[Enoch was kind enough to lighten my load this week by supplying most of the research and wording for this article.]
[From ws12/16 p. 26 January 30-February 5]
“Sin must not be master over you, seeing that you are . . . under undeserved kindness.”—ROM. 6:14.
This week’s study article will attract more than the usual attention from both JWs and non-JWs as it cuts to the heart of what many feel is one of the biggest problem areas within the Organization: Its interpretation of how to handle sin within the congregation.
Watchtower apologists will take this study article as clear evidence that Jehovah’s Witnesses have benefited from God's undeserved kindness (or grace, as the rest of Christendom would term it) since the publication of the first Watchtower in 1879. Critics of the Watchtower ranging from Bible scholars to some currently active members take a different position. They feel that whilst the Watchtower may have started out under grace that it has since gone beyond what is written in Scripture and established its own laws to govern forgiveness of sins. They feel that rather than being under grace, most Jehovah’s Witness are under the law of the Watchtower. (Compare Romans 4:3-8; 8:1; 11:6) In support of their position, critics will point to the JW judicial system as evidence that their belief in God’s grace is relative. Jehovah’s Witnesses are afforded the right to approach Jehovah in prayer through Jesus Christ on minor sins but are commanded to confess to the elders all serious sins. Critics say that this procedure creates a two-tiered approach to grace since the elders act as substitutes for Christ in determining whether or not to forgive a serious sin. (Compare 1Ti 2:5)
So which position is correct? Are the Witnesses under grace as this week’s Watchtower title proclaims, or are the critics correct in saying that JW’s are under the law of the Watchtower rather than grace? It is our hope that this review will help us to answer these questions.
Underserved Kindness or Grace, Which?
Let us begin by explaining why Witnesses prefer the term “underserved kindness” to the far more common “grace”.
While most Bibles will render the Greek word charis or kharis as “grace” in English, the NWT prefers what Witnesses consider to be the more accurate translation of “underserved kindness”. (See Insight on the Scriptures, vol. II, p. 280 under the heading Undeserved Kindness.) Witnesses adopt the "We're not worthy" mindset in their approach to God's love. Is this the view that Jehovah wants his children to have of his fatherly love? It is true that as sinners, we do not deserve kindness based on our merits, but does the worthiness of the loved one even factor into the idea of grace and favor from God? Whatever the answer, our view must be subservient to that of God.
Exploring the use of the Greek word via the link above will allow the studious reader to see that modifying the noun with the adjective "undeserved", imposes a restrictive meaning to charis which robs it of much of its richness. The word is not limited to the action of showing kindness to the undeserving. Grace, on the other hand, lacks meaning to a Jehovah's Witness. It requires meditative study to comprehend what grace or charis means to a Christian specifically and for that matter to the world at large. Perhaps we might be better served were we to do what English speakers have done for centuries and adopt a foreign word into our language to better express a new concept. Perhaps charis would make a good candidate. It would be nice to have a word that can only apply to God, but that is a topic for another time. For now, we'll contrast grace as understood in Christendom with undeserved kindness as preached by Jehovah's Witnesses.
The question we should ask ourselves is where should the focus go?
To illustrate:
Imagine you are a homeless person. You are lost, cold, hungry and alone. One night a stranger approaches with some warm blankets, bread and hot soup. The stranger also gives you some cash to help you out. You thank him from the bottom of your heart and say “I can’t repay you”.
The stranger responds, “I know you can’t repay me. You actually don’t deserve my kindness. In fact I don’t really have to help you at all. It’s not because of you but because of the generous person I am that I do this. I hope you’re grateful.
Is this the image God wants us to have of his acts of kindness, his grace? Let us contrast this with another response.
The stranger responds, “I don’t expect repayment. I do this out of love. When you can, imitate me and show love to others.”
Which of the two examples resonates with you the most? Which stranger would you call a gracious man? One long-time Witness remarked, “I don’t like using the NWT because I feel like it is telling me I don’t deserve God’s love but I deserve to die, whereas when I see the word “grace”, it me makes me feel like God is eager to extend love”. (John 3:16)
Imposing Law
Let’s look at the way the article quotes Romans 6:14 as its theme text.
“Sin must not be master over you, seeing that you are…under undeserved kindness”
The writer of the article has abridged the scripture with an ellipsis, cutting out the words, “not under law”. Why? Do the words take up too much room?WT apologists will likely say it is to give greater clarity to the subject, but one can’t rule out the possibility that the term would not support the Organization’s judicial procedures for handling sin. The JW judicial system is not about grace as revealed in the Bible, but rather the imposition of the law of men, both written and oral.
Food at the Proper Time?
