At the conclusion of part 3 the question was raised: “Was Jesus encouraging his disciples to adopt toward the sinner the attitude the Scribes and Pharisees had toward tax collectors?
The Watchtower continues:
“‘But,’ someone might ask, ‘did not Jesus associate with tax collectors?’ Well, let us examine the facts.
As “the Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world,” Jesus was a light to all people, though he concentrated on the Jews during his earthly ministry. (John 1:29; 8:12; Isa. 42:1, 6, 7; Matt. 10:5, 6; 15:24) He was like a physician in aiding all those Jews who needed him most, including sinners such as harlots, drunkards and tax collectors, who often used dishonest means. Matthew Levi, a despised tax collector, was one who responded to the new message of salvation that Jesus brought. Matthew invited Jesus to his home for a feast, thus allowing Matthew and other interested tax collectors to hear more of the wonderful new truths. (Luke 5:27-32; 19:1-10) These were men who had ‘sinned in their ignorance,’ but who were ready to take steps to have their sins “blotted out.”—Acts 3:19; Heb. 9:7.
However, Jesus’ effort to give a witness to tax collectors who ‘drew near to hear him’ and ‘followed him’ was not a pattern of how unrepentant sinners were to be treated. (Mark 2:15; Luke 15:1) How can we be sure? Though Christ ate with such tax collectors, the apostle Paul ordered that Christians must ‘not even eat with’ the sinner who was expelled from the congregation. (1 Cor. 5:11) Also, Jesus told his disciples to deal with an unrepentant wrongdoer as, logically, they viewed tax collectors of the time. The translation by R. F. Weymouth reads: “Regard him just as you regard a Gentile or a tax-gatherer.”—Compare New International Version; The New English Bible.
HOW WERE GENTILES VIEWED AND TREATED?
The apostles who heard Jesus’ words that are recorded at Matthew 18:17 were Jews and knew that their countrymen did not socialize with Gentiles. The Law distinguished between Jews and Gentiles, serving to keep the Israelites separate from the surrounding nations. (Deut. 7:1-4; Num. 15:37-41; Eph. 2:11-14) At Passover 33 C.E. the Jews would not enter the Roman governor’s palace “that they might not get defiled.” (John 18:28) And the separation between the Jews and the Samaritans, who even accepted the Pentateuch, was so wide that a woman at a well in Samaria expressed surprise that Jesus, “despite being a Jew,” would ask her for water.—John 4:9.
Furthermore, in 36 C.E., when God purposed to demonstrate that uncircumcised Gentiles could then be accepted as heirs of the Kingdom, he directed the apostle Peter to the Roman army officer Cornelius. But Peter told Cornelius: “You well know how unlawful it is for a Jew to join himself to or approach a man of another race.” (Acts 10:28) Peter’s remark shows how deeply Jews felt that there should be no fraternization with a man of the nations. Also, when it became known that Peter had gone to Cornelius, some Jewish Christians strongly objected that Peter “had gone into the house of men that were not circumcised and had eaten with them.” Yes, Jews regarded it as a shocking thing to be with and eat with a “man of the nations.”—Acts 11:1-3; compare Galatians 2:12.
The Scriptures thus help us to understand Jesus’ advice to treat an unrepentant wrongdoer who refused to listen to the congregation “as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.” Applying Christ’s counsel today certainly would not mean viewing the wrongdoer as an average person in the community, for that would not be how Jesus’ disciples understood what he said. We can better appreciate this by examining added counsel in the Christian Greek Scriptures, which will help us to deal with real-life situations today involving persons expelled from the Christian congregation. ( The Watchtower September 15, 1981 pp. 18-20 pars. 16-21 Godly Conduct Toward Others)
The April 15, 1991 Watchtower adds:
“Being Jews, the apostles would understand what it meant to treat a sinner “as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.” Jews avoided association with people of the nations, and they despised Jews who worked as Roman tax collectors. (John 4:9; Acts 10:28) Hence, Jesus was advising the disciples that if the congregation rejected a sinner, they were to cease associating with him. How, though, does that harmonize with Jesus’ being with tax collectors at times?
