1
YOUR GUIDE FOR DEFENDING THE BIBLE
Self-Education of the Bible Made Easy
EDWARD D. ANDREWS
2
Bible-Translation.Net Books Cambridge, Ohio YOUR GUIDE FOR DEFENDING THE BIBLE: Self-Education of the Bible Made Easy Copyright © 2011 by Bible-Translation.Net Books Requests for Information should be addressed to: Bible-Translation.Net Books, Cambridge, Ohio 43725 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form of by any means—electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, or any other—except for brief quotations in printed reviews, without the prior permission of the publisher.
NOTE: There is a class, which is based on this book, taught by this author, and it is FREE: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Basics-of-Biblical-Studies/
3
PREFACE INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1 BIBLE READING SCHEDULE PART 1 BIBLICAL HERMENEITICS CHAPTER 2 AN INTRODUCTION TO BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION CHAPTER 3 A GLOSSARY TO BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION CHAPTER 4 THE MEANING OF PROVERBS CHAPTER 5 THE MEANING OF PROPHECY CHAPTER 6 THE MEANING OF POETRY CHAPTER 7 THE MEANING OF IDIOMS CHAPTER 8 THE MEANING of HYPERBOLE CHAPTER 9 THE MEANING OF PARABLES CHAPTER 10 THE MEANING OF BIBLICAL NARRATIVE CHAPTER 11 THE MEANING OF EPISTLES CHAPTER 12 THE MEANING OF LAWS PART 2 INDUCTIVE BIBLE STUDY CHAPTER 13 HOW TO INTERPRET GOD‘S WORD CHAPTER 14 INTRODUCTION TO BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION CHAPTER 15 TOPICAL STUDIES CHAPTER 16 BIBLICAL WORD PICTURES CHAPTER 17 USING YOUR TOOLS CHAPTER 18 OBSERVATION CHAPTER 19 SEEING THE WHOLE PUZZLE PART 3 BOOK STUDY PROGRAM CHAPTER 20 FOUNDATION IN BIBLICAL STUDIES CHAPTER 21 FUNDAMENTALS IN BIBLICAL STUDIES CHAPTER 22 INTERMEDIATE BIBLICAL STUDIES CHAPTER 23 ADVANCED BIBLICAL STUDIES PART 4 BIBLE DIFFICULTIES 4
CHAPTER 24 WHY HAS GOD PERMITTED WICKEDNESS AND SUFFERING? CHAPTER 25 BIBLE DIFFICULTIES EXPLAINED CHAPTER 26 THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM OF MATTHEW, MARK, AND LUKE CHAPTER HYPOTHESIS
27
HIGHER
CRITICISM:
DEBUNKING
THE
DOCUMENTARY
CHAPTER 28 THE AUTHORSHIP AND UNITY OF ISAIAH CHAPTER 29 DEFENDING JOB AS A HISTORICAL PERSON CHAPTER 30 DANIEL MISJUDGED PART 5 BASICS OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM CHAPTER 31 TEXTUAL CRITICISM: THE FUNDAMENTALS CHAPTER 32 PALEOGRAPHY: THE DATING OF ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS CHAPTER 33 THE EARLIEST SKILLED CHRISTIAN COPYISTS AND THEIR WORK CHAPTER 34 ESTABLISHING THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT CHAPTER 35 THE FACTS ABOUT THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS PART 6 BASICS OF BIBLE TRANSLATION CHAPTER 36 BASICS OF BIBLE TRANSLATION CHAPTER 37 DIFFERENT KINDS OF BIBLE TRANSLATIONS CHAPTER 38 SO MANY NEW BIBLE TRANSLATIONS: WHY? CHAPTER 39 THE MAKING OF A WORTHY TRANSLATION CHAPTER 40 GENDER-INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE IN BIBLE TRANSLATION CHAPTER 41 IDIOMS IN BIBLE TRANSLATION PART 7 UNDERSTANDING OUR IMPERFECTIONS CHAPTER 42 TWELVE DISTORTED THOUGHTS CHAPTER 43 WHO IS TO BLAME? CHAPTER 44 DESTRUCTIVE SELF-TALK CHAPTER 45 SELF-DEFEATING THOUGHTS CHAPTER 46 AM I MENTALLY BENT? CHAPTER 47 DEALING WITH OUR IMPERFECTIONS
5
PREFACE Before beginning, I want to explain the need for the appendices on our sinful nature and our bent thinking, which covers the state of our imperfections. It will be mentioned another time before you get to chapter 1, but I am covering it here, so that you do not miss why I have included this section. Otherwise, they may very much seem out of place. In my life, I have met literally hundreds, if not thousands of Christians that are suffering from mental distresses, and have been affected greatly by their thinking. It has caused them to start a weight loss program, a Bible reading program, a program to kick a bad habit, but never finish them. It has contributed to their lack of commitment to their walk with God, personal study, meeting attendance, and their ministry. I believe more people suffer from these things than not, so I am offering several appendices that address these issues, and offer suggested solutions. Even if you feel they do not apply, you may wish to cover them, as they are very informative, and may help you help another. This is where I tell my story, what drove me to become an apologist for God‗s Word. I became a Christian in 1986, twenty-five years ago. I immediately fell in love with God‗s Word, as it offered a young man paradise on earth, even spiritually so during Satan‗s system of things. I loved to dream about what life would be like after Armageddon. Some of my favorite books were Daniel, Zechariah and Revelation. I loved these books because, in them, God wins! Let me offer you one small paragraph as to why an 18-year-old-boy would fall so hard for God‗s Word, and what it has to offer. As a new Christian in 1986, I was extremely excited to find a group of people, who were living a life that was purposeful and peaceful in the wicked world. To me it seemed to be a dream. However, the mental and physical abuse of my childhood would catch up with me, as I walked away from it all, just two-years later. Why? I was so antisocial and dysfunctional that I felt out of place with anyone outside of myself. As a child, I lived in a fantasy world, for the purpose of being outside of the pain and suffering. At a very early age, I began to dream of becoming the richest man in the world, who then used his money to help those in pain and suffering. I would return to Christianity in an excessive extent and I would be a very studious Bible student. Before I tell you of the specific event that lead to my becoming an apologist for God‗s Word, let me just say that I have made a mental health recovery to a degree that now allows me to function normally with others, at least as normal that one would expect. I combined the Apostle Paul‗s new personality of Scripture with cognitive therapy, both of which believe that how you think is how you feel. One of the later sections of this book will deal with just that, our thinking, as it is our roadblock to success. Why would I include that, as opposed to just giving you the tips to becoming a more successful Bible student? Because the determination, the steadfastness is what affords you the opportunity at success and it comes from your thinking. 6
It was 1997, and I had returned to Christianity about a year earlier. I had returned vigorously, studying on average of about 6-8 hours a day. Do not worry this book does not require that you put in this kind of time. Some coworkers asked me if I would like to come over for a Bible discussion. I thought to myself, this is a great opportunity to witness, and so, I said, ‗yes.‘ After everyone arrived, all of us would sit down at the kitchen table, and open our Bibles. Little did I know they were there to tear down the Bible, not build it up? The next two hours was nothing more than their taking me from verse-to-verse, to criticize the Bible, to find faults, contradiction, errors. I was distraught, as I struggled to answer even one question. I went home that evening, cried, and prayed throughout the night, telling God: ‗if you get me the books, this will never happen again, my letting you down!‘ The next eight years was a more refined study of thousands of books. In 2005, I decided to get a Bachelor of religion from Liberty University, to which a Masters of Divinity followed, and now the PhD. Through these last 25-years, I have learned many things that have moved me to write this book, which will help you to do what I have done in a much more polished way. Before I begin the introduction that will outline our agenda, let me ask you some questions: Do you want to waste your hard-earned money by buying the wrong books? Do have some basic Bible knowledge, and would love to have more? Do you wish that you could be better at sharing your faith, defending what you know to be true? Do you fear those tough Bible questions? Do you want to be able to defend God‗s Word as true, inerrant and inspired? Are you tired of the Bible scholars having all the knowledge? Do you want to have confidence when you are talking to others about the Bible? Do you want to learn how to study better, and more efficiently? Do you want to accomplish these things in the most productive way possible? The Sad Statistics There are 39,000 religious groups that call themselves Christian There are 350,000 Churches in the United States 80% of these are stagnant 19% of these experience growth only by transfers and procreation 1% of these are the result of ministering, growth by conversion 98% of churchgoers cannot answer basic Bible questions, and are unable participate in some form of ministry The lack of knowledge in the Churches is by far the number one concern of Church leaders around the world, especially the conservative ones. Young people are walking away from Christianity in record numbers. Like it or not, the numbers do not lie. In survey after survey, most college aged Christians appear to be abandoning their faith before they become seniors in college and only about a third of them ever return to the faith: 7
88% leave the faith according to the 2002 SBC Family Life Council Study 70% leave the faith according to the 2007 LifeWay Research Study 66% leave the faith according to a recent Assembly of God Study 61% leave the faith according to the 2006 Barna Group Study Part of the problem is simply that the Christian Worldview is under attack in universities all across America. According to a 2006 study conducted by Neil Gross and Solon Simmons: 25% of college professors are professing atheists or agnostics (compared to 5-7% in the general population). Only 6% of college professors describe the Bible as the "actual word of God" 51% of college professors describe the Bible as "an ancient book of fables, legends, history and moral precepts" 75% of college professors believe that religion does not belong in public schools It's time to address the problem. Many students are walking away from Christianity because they no longer believe it is true. In a survey conducted by sociologists Christian Smith and Melinda Denton, 32% of former believers said they left because of intellectual skepticism: "It didn't make sense anymore" "Some stuff is too farfetched for me to believe" "I think scientifically and there is no real proof" "Too many questions can't be answered" Robert H. Johnson, Evangelicals at an Impasse: Biblical Authority in Practice (Atlanta: John Knox, 1979), pp. 147 and 7. Contemporary evangelicals are finding it difficult to achieve anything like a consensus on each succeeding theological topic they address. Moreover, they seem stymied in any effort toward unity, unable to agree on a collective interpretive strategy for moving beyond their current impasse.... If Evangelicals cannot discover a way to move more effectively toward theological consensus, can they still maintain in good conscience their claim to Biblical authority as a hallmark?
Bible Critics If one were to go on any discussion board on the worldwide internet, he would find hundreds of millions in ongoing, unending debates on countless websites about God‗s Word and its reliability and inspiration. In other words, ‗is the Bible the Word of God?‘ 8
Sadly, the reader of this book will find many people today, who are losing faith in the belief that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God. Why? Liberal-progressive Christianity* has overtaken conservative Christianity in the last 70-years. These are the ones, who claim that the Bible is a book by man alone, not inspired; being subject to errors, contradictions, and ―unscientific.‖ Other critics argue that the Bible is nothing more than a collection of myths and legends. Still, others argue that archaeology and Biblical chronology cannot be harmonized. Other critics claim that the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John are not historically accurate. Others still, argue that Jesus was not divine, claiming he was merely a traveling sage. Below are a few samplings of what the uninformed Bible student is likely to come across as he seeks answers to his questions. * Liberal-progressive Christianity desires to conform to the modern world and their way of thinking. Instead of the Christian putting on the mind and personality shaped by Scripture, he wishes to adopt the world‗s outlook. The primary tenant of this form of Christianity is the rejection of Biblical authority, and the denial that God‗s Word is inspired and inerrant. The Encyclopædia Britannica: The character and structure of the individual traditions are incorporated into the Gospels, which definitely do not have a historical or biographical interest in facts, circumstances, and the course of events. They do not reproduce the story of Jesus as such but, instead, recount history interpreted from the viewpoint of the Christian faith. What Jesus says, does, and suffers is interpreted as the fulfillment of the Old Testament promises, and his story is slanted toward his end (the Passion and the Resurrection), his significance as the divine Saviour, and his Second Coming. In other words, the Gospel texts do not intend to describe the Jesus of the past but rather to proclaim who he is for all ages of time. These perspectives of the post-Easter church to which the writers belong and for which their reports are intended must continually be taken into consideration. (Britannica CD 2.02 ―Jesus: The Christ and Christology‖) The studies of form criticism made a life of Jesus in the old biographical sense impossible, just as consistent eschatology had declared impossible the codification of a universal ethic from the teachings of Jesus. (The New Encyclopædia Britannica, 15th edition, vol. 22, p.352) The Encyclopedia Americana: The Gospels are not biographies and make no distinction between the events they narrate and the interpretation those events are thought to bear. But they are the basis for modern attempts to reconstruct the Jesus of history... (The Encyclopedia Americana, International Edition [1999], vol. 16, p.38)
9
While the four Gospels obviously tell the same story, their interpretations of it clearly differ and many important contradictions may be noted among them. (The Encyclopedia Americana, International Edition [1999], vol. 16, p.40) Source criticism is concerned with the literary relationship of the Gospels to one another. It is generally agreed that Mark is the oldest Gospel, that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source independently of one another, and that they also used both Q* and special sources. ... Form criticism attempts to get beyond the literary sources by distinguishing between the editorial frameworks of the Gospels and the traditional materials that have been placed in these frameworks. Individual passages are separated from their literary context and examined in terms of their form and possible function in the earliest Christian preaching and even in the ministry of Jesus. Finally, redactive criticism attempts to define more clearly the perspectives of the Gospels as they are, focusing attention on the editorial frameworks rather than the traditional materials. (The Encyclopedia Americana, International Edition [1999], vol. 16, p. 40) The Q document or Q (from the German Quelle, "source") is a hypothesized document that is claimed to be lost textual source that was used along with the Gospel of Mark for the production of Matthew and Luke. While many liberal progressive scholars believe in a real ―Q‖ document of Jesus‘ sayings, there is just one problem: there is no such document, or even a fragment. Dr. Eta Linnemann, in her publication, Biblical Criticism on Trial, put it best: ―IMAGINE FLYING TO a nonexistent island on an airplane that has not yet been invented. Even if this impossible trip were to take place during the thirteenth month of the year, it would not be as fantastic as the tale of the so-called lost gospel Q and the earliest church, recently christened as scientific certainty by some New Testament Scholars.‖ (Linnemann, 2001, p. 20) Biblical Review Magazine quoting Burton L. Mack, a scholar of Religious Skepticism: Q demonstrates that factors other than the belief that Jesus was divine played a role in the generation of early Jesus and Christ movements. . . . [As a result] the narrative canonical gospels can no longer be viewed as the trustworthy accounts of unique and stupendous historical events at the foundation of the Christian faith. The gospels must now be seen as a result of early Christian mythmaking. Q forces the issue, for it documents an earlier history that does not agree with the narrative gospels. (p.8, 10) (From Q The Lost Gospel by Stephen J. Patterson, in Bible Review, October 1993) 10
The World Book Encyclopedia: Scholarly study of the New Testament is sometimes called criticism. ... Interpretative critics often find a different meaning in the Bible than those who have not studied it in this way. Such an understanding of the Bible is unsettling for some Christians. ... The most respected schools of religious studies teach the New Testament in the light of all that modern learning and scholarship have achieved. (The World Book Encyclopedia [2004], vol. 14, p.288) None of the Gospels gives a complete story of the life of Jesus. Each is a collection of His acts and words, written as an expression of the faith of a particular Christian community. (The World Book Encyclopedia [2004], vol. 8, p.277) Do these Bible critics have solid evidence to support such contentions? In the chapters that follow, we will cover many of these charges, and let you the reader decide if they have any foundation for their positions. The second reason for bringing this book about comes from what the apostle Peter had to say about the Apostle Paul‗s letters: ―just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.‖ (2 Peter 3:15-16) If the Apostle Peter felt this way, how much more so is it that we should not feel bad because we find the Bible difficult to understand. We are 2,000 years removed from Peter, and are of a different culture and language. This book intends on unraveling many of those difficulties. The final reason is the fact that each Christian must know (be familiar with) and understand (have the correct meaning of) the Bible. Why? Easy enough, we will allow God‗s Word itself to give us the answer. Proverbs 2:1-5 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) My son, if you accept my words and store up my commands within you, 2listening closely to wisdom and directing your heart to understanding; 3furthermore, if you call out to insight and lift your voice to understanding, 4if you seek it like silver and search for it like hidden treasure, 5then you will understand the fear of the LORD and discover the knowledge of God. 1
God has chosen to convey an extremely important message to the human family, one that is a matter of life and death. In His book of 66 smaller books, we find God‗s will and purpose for us, as well as what role we need to play in order to receive the gift of life. Sir Matthew Hale, lord chief justice of England, once said, ―The Bible is the only
11
source of all Christian truth; the only rule for the Christian life; the only book that unfolds to us the realities of eternity.‖1 If we are to know God, it only makes sense; we must know his Word―The Bible. Jesus Christ makes this all too clear for us when he said in prayer to his Father: ―This is eternal life: that they may know You, the only true God, and the One You have sent: Jesus Christ.‖ (John 17:3, HCSB) Therefore, here we see that ―eternal life‖ is closely related to our knowing (having a relationship with) God and his Son, Jesus Christ. It is the apostle John who answers the why: ―And the world with its lust is passing away, but the one who does God's will remains forever.‖ 1 John 2:17, HCSB In order to know ―the will of God,‖ we must recognize and trust that the Bible is our only guide in this matter. Each Christian should ―. . . be filled with the knowledge [lit. accurate or full knowledge] of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, to walk worthily of the Lord unto all pleasing, bearing fruit in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge [lit. accurate or full knowledge] of God;‖ (Col. 1:9, 10) Is it possible to ―walk worthily‖ of God without fully knowing his will? Is it possible to know his will without first understanding the Bible? Psalm 119:1654 (American Standard Version) 165
Great peace have they that love thy law; And they have no occasion of stumbling.
At times, it must be difficult for us to contemplate the idea of finding any measure of peace in the world we now know. Yet, it is our love for God‗s law and the application of that law, which will give us a righteous standing before our Creator (being justified in his eyes) and a measure of peace and happiness now. Thus, the incentive to know and trust our Bible is far greater than one might have thought, approval in God‗s eyes as well as peace and happiness and the hope of a future everlasting life. Having discussed God‗s Word with thousands of persons over many decades, the author of this book is saddened by the misconceptions that exist among so many nonstudents as well as students of the Bible. For example, those that hold with the ideas that the Bible is full of nothing but errors and contradictions, or that most of God‗s Word is nothing more than myth and legend. Liberal-progressive scholarship has done nothing but fan these flames of misunderstandings for decades. Sadly, either these scholars lack knowledge of these things and are simply passing on what they believe to be true, or they know and are simply passing on erroneous information. In the last few decades, we have seen a flurry of books by conservative scholarship in defense of the Bible and its authenticity and inerrancy as the Word of God. It is this author‗s humble privilege to add this work to the fight, to help you the reader be able to defend God‘s Word, the Bible. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules, by Robert H. Stein (1994), p. 11-12:
1
Edward, Tyrone (1966). The New Dictionary of Thoughts: New Delhi: Standard Book Company, p.
40
12
Tuesday night arrived. Dan and Charlene had invited several of their neighbors to a Bible study, and now they were wondering if anyone would come. Several people had agreed to come, but others had not committed themselves. At 8:00 P.M., beyond all their wildest hopes, everyone who had been invited arrived. After some introductions and neighborhood chitchat, they all say down in the living room. Dan explained that he and his wife would like to read through a book of the Bible and discuss the material with the group. He suggested that the book be a Gospel, and, since Mark was the shortest, he recommended it. Everyone agreed, although several said a bit nervously that they really did not know that much about the Bible. Dan reassured them that this was all right, for no one present was a 'theologian,' and they would work together in trying to understand the Bible. They then went around the room reading Mark 1:1-15 verse by verse. Because of some of the different translations used (the New International Version, the Revised Standard Version, the King James Version, and the Living Bible), Dan sought to reassure all present that although the wording of the various translations might be different, they all meant the same thing. After they finished reading the passage, each person was to think of a brief summary to describe what the passage meant. After thinking for a few minutes, they began to share their thoughts. Sally was the first to speak. ―What this passage means to me is that everyone needs to be baptized, and I believe that it should be immersion.‖ John responded, ―That's not what I think it means. I think that it means that everyone needs to be baptized by the Holy Spirit.‖ Ralph said somewhat timidly, ―I am not exactly sure what I should be doing. Should I try to understand what Jesus and John the Baptist meant, or what the passage means to me?‖ Dan told him that what was important was what the passage meant to him. Encouraged by this, Ralph replied, ―Well, what it means to me is that when you really want to meet God you need to go out in the wilderness just as John the Baptist and Jesus did. Life is too busy and hectic. You have to get away and commune with nature. I have a friend who says that to experience you have to go out into the woods and get in tune with the rocks.‖ It was Cory who brought the discussion to an abrupt halt. ―The Holy Spirit has shown me,‖ he said, ―that this passage means that when a person is baptized in the name of Jesus the Holy Spirit will descend upon him like a dove. This is what is called the baptism of the Spirit.‖ Jan replied meekly, ―I don't think that is what the meaning is.‖ Cory, however, reassured her that since the Holy Spirit had given him that meaning it must be correct. Jan did not respond to Cory, but it was obvious that she did not agree with what he had said. Dan was uncomfortable about the way things were going and sought to resolve the situation. So he said, ―maybe what we are 13
experiencing is an indication of the richness of the Bible. It can mean so many things!‖ Stein now asks, How does a text mean so many things? Can a text mean different, even contradictory things? Is there any control over the meaning of Biblical texts? Is interpretation controlled by means of individual revelation given by the Holy Spirit? Do the words and the grammar control the meaning of the text? If so, what text are we talking about? Is it a particular English translation such as the King James Version or the New International Version? Why not the New Revised Standard Version or the New English Bible? Or why not a German translation such as the Luther Bible? Or should it be the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic texts that best reflect what the original authors, such as Isaiah, Paul, Luke wrote? And what about the original authors? How are they related to the meaning of the text? It is obvious that we cannot read the Bible for long before the question arises as to what the Bible ‗means‘ and who or what determines that meaning. Neither can we read the Bible without possessing some purpose in reading. In other words, using more technical terminology, everyone who reads the Bible does so with a ‗hermeneutical‘ [interpretational] theory in mind. The issue is not whether one has such a theory but whether one‘s ‗hermeneutics‘ [interpretational principles] is clear or unclear, adequate or inadequate, correct or incorrect. What Dr. Stein describes in the above story is set out in many other books on hermeneutics, or exegesis (i.e., interpretation or explaining of the Scriptures). This is not an isolated situation or his imagination. If you go on any discussion board on the internet, you will see millions around the world discussing doctrines or beliefs and find that the division is far worse than what Dr. Stein laid out. The reason for this is that there are several different viewpoints on any given doctrine. There is the Calvin position, the Lutheran, the Wesleyan, the Keswick, the Arminian point of view, to mention just a few. Then you have those that adopt one of these views, but they do not like the whole of its position, so they will adjust it to fit what they think it should be. Worse still, you have those who have not studied these views, and they just interpret the Bible like those in the above story by Dr. Stein: ‗what it means to me.‘ The problem with all of this is the damage that is done to Bible truth. I am not saying who is right or who is wrong. What I am saying is that there is absolute Bible truth in there somewhere. There are some things that we should have in common: We believe the Bible is inspired of God. We believe that the original writings were inerrant, but that there are Bible difficulties due to the modern cultural mindset. We believe that Bible has the capacity to change lives. We believe the Bible is full of diverse material, but unified. We believe that any given text has one meaning, which must be discovered. We believe that the Bible is supposed to be the foundation for Bible truth. 14
Luther made his famous statement: ―Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason. . ., I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe. God help me. Amen.‖ We all want to believe that we have that truth. There are issues here that this book is not designed to address, but feel its readers should be aware of what is happening in the bigger picture. The independent spirit to interpret it our way, has led to 39,000 different Christian denominations, with all of them having different belief systems. If we were to take one denomination, with tens of thousands of churches, you will find that each pastor in that denomination has different beliefs from the pastors in the others, there is no one faith. Worse still, you will find that in any of those tens of thousands of churches of that one denomination, each member can have different beliefs as well, and adapt the ones in common to fit with how they feel. There are about one and a half billion Christians in the world, how will they ever be a unified people of one faith, is that even possible? The important concern of this book is you the reader. Therefore, keep the faith, learn how to study, study well, and leave the rest in the hands of your heavenly Father, as He will show you the way. All I ask is that you open your eyes to it, when it arrives. Acts 16:17; 18:25-26; 19:9, 23. Luke 18:8 (English Standard Version) I tell you, he will give justice to them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?" 8
15
INTRODUCTION I have designed this introduction to let you know the essence of what is coming, and to help you to appreciate the value of this advice on several different fronts: This book is going to help you save hundreds if not thousands of dollars in book purchases throughout your lifetime as a Christian. This book is going to help you become a defender of your faith and God‘s Word in as little as one hour a day. This book is going to enable you to acquire the same amount of Bible knowledge as the scholars, in a much shorter time. This book is going to remove your fear of talking about your faith. This book is going to help you correctly understand the Bible, and see the appropriate way of applying it in your life. This book will do so much more, but only if it is followed and applied as recommended.
Book Recommendations As you may or may not know research books are worth their weight in gold. To borrow from Paul, many books are beneficial, but not all are 'advantageous.' For instance, there are literally hundreds of books on Biblical interpretation, hermeneutics, and exegesis. Why should you spend your hard-earned money on a publication that falls short of the criteria listed below? You may buy five or six books before ever getting the one that is accurate, readable, covers the topic well, and is an enjoyable read, affordable and so on. This is where these pages of recommended reading come in. Generally, the books listed first are more of an introduction, and as you move down the list, they get a little more difficult. We have many who work in academia, when combined, have read literally thousands of books. Therefore, we have decided to compile a recommended reading and research list of good books for conservative Christians. What do we mean by conservative Christian? A conservative Christian is one who believes that the original written text of the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures is inspired of God and fully inerrant. He also recognizes that the copyist and translators are not inspired and thus present some Bible difficulties, but no contradictions or errors. It is extremely important to note that these books are not rated entirely on doctrinal basis; while that is somewhat of a concern. When a book is rated ―accurate,‖ it is based on the subject matter under consideration. However, these doctrinal positions do not count toward the book's inaccuracy because it is a passing reference of his personal doctrinal belief; not related to the subject matter of the book.
The criterion 16
High in accuracy: All secular academic books are going to have some things that would not be in harmony with our way of thinking. However, many are extremely accurate in their intended subject matter, independent of their doctrine. Readability: There are books that one must sit down with a dictionary to read and others that a 13 year old could easily understand. I have read books on linguistics that have given me a headache and others that I almost cry at the easiness of the reading. Covers Topic Well: A book can be readable and accurate; but do a terrible job in covering the subject matter: disorganized, narrow in scope, lacking good examples and so on. Entertaining: A book can be accurate, readable and cover the topic well; but put you to sleep. Some books I have read were like mystery novels. I simply could not put them down. Of course, we cannot expect a book on textual criticism, to be as entertaining as a John Grisham novel. Opposing View: It is not enough to cover our Christian worldview only, we must also understand what the others are thinking. For example, there are books that argue for literal translation only (which is our view) and others that argue for dynamic or functional equivalent only. We will list books that favor dynamic equivalent books as well. Why? This is the best way for you to identify their fallacy in thinking. Cost Effective: Some books can be gotten on Amazon.com or Christianbook.com at an affordable price. If you start your search on this author‘s Bible Translation Magazine website,2 you will be adding no further cost to the book, but we get a commission for taking you to their site. This is a way of giving to this mission, if you are unable to afford donations. Final Note: We may list books by Bart D. Ehrman, a known atheist, who pens books on the lack of trustworthiness of the New Testament text, which stumbles many Christians, by tearing down God's Word. The purpose of their being listed is to be debunked (showing them to be wrong, misleading, or false). If you read the textual criticism books first, gaining a basic knowledge of that field of study, you will see the fallacies in his arguments, his exaggerations, and his misleading information. If you miss any of those fallacies and errors, the books that follow Ehrman will highlight them for you.
Why Study the Bible The Bible is loving letter from our heavenly Father. (1 Thessalonians 2:13) If we take the things we learn, and apply them in our lives, we will live a life far more beneficial than those who do not. As you grow in knowledge, you will draw ever closer to God, the Giver of ―Every good gift and every perfect gift.‖ (James 1:17) You will discover the beauty of prayer. You will find that God is strengthening you to cope in times of trouble. If you live and walk in harmony with His Word, the opportunity of life everlasting awaits you. Romans 6:2 2
http://magazine.bible-translation.net/
17
The Bible gives us answers to questions and life that can be found nowhere else, and offers illumination to its readers. Those that take in this life-saving knowledge are freed from the misunderstandings of life that dominate billions of others. For instance, many fear death, and the Bible can lift that fear. Genesis 2:7 (American Standard Version) And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 7
Ezekiel 18:4 (English Standard Version) Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die. 4
John 11:25 (English Standard Version) Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, 25
Acts 24:15 (English Standard Version) having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust. 15
What do we see in these four texts? First, we see that humans are ―souls‖, not that they possess one at Genesis 2:7. Second, Ezekiel 18:4 informs us that we as ―souls‖ can die. Third, Jesus informs us of the hope of a resurrection just as he gave his friend Lazarus, only better at John 11:25. Fourth, Acts 24:15 tell us that there will be a resurrection of the just (those who walked with God and exercised faith in the Son), and the unjust (those who never had a chance to hear the Bible truth). Another facet of benefiting from the Bible is that it shows us the way to get the best out of life now, even in imperfection. 1 Timothy 3:2 (English Standard Version) Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, soberminded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 2
2 Corinthians 7:1 (English Standard Version) Since we have these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit, bringing holiness to completion in the fear of God. 1
1 Corinthians 6:18 (English Standard Version) Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. 18
What do we discover in these three texts? Is there any doubt that if we possess the quality of self-control that we will not have better health and better relationships. Through ‗cleansing ourselves from every defilement of body and spirit,‘ we evade 18
damaging our health. Finally, the marriage is on safe grounds by our fleeing from sexual immorality. Another aspect of the Bible is that it will help us to find true happiness in this imperfect world that we live in, with the hope of even greater happiness to come. Bible knowledge helps us to find the innermost harmony and satisfaction and gives us faith and hopefulness. It assists us to develop such pleasing characteristics as empathy, love, joy, peace, kindness, and faith. (Galatians 5:22, 23; Ephesians 4:24, 32) Such characteristics will help us to be a better spouse, father or mother, son or daughter. Another facet of the Bible is its prophecies, which will help us to understand where we are in the steams of time, and what is yet to unfold. Revelation 21:3-4 (English Standard Version) And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. 4He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away." 3
Help in Understanding the Bible The irony is that hundreds of millions of Christians are humble enough to recognize that the Bible is difficult to understand, it is a deep and complex book. There are tens of millions, who believe they understand everything they read, and for them, the Bible is easy to understand. The sad irony is that the latter do not understand it any better than the former; they are simply putting a modern-day twist on Scripture, and having it say what they want it to say. 2 Peter 3:15-16 (English Standard Version) And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. 15
This book will help the Bible student in a progressive manner, offering to lay a foundation of knowledge, before ever moving on to the basics. (Hebrews 6:1) As you carry on, you will be better equipped to take in ―solid food,‖ that is, deeper truths. Through the whole of these studies, it must be kept in mind that the Bible is the ultimate authority, and these study tools are just that, tools.
Are You Willing to Spend Time Each Week to Understand the Bible? Many want to understand, to be fearless, and capable of sharing Bible truth with others. However, if this is to be the case, you must be willing to buy out a small amount of time from the worldly system of things that surrounds you, and invest it into a small study program. Many people want to do many things, but they allow the time to slip 19
buy. The thought of, ‗oh, if I had only started six months ago, I would be so far along now!‘ Do not let another six months slip by. Colossians 4:5-6 (English Standard Version) Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making the best use of the time. 6Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person. 5
The recommendation once more is to set aside one hour each day for God. If you are able to spend more time, this is entirely up to you. What must be realized is just how much time we give to the world around us, a world that lies in the hands of Satan. Is it too much to ask that we give one hour a day to the Creator of life? Simply get up one hour earlier than you normally do, and you will have your study in before the day even gets started. The beautiful thing about that plan is; it will start your day on a spiritual track, meaning a better day from the beginning.
Digging Deeper Psalm 92:5 (American Standard Version) 5
How great are thy works, O Jehovah! Thy thoughts are very deep.
1 Corinthians 2:10 (English Standard Version) these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. 10
There is no doubt that God‘s thoughts are deep, these deeper things of God are very complex at time, and as Peter said, they are not easy to understand. Therefore, we must dig deeper by the use of the many wonderful tools on the market, along with prayerful reflection as we carry on in our studies. Psalm 139:17-18 (English Standard Version) How precious to me are your thoughts, O God! How vast is the sum of them! I would count them, they are more than the sand. I awake, and I am still with you. 17
18
If
Psalm 119:160 (English Standard Version) The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever. 160
As was true of the Psalmist, we should view God‘s sharing His thoughts as very precious. We should be very thankful and appreciative that we have access to ‗the sum of God‘s Word‘ as being truths that He has revealed to us, and therefore, we must dig deeper in the sum of God‘s Word.
Tools Needed
20
Proverbs 2:1-6 (English Standard Version) My son, if you receive my words and treasure up my commandments with you, making your ear attentive to wisdom and inclining your heart to understanding; 3yes, if you call out for insight and raise your voice for understanding, 4if you seek it like silver and search for it as for hidden treasures, 5then you will understand the fear of the LORD and find the knowledge of God. 6For the LORD gives wisdom; from his mouth come knowledge and understanding; 1
2
Deep Bible study is like digging in a mine, it takes much effort on our part if we expect to find the treasure. Please, reread the above Proverbs again, and this time, look at the active verbs, which emphasizes the effort needed, to acquire divine knowledge, wisdom, and discernment. Spiritual, educational study also requires good study process. Solomon wrote, ―If the axe is dull, and one does not sharpen its edge, then one must exert more strength; however, the advantage of wisdom is that it brings success.‖ (Ecclesiastes 10:10, HCSB) If a worker uses a blade that is not sharp or if he does not use it proficiently, he will squander his power and his work will be substandard. When an artisan begins his workday, he will get out the tools needed for the task and place them before him. In the same way, when we embark on a period of study, we should decide on which tools we will need in our individual library. Recall too that study is a mental task and requires effort; therefore, it is also best to assume a fitting posture. The idea is to stay mentally attentive, so being at a table in a chair would be more prudent than a recliner, or lying on a bed. It is best to take a short break every 20 minutes or so, walking in another room, stretching or getting some fresh air from outside. Many great study tools are also available to us today, because of software programs. Foremost among these is the Bible, God‘s Word. It is recommended that you use a literal translation (ASV, ESV, NASB, HCSB), as well as a couple dynamic equivalent translations (NIV, NET, NLT). The tools listed here are the bare basics that any Bible student should have: several Bibles, concordance, Bible dictionary, Bible handbook, Old and New Testament survey or introductions, wordbooks (Mounces), Bible encyclopedia, and at least a one or two volume commentary, a Bible atlas, and a one-volume commentary on Bible backgrounds. As you begin your Bible reading, you should have the following out on the table: (1) your Holman commentary for the book you are on, (2) Holman Bible Dictionary (3) Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (word dictionary), (4) a concordance, (5) three literal and two dynamic equivalent Bible translations, (6) and a notepad and pen.
How to Study Progressing in our personal study requires us to become skilled at how to study. First, it would be best to write a schedule on our calendar, seven days per week that will 21
not interfere with life‘s responsibilities, buying out the time to study, possibly at least a half hour each time, twice a day. Better yet, it might be best to have one hour of study, in the early morning, to start your day. Second, you will need to decide beforehand what you will study during the time you have set aside. By setting reasonable goals down on paper and in your mind, you will be much more apt to make the study time far more beneficial than if you had no goal. As an aside, do not sidetrack yourself by trying to dig deeper for the curiosities that come up during your study. Write these down and do them outside of your regular study. In order to bring your study to the next level, you must become skilled at using your tools. As is true with everything, skill will only come about by use, use and more use. You will need to acquire skill at searching for background information from maps and Bible dictionaries. Also, using your concordance to see how a word is used throughout the Bible book you are studying, or throughout the New or Old Testament. It can be very helpful in directing us to supplementary information. When we come upon Bible locations, it is time to use our maps to have a mental picture of Bible lands. An example would be Paul‘s missionary tours, or the exodus of the Israelites. Seeing where the Israelites were held captive in Babylon, how the huge cedar logs were gotten from the Mountains of Lebanon to Jerusalem, can add meaning to our study. Consider when the text says Samson ripped out the gate out of Gaza, which likely weighed several hundred pounds, and then it says that he carried them to the top of Hebron. Your in-depth study will discover that was a 37-mile hike, uphill! (Judges 16:3) These suggestions will be of no advantage to you unless you have a wish to learn. Without that longing, you will not be motivated to seek the wisdom of God‘s Word. You will not be motivated to dig for knowledge and understanding. This desire should be the possession of all dedicated Christians. If you are newly interested one, a desire for a better understanding of God‘s Word, a longing for it, can be developed. You should crave to be taught about your Creator and about the things, he caused to be written in his Word. As we take in knowledge and understanding, our thirst for these deeper things should grow. ―A discerning mind seeks knowledge.‖—Prov. 15:14. An environment that breathes study is very important as well. Some people have convinced themselves that they can study with the radio blaring, or even playing quietly in the background. Silence is the best friend of serious study. This gives your mind the opportunity to meditate and ponder whatever you are considering. If you have children, it may be best to choose a study time when they are in school, or at an activity. The phone should be ignored during this time, not allowing outside distractions. It is only by being absorbed in your material that you can really profit from the hard effort that you have put forth in your study. While it is true, we live in stressful times, we should follow Jesus‘ advice to ‗seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these others things will be taken care of‘ by applying the very Bible principles that we are learning, by not having a divided mind that is attempting to compete with today‘s troubles. It is no easy task to dismiss the world around us, but with prayerful efforts, it will come in time. Otherwise, you will find that you have read five pages, and have no 22
idea what you just read. Poor concentration is the killer of a progressive study. Yawning, feeling sleepy may not be because you tossed and turned last night, but because you are simply not interested in what lies before your very eyes. However, interest can be achieved by knowing just how you want to use the information you are studying: your personal life, to help your child, to strengthen relationship, to grow and mature, to defend what you believe. If you can find a reason for the information, the interest will peak, you concentration will improve, and your study will come to the point where it is not only interesting, but also exciting and captivating.
Study Process You have just purchased a new book; it has just come in the mail, or downloaded to your Kindle or Nook. How should you go about studying your new book? The first thing is to read the back cover that will give you an overview of the book. Stop for a moment and consider what you know about this subject area. Now, as you would walk around and kick the tires before buying a car, you should investigate before you get into the study of the book. Open the book, and look at the table of content and read the list of chapters and headings, see the progression the book is following, its line of thought. Now, turn to each chapter and look at the subheadings that run through each chapter, to get a feel for the depth that you are going to go into, to be excited by this subject area. Now that you are ready to begin, turn to chapter one. Each topic sentence usually is a summary of the whole paragraph and it generally is the first sentence, so pay special attention at you read in an undertone [slightly aloud], each sentence throughout the chapter. After reading those first sentences, attempt to see how the paragraphs build on that sentence, and the following ones as well. As you work your way through the chapter, look for the topic sentence, and underline it, this way you are mentally outlining the chapter. As you are reading, do not just read each word individually, but in a group of thought content. This will not only speed up your reading, but will help you to take hold of the content. As you grow in knowledge and understating, you will encounter terms and subject matter that is new. Initially, this will be quite often, and will taper off as your knowledge deepens. New terms and subject matter is not an area where rapid reading should continue. It is here where you slow down, because you are attempting to grasp each word at a time and how the joining of them together makes sense. In addition, you may wish to have a dictionary handy as well.* After you feel you have grasped this new thought, look up from the page and restate it in your own words. *The beauty of the Kindle PC software that allows you to download eBooks is threefold: (1) You can highlight the important thoughts, (2) you can add notes right into the book, and (3) it has a dictionary that pops up when you right click a word, which will save you a tremendous amount of time, not to mention convenience. Moreover, the stopping to pick up a dictionary and locate a word will cause you to lose the flow of thought, and many times, you will have to reread the section again. This is avoided with the Kindle PC. 23
You may wish to view subheading as stop signs. At each one, you want to give thought to, ‗what did I just cover?‘ Can you recall the whole of what was shared, or is it too muddled? If you feel that, it is too foggy, go back and reread the topic sentences that you had underlined, and it should restore your memory. When you read something that sounds worth repeating, as it may be used to help another, overturn false reasoning, or expound on a Scripture, attempt to explain it aloud. If you stumble in expressing it, reread the point, and attempt to explain it again aloud. Before the day is out, share it with another, which will help you retain it. Now you are off to the next subheading, following the same process, as you continue throughout the chapter, keep the title in mind, former subheadings and a progression of what you have taken in. This process should be followed throughout the whole book. If this is a book that you bought, not a library book, hold a pencil (or highlighter) in one hand as you read, underline your topic sentences, exceptional bits and pieces of information, and any key words that may get your attention. Do not overdo this, as it will defeat the purpose. After each chapter, take a moment to read the subheading, to see if you recall what you have read. If you have, a point that you believe you will need in the future; go to the front of the book, and create a small phrase that captures the essence of that material, and put the page number where it can be found later. Two years later, you will want to find it again, so you recall what possible books, then you simply look in the front and the phrases will be there. The most important study principle is looking up Scriptures. The rule is if it is not quoted in the book you are studying, look it up every time, unless you can quote it verbatim. If you ever stumble in quoting it, look it up every time you come across it, until you do not stumble in quoting it. An active mind while reading will enable you to retain so much more at the end of the book. Attempt to picture the material, as you are moving through it. Pay special attention to the basic truths that you are taking in. As you work your way through any book, see if you can look into yourself, are there areas that the information could be applied to you and your life. Ponder over the material, looking for information that you can use in your ministry of preaching and teaching others. A motivating factor is the simple fact that one could never teach another if he does not fully understand the subject matter himself. Worse still, it will only alienate those we are preaching to, because they want confidence that a person teaching them are not stumbling through their answers. If we fully understand something, we will be able to give reasons for it, in our own words. Therefore, the more we know and understand the better will be when the time comes to share that information, giving reasons for the hope we possess. Moreover, it may be information that we need to personalize, something that will help us to make better decisions. In addition, you will be building your faith up to withstand the agnostic, atheistic, liberal, progressive skeptics and critics that wish only to tear down. As you grow in your understanding of God‘s Word, it will enable you to have the confidence to speak to others, to grow spiritually, and get on the path that leads to everlasting life. 24
The objective of your study is to give a half hour each day to Bible reading as laid out in this book, as well as a half hour to the book reading program as explained in this herein. You can give a half hour to each them in the morning, or you can split it up: one in the morning and the other in the afternoon, or evening. It is recommended by this writer that you do both in the morning. The last appendices section may seem a bit irrelevant in a book such as this, but it is most likely the most important section. It is an introduction into our sinful state. The objective is to help the reader truly appreciate the damage that our thinking can do to our hope of life, and the life we have now. Many are not aware of the affect our thinking in this imperfect state can have on the things we hope to accomplish. Therefore, I am hoping this section will help those readers that struggle with completing goals, lack self-worth and self-esteem, which will be the main force that will help you have a good study life, leading to a good relationship with your heavenly Father.
25
CHAPTER 1 BIBLE READING SCHEDULE Directions Read each section in a week, and use the Holman Commentary Old Testament and New Testament set as you cover the chapters. (We have linked both the Old Testament set and the New Testament set separately. Keep in mind that you can purchase them individually, as you read along, which may be advantageous financially. Also, as you read along, use a book that covers every Bible difficulty from Genesis to Revelation. We recommend the Big book of Bible Difficulties by Norman L. Geisler, or the Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties by Gleason L. Archer. Either of these books will help you to defend the inerrancy of the Bible, that it is inspired of God and without error. If you want to start with a one-volume commentary, we recommend Holman's Concise Bible Commentary, by David S. Dockery. (However, if possible, we recommend that you start with number 1 above, the individual Holman commentaries for each Bible book.) (a) Read the chapter from your Bible. (b) Read the chapter from the Holman commentary, as well as the Deeper Discovery Section in that commentary. (c) Open your Big Book of Bible Difficulties, are any difficulties with the chapter that you have studied. (d) If you have the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary Old Testament and the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary New Testament, read the chapter from this as well. This last mentioned Zondervan commentary set of the Old and New Testament is somewhat expensive. If you are not able to afford it, I recommend the one volume IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament and the one volume IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. The individual Holman commentary volumes will give you the following stages of study, and cover some verses more deeply at the end of each chapter (called Deeper Discoveries). Below are the four steps from Grasping God’s Word that these Holman Commentaries will walk you through on every book of the Bible. Step 1: Grasp the text in their town. What did the text meant to the biblical audience? Step 2: Measure the width of the river to cross. What are the difference between the Biblical audience and us? Step 3: Cross the principlizing bridge. What is the theological principles in the text. [In other words, what are the implications in the text. These are the meanings that the writer would have not been aware of, but fit the pattern of what he penned. For example, Paul told the Ephesians to not to 26
get drunk with a lot of wine. An implication would be whiskey, because it fits the pattern, but Paul would have not been aware of such a drink.] Step 4: Grasp the text in our town. How should individual Christians today apply the theological principles [implications] in their lives?