Witnesses are taught that they get the food they need when they need it. This food is provided by Jesus. If we accept this teaching, then we must accept that Jesus is mostly concerned about having us avoid certain types of music and entertainment, materialism, and social interactions. Also, his chief concern seems to be that we are obedient to the dictates of the Organization. Developing Christian qualities like love do not receive the same level of emphasis. This article is a case in point. Here we are studying one of the most important truths revealed by Jesus and we give it scant attention, not even helping the brothers and sisters to understand the actual word in Greek under study. If we really wanted them to get the breadth, depth, and height of the term, we'd have provided them with hyperlinks to outside reference material.
Here again is a link to several lexicons and concordances, so you can see for yourself how charis is used in the Scriptures.
At least the article gives us one definition of charis.
He used a Greek word that, according to one reference work, has the sense of “a favor freely done, without claim or expectation of return.” It is unearned and unmerited. – par. 4
Why does the article not tell us the reference work it is quoting so that we can look it up for ourselves. Perhaps because if we had that information, we would learn that the statement that charis is "unearned and unmerited" gives a skewed understanding that is not entirely accurate.
Is it not the case that a favor can be freely done, without the giver giving any thought as to whether it is merited or not? So why force that determination? Why make the gift not about the giver’s love, but about the recipient’s unworthiness?
In paragraph 5, the WT upholds the Organization's use of the term “undeserved kindness” with a quote from scholar John Parkhurst stating that “the rendering “undeserved kindness” in the New World Translation is fitting”. To be fair, we should reject this quote out of hand, because the WT has failed to give us a reference that we can verify ourselves. Even if we give them the benefit of the doubt, by failing to provide the reference we have no way of knowing in what sense Parkhurst felt the rendering was fitting, nor do we know if he felt another rendering was more fitting and more accurate.
Appreciation for God's Undeserved Kindness
The bible has many examples of those who were forgiven for all sorts of serious transgressions. These examples include such sins as murder and adultery (King David), incest (Lot), child sacrifice and idolatry (Manasseh). These examples aren’t recorded to downplay sin but they do give confidence that God’s servants can be assured of forgiveness even for very serious and gross sins, as long as they exhibit repentance.
You might think that in a study entitled “By Undeserved Kindness You Were Set Free” the writer would make use of such examples of God's forgiveness, but instead the article heads in a different direction and presents grace, not in terms of what it is, but rather, what it is not. For example, if you asked a friend what loving his wife involves and he said “Well it involves not hitting her, not screaming at her, and not cheating on her”, would you agree? Your friend isn't defining love by what it is, but by what it isn't. A balanced view is to show both sides, as Paul does at 1 Corinthians 13:1-5.
In paragraph 8, we get a hypothetical example of a Jehovah’s Witness who says “Even if I do something wrong—something God views as sin—I do not have to worry about it. Jehovah will forgive me. “ If a Christian is under grace and repents of his sins then that statement is correct but instead the article refers readers to Jude 4.
"My reason is that certain men have slipped in among you who were long ago appointed to this judgment by the Scriptures; they are ungodly men who turn the undeserved kindness of our God into an excuse for brazen conduct and who prove false to our only owner and Lord, Jesus Christ." (Jude 4)
In this scripture, Jude is not referring to the average congregation member who might fall into serious sin but to “men who slipped in”. The whole context of Jude shows that these men were not sincere Christians who have sinned, but rather wicked impostors, “rocks hidden beneath the water”. These “rocks” are engaging in willful, unrepentant sin. Is the writer implying that anyone committing a serious sin in the congregation fits with those Jude is referring to?
Ignoring the Context
One of the problems with studying the publications as we do is that it exposes us to the negative effects of eisegesis. We are given a few verses here and there and led to conclusions which are not supported by the context. Cherry picking verses is a great way to twist the Bible to fit one's own doctrines when instructing the trusting and unwary, but it does not hold up under scrutiny.
For instance:
If they proved faithful, they would live and rule with Christ in heaven. But Paul could speak of them while they were still alive and serving God on earth as having “died with reference to sin.” He used the example of Jesus, who died as a human and then was raised up as an immortal spirit in heaven. Death was no longer master over Jesus. It was similar with anointed Christians, who could consider themselves “dead with reference to sin but living with reference to God by Christ Jesus.” (Rom. 6:9, 11)
Paul is speaking about anointed Christians here. The article even acknowledges this. It also acknowledges that the death referred to here is not literal, physical death, but the more important spiritual death. Though physically alive, these Christians were dead prior to their acceptance of Jesus, but now they were alive; alive to God. (Compare Mt 8:22 and Re 20:5)
The problem facing the writer is that his readers do not consider themselves as anointed Christians. The next paragraph opens with the words: “What of us?” What indeed! We are being taught that like the anointed, those the Governing Body claims are Other Sheep with an earthly hope are also alive with reference to God? They are, according to this article, but how can they be when the same Governing Body teaches us that the Other Sheep are resurrected into the new world still in a state of sin, still dead in God's eyes and will remain so for a thousand years? (See re chap. 40 p. 290)
To make matters even more confusing, the Governing Body through this article is teaching us that the death and life referred to in this chapter of Romans is spiritual, yet they cherry pick the 7th verse and say that in this instance, contrary to the context, the death is literal.
