Treasures from God’s Word and Digging for Spiritual Gems – “Be my follower- What is needed” (Luke 8-9)
Luke 8:3 - How were these Christians “ministering” to Jesus and the apostles? (“were ministering to them”)(nwtsty)
It is interesting that the full flavour of the meaning of diakoneo is brought out here. I.e. “to wait at the table, or to serve (generally)”. The study note says “The Greek word di·a·ko·neʹo can refer to caring for the physical needs of others by obtaining, cooking, and serving food, and so forth. It is used in a similar sense at Luke 10:40 (“attend to things”), Luke 12:37 (“minister”), Luke 17:8 (“serve”), and Acts 6:2 (“distribute food”), but it can also refer to all other services of a similar personal nature.” This meaning, the core meaning of 'minister', is virtually never used by the organization when discussing those they consider ‘older men’.
Why is this meaning given here in the study notes? It seems it is because the scripture here is talking about women, as it mentions Joanna, Susanna and many other women who were using their personal belongings to help support Jesus and his disciples as they went from city to city. Should not this serving also apply to men and particular the shepherds of the congregation? As discussed before, James 5:14 does not refer to spiritual healing as interpreted by the organization, but rather, greasing with oil was a common practice when someone was ill back in the first century. Even today we frequently apply different oils to various ailments, and often the massaging of them into the skin also assists in the healing process. Does it not smack of hypocrisy to translate diakoneo as serving others needs when referring to women and yet when diakoneo is used with men then somehow it is interpreted as exercising or holding authority as a minister over others, instead of serving others needs? Is this an example of male chauvinism?
Talk: Should we regret any sacrifices that we have made for the sake of the Kingdom? (w12 3/15 27-28 para 11-15)
This portion of the article is based on Philippians 3:1-11. It would therefore be good to examine the context rather than interpreting specific verses in isolation.
- (Verse 3)“For we are those with the real circumcision” as opposed to (verse 5) “circumcised the eighth day, out of the family stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew [born] from Hebrews”.
- Paul was saying that being circumcised in Christ and being part of Spiritual Israel as a Christian was far superior to that of being of good family descent of fleshly Israel. (Colossians 2:11,12)
- (Verse 3) “who are rendering sacred service by God’s spirit” instead of sacred service via the Mosaic Law because of birth. (Hebrews 8:5, 2 Timothy 1:3)
- Verse 3 – “have our boasting in Christ Jesus and do not have our confidence in the flesh.” It was more important to boast of being a disciple of Christ than a fleshly ‘son of Abraham’. (Matthew 3:9, John 8:31-40)
- (Verse 5b) “as respects law, a Pharisee” – Paul while he was ‘Saul’ kept the strict law of the Pharisees, i.e. all the extra traditions added to the Mosaic Law.
- (Verse 6) “as respects zeal, persecuting the congregation;” (Galatians 1:14-15, Romans 10:2-4) – The zeal Paul had been displaying was for maintaining the status of the Pharisaical ruling class against the early Christians.
- (Verse 6) “as respects righteousness that is by means of law, one who proved himself blameless.” (Romans 10:3-10) – The righteousness Paul had been previously displaying was that of obedience to the Mosaic Law.
So the gains Paul had before becoming a Christian were:
- Acknowledgement of being descended from a pure Jewish family that followed the Mosaic Law as it was required.
- Acknowledgement of being a zealous devotee to the traditions of the Pharisees (the predominant Jewish political party)
- The fame of being prominent as a persecutor of the Christians.
These were the things he viewed as “as a lot of refuse, that I may gain Christ”. When he became a Christian he used his education to the benefit of his new faith. It enabled him to preach to high officials of the Roman Empire in an eloquent way. (Acts 24:10-27, Acts 25:24-27) It also enabled him to write a big portion of the Christian Scriptures.
However the organization uses Paul’s experience this way: “Sad to say, some look back on sacrifices they made in the past and view them as missed opportunities. Perhaps you had opportunities for higher education, for prominence, or for financial security, but you decided not to pursue them. Many of our brothers and sisters have left behind lucrative positions in the fields of business, entertainment, education, or sports.”.
