You Asked It

Length of Ecclesial Service in One Office

We would be interested in some thoughts about the matter of long continuance in ecclesial offices by brothers when there are others who are capable and willing to fulfill the office We have seen examples where this has not only led to a kind of alienation of the ecclesia but also to some tiff at the end resulting in a sudden departure after a long period of ser­vice. We would certainly be interested in what your views might be. J N, UK.

Your point is well taken, especially when there are others capable of per­forming the function We have seen the matter handled both ways Where there was a limit on tenure and where there was not.

In our first exposure to a three-year limit on tenure in such offices as Recording, Asst Recording, Finance and Sunday School Superintendent, we felt this would cause stretches of ineffective ecclesial operation It has not In fact it has worked very well We have noted other ecclesias using a similar method with good success.

Some ecclesias here elect only ar­ranging brothers who then appoint brothers to serve in all the various functions We have had no personal experience with the approach so don’t know how well it has worked.

The biblical precedent for judges, priests, kings and ecclesial appointments would seem to favor serving until death While the function of the priests changed when they reached 50, they still served Judges and kings served till death although some evi­dently elevated one of their sons to be co-regent presumably to gain experience (e g Jehoshaphat with Jehoram) Perhaps, however, they are more analogous to the patriarchal role of the father who holds his position until death intervenes Spirit gifts seem to have been given for life if the person remained faithful, we know of no evidence that the duties were ro­tated between persons If the gift of administration (one of the lower ones) remained with a person, evidently he was to serve in that capacity, although circumstances did limit the service of the apostles as they were imprisoned, persecuted or slain.

If we apply principles to the cir­cumstance, we will act with loving concern for individuals (which con­cern has prompted your inquiry) and will be sensitive that as many as pos­sible have opportunities to develop for the kingdom In this latter regard, situations faced while serving as Re­corder, SS Superintendent, etc can be excellent for character development, thus arguing for a rotation of the op­portunity to several m the meeting

Textual Problem in Matthew 21:28-31

I have eight versions of the par­able of the two sons (Matt 21:28-31). Four have the first son refusing to go and then going [e.g. KJK RV, RSK NIV] and four have the first son say­ing he will go and then not going [e.g. Diaglott, NAS, JB Rotherham] to work in the vineyard.

What is the justification for this variation?

In recent years, I have become sensitive to interpretive license under the guise of translation I can see no reason for it here, however Invert­ing the response doesn’t change the essence of the teaching T H , CA

In researching the passage, we found a divergence of opinion between Greek experts who normally agree Like you, however, we can see no significance m the variant transla­tions. Following are some comments on this passage taken from A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament by Bruce M Metzger, pub­lished by United Bible Societies

“The textual transmission of the parable of the two sons is very much confused Is the recusant but subse­quently obedient son mentioned first or second?

“1) According to the Codex Sinaiticus, the Byzantine text [known as the Text us Receptus], a fourth century Syriac manuscript, Greek manu­scripts from the ninth century and the Latin Vulgate, the first son says “No” but afterwards repents.

“2) According to the Codex Vaticanus, the Caesarean text and a fifth century Syriac manuscript, the first son says “Yes” but does noth­ing.

“It may also be remarked that the inferiority of the second alternative is shown by the wide diversity of readings at the close of the parable”

This writer clearly prefers the first alternative which is the reading found m the KJV, RSV, NIV, etc

Fortunately, the meaning of the passage is not altered in either case This underscores one of the miracles of the preservation of God’s word While variations occur in ancient manuscripts, they are not of such a nature as to distort the Gospel mes­sage.