Figure 1 Duvall and Hays, Grasping God's Word, 24
Alternative Bible Reading Schedulei DIRECTIONS. Fill in the dates that you plan to read each group of chapters listed. Check them off as you complete each section. You can read the Bible books in order or select topics based on the categories shown. If you read one set of chapters each day, you will have read the entire Bible in one year. However, this book does not recommend such an approach. We suggest that you use the Holman Commentary volumes, as well as the Big Book of Bible Difficulties, and take 4-5 years to read the Bible. + Read days marked with a plus + to gain a historical overview of God‘s dealings with the Israelites. = Read days marked with a, equal sign = to gain a chronological overview of the development of the Christian congregation. THE WRITINGS OF MOSES DATE / GENESIS /
CHAPTER □• 1-3 □ 4-7 □ 27
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
EXODUS
LEVITICUS
NUMBERS
8-11 □ + 12-15 □ + 16-18 □ + 19-22 □ + 23-24 □ + 25-27 □ + 28-30 □ + 31-32 □ + 33-34 □ + 35-37 □ + 38-40 □ + 41-42 □ + 43-45 □ + 46-48 □ + 49-50 □ ♦ 1-4 □ + 5-7 □ + 8-10 □ + 11-13 □ + 14-15 □ + 16-18 □ + 19-21 □ 22-25 □ 26-28 □ 29-30 □ + 31-33 □ + 34-35 □ 36-38 □ 39-40 □ 1-4 □ 5-7 □ 8-10 □ 11-13 □ 14-15 □ 16-18 □ 19-21 □ 22-23 □ 24-25 □ 26-27 □ 1-3 □ 4-6 □ 7-9 □ + 10-12 □ + 13-15 □ 28
/ / / / / / / / / / / / 3 / / / / / / / /
+ 16-18 + 19-21 + 22-24 + 25-27 28-30 + 31-32 + 33-36 DEUTERONOMY + 3-4 5-7 8-10 11-13
□ □ □ □ □ □ □ 1-2 □ □ □ □
14-16 + 17-19 20-22 23-26 27-28 + 29-31 + 32 + 33-34
□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □
□
ISRAEL ENTERS THE PROMISED LAND DATE CHAPTER □• / JOSHUA + 1-4 □ / + 5-7 □ / + 8-9 □ / + 10-12 □ / + 13-15 □ / + 16-18 □ / + 19-21 □ / + 22-24 □ / JUDGES + 1-2 □ / + 3-5 □ / + 6-7 □ / + 8-9 □ / + 10-11 □ / + 12-13 □ / + 14-16 □ / + 17-19 □ / + 20-21 □ / RUTH + 1-4 □ WHEN THE KINGS RULED ISRAEL DATE CHAPTER □• 29
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / 4 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
1 SAMUEL
2 SAMUEL
1 KINGS
+ 1-2 + 3-6 + 7-9 + 10-12 + 13-14 + 15-16 + 17-18 + 19-21 + 22-24 + 25-27 + 28-31 ♦ 1-2 + 3-5 + 6-8 + 9-12 + 13-14 + 15-16 + 17-18 + 19-20 + 21-22 + 23-24 + 1-2 + 3-5 + 6-7 +8 + 9-10 + 11-12
□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □
1 KINGS (cont.) + 13-14 □ + 15-17 □ + 18-19 □ + 20-21 □ + 22 □ 2 KINGS + 1-3 □ + 4-5 □ + 6-8 □ + 9-10 □ + 11-13 □ + 14-15 □ + 16-17 □ + 18-19 □ + 20-22 □ + 23-25 □ 1 CHRONICLES 1-2 □ 30
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
2 CHRONICLES
3-5 6-7 8-10 11-12 13-15 16-17 18-20 21-23 24-26 27-29 4-6 7-9 10-14 15-18 19-22 23-25 26-28 29-30 31-33 34-36
□ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ 1-3 □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □
□
THE JEWS RETURN FROM EXILE DATE CHAPTER □• / EZRA + 1-3 □ / + 4-7 □ / + 8-10 □ / NEHEMIAH + 1-3 □ / + 4-6 □ / + 7-8 □ / + 9-10 □ / + 11-13 □ / ESTHER + 1-4 □ / + 5-10 □ THE WRITINGS OF MOSES DATE CHAPTER / JOB 1-5 □ / 6-9 □ / 10-14 □ / 15-18 □ / 19-20 □ 5 / 21-24 □ / 25-29 □
□•
31
/ / / /
30-31 32-34 35-38 39-42
□ □ □ □
BOOKS OF SONGS AND PRACTICAL WISDOM DATE CHAPTER □• / PSALMS 1-8 □ / 9-16 □ / 17-19 □ / 20-25 □ / 26-31 □ / 32-35 □ / 36-38 □ / 39-42 □ / 43-47 □ / 48-52 □ / 53-58 □ / 59-64 □ / 65-68 □ / 69-72 □ / 73-77 □ / 78-79 □ / 80-86 □ / 87-90 □ / 91-96 □ / 97-103 □ / 104-105 □ / 106-108 □ / 109-115 □ / 116-119:63 □ / 119:64-176 □ / 120-129 □ / 130-138 □ / 139-144 □ / 145-150 □ / PROVERBS 1-4 □ / 5-8 □ / 9-12 □ / 13-16 □ / 17-19 □ / 20-22 □ / 23-27 □ / 28-31 □ 32
/ / / /
ECCLESIASTES
5-8 9-12 SONG OF SOLOMON
1-4
□ □ □ 1-8
□
THE PROPHETS DATE CHAPTER □• / ISAIAH 1-4 □ / 5-7 □ / 8-10 □ 6 / ISAIAH (cont.) 11-14 □ / 15-19 □ / 20-24 □ / 25-28 □ / 29-31 □ / 32-35 □ / 36-37 □ / 38-40 □ / 41-43 □ / 44-47 □ / 48-50 □ / 51-55 □ / 56-58 □ / 59-62 □ / 63-66 □ / JEREMIAH 1-3 □ / 4-5 □ / 6-7 □ / 8-10 □ / 11-13 □ / 14-16 □ / 17-20 □ / 21-23 □ / 24-26 □ / 27-29 □ / 30-31 □ / 32-33 □ / 34-36 □ / 37-39 □ / 40-42 □ / 43-44 □ / 45-48 □ / 49-50 □ 33
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / 7 / / / / / / / / / / / / /
51-52 □ LAMENTATIONS 1-2 3-5 □ EZEKIEL 1-3 □ 4-6 □ 7-9 □ 10-12 □ 13-15 □ 16 □ 17-18 □ 19-21 □ 22-23 □ 24-26 □ 27-28 □ 29-31 □ 32-33 □ 34-36 □ 37-38 □ 39-40 □ 41-43 □ 44-45 □ 46-48 □ DANIEL 1-2 □ 3-4 □ 5-7 □ 8-10 □ 11-12 □ HOSEA
1-7
□
□
8-14 □ 1-3 □ 1-5 □ 6-9 □ OBADIAH/JONAH □ MICAH 1-7 □ NAHUM/HABAKKUK □ ZEPHANIAH/HAGGAI □ ZECHARIAH 1-7 □ 8-11 □ 12-14 □ MALACHI 1-4 □ JOEL AMOS
ACCOUNTS OF JESUS‘ LIFE AND MINISTRY DATE CHAPTER □• 34
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
MATTHEW
MARK
LUKE
JOHN
1-4 □ 5-7 □ 8-10 □ 11-13 □ 14-17 □ 18-20 □ 21-23 □ 24-25 □ 26 □ 27-28 □ = 1-3 □ = 4-5 □ = 6-8 □ = 9-10 □ = 11-13 □ = 14-16 □ 1-2 □ 3-5 □ 6-7 □ 8-9 □ 10-11 □ 12-13 □ 14-17 □ 18-19 □ 20-22 □ 23-24 □ 1-3 □ 4-5 □ 6-7 □ 8-9 □ 10-12 □ 13-15 □ 16-18 □ 19-21 □
GROWTH OF THE CHRISTIAN CONGREGATION DATE CHAPTER □• / ACTS = 1-3 □ / = 4-6 □ / = 7-8 □ / = 9-11 □ 8 / ACTS (cont.) = 12-14 □ / = 15-16 □ 35
/ / / / /
= 917-19 = 20-21 = 22-23 = 24-26 = 27-28
□ □ □ □ □
THE LETTERS OF PAUL DATE CHAPTER □• / ROMANS 1-3 □ / 4-7 □ / 8-11 □ / 12-16 □ / 1 CORINTHIANS 1-6 □ / 7-10 □ / 11-14 □ / 15-16 □ / 2 CORINTHIANS 1-6 □ / 7-10 □ / 11-13 □ / GALATIANS 1-6 □ / EPHESIANS 1-6 □ / PHILIPPIANS 1-4 □ / COLOSSIANS 1-4 □ / 1 THESSALONIANS 1-5 □ / 2 THESSALONIANS 1-3 □ / 1 TIMOTHY 1-6 □ / 2 TIMOTHY 1-4 □ / TITUS/PHILEMON □ / HEBREWS 1-6 □ / 7-10 □ / 11-13 □ THE WRITINGS OF THE OTHER APOSTLES AND DISCIPLES DATE CHAPTER □• / JAMES 1-5 □ / 1 PETER 1-5 □ / 2 PETER 1-3 □ / 1 JOHN 1-5 □ / 2 JOHN/3 JOHN/JUDE □ / REVELATION 1-4 □ / 5-9 □ / 10-14 □ / 15-18 □ / 19-22 □ 36
PART 1 BIBLICAL HERMENEITICS CHAPTER 2 AN INTRODUCTION TO BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION Before we can investigate the facets of Biblical interpretation, it is highly important that we understand the fundamentals of the language. The simple mention of such words as hermeneutics, exegesis, and eisegesis has the capacity to frighten most Bible readers, who are not use to the idea of deeper studies. This should certainly not be the case, for they are just more words and ideas to be added to our vocabulary, which will then make them less frightening. Hermeneutics (Greek, hermeneueinis) is simply the interpreting or explaining of a text, for us a biblical text. Exegesis is also simply the interpreting or explaining of a text, for us a biblical text. However, as the prefix, ―ex‖ (preposition) suggests, we must get that interpretation ―out of‖ or ―from‖ the biblical text, unlike our next term. Eisegesis, which has a prefix as well, ―eis (preposition) is actually reading the meaning, our meaning that we want ―into‖ the text. Therefore, we are not too concerned with eisegesis. Hermeneutics is the study of principles and methods of interpretation, while exegesis is those principles and methods. One must have the author, the text and the reader to accomplish communication. If you remove any one of these three, communication is impossible. However, modern liberalism has cause a bit of confusion as to which one of these three are responsible for the meaning.
Figure 2 Stein, A Basic Guide to Interpreting Your Bible, 18
The Author The approach that has been with us from the beginning and is by far the most logical of all is that the author is responsible for the meaning. This is the view of this writer, as one who seeks to convey meaning by the words I use. This approach holds that what the 37
Apostle John penned the words that he used to convey what he meant to his intended readers. There are several arguments against this approach, which will be debunked below. The first objection is that the reader cannot possibly get into the mind of the author, not being able to know what he was thinking as he penned his words. The reader is not capable of sharing in the experiences that contributed to the author penning those words. Therefore, they claim that the reader is block from accessing what the author meant by his words. As far as this writer is concerned, these ones missed the forest because the trees were in the way. The goal of the reader is not to share in Paul‘s experiences, or have access to the thoughts passing through his mind at the time of penning his words. The goal is determine what Paul meant to communicate by the words that he chose to use, as would have been understood his intended audience. The second objection is that Paul, like the rest of imperfect humanity, may have fallen short of convey the message, by choosing the wrong words. While this is true, even this writer has certain written a paper, or an email that has miscommunicated what I meant to say. However, we must consider two things. (1) Authors almost always get what they mean to convey across, with those exception being next to nonexistent; (2) and we do not have the ―Holy Spirit‖ to move us along (2 Pet 1:21), as was the case with the biblical authors. The process of publishing a work goes through multiple stages. The biblical author would have had a scribe that would have copied down what he was inspired to say in short hand. The scribe would have then turned that into a rough draft. At that point, both the scribe and the authors would have gone over the text, making corrections. From thee the scribe would have produced the authorized text for publishing, which the author would read again and sign. The irony is that those who write such rubbish do not believe that there is any chance that they may fail to communicate their message. The third objection is at least more grounded in reality. Here these ones suggest that we are just too far removed from the author in time (thousands of years), language, custom and culture, among many other barriers. These ones suggest that these obstacles make our understanding the author‘s meaning impossibility. While there is some merit to what they suggest, it is a difficult task at times, but impossible, hardly. The first five books of the Bible, Genesis through Deuteronomy, were written 3,500 years ago, to a different time, a different culture and in a different language. Even the people of that day found them hard to understand, so they asked the seventy and Moses to clarify at times. The same is true in the first century, Matthew through Revelation, 2,000 years ago, many, many different cultures, 3 different languages, and so on. And here is what Peter said about Paul's letters: "in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." (2 Pet 3:16, ESV) Nevertheless, know this; they understood almost immediately, what was meant, because it was their time, their language, their circumstances, their idioms, their figurative language, their way of talking and doing. It is not ours, so we must compensate. 38
If meaning is what Paul meant by the words he used in the letter to the Ephesians, as those who read it; should have understood; then, we have to have the same mindset as those Ephesians. We have to know who wrote the letter, who is the recipient, their historical setting, Bible backgrounds of the time, who are involved, what are the circumstances, what do the technical and religious terms mean in the original language, the idioms, the hyperbole, words if figurative or not, and far more than one may realize. We have study tools like a good reference Bible, word dictionaries, Bible dictionaries, handbooks, and encyclopedias, Bible background books, as well as others, and can arrive at the meaning that was intend by the author. The author had an intended meaning when he wrote his text, and that meaning is unending, as long as that text is in existence. However, we need to understand that there are extended meanings that belong to those words as well. What is an extended meaning? These meanings are in the text, but the author was not aware of them, yet they fit the pattern of the intended meaning. Let us look at a few examples from Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount. But first, Paul‘s letter to the Galatians will set the stage. Galatians 5:19-21 (English Standard Version) Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 19
20
Look again at the very last expression in that list, ―things like these.‖ The Bible is not going to provide us with exhaustive lists on everything that we should understand as an example, a lesson, or an extended meaning, as this would mean a thousand volume Bible. How long of a list would it be, if Paul had given the reader an exhaustive list on the works of the flesh? Do you think that any Galatians that had this letter written to them, thought, ‗wow, that was close; he didn‘t list the one I do.‘ By closing this out with the words ―things like these,‖ Paul was helping these ones to appreciate that they would need to perceive or discern what other things fit the pattern of these things. Matthew 5:21-22 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.' 22But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire. 21
You should take note in each of these that Jesus is giving an extended implication of what sin leads to the act of heinous sinning. Sinful anger is a sin, and in many cases does lead to murder. Let us put it another way, all premeditated murder is the result of sinful anger. Matthew 5:27-28 (English Standard Version)
39
"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' 28But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 27
You will notice the phrase ―lustful intent,‖ keying in on the word ―intent.‖ This is not a man walking along and catches sight of a beautiful woman, and has an indecent thought, which he then dismisses. It is not even a man in the same situation that has an indecent thought, who goes on to entertain and cultivate that thought. No, this is a man that is staring, gazing at a woman with the intent of lusting, and is looking at the woman, with the intention of peaking her interest and desire, to get her to lust. Therefore, the author determines the meaning of a text by the words he chose to use, as should have been understood by his intended audience. Within that, one intended meaning is other extended meanings that must conform to the pattern of the originally intended meaning. All readers are to discover the intended meaning, as well as the extended ones.
The Text The text does not determine the meaning; it is simply a tool that is used to convey the author‘s intended meaning. Whether it is the Hebrew language of Isaiah, or the Greek of the Apostle Paul, the letters, words, phrases, clauses, sentences, paragraphs, grammar and syntax is used as a tool to convey what the author intends. As scholars have grown in their understanding of Biblical Hebrew and Greek over the centuries, the better too has been our understanding of what was meant by the original Hebrew and Greek. The idea for anyone writing is that he or she wishes to be understood. Therefore, the writers will write in a standard pattern of their language. Those wishing to understand what has been penned, must learn the grammar and syntax of that language, as well as knowledge of the writer, the setting and the customs and culture of that time. The only other option is to have a translation in your language that is reflective of the original. The text will not only convey what the author meant, but will pass on cultural, historical, geographical, scientific, and other information as well. Of course, we the reader enjoy the subject matter as we try to ascertain what the author wishes to convey, but we do not want to be too sidetracked by the subject matter itself. The fact that Paul traveled more than 40,000 miles in his travels, the places he sees, the experiences he has is important, in that it conveys the length that Paul would go to, to fulfill his commission of spreading the good news. In addition, the subject matter might shed some light on the meaning at times, but for the most part, the geography of some place, the size of ship that was traveled on is not going to be the primary concern.
The Reader The idea that the reader is the one who determines the meaning is known as the ―reader response.‖ Without creating too much confusion, it is up to each Christian, as a minister before God, to understand that ―the spiritual person judges all things, but is 40
himself to be judged by no one.‖ (1 Cor. 2:15) Each of us must determine if an interpretation is correct. However, this is based on the rules of interpretation, and one‘s having a sound knowledge of these rules, which he applies in a balanced manner. The ―reader response‖ is not of that nature though. For those who hold to this position, all meaning is equal to another, and all are correct. You can have a set of verses and 20 people give different interpretation, with many be the opposite of others, and those who believe in the ―reader ―response,‖ will say that all are correct. Under this position, the text allows each reader the right to derive his or her own meaning from the text. This is where you hear ―I think this means,‖ ―I believe this means,‖ ―this means to me,‖ and ―I feel this means to me.‖ The problem with this is that the text loses its authority; God and His author lose their authority over the intended meaning of the text. When God inspired the writer, to express His will and purposes, there was the intention of one meaning, what the author under inspiration meant by the words he used. If anyone can come along and give it whatever interpretation pleases them, then God‘s authority over the meaning is lost, and there is no real meaning at all. The reader does have a responsibility in the discovery of the meaning. He must seek out the intended meaning of the author. He goes about this by using good tools. First, and foremost he would have at least 1-2 good books on how to interpret God‘s Word correctly.3 He will have several good literal translation of the Bible, to make comparisons. He would have a couple word study dictionaries, Bible handbooks, Bible dictionaries, Bible background commentaries, a book on custom and cultures of Bible times, a Bible commentary set, among other tools. This may seem like a lot to invest in, but we are dealing with the opportunity at a relatively joyous and happy life in this wicked system now, by the correct application of the Bible, as well as an opportunity at everlasting life in the next system to come.
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. 3
This book suggests the following works: Grasping God’s Word by Duvall and Hays, Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation, Biblical Hermeneutics by Kaiser and Silva, as well as the New How to Study Your Bible by Kay Arthur.
41
Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
42
CHAPTER 3 A GLOSSARY TO BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION Most people will be tempted to skip this section, because it appears that you are reading a dictionary, which can be quite boring. However, while some of these terms should be understood as you come across them in the books that you will study; others are to be memorized. I will underline those that should be memorized. Apocalyptic Literature. Apocalyptic literature is a type of writing (e.g., Daniel and Revelation) that uses a high number of symbolisms to foretell the future, especially the last days, or the time of the end. Authorial Intention. Authorial intention is the authors intended meaning by the words he used, to be set apart from other meanings that the reader may have claimed to discover. Context. These words, phrases, or passages come before and after a particular word or passage in the Bible and help to explain its full meaning. Contextualization. This is placing a word, phrase, or idea within a suitable historical context. Criticism. This is the scientific investigation of literature. This is known as higher criticism, of which you have Historical Criticism, and it sub categories: Source Criticism, Tradition Criticism, Form Criticism, and Redaction Criticism. These forms of study should be ignored by the conservative Christian, as they deny the infallibility of God‘s Word, whether they wish to admit to it or not. If you wish to read further on this, read The Jesus Crisis by Robert L. Thomas. Eisegesis. This is a reading into the text something that is not there, either from a later developed doctrine, or one‘s own personal interpretation. This is not proper Biblical interpretation. Eschatology. This is the study of the end times or last days. Etymology. This is the study of the origins of words or parts of words and how they have arrived at their current form and meaning. There has been much written on this over the last 60 years, best described as word study fallacies. The book reading schedule will have several books that cover this issue. Exegesis. This is the explanation or interpretation of texts, taking it out of the text. Extended Meaning (Implications). Extended meaning is within the meaning of the text, but the author was unaware of these meanings. However, they fall within the pattern of the author‘s intended meaning. The Apostle Paul‘s command at Ephesians 5:18 is a good example. There Paul writes, ―do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery.‖ Are we to believe that Paul would be fine if the Ephesian congregation members were to get drunk with beer instead? No. What about whiskey, since it was not 43
invented until centuries later? No, the Christian would avoid this as an instrument for getting drunk as well. The principle of what Paul meant was that a Christian does not take in a substance that can affect his or her abilities to make good decisions, in excess. Therefore, this principle would apply to whiskey, wine, beer, bourbon, marijuana, and other things like these that Paul would not be aware. Therefore, it is not enough to understand what Paul meant by his words, you must also understand what principle is behind that meaning and can it be extended into other areas that the author could have known. You must keep in mind that you yourself are not determining these extended meanings, because their pattern are within the author‘s intended meaning and principle. At Matthew 17:20 Jesus told his disciples, ―if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you." The 9,200 foot Mount Hermon loomed in the horizon, was Jesus literally saying that such faith could move this mountain? No. What was the principle? We need faith to overcome mountain like obstacles. Now, would this be applicable to starting a business in a bad economy, which would be a mountain like obstacle? The context is that of doing the work that God assigns us, doing His will and purposes. Specifically, it was the healing of a demonpossessed boy. Therefore, by extension, we can overcome mountain like obstacles that interfere with our doing God‘s will and purposes: meeting attendance, financially taking care of our family, personal study, family study, our ministry of teaching others and making disciples, as well as other spiritual obligations. Genre. This is one of the categories, based on form, style, or subject matter, into which artistic works of all kinds can be divided. For example, 2 John is the genre of a letter. Grammatical-Historical Exegesis. This is the method of interpreting that focuses on the original languages and the historical setting of Scripture. This would be the technical way of say, the literal interpretation. Hermeneutics. This is the science and methodology of interpreting the books of the Bible. Interpretation. Interpretation is an explanation of the meaning or significance of a text. This means that you are able to explain either orally or in writing, of your correct mental grasp of a text. The right of all spiritual Christians to interpret Scripture does not mean private interpretation is the established meaning for the true Christian community. This is known as Reader Response. This is where you hear ―I think this means,‖ ―I believe this means,‖ ―this means to me,‖ and ―I feel this means to me.‖ The problem with this is that the text loses its authority; God and His authors lose their authority over the intended meaning of the text. When God inspired the writer, to express His will and purposes, there was the intention of one meaning, what the author under inspiration meant by the words he used. If anyone can come along and give it whatever interpretation pleases them, then God‘s authority over the meaning is lost, and there is no real meaning at all. Jehovah 44
God has always charged some with the administration of His Word. In the time of Abraham, the Patriarchs were used to take the lead in establishing the correct understanding, in the time of the Exodus, Moses and the seventy, in the time of the kings, prophets and priests, and in the time of the first century Christians, the body of older men in Jerusalem. You will note that in many cases, it involved His choosing one outstanding person of faith, who then built upon that: Abraham, Moses, Samuel, Elijah, Elisha, Ezra and Nehemiah, Peter, Paul and John. You will also notice that it went well when God's people followed the lead of these ones that were selected. When they did not follow their lead, it did not go so well. Followers of Luther chose him, just as the followers of Calvin followed him, just as the followers of Arminius followed him, bringing about Lutherans, Calvinists, and Arminians. However, we believe the good fruit is reflective of the identity of which person is reflective of a spiritual person, a person of outstanding faith. Therefore, each person must determine which Christian congregation today is reflecting the fruits of the Scriptures. Lexical Meaning. This is the meaning given to words in a lexicon (dictionary). Linguistics. This is the systematic study of language. Meaning. In this, we will borrow from Dt. Stein, in that meaning ―is that pattern of meaning the author willed to convey by the words (shareable symbols) he used.‖ Within that meaning are extended meanings that are implied by the pattern of meaning that the author was not aware of. Metaphor. This is the use to describe somebody or something of a word or phrase that is not meant literally but by means of a vivid comparison expresses something about him, her, or it, e.g. saying that somebody is a snake. Metonymy. This is a figure of speech in which an attribute of something is used to stand for the thing itself, e.g. "laurels" when it stands for "glory" or "brass" when it stands for "military officers." Pericope. This is an extract from a book, especially a passage from the Bible selected for reading during a church service. It is not pronounced like periscope, it is pronounced pa-rikapee. Proof-Text. This is the where a person uses a portion of a passage or longer, to prove a doctrinal belief. While there is nothing wrong with this, the texts must be used within the context. Reader-Response. This is the approach where the reader is the determiner of meaning. Semantics. This is the study of how meaning in language is created by the use and interrelationships of words, phrases, and sentences. Sensus Plenior. This is the Latin word for ―fuller meaning.‖ This is similar to our extended meaning in the above, in that there is an additional meaning beyond and 45
unknown to the meaning that was intended by the author. Please avoid this use in your conversations with others, because it is explained and understood in a variety of ways. The preferred use in conversations, would be our extended meanings (implications), which is an implied meaning based on the pattern of the intended meaning of the author. Shareability. This is both the writer and reader having a common understanding of the language that it has been written in. Significance. Significance is the quality of having importance or being regarded as having great meaning to the one that values its content. For a Christian, God‘s Word has a great amount of value and significance. For an atheist, God‘s Word has no value. Therefore, while the atheist may be able to use Bible study tools, and ascertain the correct meaning of a text, he would not apply it in his life, as he sees no value or significance in it. This would hold true of a Christian that grows spiritually weak, or loses his faith. The significance of God‘s Word would decrease over time. Simile. This is a figure of speech that draws a comparison between two different things, especially a phrase containing the word "like" or "as," e.g. "as white as a sheet." Standard Pattern of Language. The idea of a standard pattern is that the language is following the norms of its grammar and syntax. Unless they are using an idiom, or a simile, metaphor, or some other literary for, the words will follow the lexical meaning. Understanding. Understanding is the ability to have the correct grasp of the author‘s intended meaning: the ability to perceive and explain the meaning to another. At Acts 28:26, Paul uses Isaiah 6:9-10 to demonstrate Israel‘s stubbornness and their unwillingness to understand how God‘s foresight brought redemption. He said, ―You will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive.‖ They did not grasp [or stubbornly refused to grasp) how the entirety of the Old Testament fitted together that should have meant something to them. Proverbs 9:10, in saying that ―the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding,‖ demonstrates that true understanding of anything includes gratefulness of its relation to God and his will and purposes. As we grow in knowledge, we will be able to grasp the new things that we learn daily and integrate them with what we already knew. As Solomon said, ―knowledge is easy to one who has understanding.‖ (Pr. 14:6) Knowledge and understanding are very much related to one another, and we are to search for both.—Pr 2:5; 18:15. You will have noticed the italicized ―to have the correct grasp of the author‘s intended meaning.‖ This indicates that there can be a misunderstanding as well, a failure to understand or interpret something correctly.
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. 46
Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
47
CHAPTER 4 THE MEANING OF PROVERBS A proverb is a short well-known pithy saying that expresses an obvious truth and often offers advice in a forceful and to the point, often with an element of wit. Generally, they will describe somebody or something of a word or phrase that is not meant literally but by means of a vivid comparison expresses something about him, her, or it. While we do have a whole book on proverbs, they are found all throughout the Bible. Isaiah 5:21 (English Standard Version) Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and shrewd in their own sight! 21
Proverbs have caused some difficulty in many churches because they are treated like absolutes or guarantees; if you do A you will get B. Proverbs are not to be applied in this sense in an imperfect world, with imperfect people. The best phrase that you can place before the proverb is ―generally speaking.‖ Let us Proverbs 22:6 as our example, it says, ―train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.‖ (ESV) Let us look at a easy version of this, ―direct your children onto the right path, and when they are older, they will not leave it.‖ (NLT) Is this an absolute guarantee that, if I raise my child in the right way, when they get older they will not leave it? No. Let us place our phrase in front of it. ‗Generally speak, if you direct your children onto the right path, and when they are older, they will not leave it.‘ Let us look at a few more examples, with my evaluation in square brackets after the proverb. Is a proverb to be interpreted as a universal law? Is it like the law of the Medes and the Persians, which could never be overruled (Esther 8:8)? Is it to be interpreted absolutely, like the laws of thermodynamics, which describe what must always take place? It is apparent when reading proverbs that many of them seem to be less than absolute in their applicability: Proverbs 1:33 (New Living Translation) But all who listen to me will live in peace, untroubled by fear of harm.‖ [Is it not true, even some of the most spiritual people we know, have suffered a lack of peace in war-torn countries, or have had trouble in a bad neighborhood, as they fearfully walk to the store, or get in and out of their car, walk out on their front porch? Was not Stephen of the first century a very spiritual Christian, and was he not martyred?] 33
Proverbs 3:9-10 (New Living Translation) Honor the LORD with your wealth and with the best part of everything you produce. 10 Then he will fill your barns with grain, and your vats will overflow with good wine. [Have not many good Christians gave much to the congregation out of their heart over the years, and suffered financial disaster during an economic downturn.] 9
48
Proverbs 10:3-4 (New Living Translation) The LORD will not let the godly go hungry, but he refuses to satisfy the craving of the wicked. [Are there not many godly Christians going to be hungry each night?] 3
Lazy people are soon poor; hard workers get rich. [Are there not poor Christians, who work hard at minimum wage jobs; while there are rich people, who have never worked a day in their life?] 4
Proverbs 13:21 (New Living Translation) Trouble chases sinners, while blessings reward the righteous. [Do we measure the righteous by who is the most blessed? Are all righteous people rich?] 21
Proverbs 17:2 (New Living Translation) A wise servant will rule over the master‘s disgraceful son and will share the inheritance of the master‘s children. [Are there not rich wicked people?] 2
It is obvious that none of these are absolutes. However, if we follow the rule of place ―generally speaking‖ before the proverb, it will be what was meant. Generally speaking, all who listen to the principles of God, will have peace, untroubled by harm. Keeping physically clean contributes to good health. (Deuteronomy 23:12-13) God‘s servants must always speak the truth. (Ephesians 4:25) Sex before marriage, adultery, bestiality, incest, and homosexuality are all serious sins against God. (Leviticus 18:6; Romans 1:26, 27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10) Christians must avoid lying. (Proverbs 6:16-19; Colossians 3:9, 10) They do not take part in any kind of gambling. (Ephesians 5:3-5) In addition, Christians do not steal. Additionally, they do not knowingly buy property that they know to be stolen, nor do they take things without the owner‘s permission. (Exodus 20:15; Ephesians 4:28) Christians have learned to control their anger, as uncontrolled anger can lead to acts of violence. (Genesis 4:5-8) God does not accept a person that is violent, or even loves violence as His friend. (Psalm 11:5; Proverbs 22:24, 25) Christians do not take revenge or to return evil for the bad things that others might do to us. (Proverbs 24:29; Romans 12:17-21) There is nothing in the Bible that prohibits drinking alcoholic beverages. (Psalm 104:15; 1 Timothy 5:23) However, heavy drinking and drunkenness are condemned. (1 Corinthians 5:11-13; 1 Timothy 3:8) A person, who consumes too much alcohol will more than likely ruin their health and upset their family. Moreover, it will decrease one‘s spiritual thinking ability, causing them to give into temptations.—Proverbs 23:20, 21, 2935.
The Case of Job What we have covered this far will help us understand one of the more complex Bible books, the book of Job. Job was a man ―blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil.‖ Job was living the happy life; he had seven sons and the daughters. He was a wealthy landowner. ―He possessed 7,000 sheep, 3,000 camels, 500 yoke of oxen, and 49
500 female donkeys, and very many servants, so that this man was the greatest of all the people of the east.‖ (1:3) Even so, he is not a materialistic person; he was simply following a proverb like the above, ‗if you work hard, your efforts will be blessed.‘ Job 1:13-19; 2:7-8 (English Standard Version) Now there was a day when his sons and daughters were eating and drinking wine in their oldest brother‘s house, 14and there came a messenger to Job and said, "The oxen were plowing and the donkeys feeding beside them, 15and the Sabeans fell upon them and took them and struck down the servants with the edge of the sword, and I alone have escaped to tell you." 16While he was yet speaking, there came another and said, "The fire of God fell from heaven and burned up the sheep and the servants and consumed them, and I alone have escaped to tell you." 17While he was yet speaking, there came another and said, "The Chaldeans formed three groups and made a raid on the camels and took them and struck down the servants with the edge of the sword, and I alone have escaped to tell you." 18While he was yet speaking, there came another and said, "Your sons and daughters were eating and drinking wine in their oldest brother‘s house, 19and behold, a great wind came across the wilderness and struck the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young people, and they are dead, and I alone have escaped to tell you." 2:7So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD and struck Job with loathsome sores from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head. 8And he took a piece of broken pottery with which to scrape himself while he sat in the ashes. 13
The Comforters Job 4:7-8 (English Standard Version) "Remember: who that was innocent ever perished? Or where were the upright cut off? As I have seen, those who plow iniquity and sow trouble reap the same. 7
8
Eliphaz in an attempt at dealing with Job‘s atrocities assumes Job‘s tragedies are a result of his own actions. Eliphaz has reasoned wrong by taking a proverb and making it an absolute. In essence, he asks Job, ‗do those that are innocent die? When have those that live a righteous life been destroyed? Eliphaz goes on by saying, ‗my experience suggests that it is those who are doing wrong and entertain bad that will get back what they gave out.‘ In other words, Eliphaz is assuming that only the wicked reap bad times. Job 5:15 (English Standard Version) But he saves the needy from the sword of their mouth and from the hand of the mighty. 15
Eliphaz again assumes that Job is at fault. Eliphaz is like assuming that it was Job‘s great riches, which were ill gotten, and this is why he is suffering. Is Eliphaz‘s statement wrong in and of itself? No, God does rescue the poor from the oppressive, by their following his counsel on the right way to live. However, this is no absolute; saying all who live by God‘s will and purposes will never be mistreated. Moreover, the whole idea is misplaced, in that maybe Job is the rich oppressor and this is his punishment from God. Job 8:3-6 (English Standard Version) 50
Does God pervert justice? Or does the Almighty pervert the right? 4If your children have sinned against him, he has delivered them into the hand of their transgression.5If you will seek God and plead with the Almighty for mercy, 6if you are pure and upright, surely then he will rouse himself for you and restore your rightful habitation. 3
Bildad too is stating true statements, but in absolute terms that are misplaced when it comes to Job, or anyone. Certainly, God does not pervert justice. Therefore, Bildad is right on that, but his application and understanding is what is twisted, as he assumes that children died because they had sinned, and justice was being meted out to them. Again, in verse 5-6, we have a true thought, in that if one is in an impure state, and turns to God with pleads with, He will restore them. However, in verses 5-6, Bildad is assuming that Job is unrighteous, because he sees that proverb as an absolute. As can be seen from the above, one must be aware that proverbs are not absolutes, but are general truths. True enough, there are likely a couple of exceptions to this rule, but that would not negate this rule, and approach of correct interpretation of proverbs.
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
51
CHAPTER 5 THE MEANING OF PROPHECY The Hebrew, navi and the Greek prophetes carry the meaning of one who is a proclaimer of God‘s message, and need not be foretelling of the future. He may very well be proclaiming a moral teaching, an expression of a divine command or judgment, or a foretelling of something to come. Just as is true of all these genres, there are principles that both writer and reader were aware of, and need be explained. We, however are far removed from their time, and need to be introduced to these principles.
The Prophetic Judgment of Nineveh Deuteronomy 18:20-22 (English Standard Version) But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.' 21And if you say in your heart, 'How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?'— 22when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him. 20
Jonah 3:4 English Standard Version (ESV) Jonah began to go into the city, going a day‘s journey. And he called out, "Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!" 4
Jonah 3:5 English Standard Version (ESV) And the people of Nineveh believed God. They called for a fast and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them to the least of them. 5
Jonah 3:10 English Standard Version (ESV) When God saw what they did, how they turned from their evil way, God relented of the disaster that he had said he would do to them, and he did not do it. 10
Does verse 5 and 10 not prove that Jonah was a false prophet? No. Because both Jonah and the Ninevites were aware of a principle that is often overlooked by the modern-day reader. Both Jeremiah and Ezekiel give the answer, or the principle that that readers of that time would have understood about judgment prophecy. Jeremiah 18:7-8 English Standard Version (ESV) If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, 8and if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I intended to do to it. 7
Jeremiah 18:9-10 English Standard Version (ESV) And if at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will build and plant it, 10and if it does evil in my sight, not listening to my voice, then I will relent of the good that I had intended to do to it. 9
52
Ezekiel 33:13-15 English Standard Version (ESV) Though I say to the righteous that he shall surely live, yet if he trusts in his righteousness and does injustice, none of his righteous deeds shall be remembered, but in his injustice that he has done he shall die. 14Again, though I say to the wicked, 'You shall surely die,' yet if he turns from his sin and does what is just and right, 15if the wicked restores the pledge, gives back what he has taken by robbery, and walks in the statutes of life, not doing injustice, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 13
Unfulfilled Prophecy Micah 3:12 (English Standard Version) Therefore because of you Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins, and the mountain of the house a wooded height. 12
Jeremiah 26:16-19 (English Standard Version) Then the officials and all the people said to the priests and the prophets, "This man does not deserve the sentence of death, for he has spoken to us in the name of the LORD our God." 17 And certain of the elders of the land arose and spoke to all the assembled people, saying, 18"Micah of Moresheth prophesied in the days of Hezekiah king of Judah, and said to all the people of Judah: 'Thus says the LORD of hosts, "'Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins, and the mountain of the house a wooded height.' 19Did Hezekiah king of Judah and all Judah put him to death? Did he not fear the LORD and entreat the favor of the LORD, and did not the LORD relent of the disaster that he had pronounced against them? But we are about to bring great disaster upon ourselves." 16
As you can see from the above that judgment prophecies are based on a continued wrong course by those receiving condemnation. However, both the condemned and the one proclaiming the prophecy knew that the judgment would be lifted if they reversed course, and repented. This was even expressed by Jonah himself. ―But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he was angry. 2And he prayed to the LORD and said, "O LORD, is not this what I said when I was yet in my country? That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from disaster.‖
Prophetic Language The prophet is much like the poet; he is given a license to express himself in nonliteral language. Generally, he is working with images that are far more effective than words themselves. Matthew 24:29-31 (English Standard Version) "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on 29
53
the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31And he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. The above cosmic terminology need not be taken literally. It is a part of their tool kit, which enables them to make it clear that God is acting in behalf of humans. (See Dan. 2:21; 4:17, 25, 34–35; 5:21) The sun is not going to be darkened, the moon will not stop giving its light, the stars are not going to fall from the heavens, nor will the heavens be shaken. What is being communicated here is that after the tribulation God is going to judge humans, the righteous receiving life the unrighteous being cut off from life. (34-45) Yet this judgment is described in cosmic terminology. Such terminology, however, was part of the imagery and symbolism available to the prophets when they sought to describe God‘s intervention in history and his sovereign rule over the kingdoms of this world (cf. Dan. 2:21; 4:17, 25, 34–35; 5:21). Such imagery was not meant to be interpreted literally. The sun was not actually going to be darkened; the moon would not stop giving its light; the stars would not stop showing their light. ―What‖ the author willed to communicate by this imagery, that God was going to bring judgment upon Babylon, was to be understood ―literally.‖ And that willed meaning, God‘s judgment upon Babylon, did take place. This prophecy was fulfilled with the rise and rule of the Persian empire over the territories once ruled by Babylon, and the later readers of this prophecy knew that this prophecy had indeed been fulfilled. Babylon had been judged just as the prophecy proclaimed, and it was God‘s doing just as the cosmic imagery described. The imagery, itself, however, was understood by the prophet and his audience as part of the stock terminology used in this kind of literature to describe God‘s intervention into history. Acts 2:14-21 (English Standard Version) But Peter, standing with the eleven, lifted up his voice and addressed them: "Men of Judea and all who dwell in Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and give ear to my words. 15For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. 16But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel: 17 "'And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; 18even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy. 19And I will show wonders in the heavens above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke; 20 the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day. 21And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.' 14
In all occurrences, prophecy proclaimed in Bible times had meaning to the people who heard it; it served for their guidance as well as ours. Usually, it had some fulfillment in that time, in numerous instances being fulfilled during the days of that very generation. In looking at Peters quote from Joel, it must be asked; did they see those cosmic events on Pentecost? Yes, the cosmic terminology is expressing that God was acting in behalf of 54
those first Christians. A new era was being entered and God did pour out His spirit, and sons and daughters did prophesy, both in proclaiming a message, and in foretelling of further future events.
The Sensus Plenior (Fuller Meaning) Psalm 37:10 (English Standard Version) In just a little while, the wicked will be no more; though you look carefully at his place, he will not be there. 10
In looking at Psalm 37:7-11, the Holman commentary makes the following comment, ―David repeated his original advice: Do not fret when men succeed. He returned to the earlier thought of verse 2, sinners who seem to flourish for a season will eventually be destroyed (Eccl. 3:16-17) To point this out, he used a series of contrasts between the godly and the ungodly. Refrain from anger he declared, because these evil men in the final day would be cut off and die . . . But those who hope in the LORD, the meek, will inherit the land.‖ Did David give application to this only for those ―in the final day,‖ at which time wickedness would be destroyed, with the wicked themselves? This would mean that David was writing of a time thousands of years in the future. Could the readers of this Psalm not see any fulfillment of these words? No. David‘s words about the outcome of the wicked would have meaning for the people of that time. Actually, they would be fulfilled in the time of David himself. It had been David‘s life experience, that the wicked would flourish for a time, but had no lasting effect. (35-36) It is for this very reason that he cautioned the people to not be troubled over the occasional wicked one. (1-2) Therefore, he was affirming a principle of life. In the lifetime of David and his son Solomon, the ―land‖ of Israel saw peace from the wicked ones. Ps. 37:11; 1 Ki. 4:20, 25. The question to be asked is there really such a thing as a ―fuller meaning‖? Proponents of this view argue that the prophet was inspired to pen one prophecy, while God had another prophecy, or a ―fuller‖ prophecy that He wished to convey. Let us look at some examples where a prophecy in the Old Testament appears to have had a fuller fulfillment in the time of Christ, or during his millennial reign. Isaiah 7:14 (English Standard Version) Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. 14
Matthew 1:22-23 (English Standard Version) All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: 23"Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel" 22
If the readers of Isaiah thought that the Davidic line and the promised see were going to end by the invaders, there is good news found at 7:14. ―Immanuel‖ means ―With Us Is God.‖ Thus, we see in this name that Jehovah God is with Judah and will not set aside 55
the covenant with David, regardless of the fact that his people will abandon Him hundreds of times over the next 200 years, committing worse atrocities than the Canaanites they replaced in the land. The Bible does not clarify who Immanuel is. However, this young boy is to serve as a sign and Isaiah states later that he and his children ―are as signs,‖ it is likely that Immanuel is Isaiah‘s son. (Isaiah 8:18) It is possible that God does not explicitly identify Immanuel is, because He does not wish to detract from the Greater Immanuel that is to come centuries later. There is only one other place in God‘s Word where the name Immanuel appears. God inspires Matthew to apply Isaiah 7:14 to the birth of Jesus, at Matthew 1:18-23. If the birth of the first Immanuel was to serve as a sign that God had not abandoned the line of David; the birth of Jesus, the Greater Immanuel would serve as a sign that He had not abandoned humanity either, the promised seed had arrived. (Lu 1: 31-33; Gen 3:15; 15:5; 22:15-18; 49:10; 2 Sam 7:12-16; John 1:25; 7:41, 42; 8:39-41) Now that the Greater Immanuel had arrive in Jesus, Matthew could rightly say, ‗With us is God.‘ Isaiah 65:17 (English Standard Version) "For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth, and the former things shall not be remembered or come into mind. 17
2 Peter 3:13 (English Standard Version) But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. 13
Revelation 21:1 (English Standard Version) Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. 1
Isaiah informed his readers of God‘s creating ―new heavens and a new earth.‖ Was this a future fulfillment alone? No, it had a fulfillment some 200 years after Isaiah penned it, as those in Babylonian captivity were returned to Jerusalem. New leaders were to restore and rebuild Jerusalem; Zerubbabel as governor and Joshua as high priest could stand for the ―new heavens,‖ while the land of Judah was inhabited with God‘s people once again, in essence a ―new earth.‖ This renewed land and its people did not have to fear anyone again like Nebuchadnezzar coming into their land to slaughter infants and children. The people had an opportunity at a normal life. They would have security as they built their houses and planted vineyards, not needing to fear that an enemy like the Babylonians would come again to desolate their new land. (Isa. 65:20-22) This was a significant fulfillment for those returning Jews, knowing they could have faith that Isaiah‘s prophecy would come true. 56
Then, we have Peter speaking of what appears to be another fulfillment when he talks of another application of Isaiah 65:17 in the future, which he connects to Christ‘s reign. In addition, the apostle John in the book of Revelation, writing some 30-years after Peter, foresees ―a new heaven and a new earth‖ for humankind‘s benefit, security and blessing in God‘s new order under Christ‘s Kingdom rule. THE MAIN PROPHECIES CONCERNING THE MESSIAH―7 OUT OF 40 Prophecy
Old Testament
New Testament
Born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2
Luke 2:4-11; John 7:42
Called out of Egypt
Hosea 11:1
Matthew 2:14-15
Entered Jerusalem on an ass
Zechariah 9:9
Matthew 21:1-9; John 12:12-15
Betrayed for 30 pieces of silver
Zechariah 11:12
Matthew 26:15; 27:3-10
Strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be scattered.
Zechariah 13:7
Matthew 26:31, 56
Pierced his side with a spear
Zechariah 12:10
Matthew 27:49; John 19:34, 3
The Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Jonah 1:17; 2:10
Matthew 12:39, 40; 16:21; 1 Corinthians 15:3-8
As you can see from all of the above, there are times when it appears that there is a second fulfillment of an Old Testament prophecy, aside from the time of initial fulfillment. We must keep in mind that, even if this is the case, the second occurrence cannot be known until it has already been fulfilled. Dr. Robert Stein had this to say on the matter: The willed meaning of the prophet is accessible to the reader because of the context the author has provided. We know the prophet‘s vocabulary, style, and grammar, and this literary context enables us to understand what he willed to convey by his prophecy. But what about the 57
alleged fuller meaning of God? How can we know this? The literary context does not help, for we have no access to God‘s vocabulary, style, and grammar but only the prophet‘s!4 What we must ask ourselves is this, ‗if the first divinely inspired author was ignorant to a second fulfillment, what is in the text, so that we can ascertain such. What should be avoided at all cost is a measure of humility and showing caution in this matter. We certainly do not want to elevate a human above divine inspiration. It is true that almost all Christian denominations have shown a lack of humility at times, and have set a date for the return of Christ, when he himself said he did not know the day, or the hour. (Mark 13:32) Again, it is best, and most who have set these dates have learned this the difficult way, is do not go beyond what can be known. We are call imperfect, and these ones just allowed those imperfections, and a desire for the end of pain and suffering, to cloud their judgment. Further, it does seem a little futile to seek out second fulfillments, when one cannot possible know until after the fulfillment itself. There is no doubt that we can accept the extending meaning when an inspired Bible writer gives it to us, as in ―Immanuel‖ and Jesus being ―called out of Egypt.‖ While it may be a splitting prophetic hairs, by calling it an extended (implication, implied because the pattern fits the historical prophecy) fulfillment; it avoids the pitfall of those who would spell out details before the implications have ever taken place.
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002.
4
Robert H. Stein, A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1994), 96.
58
Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
59
CHAPTER 6 THE MEANING OF POETRY Poetry reminds us of the Western form of balanced lines, regular stress, and rhyme. If one were able to read Hebrew, they would see that the manuscripts do not Hebrew manuscripts do not differentiate poetry from prose in such a clear-cut way. Hebrew poetry has three main features: parallelism, rhythm, and the grouping of lines into larger units called stanzas. Hebrew poetic lines are short, many are no more than two or three words, making the total result one of forceful power. A little over thirty percent of the Old Testament is poetry. The only books to have no poetry are Nehemiah, Esther, Haggai, and Malachi. Some of the books keep it to a minimum of a few verses or a chapter or two. (Exod. 15:1–18, 21; Lev. 10:3; Deut. 32:1– 43; 33:2–29; Josh. 10:12–13; Ruth 1:16–17, 20–21; 2 Kings 19:21–28; 1 Chron. 16:8–36; Ezra 3:11; Jonah 2:2–9) On the other hand, some of the books are almost all poetry, such as Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Song, Isaiah, Lamentations, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah.
The Principal Forms of Parallelism. The most significant recognized component in Hebrew poetry is parallelism, or rhythm that is attained by logical thought, not by rhyme, as in English; it has been termed ―sense rhythm.‖ Ponder the two lines of Psalm 24:1 (ASV): The earth is Jehovah's, and the fullness thereof, The world, and they that dwell therein. This form is known as synonymous parallelism, which means that line two repeats part of line one, using different words, but expressing similar thoughts. The important aspect is in the phrase, ―the earth is Jehovah‘s.‖ Both the ―earth‖ and the ―world‖ are poetically synonymous, which is also true of ―the fullness thereof‖ and ―that dwell therein.‖ Let us look at one more at Psalm 49:3 (HCSB): My mouth speaks wisdom; my heart’s meditation [brings] understanding. On the opposite end is the form antithetic parallelism, which is exactly as the name would imply, respectively each line states opposing thoughts. Psalm 37:21 (HCSB) illustrates this: The wicked borrows and does not repay, but the righteous is gracious and giving. Then there is synthetic parallelism. In this form, there is no repeating a similar thought, or an opposite. Instead, it builds on the previous thoughts. Psalm 19:7-9 (ASV) is an instance of this: The law of Jehovah is perfect, 60
restoring the soul; the testimony of Jehovah is sure, making wise the simple; the precepts of Jehovah are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of Jehovah is pure, enlightening the eyes; the fear of Jehovah is clean, enduring forever; the [rules] of Jehovah are true, and righteous altogether. A synthesis is the result of a combination, creating a new unified thought, which is what you find in Psalm 19:7-9, with the second line completing the thought. In what way is ―the law of Jehovah perfect‖? In that, it ‗restores the soul.‘ How is ―the testimony of Jehovah sure‖? In that, it ‗makes the simple on wise.‘ On by the second line, does the reader know in what sense to apply the first line.
Various Other Forms of Parallelism Emblematic parallelism incorporates the use of simile or metaphor. Notice Psalm 103:12 (NASB): As far as the east is from the west, So far has He removed our transgressions from us. In stairlike parallelism two or more lines may be used to repeat and advance the thought of the first. Luke 4:18-19 is an example of this (ESV): "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor. The introverted parallelism is an idea that is connected around a middle idea often spanning several verses. Observe this example from Psalm 135:15-18: (15a) The (A)idols of the nations are but silver and gold, (14b) The work of man's hands. (16a) They have mouths, but they do not speak; (16b) They have eyes, but they do not see; (17a) They have ears, but they do not hear, (17b) Nor is there any breath at all in their mouths. (18a) Those who make them will be like them, (18b) Yes, everyone who trusts in them.
Poetry Contrasted With Prose 61
Those writing in poetic form are not expecting their words to be taken literally. In addition, the author using poetry is not concerned with being exact or scientifically accurate. His agenda is to stir up emotion from his readers. Below to your left is the prose account of Deborah and Barak in Judges Chapter 4, while to your right is the same account in Judges Chapter 4, in poetic format. Please, as you compare the two, take note of the liberties that the poetic side can take, which is to heighten our emotions, not be interpreted literally.
Judges 4 English Standard Version (ESV) And the people of Israel again did what was evil in the sight of the LORD after Ehud died. 2And the LORD sold them into the hand of Jabin king of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor. The commander of his army was Sisera, who lived in Harosheth-hagoyim. 3Then the people of Israel cried out to the LORD for help, for he had 900 chariots of iron and he oppressed the people of Israel cruelly for twenty years. 1
Now Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lappidoth, was judging Israel at that time. She used to sit under the palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the people of Israel came up to her for judgment. 6She sent and summoned Barak the son of Abinoam from Kedesh-naphtali and said to him, "Has not the LORD, the God of Israel, commanded you, 'Go, gather your men at Mount Tabor, taking 10,000 from the people of Naphtali and the people of Zebulun. 7And I will draw out Sisera, the general of Jabin‘s army, to meet you by the river Kishon with his chariots and his troops, and I will give him into your hand'?" 8Barak said to her, "If you will go with me, I will go, but if you will not go with me, I will not go." 9And she said, "I will surely go with you. Nevertheless, the road on which you are going will not lead to your glory, for the LORD will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman." Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh. 10And Barak called out Zebulun and Naphtali to Kedesh. And 10,000 men went up at his heels, and Deborah went up with him. 4
5
Now Heber the Kenite had separated from the Kenites, the descendants of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses, and had pitched his tent as far away as the oak in Zaanannim, which is near Kedesh. 11
When Sisera was told that Barak the son of Abinoam had gone up to Mount Tabor, 13Sisera called out all his chariots, 900 chariots of iron, and all the men who were with him, from Harosheth-hagoyim to the river Kishon. 14And Deborah said to Barak, "Up! For this is the day in which the LORD has given Sisera into your hand. Does not the LORD go out before you?" So Barak went down from Mount Tabor with 10,000 men following him. 15 And the LORD routed Sisera and all his chariots and all his army before Barak by the edge of the sword. And Sisera got down from his chariot and fled away on foot. 16And Barak pursued the chariots and the army to Harosheth-hagoyim, and all the army of Sisera fell by the edge of the sword; not a man was left. 12
But Sisera fled away on foot to the tent of Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, for there was peace between Jabin the king of Hazor and the house of Heber the Kenite. 18And Jael came out to meet Sisera and said to him, "Turn aside, my lord; turn aside to 17
62
me; do not be afraid." So he turned aside to her into the tent, and she covered him with a rug. 19And he said to her, "Please give me a little water to drink, for I am thirsty." So she opened a skin of milk and gave him a drink and covered him. 20And he said to her, "Stand at the opening of the tent, and if any man comes and asks you, 'Is anyone here?' say, 'No.'" 21But Jael the wife of Heber took a tent peg, and took a hammer in her hand. Then she went softly to him and drove the peg into his temple until it went down into the ground while he was lying fast asleep from weariness. So he died. 22And behold, as Barak was pursuing Sisera, Jael went out to meet him and said to him, "Come, and I will show you the man whom you are seeking." So he went in to her tent, and there lay Sisera dead, with the tent peg in his temple. So on that day God subdued Jabin the king of Canaan before the people of Israel. And the hand of the people of Israel pressed harder and harder against Jabin the king of Canaan, until they destroyed Jabin king of Canaan. 23
24
Judges 5 English Standard Version (ESV) Then sang Deborah and Barak the son of Abinoam on that day: 2"That the leaders took the lead in Israel, that the people offered themselves willingly, bless the LORD!
1
"Hear, O kings; give ear, O princes; to the LORD I will sing; I will make melody to the LORD, the God of Israel.