The organization is here condoning these “sacrifices”. But why did many make these “sacrifices”? For most it was because they believed the organization’s claims that Armageddon would come very shortly and that by making these sacrifices they were pleasing God. But what is the reality? The article continues “Now time has passed, and the end has not yet arrived.” So that is the real problem. Failed promises (from the organization) and failed expectations.
We are then asked: “Do you fantasize about what could have happened had you not made those sacrifices?” This is has to be a common problem otherwise it would not have been voiced. You do not waste space in such an article on a non-existent problem. Is it any wonder given the history of failed promises.[i] So what does this have to do with Paul and Philippians 3? According to the article this: “Paul did not regret any of the secular opportunities that he had left behind. He no longer felt that they were worthwhile”.
Above we discussed what Paul gave up according to the Scriptures. Did these secular opportunities include a higher education? No, he was already educated. It had contributed to his sound knowledge of Scripture. Acts 9:20-22 says in part “But Saul kept on acquiring power all the more and was confounding the Jews that dwelt in Damascus as he proved logically that this is the Christ.” This was shortly after his eyesight was restored after his vision of Jesus on the road to Damascus. Did he view his education in the Scriptures at the feet of Gamaliel as a waste? Of course not. (Acts 22:3) It was what enabled him to so quickly become a fine advocate of Christ as the promised Messiah.
He even used his Roman citizenship to further the Good News. Something else we should not forget. Paul had received a personally delivered assignment from the glorified resurrected Jesus Christ. (Acts 26:14-18) None of us alive today have had such a privilege, so comparing what Paul did with what we should do and can do is like comparing apples with oranges.
So coming back to the theme question: “Should we regret any sacrifices that we have made for the sake of the Kingdom?” No, of course not, but we should make sure the sacrifices we make are those that we willingly make and will not ever regret. We should also make sure these sacrifices are actually required for the sake of the Kingdom and will benefit the Kingdom rather than for the sake of a man made organization. The sacrifices we make should not be those that are dictated or strongly suggested to us by other men.
Jesus did counsel not to pursue riches, but he neither did he require us nor suggest to us to give up a satisfying job, or the prospects of such.
__________________________________________________
[i] When young I was assured I would not leave school before Armageddon came in 1975. I am now close to retirement yet Armageddon is still just round the corner. It is still allegedly imminent. Jesus told us in Matthew 24:36 “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” It will come, but not when we want or think it to be or others try to calculate it to be.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by Alithia on 2018-07-12 04:53:41
Adding to the idea around the sacrifices that Paul willingly made. Philippians 3:1-11
The Org incorrectly uses this section of scripture to denigrate things like education, money, building a family and things associated with large well established families in a community, prestige and other things of a material nature as being refuse. And make it appear as if God inspired Paul to make it apparent that any one seeking these things are foolish and making poor choices reflective of a person who lacks faith and appreciation of spiritual things.
The fact of the matter is that Paul simply was explaining that he was faced with a choice. He could continue on his way, well placed in a society that he lived in and could capitalise on it handsomely.
However he could not capitalise on temporal things as his fleshly decent and privileged background and be a Christian at the same time! In his particular and specific personal circumstances of the time and society that he lived in!
How could Paul continue as a Pharisee or as a Lawyer of the Mosaic Law. Or mingle and collaborate with the jewish elite of the time and be a Christian. Being a Christian meant being persecuted, looked down on and thrown out of the Synagogue and society in general.
So for Paul it was a value judgement, and in doing so the immediate physical benefits were garbage/refuse by comparison!!! Not that any of those things were in themselves garbage as the Org likes to misrepresent them.
A typical ignorant and judgemental viewpoint of an indoctrinated Orga is as follows.
Paul was like university educated and he said it was garbage! Paul could of had money and he said money is garbage! And on and on as you know and can guess.