“For the one who has died has been acquitted from his sin.” (Ro 6:7)
The Insight book says:
Those resurrected will not be judged on the basis of the works done in their former life, because the rule at Romans 6:7 says: “He who has died has been acquitted from his sin.” (it-2 p. 138 Judgment Day)
A Fight that You Can Win
In discussing the topic of grace the bible does not give a sliding scale of sins, some requiring God's grace and some not. All sin is under grace. People are forgiven serious sins on conversion to Christianity but they are also forgiven serious sins after their conversion. (Compare 1Jo 2:1,2; Re 2:21, 22; Ec 7:20; Ro 3:20)
In paragraphs 13-16, the article takes an interesting turn. It speaks about serious sins being forgiven before conversion, and then switches to sins that it groups as “less serious”.
“However, are we also determined to be “obedient from the heart” by doing our best to avoid sins that some would view as less serious.” - par. 15
The Bible is clear that all sin comes under grace with the exception of sin against the Holy Spirit. (Mark 3:29; Ma 12:32) When Christian commentators discuss being under grace, they don’t refer to a two-tiered sin, so why would the Organization take this particular tack?
One possible reason could be that stated at the beginning of this review, that grace for Jehovah’s Witnesses is only for sins they consider minor (less serious) but in cases of serious sin, more is needed. God's forgiveness can only be granted if there is a judicial committee involved.
In paragraph 16, it is suggested that Paul never committed a sin that was serious after conversion and that when lamenting his sinful condition in Romans 7:21- 23 Paul is only referring to sin that was ” less serious”.
’However, are we also determined to be “obedient from the heart” by doing our best to avoid sins that some would view as less serious?—Rom. 6:14, 17. Think of the apostle Paul. We can be sure that he was not sharing in the gross wrongs mentioned at 1 Corinthians 6:9-11. Nonetheless, he confessed that he was still guilty of sin.
Whilst it may be true that Paul never committed one of the sins mentioned at 1 Cor 6:9-11, he was still an imperfect man and thus would have struggled with temptation to commit both minor and serious sin. In fact the verses in Romans 7:15-25 are possibly one of the best descriptions of why all of us sinners are in need of grace. Paul’s expression at verses 24 and 25 assures sincere Christians they can be accepted by Jesus despite having committed any manner of sin. What counts isn’t the type of sin, but the willingness to repent and the willingness to forgive others. (Mt. 6:12; 18:32-35)
In the final paragraphs, 17-22, the article introduces us to examples of “less serious” sins. These include—according to the writer—such sins as lying in half truths; drinking excessively but not to the point of drunkenness and not committing immorality but watching it in the form of lewd entertainment.
The Organization tells its followers that they are in a spiritual paradise because its disfellowshipping procedures keep the congregation clean. But here it openly acknowledges that members of the Organization are engaging in conduct that is just short of what it considers disfellowshipping offenses. Could this be because the judicial system that JW.org has created has replaced grace and is causing some members to feel they are good with God so long as they don’t violate the oral and written rules of the Organization? Is this an indication that Witnesses have become legalistic, replacing God’s grace with human rules?
For example. Two JWs go out for the evening and engage in excessive drinking. One says he was drunk but the other says he was just short of it. He may have drunk excessively but he didn’t think he reached the threshold of drunkenness. The first witness must confess his sin to the elders, while the second one is not required to do so.
This article presents a rather muddled explanation of grace that appears to be slanted towards the Organization’s own judicial or internal arrangement for handling sin rather than that set up by Christ. Instead of giving examples of why sinners can be forgiven, the article focuses on situations where they cannot simply repent to God, but must involve the elders in the process. While we condemn the Catholic confessional, claiming it is invalid since no man can forgive the sins of another, we have replaced it with something even worse.
The reasoning of the Organization regarding the handling of sin in the congregation may appear sound at a very superficial level, but deeper investigation shows that they have usurped the grace of God for a human system of judgment, and put sacrifice above mercy.
“. . .Go, then, and learn what this means, ‘I want mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came to call, not righteous people, but sinners.. . .” (Mt 9:13)
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by apollos0fAlexandria on 2017-01-30 19:04:56
Bravo. Thank you Meleti and Enoch. We had a topic going on DTT regarding "charis" - grace / undeserved kindness here: http://discussthetruth.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2001
Some of the points raised here in your WT study analysis really highlight some of the key issues.
I especially agree with the illustration of the homeless person. We certainly would not want to downplay God's kindness to us in any way, but that's not so much the issue here as what he in fact wants to communicate to us, and the way he wants us to feel about his actions toward us. If we apply the wrong emphasis, no matter how well intended from a human point of view, then we're misrepresenting this nuance in his personal words towards us and others.Reply by Enoch on 2017-01-30 23:06:32
Agreed. Grammatical accuracy aside, we certainly don't want to ever walk into territory where we in any way diminish the greatest act of love and sacrifice ever made. Enjoyed the info in your link btw.
