hall sold, the congregation would be presented with a resolution to send the money to the society. I didn’t realize that there were “articles of association “ involved. Something else the rank & file are mostly unaware of...
Reply by Astoriaboy on 2018-05-14 20:50:10
I was in a congregation that was very close to having their "loan" paid off. I put loan in quotation marks, because I could never understand how donated funds could somehow be turned into loans. Then we got a letter from the society stating that the "loan" had been forgiven. Everyone at the meeting clapped when the letter was read. However, it stated, we would continue to pay the same amount we had been paying on the "loan", except that now, the "loan" would somehow be called a "donation"! And by the way, it would be a perpetual donation. Some of these halls have been sold without the local congregations receiving one red cent. What would you call this? Certainly not legal.
Reply by Psalmbee on 2018-05-14 21:04:53
Mafioso tactics disguised as a religion what more could they ask for?
These guys out of New York and P.A. wrote the standard manual for the "protection business". The payoffs and the rip offs and the things that nobody saw, boy are they working hard to stay above the law. I call them the masters of fine print! (Eph 5:6).
Comment by River on 2018-05-14 01:01:31
As usually an insightful article and good comments. Thank's to all of you.
For me JW is a nasty pease of collectivism followed by a lot of phrases and buzzword and no connection to God's word.
I sincerely hate this mentality.
I had a conversation with a pair of elders last week and I discussed the beard with them and they are practically defenceless. My point is that I can't tell others something I don't find in the Bible.
They tell me it's a minor subject but I turn it around an ask, to whom? I'm not the one who brought it up. I'm the one who had a beard since 1981 and had to live with all the hidden consequences.
They are defenceless and they hate when I say it.
Comment by Alithia on 2018-05-14 04:14:20
A beautiful collection of sentiments!However again we are confined to a minimal and restricted framework from which to work within. Mostly within the frame work of what can be done to grease the wheels of Organisational initiatives, demonstrate obedience and a servile attitude to the organisations leadership. And not in the nature of the true scriptural spirit of hospitality, being of an all inclusive, individual and personal kind. It seems that Jesus illustration of the "Good Samaritan" is lost for the purposes of this study of how and to who to apply the admonition to show loving hospitality. If we are going to study for the purposes of encouraging true Christian hospitality, how about expanding the frame work for our minds and hearts to more closely imitate our Father and our master Jesus when he walked the Earth. Jesus, who fed everybody, (strangers) healed everybody, (strangers) taught everybody (strangers) and used occasions of hospitality to engage with sinners, (strangers) who needed the spiritual assistance he could impart. Mark 2:13-17. The Pharisees asked Jesus disciples why Jesus dined with sinners, (He initiated it with Levi the Tax collector) and tax collectors and a good many a prostitute? Galatians 6:10 says, So then as long as we have the opportunity let us work what is good towards all, but especially towards those related to us in the faith. All are not included in this study, in fact based on numerous past studies, VDOs, books and brochures and KMs all are decidedly excluded from any of the hospitality niceties described in this study.
And if they wanted to get serious about hospitality and even have the temerity to mention James writings at all, then we need to also not exclude what James said to the brothers about true religion a couple of sentences before showing favoritism !! That is as James 1:27 says, "To look after the orphans and the widows in their tribulation". These should be included in "All" and not just those who are JWs as this would be making wicked distinctions for sure!!!. The loving attitude Jehovah displays is as Jesus said at Matthew 5:45-48. In part, "God makes it rain on righteous and the unrighteous, sun rise on both, what is there about greeting your brothers only? Do not the nations do the same, accordingly you must be perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect". Hospitality can be explained by way of a dictionary definition of what the ancient Greek word may have meant in the period, but what underpins the actions is so much more of importance, the heartfelt love with all of the shades that the different Greek words used to describe the many facets of love... The kind of love Jesus displayed and exemplified by word and deed while on the Earth. No mention of Jesus and hospitality in this study, because it does not fit the organisational utilitarian culture. There is mention of poor old Martha, and Jesus telling her she need not be overanxious about things, but one cannot deduce from this anything other than that. It is ironic, not correctly understanding the reasons and the need at the time as to why Peter wrote as he did, and that after establishing the fact that hospitality is the love of strangers the study concentrates and blasts away like the point of a mega laser on just the brotherhood.