A simple reading of bible Proverbs and Ecclesiastes which are referred to as the wisdom books by the Jews shows how in opposition these crazy ideas are to how God actually encourages people to live out their life, or act and to aspire in life!.
Comment by MarthaMartha on 2018-07-09 11:48:08
Hello Tadua, nice review!
I too will was never to enter school/ leave school/ get married/ have children and I’m now a grandmother of three. I feel the same as you. It will come, but I’ve had enough of being kept in suspense for 6 decades by men who can’t follow Christ’s instructions.
At least living a simple life for so long ‘because the end is around the corner’ leaves us with a chance of being able to eke out our meagre government pension, if it’s still available when we reach that age! because we never had the chance to save or get a private pension being a window cleaner and house cleaner.
I don’t regret my life. We’ve had many advantages being in a simple job, mainly that we had time to devote to our family. We’re very glad we decided to buy our own house in the 80’s instead of renting as many have done only to be left old and with no property of their own to fall back on if times get tough.
Do I view these things as sacrifices? No! We allowed ourselves to be conned by men. We made decisions based on peer pressure. I was brought up to not even think of getting anything other than a simple job in 1974 when I left school at 16 because I wouldn’t be working for more than a couple of years.
Yes I’m aggrieved and annoyed. With myself actually! I don’t think I would have been any happier, but I know we wouldn’t be facing an uncertain old age that was never supposed to happen.
It annoys me that the word sacrifice is used at all. A sacrifice is a deliberate action made in full knowledge of what you’re giving up.
We never knew what we were giving up because we didn’t think we’d be here in this system at 60.
What we actually sacrificed was our power of reason. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
The GB sit in their ivory tower content to be provided for and with the knowledge their old age will be comfortable and safe, and have the gall to tell us off for feeling aggrieved.
The more they speak the less I respect them.
As for the ministry for women v men.... it’s so blatantly chauvinistic. The way sisters who assist at conventions are downgraded compared to the badge holding brothers given the authority to direct is so silly.
I remember years ago a brother was trying to direct me to follow a certain course of action, that I didn’t agree with and didn’t want to do. He asserted that brothers in the congregation have authority over sisters. He thought that Jesus’ headship principle applies to all men over all women. Poor thing! ?
I reminded him that I had one head, my father at the time, and there would be one future head, my husband, and other than that there is Jesus and no brother is head over me.
I think I quickly got a reputation for being a difficult and independent woman, ?although my husband has never complained at my attitude because he is a good man who doesn’t try to dominate me and I’m happy to have him as my head.
?
It all seems so silly now.
It’s good to be on the other side looking at what is said instead of being conditioned and controlled by human opinion.
Love to all!
MarthaReply by jamesbrown on 2018-07-13 01:47:19
Maratha you make me laugh…… Does your husband have the last say in the house…… Yes Maratha…… No Maratha ….. Whatever you say Maratha, just to keep the peace in the house.
If you were living in year 66CE and you fled to the mountains or near by villages, would you have complained why hasn’t the end come, why am I still living as a homeless person since I have a house? You remind me of Lots wife and we all know what happened to her, I suggest you have a look at the drama regarding the destruction of Jerusalem, then ask yourself “How can I stand it when someone is ravaging my own home and am so far away”?
You said “As for the ministry for women v men…. it’s so blatantly chauvinistic. The way sisters who assist at conventions are downgraded compared to the badge holding brothers given the authority to direct is so silly.”
Do you think God should have turned Jesus into a female and sent her to earth, would that have made you happier?
Don’t get upset with me or what I am saying, think about the drama and imagine yourself their…… What would you have done????
I think you would have stayed……. What do you think?Reply by Tadua on 2018-07-13 03:31:27
Hi James
I think that your comments directed to Martha are rather unfair and unnecessarily personal.
The reference to the drama is also uncalled for and not relevant. Jesus gave a prophecy which could be clearly seen to be fulfilled and instructions as to what to do when those events occurred for the first century. He did not give the same clearly identifiable signs and instructions for the end of the current system of things.