3
"LORD, when you went out from Seir, when you marched from the region of Edom, the earth trembled and the heavens dropped, yes, the clouds dropped water. 5The mountains quaked before the LORD, even Sinai before the LORD, the God of Israel. 4
"In the days of Shamgar, son of Anath, in the days of Jael, the highways were abandoned, and travelers kept to the byways. 7The villagers ceased in Israel; they ceased to be until I arose; I, Deborah, arose as a mother in Israel. 8When new gods were chosen, then war was in the gates. Was shield or spear to be seen among forty thousand in Israel? 9My heart goes out to the commanders of Israel who offered themselves willingly among the people. Bless the LORD. 6
63
"Tell of it, you who ride on white donkeys, you who sit on rich carpets and you who walk by the way. 11To the sound of musicians at the watering places, there they repeat the righteous triumphs of the LORD, the righteous triumphs of his villagers in Israel. 10
"Then down to the gates marched the people of the LORD. "Awake, awake, Deborah! Awake, awake, break out in a song! Arise, Barak, lead away your captives, O son of Abinoam. 13 Then down marched the remnant of the noble; the people of the LORD marched down for me against the mighty. 14From Ephraim their root they marched down into the valley, following you, Benjamin, with your kinsmen; from Machir marched down the commanders, and from Zebulun those who bear the lieutenant‘s staff; 15the princes of Issachar came with Deborah, and Issachar faithful to Barak; into the valley they rushed at his heels. Among the clans of Reuben there were great searchings of heart. 16Why did you sit still among the sheepfolds, to hear the whistling for the flocks? Among the clans of Reuben there were great searchings of heart. 17 Gilead stayed beyond the Jordan; and Dan, why did he stay with the ships? Asher sat still at the coast of the sea, staying by his landings. 18 Zebulun is a people who risked their lives to the death; Naphtali, too, on the heights of the field. 12
"The kings came, they fought; then fought the kings of Canaan, at Taanach, by the waters of Megiddo; they got no spoils of silver. 20From heaven the stars fought, from their courses they fought against Sisera. 21The torrent Kishon swept them away, the ancient torrent, the torrent Kishon. March on, my soul, with might! 19
64
"Then loud beat the horses‘ hoofs with the galloping, galloping of his steeds.
22
"Curse Meroz, says the angel of the LORD, curse its inhabitants thoroughly, because they did not come to the help of the LORD, to the help of the LORD against the mighty.
23
"Most blessed of women be Jael, the wife of Heber the Kenite, of tent-dwelling women most blessed. 25 He asked water and she gave him milk; she brought him curds in a noble‘s bowl. 26 She sent her hand to the tent peg and her right hand to the workmen‘s mallet; she struck Sisera; she crushed his head; she shattered and pierced his temple. 27Between her feet he sank, he fell, he lay still; between her feet he sank, he fell; where he sank, there he fell—dead. 24
"Out of the window she peered, the mother of Sisera wailed through the lattice: 'Why is his chariot so long in coming? Why tarry the hoofbeats of his chariots?' 29Her wisest princesses answer, indeed, she answers herself, 30 'Have they not found and divided the spoil?— A womb or two for every man; spoil of dyed materials for Sisera, spoil of dyed materials embroidered, two pieces of dyed work embroidered for the neck as spoil?' 28
31
"So may all your enemies perish, O LORD! But your friends be like the sun as he rises in his might."
The intent of every Bible reader is the correct understanding of what he or she is reading. One aspect of this is respecting the differences between poetry and prose. Poetry is a format that is not meant to be taken literal, as it is painting a word picture for the reader. Of course, whatever is meant by the poetic words is meant to be taken literally. 65
Psalm 103:12 (NASB): As far as the east is from the west, So far has He removed our transgressions from us. Are we to take the above words literally? When god for gives us of a sin does he literally remove them as far as East is from the West. This is a visual aid for the human mind, to appreciate that ‗they are so far away that they are out of sight, unable to be seen, called to mind no more.‘ Now, the literal aspect is just that, ‗when God forgives us of a transgression, He does not call it to mind no more, in relation to future transgressions.‘ In closing, remember that there are different forms of poetry, and you must be able to discern the differences. Also, to interpret poetry as you do prose, will lead to a misunderstanding every time. Finally, even in the genre of poetry, the meaning is what the author meant by the words he used.
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
66
CHAPTER 7 THE MEANING OF IDIOMS Idioms are a fixed expression with nonliteral meaning: a fixed distinctive expression whose meaning cannot be deduced from the combined meanings of its actual words. A drop in the bucket is a very small part of something big or whole. All in the same boat is when everyone is facing the same challenges. An axe to grind is to have a dispute with someone. Field day is an enjoyable day or circumstance. Method to my madness is strange or crazy actions that appear meaningless but in the end are done for a good reason. Idioms are by far the most difficult for of literature to interpret and translate. ―Between the Devil and the deep blue sea‖ is equivalent to our ―between a rock and a hard place.‖ Both mean that someone is in a serious dilemma of two very undesirable choices. Have you ever had to tell someone, ‗look you are beating a dead horse,‘ meaning the continuation of the discussion is futile. On the other hand, how about, ‗listen, you are preaching to the choir,‘ which means you are trying to convince your listener of something that he probably holds more strongly to than you do. Let us see one option that some dynamic equivalents have tried to use in dealing with an idiom at: 1: Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea was written by Ted Koehler and Harold Arlen, and recorded by Cab Calloway in 1931. Idioms can present unique problems to translators because there is the difficult decision of whether it should be rendered literally or be interpreted for the reader. An example would be the English expression ―bite your tongue‖. This expression in any other language would be taken literally to mean the act of biting one‘s tongue, thus resulting in the infliction of pain to the tongue. Yet most of the American Englishspeaking community understands that the phrase actually means to ‗refrain from speaking.‘ Below is a Biblical example of a Hebrew idiom in a literal translation wherein the idiom was rendered literally, and a dynamic equivalent translation that presents the same verses using more interpretation for the reader. Psalm 10:15 (English Standard Version) Break the arm of the wicked and evildoer; call his wickedness to account till you find none. 15
Psalm 10:15 (New Century Version) 15
Break the power of wicked people. Punish them for the evil they have done.
Deuteronomy 5:6 (American Standard Version) I am Jehovah thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. [(land of) slavery] 6
67
Judges 3:28 (American Standard Version) And he said unto them, Follow after me; for Jehovah hath delivered your enemies the Moabites into your hand. And they went down after him, and took the fords of the Jordan against the Moabites, and suffered not a man to pass over. [defeat them for you] 28
1 Samuel 10:9 (American Standard Version) And it was so, that, when he had turned his back to go from Samuel, God gave him another heart: and all those signs came to pass that day. [changed his attitude, feel like a different person, transformed him] 9
2 Kings 4:29 (American Standard Version) Then he said to Gehazi, Gird up thy loins, and take my staff in thy hand, and go thy way: if thou meet any man, salute him not; and if any salute thee, answer him not again: and lay my staff upon the face of the child. [get ready, preparation for vigorous activity] 29
What must be understood is that all societies, past and present, have figures of speech that are commonly used to express meaning, just as did those in Bible times. Moreover, figures of speech convey a meaning that is no different from if it was used literally. This is not to say that we take the figurative speech literally, but when someone says that this is a figure of speech, he does not mean that its meaning is ambiguous (can contain more than one meaning), it is specific and has one intended meaning just as other forms of speech do.5 Take for example; ‗off the top of your head,‘ ‗by the skin of his teeth,‘ and ‗the handwriting on the wall‘ all are English examples of idioms.
How Should the Idiom be Translated? Figures of speech as well as the subcategory idiom6 add something to a language that could really be said no other way to get that color and depth. The idiom of ―a land flowing with milk and honey‖ is so descriptive that even the most zealous dynamic equivalent translations dare not alter it:
5
Figure of speech is different from literal in that it contains a nonliteral sense of a word or words (e.g., a cup of mud does not mean a cup of we dirt, but a cup of coffee), but it is similar in that the figurative meaning (a cup of coffee) is to be taken literally, and there is only one intended meaning. 6 Figures of speech: nonliteral expression or use of language: an expression or use of language in a nonliteral sense in order to achieve a particular effect. Metaphors, similes, idioms and hyperbole are all common figures of speech. Idiom: fixed expression with nonliteral meaning: a fixed distinctive expression whose meaning cannot be deduced from the combined meanings of its actual words.
68
Deuteronomy 6:3 (New American Standard Bible) "O Israel, you should listen and be careful to do it, that it may be well with you and that you may multiply greatly, just as the LORD, the God of your fathers, has promised you, in a land flowing with milk and honey. [a fertile land, a land of plenty] 3
Jeremiah 31:29 (New American Standard Bible) "In those days they will not say again, 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, And the children's teeth are set on edge.' [Lit., ―got blunted (dulled)].‖7 29
Jeremiah 31:29 (The Message) "When that time comes you won't hear the old proverb Parents ate the green apples, their children got the stomachache.
29
anymore,
Jeremiah 31:29 (New Living Translation) ―The people will no longer quote this proverb: ‗The parents have eaten sour grapes, but their children‘s mouths pucker at the taste.‘ 29
Jeremiah 31:29 (Contemporary English Version) No longer will anyone go around saying, "Sour grapes eaten by parents leave a sour taste in the mouths of their children." 29
The above NASB leaves the Hebrew idiom ―teeth are set on edge‖; this means an irritating or upsetting experience. In the days just before the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon, this was a common saying, in which the sons were saying the father‘s wickedness put them in this predicament, ‗setting their teeth on edge.‘ In this, they were trying to shift the blame to the fathers.8 The dynamic equivalent translations attempted to modernize the idiom in the receptor language translation, English in this case, and substitute it in place of the Hebrew idiom. This process is one option, but one can see that even with the use of more modern terms, the meaning is still the same, though perhaps easier for some readers to understand. With this in mind, one can see how this option can be helpful, yet still leave opening the possibility of distorting the meaning of the idiom. Another option is to simply interpret the idiom and place that interpretation in place of the idiom as depicted in the following example: Isaiah 13:18 (RSV) (literal) ―. . . they will have no mercy on the fruit of the womb‖ (RSV)
7
William D. Mounce, Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), 1031. 8
Timothy M. Willis, Jeremiah/Lamentations, College Press NIV commentary. (Joplin, Mo.: College Press Pub. Co., 2002), 253-55.
69
Isaiah 13:18 (NEB) (interpreted) ―. . . [they] have no pity on little children.‖ Either of these two options should be used as a last resort, and only if a misunderstanding is the end result. The Bible is meant to be studied by the student. It is best to stay with what was written as the translator may alter the meaning of God‘s Word by choosing to replace ancient idioms with modern-day language. One must realize that languages aside from the original can distort the idiom intact. For example Luke 2:51 reads, ―. . . his mother kept all these things in her heart.‖ In Nigeria‘s Kilba language, this would be understood as ―to bear a grudge about something.‖ Thus, for them, it has been rendered: ―his mother went on thinking about these things.‖9 As to Bible translation, every effort should be made to maintain the literal wording of idioms, unless it will adversely affect the understanding of the message for the modern-day reader. If so, it can either be rendered by the interpretation (adding any alternative possibilities in a footnote), or it can be rendered by the use of a modern-day idiom that carries a similar meaning such as in the example of equivalents used earlier, ―between the Devil and the deep blue sea‖ and ―between a rock and a hard place.‖
Biblical Idioms and Body Parts Today, we use the body in a figurative way to convey a message that if heard outside of those who know what these strange phrases mean, would be quite confused. Such as, we might say, ―He risked his neck for him.‖ ―He is my own bone and flesh.‖ ―She was only tickling their ears.‖ These idioms add a vivid word picture to speech, often bringing it to life as it were. This plants the message more clearly and permanently in the listener‘s mind. Therefore, it seems quite appropriate the Jehovah God the creator of human communication should fill his Word to us, with such an array of idioms. For instance, the apostle Paul asked that the Roman congregation give greetings to his fellow Christians Prisca and Aquila, ―who risked their necks [their lives] for my life.‖ (Rom. 16:4) Laban said of Jacob, ―Surely you are my bone and my flesh,‖ which meant that they were related, Laban being Jacob‘s uncle. (Gen. 29:14; 2 Sam. 5:1) In addition, Paul wrote of persons who were ―wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires.‖ Which meant that these ones only wanted teachers that would say what they wanted to hear.—2 Tim. 4:3.
Destruction and Protection The human neck is a weak part of the human body that leaves a us vulnerable. Therefore, in Scripture, it is often associated with the destruction of life by the defeat of an enemy. When Jacob was on his deathbed, he offer this expression in a blessing to his 9
Katharine Barnwell, Bible Translation: An Introductory Course in Translation Principles. (Dallas, TX.: SIL International. 1986), 19.
70
son Judah, ―your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies,‖ which meant, God will give your enemies into your hand. (Gen. 49:8) Likewise, King David praised God in Song, saying, ―You gave me my enemies‘ necks‖ or God was the One who ―will certainly give me the back of [my enemies‘] neck.‖ [made my enemies run] As you can see, the expression likely comes from the enemy running away; thus, all they are seeing is the back of the enemy‘s neck as he is running away. (2 Sam. 22:41; Ps. 18:40, ESV ftn.) Again, this illustrates the danger of translation idioms, as the New Living Translation reads, ―you placed my foot on their necks.‖ This would tend to paint more of a picture of a battle, with defeat as the result. Then, Jehovah God warned of the coming Assyrians against Judah in these ominous terms, ―It will reach even to the neck.‖ This simply meant that the Assyrian army was coming so strongly, with so many troops that they would be should deep in them.—Isa. 8:8; 30:28. Another expression is that of placing one‘s foot on the neck of your enemy. Both the Egyptian and Assyrian monuments have depictions, where monarchs are pictured in battle with their foot on the enemy‘s neck. We find this with Moses replacement, Joshua, the leader and commander of the Israelites. Joshua 10:24 (New American Standard Bible) When they brought these kings out to Joshua, Joshua called for all the men of Israel, and said to the chiefs of the men of war who had gone with him, "Come near, put your feet on the necks of these kings." So they came near and put their feet on their necks. 24
In addition the removal of one‘s hair and beard represented imminent destruction. The Ancient Near East viewed the possession of such as a prize. The Israelites viewed the beard as manly dignity. (1 Chron. 19:5) It was only during extreme sorrow, shame, or humiliation that a beard would be mutilated or removed. (Ezra 9:3; Isa. 15:2; Jer. 41:5; 48:37) Therefore, we can better understand King David‘s strategy of . . . 1 Samuel 21:13 (New American Standard Bible) So he disguised his sanity before them, and acted insanely in their hands, and scribbled on the doors of the gate, and let his saliva run down into his beard. 13
Now that we have this Bible background, we can better understand the conquest of Assyria: Isaiah 7:20 (English Standard Version) In that day the Lord will shave with a razor that is hired beyond the River—with the king of Assyria—the head and the hair of the feet, and it will sweep away the beard also. 20
Assyria was going to invade and conquer Judah like they had Samaria and the rest of the region, but for the fact that . . . Isaiah 37:33-38 (English Standard Version)
71
"Therefore thus says the LORD concerning the king of Assyria: He shall not come into this city or shoot an arrow there or come before it with a shield or cast up a siege mound against it. 34By the way that he came, by the same he shall return, and he shall not come into this city, declares the LORD. 35For I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake and for the sake of my servant David." 33
And the angel of the LORD went out and struck down a hundred and eighty-five thousand in the camp of the Assyrians. And when people arose early in the morning, behold, these were all dead bodies. 37Then Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and returned home and lived at Nineveh. 38And as he was worshiping in the house of Nisroch his god, Adrammelech and Sharezer, his sons, struck him down with the sword. And after they escaped into the land of Ararat, Esarhaddon his son reigned in his place. 36
The destruction of Jerusalem had finally come at the hands of the Babylonians, more than a century later, it being illustrated this way . . . Ezekiel 5:1-2 (English Standard Version) "And you, O son of man, take a sharp sword. Use it as a barber‘s razor and pass it over your head and your beard. Then take balances for weighing and divide the hair. 2A third part you shall burn in the fire in the midst of the city, when the days of the siege are completed. And a third part you shall take and strike with the sword all around the city. And a third part you shall scatter to the wind, and I will unsheathe the sword after them. 1
The burning in the fire, striking with the sword and scattering to the wind of the three portions of hair signified that a third of the people would die of pestilence and be consumed with famine, a third were to die by the sword and the final third would be scattered to all the winds. Ezekiel 5:12 (English Standard Version) A third part of you shall die of pestilence and be consumed with famine in your midst; a third part shall fall by the sword all around you; and a third part I will scatter to all the winds and will unsheathe the sword after them. 12
At the opposite end, one who was able to keep his hair meant that he would not die, and signifies complete safety or guaranteed protection. The Israelite military loved Jonathan, his life was in danger, and they proclaimed, 1 Samuel 14:45 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) But the people said to Saul, "Must Jonathan die, who accomplished such a great deliverance for Israel? No, as the LORD lives, not a hair of his head will fall to the ground, for he worked with God's help today." So the people rescued Jonathan, and he did not die. 45
Jesus said to his disciples, Luke 21:18 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) 72
but not a hair of your head will be lost.
18
King Solomon said, 1 Kings 1:52 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) Then Solomon said, "If he is a man of character, then not a single hair of his will fall to the ground, but if evil is found in him, then he dies." 52
Idioms Involving the Hips and Loins 1 Kings 18:46 (New American Standard Bible) Then the hand of the LORD was on Elijah, and he girded up his loins and outran Ahab to Jezreel. 46
The people of Bible times wore a loose and flowing style of clothing. If one were to engage in some form of physical activity, it was common to gather up the skirt, pulling them forward between the legs and tucking them in the belt that was around their hips. We find this in the case of Elijah, as he prepared for a long and arduous run. Therefore, the idiom to ―gird up your loins‖ signified preparation for vigorous activity. The Israelites preparing to exodus Egypt after eating the Passover lamb, Exodus 12:11 (New American Standard Bible) 'Now you shall eat it in this manner: with your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it in haste--it is (A)the LORD'S Passover. 11
Elisha sends his servant Gehazi on an important mission, saying, 2 Kings 4:29 (New American Standard Bible) Then he said to Gehazi, "Gird up your loins and take my staff in your hand, and go your way; if you meet any man, do not salute him, and if anyone salutes you, do not answer him; and lay my staff on the lad's face." 29
Elisha sending a prophet to anoint Jehu, 2 Kings 9:1 (New American Standard Bible) Now Elisha the prophet called one of the sons of the prophets and said to him, "Gird up your loins, and take this flask of oil in your hand and go to Ramoth-gilead. 1
Jeremiah be commission by Jehovah God Himself, to prepare for vigorous activity in in serving as a prophet. Therefore, what was an actual activity of girding one‘s loins to prepare for some physical activity like running, or working in the field, was not a idiomatic expression about and vigorous undertaking. Jeremiah 1:17 (New American Standard Bible) "Now, gird up your loins and arise, and speak to them all which I command you Do not be dismayed before them, or I will dismay you before them. 17
73
While the human neck may be weak and vulnerable, the muscles in the hips and loins are quite strong. That is why Proverbs 31:17 says of the capable wife, ―She girded her loins with strength.‖ (ASV) Thus, we see the Prophet Nahum use the hips in an idiomatic sense as he warns those who were about to get invaded, ―He that dashes in pieces is come up against you: keep the fortress, watch the way, make thy loins strong, fortify thy power mightily.‖ (Nah. 2:1, ASV) This is a figurative expression of strength and power. Jehovah God would use Cyrus the Great, the Persian conqueror, to destroy kings and their kingdoms, which He expresses this way, ―to Cyrus, whose right hand I have [taken hold of], to subdue nations before him, and I will lose the loins of kings; to open the doors before him, and the gates shall not be shut.‖ The idiomatic expression means that Jehovah will remove the strength and power of these kings, giving Cyrus the victory. Ones in such a condition are referred to as having wobbling or shaking hips.—Ps. 69:23; Ezek. 21:6; 29:7. This expression means that God would take away the strength or power of these kings, so that Cyrus would be victorious. Those who have had their power removed and are in a weakened condition are therefore said to have breaking, quaking or shaking hips. Psalm 69:23 (American Standard Version) Let their eyes be darkened, so that they cannot see; And make their loins continually to shake. 23
Ezekiel 21:6 (American Standard Version) Sigh therefore, thou son of man; with the breaking of thy loins and with bitterness shalt thou sigh before their eyes. 6
Ezekiel 29:7 (New American Standard Bible) "When they took hold of you with the hand, You broke and tore all their hands; And when they leaned on you, You broke and made all their loins quake." 7
In a sense, you can see how an idiom can grow into other areas, taking its meaning with it. As the apostle Peter literally said, wherefore girding up the loins of your mind, be sober and set your hope perfectly on the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.‖ (1 Pet 1:13, ASV) In this idiomatic expression of ―girding up the loins of your mind,‖ he meant for them to ―prepare their minds for action.‖
Idioms Involving One‘s Bosom or Breasts The human body has always been used to express certain qualities and emotions. It has been the custom, all throughout human history, to hold a cherished loved one to one‘s bosom or breast. (Ruth 4:16; Song of Sol. 1:13) That position came to signify favor and intimacy. John 1:18 (New American Standard Bible) 74
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. 18
Luke 16:22-23 (New American Standard Bible) "Now the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham's bosom; and the rich man also died and was buried. 23"In Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his bosom. 22
Isaiah 40:11 (English Standard Version) He will tend his flock like a shepherd; he will gather the lambs in his arms; he will carry them in his bosom, and gently lead those that are with young. 11
Deuteronomy 13:6 (American Standard Version) If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, that is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 6
Deuteronomy 13:6 (English Standard Version) "If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or the wife you embrace or your friend who is as your own soul entices you secretly, saying, 'Let us go and serve other gods,' which neither you nor your fathers have known, 6
Deuteronomy 13:6 (New Living Translation) ―Suppose someone secretly entices you—even your brother, your son or daughter, your beloved wife, or your closest friend—and says, ‗Let us go worship other gods‘— gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known. 6
Deuteronomy 28:54 (American Standard Version) The man that is tender among you, and very delicate, his eye shall be evil toward his brother, and toward the wife of his bosom, and toward the remnant of his children whom he hath remaining; 54
Deuteronomy 28:54 (English Standard Version) The man who is the most tender and refined among you will begrudge food to his brother, to the wife he embraces, and to the last of the children whom he has left, 54
Deuteronomy 28:54 (New Living Translation) The most tenderhearted man among you will have no compassion for his own brother, his beloved wife, and his surviving children. 54
Deuteronomy 28:56 (American Standard Version) The tender and delicate woman among you, who would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter, 56
Deuteronomy 28:56 (English Standard Version) 75
The most tender and refined woman among you, who would not venture to set the sole of her foot on the ground because she is so delicate and tender, will begrudge to the husband she embraces, to her son and to her daughter, 56
Deuteronomy 28:56 (New Living Translation) The most tender and delicate woman among you—so delicate she would not so much as touch the ground with her foot—will be selfish toward the husband she loves and toward her own son or daughter. 56
The intestines or bowels are linked with deep feeling and emotions in both Biblical Hebrew and Greek. This is likely the case because that emotional distress caused abdominal distress. The bad reports regarding the coming disaster upon Israel caused Jeremiah to exclaim ―My anguish [―intestines‖], my anguish [―intestines‖]! I am pained at my very heart.‖ (Jer. 4:19, ASV) When the time of Jerusalem‘s destruction came, the abundant sorrow that Jeremiah felt caused excruciating uproar within, causing him to lament, ―My very intestines are in a ferment.‖—Lam. 1:20; 2:11.
Compassion and Pity Jeremiah 31:20 (American Standard Version) Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a darling child? for as often as I speak against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my heart yearned for him [literally, that is why my intestines have become boisterous for him]; I will surely have mercy upon him, said Jehovah. 20
Isaiah 63:15 (American Standard Version) Look down from heaven, and behold from the habitation of thy holiness and of thy glory: where are thy zeal and thy mighty acts? The yearning of thy heart [Literally, the agitation of your intestines] and thy compassions are restrained toward me. 15
1 Kings 3:26 (American Standard Version) Then spoke the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her heart yearned over her son [for her inward emotions were excited toward her son], and she said, Oh, my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, It shall be neither mine nor thine; divide it. 26
Philippians 2:1 (American Standard Version) If there is therefore any exhortation in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercies [if any bowels] and compassions, 1
1 John 3:17 (English Standard Version) But if anyone has the world‘s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him[ he might shut up the bowels of him], how does God‘s love abide in him? 17
Colossians 3:12 (English Standard Version) 76
Put on then, as God‘s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassionate hearts [bowels of compassion], kindness, humility, meekness, and patience, 12
The entire Bible from beginning to end uses the body and its parts in an idiomatic figurative sense. There is little doubt that such phrases are colorful and vivid, such as ―bowels of compassion.‖ In many cases it is possible to leave the literal rendering, while others would only cause major confusion. Regardless, most literal translations either give the sense of the meaning either in the main text, or in a footnote.
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
77
CHAPTER 8 THE MEANING of HYPERBOLE Jesus is by far the most effective teacher of all time, and hyperbole is one method that he used quite often. Hyperbole is deliberate and obvious exaggeration used for effect, e.g. "I could eat a million of these." The objective is to add emphasis and importance to what is being said. Moreover, like other special literary forms, hyperbole imprints a mental picture in your mind, one that is hard to forget.
A Belter Understanding of Hyperbole There are actually two different types of exaggerations: (1) the first being an overstatement, but possible, and (2) hyperbole, which is a statement that is impossible. Our concern is having the ability to recognize either of these when we see them. Let us take a look at a few examples. Matthew 7:1-3 (English Standard Version) "Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3Why do you see the speck that is in your brother‘s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 1
Try and picture what is being emphasized. You have a person who is continuously, and aggressively judging others, who goes up to a brother that is seldom critical, to offer advice on not being critical. The brother has a mere straw of criticalness to himself is being advised by a brother that has a logs worth of criticalness to him. Is this not a beautiful way to illustrate how a brother, who has immense problems in an area, should be slow to offer advice to another brother, who seldom offends in this area? Below Jesus is rebuking some Pharisees, Jewish religious leaders. Matthew 23:24 (English Standard Version) You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!
24
This was a foremost way to use hyperbole. Take note of the fact that he is contrasting a small gnat with a huge camel, which the largest animal known to his audience. One religious magazine stated, ―it is estimated that it would take up to 70 million gnats to equal the weight of an average camel!‖ Jesus was also very much aware that the Pharisees strained their wine through a cloth sieve to avoid ceremonial uncleanness by accidently drinking a gnat. However, they were quite eager to gulp down the figurative camel, it also being unclean. (Leviticus 11:4, 21-24) How? The Pharisees were very quick to follow the minor points of the Mosaic Law, but set aside the weightier laws, like ―justice and mercy and faithfulness.‖ (Matthew 23:23) This one point made using hyperbole made the point all too clear, and exposed them for the hypocrites they were. Matthew 17:20 (English Standard Version) 78
He said to them, "Because of your little faith. For truly, I say to you, if you have faith like a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move, and nothing will be impossible for you." 20
Jesus could have simply said plainly that they need more faith, but that would have not made the impact this figurative comment did. He only stressed the need for a little faith in a very effective manner, making the point that a small amount of faith can move mountain like objects. Matthew 19:24 (English Standard Version) Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God." 24
Try if you will to picture a camel fitting through the eye of a sewing needle. It is impossible, not difficult, but impossible! Of course, this does not mean that rich people are excluded from the kingdom of God. The context is about people, who love money more than kingdom interests. It is the love of many that makes them ineligible. Jesus‘ colorful, vivid idioms have an effect so powerful that literally hundreds of millions of people have used them over the last 2,000 years. Psalm 22:14 (English Standard Version) I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is like wax; it is melted within my breast; 14
There are Scriptural basis for the conviction that Jesus died of a broken heart. Psalm 22 is prophetic of Christ Jesus at the time of his death. A broken heart could certainly be seen in the words of verse 14. The strength of his bot had been destroyed, becoming like water pour out on the ground. He had lost his strength, causing his heart to melt away within him like wax. You get the picture, as it is painted for us in this exaggerated language. The words here are impossible if viewed in a literal sense. Lamentations 2:11 (American Standard Version) Mine eyes do fail with tears, my heart is troubled; My liver is poured upon the earth, because of the destruction of the daughter of my people, Because the young children and the sucklings swoon in the streets of the city. 11
Jeremiah revealed his own private internal distress at the incomparable suffering experienced by Jerusalem, specifically over infants and babies dying from hunger in the streets or in their mother‘s arms. Words of grief, such as ―I am in torment‖ (lit. ―my bowels are burning‖; cf. Lam 1:20) and ―my heart [lit. ―liver‖] is poured out on the ground‖ Here again, this is hyperbole, as the literal words are an impossibility. 1 Kings 1:40 (English Standard Version) And all the people went up after him, playing on pipes, and rejoicing with great joy, so that the earth was split by their noise. 40
79
As can be seen from the above, hyperbole is quite readily recognizable. To read them is to instantly tell yourself this is impossible, and meant to make a special point. This is not to say that throughout church history, there have not been those, who have taken Jesus‘ words literally, ―if your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away.‖ (Matt 5:29) There are some identifying markers that will help you the reader, to identify these exaggerate and hyperbolic statements.
Rules for Recognizing Hyperbole10 (1) The first being is it literally impossible. The laws of physics just does not permit it. (Gen 22:17) (2) The statement that is made is at odd with something said elsewhere. (Luke 14:26; Mark 7:9–13; 10:19) (3) The statement that is made is at odds with the actions of the person elsewhere. (Matt 10:34; Mark 14:43–50) (4) The statement that is made is at odds with the teachings of the Old Testament. (Luke 14:26; Exod. 20:12; Lev. 19:18; Deut. 6:5) (5) The statement that is made is at odds with the teachings of the New Testament. (Matt. 5:42; 2 Thess. 3:10); (Matt. 7:1; 1 Cor. 5:3; 6:1-6) (6) The statement is an exaggeration, and not meant to be taken literally, as to fulfillment. It was fulfilled, but not literally if we are not seeing hyperbole in our interpretation. Below Jesus is talking of the destruction of Jerusalem that is to come decades later in 70C.E. If we view his words literally, there is no fulfillment, because many of those huge stones are still there today. But if we view it as hyperbole, there is fulfillment. He was merely talking of a horrendous destruction, which was really the case. Mark 13:1-2 (English Standard Version) And as he came out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!" 2And Jesus said to him, "Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down." 1
(7) The statement, if taken literally would not achieve the goals of the writer. If you were to tear out an eye, this not an end all be all to lusting, he can lust with the other eye. If you tear out the other eye, he can lust in his mind. (Matt. 5:29–30) (8) The statement uses a special literary form that commonly uses exaggeration, like poetry, proverbs, prophecy, and idioms. (Proverbs 3:9–10; Isaiah 13:9–11; Matthew 5:39–41; Joshua 2:11) (9) The statement uses all or nothing terms, ―all,‖ ―everyone,‖ ―no one.‖ 10
Dr. Steins chapter on Hyperbole in his book A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible was very helpful.
80
Mark 9:23 (English Standard Version) And Jesus said to him, "'If you can'! All things are possible for one who believes."
23
Jeremiah 6:13 (English Standard Version) "For from the least to the greatest of them, everyone is greedy for unjust gain; and from prophet to priest, everyone deals falsely. 13
Luke 6:30 (English Standard Version) Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back. 30
81
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
82
CHAPTER 9 THE MEANING OF PARABLES The parable is a comparison or similitude, a short simple, usually fictitious, story from which a moral or spiritual truth is drawn. The parable as a teaching tool is effective in at least five ways: (1) They capture and grip your attention. (2) They stimulate the thinking ability. (3) They stimulate feelings and reach the sense of right and wrong of the heart. (4) They assist in our ability to recall. (5) They are always applicable to human life, in every generation. The primary reason the Bible writers use parable is to teach. However, they assist in other ways as well. (1) understand a parable, which will force the student not willing to buy out the time, to abandon the pursuit of an answer. Their interest is mere surface and not a matter of the heart. (Mt 13:13-15) (2) Parables have the capacity of giving the hearer a warning and a reprimand, yet there is not room to retaliate against the speaker, because the hearer is left to discern the application himself. ―And when they saw it, the Pharisees began to say to his disciples, ―Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?‖ And when he heard it, he said, ―Those who are healthy do not have need of a physician, but those [who are sick]. But go and learn what it means, ―I want mercy and not sacrifice.‖ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.‖— Mt 9:11-13.11 (3) The parable can be useful in giving correction to another, helping to sidestep prejudice. This was the case when the prophet Nathan had to counsel King David on his adulterous affair with Bathsheba and the murder of her husband Uriah. (2Sa 12:1-14) (4) Parables have the ability to expose a person as to whether he or she are truly servants of God. Jesus said, ―Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.‖ (John 6:54, ESV) By this, Jesus was able to remove those who were not there because of their love for him. (John 6:60-66) The parables of the Bible contain more than one facet. At times they may have a prophetic meaning. This may be applicable to the generation listening, and others to the distant future, like the time of the end.
Barriers to Understanding Parables Theses misconceptions can affect your ability in arriving at a correct understanding. The first is the error of viewing them as good stories that treach a moral lesson. For instance, many scholars simply view the parable of the Prodigal Son as a piece of fine
11
W. Hall Harris, III, The Lexham English Bible (Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2010), Mt 9:10–13.
83
literature. In addition, some scholars view the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus as an illustration of reward and punishment after death. Further, even though the parables have been drawn from real life and the natural things around us, they are not real-life events. The misconception can come from the start of the parable itself: ―Once upon a time,‖ ―A man had,‖ ―There was a man,‖ ―A certain man was.‖ (Jg 9:8; Mt 21:28, 33; Lu 16:1, 19) Matthew and mark had this to say about Jesus and parables, ―All these things Jesus said to the crowds in parables; indeed, he said nothing to them without a parable.‖—Matt 13:34; Mark 4:33, 34. The second barrier to understand the parables is drawing fine an application, attempting to make every detail of the parable fit symbolically or worse still allegorically by arbitrary application or interpretation. An allegory is a work in which the characters and events are to be understood as representing other things and symbolically expressing a deeper, often spiritual, moral, or political meaning. As an example. Let us look at Augustine (354 – 430 C.E.), a Church father in early Christianity, who used allegory to interpret the parable of the Good Samaritan.
Allegory of Good Samaritan The man going down to Jericho = Adam Jerusalem from which he was going = City of Heavenly Peace Jericho = The moon, which signifies our morality (there is a play here on the terms ―moon‖ and ―Jericho‖ in Hebrew) Robbers = Devil and his angels Stripping him = Taking away his immortality Beating him = Persuading him to sin Leaving him half-dead = Due to sin, he was dead spiritually, but half-alive, due to his knowledge of God Priest = Priesthood of the Old Testament, i.e., the Law Levite = Ministry of the Old Testament, i.e., the Prophets Good Samaritan = Christ Binding of the wounds = Restraint placed upon sin Oil = Comfort of good hope Wine = Exhortation to spirited work Beast = Body of Christ Inn = Church Two denarii = Two commandments of love Innkeeper = The Apostle Paul 84
Return of the Good Samaritan = Resurrection of Christ
Step One in Understanding Parables Read the context of the parable. You need to find out the setting of the parable, looking for the conditions and the circumstances. Why was the parable told? What prompted its being told? Below, we see the people of Israel being addressed as ―rulers of Sodom!‖ and ―people of Gomorrah!‖ What does that bring to mind? It reminds of us of the people of Canaan that were gross sinners again Jehovah God. Gen 13:13; 19:13, 24. Isaiah 1:10 (English Standard Version) Hear the word of the LORD, you rulers of Sodom! Give ear to the teaching of our God, you people of Gomorrah! 10
Below you have the Psalmist praying to Jehovah to do to His enemies and His people ―as you did to Midian.‖ What does that bring to mind? It reminds us of their being routed by God, and over 120,000 being slain. Judges 8:10-12. Psalm 83:2-3; Psalm 83:9-11 (English Standard Version) For behold, your enemies make an uproar; those who hate you have raised their heads. 3They lay crafty plans against your people; they consult together against your treasured ones. 9Do to them as you did to Midian, as to Sisera and Jabin at the river Kishon, 10who were destroyed at En-dor, who became dung for the ground. 11Make their nobles like Oreb and Zeeb, all their princes like Zebah and Zalmunna, 2
The two debtors (Lu 7:41-43). The reason as to the why of the parable of the two debtors, one of whom owed ten times as much as the other, and the parable‘s implications for us are found in what prompted its telling, Luke 7:36-40, 44-50. The why of the parable came about because of the attitude of the one entertaining the guests, Simon, toward the woman who came in and anointed Jesus‘ feet with oil.
Step Two in Understanding Parables You will need to be familiar with Bible backgrounds, such as the law, the customs of the specific setting, as well as the idioms that were spoken of earlier. The two debtors (Lu 7:41-43). The reason as to the why of the parable of the two debtors, one of whom owed ten times as much as the other, and the parable‘s implications for us are found in what prompted its telling, Luke 7:36-40, 44-50. To have an uninvited person arrive was not out of the ordinary, but they would enter the meal and take a seat along the wall, as they carried on conversation with those who were invited that were reclining at the table in the center of the room. Jesus‘ parable of the two debtors was quite applicable to the situation. Jesus was pointing out that Simon, the host, did not provide water for Jesus‘ feet, nor did he greet him with a holy kiss, as well as not greasing his head with oil. These were common customs in the that first-century culture. However, this woman, who had sinned greatly, 85
she sought Jesus out, and showed him greater love and hospitality than had Simon, the host. Below you have the parable of the Dragnet. A knowledge of the law at Leviticus 11:9, which defines what the Israelites may eat ―of all that are in the waters.‖ Verse 12 of that chapter holds out what was detestable to the Jewish people. Matthew 13:47-50 (English Standard Version) "Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was thrown into the sea and gathered fish of every kind. 48When it was full, men drew it ashore and sat down and sorted the good into containers but threw away the bad. 49So it will be at the close of the age. The angels will come out and separate the evil from the righteous 50and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 47
Below Jesus curses an unproductive fruit tree. Why, what purpose did it serve? An understanding of the historical setting gives us the answer. Fruit trees in first-century Palestine were taxed, with unproductive trees being cut down; therefore, Jesus used this as an opportunity to make an illustrative point. On his return to Jerusalem, Jesus grew hungry. As was the right of any Jew under Mosaic Law, Jesus chose to have figs for breakfast as he noticed the fig tree by the road. Seeing the leaves on it, Jesus assumed it had fruit. Nevertheless the leaves had sent a false message. The tree had no fruit, the promise of fruit was an empty one. Remember step one, find the context. In the section before this, Jesus had judged on Israel and its religious leaders, and found them wanting for their idolatrous behavior. (21:12-17) Using the fig tree in an illustrative way, he used it as a small parable, exposing the fruitlessness of Israel and its awaited doom. In similar manner the religious leaders falsely advertised the fruit of doing God‘s will and purposes, but like the tree they were liars. Beneath the leaves of their show display, lie the unfruitful hearts of unbelievers. Matthew 21:18-22 (English Standard Version) In the morning, as he was returning to the city, he became hungry. 19And seeing a fig tree by the wayside, he went to it and found nothing on it but only leaves. And he said to it, "May no fruit ever come from you again!" And the fig tree withered at once. 18
When the disciples saw it, they marveled, saying, "How did the fig tree wither at once?" 21And Jesus answered them, "Truly, I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what has been done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, 'Be taken up and thrown into the sea,' it will happen. 22And whatever you ask in prayer, you will receive, if you have faith." 20
Step Three in Understanding Parables This is a two point step. The first is this, look for the meaning to come from the author of the parable. An interpreter of a parable by Jesus would see what he meant in the context it was spoken, and considering his teaching as a whole. The second is this, the elements in a parable should not be assigned an subjective meaning. Generally, a parable teaches one basic point. We do not want to follow in the path of allegorical interpreters 86
that find significance in every tiny aspect of parable, like Augustine in the above interpretation of the Good Samaritan. No, we need to look for the main point. There are several stages that will help us to discover the main point of a parable.12
Stage One: Discovering the Main Characters In any given parable, it is highly important to find the main 2-3 characters. Throughout these stages, let us the parable of the Neighborly Samaritan. To better understand, we do need to consider step two in our understanding this parable, the background. Our modern mind thinks of the Samaritans as good because of this parable, but this is not how Jesus audience would have viewed them, as they were the enemy of the Jewish people. Commenting on the attitude of Jews toward Samaritans, the Talmud no doubt expressed the feeling of many Jews: ―May I never set eyes on a Samaritan.‖ Also, the Talmud taught that ―a piece of bread given by a Samaritan is more unclean than swine‘s flesh.‖ So intense was anti-Samaritan feeling that some Jews even cursed Samaritans publicly in the synagogues and prayed daily that the Samaritans would not be granted everlasting life. Luke 10:30-37 (English Standard Version) The Parable of the Good Samaritan Jesus replied, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, 'Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.' 36Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" 37He said, "The one who showed him mercy." And Jesus said to him, "You go, and do likewise." 30
Characters (1) The man going down to Jericho (2) The Robbers (3) The Priest (4) The Levite (5) The Good Samaritan 12
The stages to discovering the main point are based on Dr. Robert Stein‘s book, the Basic Guide to Biblical Interpretation, specifically pages 147-148.
87
(6) The Innkeeper (7) The lawyer The three main characters are the priest, the Levite and the good Samaritan. Think about it, does it really matter who the man is? Jesus told the story of one man, who is a victim without making known the man by race, occupation, or reason for traveling. What about the robbers and the innkeeper? They only serve the function of getting us to that main point. They are like the extra in a movie. Their only role is to move the movie along.
Stage Two: Looking to the End As is true with any kind of story, it is the end of the story that carries all the weight of importance. This is not different with the parable. The ending is where the answers lie. Look at the end of the story one more time, take note of Jesus‘ question to the lawyer. Jesus removed the attention from the term ―neighbor.‖ The lawyer had basically asked, ‗who is the one that I should show my neighborly love to?‘ Notice his attention is on the one receiving the kindness. However, Jesus asked, ―which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?" Notice that Jesus‘ focus was not on the recipient of the love, but the one who showed the love, the Samaritan.
Stage Three: Who Carries the Conversation You likely noticed that there is no conversation between the man going down to Jericho and anyone else. There is no conversation between the robbers and the man, the priest and the man, the Levite and the man, the Samaritan and the man. The only direct conversation is between the Samaritan and the innkeeper. The focus of conversation is between the Samaritan and the innkeeper, which highlights the Samaritan‘s motive and heart attitude.
Stage Three: Who Gets the Most Press Generally, whoever gets the most coverage in a story, is the primary character, as well as the secondary person that must exist to facilitate the story and its main point. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, there is little doubt that the Samaritan gets the most coverage throughout the parable, as he gets six verses, while everyone else received one verse. However, the man who went down to Jericho receives just as much coverage, with seven verses actually. However, the Samaritan is secondary to the active role of the Samaritan. Thus, our two primary characters are the Samaritan and the man who fell victim. It might be added that this ―man‖ who went down to Jericho and fell victim to robbers was a Jew, as the context of the story shows. The lawyer asking the question is a Jew, likely with many other Jewish listeners. The priest and Levite were Jewish religious leaders, who ‗when they saw him [their own Jewish countryman lying their dying from a robbery] they passed by on the other side.‘ However, you have a Samaritan will to help a Jewish victim. Thus, the primary point involves both characters that received the most 88
press. Remember Jesus focus was on the person showing the love, not the victim needing loving act of kindness. A true neighbor [Samaritan] takes the initiative to show love to others [the man going down to Jericho] regardless of their ethnic background.
89
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
90
CHAPTER 10 THE MEANING OF BIBLICAL NARRATIVE A narrative is a story or an account of a sequence of events, generally in the order in which they happened. The narrative is the literary form found most often in God‘s Word, with the Old Testament being 40 percent narrative and the New Testament 60 percent narrative. Biblical narrative involves such people as Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Samson, David, Isaiah, Ezra, Jesus, Paul and hundreds of others, in such books as Genesis, Exodus, Joshua to Esther, Matthew to Acts, in addition to large portions of Numbers, Deuteronomy, and the Prophets. The following text over support that even the narrative Scriptures can offer us a principle, an implication, extending meaning that we can learn from the Biblical accounts. 2 Timothy 3:16 (English Standard Version) All Scripture [Greek, graphe] is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness. 16
2 Peter 3:15-16 (English Standard Version) And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures [Greek, graphe]. [Here you can see that the Apostle Peter is equating Paul‘s letter as inspired of God, their being Scripture, just like the Old Testament.] 15
Romans 15:4 (English Standard Version) For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. 4
1 Corinthians 10:6; 1 Corinthians 10:11 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) Now these things became examples for us, so that we will not desire evil as they did. 11Now these things happened to them as examples, and they were written as a warning to us, on whom the ends of the ages have come. 6
This above statements offer a sound hermeneutical reason for the Christian to use Old Testament Scripture, including the narrative. In Romans 15:4 that what was written was written ―for our instruction,‖ while in his Corinthian letter, they were written ―as a warning to us.‖ Thus, the Old Testament and the New Testament are written for both as 2 Timothy 3:16 brings out, ―for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.‖
The Interpretation of Biblical Narrative 91
The Bible student accepts that certain accounts out of all human history was selected by Jehovah God to be in His inspired Word. The reason for this selection was not simply to tell the history of humans. It is not interpretation to just know and retell the Biblical account, as the Bible does that all by itself. No, we are looking for an interpretation of those events. Unlike the law or the New Testament letters, deriving the meaning out of narrative is dealing with what is not explicitly stated, but what is understood in what is expressed.
Contextual Analysis A biblical narrative is a biblical account like the death of Nadab and Abihu found at Leviticus 10:1-10, or the fall of man at Genesis 3:1-6. Nevertheless, there are larger biblical narratives like the conquest of Canaan at Joshua 5:13–12:24. However, within that larger biblical narrative are many smaller biblical narratives, for instance the circumcision of the new generation of Israelites that entered Canaan at Joshua 5:1-9, the first Passover in Canaan at Joshua 5:10-12, the first commander of Jehovah‘s army at Joshua 5:13-15, the fall of Jericho at Joshua chapter 6. Therefore, as you can see we have one large biblical narrative that covers Joshua 5:13–12:24, in essence, 8 chapters, yet having many smaller biblical narratives within those 8 chapters. Thus, the Bible student needs to appreciate that the smaller biblical narrative that you may be investigating for meaning is a part of a larger biblical narrative that needs to be taken into consideration. This is known at the ―hermeneutical circle.‖ In other words, the Bible student is making an attempt to understand a small biblical narrative, but does so in light of the larger biblical narrative, even the whole of the Bible book. As he gains a greater understanding of the smaller narratives, he will better understand the lager narratives. The best approach here, in short is the use of a trustworthy handbook that can give an understanding of the whole book, and the larger narratives, as well as the smaller narratives. Thus, you would take Holman Bible Handbook, find the book of Joshua on page 194, and you would read the introduction on pages 194-195. Thereafter, you would read a section (say 1:1-18) in the handbook followed by the Bible itself, followed by the next section (2:1-24) in the handbook followed by the Bible, repeating this until you finish the whole book of Joshua. Below in Mark 1:1-8, you will find that Mark has left you some clues for understand this narrative. The student could do extra research on the italicized portions of the text, which is in relation to the messenger, John the Baptist. However, you will notice that the author, Mark has other ideas as to who is the focus of attention here, and he addresses this straightaway in verse 1, ―the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ.‖ Thereafter, the underlined portions show the emphasis of this narrative. Mark want the reader of his book to know that Jesus is the long awaited Christ, the Son of God. John only serves the function of getting us to that main point of who Jesus is. Like the parable above, John is like the extra in a movie. His only role is to move the narrative along. Mark 1:1-8 (Lexham English Bible) John the Baptist Begins His Ministry 92
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Isaiah, 1
2
Just as it is written in the prophet
―Behold, I am sending my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way, 3
the voice of one shouting in the wilderness,
‗Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths!‘ ‖ John was there baptizing in the wilderness, proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 5 And all the Judean region and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem went out to him and were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins. 6 And John was dressed in camel‘s hair and a belt made of leather around his waist, and he ate locusts and wild honey. 7 And he was preaching, saying, ―One who is more powerful than I is coming after me, of whom I am not worthy to bend down and untie the strap of his sandals. 8 I baptized you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.‖ 13 (author‘s italics and underlining) 4
The fact that Jesus is the primary character is born our in our other narratives throughout the book, the larger narratives. Jesus begins ministry in Galilee (1:14–6:6), Jesus‘ Galilean ministry expanded (6:7–9:50), Jesus‘ ministry in Perea (10:1-52), Jesus in and around Jerusalem (11:1–15:47), and the events after Jesus‘ death (16:1-8). This is further confirmed by the smaller biblical narratives as well. Jesus the revolutionary (2:183:6), Jesus authority rejected (3:7-35), the mystery of Jesus (4:1-34), Jesus‘ faith in God (4:35-41), and so on. The author of a Bible book does offer clues as to what he intends the reader to get out of his inspired message. One such way is how he opens and closes the books. The book of Deuteronomy below ends with a summary of Exodus through Deuteronomy. This conclusion closes the Pentateuch and open a new chapter with the upcoming book of Joshua. Deuteronomy 34:9-12 (American Standard Version) And Joshua the son of Nun was full of the spirit of wisdom; for Moses had laid his hands upon him: and the children of Israel hearkened unto him, and did as Jehovah commanded Moses. 10 And there hath not arisen a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom Jehovah knew face to face, 11 in all the signs and the wonders, which Jehovah sent him to do in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh, and to all his servants, and to all his land, 12 and in all the mighty hand, and in all the great terror, which Moses wrought in the sight of all Israel. 9
13
W. Hall Harris, III, The Lexham English Bible (Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2010), Mk 1:1–8.
93
Let us look at some other books to see what they offer the reader. Read through these, and see if you can figure out what the author is conveying to you the reader, as the center of fosus. Exodus 3:6-12 (American Standard Version) Moreover he said, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. And Moses hid his face; for he was afraid to look upon God. 7 And Jehovah said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people that are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters; for I know their sorrows; 8 and I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey; unto the place of the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Amorite, and the Perizzite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite. 9 And now, behold, the cry of the children of Israel is come unto me: moreover I have seen the oppression wherewith the Egyptians oppress them. 10 Come now therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh, that thou mayest bring forth my people the children of Israel out of Egypt. 11 And Moses said unto God, Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh, and that I should bring forth the children of Israel out of Egypt? 12 And he said, Certainly I will be with thee; and this shall be the token unto thee, that I have sent thee: when thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt, ye shall serve God upon this mountain. 6
Joshua 1:1-2 (American Standard Version) Now it came to pass after the death of Moses the servant of Jehovah, that Jehovah spoke unto Joshua the son of Nun, Moses' minister, saying, 2 Moses my servant is dead; now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, you, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even to the children of Israel. 1
Judges 1:1-2 (American Standard Version) And it came to pass after the death of Joshua, that the children of Israel asked of Jehovah, saying, Who shall go up for us first against the Canaanites, to fight against them? 2 And Jehovah said, Judah shall go up: behold, I have delivered the land into his hand. 1
Judges 21:25 (American Standard Version) In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes. 25
John 20:30-31 (American Standard Version) Many other signs therefore did Jesus in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book: 31 but these are written, that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye may have life in his name. 30
Luke 1:1-4 (American Standard Version) Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to draw up a narrative concerning those matters which have been fulfilled among us, 2 even as they delivered them unto us, who 1
94
from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, 3 it seemed good to me also, having traced the course of all things accurately from the first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus; 4 that you might know the certainty concerning the things wherein you was instructed.
