In This Issue

• IF BRETHREN CAN PRACTICE IT, THEN WHY CAN'T I TEACH IT?

• “STREET GREEK”???

• NON-PROPHET ORGANIZATION

• MORE INFORMATION...

IF BRETHREN CAN PRACTICE IT, THEN WHY CAN'T I TEACH IT?

How to Treat Sinners? After a careful study of the subject, the following are my conclusions on the subject of how to treat sinners.

1. Talk to everyone but the sinner about what they've done---Forget what Jesus said in Matt. 18:15.

2. Don't attempt to restore the sinner---Paul didn't know what he was talking about in Gal. 6:1.

3. As sinners attempt to cope with their sin and its consequences, make it as difficult for them as possible by turning your back on them in their hour of need---Paul's much learning had really made him mad when he wrote Gal. 6:2.

4. Self-righteously act like you've never sinned and would certainly never do what they've done---That's what Jesus was teaching in Lk. 18:9-14.

5. When sinners repent, (a) refuse to forgive them---Jesus' command in Lk. 17:3-4 can be ignored as well as the command in Mk. 16:15-16 and (b) show them no mercy or comfort---Paul was going liberal when he wrote that mushy stuff in 2 Cor. 2:6-8.

6. Pay no attention to the example of how Jesus treated and what he said to and about the sinful woman in Luke 7:36-50---1 John 2:6 doesn't apply to us today.

7. Disregard Paul's commands in Col. 3:12-14---Any preacher who talks about "compassion", "kindness", "love", etc. can't be trusted.

8. And after you've treated a sinner in the above-described manner, try to forget what Jesus said in Matt. 6:15 when you ask for mercy and pardon for your sins---Surely God wouldn't treat you the way you've treated others.

Now if, after doing these things, you have trouble sleeping at night---good!

I hope you understand that my tongue was planted firmly in my cheek when I wrote this. But, if brethren can practice it (and I've seen them do it for years), why can't I teach it?

- David Smitherman, Charlottesville Bulletin, March 19, 2006

“STREET GREEK”???

One [internet] list to which I belong appears to be having a discussion about the nature of the Greek used in the New Testament. It appears that some are promoting what they term "street Greek." I have not been privy to the whole discussion (it appears to have been prompted by a post that I made in answering a question about translations), but it seems the position that "street Greek" is comparable to what you would hear today standing on the corner of a street in New York City.

I thought I would share the below because I have found a plethora of error, ignorance, and false teaching relative to this subject (I shall omit the names of the two people in the below post).

I was able to open an attachment this morning and saw the following from [name omitted] ".... argument that really swayed me was that the New Testament was written in the Koine, the street Greek, not the classical Greek that the intellectuals liked to use."

I am not taking issue with [name withheld] because I do not fully know what his comments have been. I will say this now and more below, the vernacular of the Greek New Testament represents a spectrum of language and language style. John wrote very simply, using a more elemental vocabulary and grammar. Paul and Luke, conversely, used a rich, advanced vocabulary and grammar, often basing major argument on grammatical nuance. Any who deny this are evidencing a lack of familiarity with New Testament Greek.

One of our deacons recently visited a church where they said the preacher used "street language" in his preaching. I asked what he meant and he replied, "The preacher used the word 'dude' a lot, for instance." I can just imagine. Of course, the whole service was geared around such. The theme of the sermon was "change" and how some are opposed to "change." The point could have been needed; however, in view of the total described scene, I imagine that "change" is a synonym for "digression."

To further comment relative to the Greek of the New Testament being "common," I shall insert below brief comments about the language found in the introduction to New Testament Greek.

"...The Greek language, generally viewed, has about five recognized periods. Failure to realize these periods can result in some serious problems. These periods are: (1) The Formative Period, from the origin of the race to about 900 B. C.; (2) the Classical Period, ca. 900 B. C. to ca. (about) 300 B. C.; (3) the Koiné Period, ca. 300 B. C. to about 300 A. D; (4) the Byzantine Period, ca. 300 A. D. to ca. 1453 A. D.; and (5) the Modern Period, ca. 1453 A. D. to the present. We shall primarily concern ourselves with the third period, Koiné Period, since the New Testament was written in the Koiné Greek.