We have all been victims of man’s desire to guess when the time would be that Jesus clearly stated we should keep on the watch for we do not know and nor did he.
If Jesus himself did not know (Matthew 24:36) then how could he give prophecies to calculate the time, or signs to be read as to when he is coming again?(Matthew 24:23-31)
The way women are treated as second class citizens in the organization does not agree with the Bible record as to how Jesus treated women, with respect and dignity, capable of having a mind of their own.
One question for you to ponder, as women are also chosen ones and hence will be Kings (or queens!) on the earth (Revelation 5:10) How will they be able to fulfill their roles if they always have to follow the direction of their fellow male kings? Surely that would negate the whole idea of their appointment?Reply by MarthaMartha on 2018-07-13 11:40:11
?
Hugs for you Tadua in a sisterly or motherly way since I’m an old lady now.
Reply by MarthaMartha on 2018-07-13 11:37:42
Hello Jamesbrown,
I’m glad youre having a good laugh at my expense. Laughing is very good for the soul.
I can tell you that I was rolling on the floor laughing at your comment about my husband. If you knew us, you would realise the very thought of my husband going yes Martha ( not Maratha) no Martha three bags full Martha is a hilarious and ridiculous thought.
The fact is you don’t know us and you don’t know me from Adam. At least I don’t think so.... where do you live? Have you rumbled my alias???
I don’t know you and I’m not going to presume to say what I think you would do in any circumstances let alone the end of the system.
Your reference to the drama has me a little confused. I can assure you that had I been in Judea at the time, I would have been first up to the mountains, alongside my husband. I will follow him to the ends of the earth and I wouldn’t be weeping about my house. Whatever gave you that idea?
I’m sorry... I think my post has got lost in translation. I don’t know where you are from. I live in the UK and what’s more I’m a Northern gal and we’re known for speaking our minds. That doesn’t mean being disrespectful or throwing our weight around. However we don’t suffer fools gladly and won’t be put down. As for my husband, he enjoys having a wife with a brain and the power to use it and the intelligence to discuss serious matters, before we make decisions, or in some cases, he makes the decision. We are a partnership and after 40 years are a very good team. I have no desire to be head of the house. I like being treated like a porcelain teacup and not a mug.
The comment about women ministering, was simply to point out that in WT land, women are not considered to be capable or worthy of having a position where they direct anything. Why are sisters not called Attendants? Why do the brothers get badges and the sisters have to wear tabards? I don’t know about where you live but here in England we have women surgeons, lawyers, pilots, police, prison officers, teachers and university professors. It’s generally accepted nowadays that a woman can be entrusted with responsibility and even heaven forbid! Authority!!!!?
I know of sisters who were asked to run the literature desk because there were not enough brothers to do it. They had the desk running like clockwork within weeks and we all commended them for their efficiency. When some brothers moved in they were summarily dismissed because sisters aren’t allowed to do these responsible tasks when brothers are available. No matter whether the brother is capable of running a desk and keeping track of orders etc.... just because he’s a man he has the job, and we women are only called in as a last resort. It’s demeaning.
The scriptural headship principle is good and perfect. However some men feel they’re superior to ALL women and as such are entitled to direct them. In Jesus description it was wife, husband, Jesus, Jehovah. That’s all I’m saying.
Your comment about me perhaps thinking Jesus should have been sent to earth as a woman instead of a man is frankly silly. Not to mention irrelevant. The ransom had to be for Adam. Who was a man. I don’t get your point and you’re being a bit impertinent now and disrespectful to our Lord.
Lot’s wife? There’s barely anything in scripture about her. All the supposition and imaginary reasons for her turning around are just that. We don’t know what was in her mind, and I don’t like to impute motives to her any more than I like you imputing motives to me. I believe the angels had to drag Lot out of the city too? In fact there’s a lot more detail in scripture about Lot’s behaviour than his wife, so why she’s held up as a symbol of rebellious or materialistic women I don’t know. There are lots of things about Lot that leave a lot to be desired. ?