The Authorial Clues: What Was Right In Their Eye or Jehovah‘s Eye 1 Kings 14:8 and rent the kingdom away from the house of David, and gave it thee; and yet thou hast not been as my servant David, who kept my commandments, and who followed me with all his heart, to do that only which was right in mine eyes, 8
1 Kings 15:5 because David did that which was right in the eyes of Jehovah, and turned not aside from anything that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite. 5
1 Kings 22:43 And he walked in all the way of Asa his father; He turned not aside from it, doing that which was right in the eyes of Jehovah: howbeit the high places were not taken away; the people still sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places. 43
2 Kings 10:30 And Jehovah said unto Jehu, Because you have done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes, and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in my heart, thy sons of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel. 30
2 Kings 14:3 And he did that which was right in the eyes of Jehovah, yet not like David his father: he did according to all that Joash his father had done. 3
The Authorial Clues: What the King Did Right In Jehovah‘s Eye 1 Kings 11:6 And Solomon did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, and went not fully after Jehovah, as did David his father. 6
1 Kings 15:26 And he did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, and walked in the way of his father, and in his sin wherewith he made Israel to sin. 26
1 Kings 15:34 And he did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, and walked in the way of Jeroboam, and in his sin wherewith he made Israel to sin. 34
1 Kings 16:19 95
for his sins which he sinned in doing that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, in walking in the way of Jeroboam, and in his sin which he did, to make Israel to sin. 19
1 Kings 16:25 And Omri did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, and dealt wickedly above all that were before him. 25
1 Kings 21:25 (But there was none like unto Ahab, who did sell himself to do that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, whom Jezebel his wife stirred up. 25
2 Kings 3:2 And he did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, but not like his father, and like his mother; for he put away the pillar of Baal that his father had made. 2
The Authorial Clues: Clarifications Mark 5:41 And taking the child by the hand, he saith unto her, Talitha cumi; which is, being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto thee, Arise. 41
Mark 7:11 but you say, If a man shall say to his father or his mother, That wherewith you might have been profited by me is Corban, that is to say, Given to God; 11
Mark 7:34 and looking up to heaven, he sighed, and said to him, Ephphatha, that is, Be opened. 34
Mark 15:22 And they bring him unto the place Golgotha, which is, being interpreted, The place of a skull. 22
Mark 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? 34
The Authorial Clues: The Incident Mark 12:12 And they sought to lay hold on him; and they feared the multitude; for they perceived that he spoke the parable against them: and they left him, and went away. 12
Mark 12:18 And there come unto him Sadducees, who say that there is no resurrection; and they asked him, saying, 18
96
Mark 12:42 42
And there came a poor widow, and she cast in two mites, which make a farthing.
Mark 14:1-2 Now after two days was the feast of the Passover and the unleavened bread: and the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might take him with subtlety, and kill him: 2 for they said, Not during the feast, lest haply there shall be a tumult of the people. 1
The Authorial Clues: Summary Statements Genesis 1:31 And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day. 31
Mark 1:14-15 Now after John was delivered up, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, 15 and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe in the gospel. 14
Mark 4:11 And he said unto them, Unto you is given the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all things are done in parables: 11
Mark 4:26 26
earth;
And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed upon the
Mark 4:30 And he said, How shall we liken the kingdom of God? or in what parable shall we set it forth? 30
Luke 9:22 saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and the third day be raised up. 22
Luke 13:33 Nevertheless I must go on my way to-day and to-morrow and the day following: for it cannot be that a prophet perish out of Jerusalem. 33
Luke 17:25
The Authorial Clues: Repetition (Repeat all Through Judges) Judges 3:7-9 And the children of Israel did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah, and forgot Jehovah their God, and served the Baal and the Asheroth. 8 Therefore the anger 7
97
of Jehovah was kindled against Israel, and he sold them into the hand of Cushanrishathaim king of Mesopotamia: and the children of Israel served Cushan-rishathaim eight years. 9 And when the children of Israel cried unto Jehovah, Jehovah raised up a savior to the children of Israel, who saved them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother. Judges 2:16 And Jehovah raised up judges, who saved them out of the hand of those that despoiled them. 16
Judges 2:18 And when Jehovah raised them up judges, then Jehovah was with the judge, and saved them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge: for it repented Jehovah because of their groaning by reason of them that oppressed them and vexed them. 18
Judges 3:9 And when the children of Israel cried unto Jehovah, Jehovah raised up a saviour to the children of Israel, who saved them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother. 9
Judges 3:15 But when the children of Israel cried unto Jehovah, Jehovah raised them up a saviour, Ehud the son of Gera, the Benjamite, a man left-handed. And the children of Israel sent tribute by him unto Eglon the king of Moab. 15
Judges 6:9 and I delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of all that oppressed you, and drove them out from before you, and gave you their land; 9
Judges 10:12 The Sidonians also, and the Amalekites, and the Maonites, did oppress you; and ye cried unto me, and I saved you out of their hand. 12
The Authorial Clues: The Use of Speakers Luke 23:50-51 (English Standard Version) Now there was a man named Joseph, from the Jewish town of Arimathea. He was a member of the council, a good and righteous man, 51who had not consented to their decision and action; and he was looking for the kingdom of God. 50
Luke 1:7 (English Standard Version) But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and both were advanced in years. 7
Genesis 16:4; Genesis 16:11 (English Standard Version) 98
And he went in to Hagar, and she conceived. And when she saw that she had conceived, she looked with contempt on her mistress. 11And the angel of the LORD said to her, "Behold, you are pregnant and shall bear a son. You shall call his name Ishmael, because the LORD has listened to your affliction. 4
Genesis 29:32 (English Standard Version) And Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name Reuben, for she said, "Because the LORD has looked upon my affliction; for now my husband will love me." 32
Leviticus 20:20-21 (English Standard Version) If a man lies with his uncle‘s wife, he has uncovered his uncle‘s nakedness; they shall bear their sin; they shall die childless. 21 If a man takes his brother‘s wife, it is impurity. He has uncovered his brother‘s nakedness; they shall be childless. 20
Throughout the Bible, certain ones are accepted as being trustworthy when they have something to say. Persons such as: Jehovah, Jesus, a patriarch, an author of a book, prophets, the apostles, and such. The secondary characters, need to be given referential testimony that what they sat can be trust, as you saw in the above texts.
The Authorial Clues: Helps On How to Interpret What They Say 1 Samuel 29:9 And Achish answered and said to David, I know that thou art good in my sight, as an angel of God: notwithstanding the princes of the Philistines have said, He shall not go up with us to the battle. 9
2 Samuel 14:17 Then thy handmaid said, Let, I pray thee, the word of my lord the king be comfortable; for as an angel of God, so is my lord the king to discern good and bad: and Jehovah thy God be with thee. 17
2 Samuel 14:20 to change the face of the matter hath thy servant Joab done this thing: and my lord is wise, according to the wisdom of an angel of God, to know all things that are in the earth. 20
2 Samuel 19:27 And he hath slandered thy servant unto my lord the king; but my lord the king is as an angel of God: do therefore what is good in thine eyes. 27
1 Kings 18:31 And Elijah took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, unto whom the word of Jehovah came, saying, Israel shall be thy name. 31
Job 1:1
99
There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and turned away from evil. 1
Wicked Characters Too Genesis 13:13 13
Now the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners against Jehovah exceedingly.
1 Samuel 2:12 12
Now the sons of Eli were base men; they knew not Jehovah.
1 Samuel 25:3 Now the name of the man was Nabal; and the name of his wife Abigail; and the woman was of good understanding, and of a beautiful countenance: but the man was churlish and evil in his doings; and he was of the house of Caleb. 3
2 Samuel 20:1 And there happened to be there a base fellow, whose name was Sheba, the son of Bichri, a Benjamite: and he blew the trumpet, and said, We have no portion in David, neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse: every man to his tents, O Israel. 1
1 Kings 12:8 But he forsook the counsel of the old men which they had given him, and took counsel with the young men that were grown up with him, that stood before him. 8
The Authorial Clues: Communication Joshua 1:2-9 (English Standard Version) "Moses my servant is dead. Now therefore arise, go over this Jordan, you and all this people, into the land that I am giving to them, to the people of Israel. 3 Every place that the sole of your foot will tread upon I have given to you, just as I promised to Moses. 4 From the wilderness and this Lebanon as far as the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites to the Great Sea toward the going down of the sun shall be your territory. 5 No man shall be able to stand before you all the days of your life. Just as I was with Moses, so I will be with you. I will not leave you or forsake you. 6 Be strong and courageous, for you shall cause this people to inherit the land that I swore to their fathers to give them. 7Only be strong and very courageous, being careful to do according to all the law that Moses my servant commanded you. Do not turn from it to the right hand or to the left, that you may have good success wherever you go. 8This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success. 9Have I not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be frightened, and do not be dismayed, for the LORD your God is with you wherever you go." 2
100
Joshua, the new leader of Israel, was commanded by Jehovah to draw his strength and courage from Jehovah Himself. Jehovah made clear that success was contingent on Joshua‘s obedience to the Law of Moses. Therefore, it would be wise to meditate on that law, so as to have success in conquering the Promise Land. You and I are not leaders of a nation, nor are we about to conquer a land of wicked people, to take over a land that has been promised to us. However, what pattern can we find in the text? Are we a leader in a congregation, are we the leader over our family? Are we looking to conquer Satan‘s evil system of things, and make into a promise land after Armageddon? If we are to succeed in our Joshua moment, we must draw courage by our personal relationship with Jehovah God. We must be obedient to His Word, the Bible, meditating on it continuously. Here are some patterns . . . (1) Spend more time mediating on God‘s Word as you listen to recorded sermons on MP3s and such. (2) If you are to conquer your ministry in a new way, then be strengthened by God‘s presence. (3) If you are taking the lead in a congregation, success is dependent on strength drawn from the presence of God, as well as meditating on His Word constant.
101
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
102
CHAPTER 11 THE MEANING OF EPISTLES An epistle is a letter written by the apostle Paul or James, Peter, John, or Jude and included as a book of the Bible. The New Testament is predominantly letters, with 21 out of 27 books coming in the form of a letter. The Apostle Paul has 14, if Hebrews is to be counted as his. The other 8 are known as general epistles. Both James and Jude are brothers of Jesus, and have one letter a piece. The Apostle Peter wrote 2 letters, with the Apostle John writing the last three around 98 C.E. While it is true that the New Testament letters served as a substitute for the person, they were authoritative substitutes. Many times, the beginning of the letter, offer the authority by which it was written: Galatians 1:1 (English Standard Version) Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead. 1
Ephesians 1:1 (English Standard Version) Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus: 1
2 Peter 1:1 (English Standard Version) Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ: 1
Form of Ancient Letters The letters of the New Testament can be divided into three sections: (1) the greeting or address (salutation), (2) the body, and (3) the conclusion (greeting, some final instructions and a doxology). Within these section you will likely find the following, but not all letters may contain them all. (1) The address or greeting contains who the writer and the recipients are, the thanksgiving, and a prayer. (2) The body of the letter contains a variety of elements that differ widely from letter to letter. The closest you can get to similarity is the authors genuine concern of the recipient and the recipients need to apply whatever is therein. (3) The conclusion contains a final blessing, a greeting (which can encompass a list of a few people to many), wishing them peace, and some final thoughts.
103
Figure 3 A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible, p. 170
The letters of the New Testament were situational. In other words, they were written to convey important information that related to circumstances that were going on with the recipient, be it a person or a congregation. For example the letter to the Thessalonians were written to clear up issues. The letter to the Colossians was to address doctrinal problems, or in the case of James, to confront the congregation about their behavior.
From Writers to Recipients While the Roman Empire had an effective postal service, it was only available for government use. Those writing the New Testament letters used friends to carry the letters to their designated places. A lot is known about a number of them. In the book of Acts and Paul‘s letters, there are over 100 coworkers mentioned. Likely you are familiar with the activities of Apollos, Barnabas, and Silas. On the other hand, you would probably find it more difficult to say much about Archippus, Claudia, Damaris, Linus, Persis, Pudens, and Sopater.
The Interpretation of New Testament Letters This book is not for the Bible scholar, it is for the Bible student. In essence, we are all Bible students. Therefore, we are not going to suppose that you have 50 hours a week to spend on an in-depth study of any Bible book. You have a family, work, congregation responsibilities, a ministry and many other things tugging at your time. Therefore, let us use this chapter to offer the faster approach. You will need several items: (1) a good study Bible (ESV, HCSB, NASB), (2) at least three good Bible handbooks (Holman, Halley‘s, and Zondervan), (3) a Bible dictionary (Holman), (4) and one word dictionary (Mounce‘s Complete Expository Dictionary), and (5) a notepad and pen. These items should be in any Christian library anyway. Read the letter through in at least 1-3 settings. This would be done in 1-3 days, not read a section on the first of the month, another section on the 15th, and a third section on the 30th. It does no good to allow so much time to pass between the sections. If the 104
letter is short, like most are, read it in one setting. This will give you the gist of what it contains. The second time, you will use all three handbooks first. Read the introduction about the book from all three. Then, take the Holman handbook first, read the first section it offers, and then read it from your study Bible, considering any important footnotes that it may offer. Thereafter, use the other two handbooks to read the same sections. Repeat this process until you have completed the letter. If you wish to learn more about any person, place, event or thing as you are going through the letter, use the Bible dictionary to get a better understanding. If there are and words that you want to better understand, or have a deeper understanding of, use the word dictionary.
105
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
106
CHAPTER 12 THE MEANING OF LAWS Law Binding or enforceable rule: a rule of conduct or procedure recognized by a community as binding or enforceable by authority. Piece of legislation: an act passed by a legislature or similar body. Legal system: the body or system of rules recognized by a community that are enforceable by established process. Control or authority: the control or authority resulting from the observance and enforcement of a community's system of rules. Divine will: the principles set out in the Bible, especially the Pentateuch, said to be the divine will. Hebrew body of law: the code of law of the ancient Hebrews, beginning with the Ten Commandments, believed to have been set down by Moses and contained in the Pentateuch. —Encarta Dictionary, 2010. Old Testament Noun: (torah), GK 9368 (S 8451), 223x. Generally rendered ―law, regulation, instruction, teaching,‖ torah was originally used to describe the instructions for daily conduct that God gave his people; eventually other meanings developed for this word. See also teaching. (1) In Exod. through Deut., torah covers a wide spectrum of regulations: from specific regulations about sacrifices (Lev 6:9), food laws (11:46), skin conditions (14:32), etc., to a summary word for the entire revelation that Moses received on Mount Sinai (the Book of the Law,‖ Deut 28:61; cf. Jos 8:31). These laws regulate every aspect of Israelite life, from food to offerings to social interactions to warfare. It is impossible to divide these neatly into categories such as ceremonial, civil, and moral, since the OT does not make such distinctions and various types of laws are all intertwined. All of Israelite life is religiously oriented; the Lord is God of every aspect of life and has something to say about every human activity. (2) Several psalms extol the beauty of God‘s law (e.g., Ps 1; 19; 119). God‘s law is something to love, since it comes from a loving God. True Israelites found the law liberating, not confining. Any negative statements relative to the law in the OT concern abuses of it, not the law itself. On tôrâ as a gracious gift from God, see Deut 4:1–8. (3) In Ps 78:1, the word torah covers not only the commands, regulations, and instructions of the Lord but also the historical review of Israel‘s past, that is, the narrative portions of the Pentateuch. Ezra‘s reading of the torah most likely involved the entire Pentateuch (Neh 8:3). From understanding God‘s past actions with and for his people, we learn his will for our own lives today. 107
New Testament Noun: (nomos), GK 3795 (S 3551), 194x. nomos means ―law.‖ This word has a variety of nuances in the NT. (1). nomos can refer to the first five books of the OT—that is, the Torah or the Pentateuch. This is its meaning in the phrase ―the Law and the Prophets‖ (Mt 5:17; Jn 1:17; Rom 3:21). But by extension, it sometimes refers to the entire OT revelation (see Jn 10:34, where Jesus quotes Ps 82:6 as part of ―the law‖; cf. also Rom 3:19; 1 Cor. 14:21). (2) nomos can also refer specifically to the legal parts of the OT, the composite body of rules, regulations, and commands God gave to his people (Jn 7:19; Acts 15:5). Keeping the laws revealed by God, however, is not a pathway to being saved (Acts 15:1, 5); we are saved by grace, not by works (Eph 2:8–10). Paul wrote especially Romans and Galatians because he knew of people who taught that a person could be justified by keeping the law (Rom 3:28; Gal 2:16). (3) Even though the law cannot save us, the law itself is still good, because it has come from God (Rom 7:7–12; 1 Tim. 1:8). But in our weakened human condition, rather than enlightening us on how to serve God, the law often ends up only revealing our sin (Rom 3:20). In fact, the law can even increase our sin because of our innate human tendency to rebel against God (Rom 5:20). This is why Paul can call it ―the law of sin and death‖ (Rom 8:2). (4) Jesus himself perfectly kept the law and so was sinless (Heb 4:15; 1 Pet. 2:22). His righteousness is imputed to us by faith when we believe (Rom 3:22; 2 Cor. 5:21), so that ―the righteous requirements of the law [are] fully met in us‖ (Rom 8:4; see righteous, righteousness). Through his accursed death on the cross he paid the wages for human sin—death (Rom 6:23; Gal 3:13)—so that we can now live freely in newness of life. (5) Even though we do not have to keep God‘s law in order to be saved, true believers attempt, to the best of their ability with the help of the Holy Spirit, to obey the law. This is the message of James, that faith without works (of the law) is dead (Jas 2:14–26). But this is also the message of Paul, who asks: ―Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!‖ (Rom 6:15).14
Source of Law Isaiah 33:22 (American Standard Version)
14
William D. Mounce, Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), 392-93.
108
For Jehovah is our judge, Jehovah is our lawgiver, Jehovah is our king; he will save us. 22
Delegating Authority Psalm 73:28 But it is good for me to draw near unto God: I have made the Lord Jehovah my refuge, That I may tell of all thy works. 28
Jeremiah 50:25 Jehovah hath opened his armory, and hath brought forth the weapons of his indignation; for the Lord, Jehovah of hosts, hath a work to do in the land of the Chaldeans. 25
Luke 2:29 "Lord, now you according to your word; 29
are
letting
your
servant
depart
in
peace,
Acts 4:24 And they, when they heard it, lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, O Lord, thou that didst make the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that in them is: 24
Only By Jehovah God‘s Authority Romans 13:1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 1
Daniel 4:35 all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, "What have you done?" 35
Acts 17:24-31 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, 25nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. 26And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, 27 that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, 28for "'In him we live and move and have our being' as even some of your own poets have said, "'For we are indeed his offspring.' 29 Being then God‘s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. 30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people 24
109
everywhere to repent, 31because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead." Psalm 97:1-2 (American Standard Version) Jehovah reigns; let the earth rejoice; Let the multitude of isles be glad. 2 Clouds and darkness are round about him: Righteousness and justice are the foundation of his throne. 1
The Law of Moses or the Mosaic Law encompasses the first five books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers Deuteronomy), and at times are just referred to as the Law. However, in an extended sense, the whole of the Old Testament is known as the Mosaic Law. The Jews though consider the Law to be divided into three sections: (1) the law of Moses, (3) the prophets, and (3) the Psalms. Luke 24:44 (English Standard Version) Then he said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled." 44
The Purpose of the Law Galatians 3:19-24 (English Standard Version) Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary. 20Now an intermediary implies more than one, but God is one. 21Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law. 22But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. 19
Romans 3:20 (English Standard Version) For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin. 20
Romans 10:1-4 (English Standard Version) Brothers, my heart‘s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God‘s righteousness. 4For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. 1
2
Hebrews 10:1; Hebrews 9:23 (English Standard Version)
110
For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. 23Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 1
Matthew 22:35-40 (English Standard Version) And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. 36"Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?" 37And he said to him, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38This is the great and first commandment. 39And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets." 35
What Laws Are Christians Obligated to Keep The Mosaic Law is made up of more than 600 laws. Are Christians obligated to keep these laws? It might be best to look at who the Mosaic Law was given to, and what was the purpose of the Law. Deuteronomy 5:1-3 (English Standard Version) And Moses summoned all Israel and said to them, "Hear, O Israel, the statutes and the rules that I speak in your hearing today, and you shall learn them and be careful to do them. 2 The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. 3 Not with our fathers did the LORD make this covenant, but with us, who are all of us here alive today. 1
Galatians 3:19-24 (English Standard Version) Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary. 20Now an intermediary implies more than one, but God is one. 21Is the law then contrary to the promises of God? Certainly not! For if a law had been given that could give life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law. 22But the Scripture imprisoned everything under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. 19
Psalm 147:19-20 (English Standard Version) He declares his word to Jacob, his statutes and rules to Israel. 20He has not dealt thus with any other nation; they do not know his rules. Praise the LORD! 19
Hebrews 10:1-4 (English Standard Version) For since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form of these realities, it can never, by the same sacrifices that are continually offered every year, make perfect those who draw near. 2Otherwise, would they not have ceased to be offered, since the worshipers, having once been cleansed, would no longer have 1
111
any consciousness of sins? 3But in these sacrifices there is a reminder of sins every year. 4For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins.
Christ Is the End of the Law Luke 2:8-14 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) In the same region, shepherds were staying out in the fields and keeping watch at night over their flock. 9 Then an angel of the Lord stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. 10 But the angel said to them, "Don't be afraid, for look, I proclaim to you good news of great joy that will be for all the people: 11 today a Savior, who is Messiah the Lord, was born for you in the city of David. 12 This will be the sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped snugly in cloth and lying in a manger." 13 Suddenly there was a multitude of the heavenly host with the angel, praising God and saying: 14 Glory to God in the highest heaven, and peace on earth to people He favors! 8
Galatians 3:25 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) But since that faith [Jesus] has come, we are no longer under a guardian [the Law],
25
Galatians 3:10-14 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) For all who [rely on] the works of the law are under a curse, because it is written: Cursed is everyone who does not continue doing everything written in the book of the law. 11 Now it is clear that no one is justified before God by the law, because the righteous will live by faith. 12 But the law is not based on faith; instead, the one who does these things will live by them. 13 Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, (J) because it is written: Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree. 14 The purpose was that the blessing of Abraham would come to the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, so that we could receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. 10
Romans 10:4 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) 4
For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
Romans 6:14 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) 14
For sin will not rule over you, because you are not under law but under grace.
Ephesians 2:11-18 (New International Version) Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called ―uncircumcised‖ by those who call themselves ―the circumcision‖ (which is done in the body by human hands) 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making 11
112
peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit. Colossians 2:13-14 (American Standard Version) And you, being dead through your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, did he make alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses; 14 having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and he hath taken it out that way, nailing it to the cross; 13
Is the Mosaic Law separated into ―ceremonial‖ and ―moral‖ parts, and is the ―moral law‖ (the Ten Commandments) obligatory for Christians? When Jesus referred to the law, did he give the impression that there were two separate parts? Matt. 5:17, 21, 23, 27, 31, 38: ―Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.‖ Take note of what Jesus said thereafter.. ―You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder‘ [Ex. 20:13; the Sixth Commandment]‘ . . . if you are offering your gift at the altar [Deut. 16:16, 17; no part of the Ten Commandments] . . . You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery' [Ex. 20:14; the Seventh Commandment].‘ It was also said, 'Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce' [Deut. 24:1; no part of the Ten Commandments]. You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth [Ex. 21:23-25; no part of the Ten Commandments].‘‖ As you can see, when Jesus referred to the Law, he did not differentiate between what is known as the Ten Commandments and other parts of the Law. To him the Laws encompassed all 613 laws, including the Ten Commandments. Romans 7:6-7 (English Standard Version) But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code. 7What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet." 6
In Romans 7:6-7, Paul informs his readers that the Jewish Christians have been ―released from the law.‖ Immediately thereafter, he cites an example of what they were released from, which is the 10th commandment, showing that the Ten Commands are included in what they were released from. 2 Corinthians 3:7-11 (English Standard Version) Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses‘ face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, 8will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory? 9For if there was 7
113
glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory. 10Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. 11For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory. Notice that Paul makes a reference here to what was ―carved in letters on stone,‖ and it was said that ―the Israelites could not gaze at Moses‘ face‖ at the time it was delivered. Obviously, this is talking about Exodus 34:1, 28-30, which is dealing with the giving of the Ten Commandments. And it says herein that these were ―brought to an end.‖
The Law of Christ The question that arises then, is this, ‗are Christians obligated to keep the Mosaic Law?‘ The answer would be no. Luke 22:20 (English Standard Version) And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. 20
Hebrews 8:7-13 (American Standard Version) For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second. 8 For finding fault with them, he said, Behold, the days come, said the Lord, That I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; 9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers In the day that I took them by the hand to lead them forth out of the land of Egypt; For they continued not in my covenant, And I regarded them not, said the Lord. 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel After those days, said the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, And on their heart also will I write them: And I will be to them a God, And they shall be to me a people: 11 And they shall not teach every man his fellow-citizen, And every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: For all shall know me, From the least to the greatest of them. 12 For I will be merciful to their iniquities, And their sins will I remember no more. 13 In that he said, A new covenant he has made the first old. But that which is becoming old [is ready] to vanish away. 7
Although Christians are not obligated to keep the Mosaic Law, there are principles behind each and every one of them that would be beneficial to heed. Below are some examples: Leviticus 10:1, 2. Those taking the lead in the congregation today must obey divine requirements. Furthermore, they must not be arrogant as take care of those congregation responsibilities. Leviticus 10:9. No one taking care of Christian responsibilities should consume alcoholic beverages while doing so.
114
Leviticus 11:45. God is holy and expects that those serving Him, will be holy too. They are expected to remain both physically and spiritually clean.—2 Corinthians 7:1; 1 Peter 1:15, 16. Leviticus 12:8. We must appreciate the our God is very conscious of those who are poor, and he does not ask for more than we can give. Numbers 12:2, 9, 10; 16:1-3, 12-14, 31-35, 41, 46-50. All Christians are obligated to respect authority that God has granted humans. Numbers 15:37-41. Christians are people set apart from the world of humankind that is alienated from God, who are obligated to obey their God. We should live a life that is different from the world around us. Galatians 6:2 (New American Standard Bible) 2
Bear one another's burdens, and thereby fulfill the law of Christ.
Matthew 22:36-40 (New International Version) ―Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?‖ 37 Jesus replied: ―‗Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.‘ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‗Love your neighbor as yourself.‘ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.‖ 36
John 13:34-35 (New International Version) ―A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.‖ 34
Galatians 5:13-14 (New International Version) You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love. 14 For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: ―Love your neighbor as yourself.‖ 13
Romans 13:8-10 (New International Version) Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for whoever loves others has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, ―You shall not commit adultery,‖ ―You shall not murder,‖ ―You shall not steal,‖ ―You shall not covet,‖ and whatever other command there may be, are summed up in this one command: ―Love your neighbor as yourself.‖ 10 Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. 8
The Mosaic Law, which encompasses the Ten Commandments, was righteous and served its purpose for God. While it is true that we are not under the Law today, not have been for some 2,000 years, the principles, implications, extended meanings behind are still very much applicable. As we study these and apply them in our lives, our life will 115
be far more joyous and happy, causing us to grow ever closer to the Creator of those divine laws. 1 John 5:3 (English Standard Version) For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome. 3
116
Bibliography Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
117
PART 2 INDUCTIVE BIBLE STUDY CHAPTER 13 HOW TO INTERPRET GOD‘S WORD Below we will go through several stages in a progression toward the goal or target of how to study God's Word, how to arrive at the correct understanding, how it should then be applied in one's life, and finally, how we can share its importance with another. It should be noted that God is the one who chose each writer, the time of writing, the place and setting for his Word to be penned. The male gender is predominately used in speaking to us; so we must respect his choices by first traveling back in time to establish the historical background of the Bible book we are working on. Meaning is what the writer meant to convey by the words that he used, and the way he chose to use those words. Idiolect is an individual‘s way of using words. Share-ability is what goes on between the writer and his intended audience, a common understanding of the words and how they are used to make sense. Understanding is simple having the correct mental grasp of the writer's meaning. Norms of language is the range of meaning allowed by the words. A writer writes with the intention of being understood. Norms of utterance would then be the specific meaning that a writer has given a word by its use in a phrase, sentence and so on; so at to be understood by his readers. Idiom is more than one word that when combine as a phrase, it does not carry the same meaning as would be assumed from the individual words alone, and is expressive of its native speakers. For instance, 'a cup of mud,' does not mean a cup of wet dirt. It means a cup of coffee. Significance is the value that a reader attributes to a a text and its meaning, which is evidenced by his or her response. In other words, an atheist may have a correct mental grasp of the text, but see it as foolishness, because he or she attaches no value or significance to the text. Subject matter is the content within a text, the stuff that is being referred to. This is the referent. Interpretation is the way one goes about expressing the meaning in their own words. Fred may use one illustration to bring the point home, while Wilma uses another, as long as each expression represents the correct meaning. Literary genre is the style of writing being used by the writer, such as narrative (story), poetic, prophetic, parable, metaphoric, letters, idioms and so on.
118
Context is the material surrounding the text under consideration, the chapter before and after, the book as a whole, the setting, the writer's other books, the section your text is in (the Old or New Testament). Prescriptive is a text that is saying that this needs to be applied, to be adhered to in your life. Descriptive is a text that is simply describing a situation or event, a place, person or thing and is not expressing the idea that this needs to be adhered to. (Stein, 1994)15
Some Important Points to Keep in Mind Word Meaning: First, I would like to note that the reader of Hebrew, Aramaic and
Greek have a small advantage over the reader that only knows English. The reader of the original languages can ascertain what the writer meant to convey by the words he used, while the English reader can only ascertain what the translator meant by the rendering of his English words. In an attempt to understand any given word within Scripture, one must keep some simple basic points in mind: A word can have several meanings. For example, the English word ―hand‖ can mean the thing at the bottom of your wrist, or a hand of cards, or a worker, and so on. It is the context of a sentence that will establish which meaning was intended. A word will only mean what the writer meant to convey by his use of it within the context of how he chose to use it. Along with the above point is the fact that the writer is going to use words in such a way that his audience will understand. In other words, ―house‖ is not going to mean a ―river.‖ This may sound ridiculous at this point, but it will pay dividends when we begin looking at word meaning. The range of meaning will be found in a lexicon and the context will tell us which one the writer intended. Etymological Fallacies: Some of this will be repeated again later in this chapter and other chapters, as repetition for emphasis. A word‘s meaning must come from its use at the time of the writing. To find the origin of a word and its historical meaning throughout history is not going to add anything to its meaning. Moreover, the form of a word has nothing to do with its meaning. This would also mean that most compound words do not attribute to the meaning of a word by looking at the two separate words that have been combined. For example, the word ―pineapple,‖ if broken apart into ―pine‖ and ―apple‖ add nothing to its meaning. Another fallacy would be to look at how a word is used centuries later, but in all likelihood, the word‘s meaning will have been altered over time. In 1611 the English word ―let‖ meant to ―stop‖ or ―restrain.‖ Today it means ―to allow.‖ (See 2 Thess 2:7 KJV/ESV) The only time the history of a
15
Stein, Robert H: A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 1994, p. 37-59
119
word may be some help is when there is no possible way of knowing its meaning at the time of use, or with names. (Louw, 1982)16
Concordance: While the lexicon will give us the range of meaning, another
approach is how a writer uses a word. You may look up a word that Paul has used and see where he has used it elsewhere. It is best if it is in the subject matter that you are dealing with, or at least in the same book. However, one could go to the book of Romans to consider a word in Galatians, if it is dealing with the same subject matter. One may even consider the New Testament as a whole, or even the Septuagint (The Greek Old Testament). However, a word of caution, the further removed that you get from the writer and the area your word is found in, the more danger you are in in coming away with the wrong meaning. There is no reason to believe that just because Paul and Peter used the same word that they must have intended the same meaning by its use.
Stage One: Prayerful Attitude At this point one has a verse, or a portion of Scripture that they are attempting to understand. For convenience sake, we will pick one to be used throughout each of our stages, as an example. We will be using Leviticus 3:17. In stage one, we want to get our heart right by going to God in prayer, asking for understanding, asking that he bless our efforts to garner the correct mental grasp of what his word is saying and to be able to apply it in our lives thereafter, as well as share it with others. Leviticus 3:17 (English Standard Version) It shall be a statute forever throughout your generations, in all your dwelling places, that you eat neither fat nor blood." 17
Stage Two: Reading of the Text As was stated in the above, one of the barriers for the modern-day reader is that he does not know Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek. Therefore, he is one-step removed from wrapping his mind around the correct meaning. This barrier can be overcome somewhat by following the reading below. Before we look at that, let us consider some terms that can be beneficial. Interlinear Translation The interlinear Bible page is set up with the left column where you will find the original language text, with the English word-for-word translation beneath each original language word; generally, the right column contains an English translation like the ESV, NASB, or the NIV. The interlinear translation in the left column and the modern-day English translation in the right column are parallel to each other. This allows the student to make immediate comparisons between the translation and the interlinear, helping one to determine the accuracy of the translation. 16
Louw, J. P.: Semantics of the New Testament Greek. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press, 1982, pp.
23-31.
120
The interlinear and the English equivalent in the left column is not generated by taking the English word(s) from the translation on the right, and then placing them under the original language text. Whether we are dealing with Hebrew or Greek as our original language text, each word will have two or more English equivalents. What factors go into the choice of which one will go under the original language word? One factor is the time the book was written in, as the New Testament was penned in the first-century, during the era of Koine Greek, as opposed to classical Greek of centuries past. The context of what comes before and after the word under consideration. Therefore, the translator will use his training in the original language, or a lexicon to determine if he is working with a noun, verb, definite article, adjective, adverb, preposition, conjunction, participle, and so on. Further, say he is looking at a verb, it must be determined what mood it is in (indicative, subjunctive, imperative, etc.), what tense (present, future, aorist, etc.), what voice (active, middle, passive, etc.), what case (nominative, genitive, dative, etc.) gender, person, singular or plural. In addition, the English words under the original language text are generated from grammatical form, the alterations to the root, which affect its role within the sentence, for which he will look to a Hebrew or Greek grammar. The best lexicon is the 3rd edition Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, (BDAG) ten years in the making, this extensive revision of Bauer―the standard authority worldwide―features new entries, 15,000 additional references from ancient literature, clearer type, and extended definitions rather than oneword synonyms. Providing a more panoramic view of the world and language of the New Testament, it becomes the new indispensable guide for translators. The second best lexicon is the Greek-English Lexicon: With a Revised Supplement, 1996: Ninth Revised Edition - Edited By H.G. Liddell, R. Scott By: H.G. Liddell & R. Scott. Each word is given in root form along with important variations, and an excellent representation of examples from classical, Koine, and Attic Greek sources follows. This lexicon is appropriate for all classical Greek and general biblical studies. By far the best traditional Hebrew lexicon currently available is The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (HALOT) (vols. 1-5; trans. M. E. J. Richardson; Brill, 1994-2000). However, the price is beyond most students and scholars. A more affordable edition, which I highly recommend, is available, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Unabridged 2-Volume Study Edition) (2 vols. trans. M. E. J. Richardson; Brill, 2002). There are numerous lexicons on the market, which would be fine tools for the Bible student. Many scholars would concur that Biblical lexicons have four main weaknesses: (1) They are geared toward the translations of the 20th century, as opposed to new translations. (2) They primarily contain only information from the Bible itself, as opposed to possessing information from Greek literature overall. (3) They are too narrow as to the words of say the New Testament, attempting to harmonize a word and its meaning. The problem with this agenda is that a word 121
can have numerous meanings, some being quite different, depending on its context, even within the same author. (4) Most Biblical lexicons have not escaped the etymological fallacy, determining the meaning of a word based on its origin and past meaning(s). Another aspect being that the meaning of a word is based on the internal structure of the word. A common English example of the latter is ―butterfly.‖ The separate part of ―butter‖ and ―fly‖ do not define ―butterfly.‖ John 3:7 (1881 Westcott-Hort New Testament)* me thaumases hoti eipon soi dei humas gennethenai anothen
7
not to be astonished that I said to you it is necessary you to give birth to from above Do not be astonished that I said to you, ‗It is necessary for you to be born from above.17 7
* We are not going to place the actual Greek fonts, as the interlinear would have, as most of our readers have no knowledge of Greek, but we will use the transliteration into English. As you can see the interlinear translation to the left reads very rough, as it is following the Greek sentence structure. The Lexham English Bible rearranges the words according to English syntax on the right. Do not be surprised that at times words may need to be left out of the English translation, as they are unnecessary. For example, The Greek language likes to put the definite article ―the‖ before personal name, so in the Greek you may have ―the Jesus said.‖ In the English, it would be appropriate to drop the definite article. At other times, it may be appropriate to add words to complete the sense in the English translation. For example, at John 4:14, the LEB has ―But an hour is coming—and now is here—when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for indeed the Father seeks such people to be his worshipers.‖ *The word ―here‖ is not in the Greek text but is implied, so it is added to complete the sense. Essential Literal Translation Once the interlinear level of translation has taken place, it is now time to adjust them into sentences. Each word will possess its own grammatical indicator. As the translator begins to construct his English sentence, he will adjust according to the context of the words surrounding his focus. As you will see shortly, in the examples below, the translator must transition the words from the Greek order, to correct English grammar and syntax. This is the delicate balance face by the literal translation team, how close to we cling to the Hebrew or Greek word order in our English translation. The reader will find that the KJV, ASV and the NASB will allow a little roughness for the reader, for them an acceptable sacrifice, as they believe that meaning is conveyed by the word order at times. An overly simplified example might be Christ Jesus as opposed to Jesus Christ,
17
W. Hall Harris, III, The Lexham English Bible (Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2010), Jn 3:7.
122
with the former focusing on the office (―Christ‖ anointed one), while the latter focuses on the person. Even though it is impossible to follow the word order of the original in the English translation, the translator will attempt to stay as close as possible to the effective and persuasive use of the style of the original language. In other words, what is said is rendered into the English, as well as the way that it is said, as far as possible. This is why the literal translation is known as a ―formal equivalence.‖ As the literal translation, ―is designed so as to reveal as much of the original form as possible. (Ray 1982, 47) It should be noted that this writer favors the literal translation over the dynamic equivalent, and especially the paraphrase. The literal translation gives you what God said, there is no concealing this by going beyond into the realms of what a translator interprets these words as saying. It should be understood that God‘s Word to man is not meant to be read through like a John Grisham novel. It is meant to be meditated on, pondered over, and absorbed quite slowly; using many tools and helps along the way. There is a reason for this, it being that the Bible is a sifter of hearts. It separates out those who really want to know and understand God‘s Word (based on their evident demonstration of buying out the opportune time for study and research), from those who have no real motivation, no interest, just going through life. Having said that―there are two weaknesses of the literal translation―if taken too far. There are times when a literal word-for-word translation is not only in the best interest of the reader, but would convey a meaning contrary to the original. (1) As we have established throughout this chapter, but have not stated directly, no two languages are exactly equivalent in grammar, vocabulary, and sentence structure. Ephesians 4:14 (American Standard Version) As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery [lit., dice playing] of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming 14
The Greek word kybeia that is usually rendered ―craftiness‖ or ―trickery,‖ is literally ―dice-playing,‖ which refers to the practice cheating others when playing dice. If it was rendered literally, ―carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery dice playing of men,‖ the meaning would be lost. Therefore, the meaning of what is meant by the ‗dice playing‘ must be the translator‘s choice. Romans 12:11 (English Standard Version) Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent [lit., boiling] in spirit, serve the Lord.
11
When Paul wrote the Romans, he used the Greek word ―zeontes‖, which literally means ―boil,‖ ―seethe,‖ or ―fiery hot.‖ While some very serious Bible students may pick up on the thought of ―boiling in spirit,‖ as being ―fervent in spirit,‖ or better ―aglow with the spirit,‖ or ―keep your spiritual fervor.‖ Therefore, for the sake of making sense, it is 123
best to take the literal ―boiling in spirit‖, determine what is meant by those words, ―keep your spiritual fervor‖, and render it thus. Matthew 5:3 (New International Version, ©2011) 3
―Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:3 (GOD‘S WORD Translation) ―Blessed are those who [are poor in spirit] recognize they are spiritually helpless. The kingdom of heaven belongs to them. 3
This one is really a tough call. The phrase ―poor in spirit‖ carries so much history, and has been written on endlessly as to what it means, for almost 2,000 years, even the dynamic equivalent translations are unwilling to translate its meaning, not its words. Personally, this writer is in favor of the literal translation of ―poor in spirit.‖ Those who claim to be literal translators should not back away because ―poor in spirit‖ is ambiguous, and there is a variety of interpretations. The above dynamic equivalent translation, God‘s Word, has come closest to what was meant. Actually, ―poor‖ is even somewhat of an interpretation, because the Greek word ―ptōchoi‖ means ―beggar.‖ Therefore, ―poor in spirit‖ is an interpretation of ―beggar in spirit.‖ The extended interpretation is that the ―beggar/poor in spirit‖ is aware of his or her spiritual needs, as if a beggar or the poor would be aware of their physical needs. (2) As we have also established in this chapter a word‘s meaning can be different, depending on the context that it was used. 2 Samuel 8:3 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) David also defeated Hadadezer son of Rehob, king of Zobah, who went to restore his control [hand] at the Euphrates River. 3
1 Kings 10:13 (English Standard Version) And King Solomon gave to the queen of Sheba all that she desired, whatever she asked besides what was given her by the bounty [hand] of King Solomon. So she turned and went back to her own land with her servants. 13
Proverbs 18:21 (English Standard Version) Death and life are in the power [hand] of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruits. 21
The English word ―hand‖ has no meaning outside of its context. It could means, ―end of arm,‖ ―pointer on a clock,‖ ―player‘s cards,‖ ―round in a card game,‖ ―part in doing something,‖ ―round of applause,‖ ―member of a ship‘s crew,‖ or ―worker.‖ The Hebrew word ―yad,‖ which means ―hand,‖ has many meanings as well, depending on the context, as it can mean ―control,‖ ―bounty,‖ or ―power.‖ This one word is translated in more than forty different ways in some translations. Let us look at some English sentences, to see the literal way of using hand, and then add what it means, as a new sentence. 124
Please give a big hand for our next contestant. Please give a big applause for our next contestant. Your future is in your own hands. Your future is in your own power. Your future is in your own possession. Attention, all hands! Attention, all ship’s crew! She has a good hand for gardening. She has a good ability or skill for gardening. At times, even a literal translation committee will not render a word the same every time it occurs, because the sense is not the same every time. The only problem we have is that the reader must now be dependent on the judgment of the translator to select the right word(s) that reflect the meaning of the original language word accurately and understandably. Let us look at the above texts from the Hebrew Old Testament again, this time doing what we did with the English word ―hand‖ in the above. It is debatable if any of these verses really needed to be more explicit, by giving the meaning in the translation, as opposed to the word itself. who went to restore his hand at the Euphrates River – who went to restore his control at the Euphrates River she asked besides what was given her by the hand of King Solomon - she asked besides what was given her by the bounty of King Solomon Death and life are in the hand of the tongue - Death and life are in the power of the tongue Dynamic Equivalent Translation Translators who produce what are frequently referred to as paraphrase Bibles, or free translations, take liberties with the text as presented in the original languages. How so? They either insert their opinion of what the original text could mean or omit some of the information contained in the original text. Paraphrase translations may be appealing because they are easy to read. However, their very freeness at times obscures or changes the meaning of the original text. Consider the way that one paraphrase Bible translates Jesus‘ famous model prayer: ―Our Father in heaven, reveal who you are.‖ (Matthew 6:9, The Message: The Bible in Contemporary Language) A more accurate translation of Jesus‘ words renders this passage: ―Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.‖ Note, too, the way that John 17:26 is rendered in some Bibles. According to one free translation, on the night of his arrest, Jesus said to his Father in prayer, ―I made you known to them.‖ (Today‘s English Version) However, a more faithful rendering of Jesus‘ prayer reads: ―I have made your name known to them.‖ Can you see how some translators actually hide the fact that God has a name that should be used and honored?
125
Paraphrase Translation A paraphrase is ―a restatement of a text, passage, or work giving the meaning in another form.‖18 The highest priority and characteristic is the rephrasing and simplification. Whatever has been said in the above about the dynamic equivalent can be magnified a thousand fold herein. The best way to express the level this translation will go to is to select some paraphrases and set them side-by-side with the dynamic equivalent and literal translations. It is recommended that you read verses 1-4 in the Message Bible, then in the New Living Translation, and then in the English Standard Version. Thereafter, read verses 5-9 in the same manner, followed by verses 10-12, and 13-17. This way you will taste the flavor of each with just a small bit at a time, so you do not lose the sense of the previous one by too much reading.
Isaiah 1:1-17 The Message (MSG) The vision that Isaiah son of Amoz saw regarding Judah and Jerusalem during the times of the kings of Judah: Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. 2-4Heaven and earth, you're the jury. Listen to God's case: "I had children and raised them well, and they turned on me. The ox knows who's boss, the mule knows the hand that feeds him, But not Israel. My people don't know up from down. Shame! Misguided God-dropouts, staggering under their guilt-baggage, Gang of miscreants, band of vandals— My people have walked out on me, their God, turned their backs on The Holy of Israel, walked off and never looked back. 1
"Why bother even trying to do anything with you when you just keep to your bullheaded ways? You keep beating your heads against brick walls. Everything within you protests against you. From the bottom of your feet to the top of your head, nothing's working right. Wounds and bruises and running sores— untended, unwashed, unbandaged. Your country is laid waste, your cities burned down. 5-9
18
Inc Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary., Eleventh ed. (Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003).