Luke 15:1 says: “All the tax collectors and the sinners kept drawing near to him to hear him.” Not every tax collector or sinner was there, but “all” in the sense of many. (Compare Luke 4:40.) Which ones? Those who were interested in having their sins forgiven. Some such were earlier drawn to John the Baptizer’s message of repentance. (Luke 3:12; 7:29) So when others came to Jesus, his preaching to them did not violate his counsel at Matthew 18:17. Observe that “many tax collectors and sinners [heard Jesus] and they began following him.” (Mark 2:15) These were not ones who wished to continue in a bad way of life, refusing any help. Rather, they heard Jesus’ message and their hearts were touched. Even if they were still sinning, though likely trying to make changes, “the fine shepherd” by his preaching to them was imitating his merciful Father.—John 10:14. (The Watchtower April 15, 1991 pp. 20-21 pars. 3-4 Imitate God’s Mercy Today)
In answer to the dilemma that Jesus appears to be instructing his disciples to deal with unrepentant sinners by adopting the prevailing Jewish view of gentiles and tax collectors and not according to how he dealt with them, the Watchtower explains that the tax collectors that were drawn to Jesus did so out of a desire to be helped. Thus demonstrating heartfelt repentance, as if they were “newly interested ones” sinning in ignorance, whose conduct and lifestyle may be overlooked for a time. Personally, I believe this is incorrect. These were Jews who knew the law that had fallen into a sinful lifestyle and yet Jesus, like his father, came to call them to repentance. (Matt. 15:24; Luke 19:10)The writer acknowledges: “they were still sinning, though likely trying to make changes”. It is also possible that some attended merely out of curiosity. Thus it was, not before, but after receiving Jesus’ help that proof of repentance came. Although the religious leaders and those in the Jewish community viewed them as outcasts, Jesus could read their hearts. Many were sinners, even prostitutes, at the time of Jesus’ associating with them, talking with them. As he said, “I have come to call not the righteous but sinners”. They were for the most part already in the Jewish community, the covenant people of God (probably from birth onward), but their conduct made them outcasts. And those who declared them such were the “elders” of God’s visible organization of the time. For one of Jehovah’s Witnesses to admonish such a person today in a comparable situation, to encourage them to repent would attract the attention of the elders:
“Unnecessary Association With Disfellowshipped or Disassociated Individuals:
Willful, continued, unnecessary association with disfellowshipped or disassociated nonrelatives despite repeated counsel would warrant judicial action.—Matt. 18:17b; 1 Cor. 5:11, 13; 2 John 10, 11; lvs pp. 39-40. If a member of the congregation is known to have unnecessary association with disfellowshipped or disassociated relatives who are not in the household, elders should use the Scriptures to counsel and reason with him. Review with him information from the Remain in God’s Love book, page 241. If it is clear that a Christian is violating the spirit of the disfellowshipping decree in this regard and does not respond to counsel, he would not qualify for congregation privileges, which require one to be exemplary. He would not be dealt with judicially unless there is persistent spiritual association or he persists in openly criticizing the disfellowshipping decision. (2019 Shepherd the Flock of God ch. 12 sect. 17)
Here is what it says in the Remain in God’s Love book:
“When someone who has seriously sinned does not repent and refuses to follow Jehovah’s standards, he can no longer be a member of the congregation. He needs to be disfellowshipped. When someone is disfellowshipped, we have no more dealings with that person and we stop talking to him. (1 Corinthians 5:11; 2 John 9-11) The disfellowshipping arrangement protects Jehovah’s name and the congregation. (1 Corinthians 5:6) Disfellowshipping is also discipline that can help someone to repent so that he can return to Jehovah.—Luke 15:17. (lvs p. 241 Endnotes)
Think about that for a moment! For one of Jehovah’s Witnesses to imitate Jesus’ conduct would mean to spend time encouraging persons who were outcasts, having fallen into sinful practices, and to seek to be a positive, healing force for them. The April 1991 Watchtower states: “Even if they were still sinning, though likely trying to make changes, “the fine shepherd” by his preaching to them was imitating his merciful Father.” Yet the organization’s policies rule against witnesses taking such a course. Once the “disfellowshiped” label is applied to a person, even his family members are to cut off any spiritual discussion with him. Even though the person may have expressed remorse at the time of the hearing, disfellowshiping still took place in some cases because it was felt by the elders that there were not enough works befitting repentance. The person would continue in this state until, after a sufficient amount of time had passed, he reached out by letter with a request for reinstatement, even while attending meetings at the kingdom hall the entire time. As an elder I have seen situations where disfellowshipped persons have “respected the arrangement” and informed witnesses visiting from other places and unaware of their situation that they were disfellowshipped and could not be spoken to. In many cases reinstatement has taken years, long after the initial reason for the disfellowshiping had been resolved. The Jewish religious leaders were often criticized by Jesus because they took God’s commandments to an unreasonable extreme. (Matt. 15:3-11) As a Jew, Jesus firmly upheld the Mosaic law regarding the observance of the Sabbath. But would doing so mean that he approved of the Pharisaical interpretation of it? (Matt. 12:1-14) Rather than encourage his disciples to imitate their example he warned against doing so. (Matt. 23:1-3)
“Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill. 18 Truly I say to you that sooner would heaven and earth pass away than for one smallest letter or one stroke of a letter to pass away from the Law until all things take place. 19 Whoever, therefore, breaks one of these least commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in relation to the Kingdom of the heavens. But whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in relation to the Kingdom of the heavens. 20 For I say to you that if your righteousness does not surpass that of the scribes and the Pharisees, you will by no means enter into the Kingdom of the heavens. 21 “You heard that it was said to those of ancient times: ‘You must not murder, but whoever commits a murder will be accountable to the court of justice.’ 22 However, I say to you that everyone who continues wrathful with his brother will be accountable to the court of justice; and whoever addresses his brother with an unspeakable word of contempt will be accountable to the Supreme Court; whereas whoever says, ‘You despicable fool!’ will be liable to the fiery Ge·henʹna. 23 “If, then, you are bringing your gift to the altar and there you remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your gift there in front of the altar, and go away. First make your peace with your brother, and then come back and offer your gift. 25 “Be quick to settle matters with your legal opponent, while you are with him on the way there, so that somehow the opponent may not turn you over to the judge, and the judge to the court attendant, and you get thrown into prison. 26 I say to you for a fact, you will certainly not come out of there until you have paid over your last small coin. 27 “You heard that it was said: ‘You must not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who keeps on looking at a woman so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If, now, your right eye is making you stumble, tear it out and throw it away from you. For it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to be pitched into Ge·henʹna. 30 Also, if your right hand is making you stumble, cut it off and throw it away from you. For it is better for you to lose one of your members than for your whole body to land in Ge·henʹna. 31 “Moreover, it was said: ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 However, I say to you that everyone divorcing his wife, except on account of sexual immorality, makes her a subject for adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. 33 “Again you heard that it was said to those of ancient times: ‘You must not swear without performing, but you must pay your vows to Jehovah.’ 34 However, I say to you: Do not swear at all, neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 nor by earth, for it is the footstool of his feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. 36 Do not swear by your head, since you cannot turn one hair white or black. 37 Just let your word ‘Yes’ mean yes, your ‘No,’ no, for what goes beyond these is from the wicked one. 38 “You heard that it was said: ‘Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.’ 39 However, I say to you: Do not resist the one who is wicked, but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other also to him. 40 And if a person wants to take you to court and get possession of your inner garment, let him also have your outer garment; 41 and if someone in authority compels you into service for a mile, go with him two miles. 42 Give to the one asking you, and do not turn away from one who wants to borrow from you. 43 “You heard that it was said: ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 However, I say to you: Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is in the heavens, since he makes his sun rise on both the wicked and the good and makes it rain on both the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 For if you love those loving you, what reward do you have? Are not also the tax collectors doing the same thing? 47 And if you greet your brothers only, what extraordinary thing are you doing? Are not also the people of the nations doing the same thing? 48 You must accordingly be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (Matthew 5:17-48)
Like the Pharisees of Jesus day, the policy established by the organization carries Jesus instruction to avoid association with individuals continuing to practice a sinful course despite being warned by the congregation to an unreasonable extreme.