Comment by Thaddeus on 2017-01-30 22:47:53
Very very good points,and thoroughly examined. Thank you.
Now a question, how might I go about discussing these points with my brothers without landing in a judicial committee myself?Reply by Enoch on 2017-01-30 23:02:12
Just wear a shiny JW.ORG badge and you'll be fine. If you wear a really big badge the brothers can also straighten their tie in the reflection which makes for a good distraction. If worse comes to worse just point out the window and say "I think I see brother Letz". Then while they are clamoring for Autographs run like stink out of the building. :-) :-)
Seriously, I think the best strategy is as often repeated by people more wise and experienced then myself and that is to always be as innocent as doves and cautious as serpents. The thing with the topic of Grace is that the society can't fault you for using it so I guess it's one of those subjects that can be slid into conversation without being too confronting.
The other principle of course is to "not throw your pearls before the swine.". So a good degree of understanding of your target audience is also necessary. For some brothers, even just the mention of a Secular source is unsettling for them even when it supports the WT view.
Comment by kyaecker on 2017-01-31 01:51:16
Thank you very much for this article. I found the WT comments on Paul's sins interesting. It stated; "We can be sure that he was not sharing in the gross wrongs mentioned at 1 Corinthians 6:9-11." How can we be sure? When you read Paul's account of his struggle, doesn't it imply a more serious sin? Would he really be so emotional about a minor sin?
Comment by lazarus on 2017-01-31 03:38:44
Excellent review Enoch and Meleti.
Great observations also on the "scaling sins"
Advance apologies for long comment, half of it is A great review and response by Byington and the watchtower, it's worth reading. There's a link to the full thread also.
The Word Grace is foreign to a JW, Why? It's because in 1947 the Wt Authored the start of the NWT. First release was in 1950, full Bible completed around 1960. And of course the word Grace was replaced with Undeserved Kindness. So the brothers Today, are not aware of the beauty of the Word Grace and it's full meaning.
Interesting the quote in para 4, is found in the insight book Under. Underserved Kindness. Note the full quote. The irony .
Scholar R. C. Trench, in Synonyms of the New Testament, says kha′ris implies “a favour freely done, without claim or expectation of return—the word being thus predisposed to receive its new emphasis [as given it in the Christian writings] . . . , to set forth the entire and absolute freeness of the loving-kindness of God to men. Thus Aristotle, defining [kha′ris], lays the whole stress on this very point, that it is conferred freely, with no expectation of return, and finding its only motive in the bounty and free-heartedness of the giver.” (London, 1961, p. 158)
Note quoting in the quote of Aristotle: "Thus Aristotle, defining [kha′ris], lays the whole stress on this very point, that it is conferred freely, with no expectation of return, and finding its only motive in the bounty and free-heartedness of the giver.”
So in Translating kha′ris as underserved kindness the watchtower is narrowing its full usage and subtly misleading in the sense it conveys only the act of the giver being undeserved but not the motive of the giver as encompassed in the word grace.
To me it misleads one to conclude perhaps they may need to do something (works) deserving to receive God's kindness. Most of the problems the brothers have is the pressure to go witnessing, report your time, etc.
This was thanks to Rutherfords drive to Advertise Advertise Advertise. This influenced the mindset of the brothers since and no doubt reflected in the Translation committee to reflect their view of a works based Translation. My observation.
What can you liken Grace to? Consider, By the end of his presidency on January 20, 2017, President Barack Obama had exercised his constitutional power to grant executive clemency—that is, "pardon, commutation of sentence, remission of fine or restitution, and reprieve"—to 1,927 individuals convicted of federal crimes. 504 were life sentences.
That's mans Grace!
But God's Grace goes even further, for not only does he stay the execution, he sets us free from prison! The Grace extended by God can never be earned by us, it is Jehovah's free gift.
Ephesians 2:8 clearly illustrates this very point:
This might be of interest, it's Byingtons Review of the NWT In the 1950's. Which I believe the watchtower now owns or have the rights to it. I only selected the parts were they discuss the word Kharis Grace and Underserved Kindness. Enjoy.
http://www.jwstudies.com/Byington.pdf
First response by Byington. In his magazine in 1951.
Then Watchtower, final by Byington.
These are just excerpts. Half way down his review he says:
Byington:
"The main fault is overtranslation. I mean that, where a Greek word may he found to carry an implication in addition to its rough meaning, this implication is made explicit, frequently by an added word. This fault is common to various translators, who usually claim it as a merit, but the New World Translation goes rather far. The tenses of verbs are rendered not only by such forms as "would say" or "was saying" but also by inserting "begin to" or "continue to" where the tense is deemed to be inceptive or continuative. Other words have an extra word added to "bring out the meaning"; a bad case is the regular insertion of "undeserved" or the like before whatever translation is given for "grace." Compound verbs suffer especially by overtranslation of the prefix, in which (as in other distinctions of synonyms) an imaginary meaning is sometimes brought in. The translators trusted their dictionary too much, not realizing that dictionaries are uninspired. "
"The book does not give enjoyable continuous reading; but if you are digging for excellent or suggestive renderings, this is among the richer mines."