Ok. I love my husband and I respect him. I respect men and admire their qualities. I believe women should be respected too and don’t see why watchtower has to push the idea that the use of diakonos in the scripture could only mean they were serving food or waiting on the men.
Just to make it clear, I was not, am not and never have complained that the end hasn’t come. I’ve always accepted what our Lord said, you do not know the time.
I have, am, and will continue to complain about the actions of certain ones in the organisation who’ve continued to ignore that counsel and claim the end is imminent for the 60 years I’ve been alive and longer.
You think I would have stayed do you?
Your thinking is faulty and not based on accurate knowledge.
With sisterly affection and respect, and a playful punch ?
Martha.Reply by MarthaMartha on 2018-07-13 11:43:33
PS
I have to say, it’s ironic that your name is James Brown.
I’ve got that song in my head now.
“It’s a man’s world.... but it would be nothing.... “ how did the rest go?
?
Reply by Warp Speed on 2018-07-13 13:01:24
"I feel good!............."
In all seriousness JB, since you have made a few assumptions about our Sister Martha, I think it only fair to return the favor. But I won't because I am finally starting to really work on displaying the fruits of the spirit after being a devout JW for 40 years.
I get where you're coming from though. We lived in a culture of superiority and judgement in the Org. Welcome to the forum and may the love of the Christ be with you.......?Reply by MarthaMartha on 2018-07-13 16:53:10
Ah WS,
I’m put in my place by you. I’m still struggling behind you in displaying the fruits of the spirit.
JB I’m sorry I didn’t even realise that you’re new to the forum. I’m often busy with family matters and don’t always keep up with who’s who here. I’m sorry for going into full defensive Martha mode. Welcome to the forum. I didn’t like what you said about me and reacted defensively, but I’m glad you’re here. The more the merrier. Iron sharpens iron.
WS, greetings to you and yours. ?
Martha and husband xxReply by Warp Speed on 2018-07-14 12:32:12
Hi Martha and hubby,
The extended Warp family is doing well. Thanks for asking. Sounds like you guys are doing ok too. Martha, keep being the person that you are (while following Christ) and everything will be just fine.?
Mrs. Warp and myself love your comments!
Comment by kyaecker on 2018-07-09 11:50:37
Nice review. Thank you. Sounds like the organization is in “damage control” mode again. Telling us what to think of decisions we made based largely on the edicts of men.
Comment by JackSprat on 2018-07-10 22:53:23
regarding Our Lord saying let the dead bury the dead,
Jesus was not talking about the persons father dying that day because ceremonial death rituals were very important to Jewish family's. Rather he no doubt was referring to the waiting on the corpse period of decomposition and the bones collected and placed in an Ossuary (bone box) then they could lay with their forefathers in the family Tomb,
There us an excellent article describing this here
http://blog.adw.org/2014/08/what-were-the-rituals-associated-with-death-and-burial-in-jesus-day/
Comment by lazarus on 2018-07-13 16:39:51
Just reiterating this point in lu 8:1-3 Why does Luke specifically mention the women who followed and served Jesus? Because in that day, Rabbis generally refused to teach women and almost always gave them an inferior place -but not Jesus. It might explain why most of if not all Jesus haters we’re men. Interesting.
Comment by jamesbrown on 2018-07-16 01:56:17
MarthaMartha and the rest: Let me first say I am sorry for upsetting everyone with the comments that I made, my intentions were not to offend and for that I apologise.
Tadua you said: The way women are treated as second class citizens in the organization does not agree with the Bible record as to how Jesus treated women, with respect and dignity, capable of having a mind of their own.
One question for you to ponder, as women are also chosen ones and hence will be Kings (or queens!) on the earth (Revelation 5:10) How will they be able to fulfil their roles if they always have to follow the direction of their fellow male kings? Surely that would negate the whole idea of their appointment?
In what sense are women treated as second class citizens in organization/congregation? What position do you want women to have in congregation?