126
Your land is destroyed by outsiders while you watch, reduced to rubble by barbarians. Daughter Zion is deserted— like a tumbledown shack on a dead-end street, Like a tarpaper shanty on the wrong side of the tracks, like a sinking ship abandoned by the rats. If God-of-the-Angel-Armies hadn't left us a few survivors, we'd be as desolate as Sodom, doomed just like Gomorrah. "Listen to my Message, you Sodom-schooled leaders. Receive God's revelation, you Gomorrah-schooled people. 10
"Why this frenzy of sacrifices?" God's asking. "Don't you think I've had my fill of burnt sacrifices, rams and plump grain-fed calves? Don't you think I've had my fill of blood from bulls, lambs, and goats? When you come before me, whoever gave you the idea of acting like this, Running here and there, doing this and that— all this sheer commotion in the place provided for worship? 11-12
"Quit your worship charades. I can't stand your trivial religious games: Monthly conferences, weekly Sabbaths, special meetings— meetings, meetings, meetings—I can't stand one more! Meetings for this, meetings for that. I hate them! You've worn me out! I'm sick of your religion, religion, religion, while you go right on sinning. When you put on your next prayer-performance, I'll be looking the other way. No matter how long or loud or often you pray, I'll not be listening. And do you know why? Because you've been tearing people to pieces, and your hands are bloody. Go home and wash up. Clean up your act. Sweep your lives clean of your evildoings so I don't have to look at them any longer. Say no to wrong. 13-17
127
Learn to do good. Work for justice. Help the down-and-out. Stand up for the homeless. Go to bat for the defenseless. Isaiah 1:1-17 New Living Translation (NLT) These are the visions that Isaiah son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. He saw these visions during the years when Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah were kings of Judah. 1
Listen, O heavens! Pay attention, earth! This is what the LORD says: ―The children I raised and cared for have rebelled against me. 3 Even an ox knows its owner, and a donkey recognizes its master‘s care— but Israel doesn‘t know its master. My people don‘t recognize my care for them.‖ 4 Oh, what a sinful nation they are— loaded down with a burden of guilt. They are evil people, corrupt children who have rejected the LORD. They have despised the Holy One of Israel and turned their backs on him. 2
Why do you continue to invite punishment? Must you rebel forever? Your head is injured, and your heart is sick. 6 You are battered from head to foot— covered with bruises, welts, and infected wounds— without any soothing ointments or bandages. 7 Your country lies in ruins, and your towns are burned. Foreigners plunder your fields before your eyes and destroy everything they see. 8 Beautiful Jerusalem stands abandoned like a watchman‘s shelter in a vineyard, like a lean-to in a cucumber field after the harvest, like a helpless city under siege. 9 If the LORD of Heaven‘s Armies had not spared a few of us, 5
128
we would have been wiped out like Sodom, destroyed like Gomorrah. Listen to the LORD, you leaders of ―Sodom.‖ Listen to the law of our God, people of ―Gomorrah.‖ 11 ―What makes you think I want all your sacrifices?‖ says the LORD. ―I am sick of your burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fattened cattle. I get no pleasure from the blood of bulls and lambs and goats. 12 When you come to worship me, who asked you to parade through my courts with all your ceremony? 13 Stop bringing me your meaningless gifts; the incense of your offerings disgusts me! As for your celebrations of the new moon and the Sabbath and your special days for fasting— they are all sinful and false. I want no more of your pious meetings. 14 I hate your new moon celebrations and your annual festivals. They are a burden to me. I cannot stand them! 15 When you lift up your hands in prayer, I will not look. Though you offer many prayers, I will not listen, for your hands are covered with the blood of innocent victims. 16 Wash yourselves and be clean! Get your sins out of my sight. Give up your evil ways. 17 Learn to do good. Seek justice. Help the oppressed. Defend the cause of orphans. Fight for the rights of widows. 10
Isaiah 1:1-17 English Standard Version (ESV) The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. 1
Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth; for the LORD has spoken: "Children have I reared and brought up, but they have rebelled against me. 3The ox knows its owner, and the donkey its master‘s crib, 2
129
but Israel does not know, my people do not understand." Ah, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, offspring of evildoers, children who deal corruptly! They have forsaken the LORD, they have despised the Holy One of Israel, they are utterly estranged. 4
Why will you still be struck down? Why will you continue to rebel? The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. 6 From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness in it, but bruises and sores and raw wounds; they are not pressed out or bound up or softened with oil. 5
Your country lies desolate; your cities are burned with fire; in your very presence foreigners devour your land; it is desolate, as overthrown by foreigners. 8And the daughter of Zion is left like a booth in a vineyard, like a lodge in a cucumber field, like a besieged city. 7
If the LORD of hosts had not left us a few survivors, we should have been like Sodom, and become like Gomorrah. 9
Hear the word of the LORD, you rulers of Sodom! Give ear to the teaching of our God, you people of Gomorrah! 11 "What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says the LORD; I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams 10
130
and the fat of well-fed beasts; I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs, or of goats. "When you come to appear before me, who has required of you this trampling of my courts? 13 Bring no more vain offerings; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations— I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly. 14Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hates; they have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them. 15When you spread out your hands, I will hide my eyes from you; even though you make many prayers, I will not listen; your hands are full of blood. 16 Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean; remove the evil of your deeds from before my eyes; cease to do evil, 17learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow‘s cause. 12
Essentially Literal Contrasted With Dynamic Equivalent In short, the dynamic equivalent translator seeks to render the biblical meaning of the original language text as accurately as possible into an English informal (conversational) equivalent. Alternatively, the essentially literal translation seeks to render the original language words and style into a corresponding English word and style. Before we delve into the basics of Bible translation, it would be best to define a couple common acronyms that are commonly used in these sorts of technical discussions. Source Language (SL) is the language from which a translation is being produced in another. Therefore, if one is translating from Hebrew into English, then Hebrew is the SL. Receptor Language (RL) is just the opposite; it is the language into which the translation is being produced. Therefore, if one is translating from Greek into English, then English is the RL. 131
As you can see from the above, the terms Source and Receptor language have the acronym SL and RL. Also, keep in mind that the text that the translator is rendering into another language is the source text. Please do not confuse the Source Language with the Original Language. True, the Source Language can be the Original Language of say Hebrew or Greek. However, if there is a case of a translator making a Chinese translation of the New Testament, but has chosen to make it from English, the Source Language would be English. Yet, the Original language of the Old Testament is Hebrew, and the New Testament is Greek. We will get more into the differences in translations in the appendices, but for now, know that there are two major divisions as mentioned above. You have the word-forword and the thought-for-thought. A literal translation is one-step removed from the original and something is always lost or gained, because there will never be 100 percent equivalent transference from one language to the next. A thought-for-thought translation is one more step removed than the literal translation in many cases, and can block the sense of the original entirely. A thought-for-thought translation slants the text in a particular direction, cutting off other options and nuances. A literal word-for-word translation makes every effort to accurately represent the authority, power, vitality and directness of the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures and to transfer these characteristics in modern English. The essentially literal translations have the goal of producing as literal a translation as possible where the modern-English idiom permits and where a literal rendering does not conceal the thought. Comparison of Word-for-Word and Though-for-Thought Translations Essentially Literal Translation Though-for-Thought Translation Focuses on form
Focuses on meaning
Emphasizes source language
Emphasizes receptor language
Translates what was said
Translates what was meant
Presumes original context
Presumes contemporary context
Retains ambiguities
Removes ambiguities
Minimizes interpretative bias
Allows for interpretative bias
Valuable for serious Bible study
Valuable for commentary use
Awkward receptor language style
Natural receptor language style
1 Kings 2:10 Essentially Literal Translation (ASV, RSV, ESV, NASB)
And David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David. And David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David. Then David slept with his fathers and was buried in the city of David. Then David slept with his fathers and was buried in the city of David. 132
1 Kings 2:10 Though-for-Thought Translation (GNB, CEV, NLT, MSG)
David died and was buried in David's City. Then he died and was buried in Jerusalem. Then David died and was buried with his ancestors in the City of David. Then David joined his ancestors. He was buried in the City of David. One could conclude that the thought-for-thought translations are conveying the idea in a more clear and immediate way, but is this really the case? There are three points that are missing from the thought-for-thought translation: In the scriptures, ―sleep‖ is used metaphorically as death, also inferring a temporary state where one will wake again, or be resurrected. That idea is lost in the thought-forthought translation. (Ps 13:3; John 11:11-14; Ac 7:60; 1Co 7:39; 15:51; 1Th 4:13) Sleeping with or lying down with his father also conveys the idea of having closed his life and having found favor in God‘s eyes as did his forefathers. When we leave out some of the words from the original, we also leave out the possibility of more meaning being drawn from the text. Missing is the word shakab (―to lie down‖ or ―to sleep‖), ’im (―with‖) and ‗ab in the plural (―forefathers‖). Psalm 13:3 (American Standard Version) Consider and answer me, O Jehovah my God: Lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death; John 11:11-14 (American Standard Version) These things spake he: and after this he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus is fallen asleep; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. The disciples therefore said unto him, Lord, if he is fallen asleep, he will recover. Now Jesus had spoken of his death: but they thought that he spake of taking rest in sleep. Then Jesus therefore said unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead. Acts 7:60 (American Standard Version) And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep. 1 Corinthians 7:39 (New World Translation) A wife is bound during all the time her husband is alive. But if her husband should fall asleep (koimethe) [in death], she is free to be married to whom she wants, only in [the] Lord.* * The ASV, ESV, NASB, and other literal translation do not hold true to their essentially literal policy here. This does not bode well in their claim that essential literal is the best policy. I am speaking primarily to the ESV translators, who make this claim in numerous books. 133
1 Corinthians 15:51 (American Standard Version) Behold, I tell you a mystery: We all shall not sleep, but we shall all be changed, 1 Thessalonians 4:13 (American Standard Version) But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning them that fall asleep; that ye sorrow not, even as the rest, who have no hope. Those who argue for a though-for-thought translation will say the literal translation ―slept‖ or ―lay down‖ is no longer a way of expressing death in the modern English speaking world. While this may be true to some extent, the context of chapter two, verse 1: ―‖when David was about to die‖ and the latter half of 2:10: ―was buried in the city of David‖ really resolves that issue. Moreover, while the reader may have to meditate a little longer, or indulge him/herself in the culture of different Biblical times, they will not be shorted of the full potential that a verse has to convey. (Grudem, Ryken, Collins, Polythress, & Winter, 2005, 21-22)
A Word of Caution The dynamic equivalent can obscure things from the reader by overreaching in their translations. This can be demonstrated on the moral standards found in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (The Message) Don't you realize that this is not the way to live? Unjust people who don't care about God will not be joining in his kingdom. Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it, don't qualify as citizens in God's kingdom. 9-10
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (English Standard Version) Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 9
If you compare the MSG with the ESV, you will notice that the MSG does not even list the specifics defined by the apostle Paul on precisely what kind of conduct we should shun are not even mentioned. Matthew 7:13 (Today‘s English Version) ―Go in through the narrow gate, because the gate to hell is wide and the road that leads to it is easy, and there are many who travel it. 13
Matthew 7:13 (English Standard Version) "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 13
134
The Greek word apōleian means ―destruction,‖ ―waste,‖ annihilation, ―ruin.‖ Therefore, one has to ask, ‗why did the TEV translation committee render it ―hell‖? It is doctrinal bias, plain and simple. The translation committee is looking to promote the doctrine of eternal torment, not destruction. The objective of the translator is to render it the way that it should be rendered. If it supports a certain doctrine, so be it, if not, so be it. The policy is that God does not need an overzealous translator to convey his doctrinal message. A good translation will do the following: (1) Accurately render the original language words and style into the corresponding English word and style that were inspired by God. (2) Translate the meaning of words literally, when the wording and construction of the original text allows for such a rendering in the target language. (3) Transfer the correct meaning (sense) of a word or a phrase when a literal rendering of the original-language word or a phrase would garble or obscure the meaning. (4) In considering the first three points here, as far as possible, use natural, easyto-understand language that inspires reading. Are there such translations available on the market? Yes, this book recommends the following translations below, as every Bible student should have multiple translations, and at least one from every style.
Literal Translations for Bible Study and Research ESV: English Standard Version (2001) NASB: New American Standard Version (1995) AS V: American Standard Version (1901) LEB: Lexham English Bible (2010)
Semi-Literal Translations HCSB: Holman Christian Standard Bible (2003) NET: New English Translation (1996)
Translations Between Literal and Dynamic Equivalent NIV: New International Version (2011)
Dynamic Equivalent Translations NLT: New Living Translation (2004) CEV: Contemporary Version (1995) 135
TEV: Today’s English Version (1976)
Paraphrase Translation MSG: The Message Bible (2002)
Stage Three: Word Study Word study is a valuable tool in our getting to understand the Word of God, but we must understand that there is a correct way and a wrong way of doing word studies. One primary concern is the every word has multiple meanings.
Two Principles to Keep in Mind (1) The first principle is that words in all languages have a range of meanings. The technical term for this is semantics, which is defined as, the study of how meaning in language is created by the use and interrelationships of words, phrases, and sentences. Let us just chose one word, the English word ―grace.‖ There are numerous uses for that word: elegance, beauty, and smoothness of form or movement; dignified, polite, and decent behavior; a capacity to tolerate, accommodate, or forgive people; a grace period in one‘s finances; a pleasing and admirable quality or characteristic; in Christianity, the infinite love, mercy, favor, and goodwill shown to humankind by God. To have the word ―grace‖ written on a piece of paper by itself, it would carry no meaning, you must have it in a sentence, like the following: She fended off queries with her usual grace, or so good of you to grace us with your presence. (2) The second principle is that the context will determine the meaning of any word. Context is by far the most important principle in Bible study. There is no way to determine the meaning of a word without all of the material that surrounds it. If you were asked what does the ―grace‖ mean? You would have to say, ‗well, it all depends on the context.‘ In considering the context, we may want to move outwards, in a sort of spiral. Of course, we want to look at the immediate context, the surrounding words, sentences and paragraphs. We want to consider how the text is being used. It may be beneficial to look at how the word is used elsewhere, like Paul in the book of Romans, and the book of Galatians. In addition, we may want to consider the rest of the New Testament, if it is a New Testament word. However, I would offer a word of caution, in that just because Paul uses a word 20 times, it does not mean that he is always using it in the same sense, context determines that.
Do Not Become Sidetracked With Word Studies No, I am not encouraging you not to do words studies. One can become bogged down in word studies if they attempt to study every word in a reading that may make up 10 to 20 verses. Imagine having to do an extensive word study on several hundred words. Therefore, it is best to focus your energies on the more important 4-5 words in each text, such as the verbs. It is the verb that moves the action along, so they may be 136
important. If you find that, the same word is showing up repeatedly. In the latter part of chapter 3 and chapter four in the book of Hebrews, the word ―today‖ shows up numerous times. "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion." (3:15) Other words that would be important are difficult words, or theological words. You will want to read the passages repeatedly, looking for those words that the passage seems to hinge on, as well as figures of speech, and words that come across as different. While there are those that are still using books, tablet and pen, today‘s Bible student has access to software tools that make word study a simplified task. What would take hours before, can now be done in minutes. At the end of this chapter, I will recommend some software programs that run from free to somewhat expensive. The only need is access to a computer.
Word Study Fallacies One of the primary fallacies comes from those that only use one specific Bible translation, like the King James Version only Bible students. If you are only studying or reading on the surface, you will never discover what is behind some of those English words. The other aspect of this is the reader is thinking with his or her modern day mindset. Philippians 2:5-8 (King James Version) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 5
Philippians 2:5-8 (English Standard Version) Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 5
Philippians 2:5-8 (New American Standard Bible) Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 5
Looking at the King James Version, and our English mindset, how are we to understand that Jesus made himself of no reputation? It can give us the impression that he was simply attempt to avoid fame, to avoid a reputation. This is certainly not the case, and by exploring more than on translation, it can wake us up to a 137
misunderstanding, or at least a difference that needs to be investigated. While there seems to be no end to the line of new English translations, it must be said that there will always be a need for new translations. ‗Why‘ you may be asking? If we were to turn to the many translators in the field of Bible translation, they would offer at least three good reasons: (1) the manuscripts that have been discovered over the centuries are always being studied and better understood, then this increased knowledge may mean adjustments in the translation. (2) Our knowledge of the Bible languages just keeps improving over the years, and once again this can leader to more accurate translations. (3) Languages are living and growing and change over time, altering the meaning of words, in some case, to the opposite. In 1611, ―let‖ in ―I let John go to school‖ meant ―stop‖ or ―restrain.‖ However, it is not just the need to have something other than the King James Version. One needs What I recommend is that for study of God‘s Word, use 2-3 very good literal translations, and 2-3 dynamic equivalents as a sort of quick commentary on Scripture. As to the literal translations, we would recommend the English Standard Version, 2001 (ESV), The Updated New American Standard Bible, 1995 (UNASB), the American Standard Version, 1901 (ASV), the Holman Christian Standard Bible, 2003 (HCSB), as well as the Lexham English Bible (LEB). As to the dynamic equivalent, we recommend the New Living Translation, 2007 (NLT), the Good News Bible, 2001 (GNB), and the Contemporary English Version, 1995 (CEV).
The Root Fallacy The basic of this fallacy is that I acquire my understanding of the Hebrew or Greek word by its root. The root of a word is the simplest possible form of a word, the smallest meaningful element of speech or writing. An English example for runners is run. This fallacy assumes that every word has a meaning that is derived from its shape or parts. It is often said that the person who has only learned enough Hebrew or Greek to be dangerous commits this mistake. However, once you read enough commentaries, you will find that the scholars commit this fallacy as well. A verbal cognate is a noun that functions as the object of a verb that is from the same etymological root, as in "to dream a dream" or "to think a thought." The pastor regularly says that the verbal cognate of apostle (apostolos) is ―I send‖ (apostellō); therefore, the root meaning of ―apostle‖ is ―one who is sent‖, ―send forth‖ or ―send off.‖ A leading Bible dictionary, Holman has it this way, ―APOSTLE Derivation of the Greek word apostolos, one who is sent.‖19 This meaning is established by breaking apostellō apart, apo + stellō. It is likely that ‗sent out‘ is an aspect of apostolos (apostle), it is not the primary meaning. The word apostolos primarily means ‗a special messenger, a representative,‘ with the idea of being sent out as an implication from the background. (Louw 1982, 27-28)
19
Chad Brand, Charles Draper, Archie England et al., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003), 88.
138
This is not how language works. If we turn to an English example, it may clear things up for us. Say 2,000 year from now, a linguist is trying to discover the meaning of our English word ―pineapple.‖ He disciver that the document that he is holding was written in part of the United States that had a lot of pine trees, with many apple tree orchard nearby. The linguist suggests to his colleagues that the scientists back in the 20 th and 21st century must have combined the gentics of these two fruits to produce a pineapple tree. The parts of a word does not determine its meaning. Just because an icecream truck brings us icecream, are we to expect that a firetruck brings us fire? Does the word ―parkway‖ mean a large parking lot? No. Does a ―driveway‖ infer that it is a place for driving a vehicle? What would linguistic scholars 2,000 years from now think of our English language? Having made a case for the above, one must say there are no absolutes, as some words carry a meaning based on their parts that make them up. The way you should hold this within your thinking is this way, ‗largely, words do not derive their meaning from their parts, their internal structure. However, at times, this can be te case. Yet, the key is what did that word mean to that culture, those people at that time, how was it commonly used?‘ An example of this, is the fact that at time a preposition was added on the from of a word for intensification purposes. An example would be gnosis, which is the Greek word for ―knowledge,‖ with the preposision epi (meaning ―additional‖) added to the front, giving us epignosis, meaning complete, accurate or full knowledge.
The Time Frame fallacy The fallacy is the act of taking the meaning of a word hundreds of years before or after the time of the writing and applying that meaning to the word under consideration, to get the meaning we want. For example, the teacher may take the meaning of the Greek word hades, as it was understood in classical Greek (―netherworld,‖ hundreds of years before) and apply it to the New Testament meaning of hades (grave). The apostle Paul tells us at Romans 1:16 that the ‗gospel is God‘s power for salvation. The Greek word behind the English ―power‖ is dynamis, which means ―power, might, strength, and force.‖ However, the pastor will say that dynamis is where we get our English word dynamite from. Then he will go on to say that ‗the gospel is the dynamite of God.‘ You the reader can obviously see the fallacy in this from a timeframe standpoint. The apostle Paul was not aware of the word dynamite, and the meaning it conveys is not what was going through his mind as he penned the word dynamis. What word picture do you the reader draw at the idea of dynamite? It is used to blow things up, to destroy things, and terrorists use it. There is really nothing about the word that can be read into what Paul meant by dynamis. To say that the gospel is ―power‖ is to acknowledge the dynamic quality of the message. In the proclamation of the gospel God is actively at work in reaching out to the hearts of people. The gospel is God telling of his love to wayward people. It is not a lifeless message but a vibrant encounter for everyone who responds in faith. Much religious discourse is little more than words and ideas about religious subjects. Not so the 139
gospel. The gospel is God at work. He lives and breathes through the declaration of his redemptive love for people. To really hear the gospel is to experience the presence of God.20
The Overload Fallacy As we have discussed, every word has more than one meaning, and the context that determines that meaning. Those who are guilty of this fallacy, take a word that has multiple meanings and attempts to incorporate all of the meanings into this one word. The word has one meaning in its context, that the author intended by its use in that context he placed it in, at the time and place of the writing. Worse still, the person chooses the meaning that he likes and applies that to the word, regardless of its context.
How to do a word study (A) Determine which English word in a given text that you wish to know more about. As was said in the above, you do not want to do every word, as it will lead to burnout from boredom. Let us choose Ephesians 1:7 as out test passage. We are going to investigate the English word ―grace.‖ The first thing we want to do is look at numerous translations, to see if the word is rendered the same way each time. ―Grace‖ is a theologically important word, so as was expected, it is the same in all the translation I considered (ESV, HCSB, NIV, NLT, NASB, and the ASV). However, I came across a highly dynamic equivalent translation that tends to render what they believe a word means, not what it is, so I will include that below as well. The Contemporary English Version has determined that ―grace‖ means ―kindness‖ here at Ephesians 1:17. Ephesians 1:7 (English Standard Version) In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace 7
Ephesians 1:7 (Contemporary English Version) Christ sacrificed his life's blood to set us free, which means that our sins are now forgiven. Christ did this because God was so kind to us. God has great wisdom and understanding, 7-8
(B) Now we need to determine the Greek word behind our English word ―grace.‖ It is charitos (charis). The easiest tool to use at this initial stage is the interlinear. I would personally recommend the Word Study Greek-English New Testament for the student. (http://astore.amazon.com/bibletranslat-20/detail/0842382909) The interlinear will seem somewhat confusing as was discussed earlier. The word order of Greek is not the same as the English, so it will come off as somewhat garbled. However, you are just looking for your English word, and the Greek word beneath it. If 20
Robert H. Mounce, vol. 27, Romans, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001), 70.
140
we look into our word study interlinear, we find our Charitos, but we also find that the interlinear has rendered it ―favor.‖ My, it seems the further that we dig; the more confusion is beginning heaped upon us. However, let us stay the course, and see if the dust settles in the end, clearing things up for us. Anyway, we find that I has Greek number 5485, which will help us make sure that we are considering the right word in our tools as we move along. A step that is not always necessary is to look the word up in a concordance. ―A concordance is a book that lists all the words in the Bible in alphabetical order, and under each word shows you the verses in which that word occurs.‖21 I need to offer you a word of caution on concordances. A regular concordance can be misleading to the beginner. You may look up an English word and find a hundred occurrences, and not realize, it is showing you all the occurrences of your English word, but there might be several different Greek words behind those occurrences. Our word study book has a special concordance in the back. It will show you all the occurrences of the same Greek word. We simply move through the numbers until we come to our 5485. We are going to find every place that charitos is used and a short phrase, which encompasses our word. At Ephesians 1:7, we find ―to the riches of his grace.‖ One thing that we discover immediate is that Paul uses charitos with the same meaning all through Ephesians, 12 times. (C) The next step in our word study is to find the range meaning for our word charis. You will also notice that the word study book has chosen ―favor‖ as a primary meaning, which will be found throughout the interlinear under each occurrence of charis, regardless of how it will end up being rendered in the English Bible translation. Another discovery is that the word is used with a number of meanings: grace, thank, thankfulness, thanks, favor, graciousness, benefit, gift, credit, and grateful. Another tool is the word dictionary, or as the scholar calls them, the lexicon. Here are a few examples of our word charis.
5485.
charis; a prim. word; grace, kindness:—blessing(1), concession(1), credit(3), favor(11), gift(1), grace(122), gracious(2), gracious work(3), gratitude(1), thank(3), thankfulness(2), thanks(6).22 (D) The next step in our word study process is looking to the context. You have chosen the English word to investigate, discovered the Hebrew or Greek word behind it, and you then determined the range of its possible meaning. Now you need to turn your attention to the context.
21
William D. Mounce, Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), xvi. 22
Robert L. Thomas, New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries: Updated Edition (Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc., 1998).
141
As was stated earlier, you are working in a spiral, moving out from the word, to the sentence, the verse, the section of verses that encompass the subject, the chapter, and the Bible book itself. What you will do is take the list of possible meanings and plug them into the sentence, seeing which fit the sentence context. If that does not resolve things, you move out to the verse itself. If you are still struggling with the choice, move out to the verse before and after your verse, all of which are dealing with the subject area of your verse. For example, our Ephesians 1:7 would include verses 3-7. What you need to keep in mind is the further removed you are from the initial sentence; the less likely you are to lock down the meaning. Therefore, you will want to ascertain the meaning as soon as possible. On the return trip home after the festivals in Jerusalem, Joseph and Mary may have thought that Jesus was with the family, so at first his not being present had gone unnoticed. Three days later, when Mary and Joseph came to find Jesus, he was in the temple, ―sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions.‖—Luke 2:44-46. Luke 2:46 (English Standard Version) After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 46
This was no 12-year-old boy question of curiosity. The Greek word erōtaō is the Greek word for ―ask,‖ ―question,‖ and is a synonym of eperōtaō. The latter of the two was used by Luke and is much more demanding, as it means, ―to as a question, to question, interrogate someone, to questioning as used in judicial examination‖ and therefore could include counter questioning. Therefore, Jesus, at the age of twelve did not ask childlike questions, looking for answers, but was likely challenging the thinking of these Jewish religious leaders. What was the response of these Jewish religious leaders? Luke 2:47 (English Standard Version) And all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers.
47
Basic Bible Study Tools Needed Below will be the basic Bible study tools that one needs to dig deeper into God‘s Word, and complete the study charts in upcoming chapters.
Bibles The ESV Study Bible (ESV) by Crossway Bibles NASB MacArthur Study Bible, Revised and updated By John MacArthur / Thomas Nelson NIV Archaeological Study Bible, Hardcover By Zondervan
Bible Dictionaries Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary New Bible Dictionary 142
New International Bible Dictionary
Word Study Dictionaries Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words Expository Dictionary of Bible Words: Word Studies for Key English Bible Words Based on the Hebrew and Greek Texts Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words: With Topical Index
Bible Commentary Holman Concise Bible Commentary
Bible Commentary Volumes Holman Old Testament Commentary Series- 20 volume set Holman New Testament Commentary (12 volume set)
Bible Handbook Holman Bible Handbook Halley's Bible Handbook with the New International Version―Deluxe Edition Zondervan Handbook to the Bible, Revised Edition
143
Stage Four: Historical Setting It is at this stage that we begin to take a look at the type of literature that we are considering, and the historical setting in which the letter was written. You can find this information in any good Bible handbook, like The Holman Bible Handbook. Writer Place written Time of writing Written to whom Literary form
Moses Wilderness 1512 B. C. The Israelites Saga (Sinai), Prose, Ritual Law
Purpose of writing: God had purposed to have a holy nation, a sanctified people, set apart for his service. From the time of Abel, faithful men of God had been offering sacrifices to Him. It is here though that He chose to explicitly explain the instruction for the sin offerings. These offerings made the Israelite people well aware of their sinfulness and the need for a better sacrifice. These laws served as a bodyguard, to protect the people from outside nations, leading to Jesus Christ. It is the ceremonial laws that were set in place to keep the people holy as God is holy. – Lev. 11:44; Gal. 3:19-25. Leviticus 3:17: It is here that we look to Bible background commentaries, like the IVP or the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary. In the IVP, we find the following comment: ―The suet [fat] is grouped with the blood as the portion belonging to the Lord. Just as the blood is a token of the life of the animal, the suet is a token of the meat of the sacrifice. (p. 122) The fat was regarded as the best or the richest part, this prohibition was in place to impress upon the Israelites that the best belonged to God. (Genesis 45:18)
Stage Five: Theological Context Leviticus 3:17, our above verse will likely not show up on the theological radar, especially in isolation. Theology is simply the study of God and His dealings with humanity and our world. (Towns, 2002)23 How does this verse (or any verses under consideration), help us understand God better, help us to draw closer to him? In other words, what does any text we are considering tell us about God, based on what we already know, and as possible new information we may have never considered before. Therefore, we want to garner the ability to see how the parts or aspects of what we know relate to one another, to see the entire matter and not just isolated facts.
Stage Six: Application This is where we bring the exegetical meaning back to our modern-day world in the same pattern or likeness. The text of ours simply reminds us that we should give our very best to God. Proverbs 3:9, 10; Colossians 3:23, 24. 23
Towns, Elmer L: Theology for Today. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Group, 2002, p. 901
144
Context Immediate context is the words, phrases, or passages that come before and after a particular word or passage in the Bible and help to explain its full meaning. Of course, the larger context would be the section of Scripture that your word or verse is in, as well as the chapter, the book, the Old or New Testament, or the Bible as a whole. Preunderstanding is all the knowledge and understanding that you possess before you begin. Thus, you will need to allow the important preunderstanding to affect you. However, we are not to be biased by the other portions. Therefore, we need to take those unimportant portions and place them on a lower priority or give it less prominence. Preunderstanding is everything that you are, and can be broken down into four categories, as discussed by Ferguson, Biblical Hermeneutics. (1) Information: This is the information, right or wrong, that you may possess before you begin reading about the subject. (2) Attitude: This is the mindset that you bring to the study: such as prejudice, bias, or predisposition (i.e., a favorable attitude toward somebody or something, or an inclination to do something). (3) Idealism: This is your worldview of everything, your perspective in life, a particular evaluation of a situation or facts, especially from your point of view. (4) Methodology: This is your way of expressing yourself on a given subject. In other words, you may at times, explain things by way of science, history, or explaining your conclusions based on your observation. This preunderstanding of things belongs to all of us, and there is no way to dislodge ourselves from it, the best we can hope for is to garner a measure of control over its influence on us, as we go about the task of Biblical interpretation. An example would be point number (3), idealism. If we are a scientific minded individual, we may start to set aside some of the supernatural acts of God and his human workers that he gave power and authority to, as being impossible according to modern science. Therefore, we start to rationalize how it may have come about according to our understanding of science. A preconception is an idea that we have in advance, and can be based on little or no information, reflecting bias. For example, one may approach the study of hellfire, a teaching of eternal torment for the damned, one that he has held from childhood, because of going to church with his grandmother. In his research, he will subconsciously or even willfully accept information that supports his preconception, but reject or ignore other information that does not support it. However, there are presuppositions that a Christian will want to accept as true: (1) The Word of God is inspired and fully inerrant, (2) The Bible is authoritative and true, (3) The Bible is full of diverse material (but unified), (4) The Bible has one meaning that the reader must discover, and 145
(5) Those meanings have many implications, and so on. How can we know if our preunderstanding is at odd with Scripture? You are to pray from this day forward that God give you understanding, that he help you to place your preunderstanding on a lower priority or give it less prominence until He helps you to uncover the truth of it, or to set it aside as untrue. You will from then on, work in harmony with that prayer, to establish if that preunderstanding is in harmony with the biblical data. As we have discussed at length, every word has a range of meanings, and it is the context that will determine what was meant. For example: 2 Timothy 3:17 (King James Version) The word of God was given so 17that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. What is meant by ―perfect‖ in the KJV? Are we to expect that by following the Word of God, we will become sinless? Will we become incapable of erring? While ―perfect‖ is an option in the range of meaning, but a poor choice. Before we visit other translations, let us attempt to work it out by looking at the context. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (King James Version) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. 16
As you can see by looking at what comes before and after our word ―perfect,‖ it is not talking about becoming sinless. It is saying that the Bible is beneficial in helping us live an equipped, competent, adequate, or complete godly life by establishing true doctrine and teaching others, by evaluating ourselves against Scripture in a reproof or corrective way, which will instruct us in the right way to walk with God. Therefore, as you can see, the context alone, corrected any possible misunderstandings. If we had visited other translations, we would have discerned this as well: ―that the man of God may be competent‖ (ESV), ―that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped‖ (NIV), ―so that the man of God may be adequate‖ (NASB), or ―so that the man of God may be complete.‖ (HCSB) As you noticed, the meaning of our word was easily established by a careful observation of what surrounded it. The entire Bible is open to this form of intensive observation. The context will always disclose the true meaning to you. John was in the backyard working on his car, when he yelled at his wife in the house, ‗Lisa, can you give me a hand for a second?‘ While it may seem silly to the English reader, one learning English may ask two questions, (1) ‗surely she is not going to cut off her hand and give it to him?‘ (2) ‗Who would need help on something for a second; it is such a short period of time?‘ Give me a hand also means help with something, and a second can mean various lengths of time in American English. Actually, it is not that ―hand‖ means ―help,‖ or that ―second‖ means longer than a second does. The technical 146
term for this is metonym, which is like an extension of that meaning, a word or phrase used in a figure of speech in which an attribute of something is used to stand for the thing itself. My asking a server at a restaurant for a cup of mud, is the same as asking for a cup of coffee, and is metonymy.
The Importance of Observation While this may seem like a given in Bible study, it is important that you understand the importance of observation, as you study your Bible and the tools that are out there, for there is no way you are going to arrive at a correct interpretation if you are missing key elements. We may all smile, but there are times that we are looking for something like our car keys, and spend 30 minutes of desperately searching for them, to find that they have been laying there right before our eyes the whole time. If you were to take one small book, like the book of Jude, and read it 50 times, meticulously, over the next month, taking notes, you would find that you missed many things after you opened a few commentaries. Therefore, our message for this chapter is observation, observation, observation. This is about slowing down, looking deeper, and pondering the Word of God. The world around us is all about immediate gratification. This is why in chapter 7 that I recommended you commit to a Bible reading plan that runs 4 – 5 years, not 1 year. Once you are a few months into that careful Bible reading plan, you will fully appreciate how much you have been missing. It is like taking a train through the most beautiful countryside in England, observing the beauty of God‘s handiwork. Now imagine that same train ride on a bullet train, at 130 mph. The same is true with those that are speedreading through the Bible, they are covering much ground, but do they really remember what they read, let alone understand what they read? Observation: This is paying close attention to the text, so that we can see what Jehovah God has laid out for us, becoming aware, for ascertaining all the details. Joshua 1:8 (English Standard Version) This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success. 8
Let us test just how much we can pull from a verse that is informing you of what I have said in the opening paragraphs. First, we see that we need to meditate on it day and night. The day and night is really hyperbole for read in it every day. The Hebrew word behind meditate (haghah) can be rendered ―mutter.‖ In other words, as we read, we are to read in an undertone, slightly out load, like muttering to oneself. The process of hearing the words increases our retention of the material dramatically. As Bible students we read to understand and remember what we read, as we are obligated to share this good news with others. Gesenius‘ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon (translated by S. Tregelles, 1901, p. 215) says of haghah: ―Prop[erly] to speak with oneself, murmuring and in a low voice, as is often done by those who are musing.‖—See also Ps 35:28; 37:30; 71:24; Isa 8:19; 33:18. 147
The last phrase in verse 8, ―you will have good success‖ can be rendered to ―act with insight.‖ How was Joshua to acquire this ability ―to act with insight‖? He was to meditate on God‘s Word day and night. What is the equation of Joshua 1:8? If Joshua were to read meditatively (in an undertone) from God‘s Word daily, applying it in his life, he would be able to act with insight, resulting in his prospering. Of course, the prospering is not financial gain. It is a life of joy and happiness in an age of difficult times. It is avoiding the pitfalls that those in the world around us suffer daily.
The Precision of Observation The eminent physician, Sir William Osler, made it a point to stress the importance of observation to his medical students. One day he took a bottle off his desk, saying, ‗This bottle contains a sample for analysis. It‘s possible by testing it to determine the disease from which the patient suffers.‘ Bringing this object lesson home, he dipped his finder into the fluid in the jar and then into his mouth. ‗Now, I am going to pass the bottle around. Each of you tastes the contents as I did and see if you can diagnose the case.‘ Thereafter, the bottle was passed from student to student, with each student nervously sticking their finger in the liquid of the jar, and bravely sticking their finger in their mouth, tasting a sample. After Osler retrieved the bottle, he announced, ‗Now you will understand what I mean when I speak about details. Had you been observant you would have seen that I put my index finger into the bottle but my middle finger in my mouth.‘ Let me ask, did you the reader notice that I italicized Osler‘s words to do ―as I did‖? A later chapter will cover this in greater detail.
Active Reading Reading is active, not a passive activity. This means that your mind is not wondering about, it is actively involved the material in front of you. As you are reading a given chapter, see if you are in agreement with the things being said. What is it that the writer is trying to get across? How does what he is saying support his theme? Is this information to be applied in my life (prescriptive), or is it simply historical information to move the story along (descriptive)? If it is prescribed for us, in what way am I to apply it in my life? As you are reading, let your mind capture the moment, placing you in the midst of the events. Smell the flowers, see the mountains, wade through the rivers, listen to the children as they play, catch the scent of freshly baked bread, take note of the way people are dressed, and be distraught over the injustices. Reading can be an adventure if you allow it. However, there are deep reasons for active reading, meditative reading. There are at least four reasons: (1) we want to develop a relationship with our heavenly Father, (2) we want to recall what we have read, (3) we want to apply these principles in our live, and (4) we want to share the truths we discover with others.
Live by the Rules The Rule is to Remember Context 148
As you know, the context is the surrounding verses and chapters, to the text under consideration, as well as the book, and the entire Word of God. Is the interpretation you have come away with, in harmony with the context? Is this interpretation fit the pattern of meaning, of the historical setting? For example, Psalm 1:1-3 tells us that if we do not walk in the counsel of the wicked, or stand in the path of sinner, nor sit with scoffers, but delight in the Word of God, ‗whatever he does, he will prosper.‘ Is that how we are to understand this, WHATEVER we do, we will prosper? No. In psalms, proverbs and other genre, there is an invisible ―generally‖ before these absolute statements. In other words, ‗generally speaking, whatever we do, we will prosper.‘
Figure 4 Stein, p. 39
149
The Rule is Know the Whole of the Word of God One needs to be familiar with the whole of the Word of God, to not be misled when someone presents you with Scriptures that are out of context. Too many people take a verse by what it says, without looking at what comes before or after it. For example, at Jesus said at John 15:7, ―ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.‖ This brings up to immediate questions: (1) can we simply ask for anything and God will give it to us, (2) and even if it is according to His will and purposes, are we guaranteed of getting it? First, the context of the first part of that verse qualifies what is being talked about here Jesus said, ―If you abide in me, and my words abide in you . . .‖ Thus, you must be doing A to get B. Second, this is an absolute, which has the invisible ―generally speaking‖ before it. Generally speaking, if you are abiding in Jesus and his words, the Father will answer your prayer if it is in harmony with His will and purposes. The Rule is to Remember that Scripture Will Never Contradict Itself If ever something is said in one place in Scripture that is at odd with another place in Scripture, you are misinterpreting it, or are not in the context. There are verses that say the earth will be here forever, and then 2 Peter 3:7 says ―the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire.‖ This would seem like a contradiction to the many other verses that say the earth will be here forever. However, if you look at the second half of that verse, it lets you know who is going to be destroyed, ―destruction of the ungodly.‖ The Rule is to Not Hang Your Doctrinal Beliefs on Texts that are Hard to Understand Do not be ashamed of struggling with passages that are hard to understand, because the apostle Peter even felt this way about some of the apostle Paul‘s letters. ― . . . our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.‖ (2 Pet 3:15-16) The Rule is Literal Interpretation The Bible is to be interpreted literally, as to what it meant to the original audience at the time of its being written. We are to seek the obvious meaning of the words that the author used, and in the context, he used them, as well as the language he used. This rule does not mean that we are ignorant to figurative language, where Jesus says he is a door, and Jehovah says he is a rock. Herein, we still take it literally, as to what the figurative language means. For example, if Jesus meant that he is the way , it is through him that we receive life, we take that message literally, not that we actually believe he is literally some movable barrier used to open and close the entrance to a building, room, closet. The Rule is what the Author Meant by the Words He Used This rule has been stressed all throughout this book. The meaning is what the author meant by the words that he used, as should have been understood by his readers, at the 150
time of writing. We must understand that descriptive history to move the text along is not necessarily prescribing what we should do. For example, in Judges Chapter 6, Gideon, desiring evidence that God was with him, requested that a fleece exposed at night on the threshing floor be wet with dew the next morning but that the floor be dry. This does not mean that we follow this as an example, to see if God wants us to do something. This was descriptive not prescriptive. The Rule is that Not All Commentaries are Created Equal Sadly, not all commentaries are equal. Sadly, theological bias affects us all, some more than others do. Therefore, it is good to fine a few companies that can be depended on, and rely on theses ones, unless you discover others that are found to be dependable as well. Software
Online Bibles: BibleGateway All-in-One
Faith Comes By Hearing Bible Study Tools The Unbound Bible
United Bible Societies NET Bible
Crosswire Blue Letter Bible
Study Tools: Olive Tree Bible Software Logos Bible Software Biblos Interlinear
NeXT Interlinear
New Living Bible Interlinear BibleWebApp
BibleArc
Biblos
Tagged Tanakh
Biblia
Bible Reader
Downloadable Tools: The Word (PC)
Scripture4All (PC)
My Offline Bible
XulSword (PC)
PocketSword
Glo Bible
BibleCrawler (PC)
E-Sword 151
Commercial Bible Software (Advanced Students): Accordance SESB
BibleWorks
Olive Tree
Gramcord
152
Bibliography Arthur, Kay. How to Study Your Bible. Eugene: Harvest House Publishers, 1994. Bock, Darrell L, and Buist M Fanning. Interpreting the New Testament Text. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2006. Caird, G B. The Land and Imagery of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Eermans, 1980. Carson, D A. Exegetical Fallacies. Grand Rapids: Baker Academics, 1996. Comfort, Philip. Encounterring the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography and Textual Criticism. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005. Comfort, Philip W. Essential Guid to Bible Versions. Wheaton: Tyndale House , 2000. Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Dockery, David S, and George H. Guthrie. The Holman Guide to Interpreting the Bible. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004. Erickson, Richard J. A Beginner's Guide to New Testament Exegesis. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2005. Grudem, Wayne, Leland Ryken, John C Collins, Vern S Polythress, and Bruce Winter. Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Louw, J P. Semantics of New Testament Greek. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1982. Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. New York: United Bible Society, 1994. Metzger, Bruce. The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001. —. The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, & Content. Nashville: Abingdon Books, 1965, 1983, 2003. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Ryken, Leland. Choosing a Bible: Understanding Bible Translation Differences. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005. —. The Word of God in English. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2002. —. Understanding English Bible Translation: The Case for an Essentially Literal Approach. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2009. 153
Silva, Moises. Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983, 1994. Silva, Moises, V. Philips Long, Tremper Longman, and Richard and Poythress, Vern S. Muller. Foundations of Contemporary Interpretation: Six Volumes in One. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
154
CHAPTER 14 INTRODUCTION TO BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION Hermeneutics is the science and art of interpreting texts, especially the books of the Bible. It is a science in that there are rules and principles that must be followed methodologically. It is an art in that the rules and principles must be applied in a balanced manner, and without preconceptions. Exegesis is one of the goals of hermeneutics. Exegesis is the explanation or interpretation of texts, especially religious writings in the context of the time it was written. In other words, the meaning is what the author meant by the words that he used, as should have been understood by his intended audience. Some may argue that you only read the Bible; saying that you do not have to make any effort to interpret it; therefore, why is there any need to understand biblical interpretation. The problem with this is that reading alone is interpretation; we are interpreting as we read. So then, what are the goals of the one who is interpreting the Bible? No one reads to misunderstand. Therefore, the chief priority would be to have a correct understanding of what you are studying, the correct mental grasp of the writer‘s intended meaning. Exegesis has the idea of getting the meaning out of the text, while eisegesis means to read the meaning into the text. We want to follow the former. It is beneficial that you be aware that others believe that meaning comes not from what the writer intended to convey by his words, but from the text itself. In other words, the words, the sentences the paragraphs are where the real meaning lies. The third alternative is that some believe that the reader, you yourself determine the meaning of the text. The latter is referred to by modern-day higher criticism as Reader Response. In other words, the reader himself generates the meaning, it can be different for each person, and all can be legitimately right. Without going into what I am certain is obvious to you, the correct approach is that the writer determines the intended meaning by the words he used, in the historical setting of that time, and this is the focus of this book. There is the need to establish the difference between a sentence and an utterance. A sentence is a group of words or a single word that expresses a complete thought, feeling, or idea. An utterance is a sentence, which occurs, in real life. If I were to say, ―He wrote the letter‖, it would be a complete sentence, but it is not an utterance, as it has no reallife application to it. However, if it is in reference the apostle Paul writing the Corinthian congregation; it is an utterance, because it has real-life application. Why is this important to us? Because a sentence has no meaning until it is tied to a real-life event. This is quite clear from looking back at our sentence, ―he wrote the letter.‖ Without context, there is no real meaning. Who is he, to whom did he write, when, and for what reason? Until the sentence is placed within its context, it has no real meaning. Now, once it is placed in the context, it has the intended meaning of the person who wrote it. Now, the question is, ‗does the Bible contain sentences or utterances?‘ It contains utterances, as it has real authors, dealing with real events, in actual historical settings, and real people. It is from 155
here that we arrive at the originally intended meaning. This is well illustrated by the images found in the book Grasping the Word of God by Duvall and Hayes.
Bridging the Gap
Duvall & Hays, Grasping God‘s Word, 2005, 24-2524
Focus on the picture for a moment and then come back to read. First, you need to recognize that the text was written in a completely different time and place with different custom and cultures, different languages from our modern-day setting. Duvall and Hayes recommend these four steps: Step 1: Grasp the text in their own town: What did the text mean to the original audience? Step 2: Measure the width of the river to cross: What are the differences between the biblical audience and us? Step 3: Cross the Principlizing Bridge: What is the theological principle in this text? Step 4: Grasp the text in our town: How should individual Christians today apply the theological principal in their lives? On the right side of this Principlizing Bridge are you and I, while the Biblical writer and his audience are on the left side. The writer can be any one of the forty plus writers, it all depends on which book you are studying. Between them and us is a huge flowing river. This river is pictorial of the difficulties that underlie the lack of ease in being able to interpret the Bible: time of writing, language, custom and culture, historical setting. Our 24
Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005.
156
goal is to cross over this bridge of difficulty to the other side, to be with them. Once there, we must enter into the world of the Bible writer: his mindset, his worldview, his thinking, the historical setting of his day, his language, among other things. This does not mean that you need to become fluent in biblical Hebrew and Greek, as you have word study tools that have done that for you. However, there is a joy in going to new places, and what better place than Bible times. There are tools out there that can help you understand these things, like Zondervan‘s Bible Background volumes that give you the biblical world as you read the Bible. Yes, this will mean a little work on your part, but that is just what one must do to go on vacation. You spend a considerable amount of time learning some basic French before visiting Paris. You learn a little of the city‘s history, and the best historical sites to visit. All of this is done for the sake of seven days in a city, as recreation. What more should we do for everlasting life, for an improved relationship with our Creator? Who wrote the book of Jude? How do you know? When was it written? And where was Christianity at the time it was written? Where did he write the letter, and to whom? What was the congregation like, and in what city? What was life like for the people, who received the letter? Why did he write about the subject he covered? What events moved him to pen this letter? As you read this short letter, from word to word, sentence to sentence and paragraph to paragraph, what message is being built based on your background knowledge? This is the goal of our journey into their ancient world. What would the second goal be?
Implications that Flow From the Meaning Once we have determined what the author meant by his words, we must now ascertain what implications we can draw from that meaning. An implication is a meaning that the author may have not been aware of, but falls within the pattern of meaning that the author intended to convey. Is it possible that the apostle Paul would be aware of the bad language and foul jokes that are told today? No. An implication of Paul‘s words at Ephesians 4:29 would apply as principles that we would want to live by if we are to maintain an approved relationship with God. Ephesians 4:29 (English Standard Version) Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. 29
We must determine the principle behind the words, and we do that by making sure that we are following the same pattern as the original meaning. Jesus himself in Matthew chapter 5 provides several good examples of this for us: Matthew 5:21-22 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.' 22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, 'You fool!' will be liable to the hell of fire. 21
157
Matthew 5:27-28 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' 28But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 27
Matthew 5:31-32 (English Standard Version) "It was also said, 'Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.' 32 But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. 31
Matthew 5:33-34 (English Standard Version) "Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.' 34 But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, 33
Matthew 5:38-39 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' 39 But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 38
Here you see a pattern, where Jesus says, ―You have heard that it was said,‖ . . . ―but I say to you.‖ The first half of that equation is the meaning from the Law, with the latter half being the implication that Jesus placed on it, following the same pattern. Looking at just one example, the Law did say that, ‗you shall not commit adultery,‘ but Jesus said that to have a lustful attitude toward another other than our spouse is to have already committed adultery in our heart. Sexual desire is not wrong, nor is it wrong to find a woman sexually attractive. Jesus is talking about lustful intent(something planned, or the purpose that accompanies a plan), which if opportunity presented itself, adultery would occur. He is also talking about looking at a woman in such a way as to cause her to lust as well. (Carson and Moo 1984, 151) While it is true that if there is no actual act of adultery, no overt sexual sin, there are no grounds for divorce, yet one has crossed over into the sinful nature of entertaining this act in their heart, the center of their being. They are an adulterer in their heart. Remember this is not a temptation, which is not a sin; it is an intention of the heart.
Application in Context We must do the same as Jesus did; he brought the comment from the Mosaic Law as an implication to his day. He crossed from the days of Moses to the very audience he was talking to, as should we. We are to take the principles behind the text, and cross back over our Principlizing Bridge, into our day. Once back on our side, we must determine how it can apply to our context and us, but not lose its pattern of meaning. How could you apply the following sample?
158
Genesis 19:26. How unwise to be sidetracked by or yearningly look back at what we have left behind in the world, after we have come a Christian! Exodus 3:14. God unswervingly carries out his purposes. Therefore, we can be certain that he will do the same for the other hopes found in His Word. Leviticus 12:8. God permitted the financially unfortunate to offer birds in place of a more expensive sheep as a sacrificial offering. He simply wants the best we have, and is concerned for His people that are struggling financially. John 14:15, 21, 23, 24; 15:10. Obedience to the will of God will help us to remain in an approved, loving relationship with Him as well as His Son. Acts 12:5-11. All Christians should offer prayers in behalf of our fellow brothers. After we have determined what the text meant in their context, we must cross back over the Principlizing Bridge and determine how to apply that same pattern in our life, in our context. We have to understand that not everything written in the Bible has a principle behind it that is eternal and is to be applied throughout time. Some of the Bible is simply historical data. Other parts of the Bible, like the sacrificial obligations of the Israelite nation are certainly not applicable to us today, but there are likely some principles behind them that can be applied in our walk with God. Exodus 29:38 (English Standard Version) "Now this is what you shall offer on the altar: two lambs a year old day by day regularly. 38
Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (English Standard Version) "If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, 19then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, 20and they shall say to the elders of his city, 'This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.' 21 Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear. 18
Leviticus 19:19 (English Standard Version) "You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material. 19
Are we obligated to offer animal sacrifices today? Are we to stone our rebellious children to death? Are we to where clothes with only one kind of material? Is the Christian farmer today allowed to only plant one type of seed in his field? The answer to these questions would be, no, as they applied to the Israelites. At to sacrifices, we Christians do well to ask, what did God expect of the Israelites, why He expected it, and how did He feel about it get done as He outlined it, or if it was done improperly, or if a 159
person was halfhearted in the service? Were the Israelites to offer their best in their sacrifices to Jehovah God? The Bible difficulty of the stoning of one‘s son is a great exercise in attempting to find an answer for such actions. We know that God is not an unjust God, so there is more to these verses than upon first glance. You are going to have to find the circumstances of why such an action would be necessary, and the principles behind that would likely be a different justified form of punishment today. First, to what extent are we talking about rebellious? It this like the physically and mentally abusiveness of teenage children today on their mothers, who have gone so far as to kill their parents? It should be understood there were no mental hospitals, no prescriptions, no jails, no detention centers in the days of the Israelites. In addition, as to the mixing of different seeds in sowing not being allowed, it must be remembered that different kinds of seeds could be sown, but it had to be separate places in the same field. (Le 19:19; Isa 28:25) Does this have anything to do with the fact that the Mosaic Law emphasized the need for separateness from their pagan neighbors? Was God emphasizing, or illustrating separateness in an objective lesson, to keep His people distinct? The Encyclopaedia Judaica (Jerusalem, 1973, Vol. 14, col. 1213) remarked: ―The clothing of the priests was notably exempt from the prohibition of shaʼatnez [a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material, ESV]. Exodus 28:6, 8, 15 and 39:29 prescribe that various pieces be made of linen and colored wool interwoven. . . . This suggests that the general prohibition was grounded on the taboo character of such a mixture, pertaining exclusively to the realm of the sacred.‖ The objective here should be quite clear, we need to fully understand the time, the language, the cultural setting and the later history that may be the reason behind an earlier text, before we can make an evaluative judgment as to how we can apply the verse. At first glance, it may seem that something is not applicable, but after further investigation, you discover why God had them doing something, and there is a message in it for us too, an implication that very well may apply in like circumstances, like offering God our best, and following the plan as He laid it out. Exodus 31:12-17 (English Standard Version) And the LORD said to Moses, 13"You are to speak to the people of Israel and say, 'Above all you shall keep my Sabbaths [Saturday], for this is a sign between me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I, the LORD, sanctify you. 14You shall keep the Sabbath, because it is holy for you. Everyone who profanes it shall be put to death. Whoever does any work on it, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. 15 Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the LORD. Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day shall be put to death. 16Therefore the people of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, observing the Sabbath throughout their generations, as a covenant forever. 17 It is a sign forever between me 12
160
and the people of Israel that in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and was refreshed.'" Today many people work on the Jewish Sabbath, Saturday. Are they to be stoned to death? Are we still obligated to keep the Sabbath? Why did God set the day aside anyway? Is there a principle behind that reason? Before we look at some texts from the New Testament, we can see from the bold portion that this was written to ―the people of Israel‖, and it was ―a sign forever between [God] and the people of Israel.‖ We will see from the New Testament texts below that we are not obligated to follow that Sabbath law, as it was removed as an obligation to the Christian. However, the reason for the Sabbath is spelled out in the above, it serving as a sign between Jehovah God and His chosen people, a remembrance that it is He who chose them, to make them a holy people. Are there any principles that we as Christians could draw from that, and in like manner help us to remember our covenant we personally made with God? They could work six days to benefit themselves financially, but their God expected them to give one day to Him, a day spent in remembrance, in prayer, in contemplation of their God. Are there any principles that we as Christians could draw from that, and in like manner help us to remember our relationship with God, giving Him the time out of our lives that He deserves? Romans 10:4 (English Standard Version) For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.