STEVEN T. BYINGTON.
(The following is from "The Christian Century", May 9, 1951, pages 587 – 589)
Response by Watchtower.
" You note the list contains kindness, lovingkindness and undeserved kindness. These three English expressions represent three different unrelated Greek words, the last one being charis which many translators render grace. But the proper meaning of grace is not clear to readers in general. In Scripture it has many times the meaning the New World Translation gives it, undeserved kindness, so that using the qualifying adjective "undeserved" is not to be viewed as needless or an overtranslation of the Greek word charis. It differentiates charis from other forms of kindness represented by other Greek words. Correspondingly the verb charizomai contains the element of kindness and this is retained in translating it kindly or freely forgive, to distinguish it from merely forgive which renders the verb aphiemi, as in the Lord's Prayer."
NEW WORLD BIBLE TRANSLATION COMMITTEE
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Reply by Byington.
"What the Apostle Meant
My second objection is illustrated by the committee's next example, charis (on which see another note by the same Robinson in the same book). They talk as if undeservedness were part of the essential sense of the word. But it is not so; this is the regular word for our thanks to God, which are never undeserved. Paul uses the word frequently of cases where there is in fact no desert, but not because this word says so. In texts like Rom. 4:4; 11:6, the essential point is that this benefit comes from an act, attitude or quality of God, not from an act or status of the man; by making "undeserved" the emphatic word we are making the man's status the prominent thought. James 1:5 says that God gives generously and does not keep throwing his gifts in our faces by ungenerously reminding us how much in his debt we are; to keep translating "undeserved kindness" with labored persistency makes on me the impression that the writer who writes on God's behalf is in fact throwing up to us how generously we have been treated. I should feel that the proper meaning of "grace," associated as it naturally is with "gracious," "gratis," "gratuitous," was clear to readers in general. If in this respect I am not sufficiently conscious of the difference between past and present usage, I would sooner try either "favor" or "graciousness" than load a three-syllable adjective on the back of the noun.
STEVEN T. BYINGTON
Ballard Vale, Mass.
(The following is from "The Christian Century", October 7, 1953, pages 1133 – 1134)Reply by Enoch on 2017-01-31 04:16:04
Thanks Lazarus. Enjoyed that information from Byington.
I think the NWT committee sometimes underestimates the readers ability to gain understanding from context. I don't get the impression that readers of the Bible in Christendom over the centuries have become all confused over the word Grace simply because it can be used in different settings. I think most Christians derive the true beauty and meaning of grace from the broad picture painted by the Gospel Narrative.
I havn't researched this thoroughly but I notice the same thing with the term "exercise faith". When you combine the two NWT phrases you do tend to get a narrative that tends to be focusing on works. ..ie...."we don't deserve God's kindness so we must exercise faith"....sounds like " you don't deserve so get busy". Juxtapose that with " God extends grace to all those who believe in Jesus Christ " The second one sounds more centred around love then works.
As Meletti said, Is it Mercy over Sacrifice or Sacrifice over mercy? As Witnesses centred on the Watchtower/NWT my experience is we tend to focus more on the latter.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-01-31 10:00:47
Thanks for that information. Byington expresses it so well. To think this information was out there when I was a child, but I never knew of it. The honesty of the NWT translation committee and the Society in general is seriously called into question in that they never presented contrary views for our consideration.
Reply by lazarus on 2017-01-31 11:11:41
Yes it's a shame really, not to see a honest review. If he felt that way of the 1st Translation, I'm sure he would have a word to say of the current rNWT(the silver sword)
Comment by Enoch on 2017-01-31 18:02:26
Another thing I have noticed that has stood out alarmingly is the baptism talks at Conventions. I use to switch off during the Baptism talks and start planning how I was going to con my family out of some sandwiches at the lunch break.
From about 2007 I started paying extra special attention to the Baptism talks through the lens of UK/Grace. What I noticed was the talks rarely referred to the death of Christ at all. They were all on Christian/Organizational living/works.
In recent years the Society has been interviewing 3 publishers at the end of the talk. Not once has any of these brothers referred or even hinted at Jehovah's grace through Jesus. They all talk about their walk in the organization.
Just wanted to throw this point out there as I believe when comparing grace to being under the law of the WT it is no more evident then at the "Christian" baptism of JWs. That a 45 minute talk could consistently miss out this central truth about becoming a Christian is dumb founding and is another evidence that JWs are not giving grace its proper place in Christian dedication. (not to mention the baptism questions)Reply by Candace on 2017-01-31 23:27:32
Amazing. I always though grace was a word used only by Christendom, like the cross, Holy Ghost and trinity. Thanks for helping me make sense of it.