Jesus treated women, with respect and dignity, capable of having a mind of their own, so how is this any different in the organization? Again, what position do you want women to have in congregation?
You said: How will they be able to fulfil their roles if they always have to follow the direction of their fellow male kings? Surely that would negate the whole idea of their appointment.
I don’t have a clue what you mean by that, do you mean they should have a position in the congregation, please explain yourself, as to what you want to see a sister/woman role in congregation in harmony with the bible.
People in the “world” claim that the bible is a male chauvinistic book, written by men, whose God is portrait as a male, uses angelic males and so forth. Honestly in all the years that I have been a witness, I have never heard any sister wanting to lead in the congregation, I have come across a number of anointed, have you come across anyone?
I am NOT against women having a position in the congregation, but what does the bible say on this matter?
Tadua, women are the “silent” achievers make no mistake about that and I am suer you know that………… But what was Jehovah and Jesus thinking when they inspired Paul to write at 1Timothy 2:12 “I do not permit a woman to teach in the congregation…….”
Again in 50 years that I have been a witness I have never heard a sister complain about not being heard or not having a position, but as you already would have come across it’s the brothers that do most of the complaining of not having a position or treated betterReply by Warp Speed on 2018-07-16 11:38:56
Hi JB,
You must have only been in one or two congregations that were an exception to the rule for those 50 years. I served many congregations in a few different states in the US and found that many of our sisters are indeed treated like second-class citizens.
Did those sisters necessarily want to have "positions of responsibility"? No, but that is not the issue here. The issue is taking what the Bible says out of context to support a position of superiority of Men over Women.
I would suggest that you re-study Paul's words to the Congregations exegetically and with a view to the times and circumstances of what was happening in and around our first century brothers and sisters to get a better understanding of what Paul was really trying to get across.
As usual, the Org cherry-picks what it wants from the Scriptures to support what THEY want.......Reply by jamesbrown on 2018-07-16 22:26:07
Hi Warp Speed
I have served many congregations in Australia, but I have not come across any sister who felt she was a second-class citizen or made to feel that way, maybe it’s the way you feel they are classed as a second-class citizen.
You said: I would suggest that you re-study Paul’s words to the Congregations exegetically and with a view to the times and circumstances of what was happening in and around our first century brothers and sisters to get a better understanding of what Paul was really trying to get across.
Help me to understand what? You still have not answered my question. How are sisters made to feel they are classed as a second-class citizen?Reply by Tadua on 2018-07-17 08:06:54
Hi JB
Sorry, but I find it strange that you have never noticed such things in all those years, still here are some examples.
Sisters cannot:
Hand out Clam (and previously TMS) meeting assignments, but a 12-13 year old boy who is an unbaptised publisher can.
Organise working on the territory when even a teenage boy who is baptised is present, even if they have been a pioneer witness for 4 x the boy’s lifetime.
Handle microphones.
Even relay a verbal message from their husband to another brother about non confidential spiritual things relating to the congregation.
Correct by their answer at a meeting a blatantly incorrect answer by a brother.
Take the case of adultery. According to the Shepherd the flock of God book, p84
“If the accused is a married sister, it is best to have her believing husband present for the hearing. He is her head, and his efforts to restore her and direct her can be very helpful. (1 Cor. 11:3) “
“If the accused is a married brother, his wife would normally not attend the hearing. How- ever, if the husband wants his wife to be present, she may attend a portion of the hearing. The judicial committee should maintain confidentiality.”
Matthew 19:5-6 Jesus says the two are one flesh. They should therefore both be aware of everything and the partner present at any judicial hearing. What right do other men have to decide what the wife should hear, especially when it directly concerns her and her husband.
Care for the congregation accounts even if a qualified accountant, but the congregation might be forced to get them to do the external audit!
Care for the literature department unless there are no brothers available.
Even Hold their own territory map unless it is under the oversight of their group study conductor.
Cannot see the Shepherd the flock of God book, (admittedly neither are non elders) but it is ok for a non-witness female lawyer defending the organization to have a copy.