xjwsforChrist

I have seen the Elder arrangement change in the WT organization from having one Congregation servant to a body of elders. My Dad was a congregation servant but when it changed to having to share the leadership to represent Christ he was unhappy and disagreements occured and he resigned.
Nowadays we have the Governing body who say they represent Christ and we must obey them and believe the things they write in their publications. The whole who is in charge with the WT changes around a bit. The focus is on who is in charge on earth and there is a tendancy to forget about Christ and put all the focus on the MEN at the WT. I guess we need someone to organize and serve the congregation but why does it now seem to focus more on MEN than on Christ. I don't think it is supposed to be like that and can see how the WT has really gotten off track.

I think some other religions are also putting too much emphasis on the MAN as the elder. For me and many others we don't do well on our own with spirituality so it is easy to listen and follow others opinions and beliefs, or just do nothing in confusion. I can see how its easy to follow man and be tricked into thinking its Christ we are following.

I think we need to have less glory on the men and more about Christ and only obey him, but those of us that have no personal relationship with him and don't hear his voice are prone to follow a church or organization. I think its human nature. I myself am guilty of liking the ceremony and visuals that organized religion offers. It is very confusing and controversial on what to do.

I do know the WT org does not have fancy ceremonies and clothes but they have misrepresented Christ and thats a sin. I have not belonged to other relgions so their teachings I cannot say if they are right or wrong but the ones that have all the fancy clothes for the Bishop etc seem to make the 'man" exalted but say its to represent and remind them of the glory of God and Christ.

So is it right to have a human spiritual leader to guide us as a "elder" based on the bad history of misrepresentation, deviations and taking the glory for themself.

I thought this video was excellent in showing the history of how the Elder arrangement evolved and was distorted. This video focuses on how the WT distorted it but can be related to some other Religions too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4pc9iq6yP0&feature=player_embedded#!

I can only speak for myself Zoe. After the WTBS, my trust in organised religion was really damaged, I had had a good taste of Protestantism growing up, had been related in marriage to family in the RCC, and knew that I could support neither of their doctrines. I did wonder though if I should be seeking a 'place' to worship. I prayed about it a great deal.

I do understand your liking of ceremony etc and there is often a lot to be said for the fellowship that churches offer. The only trouble is they all have doctrines to promote. Now that I know my bible I can't agree with a doctrine that supports the trinity for example. Gradually, having met and discussed my bible understanding with others, I realised that if Jah and Christ wanted me to find a church, They would show me, and lead me there.

What happened though, was that my vision about avoiding organisations led by men got clearer. It's true what you say, Christ is our mediator and our leader, and Jah is our father, we don't need anyone else in between, nor should anyone try to take Christ's role. The danger as you point out, is that we can be led away from Them by men, all too easily. I think your father showed great integrity by resigning.

I realise it takes faith, but if you really trust Them you can personally draw closer to Jah and Christ and let Christ feed you spiritually. Because He will, since He actually IS the "faithful and discreet slave" who gives us our food at the proper time. He promises to be with us, to not leave us orphans. There is nothing surer. Keep praying Zoe and talking to Christ about everything that concerns you.

Loz x

_________________
"This is my son. LISTEN to Him!"

There is only one advocate between Man and God and that is Christ.
Nowhere in the bible do you see mention an advocate or representative between Man and Christ.
Nowhere.

Absolutely correct, Paul.

I don't know a single church that suggests otherwise.

I'm very grateful to you, Zoe, for asking such an interesting question, because it gives the opportunity to refute just one more of the erroneous misunderstandings apparently prevalent about the Catholic Church.

That is, unless I have misunderstood the numerous times when people have indicated that they think Catholics go to God in prayer through the Pope. That has seemed to be the implication of a number of posters on here, but of course if that was not what people meant I'm sure we'll be told.

In the meantime, how very nice to find something we can all agree on!

I thank you for commenting folks, I do not think myself that we need a human to represent Christ.
I saw that video this morning and I found it so interesting about the history of "elders" to guide and shepherd people and how it ended up getting misused through the centuries. The prime example for me was the WT society and how they have done this.


I wanted to share it with you all.

It is important to understand that the Pope is simply the elected head priest of the RCC.
That is all He is.

Same goes for the head priest of all other Christian denominations.

They simply represent the top of the established hierarchy of the given organization.