Once a person has been disfellowshipped, no one is to speak to him. Not even to admonish him as a brother or encourage him to change his course. (2 Thess. 3:15)
But this is completely contrary to what Jesus taught and the example he set. (Luke 7:36-50)
“A woman of Sa·marʹi·a came to draw water. Jesus said to her: “Give me a drink.” 8 (For his disciples had gone off into the city to buy food.) 9 So the Sa·marʹi·tan woman said to him: “How is it that you, despite being a Jew, ask me for a drink even though I am a Sa·marʹi·tan woman?” (For Jews have no dealings with Sa·marʹi·tans.) (John 4:7-9)
Again the society’s previous understanding of Jesus instructions published in the August 1974 Watchtower was much less extreme:
“ONE’S BEING VIEWED AS “A MAN OF THE NATIONS AND AS A TAX COLLECTOR”
Paul when writing his apostolic counsel to Corinth regarding disfellowshiping, had earlier inspired information on which to base his instructions. Christ Jesus himself had supplied this. Matthew 18:15-17 records his instructions for handling sins (clearly not just petty trespasses but sins of genuine gravity) committed against individuals. He set out the possibility of a disfellowshiping action where no repentance was manifested on the part of the sinning one. After describing progressive efforts made to ‘gain’ such a one through getting him to acknowledge his wrong and repent of it, Jesus said: “If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.”
It is important to note that, in the Greek, Jesus words are addressed to the individual. Hence it is the individual that is authorized to take the final step.
Regarding this, the NICNT comments:
“It is addressed entirely to the individual disciple; even the “you” of Mat 18:17 is still singular, so that that verse prescribes not a communal ostracism but the attitude of the individual disciple who first noticed the problem. The disciple is envisaged as acting within the context of the whole community, but the focus is on the individual’s attitude and action. In Mat 18:18-20, on the other hand, the “you” will be plural, and the focus will be on the authority of the whole disciple community and the nature of its spiritual fellowship. This change from singular to plural is sufficiently remarkable to justify treating Mat 18:18-20 as a separate section, even though here, as throughout the first part of this discourse, there is an important thematic link between the paragraphs.” (New International Commentary on the New Testament)
It may be that the entire congregation may wish to share in the discipline but that is not explicitly stated in the verse. All that can be said is that the person that initially dealt with the sinner was then to avoid fellowship with him.
This agrees with the situation Paul addressed in Corinth where it is said that it was the majority of the congregation that took action:
Now if anyone has caused sadness, he has saddened, not me, but all of you to an extent—not to be too harsh in what I say. 6 This rebuke given by the majority is sufficient for such a man; (2 Corinthians 2:5, 6)
Regarding how such a person was thereafter to be treated, Albert Barnes comments:
But if he neglect to hear the church, let him be … – The Jews gave the name “heathen” or “Gentile” to all other nations but themselves. With them they had no religious contact or communion…
Publicans were people of abandoned character, and the Jews would have no contact with them. The meaning of this is, cease to have religious contact with him, or to acknowledge him as a Christian brother. It does not mean that we should cease to show kindness to him and aid him in affliction or trial, for that is required toward all people; but it means that we should disown him as a Christian brother, and treat him as we do other people not connected with the church.” (Albert Barnes Notes on the New Testament)
The 1974 Watchtower continues:
At this time (32 C.E.) the Christian congregation had not been formed and so the “congregation” referred to by Jesus must relate to the Jewish arrangement then existing, with its bodies of elders, including those serving as judges and representing the congregation locally in such capacity. (Ezra 10:14; Luke 7:3) Nevertheless, Jesus’ instructions certainly provided a guiding principle that would aid the future Christian congregation. Of particular interest to us is knowing what the unrepentant sinner’s being viewed “as a man of the nations and as a tax collector” would imply. To find out we need to consider how such ones were properly viewed by the Jewish congregation. This will aid us to understand better the apostle’s instructions at 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 as to how Christians should view those disfellowshiped by the Christian congregation.
In considering the Jewish attitude toward those of the nations, we cannot be guided entirely by rabbinical writings that were composed after the time Jesus was on earth. Some of these writings display an extreme attitude, one of virtual hatred and contempt toward “Gentiles,” people of the nations. Some rabbinical writings held that a Jew should not come to the rescue of a Gentile even when such a one was in peril of death. (Maimonides, Rozeach. iv, 12; McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia, Vol. III, p. 789) Rather, we can find reliable information in God’s inspired Scriptures to guide us in ascertaining the attitude of first-century Jews.