4
Colossians 2:13-16 (English Standard Version) And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. 15 He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him. 16Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 13
Romans 7:6-7 (English Standard Version) But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code. 7What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet." 6
2 Corinthians 3:7-11 (English Standard Version) Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone [Ten Commandments], came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses‘ face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end, 8will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory? 9For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory. 10Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has 7
161
come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it. 11For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.
What About the New Testament? In the Old Testament we do not dismiss applying, say the Mosaic Law, because the ―Old‖ in Old Testament means that these things no longer apply. The Old Testament is the first half of a book that is very much applicable, but the Law is applied in principle. The proverbs are as applicable today, as in the day they were written, as the meaning was understood then. Many of the praises in the Psalms are just what we should be praising God for in our context. Therefore, ―New‖ in the New Testament does not automatically assume that these texts are applied specifically [many are], and not in principle. Let us look at a few examples that are applied in principle. 1 Peter 5:14 (English Standard Version) 14
Greet one another with the kiss of love.
1 Timothy 5:23 (English Standard Version) (No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.) 23
Not everyone greets fellow brothers and sisters with a holy kiss. In some lands, that is the case, but in the Western world, it is usually a handshake or a pat on the back. Is this violating Peter‘s words? The principle behind it is to show an expression of brotherly love to your brother or sister when greeting them. This can be done in a number of ways in our context. As to the wine, Paul is talking specifically to Timothy, who suffered from a stomach illness. Dr. Salvatore P. Lucia, professor of medicine, University of California School of Medicine, writes, ―Wine is the most ancient dietary beverage and the most important medicinal agent in continuous use throughout the history of mankind. . . . Actually, few other substances available to man have been as widely recommended for their curative powers as have wines.‖—Wine as Food and Medicine, 1954, p. 5. Again, we are looking at the text in their ―town.‖ What did Paul mean by his words, as should have been understood by his intended audience? What are the principles behind that meaning, and how can we apply it today, in like manner? This is not to say that some commands are not directly applicable, and black and white in their meaning. When Paul says, ―do not lie to one another‖, it is self-evident that we simply do not lie, and it is one of the sins that God hates.―Colossians 3:9; Proverbs 6:16-19.
Avoid Shortcuts It is paramount that you not live any portion of the Bible that you have not established by the above steps, as shortcuts can result in mistakes. There are many who have applied God‘s Word without a correct understanding. Not all cases can be as extreme as the one I am listing here, but it should bring home the point that the Bible needs to be fully understood [a correct mental grasp] before applying.
162
Wisconsin Church Members Charged With Abusing Infants. Pastor Philip Caminiti, 53, and his brother, John Caminiti, 45, were charged with a dozen counts of child abuse last week and also pleaded innocent. The victims included 12 children ranging in age from infancy to 6 years old, according to the sheriff's office. "During interviews with detectives, Phil expressed his belief that the Bible dictates the use of a rod over a hand to punish children. He stated that children only a few months old are 'worthy' of the rod and that by 'one and a half months,' a child is old enough to be spanked," according to the sheriff's office release. "Throughout the investigation, the church members were open with detectives about their 'Spare the rod, spoil the child' philosophy. They described using wooden dowels and wooden spoons on the bare skin of children, starting as young as 2 months old," the sheriff's office said.25 Proverbs 13:24 (English Standard Version) 24
him
Whoever spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is diligent to discipline
Proverbs 22:15 (English Standard Version) Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline drives it far from
15
him.
Proverbs 23:13 (English Standard Version) Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you strike him with a rod, he will not
13
die.
How are we to understand these verses? Are we to take them literally, and beat our children with rods? In this context, the rod is representative of authority in the Bible, and stands for parental authority, correction, whatsoever form it may take. In Bible times, the Hebrew word for ―rod‖ stood for a stick or a staff, such as the one a shepherd used to guide his sheep. (Psalm 23:4) Can you picture a shepherd that beat his sheep with that rod or that staff? Therefore, ―the rod‖ of parental authority advocates loving guidance, not harsh or brutal punishment. It does not mean beating a child, but spanking is permissible, depending on the age and to the extent that it is, a corrective measure, not to punish, hurt or harm. Many times, a simple rebuke will be the corrective measure that gets the desired results. U.S.News & World Report, August 7, 1989, correctly states, ―Parents who are not harshly punitive, but who set firm boundaries and stick to them, are significantly more likely to produce children who are high achievers and who get along well with others.‖ In its conclusion the article stated: ―Perhaps the most striking theme to emerge from all the scientific data is that establishing a pattern of love and trust and acceptable limits 25
http://www.aolnews.com/2011/03/26/members-of-aleitheia-bible-church-in-wisconsincharged-with-abus/
163
within each family is what really counts, and not lots of technical details. The true aim of discipline, a word that has the same Latin root as disciple, is not to punish unruly children but to teach and guide them and help instill inner controls.‖ Many people read the Bible and immediately take it to mean what it means to them. They do not look for the context of the Bible and find a like context in their life. It is like the above Bible study that Dr. Stein shared with us, where he person said: ―this means . . . to me.‖ As you work your way around the group, each person offers their individual stamp on what the text under consideration means to them. They are not considering what the text meant to the initial readers, just what it means to them.
Proof Texting Another misapplication of the text is what is known as proof texting. Proof texting is stringing along a series of verses throughout the Bible, using a sentence or two from each, to find support for what we want the Bible to say. The problem with this process is that they are taking the texts out of their context. There is nothing wrong with listing verses that support what you believe, but they need to be within the context of their actual meaning. Let us look at one Scriptural example: Acts 2:38 (English Standard Version) And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 38
Immediately, there are several doctrinal points that this text would be used for: (1) One must be baptized to be saved, (2) baptism take ones sins away, and (3) one must be baptized only in Jesus‘ name. The interpreter has forgotten the first word uttered by Peter in verse 38, ―repent.‖ To repent means to turn one‘s life around and live in another direction. This is what brings about the forgiveness of sins, not baptism. Baptism is an outward display of this repentance, a life course that is now made known to others by the ceremony of baptism.
Lack of Application At the other end of the spectrum are those that understand what the text means, but fail to apply it in their lives. They read the Bible, study the Bible, understand the Bible, but fail to allow it to change their life. Hebrews 4:12 (English Standard Version) For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. 12
The power that God‘s Word has is so tremendous, it would take a set of encyclopedias to cover this alone, and likely, that would barely scratch the surface. The Scriptural truths contained in God‘s Word are able to penetrate into the inner most part 164
of a person, his thoughts and emotions, helping the reader to see who he truly is on the inside. These truths are able to bring about transformations in a person‘s life. (Col. 3:10) Yes, God Word has power! The Bible has principles that are timeless, as our Creator wrote them for us. Jehovah‘s wisdom is without match. The information found in this book is able to help us live a life of happiness and joy now, with the hope of the life to come. The Bible is like a light that brightens the pathway right in front of us, and the roadway of tomorrow. (Ps. 119:105) It will help us determine the best course to follow in our choice of employment, family life, friends, and entertainment and so on. (Ps. 37:25; Prov. 13:20; John 15:14; 1 Tim. 2:9) Applying this counsel from God‘s Word will also help us get along with our spiritual brothers and sisters, our workmates, our families, and even our enemies. (Matt. 7:12; Phil. 2:3, 4) The beauty of the Bible is that it lets us see down the road, so we can see the outcome of poor decisions. (1 Tim. 6:9) Moreover, the Bible discloses the future for man, the earth and God‘s will and purposes, offering us the way toward being included in that future. (Matt. 6:33; 1 John 2:17, 18) The only pitfall would be the lack of application!
165
Recommended Reading Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Erickson, Richard J. A Beginner's Guide to New Testament Exegesis. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
166
CHAPTER 15 TOPICAL STUDIES One of the best extra studies that any Christian can do is topical studies. Exactly what are topical studies? What is involved such a study? Moreover, what is the best way to accomplish them in a timely and proficient manner? How are you to go about collecting your information for such a study?
Topical Study A topical study is simply what you might think from the title itself. It is covering a person, place, event, or doctrine in a comprehensive manner. You will soon find that many people offer their opinions about what God‘s has to say on a particular subject, and that it is usually just than an opinion. After you have completed your first topical study, you will likely find that you only had a scrap of knowledge about the topic, and most of it was mistaken. These studies require quite a bit of time and energy, so I would personally recommend that you not do any more than one topic at a time. In addition, you will not want to be consumed by the topic itself. Simply choose your first topic, and the amount of time that you can give to it, which will not take away from family, preparing for regular religious services, your personal Bible studied outlined in this book (Bible Reading and Book Study), and your ministry. To find all of the references to your topic, you will need an exhaustive concordance, or a topical Bible. If you use the concordance at the back of your study by, remember that it will not cover every reference. Also, remember that you want to not only find every reference to the English word earth, but every reference to the original language words, as they may not be rendered as earth in some of your translations. In addition, you may want to fins the reference to ―world.‖ Just how you use these tools will be explained in chapter 6.
The Initial Step in Setting up Your Topical Study Initially you will want to pick your topic. For the sake of an example, we will pick the word ―earth.‖ At the top of your legal tablet, or Microsoft word document, type or write EARTH, and make it large and bold, as your paper title. Initially you will want to ask yourself questions, to generate a thought process that you would like to see answers to, but not in such a way as to form any kind of preconceived ideas. Questions such as: (1) Why did God create the earth? (2) What were His intentions for man on the earth? (3) Have those intentions changed after the sin of Adam and Eve? (4) What is the future for the earth and its inhabitants? These questions are certainly not exhaustive, but are enough to see what you would like to know about the earth, but not so leading that you are trying to influence the 167
outcome. The next step in our process is to find our subject in all related passages, but that they fall within the same context. As you go, you will generate heading and subheadings from your findings that may be adjusted as you grow in knowledge of your topic. In addition, you may want to consider whether you want to include other related word, like ―world.‖ Moreover, in some way (underline, italicize, bold, highlight), you may want to mark each text that you list, to remind you of what it is adding to your knowledge of the topic, and later you can see if it is a literal addition, or symbolic or figurative. (1) The Original Language Terms: Here you will look up all of the original language terms that are related to your topic. In this, you will need to look at a Mounce‘s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words. You may choose to read some of his commentary on each of these terms, and then list the words and their range of meaning on your paper. a) (Heb) erets: land earth, ground b) (Heb) adhamah′: ground, soil, earth, land, regions below the ground c) (Grk) ge: Earth, land, region, humanity d) (Grk) Oikoumene: the inhabited earth (2) The Creation of the Earth: Here you will want to look at every verse that discusses the earth‘s initial creation. Of course, we do not have the space, to consider every verse as we generate our example topic headings here. Genesis 1:1 (English Standard Version) In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. [As we generate verses under sections, we start to see questions that we would like to have answers to, such as, ‗what exactly is meant by ‗in the beginning?‘ We may want to know what is meant by the word ―create‖ bara, as opposed to the word ―make‖ asah that is used later in the creation account.] (3) The Purpose for the Creation of the Earth: This thought logically follows the creation of the earth. If an all-powerful person creates something the earth, the question that follows is, why. Is the earth permanent? Or is it a temporary home? Was it created specifically for humans? Many other questions could be asked. Genesis 1:28 (English Standard Version) And God blessed them. And God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth." Psalm 78:69 (English Standard Version) He built his sanctuary like the high heavens, like the earth, which he has founded forever. 69
168
Psalm 104:5 (English Standard Version) He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved.
5
Psalm 119:90 (English Standard Version) Your faithfulness endures to all generations; you have established the earth, and it stands fast. 90
Ecclesiastes 1:4 (English Standard Version) A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever.
4
Isaiah 45:18 (American Standard Version) For thus saith Jehovah that created the heavens, the God that formed the earth and made it, that established it and created it not a waste, that formed it to be inhabited: I am Jehovah; and there is none else. 18
(4) The Bible and Science: Is the Bible an enemy of science? Does the Bible contradict science? Is the Bible attempting to be a science textbook? When it touches on science is it accurate? Job 26:7 (English Standard Version) He [god] stretches out the north over the void and hangs the earth on nothing. Job 26:10 (English Standard Version) He has inscribed a circle on the face of the waters at the boundary between light and darkness. 10
Isaiah 40:22 (English Standard Version) It is he who sits above the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them like a tent to dwell in; 22
Job 38:8-11 (English Standard Version) "Or who shut in the sea with doors when it burst out from the womb, 9when I made clouds its garment and thick darkness its swaddling band, 10and prescribed limits for it and set bars and doors, 11and said, 'Thus far shall you come, and no farther, and here shall your proud waves be stayed'? 8
Numbers 2:3 (English Standard Version) Those to camp on the east side toward the sunrise shall be of the standard of the camp of Judah by their companies, the chief of the people of Judah being Nahshon the son of Amminadab, [We know scientifically, the sun does not rise or set, so how do we understand this? You will have to read the appendix on Bible difficulties.] 3
Psalm 46:9 (English Standard Version) He makes wars cease to the end of the earth; he breaks the bow and shatters the spear; he burns the chariots with fire. [How are we to understand this?] 9
169
Isaiah 11:12 (English Standard Version) He will raise a signal for the nations and will assemble the banished of Israel, and gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. [Is the earth square, or flat? Is that what the author meant by the words that he used?] 12
(5) The Earth Metaphorically: the use to describe the earth that is not meant literally but by means of a vivid comparison expresses something about it, e.g. saying that the earth is a . . . . . This can be done symbolically, where one thing used or considered to represent another. Revelation 12:16 is a good example of this: ―But the earth came to the help of the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed the river that the dragon had poured from his mouth.‖ This can also be done figuratively, where the language does not literally represent real things. Job 38:14 is a good example of this: It [the earth] is changed like clay under the seal, and its features stand out like a garment.‖ Keep in mind, right now, we are just generating our list of texts. Job 38:4-6 (English Standard Version) "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. 5Who determined its measurements—surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? 6On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone, 4
2 Peter 3:7 (English Standard Version) But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. [Is the earthy to be destroyed by fire, some nuclear holocaust? Is this a contradiction of the other texts, which suggest the earth is to be here forever? Will context answer these questions?] 7
The Second Step in Your Topical Study By now, you should have some subheading, and should have organized where you feel the text should be as to those headings, noting that this is just your initial sense. Now it is time to investigate the texts yourself, each one, knowing that you may have to move it under another heading or it may get to stay. In addition, you may need to generate more headings during this stage as well. When you investigate the passage, find its meaning by context, a good exegetical commentary, background commentary, and list how your topic is used in this passage. What did the author mean to convey by the use of your topical word in this passage? Once you are through the whole of your texts, make a note if the Bible grew the understanding progressively through time.
The Third Step in Your Topical Study It is time to organize all of those notes. You will want to create an outline. Place your title at the top, and your headings and subheading in a logical way, with the texts that apply to each heading and subheading throughout your paper. Once you have this skeleton, it is time to add the meat, the information that you have discovered about each 170
text. Do not get excessive here, just the facts in succinct and concise sentences. You can do it one of two ways. You can write out what you know, site your Scripture, and then add to that, and site another Scripture. On the other hand you may follow, the pattern that was used in the above, the heading, and the texts fully quoted, placing the basic information in brackets after it. Below is an example of the former: Throughout the Bible, the earth is spoken of in a figurative sense. In Job 38:4-6, it is compared to a building, as Jehovah God questions Job about the creation of the earth, as well as His management of it, leaving Job speechless. The earth is also symbolically used to mean the steadier, more unwavering basics of humankind. The on edge, unhinged elements of humankind are demonstrated by the representative restlessness of the sea. Isa 57:20; Jas 1:6; Jude 13; compare Re 12:16; 20:11; 21:1.
171
CHAPTER 16 BIBLICAL WORD PICTURES Most have heard the saying that ‗a picture is worth a thousand words.‘ However, the Bible has a real knack of painting a picture with just a few words. The word pictures found in God‘s word create an image in the mind of the reader that will unlikely ever be forgotten. The phrase that I am using, ‗word picture,‘ is to be understood as all of the different figures of speech found in God‘s Word: metaphors, similes, as well as other forms of literary devices that involve figures of speech. If we were to meticulous read through Jesus‘ Sermon on the Mount, we would discover that he used over 50 different word pictures. It is paramount that we learn how to discover the meaning behind these word pictures. Without discovering their true meaning, you will misinterpret the Bible, and misapply it in your life. As we have already seen in the above, misapplication cannot only cause one not to have the success that the Bible holds out, but can be dangerous at times, like the rod of the shepherd and the many proverbs that talk about the disciplining of a rebellious boy. Of course, these word pictures throughout God‘s Word are not to be taken literally, but the message they convey by the picture is to be taken literally.
Correct Mental Grasp of Word Pictures A word picture is one thing used or considered to represent or express something another. The topic is what is being compared with the image. There is something about the topic and the image that are similar. In order for us to discover the true meaning, we must find these similarities. The danger is overdoing this aspect, finding more than was intended by the author. Proverbs 30:18-19 (English Standard Version) Three things are too wonderful for me; four I do not understand: 19the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a serpent on a rock, the way of a ship on the high seas, and the way of a man with a virgin. 18
There is a similarity to the above list. An eagle soars through sky, the way of a serpent on a rock is that it crosses the rock, the way of a ship on the high seas at it cuts through the waves. The similarity is that none of these three leave a trail, which does not allow anyone to follow their path. This now helps us establish the similarity of number four, where the proverb was leading us, ―the way of a man with a virgin.‖ A man may engage cunning, cunning ways of using insincere flattery and pleasantness, especially in order to persuade somebody to do something, to slide into the friendliness of an innocent virgin. She is innocent and untested; she would not be able to discover his charms. It is near impossible for her to see the trail or path of a seductive man, yet he has a goal just as ―the way of an eagle in the sky, the way of a serpent on a rock, the way of a ship on the high seas.‖ The seductive man has the objective of exploiting her for sex. 172
Revelation 3:3 (English Standard Version) Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it, and repent. If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you. 3
Jesus said, ―I will come (topic) like a thief (image).‖ There must be a similarity. The context of verse three answers the question for us, as it reads: ―you will not know at what hour I will come against you.‖ Therefore, we can rule out that the verse is telling us why he is coming, but instead tells us of how he will come. It will be like a thief, unforeseen and without warning. The context helps us. Jesus went on to say: ―You will not know at all at what hour I shall come upon you.‖ (Revelation 3:3) So the comparison does not point to the purpose of his coming. He was not implying that he would come to steal anything. Rather, the point of comparison involves the unforeseen, without warning aspect of his arrival. 1 Thessalonians 5:2 (English Standard Version) For you yourselves are fully aware that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 2
While the context here does not offer us a spelled out explanation of the similarity, like the words of Jesus, it is best to use one part of the Bible to interpret the other. So, then, let us wake up!
Word Pictures and God Psalm 145:3 (English Standard Version) Great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised, and his greatness is unsearchable.
3
Job 26:14 (English Standard Version) Behold, these are but the outskirts of his ways, and how small a whisper do we hear of him! But the thunder of his power who can understand?" 14
It is impossible for us to understand fully the greatness and the power of God. But the Bible paints the best picture, for our limited minds. Walk with me as I list just a few of these word pictures: King, a Lawmaker, a Judge, and a Warrior—obviously, someone you should esteem and revere. He is also described as a Counselor, a Shepherd, an Instructor, a Teacher, a Father, a Healer, Lawgiver, and a Savior—One you can hardly relist loving. Psalm 16:7 (English Standard Version) I bless the LORD who gives me counsel; in the night also my heart instructs me.
7
Psalm 23:1 (English Standard Version) The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.
1
173
Psalm 32:8 (English Standard Version) I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will counsel you with my eye upon you. 8
Psalm 71:17 (English Standard Version) O God, from my youth you have taught me, and I still proclaim your wondrous deeds. 17
Psalm 89:26 (English Standard Version) He shall cry to me, 'You are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation.'
26
Psalm 103:3 (English Standard Version) who forgives all your iniquity, who heals all your diseases,
3
Psalm 106:21 (English Standard Version) They forgot God, their Savior, who had done great things in Egypt,
21
Isaiah 33:22 (English Standard Version) For the LORD is our judge; the LORD is our king; he will save us. 22
the
LORD
is
our
lawgiver;
Isaiah 42:13 (English Standard Version) The LORD goes out like a mighty man, like a man of war he stirs up his zeal; he cries out, he shouts aloud, he shows himself mighty against his foes. 13
John 6:45 (English Standard Version) It is written in the Prophets, 'And they will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me 45
Inanimate 2 Samuel 23:3 (English Standard Version) The God of Israel has spoken; the Rock of When one rules justly over men, ruling in the fear of God, 3
Israel
has
said to me:
Psalm 18:2 (English Standard Version) The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer, my God, my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold. 2
Deuteronomy 32:4 (English Standard Version) "The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, just and upright is he. 4
Personality 174
Psalm 84:11 (English Standard Version) For the LORD God is a sun and shield; the LORD bestows favor and honor. No good thing does he withhold from those who walk uprightly. 11
Psalm 121:5 (English Standard Version) The LORD is your keeper; the LORD is your shade on your right hand.
5
Isaiah 51:16 (English Standard Version) And I have put my words in your mouth and covered you in the shadow of my hand, establishing the heavens and laying the foundations of the earth, and saying to Zion, 'You are my people.'" 16
Psalm 17:8 (English Standard Version) Keep me as the apple of your eye; hide me in the shadow of your wings,
8
Psalm 36:7 (English Standard Version) How precious is your steadfast love, O God! The children of mankind take refuge in the shadow of your wings. 7
Psalm 103:12 (English Standard Version) as far as the east is from the west, so far does he remove our transgressions from us.
12
Isaiah 38:17 (English Standard Version) Behold, it was for my welfare that I had great bitterness; but in love you have delivered my life from the pit of destruction, for you have cast all my sins behind your back. 17
Micah 7:19 (English Standard Version) He will again have compassion on us; he will tread our iniquities underfoot. You will cast all our sins into the depths of the sea. 19
Word Pictures and Jesus John 1:34 (English Standard Version) And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God."
34
John 15:1 (English Standard Version) "I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser.
1
John 15:5 (English Standard Version) I am the vine; you are the branches. Whoever abides in me and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. 5
175
John 15:8 (English Standard Version) By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit and so prove to be my disciples. 8
Word Pictures and the Similarity One can never find the meaning of the word picture, without finding the similarity. In fact, as our example illustrates, to miss the mark is dangerous, if taken the wrong way. Romans 12:20 (English Standard Version) To the contrary, "if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head." 20
Are we to infer that Paul was suggesting a retaliate attitude? No. Here we have to go back the historical setting of the first-century. The melting of ore in order to get metal from it was accomplished by heaping the hot coals on top of the ore. This process was to soften the metal to cause impurities to separate. The similarity is that you are to soften the enemy with loving kindness and bring out the good in him. Luke 11:4 (English Standard Version) and forgive us our sins, for we ourselves forgive everyone who is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation." [Do your sins feel like a debt to you?] 4
Psalm 32:1 (English Standard Version) Blessed is the one whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
1
Word Pictures The word picture is capable of taking a difficult concept and using an easier one, to help us wrap our mind around the difficulty. There can be multiple word picture, to highlight the different aspects of the subject. The word picture may be used to emphasize the concept the author is trying to bring out, more memorable, more appealing.
Recognizing the Different Features WORD PICTURE: ―He is like a tree planted by streams of water.‖ (Psalm 1:3) TOPIC: You (the one who loves God‘s Word, vss 1-2) IMAGE: tree planted by streams of water SIMILARITY IN CONTEXT: life is drawn through the root from the water, you draw spiritual vitality through God‘s word LESSON: Just as a tree that is most healthy by being next to its life-sustaining element of water, you are most healthy when you are in the Word of personal study, meeting and ministry.
176
CHAPTER 17 USING YOUR TOOLS Most today have access to software, and this chapter does not permit coverage of all of the types that are available. However, if you are one, who has some computer skills, they are extremely user friendly. Some of what is explained here, will help you in the electronic endeavor too, but it is primarily concerned with the physical books.
Exhaustive Concordance Initially you must determine which concordance to select. My suggestion would be to get the one that goes with your primary study Bible. I would recommend the ESV or the NASB. Look up the word Abandon in the concordance. You will find a setup like what you see below this paragraph. The book is alphabetical. However, you will see a long list of where this word occurs. The list will have a small phrase or sentence, with the word bold, and it will list them according to the Bible books, from Genesis to Revelation. You will see the Scriptural citation out to the right of the phrase. To the right of your Scripture citation, you will find a number 5800a. You should write this reference number down. The next step is to look the number up in the original language word dictionary in the back.
Once back in the Hebrew or Greek dictionary, you are looking for the number from above. Once you locate the number, the Hebrew or Greek word will be right next to it. If you do not know how to read Hebrew or greek, jus overlook the word, as the next entry will be a transliteration of the Hebrew or Greek word. These represent letters or words written in one alphabet using the corresponding letters of another. This is followed by an etymology of the word: origins of words or parts of words. Then you will get the definitions, or the pssible range of meaning. While my explanation is not exhaustive, most concordances will have an explanation of how to use them in the beginning of the book.
Using Mounce‘s Word Study Dictionary English Only There are two basic ways to use this book. The most common way for people who do not know Greek and Hebrew is to work purely from the English. You are reading a verse, you see an English word, and you want to know what the Greek or Hebrew behind the English word means. In many cases this will work fine. For example, you want to know what ―prophet‖ means. You go to the first of the three dictionaries in this book, find the entry ―PROPHET,‖ and you can read the entry for the Hebrew nabiʾ and the Greek prophetes. If you want to learn about ―Propitiation,‖ you can read about the verb hilaskomai or the noun hilasmos. 177
However, what if you want to learn about ―Purpose‖? There are three Greek nouns that we list under this entry: boule, eudokia, and prothesis. As you will learn in the next section (―How to Do Word Studies‖), these three Greek words have some overlap in meaning, but each one has its own range of meanings. In other words, boule may have a meaning that prothesis doesn‘t, and vice versa. If you don‘t know the Greek (or Hebrew) word behind the specific English word in the specific verse you are studying, you wouldn‘t know which set of definitions apply in your situation.
Using Vine‘s Word Study Dictionary When beginning a word study of a particular Hebrew term, you should obtain good editions of at least three English versions of the Old Testament. Always have a King James Version or a New King James Version, a more scholarly version such as the RSV or NASB, and a colloquial version such as the TEV. You should also have a good concordance to the KJV, NKJV or the RSV. The Expository Dictionary gives wide ranges of meanings for most Hebrew words. They should not be substituted for each other without carefully reviewing the usage of the term in its different contexts. All Hebrew words have different meanings-sometimes even opposite meanings-so they should be studied in all of their occurrences, and not just one. Strive for consistency in rendering a particular Hebrew word in different contexts. Seek the smallest number of equivalent English words. The contributors to this book have already done extensive research in the original languages and in modem scholarly literature. You can make the best use of their work by looking up the various usages of each word in order to get a balanced view. Comparison and frequency are two fundamental factors in Bible word study. Write down the passages that you are comparing. Do not be afraid to look up all of the occurrences of a particular word. The time you spend will open up your Bible as it has never been opened before.
178
CHAPTER 18 OBSERVATION The importance of observation should be evident by now, as it has been covered sever times in this publication, aside from this chapter. The observation that goes into your biblical studies is to look into the text with attentive awareness, without being partial, being able to see things as they really were, and as they truly should be applied today.
Observation of Words As we have learned throughout this publication, any given word has multiple means. Even if we were to consider the word ―mean,‖ we cannot ascertain what we mean by ―mean‖ outside its context. She says she is resigning, and I think this time she means it, would be an expression of intention. I do not know what half these words mean, is indicating a particular sense. That is not quite what I meant, is intent. Then, let us go to what the dictionary actually considers another word, but spelled the same way. You hurt her feelings―that was a mean thing to do. He plays a mean sax, which is used in the sense of being skillful. This is the meanest climate I have ever lived in, which means uncomfortable. Moreover, we could even look at another term, which is spelled the same, but considered a different word from the first two cases of mean. We need to find the mean between these extremes. Of course, we need to be wise in our selection of what terms we are going to give extra attention to, as we can only spend so much time at Bible study. There are words that are used, which are obvious as to their meaning, and will not give us a difficult time in arriving at a correct understanding of a passage. While it may be obvious, we are talking about such terms as ―the.‖ As you can see, these types of terms could be thought of as common patterns of activity within writing. This not to say that a definite article is never going to convey something that needs to be investigated. On the other hand, there are terms that will need some extra attention, with others needing a substantial amount of attention, to those that will be crucial. The first of these might just be a term that is difficult to understand, because it is not a part of your vocabulary, or it is based on the cultural society of the first century, or maybe idiomatic. The second level will be those that have to be understood to be able to arrive at a correct meaning. Finally, there are the terms that are going to enhance the meaning of the text beyond what you will have realized. Below are two texts, the first offering two terms that would fall into the first and second level, while the other will offer something profound. Mark 9:2-4 (English Standard Version) And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, 4And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus. 2
Luke 2:46 (English Standard Version) 179
After three days they found him [Jesus at 12-years-old] in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions (eperotao, not erotao). 46
Eperotao is a legal term and means ―to ask, to question, to demand,‖ while erotao means ―I ask, I request, I entreat.‖ Kittel‘s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament brings to our attention that in this case the Greek word for ―questioning‖ was not just a boy‘s inquisitiveness. The word could refer to questioning used in judicial examination, investigation, counter questioning, even the ―probing and cunning questions of the Pharisees and Sadducees,‖ such as those mentioned at Mark 10:2 and 12:18-23. One would never come to this conclusion without investigating the original language word, which definitely adds a greater understanding to this text.
Observation of Literal and figurative Words Exodus 21:26 (English Standard Version) "When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free because of his eye. 26
Proverbs 28:22 (New American Standard Bible) A man with an evil [envious or stingy] eye hastens after wealth And does not know that want will come upon him. 22
A literal term like ―eye‖ found at Exodus 21:26, is to be taken as it is meant in its normal use. ―Eye as found at Proverbs 28:22 contains a nonliteral sense of the word, which should be interpreted accordingly. Generally, there is no real problem in determining if a term is literal or not. However, there will be a few occasions when secondary step must be taken to determine what the author meant by his use of the word.
Observation as if it were a Love Letter This young man has just received his first love letter. He may have read it three or four times, but he is just beginning. To read it as accurately as he would like would require several dictionaries and a good deal of close work with a few experts of if etymology [history of words] and philology [study of language]. However, he will do all right without them. He will ponder of the exact shade of meaning of every word, every comma. She has headed the letter ―Dear John.‖ What, he asks himself, is the exact significance of those words? Did she refrain from saying ―dearest‖ because she was bashful? Would ―My Dear‖ have sounded too formal? Maybe she would have said ―Dear So-and-so‖ to anybody! A worried frown will now appear on his face. But it disappears as soon as he really gets to thinking about the first sentence. She certainly wouldn‘t have written that to anybody! 180
And so he works his way through the letter, one moment perched blissfully on a cloud, the next moment huddled miserably behind an eight ball. It has started a hundred questions in his mind. He could quote it by heart. In fact, he will―to himself―for weeks to come.26 As has been state herein at least once, today‘s Christian is seeking to read the Bible as a speed-reader. Many people feel as though they have accomplished something if they have read the Bible in a year. Almost every Bible reading schedule is titled, ‗Read the Bible in a Year.‘ Those who succeed at doing so, many times, have no understanding of what they are reading, and seldom even remember the events even. How many Bible reading schedules suggest 4-5 years? This book is only one of two that I have ever seen. The reader needs to slow down, and grasp the details of what has been written: difficult words, meaningful words, repetition of words, contrasts, comparisons, lists, cause and effects, figures of speech, phrases, clauses, sentences, conjunctions, verbs and pronouns. Look for Repetition of Words In the two separate texts below, look for the repetition of words, and see if it does not add some validity as to what the idea is that the author wanted his reader to focus in on, which could be the heading for that section of text. 1 John 2:15-17 (English Standard Version) Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions—is not from the Father but is from the world. 17And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever. 15
2 Corinthians 1:3-7 (English Standard Version) Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort, 4who comforts us in all our affliction, so that we may be able to comfort those who are in any affliction, with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God. 5For as we share abundantly in Christ‘s sufferings, so through Christ we share abundantly in comfort too. 6If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; and if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which you experience when you patiently endure the same sufferings that we suffer. 7Our hope for you is unshaken, for we know that as you share in our sufferings, you will also share in our comfort. 3
26
This famous anecdote first appeared in 1940 in the New York Times as part of an advertisement for Mortimer J. Adler‘s work How to Read a Book (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1940). It is cited by Robert Traina, Methodical Bible Study: A New Approach to Hermeneutics (Wilmore, Ky.: Asbury Theological Seminary, 1952), 97-98. It is also cited in Grasping God’s Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible 2005, 29.
181
Look for Elements that are Contrasted In the texts below, look for elements that are contrasted. As you are looking them over and discovering the contrast, write out what sets them apart, and how it affects the circumstances. Notice to a conjunction that I have underlined for you, which is used in the middle of or at the beginning of a sentence to introduce something that is the opposite of what was just said. Proverbs 14:31 (English Standard Version) Whoever oppresses a poor man insults his Maker, but he who is generous to the needy honors him. 31
Proverbs 15:1 (English Standard Version) A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.
1
Romans 6:23 (English Standard Version) For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. 23
Look for Lists In the texts below, look for lists of more than two items, and investigate what you can about why they were listed together. 1 John 2:16 (English Standard Version) For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions—is not from the Father but is from the world. 16
Galatians 5:22-23 (English Standard Version) But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 22
Galatians 5:19-21 (English Standard Version) Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, 21envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 19
20
Look for Cause and Effect Cause and effect represents the concept of causality, in which an action or event will yield a certain response to the action in the form of another event. Start by asking yourself, ‗what is the cause?‘ After establishing the cause, ask yourself, ‗what is the effect, the end result of that cause?‘ Proverbs 15:1 (English Standard Version) A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.
1
Romans 6:23 (English Standard Version) 182
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. 23
Romans 12:2 (English Standard Version) Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. 2
Look for Figures of Speech Figures of speech are word pictures that generally involve only a few words; yet they can result in very vivid mental images. Similes are the easiest figure of speech to use and understand. Generally, they start with the word ―like‖ or ―as.‖ Although comparing two things that are reasonably unalike, similes focus on something these have in common. Metaphors also focus on similarity between two very unalike things. However, the metaphor is extra powerful. It expresses it as though the one element was the other, and as a result, it conveys some quality from one thing to the other. The first three texts below are similes, with the second three texts being metaphors. Psalm 1:3 (English Standard Version) He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers. 3
Psalm 10:9 (English Standard Version) he lurks in ambush like a lion in his thicket; he lurks that he may seize the poor; he seizes the poor when he draws him into his net. 9
Genesis 22:17 (English Standard Version) I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, 17
Matthew 5:14 (English Standard Version) "You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden.
14
James 3:6 (English Standard Version) And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by hell. 6
Psalm 31:3 (English Standard Version) For you are my rock and my fortress; and for your name‘s sake you lead me and guide me; 3
183
Look for the Conjunctions Many books on Bible study and most Bible readers hold back from considering conjunction, for one reason or another, but this is unwise, because they are what holds the sentences together; therefore, it is best that we consider them. And is a conjunction used to indicate an additional thing, situation, or fact. For is a preposition indicating that something is directed at somebody, done to benefit somebody, or done on somebody's behalf. But is a conjunction used in the middle of or at the beginning of a sentence to introduce something that is true in spite of either being or seeming contrary to what has just been said. Because is a conjunction for the reason that follows (I like her because she is always so friendly). But can also mean on the basis of or taking into account what follows (It must have been raining, because the sidewalk is wet). Therefore and thus are both formal words that introduce a statement that is a consequence of the previous statement. Romans 6:23 (English Standard Version) For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. 23
Romans 12:1 (New American Standard Bible) Therefore, I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. 1
2 Timothy 1:7-8 (New American Standard Bible) For God has not given us a spirit of timidity, but of power and love and discipline. Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord or of me His prisoner, but join with me in suffering for the gospel according to the power of God, 7
8
Herein, I have offered you a taste of observation. The primary purpose of this book is the new approach to a Bible Reading Schedule, with a regular Book Study Program. Everything aside from these chapters are just some tips to success that will be covered more extensively in the books you will be studying.
184
CHAPTER 19 SEEING THE WHOLE PUZZLE I have decided to add this chapter for those who would like to go outside of the Bible Reading and Holman Commentary Program that was outlined in chapter 1, as well as the book-reading program that I have laid out in later chapters of this book. For those that want to investigate the book themselves, digging deeper, doing an inductive Bible study, they should follow the stages below, and listen to the lectures on my BibleTranslation.Net Magazine site. The link to the inductive Bible study lectures is http://magazine.bible-translation.net/page/dr-george-guthrie I like to think of the Bible as a 500,000-piece jigsaw puzzle. If we have not put any of it together, it seems highly complicated. A master puzzler will put together a 24,000piece jigsaw puzzle, the largest one in the world. An advanced puzzler will do 10,000piece puzzles. A beginner will start with a 250-piece puzzle. This hobby can be drawn on as an analogy for inductive Bible study. The Bible is 66 books, but really makes up one book. If one were to know the overall theme of the Bible, and know most of the Bible stories and the very basic history of the Bible books, he would be looking at the cover of the box that contains that 500,000-piece jigsaw puzzle. As we begin putting such a puzzle together, it will seem very difficult, and the picture will seem unclear. However, once we have different portions of it together, the muddy water will clear up, and you will start to see the big picture, as well as its parts.
Stage One: The Importance of Prayer In order for Bible students to make progress, he will need to have God‘s blessing of his efforts to buy out the time. Hence, it is good to open and close your study with prayer. Isaiah 54:13 (American Standard Version) And all thy children shall be taught of Jehovah; and great shall be the peace of thy children. Luke 11:13 (American Standard Version) If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him? Luke 6:40 (American Standard Version) The disciple is not above his teacher: but every one when he is perfected shall be as his teacher.
Stage Two: The Importance of Reading the Word of God Most inductive books are very big on reading a book repeatedly, to get familiar with its information. This is not feasible with the bigger books, like Isaiah, Luke, Romans, and so on. Isaiah is 66 long chapters of very complicated and complex reading. If you want 185
to attempt this form of study with the larger Bible books, it would be best to do it the same way you would a 10,000-piece jigsaw puzzle, by putting those pieces together in sections. As the sections are completed, there will come a time when you can put the sections together, getting the big picture. Isaiah could be broken down into chapter sections (1) 1:1–6:13; (2) 17:1–12:6; (3) 13:1–14:27; (4) 14:28–23:18; (5) 24:1–27:13; (6) 28:1–35:10; (7) 36:1–39:8; (8) 40:1–44:28; (9) 45:1–48:22; (10) 49:1–59:21; (11) 60:1– 64:12; (12) 65:1–66:24. Now, you are able to reread each of these sections one at a time, walk through the stages in this chapter, then move on to the next section, and in the end connect the sections to make Isaiah one big picture. As you read the first time, do not be overly analytical; just follow what is being said, without attempting to interpret the material that is beyond your understanding at this point. In an effort at keeping it simple, as we go through these stages, we are going to use 2 John 1-13, one of the shortest Bible books. It is best if you do not remove the divisions that the Bible places within the text, but remove any subheadings, and even the verse numbers. Look at several translations, to see if the breaks in the text are in different places. We have kept those from the LEB translation. Please read 2 John 1-13 below five times, carefully considering what you are reading. Do not stop to investigate what is not immediately clear to you. We will be walking through these stages, using this book as we go, giving you an example of the process.
2 John 1-13 (The Lexham English Bible) The elder, to the elect lady and her children, whom I love in truth— and not I alone, but also all those who know the truth—because of the truth that resides in us and will be with us forever . Grace, mercy, peace will be with us from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Son of the Father in truth and love. I was very glad because I found some of your children walking in the truth, just as the Father commanded us. And now I ask you, lady (not as if I were writing a new commandment to you, but one that we have had from the beginning), that we should love one another. And this is love: that we walk according to his commandments. This is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it. For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess Jesus Christ coming in the flesh. This person is the deceiver and the antichrist! Watch yourselves that you do not lose what we have worked for, but receive a full reward. Everyone who goes too far and does not remain in the teaching of Christ does not have God. The one who remains in the teaching—this person has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house and do not 186
speak a greeting to him, because the one who speaks a greeting to him shares in his evil deeds. Although I have many things to write to you, I do not want to do so by means of paper and ink, but I hope to be with you and to speak face to face, so that your joy may be complete. The children of your elect sister greet you.
Stage Three: The Importance of Literary Genre Every book has a form, some even having multiple forms. The term ―genre‖ means ―form‖ or ―kind‖ of literature that we are dealing with. The Old Testament has narrative, law, poetry, prophecy, apocalyptic, wisdom. The New Testament has gospels, history, letter, and apocalyptic. Of course, there are subcategories, like idioms, hyperbole, similes, metaphors, proverbs, parables, riddles, and sermons. Without identifying the type of literature that you are reading, it will be impossible to determine the meaning. We will not cover these in this chapter, but will cover them more fully and thoroughly in the following chapters. For now, we will list a few, giving you the gist of each. Narrative: a story or an account of a sequence of events in the order in which they happened (Genesis, Exodus, Joshua, Esther, Matthew, Acts, and some of the prophets) Law: The law is generally referred to as Genesis through Deuteronomy, but can be used in a broad sense to encompass the whole Old Testament. A rule of conduct or procedure recognized by a community as binding or enforceable by authority; the principles set out in the Bible, especially the Pentateuch, the divine will. Poetry: literary works written in verse, in particular verse writing of high quality, great beauty, emotional sincerity or intensity, or profound insight. Poetry is found all throughout the Bible, but the book of Psalms is the primary book. One should not assume that is has to do with rhyme, it is more with rhythm. Prophecy: The primary meaning of prophecy is not the foretelling of the future, it is the prophet expounding on God‘s will and purposes. Prophecy is primarily found in prophetic books like Isaiah, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, but is found in much of the Bible as well. Apocalyptic: Apocalyptic literature is found in prophetic books like Daniel and Revelation primarily. ―Revelation‖ is the English translation of apokalypsis in the Greek New Testament. The Greek apokalypsis means ―unveiling‖ or ―uncovering.‖ Therefore, we are talking about a revealing of what has been ―hidden‖, mostly in relation to end times prophecy. Wisdom: Wisdom literature is an instructive, informative, and moralistic form of religious writing, exemplified by the books of Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes. Generally, these proverbial sayings were brief, yet forceful and to the point, often with an element of wit. Many proverbial sayings employ likenesses or comparisons. Gospels: A book of the Bible belonging to a set of four, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John that tells the teachings and the story of the life of Jesus Christ. 187
Letter: A letter written by the apostle Paul or other early Christian writers often intended to provide practical instruction and doctrine. Idioms: An idiom is a fixed distinctive expression whose meaning cannot be deduced from the combined meanings of its actual words. A Hebrew idiom literally meaning ―steal the heart‖ has the sense ―outwit.‖ 2Sa 15:6 Hyperbole: hyperbole is deliberate and obvious exaggeration used for effect, e.g., "I could eat a million of these." Matthew 7:3 Similes: Similes are a figure of speech that draws a comparison between two different things, especially a phrase containing the word "like" or "as," e.g. "as white as a sheet" Metaphors: Metaphors are used to describe somebody or something of a word or phrase that is not meant literally but by means of a vivid comparison expresses something about him, her, or it, e.g. saying that somebody is a snake. These figures of speech or symbolisms do not literally represent real things. Parables: Parables are short simple stories intended to illustrate a moral or spiritual truth. Lu 7:41-43; Matt 13:3-8; 13:24-30; Lu 11:5-8; Mr 4:3-8 Riddles: A riddle is a puzzle in the form of a question or rhyme that contains clues to its answer, something that is puzzling or confusing. Pro 1:5-6; 30:18-19; Eze 17:1-8; Jg 14:8-18.
Stage Four: The Importance of Questions There are questions that need answered before one can begin the in-depth investigation of the book. You will need to understand the setting in which the book was written. You will need to gather information on the writer, when he wrote, and what period was covered. You will want to appreciate that book is authentic, belonging in the Bible, the inspired Word of God. A Bible handbook will serve you best, and we recommend Holman Bible Handbook. Some questions to consider are . . . Who is the writer of the book? Who is the person speaking, are there more than one? Who are the primary characters in the book? In the Gospels, it might be Jesus, John the Baptist, one of the apostles, a Pharisee, and so on. What is the author talking about, what is he trying to convey to his readers: the main ideas, events, teachings, and what does he cover the most throughout the book. What are the natural breaks in the different subjects he covers? What subheadings could we give to each section of a book, or chapters within a book? What time period is covered by the book? When was the book written? When will the events discussed take place? Why did the author pen this book? Why is one point covered more or less than another?