Fortunately, Zoe, such organisations as you describe are few and far between. The WT GB probably comes into something close to that, if my understanding is correct, that the GB more or less stand in for God under the name Jehovah.

Just to emphasise and further clarify what Paul said, individuals like the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Pope, and the Metropolitan of the Russian Orthodox Church, never ever represent Christ, no matter whatever is said about them by people trying to cause those churches damage. It's as bad as misrepresenting or mocking the Pope. The Pope and all the other titular heads of the churches are just the head man of the church, ceremonially and prayerfully, yes, but not in any way representing Christ.

It's just hostile propaganda, Zoe, spread by atheists and JW's and a minority of ex JW's.

Okay, this is NOT a dig at the RCC (peace to you all!), but just an attempt to understand as to how others view it:



By "RCC" you mean "Roman Catholic CHURCH", yes, dear P (the greatest of love and peace to you, dear one!)? By "church", you mean the Body of Christ, yes? Because that is what "the church" is, his Body, yes?

Okay, then, someone please help ME understand: WHEN did the Body... or even Israel... EVER elect a "head" priest? Ever "elect" anyone to anything for ANY reason... other than the "distribution"? When did the Body... or even Israel... even NAME a priest? Were not priests (for Israel) ONLY from the line of Levi and either personally designated such by JAH Himself... OR by the high priest but through the line of Aaron/Levi? And didn't choosing someone from any other tribe result in catastrophe for Israel (and by "Israel", I mean the 10-tribe kingdom of Israel, first under Jeroboam?)

And wasn't Christ the LAST high (i.e., head) priest... for Israel AND for Christians??? I mean, if we have THE High Priest as our HEAD... why do we need any other? Particularly, one on earth? Per Christ, weren't all who belonged to HIM to be EQUAL, so that NO one was "greater" than any other?

I realize that certain men were designated as "overseers"... but those were NOT priests, not at ALL. These were designees to oversee the "distribution" of food, money, etc., given to the widows and orphans, after the Greek-speaking Jewish widows complained that they were being overlooked for the sake of the Hebrew-speaking Jewish widows. Priests "render SACRED service," not divide out goods, etc.

After Christ, then, where did this "priest" thing come from? Where did the Apostles... or any of those after them... until the great apostasy... serve in temples (which is what priests do)?? The ONLY VISIBLE temples were:

1. The edifice in Jerusalem (however, JAH removed His spirit from that structure and put in His Son and so it was ultimately destroyed)...

2. Christ himself (John 2:21)... and

3. The ENTIRE Body of Christ... which is his "church" (1 Corinthians 3:16).

Again, not singling out the RCC, not at ALL. Rather, I am asking as to ALL "priests" who act as such for anything/anyone other than their own household (for which ALL of the Body of Christ are priests - Job 1:5).

Because those (heads of households, including but not necessarily a "spiritual" head) are the ONLY "priests", indeed HEAD priests... sanctioned by God, through Christ: the [spiritual] "head" of a household.

Anyone?

Again, peace to you all!

A slave of Christ,

SA

Teachers

_________________
To fear me is to love me....

John 13:20 comes to mind:
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me. KJV

Christ repeatedly said he would send the Helper, the Holy Spirit, however, here, it appears that there would be others he would send. Could that be some earthly representative(s)?

Absolutely, dear LQ (peace to you, dear one!):

"You serpents, you offspring of vipers, how will you escape the judgment of Gehinnom? Therefore, behold, I send to you prophets, wise men, and scribes. Some of them you will kill and crucify; and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city..." Matthew 23:34

And those he sent... and still sends... are his representatives:

"We are therefore ambassadors on behalf of Messiah, as though God were entreating by us. We beg you on behalf of Messiah, be reconciled to God." 2 Corinthians 5:20

How, though, can one be an ambassador of/on behalf of someone who has never SPOKEN to them? Paul was not among the 12 nor did he even know my Lord when that One walked in the flesh. So from where/WHOM did he get what HE shared with others... that WAS inspired and not his own opinion? And for what he taught of his own understanding... WHO corrected/taught HIM?

We MUST use our thinking abilities... and NOT just rely on what we've been taught by "man." It is imperative.