When sent to the home of the Gentile Cornelius in Caesarea, the apostle Peter said to those there gathered: “You well know how unlawful it is for a Jew to join himself to or approach a man of another race; and yet God has shown me I should call no man defiled or unclean.” (Acts 10:27, 28) When Peter later went to Jerusalem, supporters of circumcision in the Christian congregation there contended with him, “saying he had gone into the house of men that were not circumcised and had eaten with them.” (Acts 11:2, 3) Thus, the basic position of the Jews was that they were not to fraternize with the Gentiles, viewing them as spiritually unclean. They were such due to being “alienated from the state of Israel and strangers to the covenants of the promise,” hence having no real standing or approved relationship with Jehovah God. (Eph. 2:11, 12) To fraternize with them, entering their homes and eating with them, would bring spiritual defilement on the Jews.—Compare John 18:28; Galatians 2:11-14.
It can also be added that Jews did preach to Gentiles. Some even becoming proselytes. (Matt. 23:15) Clearly this did not involve fraternizing with them.
Jesus Christ adhered to this basic rule of refraining from fraternizing with people of the nations. And he instructed his disciples that in their preaching activity they should “not go off into the road of the nations [Gentiles], and do not enter into a Samaritan city; but, instead, go continually to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matt. 10:5, 6) Yet, notwithstanding all of this, Jesus showed no approval of, or conformity to, the extreme view found in rabbinical writings that counted all Gentiles as enemies to be treated with virtual contempt—even as he did not let such attitudes control his dealings with Samaritans. (John 4:4-40) Far from this, Jesus cited his Father’s prophetic Word to show that people of the nations would accept the Messiah, that the temple was to be a house of prayer for all nations, and that the Messiah would prove to be a light to the nations. (Matt. 12:18, 21; Mark 11:17; compare Luke 2:27-32; Acts 13:47.) When a Gentile army officer, who had shown great kindness to the Jews, asked Jesus to heal a sick slave, Jesus did so. (Luke 7:2-10) So, while never going contrary to the admonition of the Mosaic law concerning fraternizing with those not of God’s congregation (Gentiles), Jesus did not become unbalanced, extreme or rigidly hard, adopting an antagonistic attitude toward these. He wisely discerned the principles contained in God’s instructions and was guided by them.
So, too, with the tax collectors, usually not Gentiles but Jews. Because they were so often dishonest, tax collectors were generally viewed by their fellow Jews as persons of bad reputation, to be classed with known sinners and harlots. (Matt. 9:10, 11; 21:31, 32) While not condoning their wrong ways, Jesus did not hold back from helping such ones when they showed an inclination toward righteousness, as did such tax collectors as Matthew Levi and Zacchaeus. Because he aided such to make spiritual progress, Jesus was falsely accused of being a “friend of tax collectors and sinners.” There was a difference, however, between friendship and Jesus’ efforts to heal those who were spiritually sick and to direct them to repentance and into the path of righteousness.—Matt. 11:19; Luke 5:27-36; 19:2-10.
Thus, Jesus’ own example protects us against adopting the extreme view of certain rabbinical writers in this matter of dealing with persons as “a man of the nations and as a tax collector.” We see, too, a close similarity between the treatment accorded these and the treatment set forth in the apostle Paul’s instructions regarding those disfellowshiped from the Christian congregation, namely, not “mixing in company” with such ones nor “even eating” with them. (1 Cor. 5:11) Clearly, treating an unrepentant sinner as “a man of the nations and as a tax collector” means there should be no fraternizing with such a one. But, as Jesus’ example shows, this does not require our treating such a one as an enemy or refusing to show common courtesy and consideration. Nor does it rule out the giving of help to those who want to correct a wrong course and gain or regain God’s favor. (The Watchtower August 1, 1974 pp. 463-464)
Why the change? Is the current view supported by better scriptural arguments? In fact, according to the society’s current policy it is not even appropriate to say a greeting such as “hello” to them. The basis for this is said to be found in the Apostle John’s words in 2 John:
“Everyone who pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. The one who does remain in this teaching is the one who has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.” (2 John 9-11)
However, does this scripture support not even saying a greeting to one that is disfellowshipped?
To be continued in Part 5