I love how baptism talks starts by asking everyone to pay attention probably to stop people figeting. :) I enjoy the interview at the end of these talks and notice also how they talk about their experience and not with the organisation. It would be definitely be nice if they focussed on Jesus more like you said.
Undeserved kindness sounds just so unnatural. I don't think any non JW would have a clue what that even means. Isn't it annoying that quotes are given without proper references? If I did that for any uni assignments I would get marked down for it.Reply by Enoch on 2017-02-01 02:07:54
Howdy Candace. You have strong powers of observation which should stand you in good stead both spiritually and secularly (spell check not liking that?). You are observing, crunching the data, formulating and reporting which shows a mind at work!
One very simple but powerful exercise that I did back in 2006 was read the books of Galations, Ephesians, Phillipians and Colossians. I had a pen in my hand and simply underlined every scripture that referred to Jesus. I then went back and read every scripture that I had underlined.
The read time is only about 90 minutes but it's an hour and a half well spent. Remember that the letters that Paul writes are inspired directly by holy spirit.
Gal 1:11 Let me tell you, my friends, that the gospel I preach is not of human origin.
Gal 1:12 I did not receive it from any human being, nor did anyone teach it to me. It was Jesus Christ himself who revealed it to me.
When we read Paul's letters we get a window shot into how the brothers spoke and what was important to them back in the first century. We essentially become a "fly on the wall' to what the congregation was talking about. In some ways the Pauline letters are a time capsule that help us to travel 2000 years ago and stand among the original anointed brothers of Christ.
During the years from 2006 til the present I compared the speech of the original Christian letters to the brothers in the Congregation.Try it yourself and see what you notice. I don't want to put words into your mouth so I'll just leave it as an open exercise but I think it's one that you will enjoy and should dovetail nicely with your observational skills.
Reply by Amitafal on 2017-02-02 14:32:12
Hi Candace
Are you from the Philippines? Or one of your parents?Reply by Candace on 2017-02-02 21:29:40
How do you work that out? You are half right, my mum is from Cebu :)
Reply by Amitafal on 2017-02-03 02:29:05
I know a lot of Philipino witnesses. You have a name similar to a relative in our cong.
Reply by mailman on 2017-02-07 09:39:24
Hi Candace, really from Cebu? Maayong gabii. :)
Reply by Amitafal on 2017-02-02 14:30:27
Well said. I was questioned on the ministry about what was said at my baptism. The man asked -"did they say in the name of the Father, son and Holy Spirit"? I had to think but said I wasn't sure. Of course after thought about it and convinced myself that they covered the father and son. Of course last year looked at the questions in the Org book and thought this isn't right! I am saying I agree with something not in the scriptures! Crazy but true. How did we end up so brainwashed?
Amitaf
Comment by Menrov on 2017-02-01 05:52:18
The comment or quote "the rendering “undeserved kindness” in the New World Translation is fitting” by John Parkhurst cannot be found anywhere. If this is the John Parkhurst that died in 1797 and developed the greek english lexicon, how could he have made a reference to the NWT???
If my research was fine, it is MOST misleading.
Further, my mother tongue is not English but I have a good sense of what GRACE stands for, particularly if you read how the word is used in the NT. Undeserved Kindness is a double emphasis in my view. Like ministerial servant, because to serve = to minister.
To be kind is a behaviour applied when it is actually not really deserved or could be expected. But in the bible, the Father is showing what true kindness or grace is: 1 John 4:10 In this is love: not that we have loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.
The opposite of undeserved kindness is deserved kindness? That sounds more like a reward, results of works. So, undeserved kindness is like a reward or result of works that is still not deserved....
The point: technically "undeserved kindness" might be in some cases correct, as a technical translation. However is does in that way do no justice to our Father and His Son and does not align with the spirit and context of the use of the word.Reply by Enoch on 2017-02-01 08:17:24
"The point: technically “undeserved kindness” might be in some cases correct, like a technical translation. However is does in that way do no justice to our Father and His Son and does not align with the spirit and context of the use of the word."
Agreed. The best result is the one that always reflects best on our heavenly father not on us.
Btw...I'm Australian so English is also my second language.....you have my sympathies :-) ( slang being my first language :-) )
Comment by Disappointed1 on 2017-02-01 11:31:27
I just had a google of John Pankhurst and if he ever did make that quote about undeserved kindness, he certainly didn't make it about the NWT as he lived in the 18th century 1729-1797. I also looked up his Greek-English Lexicon and found 5 pages of quotes devoted to the word 'Grace', 3 pages to the word 'Kindness' and nothing at all for the phrase 'Undeserved Kindness'. If he ever did say it then it must be somewhere else and it was said about two hundred years before the NWT existed.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-02-01 14:20:50
I found a reference to the quote the Watchtower makes here. The quote in question is "their free and undeserved favour or kindness in the redemption and salvation of man". Actually, it is a reference to a reference. Since Parkhurst approved of the rendering in some instances, the publishers of the Watchtower feel they have authorization to claim their use of it to the exclusion of 'grace' is "fitting". By not providing a reference (as any scholarly and academic work would do) for the quote, the average reader is naturally going to assume the Parkhurst is a modern-day scholar. Then by drawing the conclusion that the NWT rendering is fitting based on his quote, the reader is likely to assume that parkhurst--a man dead for centuries--approves of the NWT. This amounts to intellectual dishonesty.