188
How is the book relevant to the rest of the Bible? How does it support other things the author may have said elsewhere? 2 John 1-13 Book Number 63 Writer: Apostle John Place Written: Ephesus, or near Writing Completed: c. 98 C.E. The Date of Writing 1 John was also written in 98 C.E. Therefore, there is no great interval between the two. The false teaching mention in 1 John 4:1-3 was still relevant in 2 John. Like 1 John, 2 John seems to have been written in or around Ephesus, about 98 C.E. Concerning Second and Third John, McClintock and Strong‘s Cyclopedia comments: ―From their general similarity, we may conjecture that the two epistles were written shortly after the 1st Epistle from Ephesus. They both apply to individual cases of conduct the principles which had been laid down in their fullness in the 1st Epistle.‖ Written to Whom Who is ―the elect lady and her children‖? The Greek word for ―lady‖ (kyria) was known as a proper name at the time, leading some Bible scholars to suggest that it was written to an individual. Then again, it is possible that John was referring to a particular Christian congregation. The latter is a possibility, designed to confuse persecutors. If the second option were the reality, ―the children of your elect sister‖, would be another congregation and its members. Regardless, we can see that 2 John was penned either for an individual or an individual congregation. The Writer ―The elder‖ means ‗older man.‘ This would fit the apostle John, who would have been about 98-years-old at the time. In addition, some forty years earlier John is described as ―a pillar‖ of the Christian congregation at Galatians 2:9. Moreover, there is not one of the apostles left, they have all died or were martyred. There was no real need for a name at this point, as he would be known to the entire Christian world, especially to this specific congregation or person. Additionally, the writing style matches that of 1 John and the Gospel he penned. Books Literary Form This book is an epistle (letter). It follows the format of an introduction, the mention of recipients, and a final greeting. The Purpose of Writing Like first John, here again, there is a defense against the false teachers, who are attacking the Christian faith. John intends to give his readers a warning and the means of recognizing such ones, encouraging them to stay clear of these false teachers. While Christians were obligated to be hospitable, this was not to be the case when it came to 189
these false teachers. He also, encourages them to continue offering love to one another and ‗remain in the teachings.‘
Stage Five: The Importance of the People and Events It is always easiest to start with the basics of who are involved in the book, and what is going on. The People Involved The elder: the apostle John Elect lady: a woman named ―lady‖ or more likely, a particular congregation called ―lady‖ figuratively to avoid persecution. Her children: the children of a woman named ―lady‖ or congregation members of a particular congregation called ―lady‖ figuratively. Those: all true Christians at the time of the writing of this letter Us: all true Christians at the time of the writing of this letter Personal pronoun I: the writer John, the apostle God: the Father Jesus Christ: the Son Your children: the children of a woman named ―lady‖ or congregation members of a particular congregation called ―lady‖ figuratively. We: Christians One another: Christians His: God You: Elect lady, a congregation, or a woman named ―lady.‖ Deceivers: those who do not confess Jesus Christ coming in the flesh, the antichrist, of which are many, who have gone out into the world Those who: antichrist, deceivers Jesus Christ: Son of God Antichrist: those who are against Christ, denying he came in the flesh, deceivers The one who did not remain in the teaching: persons who associate with the deceivers, making themselves antichrists The one who did remain in the teaching: true Christian, who walk in the truth and keep the commandments The children of your elect sister: another congregation Elect sister: another congregation 190
2 John 1-13 (The Lexham English Bible) The elder [apostle John], to the elect lady [this congregation] and her children [congregation members], whom I [John] love in truth—and not I [John] alone, but also all those [Christians] who know the truth—because of the truth that resides in us [Christians] and will be with us [Christians] forever. Grace, mercy, peace will be with us [Christians] from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Son of the Father in truth and love. I [John] was very glad because I [John] found some of your [lady, congregation] children [congregation members] walking in the truth, just as the Father [God] commanded us [Christians]. And now I [John] ask you, [lady, congregation] (not as if I [John] were writing a new commandment to you [this congregation], but one that we [Christians] have had from the beginning), that we [Christians] should love one another. And this is love: that we [Christians] walk according to his [God‘s] commandments. This is the commandment, just as you [this congregation] have heard from the beginning, so that you [this congregation] should walk in it. For many deceivers [antichrists] have gone out into the world, those [antichrists] who do not confess Jesus Christ [Son of God] coming in the flesh. This person is the deceiver and the antichrist! Watch yourselves [this congregation] that you [this congregation] do not lose what we [Christians] have worked for, but receive a full reward. Everyone [potential deceivers and antichrists] who goes too far and does not remain in the teaching of Christ [Son] does not have God [the Father]. The one [true Christian] who remains in the teaching—this person [true Christian] has both the Father [God] and the Son [Jesus]. If anyone [deceiver, antichrist] comes to you [this congregation] and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him [deceiver, antichrist] into your house [this congregation] and do not speak a greeting to him [deceiver, antichrist] because the one [potential deceiver, antichrist] who speaks a greeting to him [deceiver, antichrist] shares in his [deceiver, antichrist] evil deeds. Although I [John] have many things to write to you [this congregation], I [ John] do not want to do so by means of paper and ink, but I [John] hope to be with you [this congregation] and to speak face to face, so that your [this congregation‘s] joy may be complete. The children [another congregation‘s members] of your [this congregation‘s] elect sister [another congregation] greet you [this congregation]. What do You Know About the People Involved? Take a notepad and list each person or group of persons. Go through the book on your printout (or word document), and take those notes and write them under the appropriate person. You will then have all this book has given you about the person(s) in 191
it. As you can see from the above, we have highlighted all the people in the text, identifying each one in the text, and have made a list with a short note of whom they are, and now it is time to build on that. The elder: this is the apostle John, who is writing a congregation of beloved Christians, warning them of some deceivers, who are about, denying that Jesus Christ came in the flesh, people John calls the antichrist. This congregation he is writing has brought him joy because some of them are walking in the truth of what his Father commanded, a command that they have had from the beginning. John expresses that he has grace, mercy and peace, because of sticking to the truth with his fellow Christians. John states that he is eager to write many things to this congregation, but not with ink and paper, he wants to come to them face to face. He closes his letter by offering greetings from a fellow congregation of Christians, who have not fallen to these deceivers, these antichrists. Elect lady and her children: As you can see, I have settled on the position that this lady is a congregation and its children are its members, but you may see the evidence differently. Their faithful fellow Christian, the apostle John, is writing to this congregation. These ones are being warned of deceivers, antichrists who are denying Christ came in the flesh. They are to not associate with these deceivers, not to let them in their home, not to even greet them in the streets. If they were to do so, they would be joining in their sin. This congregation and members can share in John‘s grace, mercy and peace by walking in the truth that they have had from the beginning. These ones can draw comfort that John is coming to them, and that another close congregation is overcoming this infiltration of deceivers as well. The Son of God, Jesus Christ: Jesus, who came in the flesh, in the beginning, had said to John and the other apostles, ―By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.‖ (John 13:35) Jesus also said, ―If you love me, you will keep my commandments.‖ (14:15) Jesus further said, ―Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him." (14:21) "If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.‖ (14:23) ―If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father‘s commandments and abide in his love.‖ (15:10) Jesus and the Father will provide Grace, mercy, and peace to all of those Christians in that congregation, who continue walking in the truth, which they had heard from the beginning. God, the Father: the Father and the Son will provide Grace, mercy, and peace to all of those Christians in that congregation, who continue walking in the truth, which they had heard from the beginning. The congregation, its members and the Christians of that day must obey the commands, and not receive the antichrists into their homes, or even say a greeting to them. Deceivers, the antichrists: these ones were denying that Jesus Christ, the Son of God came in the flesh. The Christians were walking in the truth, while these ones were in 192
denial of that truth, attempting to deceive and stumble their former brothers. These ones have left the congregation, and had gone out into the world mankind that is alienated from God. Notice another letter, where John has spoken of going out into the world. ―They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.‖ (1 John 2:19) ―Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.‖ (4:1) The one who did not remain in the teaching: These ones run ahead of the truth, persons who associate with the deceivers, making themselves antichrists. These ones no longer have the Father and Son, because they rejected the teachings of Jesus. No one is to take these ones into their home, which could also mean congregation too. The one who did remain in the teaching: These are the true Christian, who continued to walk in the truth, obeying the Father and the Son. Therefore, they still had the Father and the Son. The children of your elect sister: a figurative expression meaning the local congregation and its members to which this letter was sent from. When the John closes the letter with greetings from ‗the children of your elect sister‘, he is conveying the greetings of the members of the local congregation of which he himself is likely a member, to the elect lady, a sister congregation and their children, members. What are the Circumstances and Events? You have the apostle John writing from his home congregation, which is the sister congregation of the recipient of this short letter. He is dealing with deceivers, who are denying that Jesus came in the flesh. Some in both congregations are walking in the truths that they had learned from the beginning, which brings John great joy. However, the warning is to not allow these deceivers (antichrists) in one‘s home, nor even say a customary greeting to them. If these warnings are not heeded, this one will be sharing in the deceiver‘s sin. John intends to visit this congregation, to speak with them face to face, as he is concerned for their spiritual welfare. What are Some of the Key Words? Who is ―the elder‖ and why this use? Who is the ―elect lady‖ and what does the original language word for ―elect‖ (eklekte) mean? It might be interesting to better understand ―know‖ [ginosko] in ―know the truth‖ (vs. 1). Both ―love‖ (agape) and ―truth‖ (aletheia) are driving the beginning of this letter, more investigation is needed (vss. 1-2). In what sense is the word being used? Does each occurrence have the same sense, and are these occurrences of ―truth‖ in verses 1-2, to be understood in the same way as the occurrences in verses 4-6? Just how does ―the truth reside in us‖? What is meant by ―grace‖ (charis), ―mercy‖ (eleos), and ―peace‖ (eirene)? (vs. 3) How are we to understand the idiomatic* (―walk in‖) phrases, like ―walking in the truth‖ (vs. 4), or ―walk according to his commandments‖ (vs. 5). While we have not considered all of the 193
words that may be beneficial to investigate, it is enough of a start, to give you an idea of how it is done. * An idiom is a fixed expression with nonliteral meaning: a fixed distinctive expression whose meaning cannot be deduced from the combined meanings of its actual words. (e.g., a cup of mud is a cup of coffee, not a cup of wet dirt) What is the Theme? It seems that there are two themes in this letter, (1) the readers of John‘s letter are to lover one another, and (2) be cautious of false teacher as you walk in the truth. While your handbook will offer their idea of what the theme is, it is best that you consider whether their suggestion fits, or another should be chosen. Some writers tell you why they wrote their book, so there is no work needed. John 20:31 (English Standard Version) but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. 31
Of course, 2 John is one of the shortest books in the Bible, so determining the theme is not that complicated. It will be a much more difficult job in determining the theme of larger books like Isaiah. The best way is to break the book down into small sections, as we suggested in the above. Once that is done, walk through the steps that you have been shown here for each section, and then find a theme for each section. From the multiple themes, you should be able to find the overall theme. Some books might just need studied chapter by chapter, others being so long, they need to be broken down into sections.
194
PART 3 BOOK STUDY PROGRAM CHAPTER 20 FOUNDATION IN BIBLICAL STUDIES The books listed throughout this section are very basic, which will lay a nice foundation for the upcoming study programs. There is no certain order, simply complete this whole section before moving on to the next. There are audio lectures that go with some of these books, and will be very beneficial. If the links to our site do not work, I have provided the web address as well. If that is not working, our website can be found at: http://magazine.bible-translation.net/
Tips to Success Initially, it may feel like a slow moving process, but as you grow in knowledge, you will find yourself going through the material at much faster pace. Always remember, it is fine that after have acquire a certain amount of knowledge, you find yourself moving faster, but just make sure it is in a meditative way. Again, each of the books below is linked to our Amazon store on our site. If the links do not work, please visit our site at http://magazine.bible-translation.net/, and look at the tabs to the top of the webpage, and to your right, ―Amazon Store.‖ Edward Andrews President and CEO Bible Translation Magazine
[email protected] 740-630-9318 614-360-1550
Foundation in Biblical Studies LANGUAGE STUDIES
OLD TESTAMENT SURVEY
LANG 110―Greek for the Rest of Us
OTBS 110―Old Testament Survey
195
Greek for the Rest of Us: Using Greek Tools without Mastering Biblical Greek by William D. Mounce (Jul 31, 2007) LECTURES: CLICK HERE
Old Testament Survey by Paul R. House and Eric Mitchell (Sep 1, 2007)
CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY
LECTURES: CLICK HERE NEW TESTAMENT SURVEY
PHIL 101―Intro to Philosophy
NTBS 110― New Testament Survey
The Fallacy Detective: Thirty-Eight Lessons on How to Recognize Bad Reasoning by Nathaniel Bluedorn, Hans Bluedorn, Rob Corley and Tim Hodge (Oct 1, 2009) BIBLICAL STUDIES HERM 110―Introduction to Hermeneutics
Survey of the New Testament, A (4th Edition) by Robert Horton Gundry (Jul 1, 2003) LECTURES (Gospels): CLICK HERE LECTURES (Acts-Rev.): CLICK HERE EARLY CHRISTIANITY BECS 110―Early Christianity I
196
Backgrounds of Early Christianity by Everett Ferguson (Sep 2003)
Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible, A: Playing by the Rules by Robert H. Stein (Jun 1, 2011) LECTURES: CLICK HERE CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS
TEXTUAL STUDIES
APOL 101―Intro to Apologetics I
NTTC 101―Intro to NTTC
The Thinking Toolbox: Thirty-five Lessons Introduction to New Testament Textual That Will Build Your Reasoning Skills by Criticism by J. Harold Greenlee (Oct 1, Nathaniel Bluedorn, Hans Bluedorn and 1993) Richard LaPierre (Jan 30, 2005) BIBLE TRANSLATION
BIBLE BACKGROUND
BSBT 101―History of Bible
NTBB 101―Basics of 1st Century
How We Got the Bible by Neil R.
Jesus & the Rise of Early Christianity: A History of New Testament Times by Paul 197
Lightfoot (Jun 1, 2010)
Barnett (Apr 17, 2002)
ARCHAEOLOGY
HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY
ARCH 110―Intro to Archaeology
CHHI 120―History of Christianity I
The Stones Cry Out: What Archaeology Reveals About the Truth of the Bible by Randall Price (Nov 1, 1997) DVD: CLICK HERE
Story of Christianity: Volume 1, The: The Early Church to the Dawn of the Reformation by Justo L. González (Aug 10, 2010)
BIBLICAL APOLOGETICS
LECTURES: CLICK HERE BIBLICAL APOLOGETICS
BDEF 101―Historical Jesus
BDEF 105―Resurrection
The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ by Gary R. Habermas (Jun 3, 1996) LINGUISTICS / SEMANTICS
The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary R. Habermas and Michael Licona (Sep 25, 2004) LINGUISTICS / SEMANTICS
LING 101a―Linguistics_Semantics
LING 102―Linguistics and Interpretation
198
God, Language and Scripture by Moisés Silva (Feb 11, 1991)
The Language and Imagery of the Bible by G. B. Caird (May 1, 1988)
199
CHAPTER 21 FUNDAMENTALS IN BIBLICAL STUDIES Tips to Success At the beginning of each new level, it is recommended that you start with the biblical studies section first, as it is important that you grow in knowledge of the process of interpretation, before you read the interpretation of others. This is not to suggest that the others are wrong, it is so you will know how they got from A to B. At times, many conservative scholars will dip their toe in the pool of liberal scholarship, just to test the waters, and you need to recognize these moments. Edward Andrews President and CEO Bible Translation Magazine
[email protected] 740-630-9318 614-360-1550
Fundamental in Biblical Studies LANGUAGE STUDIES
OLD TESTAMENT SURVEY
LANG 220―Intro to Biblical Hebrew OTBS 210―Old Testament I
Hebrew for the Rest of Us: Using Hebrew A Survey of Old Testament Tools without Mastering Biblical Introduction by Gleason Leonard Hebrew by Lee M. Fields(Nov 18, 2008) Archer (Oct 1, 2007)
CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY
LECTURES: GO HERE NEW TESTAMENT SURVEY
PHIL 210―Intro to Philosophy
NTBS 210― New Testament History
200
Life's Ultimate Questions by Ronald H. Nash (Aug 1, 1999) LECTURES: CLICK HERE BIBLICAL STUDIES
New Testament History by F. F. Bruce (Mar 15, 1983)
HERM 205 Hermeneutics
BECS 210―Early Christianity
EARLY CHRISTIANITY
Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and The Greco-Roman World of the New Applying the Bible by J. Scott Duvall and Testament Era: Exploring the Background J. Daniel Hays (Jul 26, 2005) of Early Christianityby James S. Jeffers (Oct 7, 1999)
CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS
TEXTUAL STUDIES
APOL 210― Intro to Apologetics II
OTTC 205―Old Testament Textual Criticism
Holman QuickSource Guide to Christian 201
Apologetics (Holman Quicksource Guides) by Doug Powell (Jul 1, 2006)
Old Testament Textual Criticism: A Practical Introduction by Ellis R. Brotzman (Nov 1, 1993)
BIBLE TRANSLATION
BIBLE BACKGROUND
BSBT 210―History of Bible
NTBB 210―Basics of 1st Century
The Birth of Christianity: The First General Introduction to the Bible by Twenty Years (After Jesus, Vol. 1) by Paul Norman Geisler and William Nix (Aug 8, Barnett (Apr 2005) 1986) LECTURES: HISTORY OF ENGLISH BIBLE TRANSLATION ARCHAEOLOGY
HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY
ARCH 210―Intro to Old Testament Archaeology
CHHI 220―History of Christianity II
Archaeology and the Old Testament by Alfred J. Hoerth (Jan 1, 2009)
The Story of Christianity: Volume 2: The Reformation to the Present Day by Justo L. González (Dec 7, 2010)
BIBLICAL APOLOGETICS
LECTURES: CLICK HERE BIBLICAL APOLOGETICS
202
BDEF 210―Defending the Gospels
BDEF 205― Defending the Gospels
Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman's "Misquoting Jesus" by Timothy Paul Jones (May 23, 2007) LINGUISTICS / SEMANTICS
Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospels by Craig A. Evans (Sep 26, 2008)
LING 201a―Linguistics_Semantics
LING 201b―NT Linguistics
LINGUISTICS / SEMANTICS
Linguistics & Biblical Interpretation by Semantics of New Testament Greek by J. Peter Cotterell and Max Turner (Jan 27, P. Louw(1982) 1989)
203
CHAPTER 22 INTERMEDIATE BIBLICAL STUDIES Tips to Success The pool is getting deeper, but if you have covered the above level well, you should have no problem swimming in this part of the pool. Once again, please do the biblical studies section first. To that end, these two hermeneutic books are the best there are, so cover them meticulously, and do every exercise they ask of you. Edward Andrews President and CEO Bible Translation Magazine
[email protected] 740-630-9318 614-360-1550
Intermediate Biblical Studies LANGUAGE STUDIES
OLD TESTAMENT SURVEY
NTGK―320 Introduction to Biblical Greek
OTBS 320―Old Testament II
Mastering New Testament Greek on CDROM: An Interactive Guide for Beginners by Ted Hildebrandt(Oct 1, 2003) LECTURES: CLICK HERE CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY
Old Testament Survey: The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament by William Sanford Lasor, David Allan Hubbard and Frederic W. Bush (Sep 1996) LECTURES: CLICK HERE NEW TESTAMENT SURVEY 204
PHIL 320―Intro to Philosophy
Introduction to Philosophy: A Christian Perspectiveby Paul D. Feinberg and Norman L. Geisler (May 1, 1987) BIBLICAL STUDIES HERM 305―Intro to Biblical Hermeneutics
Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. and Moisés Silva (Oct 30, 2007) CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS APOL 310―Old Testament Documents
NTBS 320―New Testament History
The New Testament in Antiquity: A Survey of the New Testament within Its Cultural Context by Gary M. Burge, Lynn H. Cohick and Gene L. Green (Feb 10, 2009) EARLY CHRISTIANITY BECS 310―Early Christianity III
The Heresy of Orthodoxy: How Contemporary Culture's Fascination with Diversity Has Reshaped Our Understanding of Early Christianity by Andreas J. Kostenberger, Michael Kruger and I. Howard Marshall (Jun 9, 2010) TEXTUAL STUDIES OTTC 320―Intro to Textual Criticism
205
The Old Testament Documents: Are They Reliable & Relevant? by Walter C. Kaiser (Aug 17, 2001) BIBLE TRANSLATION
A Student's Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible: Its History, Methods and Results by Paul D. Wegner (Mar 9, 2006) BIBLE BACKGROUND
BSBT 310―Literal VS Dynamic Equivalent
NTBB 310―Bible Backgrounds
Paul, Missionary of Jesus: After Jesus, Vol. Understanding English Bible Translation: 2 by Paul Barnett (Jan 2008) The Case for an Essentially Literal Approach by Leland Ryken (Sep 2, 2009) ARCHAEOLOGY HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY ARCH 310―Intro to New Testament CHHI 320―History of Christianity I Archaeology
Zondervan Handbook to the History of Christianityby Jonathan Hill (Jan 30, Archaeology and the New Testament by 2007) 206
John McRay (Feb 1, 2008)
READ chapters 1-8 ONLY
BIBLICAL APOLOGETICS
LECTURES: CLICK HERE BIBLICAL APOLOGETICS
IDEF 320―Trusting the Old Testament
On the Reliability of the Old Testament by K. A. Kitchen (Jun 9, 2006)
IDEF 330―Trusting the Bible
Why Believe the Bible? by John MacArthur (Apr 1, 2008)
207
CHAPTER 23 ADVANCED BIBLICAL STUDIES Tips to Success You have accomplished so much over the last couple of years, and now you are on the last voyage. By now, you hardly need my advice anymore. My last tip in this area is humility. Much knowledge can lead to a haughty spirit. Notice I said, ‗can lead to,‘ not ‗leads to.‘ You have not become a powerhouse in biblical apologetics to beat the Bible critic up in a conversation, but to overturn false reasoning to win lives, to pull doubting Christians back from destruction, to help the atheist and agnostic find the real truth. Do not let your new found confidence, let you abuse what God has so graciously given, the gift of knowledge. Edward Andrews President and CEO Bible Translation Magazine
[email protected] 740-630-9318 614-360-1550
Advanced Biblical Studies LANGUAGE STUDIES
OLD TESTAMENT SURVEY
BBHB 320―Basics of Biblical Hebrew OTBS 510―Old Testament History
Basics of Biblical Hebrew Grammar: Second Edition by Gary D. Pratico and Miles V. Van Pelt(Jul 17, 2007) Basics of Biblical Hebrew: Workbook, 2nd Editionby Gary D. Pratico and Miles V. Van Pelt (Jul 17, 2007) LECTURES: CLICK HERE
Israel & the Nations: The History of Israel from the Exodus to the Fall of the Second Temple by F. F. Bruce and David F. Payne (Aug 3, 1998)
208
CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY
NEW TESTAMENT SURVEY
PHIL 510―Christian Philosophy
NTBS 330―The Apostle Paul
Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Paul Apostle of the Heart Set Free by F. Worldview by J. P. Moreland and F. Bruce(Mar 3, 2000) William Lane Craig (Mar 31, 2003) BIBLICAL STUDIES
EARLY CHRISTIANITY
HERM 205―Evangelical Hermeneutics
BECS 510―Early Christianity IV
Evangelical Hermeneutics: The New Versus the Old by Robert L. Thomas (Jan Exploring the New Testament, Volume 1: 13, 2003) A Guide to the Gospels & Acts (Exploring the Bible) by David Wenham and Steve Walton (Oct 2, 2011) CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS TEXTUAL STUDIES APOL 520―The Jesus Crisis
OTTC 301―Intro to Textual Criticism
209
The Jesus Crisis by Robert L. Thomas and A Student's Guide to Textual Criticism of F. David Farnell (Sep 25, 1998) the Bible: Its History, Methods and Results by Paul D. Wegner (Mar 9, 2006) BIBLE TRANSLATION BIBLE BACKGROUND BSBT 510―Literal VS Dynamic Equivalent
NTBB 510―Bible Backgrounds
Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Collection by E. Randolph Richards (Oct Literal Bible Translation by C. John 22, 2004) Collins, Wayne Grudem, Vern Sheridan Poythress and Leland Ryken (Nov 8, 2005)
ARCHAEOLOGY
HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY
ARCH 310―Archaeology
CHHI 320―History of Christianity II
210
Archaeology of the Bible, The by James KarlHoffmeier (Jan 29, 2008)
Zondervan Handbook to the History of Christianity by Jonathan Hill (Jan 30, 2007) READ chapters 9-17 ONLY
BIBLICAL APOLOGETICS
LECTURES: CLICK HERE BIBLICAL APOLOGETICS
IDEF 320―Biblical Criticism
IDEF 330―Trusting the Bible
Biblical Criticism on Trial: How Scientific Is Scientific Theology? by Eta Linnemann and Robert W. Yarbrough (Nov 7, 2001)
Historical Criticism of the Bible: Methodology or Ideology: Reflections of a Bultmannian Turned Evangelical by Eta Linnemann and Robert W. Yarbrough (Nov 6, 2001)
211
PART 4 BIBLE DIFFICULTIES CHAPTER 24 WHY HAS GOD PERMITTED WICKEDNESS AND SUFFERING? The history of humans has been inundated with pain and suffering on an unprecedented scale, much of which they have brought on themselves. The question that has plagued many a person is, ‗why if there is a loving God, would he allow it to start with, and worse still, why allow it go on for over 6,000 years?‘ Many apologist scholars have struggled to answer this question, because they are over analyzing, as opposed to just looking for the answer in God‘s Word. Therefore, if we are to answer this question, we must go back to Adam and Eve at the time of the first sin. Many have read this account, but we will list the texts as we go again, to refresh our minds. Genesis 2:17 (English Standard Version) but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." 17
As you can see, humankind‘s continued existence in a paradise, with perfection, was dependent upon obedience, his continued acceptance of God as his sovereign. Genesis 3:1-5 (English Standard Version) Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God actually say, 'You shall not eat of any tree in the garden'?" 2And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'" 4 But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die. 5For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." 1
Later Bible texts establish Satan the Devil as the one using a serpent as his mouthpiece, like a ventriloquist would a dummy. Anyway, take note that Satan contradicts the clear statement made to Adam at Genesis 2:17, "you will not surely die.‖ Backing up a little, we see Satan asking an inferential question, "Did God actually say, 'You shall not eat of any tree in the garden'?" First, he is overstating what he knows to be true, not ―any tree,‖ just one tree. Second, Satan is inferring, ‗I can‘t believe that God would say, . . . how dare He say such.‘ Notice that Eve has been told so thoroughly about the tree that she even goes beyond what Adam told her, not just that you ‗do not eat from it,‘ no, ‗you do not even touch it!‘ Then, Satan out and out lied and slandered God as a liar, saying that ‗they would not die.‘ To make matters much worse, he infers that God is withholding good from them, and by rebelling they would be better off, being like God, ‗knowing good and bad.‘ This latter point is not knowledge of; it is the 212
sovereignty of choosing good and bad for oneself, and act of rebellion for created creatures.
The Issues at Hand Satan called God a liar and said he was not to be trusted, as to the life or death issue. Satan‘s challenge therefore took into question the right and legitimacy of God‘s rightful place as the Universal Sovereign. Satan also suggested that people would remain obedient to God only as long as submitting to God was to their benefit. Satan all but said that humankind was able to walk on his own, there being no need for dependence on God. Satan argued that man could be like God, choosing for himself what is right and wrong. Satan claimed that God‘s way of ruling was not in the best interests of humans, and they could do better without God. Job 1:6-11 (English Standard Version) Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. 7The LORD said to Satan, "From where have you come?" Satan answered the LORD and said, "From(C) going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it." 8And the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil?" 9Then Satan answered the LORD and said, "Does Job fear God for no reason? 10Have you not put a hedge around him and his house and all that he has, on every side? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions have increased in the land. 11But stretch out your hand and touch all that he has, and he will curse you to your face." 6
Job 2:4-5 (English Standard Version) Then Satan answered the LORD and said, "Skin for skin! All that a man has he will give for his life. 5But stretch out your hand and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse you to your face." 4
This general reference to ―a man,‖ as opposed to specifically naming Job, is suggesting that all men [and women] will only obey God when things are good, but when the slightest difficulty arises, he will not obey. If you were put to the test, would you prove your love for your heavenly Father and show that you preferred His rule to that of any other?
God Settles the Issues There is one thing that Satan did not challenge, God‘s power. Satan did not suggest that God was unable to destroy him as an opposer. However, he did challenge God‘s way of ruling, not His right to rule. Therefore, it is a moral issue that must be settled. 213
An illustration of how God chose to deal with the issue can be demonstrated in human terms. A neighbor down the street slandered a man, who had a son and a daughter. The slanderer said that he was not a good father, that he withheld good from his children, and was so overbearing, to the point of being abusive. The slanderer stated that the children would be better off without the father. He further argued that the children had no real love for their father, and only obeyed him because of the food and shelter. How should the father deal with these false slanderous accusations? If he were to go down the street and pummel the slanderer, it would only validate the lies, making the neighbors believe he is telling the truth. The answer lies within his family, they can serve as his witnesses. (Pro 27:11; Isa 43:10) If the children stay obedient and grow to be successful adults, turning out to be loving, caring, honest people with spotless character, it proves the accusations false. If the children accept the lies, and rebel, and grow up to be despicable people, it just further validates that they would have been better off by staying with the father. This is how God chose to deal with the issues. The issues that were raised must be settled beyond all reasonable doubt. If God had destroyed the rebellious three: Satan, Adam and Eve; he would have not resolved the issue if man could walk on his own, would be better off without his Creator, if God‘s rulership was not best, and if God were hiding good from man. In addition, there was an audience of untold billions of angelic spirit creatures looking on. If God destroyed without settling things, these spirit persons would be following God out of dreadful fear, not love, fear of displeasing God. Moreover, say He did destroy them, and start over, and ten thousand years down the road (with billions of humans now on earth), the issues were raised again, He would have to destroy billions of people again, again, and again all throughout time, until these issues were laid to rest. What God has done is allow time to pass, and the issues to be resolved. Man thought he was better off without God, and could walk on his own. In addition, man has attempted every kind of rulership imaginable, and one must ask, ‗have they proven themselves better than rulership under the sovereignty of their Creator?‘ (Proverbs 1:3033; Isaiah 59:4, 8) Sadly, the issues must be taken up to the brink of destroying man (Rev 11:18), otherwise the argument would be that if given enough time, they could have turned things around. If man goes up to the point of destroying himself and Armageddon comes at the last minute, it will have set a case law, solved the issue, and the Bible can serve as the example forever. If the issues of God‘s sovereignty or the loyalty of His created creatures, angelic or human, is ever questioned again, we have the Holy Bible that will serve as a law established based on previous verdicts of not guilty, please see below.
What Have the Results Been? (1) Evil and suffering are not caused by God. Romans 9:14. (2) God‘s allowing evil, pain and suffering has proved that independence from God has not brought about a better world. Jeremiah 8:5, 6, 9. 214
(3) God‘s permission of evil, pain and suffering has also proved that Satan has not been able to turn all humans away from God. Exodus 9:16; 1 Samuel 12:22; Hebrews 12:1. (4) God‘s permitting evil, pain and suffering to continue has provided proof that only God, the Creator, has the capability and the right to rule over humankind for their eternal blessing and happiness. Ecclesiastes 8:9. (5) Satan has been the god of this world since the sin in Eden (over 6,000 years), and how has that worked out for man, and what has been the result of man‘s course of independence from God and his rule? Matthew 4:8-9; John 16:11; 2 Corinthians 4:3-4; 1 John 5:19; Psalm 127:1. Satan‘s impact on the earth‘s activities has carried with it conflict, evil and death, and his rulership has been by means of deception, power and his own self-interest. He has demonstrated himself an unfit ruler of everything. Therefore, God is now completely vindicated in putting an end to this corrupted rebel along with all who have shared in his evil deeds. (Romans 16:20) God has tolerated evil, sickness, pain, suffering and death until our day in order to resolve all the issues raised by Satan. We are self-centered in thinking that this has only pained us. Imagine that you are holding a rope on a sinking ship that 20 other men, women and children are clinging to, when your child loses her grip and falls into the ocean. You can either hold the rope, saving 20 people, or you can let go and attempt to rescue your daughter. God has been watching the suffering of billions from the day of Adam and Eve‘s sin. Moreover, it has been His great love for us, which causes Him to cling to the rope of issues, saving us from a future of repeated issues. Nevertheless, he will not allow this evil to remain forever. He has set a fixed time when He will end this wicked system of Satan‘s rule. Daniel 11:27 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) The two kings, whose hearts are bent on evil, will speak lies at the same table but to no avail, for still the end will come at the appointed time. 27
Unlike what many people of the world may think (the world that lies in the hands of Satan), being obedient to God is not difficult. We simply must set our pride aside and accept that the wisdom of God is so far greater than our own, and accept that He has worked for the good of obedient humankind, as He loves each one of us. Matthew 7:21 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord!' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but [only] the one who does the will of My Father in heaven. 21
1 John 2:15-17 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) Do not love the world or the things that belong to the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in him. Because everything that belongs to the world, 16the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride in one's lifestyle, is not from the 15
215
Father, but is from the world. 17And the world with its lust is passing away, but the one who does God's will remains forever.
216
CHAPTER 25 BIBLE DIFFICULTIES EXPLAINED IT SEEMS THAT the charge that the Bible contradicts itself has been made more and more in the last 20 years. Generally, those making such claims are merely repeating what they have heard, because most have not even read the Bible, let alone done an in-depth study of it. I do not wish, however, to set aside all concerns as though they have no merit. There are many who raise legitimate questions that seem, on the surface anyway, to be about well-founded contradiction. Sadly, these issues have caused many to lose their faith in God‘s Word, the Bible.
Inerrancy: Can the Bible Be trusted? If the Bible is the Word of God, it should be in complete agreement throughout; there should be no contradictions. Yet, the rational mind must ask, why is it that some passages appear to be contradictions when compared with others? For example, Numbers 25:9 tells us that 24,000 died from the scourge, whereas at 1 Corinthians 10:8, the apostle Paul says it was 23,000. This would seem to be a clear error. Before addressing such matters, let us first look at some background information. Full inerrancy * in this book means that the original writings are fully without error in all that they state, as are the words. The words were not dictated (automaton), but the intended meaning is inspired, as are the words that convey that meaning. The Author allowed the writer to use his style of writing, yet controlled the meaning to the extent of not allowing the writer to choose a wrong word, which would not convey the intended meaning. Other more liberal-minded persons hold with partial inerrancy, which claims that as far as faith is concerned, this portion of God‘s Word is without error, but that there are historical, geographical, and scientific errors. * There are several different levels of inerrancy. Absolute Inerrancy is the belief that the Bible is fully true and exact in every way; including not only relationships and doctrine, but also science and history. In other words, all information is completely exact. Full Inerrancy is the belief that the Bible was not written as a science or historical textbook, but is phenomenological, in that it is written from the human perspective. In other words, speaking of such things as the sun rising, the four corners of the earth, or the rounding off of number approximations are all from a human perspective. Limited Inerrancy is the belief that the Bible is meant only as a reflection of God‘s purposes and will, so the science and history is the understanding of the author‘s day, and is limited. Thus, the Bible is susceptible to errors in these areas. Inerrancy of Purpose is the belief that it is only inerrant in the purpose of bringing its readers to a saving faith. The Bible is not about facts, but about persons and relationships, thus, it is subject to error. Inspired: Not Inerrant is the belief that its authors are 217
human and thus subject to human error. It should be noted that this author holds the position of full inerrancy. For many today, the Bible is nothing more than a book written by men that are full of myths and legends, contradictions, and geographical, historical, and scientific errors. University professor Gerald A. Larue had this to say, ―The views of the writers as expressed in the Bible reflect the ideas, beliefs, and concepts current in their own times and are limited by the extent of knowledge in those times.‖27 On the other hand, the Bible‘s claims are quite different. 2 Timothy 3:16, 17 (HCSB): All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work. 2 Peter 1:21 (ESV): For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. The question remains as to whether the Bible is a book written by imperfect men and full of errors, or is written by imperfect men, but inspired of God. If the Bible is just another book by imperfect man, there is no hope for humankind. If it is inspired of God and without error, although penned by imperfect men, we have the hope of everything that it offers: a rich happy life now by applying counsel that lies within and the real life that is to come, everlasting life. This author contends that the Bible is inspired of God and free of human error, although written by imperfect humans. Before we take on the critics who seem to sift the Scriptures looking for problematic verses, let us take a moment to reflect on how we should approach these alleged problem texts. The critic‘s argument goes something like this: ‗If God does not err and the Bible is the Word of God, then the Bible should not have one single error or contradiction, yet it is full of errors and contradictions.‘ If the Bible is riddled with nothing but contradictions and errors as the critics would have us believe, why, out of 31,173 verses in the Bible, should there be only 2-3 thousand Bible difficulties that are called into question, this being less than ten percent of the whole? First, let it be said that it is every Christian‘s obligation to get a deeper understanding of God‘s Word, just as the apostle Paul told Timothy: 1 Timothy 4:15, 16 (ESV): Practice these things, immerse yourself in them, so that all may see your progress. Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers. Paul also told the Corinthians: 2 Corinthians 10:4, 5 (NET): For the weapons of our warfare are not human weapons, but are made powerful by God for tearing down strongholds. We tear down 27
Gerald Larue, ―The Bible as a Political Weapon,‖ Free Inquiry (Summer 1983): 39.
218
arguments and every arrogant obstacle that is raised up against the knowledge of God, and we take every thought captive to make it obey Christ. Paul also told the Philippians: Philippians 1:7 (ESV): It is right for me to feel this way about you all, because I hold you in my heart, for you are all partakers with me of grace, both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel. In being able to defend against the modern-day critic, one has to be able to reason from the Scriptures and overturn the critic‘s argument(s) with mildness. If someone were to approach us about an alleged error or contradiction, what should we do? We should be frank and honest. If we do not have an answer, we should admit such. If the text in question gives the appearance of difficulty, we should admit this as well. If we are unsure as to how we should answer, we can simply say that we will look into it and get back with them, returning with a reasonable answer. However, do not express disbelief and doubt to your critics, because they will be emboldened in their disbelief. It will put them on the offense and you on the defense. With great confidence, you can express that there is an answer. The Bible has withstood the test of 2,000 years of persecution and is the most printed book of all time, currently being translated into 2,287 languages. If these critical questions were so threatening, the Bible would not be the book that it is. When you are pursuing the text in question, be unwavering in purpose, or resolved to find an answer. In some cases, it may take hours of digging to find the solution. Consider this: as you resolve these difficulties, you are also building your faith that God‘s Word is inerrant. Moreover, you will want to do preventative maintenance in your personal study. As you are doing your Bible reading, take note of these surface discrepancies and resolve them as you work your way through the Bible. Make this a part of your prayers as well. I recommend the following program. At the end of this chapter I list several books that deal with difficult passages. As you read your Bible from Genesis to Revelation, do not attempt it in one year; make it a four-year program. Use a good exegetical commentary like The New International Commentary of the Old and New Testament (NICOT/NICNT) or The New American Commentary set, and the first two books that I list at the end of this chapter, and cover every difficulty that they discuss within these two publications, which also run from Genesis to Revelation. You should be aware that the originally written books were penned by men under inspiration. In fact, we do not have those originals, what textual scholars call autographs, but we do have thousands of copies. The copyists, however, were not inspired; therefore, as one might expect, throughout the first 1,400 years of copying, thousands of errors were transmitted into the texts that were being copied by imperfect hands that were not under inspiration when copying. Yet, the next 450 years saw a restoration of the text by textual scholars from around the world. Therefore, while many of our best literal translations today may not be inspired, they are a mirror-like reflection of the autographs by way of textual criticism.* Therefore, the fallacy could be with the copyist 219
error that has simply not been weeded out. In addition, you must keep in mind that God‘s Word is without error, but our interpretation and understanding of that Word is not. * Textual criticism is the study of copies of any written work of which the autograph (original) is unknown, with the purpose of ascertaining the original text. Harold J. Green, Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 1. In this chapter, we are not going to take the space that we will in later chapters that dedicated to one difficulty. Her, in short, we will address a number of them. Before looking at a few examples, it should be noted that the Bible is made up of 66 smaller books that were hand-written over a period of 1,600 years, having some 40 writers of various trades such as shepherd, king, priest, tax collector, governor, physician, copyist, fisherman, and tentmaker. Therefore, it should not surprise us that some difficulties are encountered as we casually read through the Bible. Yet, if one were to take a deeper look, one would find that these difficulties are easily explained. Let us take a few pages to examine some passages that have been under attack. Again, our objective here is not to be exhaustive, not even close. What we are looking to do is cover a few alleged contradictions and a couple of alleged mistakes. This is to give you, the reader, a small sampling of the reasonable answers that you will find in the recommended books at the end of the chapter. Remember, your Bible is a sword that you must use both offensively and defensively. One must wonder how long a warrior of ancient times would last who was not expertly trained in the use of his weapon. Let us look at a few scriptures that support our need to learn our Bible well so will be able to defend what we believe to be true. When ―false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ‖ were causing trouble in the congregation in Corinth, the apostle Paul wrote that under such circumstances, we are to tear down their arguments and take every thought captive. (2 Corinthians 10:4, 5; 11:13–15) All who present critical arguments against God‘s Word, or contrary to it, can have their arguments overturned by the Christian who is able and ready to defend that Word in mildness.—2 Timothy 2:24–26. 1 Peter 3:15: But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect. Peter says that we need to be prepared to make a defense. The Greek word behind the English ‗defense‘ is apologia (apologia), which is actually a legal term that refers to the defense of a defendant in court. Our English apologetics is just what Peter spoke of, having the ability to give a reason to any who may challenge us, or to answer those who are not challenging us but who have honest questions that deserve to be answered. 2 Timothy 2:24, 25: And the Lord‘s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge [epignosis] of the truth. 220
Take a look at the Greek word (epignosis) behind the English ―knowledge‖ in the above. ―It is more intensive than gnosis (1108), knowledge, because it expresses a more thorough participation in the acquiring of knowledge on the part of the learner.‖ 28 The requirement of all of the Lord‘s servants is that they be able to teach, but not in a quarrelsome way, but in a way to correct his opponents with mildness. Why? The purpose of it all is that by God, yet through the Christian teacher, one may come to repentance and begin taking in an accurate knowledge of the truth.
Inerrancy: Practical Principles to Overcoming Bible Difficulties Different Points of View. At times you may have two different writers who are writing from two different points of view. Numbers 35:14 (NIV): Give three on this side of the Jordan and three in Canaan as cities of refuge. Joshua 22:4 (NIV): Now that the LORD your God has given your brothers rest as he promised, return to your homes in the land that Moses the servant of the L ORD gave you on the other side of the Jordan. Here we see that Moses is speaking about the east side of the Jordan when he says ―on this side of the Jordan.‖ Joshua, on the other hand, is also speaking about the east side of the Jordan when he says ―on the other side of the Jordan.‖ So, who is correct? Both are. When Moses was penning Numbers the Israelites had not yet crossed the Jordan River, so the east side was ―this side,‖ the side he was on. On the other hand, when Joshua penned his book, the Israelites had crossed the Jordan, so the east side was just as he had said, ―on the other side of the Jordan.‖
A Careful Reading. At times, it may simply be a case of needing to slow down and
carefully read the account, considering exactly what is being said.
Joshua 18:28 (NASB): And Zelah, Haeleph and the Jebusite (that is, Jerusalem), Gibeah, Kiriath; fourteen cities with their villages. This is the inheritance of the sons of Benjamin according to their families. Judges 1:21 (NIV): The Benjamites, however, failed to dislodge the Jebusites, who were living in Jerusalem; to this day the Jebusites live there with the Benjamites. Joshua 15:63 (NASB): Now as for the Jebusites, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the sons of Judah could not drive them out; so the Jebusites live with the sons of Judah at Jerusalem until this day. Judges 1:8, 9 (NASB): Then the sons of Judah fought against Jerusalem and captured it and struck it with the edge of the sword and set the city on fire. Afterward the sons of Judah went down to fight against the Canaanites living in the hill country and in the Negev and in the lowland.
28
Spiros Zodhiates, The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament, Electronic ed. (Chattanooga, TN: AMG Publishers, 2000, c1992, c1993), S. G1922.
221
2 Samuel 5:5–9 (NASB): At Hebron he [David] reigned over Judah seven years and six months, and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty-three years over all Israel and Judah. Now the king and his men went to Jerusalem against the Jebusites, the inhabitants of the land, and they said to David, ―You shall not come in here, but the blind and lame will turn you away‖; thinking, ―David cannot enter here.‖ Nevertheless, David captured the stronghold of Zion, that is the city of David. David said on that day, ―Whoever would strike the Jebusites, let him reach the lame and the blind, who are hated by David's soul, through the water tunnel.‖ Therefore, they say, ―The blind or the lame shall not come into the house.‖ Therefore, David lived in the stronghold and called it the city of David And David built all around from the Millo and inward. There is no doubt that even the advanced Bible reader of many years can come away confused because the above accounts seem to be contradictory. In Joshua 18:28 and Judges 1:21, we see that Jerusalem was an inheritance of the tribe of Benjamin, yet the Benjamites were unable to conquer Jerusalem. But in Joshua 15:63 we see that the tribe of Judah could not conquer them either, with the reading giving the impression that it was a part of their inheritance. In Judges 1:8, however, Judah was eventually able to conquer Jerusalem and burn it with fire. Yet, to add even more to the confusion, we find at 2 Samuel 5:5–8 that David is said to have conquered Jerusalem hundreds of years later. Now that we have the particulars, let us look at it more clearly. The boundary between Benjamin‘s inheritances ran right through the middle of Jerusalem. Joshua 8:28 is correct, in that what would later be called the ―city of David‖ was in the territory of Benjamin, but it also in part crossed over the line into the territory of Judah, causing both tribes to go to war against this Jebusite city. It is also true that the tribe of Benjamin was unable to conquer the city and that the tribe of Judah eventually did. However, if you look at Judges 1:9 again, you will see that Judah did not finish the job entirely and moved on to conquer other areas. This allowed the remaining ones to regroup and form a resistance that neither Benjamin nor Judah could overcome, so these Jebusites remained until the time of David, hundreds of years later.
Intended Meaning of Writer. First, the Bible student needs to understand the level
that the Bible intends to be exact in what is written. If Jim told a friend that 650 graduated with him from high school in 1984, it is not challenged, because it is all too clear that he is using rounded numbers and is not meaning to be exactly precise. This is how God‘s Word operates as well.
Acts 2:41 (ESV): So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls. As you can see here, numbers within the Bible are often used with approximations. This is a frequent practice even today, in both written works and verbal conversation. Acts 7:2-3 (ESV): Brothers and fathers, hear me. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran, and said to
222
him, ―Go out from your land and from your kindred and go into the land that I will show you.‖ If you were to check the Hebrew Scriptures at Genesis 12:1, you would find that what is claimed to have been said by God to Abraham is not quoted word-for-word; it is simply a paraphrase. This is a normal practice within Scripture and in writing in general. Numbers 34:15 (ESV): The two tribes and the half-tribe have received their inheritance beyond the Jordan east of Jericho, toward the sunrise. Just as you would read in today‘s local newspaper, the Bible writer has written from the human standpoint, how it appeared to him. The Bible also speaks of ―to the end of the earth‖ (Psalm 46:9), ―from the four corners of the earth‖ (Isa 11:12), and ―the four winds of the earth‖ (Revelation 7:1). These are phrases that are still used today.
Unexplained Does Not Equal Unexplainable. Considering that there are 31,173
verses in the Bible, encompassing 66 books written by about 40 writers, ranging from shepherds, to kings, an army general, fishermen, tax collector, a physician and on and on, and being penned over a 1,600 year period, one does find a few hundred Bible difficulties (about one percent). However, 99 percent of those are explainable. Yet no one wants to be so arrogant to say that he can explain them all. It has nothing to do with the inadequacy of God‘s Word, but is based on human understanding. In many cases, science or archaeology and the field of custom and culture of ancient peoples has helped explain difficulties in hundreds of passages. Therefore, there may be less than one percent left to be answered, yet our knowledge of God‘s Word continues to grow.
Guilty Until Proven Innocent. This is exactly the perception that the critic has of
God‘s Word. The legal principle of being ―innocent until proven guilty‖ afforded mankind in courts of justice is withheld from the very Word of God. What is ironic here is that this policy has contributed to these Bible critics looking foolish over and over again when something comes to light that vindicates the portion of Scripture they are challenging. Daniel 5:1: King Belshazzar made a great feast for a thousand of his lords and drank wine in front of the thousand. Bible critics had long claimed that Belshazzar was not known outside of the book Daniel, so therefore Daniel was mistaken. Yet it hardly seems prudent to argue error from absence of outside evidence. Just because archaeology had not discovered such a person did not mean that Daniel was wrong, or that such a person did not exist. In 1854 some small clay cylinders were discovered in modern-day southern Iraq, which would have been the city of Ur in ancient Babylonia. The cuneiform documents were a prayer of King Nabonidus for ―Bel-sar-ussur, my eldest son.‖ These tablets also showed that this ―Bel-sar-ussur‖ had secretaries as well as a household staff. Other tablets were discovered a short time later that showed that the kingship was entrusted to this eldest son as a coregent while his father was away. He entrusted the ‗Camp‘ to his oldest (son), the firstborn [Belshazzar], the troops everywhere in the country he ordered under his (command). He let (everything) go, entrusted
223
the kingship to him and, himself, he [Nabonidus] started out for a long journey, the (military) forces of Akkad marching with him; he turned towards Tema (deep) in the west.‖29
Ignoring Literary Styles. The Bible is a diverse book when it comes to literary
styles: narrative, poetic, prophetic, and apocalyptic; also containing parables, metaphors, similes, hyperbole, and other figures of speech. Too often, these alleged errors are the result of a reader taking a figure of speech as literal, or reading a parable as though it is a narrative.
Matthew 24:35: Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. If some do not recognize that they are dealing with a figure of speech, they are bound to come away with the wrong meaning. Some have concluded from Matthew 24:35 that Jesus was speaking of an eventual destruction of the earth. This is hardly the case, as his listeners would not have understood it that way based on their understanding of the Old Testament. They would have understood that he was simply being emphatic about the words he spoke, using hyperbole. What he was conveying is that his words are more enduring than heaven and earth, and with heaven and earth being understood as eternal, this merely conveyed all the more so that Jesus‘ words could be absolutely trusted.
Two Accounts of the Same Incident. If you were to speak to officers that take accident reports for their police department, you would find that there is cohesion in the accounts, but each person has merely witnessed aspects that have stood out to them. We will see that this is the case as well with the examples below: Matthew 8:5: When he entered Capernaum, a centurion came forward to him, appealing to him. Luke 7:3: When the centurion heard about Jesus, he sent to him elders of the Jews, asking him to come and heal his servant. Immediately we see the problem of whether the centurion or the elders of the Jews spoke with Jesus. The solution is not really hidden from us. Which of the two accounts is the more detailed account? You are correct if you said Luke. The centurion sent the elders of the Jews to represent him to Jesus, so; that whatever response Jesus might give, it would be as though he were addressing the centurion; therefore, Matthew gave his readers the basic thought, not seeing the need of mentioning the elders of the Jews aspect. This is how a representative was viewed in the first century, just as some countries see ambassadors today as being the very person they represent. So both Matthew and Luke are correct.
Man‘s Fallible Interpretations. Inspiration by God is infallible, without error. Imperfect man and his interpretations over the centuries, as bad as many of them have been, should not cast a shadow over God‘s inspired Word. The entire Word of God has
29
J. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts (1974), 313.
224
one meaning and one meaning only for every penned word, which is what God willed to be conveyed by the human writer he chose to use.
The Autograph Alone Is Inspired and Inerrant? It has been argued by some
extremely conservative scholars that only the autograph manuscripts were inspired and inerrant, not the copying of those manuscripts over the next 3,000 years for the Old Testament and 1,500 years for the New Testament. It should be noted that we do not possess the autographs, so to argue that they are inerrant is to speak of nonexistent documents. However, it should be further understood that through the science of textual criticism, B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, F. F. Bruce, Norman L. Geisler, and many other textual scholars would agree with Norman L Geisler‘s assessment: ―The New Testament, then, has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other great book―a form that is 99.5 percent pure.‖30 An example of a copyist error can be found in Luke‘s genealogy of Jesus at Luke 3:35–37. In verse 37 you will find a Cainan, and in verse 36 you will find a second Cainan between Arphaxad (Arpachshad) and Shelah. As one can see from most footnotes in different study Bibles, the Cainan in verse 36 is seen as a scribal error, and is not found in the Hebrew Old Testament, the Samaritan Pentateuch, or the Aramaic Targums, but is found in the Greek Septuagint. (Genesis 10:24; 11:12, 13; 1 Chronicles 1:18, but not 1 Chronicles 1:24) It seems quite unlikely that it was in the earlier copies of the Septuagint, because the first-century Jewish historian Josephus lists Shelah next as the son of Arphaxad, and Josephus normally followed the Septuagint.31 So one might ask why this second Cainan is found in the translations at all if this is the case? The manuscripts that do contain this second Cainan are some of the best manuscripts that are used in establishing the original text: אB L À1 33 (Kainam), A Θ Ψ 0102 À13 œ (Kainan).
Look at the Context. Many alleged inconsistencies disappear by simply looking at the context. Taking words out of context can distort their meaning. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary defines context as ―the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning.‖32 Context can also be ―the circumstances or events that form the environment within which something exists or takes place.‖ If we were to look in a thesaurus for a synonym, we would find ―background‖ for this second meaning. At 2 Timothy 2:15, the apostle Paul brings home the point of why context is so important: ―Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.‖ Ephesians 2:8, 9: For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
30
Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix: A General Introduction to the Bible (Chicago, Moody Press, 1980), 367. (Emphasis is mine.) 31 Jewish Antiquities, I, 146 [vi, 4]. 32 Merriam-Webster, Inc: Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Eleventh ed. (Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc. 2003).