I hope this helps, dear LQ, and again, peace to you!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

There is as distinction between the Vatican and the RCC AND The Catholic Church, even if it is something that is not made explicitly clear.
The Catechesim, which was written in the 20th century, notes the CATHOLIC church and not the RCC or Vatican when it speaks of The Church.
Of course by this time there was a well documented and official use of RCC and that in the Catechism the do NOT use RCC but just Catholic actually means something.
The RCC is simply one of the parts of the Church (body) of Christ and does NOT speak for ALL but simply for those that profess being RCC and agree that the Vatican speaks for them.
The Pope is equivalent to the "head priest" of the Sanhedrin.
The RCC traces it's self ( as does the orthodox) via DIRECT apostolic succession, back to the original Apostles and their first "students".

PSACTO SAYS...

There is only one advocate between Man and God and that is Christ.
Nowhere in the bible do you see mention an advocate or representative between Man and Christ.
Nowhere.


It is important to understand that the Pope is simply the elected head priest of the RCC.
That is all He is.
Same goes for the head priest of all other Christian denominations.
They simply represent the top of the established hierarchy of the given organization.


AGUEST SAYS...
And wasn't Christ the LAST high (i.e., head) priest... for Israel AND for Christians??? I mean, if we have THE High Priest as our HEAD... why do we need any other? Particularly, one on earth? Per Christ, weren't all who belonged to HIM to be EQUAL, so that NO one was "greater" than any other?



ZOE SAID...
I do know the WT org does not have fancy ceremonies and clothes but they have misrepresented Christ and thats a sin. I have not belonged to other relgions so their teachings I cannot say if they are right or wrong but the ones that have all the fancy clothes for the Bishop etc seem to make the 'man" exalted but say its to represent and remind them of the glory of God and Christ.

So is it right to have a human spiritual leader to guide us as a "elder" based on the bad history of misrepresentation, deviations and taking the glory for themself.



hello dear Zoe....

PaulS hit the nail on the head in his first comment as to no where in the bible is there mention of an advocate or representative between man and CHRIST ....

Aguests comment in in perfect agreement with PaulS first comment as well.

So....based on what you already know and have seen that the WT has done and IS....
ANYWHERE ELSE you see a physical,spiritual, organized structure allowing " a man" ( regardless of his title) to be in-between YOU and CHRIST , this can help you identify if it can be TRUTH or not. And whether or not you should follow it.

I understand my sister you feel your faith is not strong enough to be able to discern our Lords voice in order to follow only HIS and to not be misled, but....
Knowing you only have and need ONE mediator and CHRIST to go to and no one else between you and the father, makes it a whole lot easier to be able to understand who can and should be leading you.
And if ANYONE tells you differently, then they are " false Christs"

Hope this helps you
Remember our Lords invitation is open to you Zoe to..." come to Him and receive life's water the Holy Spirit FREE!!!!!! "

Love Justmom

I wanna make it clear that one of the issues I do have with the RCC ( and any other organization that does this) is that they DO have a hierarchy and do have a "high priest".
Neither is biblical in the NT way.
While it is quite natural for some to become more prominent because of their natural Chartism and even their preaching skills ( Peter, John and James were all knows as the "pillars" of the Church for different reasons), that does NOT mean that they were "more" or "higher" than anyone else.
Christ's teachings on the matter were quite clear and explicit, SERVE others, not "RULE" them.

@JustMom & PaulS - Amen to what you said, I am in total agreement and YES it is simple when its explained reasonably the way you both did.
Thank you both of you :::HUGs:::

I don't like to hurt people's feelings who love the Pope but I do not agree with the Catholic Church at all especially because of the Pope arrangement. I understand how so many people are attracted to it but that doesn't make it right. All the showy display of holiness does not make it holy. People often need/want the visual and I for one totally get that, but from what I have read in the bible calling someone Father and exalting him is wrong, never mind forbidding to marry.

The present Pope seems very interested in helping people, he is charitable and open minded and I was commenting earlier that I think he seems to be a good person. That is nice but it still doesn't change the church's wrongs and its past history that proves its about power and greed not love.

I am attracted to seeing the beautiful churches and music and processions, its so entertaining and gives me goosebumps but to me when I really think about it then my common sense says its entertainment not the way to please God or Christ. I understand the reason why so many people like the Catholic church and if it gives them a moral code and structure then that is not a "bad" thing in a lot of peoples opinion. It might not be truth but it is trying to worship. However when the Church or religion starts deviating from love for their people and taking the glory from God and Christ some of us do not wish to be part of it.