Reply by Amitafal on 2017-02-02 14:24:53
Yes no phrase saying undeserved kindness. That's the Org all over- twisting to fit their beliefs
Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2017-02-02 06:56:27
Just a thought, which you may or may not agree with. Undeserved kindness is to Grace as loyalty (as in Micah 6:8) is to Loving Kindness or Loyal love (I still prefer loving kindness, it is much more human).
The phrases may be just about technically correct, but they do not portray Jehovah's loving qualities properly.
It all goes to show how careful we have to be.Reply by Smoldering Wick on 2017-02-05 13:28:31
Yes Leonardo, I still grit my teeth over Micah 6:8.....that along with using their slanted translation as a regional convention theme???
SW1
Comment by Amitafal on 2017-02-02 14:23:24
Hello
Thank you so much for your hard work on that article.
We had a WT towards end of 2016 which discussed Undeserved Kindness & I too felt that I didn't deserve God's kindness after reading the WT. I too researched the other translations on the Bible Hub and was amazed that nearly every translation used the word grace. I also referenced Strongs Concordance. It just goes to show if we earnestly want the truth and read the bible no matter which translation and research outside of JW.org info , we can all come to the same conclusions. No need for the organisation to tell us what we should believe.
AmitafReply by mailman on 2017-02-04 00:28:47
Hi Amitafal. I share your own experience and I think many of us here have similar point of view.
When we read our Bibles with a sincere spirit and humility, we are guided by God's Spirit. It's the holy spirit (which Christ promised to his apostles) that really counts. It's the overwhelming force that leads us to profound wisdom and understanding. Nowhere in the scriptures do we see an organization SOLELY in authority to interpret God's word to perfection.
Comment by tyhik on 2017-02-03 10:20:22
Thanks Enoch and Meleti. A very good article.
I think it is wrong to translate charis as undeserved kindness. Translation is not interpretation. I rather want my Bible be translated from original languages and not interpreted. The interpretation should be left to the reader, or at most kept in footnotes. There must be a reason why God's spirit inspired Paul and others to write down charis without any qualification such as undeserved. Translating it as such is making the spirit say stuff he/it did not say, which may mislead an unsuspecting reader. God has left it up to us to comprehend that it's undeserved.
Comment by lazarus on 2017-02-03 22:09:02
Why didn't they include the Greek Word we're Undeserved Kindness has been Translated?
Note, in para 4,5, they go to explain what that Greek word is, but they don't write what that word is, why is that?
For eg under the Sub-Heading FORGIVEN THROUGH UNDESERVED KINDNESS
Para 4, "..He used a Greek word that, according to one reference work.." What Word?
Para 5" 5 Scholar John Parkhurst noted: “When spoken of God or Christ, it [that Greek word] very often particularly refers to their free and undeserved favour or kindness in the redemption and salvation of man" again What Word?
Reminds me of para 18, about being deceptive.
One could argue what is the reason or motivation for omitting this Greek Word? Are the writers being deceptive by choosing to omit the word? A sin of omission or a sin of commission.
Or am I just making something out of nothing.Reply by AndereStimme on 2017-02-04 16:37:52
Well, it's hard sometimes not to see conspiracies everywhere. Nevertheless, since it's entirely normal for sources to be identified and Greek words under consideration to be named at least once, I think it's a valid question why the publications generally don't name their sources, and why in this particular case they don't say what the Greek word is. I believe the answer can be found in the 2007 KM:
*** km 9/07 p. 3 Question Box ***
Thus, “the faithful and discreet slave” does not endorse any literature, meetings, or Web sites that are not produced or organized under its oversight.—Matt. 24:45-47...
For those who wish to do extra Bible study and research, we recommend that they explore Insight on the Scriptures, “All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial,” and our other publications, such as those that discuss the prophecies found in the Bible books of Daniel, Isaiah, and Revelation. These provide abundant material for Bible study and meditation, whereby we can be “filled with the accurate knowledge of [God’s] will in all wisdom and spiritual comprehension, in order to walk worthily of Jehovah to the end of fully pleasing him as [we] go on bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the accurate knowledge of God.”—Col. 1:9, 10.
In short, don't try to do your own research; we'll do the research for you. Trust us.Reply by Stormie on 2017-02-04 18:37:16
I noticed this at the 2016 convention as well. Again they defined the Greek word, without ever giving the Greek word. (It actually wasn't even in the outline for that talk that I found on the internet afterwards). To me it is a glaring omission. In fact my notes for that opening talk has 'What is the Greek word!?!?!?!?' written in all caps and underlined a few times. Being a writer I am acutely aware of how word choice can manipulate the narrative, it's something I had started to notice more and more often in the articles. I have seen it mentioned on this site many times as well. With quotes left unidentified the reader is left to either trust the writer at their word, or called to do the legwork themselves.