The term Koiné is transliterated from the Greek koinh and means common. It was "common" in that it pertained to the public at large, the language commonly spoken everywhere. Some mistakenly believe the language of the New Testament was the language of the uneducated and ignorant. "The New Testament is written in the vernacular Koiné, which was the language of the common people as well as of the cultured in the first century A. D.," wrote Professor A. T. Robertson (The Minister and His Greek New Testament, pg. 16). Robertson in his introduction to one recognized Greek grammar (Beginner's Grammar of the Greek New Testament, by W. H. Davis, pg. 9) wrote thus: "The Koiné means the language common to people everywhere, not merely the language of the common people… The New Testament is mainly in the vernacular Koiné, but it is the vernacular of men of great ability and some of them have a decided literary flavor, as we see in the writings of Luke, the Epistles of Paul, the Epistle to the Hebrews."

To offer further proof of the type language used by the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 2: 13), I again quote the esteemed A. T. Robertson as he wrote regarding the great papyri contributions to understanding the Greek of the New Testament: "Although the New Testament writers were not Atticists, neither were they mere purveyors of slang... The New Testament used the language of the people, but with a dignity, restraint and pathos far beyond the trivial nonentities in much of the papyri remains" (A Grammar of the Greek New Testament, pg. 83, 84, 88).

I am belaboring this point in view of the number who have misrepresented the Greek of the Holy Spirit as being vulgar and illiterate. Such a charge is false and highly bias..."

- Don Martin

NON-PROPHET ORGANIZATION

Pastor Russell said (Studies, II, 33) that "the seventh thousand or the Millennium" began in 1872. The same volume, p.101, says God's kingdom began "the exercise of power in A.D. 1878, and that the `battle of the great day of God Almighty' (Rev. 16:14) which will end in A.D. 1914...is already commenced." (The 1915 edition changed the above date to 1915...rft.)

Judge Rutherford's HARP OF GOD, 1921, used the same general "prophetic rules" to reach the date 1874 "at which time...the Lord's second presence is due."

In WATCHTOWER, July 15, 1894, we read, "They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours. But bear in mind that 1914 is not the date for the BEGINNING, but for the END of the time of trouble."

Russell's STUDIES, VII, published by Rutherford, 1917, said "The spring of 1918 will bring upon Christendom a spasm of anguish greater even than that experienced in the Fall of 1914."

Then in 1920, Rutherford published his "Millions Now Living Will Never Die." "...It is reasonable to conclude that millions of people now on the earth will be still on the earth in 1925...That millions now living will never die" (p. 97).

WATCHTOWER, Sept. 1, 1922 said, "The date of 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914" (p. 262). "Our thought is that 1925 is definitely settled by the Scriptures." WATCHTOWER, Apr. `23. But in the Scotland Trial (p. 120-121) Fred Franz admitted an error had been made by Judge Rutherford.

In AWAKE, Oct. 8. `68, we read past failures were due to lack of evidence. "But what about today? Today we have the evidence required, ALL OF IT, and it is overwhelming!"

THE WATCHTOWER, Aug. l5, '68, in an article "WHY ARE WE LOOKING FORWARD TO 1975?" says, "The nearness of such an important date indeed fires the imagination and presents unlimited possibilities for discussion."

In 1969 the ARIZONA REPUBLIC (Aug. 24) reported Erroll Burton (J.W.) as saying "within months, or at the most five years, the end of the world as we have known it will occur...." The L.A. HERALD-EXAMINER reported Watch-tower president Nathan Knorr's lecture: "Although he did not pinpoint the predicted date, Knorr did narrow it down to the `mid-seventies.' The year 1975 has been specifically mentioned in Witness publications."

WATCHTOWER, Oct. l5,'74, p. 635 says: "The publications of Jehovah's Witnesses have shown that according to Bible chronology, it appears that 6,000 years of man's existence will be completed in the mid-1970's." The writer hedged on saying this meant "world's end would come then," but he concluded, "So we can be confident that the end is near...."

1975 is past, and so J.W.s are busy trying to "cover" that failure and "try again." CAN ANY REALLY DOUBT THEY HAVE A NON-PROPHET ORGANIZATION?

- Robert F. Turner, Plain Talk, March 1976

MORE INFORMATION...