See you all at the local soup kitchen!!!
Comment by mark on 2018-05-16 11:40:22
I'd like to make a comment on the strict uniform that men need to wear at the meetings and conventions.
I did some research and found that in the First Century the only ones that needed to wear some sort of special garb were the priests who served at the temple.
It never states in the Bible or any where else that Jesus followers needed to change into some uniform to preach or go to the temple or meet at some sort of congregation.
Has anyone ever found in the bible that Jesus told his disciples - before we preach or go to the temple or go to a congregation that we need to put on our special uniform or else we are disrespecting Jehovah. The answer is NO!!!
In fact, in the first century they wore the same outfit to every where they went
The GB are exactly like the Pharisees.. Making people do what they want them to do. They are putting undue burden on Jesus' sheep. Another shame on themReply by LaRhonda T. on 2018-05-16 13:36:41
Mark, I am SO there with what you are saying!!!! I can remember being so cold, literally had my teeth chattering, but I knew I had to put on a dress to go to the meeting. I remember asking the question as to why I couldn't wear a nice, warm, fleece sweatshirt and thick pants, socks and heavy boots to keep warm, and was told, "Well, when you go to Jehovah's house, you're supposed to wear your best." I was also told that I should just consider being cold a test of loyalty, was I willing to be uncomfortable for Jehovah's sake? I remember thinking that that was ridiculous, but I went along to get along. ( I was young, and hadn't developed the big mouth I've got now :) !) Anyway, I simply never understood the 'dress code' business. As long as one is neat, clean and modest, (I believe we ALL know deep down inside what those words mean, and don't need guidelines) what is wrong with wearing what one has. Someone who does not have a suit, perhaps you work in a profession that requires you to have a uniform, ( Doctor, nurse, etc...) Particularly, the problem the society seems to have with jeans and casual shoes. I worked as a preschool teacher, so I literally lived in jeans, sweats, tennis shoes. I think I owned maybe a denim skirt and one formal black dress and a pair of heels. My then-husband had a skin condition that prevented him from shaving every day, he also didn't like ties because he felt constricted, so he would wear one. We were both criticized for not wearing a tie, not shaving and me wearing a denim skirt and sandals. I really got criticized for wearing bright nail-polish, toe rings, and a silver anklet, but by that time, I found myself not really caring. I'm quite sure that The Most High had and has more important things to do than concern Himself with whether or not His servants shave or wear denim skirts
Reply by wild olive on 2018-05-16 21:47:55
I often wondered how sisters could cope with cold , especially in places where the snow piles up, don't get much of that here in Aus .
The beard thing is a funny one, Hebrew men were commanded by the Law to not shave off their beard, using WT logic , that would mean that Jehovah actually likes beards on men, so I guess the question should be, has he changed his mind?Reply by mark on 2018-05-17 12:15:21
Yah I never did understand why we weren't allowed to grow a beard. It does make sense if they want to control its members
Reply by mark on 2018-05-17 12:21:25
LaRhonda, the org doesn't have any Idea what Love is and that's a major problem if they claim that they are the only true religion.
Comment by wild olive on 2018-05-16 21:41:37
Real hospitality, that is to say biblical hospitality is a rare thing. Speaking from my own perspective, once upon a time I would invite anyone in for a coffee and a chat, now I don't feel so inclined anymore, it started to feel that the only time people would visit was because they want something, either advice on some project , or to listen to their victim sob story, or to get home made salami and ham , it gets annoying after a while.
I used to have the book study at my house,back then , about 13 yrs ago, the congregation was flourishing, I even put on an extension on my house to accommodate the growth, then the home book study got canned, and it all went downhill from there, something important died when the book study changed. Hospitality perhaps?
Comment by Astoriaboy on 2018-05-21 15:19:48
I thought it was interesting that no reference was made to the latter part of Matthew 25:35, where the parable says, "I was a stranger and you received me hospitably" in connection with how Christ's "brothers" are treated? How are individuals in the congregation supposed to know how to show hospitality to anointed ones if they don't know who we are? Any thoughts on this?