In my case... I do the legwork and draw my own conclusions. I think it is a great disservice to not provide the actual word.Reply by lazarus on 2017-02-05 00:11:36
True and agree it is a disservice.
Reply by lazarus on 2017-02-05 00:09:47
Thanks for the reference, a brother made a comment at the meeting, he hesitantly, used the Greek Word, "hari" or charis, then quoted the reference provided in the paragraph. Wt Conductor, thanked him and that was it. Yes it's not to difficult to include a word be it in Hebrew or Greek that is already part of the sacred writings.
Reply by Smoldering Wick on 2017-02-05 12:55:51
Yes AndereStimme, even translators are guilty of interpreting without due explanation. All Bibles suffer a wee bit to the opinions of translating committees. All of which justifies the birth of commentators.?☀
And BTW, thanks for pinch hitting to Enoch and the rest! You did a great job!
Comment by mailman on 2017-02-04 00:20:03
Just dawned on me dear brothers that this site can be considered also as a produce from faithful and discreet slaves (FDS) in our modern era.
Bereoan Pickets is providing nutritious spiritual food at the proper time. It makes us see the real ingredients of the food being served by the Society. In the process of refinements from Meleti and the brothers sincerely providing comments that give flavor, we are exposed to rich and bountiful spiritual meal which otherwise would not be available if we would simply be content on what is served on the table.
We would rather learn the truth no matter how painful it is - than be ecstatic and celebrate under deception.
Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2017-02-06 04:58:47
On this site we are spending lots of time researching and opening up things which I would have expected the writing committee to open up to us in the first place. After all, if they knew the Greek word and had John Parkhurst's publication to hand, there can be no valid reason not providing the references. Just look at the back of the Creation brochures and see how many references are shown. So why not explain what Greek word is being used, the publication reference for a writer,(and why wasn't Vine's or Strong's quoted instead of some clergyman from the 18th century). If the GB want to be trusted they must ensure they and the writing committee take the responsibility to explain properly, otherwise those who have doubts will end up doing their own research and lose their trust in them. Hang on, is that not what is happening here ?
Reply by mailman on 2017-02-08 00:21:45
Error of unintended omission or an intentional one not to disclose the references? If failure to disclose leads a reader to a conclusion that would have not been the case had proper disclosures been made, then that's misrepresentation if not a subtle pretense.
Comment by Joseph Ben Mathias on 2017-02-08 08:03:49
Great article in response to another mind boggling WT study article. Many thanks!
It's always puzzled me how many JWs will remark that "undeserved kindness" makes more sense than the word "grace". I've found it helpful to take such persons right on over to Colossians 4:6 in the NWT- "Let your words always be (wait for it) GRACIOUS {Greek Chariti}, seasoned with salt...." Other translations use similar expressions.
The NWT translation committee was OK using a form of the word grace for that scripture, with good reason. One's words being full of "undeserved kindness" doesn't make any sense, and twists the scripture's obvious meaning. The sad part is, the use of "undeserved kindness" in the other instances also warps the thought and intent of the scripture.
Of course, I always remind myself that I would have once responded the exact same a couple of years ago. Many thanks to persons on this site for helping with awakening process.Reply by Smoldering Wick on 2017-02-08 13:30:59
So very true Joseph Ben, since kindness is 'conditional' when undeserved, much like our conditional love exclusively given to fellow dedicated JW'S regardless of actual Christian ethics.
Agape and affectionately SW
Comment by wish4truth2 on 2017-02-08 17:09:25
Wow! What a wonderful article!!this was a big one for our family to study. 45 years as a JW feeling guilty trying to overcome guilt by doing more works,and never knew the truth about God and Christ. I can finally have peace and know that God is truly kind. thank you so much for this article guys!!! keep up the good work Meleti.
Reply by Enoch on 2017-02-08 21:51:35
We were taught that the load is heavy. It is definitely heavy when men wield power like worldly kings in the name of God. So pleasing to you see you lighten the load through Christ Jesus. Best wishes brother.
Mat 11:28 "Come to me, all of you who are tired from carrying heavy loads, and I will give you rest.
Mat 11:29 Take my yoke and put it on you, and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble in spirit; and you will find rest.
Mat 11:30 For the yoke I will give you is easy, and the load I will put on you is light."
Mat 23:4 They tie onto people's backs loads that are heavy and hard to carry, yet they aren't willing even to lift a finger to help them carry those loads.
Mat 20:25 So Jesus called them all together and said, "You know that the rulers of the heathen have power over them, and the leaders have complete authority.
Mat 20:26 This, however, is not the way it shall be among you. If one of you wants to be great, you must be the servant of the rest;