225
James 2:26: For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead. So, which is it? Is salvation possible by faith and not works as Paul wrote to the Ephesians, or is faith dead without works as James wrote to his readers? As our subtitle brings out, let us look at the context. In the letter to the Ephesians the apostle Paul is speaking to the Jewish Christians who were looking to the works of the Mosaic Law as a means to salvation, a righteous standing before God. Paul was telling these legalistic Jewish Christians that this is not so. In fact, this would invalidate Christ‘s ransom, because there would have been no need for it if one could achieve salvation by meticulously keeping the Mosaic Law. (Romans 5:18) But James was writing to those in a congregation who were was concerned with their status before other men, who were looking for prominent positions within the congregation, and not taking care of those that were in need. (James 2:14–17) So, James is merely addressing those who call themselves Christian, but in name only. No person could truly be a Christian and not possess some good works, such as feeding the poor, helping the elderly. This type of work was an evident demonstration of one‘s Christian personality. Paul was in perfect harmony with James on this.—Romans 10:10; 1 Corinthians 15:58; Ephesians 5:15, 21–33; 6:15; 1 Timothy 4:16; 2 Timothy 4:5; Hebrews 10:23–25.
Inerrancy: Are There Contradictions? Below I will follow this pattern. I will list the critic‘s argument first, followed by the text of difficulty, and conclude with an answer to the critic. What should be kept at the forefront of our mind is this: one is simply looking for the best answer, not absoluteness. If there is a reasonable answer to a Bible difficulty, why are the critics able to set them aside with ease? Because they start with the premise that this is not the Word of God, but only a book by imperfect men and full of contradictions; thus, the bias toward errors has blinded their judgment. Critic: The critic would argue that there was an Adam and Eve, and an Abel who was now dead, so, where did Cain get his wife? Genesis 4:17 (NET): Cain had marital relations with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was building a city, and he named the city after his son Enoch. Answer: If one were to read a little further along they would come to the realization that Adam had a son named Seth; it further adds that Adam ―became father to sons and daughters.‖ (Genesis 5:4) Adam lived for a total of 800 years after fathering Seth, giving him ample opportunity to father many more sons and daughters. So it could be that Cain married one of his sisters. If he waited until one of his brothers and sisters had a daughter, he could have married one of his nieces once she was old enough. In the beginning, humans were closer to perfection; this explains why they lived longer and why at that time there was little health risk of genetic defects in the case of children born to closely related parents, in contrast to how it is today. As time passed, genetic defects increased and life spans decreased. Adam lived to see 930 years. Yet Shem, who lived 226
after the Flood, died at 600 years, while Shem‘s son Arpachshad only lived 438 years, dying before his father died. Abraham saw an even greater decrease in that he only lived 175 years, while his grandson Jacob was 147 years when he died. Thus, due to increasing imperfection, God prohibited the marriage of closely related people under the Mosaic Law because of the likelihood of genetic defects.—Leviticus 18:9. Critic: If God is here hardening Pharaoh‘s heart, what exactly makes Pharaoh responsible for the decisions he makes? Exodus 4:21 (RSV): And the LORD said to Moses, ―When you go back to Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the miracles that I have put in your power. But I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go.‖ Answer: This is actually a prophecy. God knew that what he was about to do would contribute to a stubborn and obstinate Pharaoh, who was going to be unwilling to change or give up the Israelites so they could go off to worship their God. So this is not stating what God is going to do; it is prophesying that Pharaoh‘s heart will harden because of the actions of God. The fact is, Pharaoh allowed his own heart to harden because he was determined not to agree with Moses‘ wishes or accept Jehovah‘s request to let the people go. Moses tells us at Exodus 7:13 (ESV) that ―Pharaoh‘s heart was hardened, and he would not listen to them, as the LORD had said.‖ Again, at 8:15 we read: ―When Pharaoh saw that there was a respite, he hardened his heart and would not listen to them, as the LORD had said.‖ Critic: The Israelites had just received the Ten Commandments, with one commandment being: ―You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.‖ Therefore, how is the bronze serpent not a violation of this commandment? Numbers 21:9: So Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on a pole. And if a serpent bit anyone, he would look at the bronze serpent and live. Answer: First, an idol is ―a representation or symbol of an object of worship; broadly: a false god.‖33 Second, it should be noted that not all images are idols. The bronze serpent was not made for the purpose of worship, or for some passionate devotion or veneration. There were times, however, when images were created with absolutely no intention of it receiving devotion, veneration, or worship, yet were later made into objects of veneration. That is exactly what happened with the copper serpent that Moses had formed in the wilderness. Many centuries later, ―in the third year of Hoshea son of Elah, king of Israel, Hezekiah the son of Ahaz, king of Judah, began to reign. He removed the high places and broke the pillars and cut down the Asherah. And he broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made; for until those days the people of Israel had made offerings to it (it was called Nehushtan).‖—2 Kings 18:1, 4.
33
Merriam-Webster, Inc: Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Eleventh ed. (Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003).
227
Critic: Deuteronomy 15:11 (NET) says: ―There will never cease to be some poor people in the land; therefore, I am commanding you to make sure you open your hand to your fellow Israelites who are needy and poor in your land.‖ Is this not a contradiction of Deuteronomy 15:4? Will there be no poor among the Israelites, or will there be poor among them? Which is it? Deuteronomy 15:4 (NET): However, there should not be any poor among you, for the LORD will surely bless you in the land that he is giving you as an inheritance. Answer: If you look at the context, Deuteronomy 15:4 is stating that if the Israelites obey Jehovah‘s command to take care of the poor, ―there should not be any poor among‖ them. Thus, for every poor person, there will be one to take care of that need. If an Israelite fell on hard times, there was to be a fellow Israelite ready to step in to help him through those hard times. Verse 11 stresses the truth of the imperfect world since the rebellion of Adam and inherited sin: there will always be poor among mankind, the Israelites being no different. However, the difference with God‘s people is that those who were well off were to offset conditions for those who fell on difficult times. This is not to be confused with the socialistic welfare systems in the world today. Those Jews were hard-working men, who labored from sunup to sundown to take care of their families. But if disease overtook their herd or unseasonal weather brought about failed crops, an Israelite could sell himself into the service of a fellow Israelite for a period of time; thereafter, he would be back on his feet. And many years down the road, he may very well do the same for another Israelite who fell on difficult times. Critic: Joshua 11:23 says that Joshua took the land according to what God had spoken to Moses and handed it on to the nation of Israel as planned. But in Joshua 13:1, God is telling Joshua that he has grown old and much of the Promised Land has yet to be taken possession of. How can both be true? Is this not a contradiction? Joshua 11:23: So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that the LORD had spoken to Moses. And Joshua gave it for an inheritance to Israel according to their tribal allotments. And the land had rest from war. Joshua 13:1: Now Joshua was old and advanced in years, and the LORD said to him, ―You are old and advanced in years, and there remains yet very much land to possess.‖ Answer: No, it is not a contradiction. When the Israelites were to take the land, it was to take place in two different stages: 1) the nation as a whole was to go to war and defeat the 31 kings of this land; thereafter, each Israelite tribe was to take their part of the land based on their individual actions. (Joshua 17:14–18; 18:3) Joshua fulfilled his role, which is expressed in 11:23, while the individual tribes did not complete their campaigns, which is expressed in 13:1. Even though the individual tribes failed to live up to taking their portion, the remaining Canaanites posed no real threat. Joshua 21:44, ASV, reads: ―Jehovah gave them rest round about.‖ Critic: The critic would point out that John 1:18 clearly says that ―no one has ever seen God,‖ while Exodus 24:10 explicitly states that Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel ―saw the God of Israel.‖ Worse still, God informs them 228
in Exodus 33:20: ―You cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live." The critic with his knowing smile says: ‗This is a blatant contradiction.‘ John 1:18 (NASB): No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. (Italics NASB.) Exodus 24:10: And they saw the God of Israel. There was under his feet as it were a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness. Exodus 33:20: ―But,‖ he said, ―you cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live.‖ Answer: Exodus 33:20 is one-hundred percent correct: No human could see Jehovah God and live. The apostle Paul at Colossians 1:15 tells us that Christ is the image of the invisible God, and the writer informs us at Hebrews 1:3 that Jesus is the ―exact representation of His nature.‖ Yet if you were to read the account of Saul of Tarsus (the apostle Paul), you would see that a mere partial manifestation of Christ‘s glory blinded Saul (Acts 9:1–18). When the Bible says that Moses and others have seen God, it is not speaking of literally seeing him, because first of all He is an invisible spirit person. It is a manifestation of his glory, which is an act of showing or demonstrating his presence, making himself perceptible to the human mind. In fact, it is generally an angelic representative that stands in his place and not him personally. Exodus 24:16 informs us that ―the glory of the LORD dwelt on Mount Sinai,‖ not the LORD himself personally. When texts such as Exodus 24:10 explicitly state that Moses and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel ―saw the God of Israel,‖ it is this ―glory of the LORD,‖ an angelic representative. This is shown to be the case at Luke 2:9, which reads: ―And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them [the shepherds], and they were filled with fear.‖ Many Bible difficulties are cleared up elsewhere in Scripture; for example, in the New Testament you will find a text clarifying a difficulty from the Old Testament, such as Acts 7:53, which refers to those ―who received the law as delivered by angels and did not keep it.‖ Support comes from Paul at Galatians 3:19: ―Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary.‖ The writer of Hebrews chimes in at 2:2 with ―For since the message declared by angels proved to be reliable, and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution. . . .‖ As we travel back to Exodus again, to 19:19 specifically, we find support that it was not God‘s own voice that Moses heard; no, it was an angelic representative, for it reads: ―Moses was speaking and God was answering him with a voice.‖ Exodus 33:22–23 also helps us to appreciate that it was the back of these angelic representatives of Jehovah that Moses saw: ―While my glory passes by . . . Then I will take away my hand, and you shall see my back, but my face shall not be seen.‖ Exodus 3:4 states: ―God called to him out of the bush, ‗Moses, Moses!‘ And he said, ‗Here I am.‘‖ Verse 6 informs us: ―I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the 229
God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.‖ Yet, in verse 2 we read: ―And the angel of the LORD appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush.‖ Here is another example of using God‘s Word to clear up what seems to be unclear or difficult to understand at first glance. Thus, while it speaks of the LORD making a direct appearance, it is really an angelic representative. Even today, we hear such comments as ‗the president of the United States is to visit the Middle East later this week.‘ However, later in the article it is made clear that he is not going personally, but it is one of his high ranking representatives. Let us close with two examples, starting with Genesis 32:24–30: And Jacob was left alone. And a man wrestled with him until the breaking of the day. When the man saw that he did not prevail against Jacob, he touched his hip socket, and Jacob‘s hip was put out of joint as he wrestled with him. Then he said, ―Let me go, for the day has broken.‖ But Jacob said, ―I will not let you go unless you bless me.‖ And he said to him, ―What is your name?‖ And he said, ―Jacob.‖ Then he said, ―Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with God and with men, and have prevailed.‖ Then Jacob asked him, ―Please tell me your name.‖ But he said, ―Why is it that you ask my name?‖ And there he blessed him. So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, saying, ―For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life has been delivered.‖ It is all too obvious here that this man is simply a materialized angel in the form of a man, another angelic representative of Jehovah God. Moreover, the reader of this book should have taken in that the Israelites as a whole saw these angelic representatives, and spoke of them as though they were dealing directly with Jehovah God himself. This proved to be the case in the second example found in the book of Judges where an angelic representative visited Manoah and his wife. Like the above mentioned account, Manoah and his wife treated this angelic representative as if he were Jehovah God himself: ―And Manoah said to the angel of the LORD, ‗What is your name, so that, when your words come true, we may honor you?‘ And the angel of the LORD said to him, ‗Why do you ask my name, seeing it is wonderful?‘ Then Manoah knew that he was the angel of the LORD. And Manoah said to his wife, ―We shall surely die, for we have seen God.‖—Judges 13:3–22.
Inerrancy: Are There Mistakes? I have addressed the alleged contradictions, so it would seem that our job is done here, right? Not hardly. Yes, there are just as many who claim that the Bible is full of mistakes. Critic: Matthew 27:5 states that Judas hanged himself, whereas Acts 1:18 says that ―falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out.‖ Matthew 27:5: And throwing down the pieces of silver into the temple, he departed, and he went and hanged himself.
230
Acts 1:18: Now this man acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness, and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. Answer: Neither Matthew, nor Luke made a mistake. What you have is Matthew giving the reader the manner in which Judas committed suicide. On the other hand, Luke is giving the reader of Acts, the result of that suicide. Therefore, instead of a mistake, we have two texts that complement each other, really giving the reader the full picture. Judas came to a tree alongside a cliff that had rocks below. He tied the rope to a branch and the other end around his neck, and jumped over the edge of the cliff in an attempt at hanging himself. One of two things could have happened: (1) the limb broke plunging him to the rocks below, or (2) the rope broke with the same result, and he burst open onto the rocks below. Critic: The apostle Paul made a mistake when he quote how many people died. Numbers 25:9: Nevertheless, those who died by the plague were twenty-four thousand. 1 Corinthians 10:8: We must not indulge in sexual immorality as some of them did, and twenty-three thousand fell in a single day. Answer: We must keep in mind the above principle that we spoke of, the Intended Meaning of the Writer. We live in a far more precise age today, where specificity is highly important. However, we round large numbers off (even estimate) all the time: ―there were 237,000 people at the even in Time Square last night.‖ The simplest answer is that the number of people slain was in between 23,000 and 24,000, and both writers rounded the number off. However, there is even another possibility, because the book of Numbers specifically speaks of ―all the chiefs of the people‖ (25:4-5), which could account for the extra 1,000, which is mentioned in Numbers 24,000. Thus, you have the people killing the chiefs of the people and the plague killing the people. Therefore, both books are correct. Critic: After 215 years in Egypt, the descendants of Jacob arrived at the Promised Land. As you recall they sinned against God and were sentenced to forty years in the wilderness. But once they entered the Promised Land, they buried Joseph‘s bones ―at Shechem, in the piece of land that Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem,‖ as stated at Joshua 24:32. Yet, when Stephen had to defend himself before the Jewish religious leaders, he said that Joseph was buried ―in the tomb that Abraham had bought for a sum of silver from the sons of Hamor.‖ Therefore, at once it appears that we have a mistake on the part of Stephen. Acts 7:15, 16: And Jacob went down into Egypt, and he died, he and our fathers, and they were carried back to Shechem and laid in the tomb that Abraham had bought for a sum of silver from the sons of Hamor in Shechem. Genesis 23:17, 18: So the field of Ephron in Machpelah, which was to the east of Mamre, the field with the cave that was in it and all the trees that were in the field, throughout its whole area, was made over to Abraham as a possession in the presence of the Hittites, before all who went in at the gate of his city. 231
Genesis 33:19: And from the sons of Hamor, Shechem‘s father, he [Jacob] bought for a hundred pieces of money the piece of land on which he had pitched his tent. Joshua 24:32: As for the bones of Joseph, which the people of Israel brought up from Egypt, they buried them at Shechem, in the piece of land that Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for a hundred pieces of money. It became an inheritance of the descendants of Joseph. Answer: If we look back to Genesis 12:6-7, we will find that Abraham‘s first stop after entering Canaan from Haran was Shechem. It is here that Jehovah told Abraham: ―To your offspring I will give this land.‖ At this point Abraham built an altar to Jehovah. It seems reasonable that Abraham would need to purchase this land that had not yet been given to his offspring. While it is true that the Old Testament does not mention this purchase, it is likely that Stephen would be aware of such by way of oral tradition. As Acts chapter seven demonstrates, Stephen had a wide-ranging knowledge of Old Testament history. Later, Jacob would have had difficulty laying claim to the tract of land that his grandfather Abraham had purchased, because there would have been a new generation of inhabitants of Shechem. This would have been many years after Abraham moved further south and Isaac moved to Beersheba, and including Jacob‘s twenty years in Paddan-aram (Gen 28:6, 7). The simplest answer is that this land was not in use for about 120 years because of Abraham‘s extensive travels and Isaac‘s having moved away, leaving it unused; likely it was put to use by others. So, Jacob simply repurchased what Abraham had bought over a hundred years earlier. This is very similar to the time Isaac had to repurchase the well at Beersheba that Abraham had already purchased earlier.―Genesis 21:27–30; 26:26–32. Genesis 33:18–20 tells us that ‗Jacob bought this land for a hundred pieces of money, from the sons of Hamor.‘ This same transaction is also mentioned at Joshua 24:32, in reference to transporting Joseph‘s bones from Egypt, to be buried in Shechem. We should also address the cave of Machpelah that Abraham had purchased in Hebron from Ephron the Hittite. The word ―tomb‖ is not mentioned until Joshua 24:32, and is in reference to the tract of land in Shechem. Nowhere in the Old Testament does it say that Abraham bought a ―tomb.‖ The cave of Machpelah obtained by Abraham would eventually become a family tomb, receiving Sarah‘s body and, eventually, his own, and those of Isaac, Rebekah, Jacob, and Leah. (Genesis 23:14–19; 25:9; 49:30, 31; 50:13) Gleason L. Archer, Jr., concludes this Bible difficulty, saying: The reference to a mnema (―tomb‖) in connection with Shechem must either have been proleptic [to anticipate] for the later use of that shechemite tract for Joseph‘s tomb (i.e., ‗the tomb that Abraham bought‘ was intended to imply ‗the tomb location that Abraham bought‖); or else conceivably the dative relative pronoun ho was intended elliptically [omission] for en to topo ho onesato Abraam (―in the place that Abraham bought‖) as describing the location of the mnema near the Oak of Moreh 232
right outside Shechem. Normally Greek would have used the relativelocative adverb hou to express ‗in which‘ or ‗where‘; but this would have left onesato (―bought‖) without an object in its own clause, and so ho was much more suitable in this context. (Archer 1982, 379–81) Another solution could be that Jacob is being viewed as a representative of Abraham, for he is the grandson of Abraham. This was quite appropriate in Biblical times, to attribute the purchase to Abraham as the Patriarchal family head. Critic: 2 Samuel 24:1 says that God moved David to count the Israelites, while 1 Chronicles 21:1 Satan, or a resister did. This would seem to be a clear mistake on the part of one of these authors. 2 Samuel 24:1: And again the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them, saying, Go, number Israel and Judah. 1 Chronicles 21:1: And Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel. Answer: In this period of David‘s reign, Jehovah was very displease with Israel, and therefore he did not prevent Satan from bringing this sin on them. Often in Scripture, it is spoken of as though God did something when he allowed an even to take place. For example, it is said that God ‗hardened Pharaoh‘s heart‘ (Exodus 4:21), when he actually allowed the Pharaoh‘s heart to harden.
Inerrancy: Are There Scientific Errors? There are over a dozen different interpretations concerning the creative days of Genesis. Herein we will consider the main four in an effort to make our point. First, there is the young earth view that asserts that all physical creation was produced in just six literal 24-hour days sometime between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago. Second, there is the day-age view that asserts that each creative day is to be understood figuratively as creative periods of unknown durations of time. According to this view the earth is millions of years old, and the universe is billions of years old. Third, there is the restoration view (gap theory) that asserts that there is a large gap of time between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. Fourth, there is the literary framework view that asserts that God was not having Moses address how He created the world, nor the length of time in which to do such. This view holds that this account in Genesis 1 is merely a literary outline that summarizes a theology of creation. This so-called ―seven day framework‖ is not to be understood in a literal sense of order and chronology, but is a literary device expressing God‘s involvement in creation and the Sabbath. Different Evangelical Christian scholars hold all four of these views; however, the author of this book dismisses three of these as being contrary to Scripture and science. We will discuss the first two views listed above in more detail below. 34 34
For a more in-depth understanding of these for creative views, see Gregory A. Boyd and Paul R. Eddy, Across the Spectrum (Grand Rapids, Baker Academic, 2002), 50–73.
233
I do not believe those who hold to the young-earth view of creationism have the evidence to support their case. Actually, I do not believe they even speak in terms of evidence. Why? Most of the young-earth commentators attempt to disprove the day-age view by using many words like ―possibly,‖ ―could be,‖ ―may be,‖ and so on. Also, I do not believe they look at the evidence without theological bias. Professor Kirk Wise writes: I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand. (Ashton, 2001)35 It shows theological bias when he states that no evidence will change his mind. Just as in the case of Galileo, theologians cast doubt on the Bible by ignoring scientific evidence. The Bible was not out of harmony with the truth that the earth revolves around the sun and not the other way. God‘s Word needed no revision. It was the Catholic Church‘s misinterpretation of the Bible that caused the problem. As one grows in understanding of physics, biology, and chemistry (as is also true with history, ancient languages, and manuscripts), one may need to revise conclusions derived from previous knowledge. When knowledge increases, it calls for humility to make adjustments in ones thinking. To suggest, as do many conservative Christians, that one needs to read the Bible in a plain way (sensus plenoir) is quite misleading, as though one would never consider otherwise. Galileo‘s own words to a pupil said it well: ―Even though Scripture cannot err, its interpreters and expositors can, in various ways. One of these, very serious and very frequent, would be when they always want to stop at the purely literal sense.‖ 36 Professor Kirk Wise argues that because Genesis chapter one was written as historical narrative, it disallows an interpretation that has millions of years involved. This is hardly the case, for he goes on to admit that other historical narratives contain imbedded material that is not to be taken literally. Moreover, it is implied that one who accepts long creative periods must also believe the Big Bang theory, and believe that fossils are millions of years old, and believe in other facets of Evolution. This is simply untrue. Simply put, Genesis 1:1 says: ―In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.‖ (ESV) This would include our home, the earth, and our solar system and galaxy that King David referred to when he looked into the night sky and wrote: ―When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is man that you are mindful of him, and the son of man that you care for him?‖ (Psalm 8:3, 4, ESV) It would also include all the billions of universes that David was unable to see with his naked eye. Therefore, all this came before the first day of creative preparation for life on the earth that starts in Genesis 1:3, as would also be the case with the description of the earth as found in verse 2. It is not until we get to Genesis 35 36
http://richarddawkins.net/articles/115. Letter from Galileo to Benedetto Castelli, December 21, 1613.
234
1:3–5 that Moses starts to expound on the first day of creation specifically in respect to the earth. What does this mean? It means that regardless of how long you may feel the creative days were, verses 1 and 2 are covering things that existed prior to the start of the events described in the successive creative days. Therefore, it takes nothing away from the Bible when geologists state that the earth is four billion years old, or astronomers who have calculated the age of the universe say it is at least 14–20 billion years old. For the Christian to argue with science is only history repeating itself, as you will see before this chapter closes. Again, Genesis chapter one, verses 1 and 2, are outside the events of the creative days, which are simply a summary of the steps taken to transform the condition of verse 2 into the habitable earth in which the animals and Adam and Eve were created. Now that we have settled the controversy between science and the erroneous interpretations of man‘s tradition that the universe and earth were created in only six literal days, we should clear the air over the age and origin of the sedimentary geological strata. Many have postulated that it was formed at the time of the flood of Noah. This answer is not to be found in God‘s Word. Those who hold to the young-earth view (6,000–10,000 years old), work very hard to try to reconcile the geologic column and the fossils of dinosaurs and such, in which they try to overcome evidence that shows the earth is millions of years old. What is now known and acknowledged by science is that the geological record does not contain a series of gradual and progressive stages of fossils from one species to another. Actually, the fossil record supports the creation account in that new species appear suddenly on the scene within this geological column, having absolutely no connection with any other species. The problem with young-earth proponents is that they are unable to use this information because it will not fit with their belief that all land and sea animals were created in two 24-hour days. This is not to say that this publication accepts the idea that the sea and land animals have existed for untold hundreds of millions of years, but it does not negate that the fifth and sixth creative days were possibly many thousands of years long, having flying and sea creatures, and land animals being created throughout, as well as dinosaurs. What exactly does the Bible reveal? It says plainly that Jehovah God is the ―fountain of life.‖ (Psalm 36:9) In other words, life did not come from nothing, and then develop gradually in some evolutionary process over billions of years. Additionally, God‘s Word says that everything was created according to its kind. (Genesis 1:11, 21, 24) And finally, the Bible does provide the time period of man‘s creation, some 6,000 years ago. On this, both archaeology and Biblical chronology are not far off from each other. Creation is clearly stated within God‘s Word, and can be understood in relation to the correct study and interpretation of its texts, in light of factual science, astronomy, physics, chemistry, geology, and biology. The evolutionary theory stands in opposition to the Bible and to the facts of paleontology and biology. The ideas of young-earth creationists are not supported by God‘s Word either, conflicting with astronomy, physics, and geology. Back in the seventeenth century, the world-renowned scientist Galileo proved beyond any doubt that the earth was not the center of the universe, nor did the sun 235
orbit the earth. In fact, he proved it to be the other way around (no pun intended), with the earth revolving around the sun. However, he was brought up on charges of heresy by the Catholic Church and ordered to recant his position. Why? From the viewpoint of the Catholic Church, Galileo was contradicting God‘s Word, the Bible. As it turned out, Galileo and science were correct and the Church was wrong, for which it issued a formal apology in 1992. However, the point we wish to make here is that in all the controversy, the Bible was never in the wrong. It was a misinterpretation on the part of the Catholic Church, and not a fault with the Bible. One will find no place in the Bible that claims the sun orbits the earth. So where would the Church get such an idea? From Ptolemy (b. about 85 C.E.), an ancient astronomer, who argued for such an idea. This geocentric model that the earth is the center of the universe was long held by Ptolemy‘s predecessors like Aristotle and most of the ancient Greek philosophers. The idea of the earth being the center of the universe was held on to by the fact that the observer with his naked eye saw both the sun and moon appear to revolve around the earth each day, while the earth appeared to stand still. Now consider that the church fathers of the third to the fifth centuries C.E. were inundated by Greek thought, believing philosophical thinking was a means of interpreting God‘s Word. Commenting on such ones, Douglas T. Holden37 stated: ―Christian theology has become so fused with Greek philosophy that it has reared individuals who are a mixture of nine parts Greek thought to one part Christian thought.‖ Couple this with a literal reading of some texts that should be understood figuratively and you have the makings for a conflict between the Church and the scientific world. In interpretation, you may find one verse that appears to be in direct conflict with another (such as, the earth will be destroyed by fire, or, the earth will last forever). We do not automatically assume that God‘s original Word is wrong. We must do some investigative work. (1) Is there a scribal error? (2) Is there an error in translation? (3) Is this a case of one verse using ―earth‖ in a literal sense, while another is using figurative language, speaking of mankind as the ―earth?‖ This can be the case with science as well. One does not let the scientific world dictate our understanding of Scripture, but we should not be so dogmatic in the face of scientific facts that we will, like Professor Kirk Wise, set aside ―all the evidence in the universe [that] turns against creationism,‖ while still holding onto erroneous, unreasonable, and unscriptural interpretations. We have many of conservative scholarship who still argue that the earth and all life on it were created in six literal 24-hour days. As you may know, this flatly contradicts modern-day science. Do we have another Galileo moment in time? Who is correct here, the scholars or science? One thing is for certain, there is no fault to be found in God‘s Word. The Bible does not explicitly say these creative days were literal 24-hour days. What many are failing to realize and quite a few refuse to accept is that, in both the
37
Douglas T. Holden, Death Shall Have no Dominion: A New Testament Study (Bloomington: Bethany Press, 1971), 14.
236
Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures, the word for ―day‖ (Heb., yohm; Gr., hemera) is used both in a literal and in a figurative sense.
237
SIX CREATIVE DAYS DAY
WORKS
1
Light gradually came to be;* a separation between day and night
1:3–5
2
Expanse, a separation between the waters below from the waters above
1:6–8
3
Dry land vegetation
1:9–13
4
Sources of light now become visible from earth **
1:14–19
5
Aquatic creatures
flying
1:20–23
6
Land animals; man and woman created
1:24–31
appears;
souls
and
GENESIS
produces
* Many believe that God said: ―Let there be light‖ and it immediately appeared. No, this was a gradual process, taking such an enormous amount of time that speculation would be the result of any guess. J. W. Watt‘s translation reflects this gradual process: ―And gradually light came into existence.‖ (A Distinctive Translation of Genesis) This light from our sun was spread through the dark overcast, to the point that it was not at first observable but gradually became observable through time. ** And God said, ―Let there be light,‖ and there was light, the first day. Hebrew has different words that distinguish their source and their quality. The Hebrew word used in verse one for ―light‖ is ohr, which carries the general sense. However, by the fourth ―day,‖ or creative period, the Hebrew word changes to maohr, which is now referring to the source of the light. While the word ―day‖ in Hebrew can mean a 24-hour period, clearly yohm and context allows the creative days to be understood as a period of time, an age, or an era. For example, immediately after he mentions the six creative days, Moses uses the same word for ―day‖ in a more general way, lumping all six creative days together as one day: Genesis 2:4: These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven. Here we are given the context of just how Moses is using yohm, which in this verse is referring to all six creative periods as ―in the day.‖ With this alone, it is difficult to argue that in chapter one yohm was being used to refer literally to a 24-hour period. Below are 238
a few other examples where yohm is being used in the sense of an extended period of time, age, or era: Proverbs 25:13 (HCSB): a trustworthy messenger is like the coolness of snow on a harvest day [yohm]; he refreshes the life of his masters. Proverbs 25:13 (NASB): Like the cold of snow in the time [yohm, ftn lit. day] of harvest, Is a faithful messenger to those who send him, For he refreshes the soul of his masters. Isaiah 4:2 (ASV): In that day [yohm] shall the branch of Jehovah be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the land shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel. Zechariah 14:1 (ASV): Behold, a day [yohm] of Jehovah cometh, when thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee. You will have those who cling to the 24-hour creative day by informing you that yohm, ―day, ‖ is used 410 times outside of Genesis with a day and number and in all cases it is to be taken literally, meaning an ordinary day. First, let us point out that there is no absolute grammatical rule in Hebrew that would make this mandatory in every case. Young-earth proponents must support their proposition with their circular argument. For the sake of an argument, let us say that their claim is true. To have ―day‖ used with an ordinal number in 410 places outside of Genesis chapter one would not negate yohm being used in a different setting (like creation) with ordinal numbers and still be referring to periods of time (epochs). One must keep in mind that those uses of a yohm outside the creation account are used in reference to humans and a human day. Because Genesis is the only place in Scripture where periods of time can be used with ordinal numbers, there is no problem with it being the exception to the rule. No other book has the setting of the creation of heaven and earth, so to equate uses of yohm in totally different settings with its use in Genesis is circular reasoning, as if to say: ―Yohm is used with ordinals in 410 occurrences outside of Genesis and they are literal, so yohm must be literal in Genesis because it is used with ordinal numbers.‖ You might as well say that ―yohm is literal with ordinal numbers because yohm should be literal with ordinal numbers.‖ The young-earth proponent‘s argument is circular by supporting a premise with a premise instead of a conclusion. Exodus 20:11 (ASV): For in six days Jehovah made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore Jehovah blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. Is Moses, the writer of Genesis, making reference here at Exodus 20:11 to the six creative days as a representative for the weekly Sabbath, thus suggesting that the six creative days were literal 24-hour days? No, this is not so. At Genesis 2:4, the same writer uses yohm, ―day,‖ figuratively to refer to the six creative days of Genesis chapter one and Exodus 20:11 as a whole, starting from the gradual appearance of light on the first day (Genesis 1:3, as it would appear to an earthly observer), but does not include the earth as it lay in its prior existence, in which it is described as being ―without form 239
and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.‖ Another stumbling block for those who wish to take the creation account in a literal sense of 24-hour periods is that the context is really presented as events that take long periods of time to accomplish. Genesis 1:11, 12 (ASV): And God said, Let the earth put forth grass, herbs yielding seed, and fruit-trees bearing fruit after their kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth: and it was so. [Resulting in] And the earth brought forth grass, herbs yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit, wherein is the seed thereof, after their kind: and God saw that it was good. Obviously we are dealing with far more time than one 24-hour day would allow when speaking of grass, herbs, and fruit trees sprouting and growing to maturity and producing seed and fruit. Genesis 2:18–20 (ASV): And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him. And out of the ground Jehovah God formed every beast of the field, and every bird of the heavens; and brought them unto the man to see what he would call them: and whatsoever the man called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And the man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the heavens, and to every beast of the field; but for man there was not found a help meet for him. At this point in the creation account it was still the sixth creative day. The question here is, if the sixth ―day‖ was only going to be 24 hours, why would Adam be lonely? God would have known he was creating his helper in that sixth ―day.‖ Why the concern for loneliness if it were only a few short hours before Eve was to be created? For this reader, the implication is that the sixth day is a long creative period. Even more activity would be impossibly crammed into the sixth creative day if it were only a 24-hour period. Adam is assigned the task of naming the different kinds of animals. This is not a simple task of just picking a name randomly. In the ancient culture, names carried even more meaning than in our modern Western culture. Names were chosen to be descriptive, to reflect something about the person, animal, or thing. From the descriptive forms of the names Adam chose, it is obvious that it took some time, for the account literally reads ―whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.‖38 (Genesis 2:19) For example, the Hebrew word for the ―ass‖ refers to the usual reddened color. The Hebrew word for stork is the feminine form of the word meaning ―loyal one.‖39 This name is certainly a perfect fit, as the stork is known for the loving care
38
Walter A. Elwell and Barry J Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1988), S. 93. 39 Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. electronic ed. (Oak Harbor, WA : Logos Research Systems, 2000), S. 339.
240
it gives its young, and the loyalty of staying with its mate for life, something that would have been impossible to observe within a mere 24-hour day. Regardless, it has been estimated, even if Adam has taken just one minute to name each pair, it would have taken 40 days with no sleep. It was only after Adam completed this task that Eve was created. Yet, even conceding the possibility that the process of naming the animals went quicker, because Adam named only the basic kinds of animals, like what went in Noah‘s ark at the time of the flood, which did not involve thousands of creatures, it would have taken weeks, possibly months, not a literal 24-hour day. It is during the process of Adam‘s naming the animals that it is discovered that ―for the man no helper was found who was like him.‖ (Genesis 2:20) Thus, we now see where the concern from Genesis 2:18 comes from, with God‘s reference to Adam‘s getting lonely. If it took weeks, months, or decades for Adam to complete his assignment of naming the animals, he would have had the time to grow lonely, but not in a couple hours as would be the case with a 24-hour day. Thus, the context here is that over a long period of time of naming the animals, Adam took note that he was alone while all the animals had mates. Also, it should be noted that God‘s Word explicitly helps man to appreciate that a ―day‖ to Jehovah God is not measured in the same way as man‘s. Psalm 90:4 (AS): For in Your sight a thousand years are like yesterday that passes by, like a few hours of the night. 2 Peter 3:8 (ASV): Dear friends, don't let this one thing escape you: with the Lord one day is like 1,000 years, and 1,000 years like one day. 2 Peter 3:10 (ASV): But the Day of the Lord will come like a thief; on that [day] the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, the elements will burn and be dissolved, and the earth and the works on it will be disclosed. Then there is the problem of the seventh day: it never ended. There was no opening and closing, as occurred with the preceding six days; it is still in progress from the close of the sixth day, more than 6,000 years ago. Hebrews 4:4, 5, 9–11 (ASV): For somewhere He has spoken about the seventh day in this way: And on the seventh day God rested from all His works. Again, in that passage [He says], They will never enter My rest. A Sabbath rest remains, therefore, for God‘s people. For the person who has entered His rest has rested from his own works, just as God did from His. Let us then make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall into the same pattern of disobedience. Clearly, the context of God‘s Word as a whole shows the earth to be much older than 6,000+ years. Habakkuk 3:6 (ASV): He stood, and measured the earth; He beheld, and drove asunder the nations; And the eternal mountains were scattered; The everlasting hills did bow; His goings were as of old. 241
Micah 6:2 (ASV): Hear, O ye mountains, Jehovah's controversy, and ye enduring foundations of the earth; for Jehovah hath a controversy with his people, and he will contend with Israel. Proverbs 8:22, 23 (ASV): Jehovah possessed me in the beginning of his way, Before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, Before the earth was. The writer of Proverbs is using the age of the earth to emphasize that wisdom is much older. But if one accepts the young-earth theory (4004 B.C.E. for the creation of man),* when Solomon, who died shortly after 1000 B.C.E., wrote this, the earth would have been only about 3,000 years old—so not much of an emphasis. * Archbishop James Usher (1581–1656) developed a chronology of the Bible, and dated creation at 4004 B.C.E. Science has established that light travels at 186,282 miles per second. We know that it takes 100,000 years for light to cross our galaxy. We also know that it has taken hundreds of millions of years for the light of the stars we now see to reach the earth. Let us not repeat the Galileo history once more. It takes humility to learn from past experience. The Galileo conflict between science and the Church should at the very least help dogmatic conservative scholarship to avoid taking ―day‖ as a literal 24-hour day when Scripture itself allows for another understanding; context weighs in that direction and science has established that the earth and the universe are far older than 6,000– 10,000 years. Regardless of whether some scholars will concede to the correct understanding, this would in no way put the Bible in the wrong, for it is its interpreters who have misunderstood it. We must keep in mind that science (or the scientist) has no quarrel with the Bible: the quarrel would be with the misinterpretation of the teachers of Christendom, orthodox Jews, and others. The website ChristianAnswers.Net concludes: ―The lesson to be learned from Galileo, it appears, is not that the Church held too tightly to biblical truths; but rather that it did not hold tightly enough. It allowed Greek philosophy to influence its theology and held to tradition rather than to the teachings of the Bible. We must hold strongly to Biblical doctrine which has been achieved through sure methods of exegesis. We must never be satisfied with dogmas built upon philosophic traditions.‖40 However, it is also true that science alone should not determine our interpretation, but it is to be used in a balanced way, as another source to consider. The Copernican theory was, in fact, condemned by the theologians of the Inquisition and Pope Urban VIII. They argued that it contradicted the Bible: to be specific, Joshua‘s statement: ―O sun, stand still . . . So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped.‖ (Joshua 10:12, ESV) Of course, this is not meant to be taken literally. There are several reasonable explanations, one of which, I will give you here. Verse 13 says that ―the sun stopped in the midst of heaven and did not hurry to set for about a whole day.‖ This could simply allow for a slower movement of the earth, giving the appearance to an earthly observer 40
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c007.html. (Accessed January 28, 2010.)
242
that the sun and moon had stood still. As for another reasonable explanation, one Bible encyclopedia comments: ―While this could mean a stopping of earth‘s rotation, it could have been accomplished by other means, such as a refraction of solar and lunar light rays to produce the same effect.‖ Therefore, once more, it becomes obvious that the Bible does not contradict itself.
In Summary The Hebrew word for day that was used for the creation days of Genesis chapter 1 is the same word used at Genesis 2:4 as a reference to the whole of the creative period, six days, ―in the day that . . .‖ The Bible uses the word for ―day‖ as longer periods than a 24-hour day ―one day is as a thousand years.‖ (2 Peter 3:8; Psalm 90:4) There are indicators within the first two chapters that we are dealing with periods longer than 24-hour days. (1) Third Day: At Genesis 1:11-12, we find that trees grew from seeds to maturity, and produced seeds of their kind. This takes months, even years. (2) Sixth day: We find Adam was created, went to sleep, named thousands of animals (names that indicate observation of the animals), grew lonely (looking for a helper), went to sleep, Eve was produced out of Adam‘s rib. This is obviously longer than 24 hours. (3) Seventh Day: Genesis 2:2 informs us that God ―proceeded to rest.‖* The reader will note that Hebrews 4:4 shows that God is still in His rest from the ending of the six creative days. Therefore, the seventh day has been running for thousands of years thus far, which allows the other creative days to be thousands of years long. * Why do I have it rendered as a continuous, ―proceeded to rest‖, when most translations read ―he rested‖? Heb., waiyishboth (imperfect sequential): The verb is in the imperfect state denoting incomplete or continuous action, or action in progress. As it usually turns out, the so-called contradiction between science and God's Word lies at the feet of those who are interpreting Scripture incorrectly. To repeat the sentiments of Galileo when writing to a pupil—Galileo expressed the same sentiments: ―Even though Scripture cannot err, its interpreters and expositors can, in various ways. One of these, very serious and very frequent, would be when they always want to stop at the purely literal sense.‖41 I believe that today‘s scholars, in hindsight, would have no problem agreeing.
Procedures for Handling Biblical Difficulties 1. You need to be completely convinced a reason or understanding exists. 41
Letter from Galileo to Benedetto Castelli, December 21, 1613.
243
2. You need to have total trust and conviction in the inerrancy of the Scripture as originally written down. 3. You need to study the context and framework of the verse carefully, to establish what the author meant by the words he used. In other words, find the beginning and the end of the context that your passage falls within. 4. You need to understand exegesis: find the historical setting, determine author intent, study key words, and note parallel passages. You need to slow down and carefully read the account, considering exactly what is being said 5. You need to find a reasonable harmonization of parallel passages. 6. You need to consider a variety of trusted Bible commentaries, dictionaries, lexical sources, encyclopedias, as well as books on Bible difficulties. 7. You should investigate as to whether the difficulty is a transmissional error in the original text. 8. You must always keep in mind that the historical accuracy of the biblical text is unmatched; that thousands of extant manuscripts some of which date back to the second century B.C. support the transmitted text of Scripture. 9. We must keep in mind that the Bible is a diverse book when it comes to literary styles: narrative, poetic, prophetic, and apocalyptic; also containing parables, metaphors, similes, hyperbole, and other figures of speech. Too often, these alleged errors are the result of a reader taking a figure of speech as literal, or reading a parable as though it is a narrative. 10. The Bible student needs to understand the level that the Bible intends to be exact in what is written. If Jim told a friend that 650 graduated with him from high school in 1984, it is not challenged, because it is all too clear that he is using rounded numbers and is not meaning to be exactly precise.
244
RECOMMENDED READING Archer, Gleason L., Jr. New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1982. Davids, Peter H., Frederick Fyvie Bruce, Manfred T. Brauch, and Walter C. Kaiser. Hard Sayings of the Bible. Downer Groves, Illinois: Inter Varsity Press, 1996. Geisler, Norman L., and Thomas Howe. The Big Book of Bible Difficulties: Clear and Concise Answers from Genesis to Revelation. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1992. Torrey, Reuben Archer. Difficulties in the Bible: Alleged Errors and Contradictions. Chicago, Illinois: Moody Press, 1907.
245
CHAPTER 26 THE SYNOPTIC PROBLEM OF MATTHEW, MARK, AND LUKE Is There Literary Dependence? Introduction to the Synoptic Problem THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS believed that Matthew penned his Gospel first with Luke and Mark following in that order.42 Further, it is possible that both Mark and Luke were likely aware of Matthew‘s Gospel, yet the early Church Fathers give no inclination that it was used as a source for their Gospels. Rather, their writings reveal that all four gospels were written independently. Inasmuch as John penned his Gospel in 98 C.E., it was assumed that he too was aware of the other three gospels but was moved to supplement and not cover the same material a fourth time. This impression would stay intact for 1,700 years. The synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke are referred to as such because they are similar when compared to the Gospel of John. They are similar in view, material covered and even similar wording. The word synoptic can be broken down into syn-, meaning ―together with,‖ and ―optic,‖ meaning ―see,‖ giving us ―seeing together.‖ 43 Matthew‘s Gospel is over 90 percent similar in its content to Mark. Of Mark, 601 of his 606 verses are to be found in Matthew while Luke‘s Gospel is about 50 percent similar in its content to Mark. The Gospel of Mark is only about 7 percent unique to itself while Matthew contains 42 percent that is characteristic to it alone with Luke coming in with 59 percent that is unique to itself, and the Gospel of John has 92 percent that is characteristic to itself. The synoptic question got its start in earnest in 1774 when Johann Jakob Griesbach (1745-1812) issued his Synopsis of the Gospels Matthew, Mark and Luke with the passages laid out in corresponding columns for straightforward assessment. From that day, they have been referred to as the ―synoptic‖ (similar view) Gospels. Griesbach had absolutely no doubt that the Gospels themselves were penned by none other than the names associated with them, even though these names were not added to them until the second century C.E. Moreover, Griesbach felt that ―the apostles were fitted through the Holy Spirit to both understand and transmit the doctrine without danger of error.‖44
42
At times, Mark is found in second place. Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black, The New Testament: Its Background and Message, 2nd ed. (Nashville, Tenn.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 113. 44 Orchard, Bernard. J. J. Griesbach: Synoptic and Text - Critical Studies 1776-1976. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 43
246
The ―problem‖ that we speak of is literary dependency. Are they so similar that they were excessively dependent on one another? Are Matthew, Mark and Luke plagiarists? One must ask of each author, where did he get his material from? It does no damage to one‘s faith to ask such questions as we will go no further than the evidence will allow, unlike higher criticism. Before beginning our quest of the synoptic problem, it may do us good to take a moment and see just how books were published in the first-century C.E. The following material will be a summary taken from Philip W. Comforts Encountering the Manuscripts (2005):
The Publication of the Greek New Testament The publication of the Christian Greek Scriptures in the first century C.E. would be far different from what we, with our modern-day mindset, would understand of the preparing and producing material in printed or electronic form for distribution to the public. The ancients lived in an oral society that published by word of mouth primarily, which would later be followed up and supported by written announcement. Jesus operated like most ancient teachers, in that he wrote nothing himself. He published his teachings orally for three and a half years, leaving his message in the minds and hearts of thousands. Jesus‘ most intimate followers, his apostles would have heard first hand, over and over as he declared this good news of the kingdom. Further, they were given a promise by Jesus himself that ―the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.‖ (John 14:26, ESV) The Gospel accounts themselves leave the reader with the impression that Jesus knew he had a mission from the Father, and that his time was short; therefore, he proclaimed his message every day of the week without let up, preaching and teaching. This form of oral publishing is known by the Greek term kerugma, the proclamation of Jesus Christ's teachings. Of course, kerugma was an ancient practice, and did not belong to Jesus alone, or his disciples, but the term has ―become a quasitechnical term for the content of early Christian polemic, the ‗gospel‘ par excellence.‖45 In ancient times, the king or emperor would make known his message by means of a kerux, an announcer, who would travel throughout the kingdom, proclaiming or announcing the king‘s message. It is Paul, who states explicitly ―for this I was appointed a preacher (kerux) and an apostle . . . a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.‖ 1 Timothy 2:7, ESV. The risen Christ repeats his earlier promise of sending the disciples a helper, ―the Holy Spirit,‖ and adds further details, stating that his closest followers would shortly ―receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth." (Ac 1:8, ESV) Thereafter, Jesus ascended into heaven and ―a cloud took him out of their sight.‖ (vs. 10) The apostles returned the half mile and entered the upper room, where they would spend the next ten days together before Pentecost and the receiving of the promised 45
Allen C. Myers, The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1987), 621.
247
―Holy Spirit.‖ In all likelihood, it was throughout these days of waiting that the twelve apostles and the 120 of Jesus most intimate followers formulated their oral message that needed to be published, proclaimed ―in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth." Hence, we can see that the very early formulation of the Christian community was contingent on the proclamation [kerugma] of the gospel to the new believers. In fact, the 3,000 baptized the day of Pentecost ―devoted themselves to the apostles‘ teaching.‖ (Ac 2:42) In truth, when Luke penned his Gospel to Theophilus, he explain his purpose for writing ‗that Theophilus may know the full truth and understand with certainty and security against error the accounts (histories) and doctrines of the faith of which he had been informed and in which he had been orally instructed.‘ (Lu 1:1-4, AB) As Comfort brings out, the Greek of 1:4 is extremely important, and could be rendered ―that you might know the certainty of the words you have been taught by word of mouth.‖46 The apostle Paul himself received this kerugma, this gospel and was passing it on to the Gentiles. 1 Corinthians 15 (English Standard Version) Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. 3For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received 1
In addition, Paul exhorted the Galatians to share all good things with the one that is orally teaching them. (Gal 6:6) This was the common way of receiving the gospel in the early years, before they were penned by Matthew, Luke and Mark. This oral instruction was a form of ―katecheo, ‗teach by word of mouth‘ (originally used in drama), acquired in primitive Christianity the sense of communicating the content of the faith by instruction (1 Cor. 14:19; Gal. 6:6; Acts 18:25, etc.).‖47 Apollos is another example from Luke‘s Acts of the Apostles, in which he was ‗orally instructed in the way of the Lord.‖ (Ac 18:25) It was Luke‘s intention, as was true of the others, to share a written version of this oral gospel. The careful reader will also notice that Luke did not speak as though his written record was any different than the oral instruction that had been being proclaimed for the previous 23 years before he decided to add ―an accurate extension and continuation of the oral.‖48 Philip Comfort gives us some historical perspective on both the third and the fourth Gospels that were published: Tradition tells us that Mark compiled a Gospel based on Peter‘s oral messages about Jesus‘ ministry. And many scholars think John first preached
46
Philip Comfort, Encountering the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography & Textual Criticism (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2005), 13. 47 Erwin Fahlbusch and Geoffrey William Bromiley, vol. 1, The Encyclopedia of Christianity (Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leiden, Netherlands: Wm. B. Eerdmans; Brill, 1999-2003), 360. 48 Philip Comfort, Encountering the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography & Textual Criticism (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman, 2005), 13.
248
many of the chapters that later he composed as a Gospel narrative. Thus, the Gospel was first published in oral form, then in written form.49 Even after Matthew, Mark and Luke had penned their Gospels, the oral proclamation would have not been dispensed with, because many could not read. Like the synagogue, the Christian congregation had a lector (one who read aloud to the congregation), who would have used the written gospel aiding the oral instruction.
Writing Practices of the First-Century of Our Common Era While we today have the advantages of paper and pen, audio and video recorders, and Microsoft Word; this is hardly the case of the first century person who wanted to pen a record for posterity, or simply get a message from one place to the next. The occupation of secretary was a good trade in the first-century, as the process of composing a document was no easy task. According to scholar E. Randolph Richards, the abilities of these private secretaries ―could range from a minimal competency with the language and/or the mechanics of writing to the highest proficiency at rapidly producing an accurate, proper, and charming letter.‖50 The use of a secretary is not dependent on the ability to read and write alone. John L. McKenzie stresses that, ―it was probably not even a concern for legibility, but rather a concern for beauty, or at least for neatness, which imposed dictation as a social canon.‖51 If one were privy to the materials needed to even pen a small letter and the conditions involved, it soon becomes obvious why one would want to get out of this chore, educated or not. Many were all too happy to hand this responsibility over to the professional scribe. Before looking at the process of publishing a first-century letter, we should review at least several main terms. Autograph:52 The first copy by the New Testament author, or by the scribe as he was dictated to by the author; the scribe would take it down in shorthand and turn it into a rough draft that would be corrected by both the scribe and the author. Original: The first published book by one of the New Testament writers, or that was dictated to a scribe by the writer, and used as the first archetype. Rough Draft: The copy that was created from the shorthand copy taken down by a scribe. This would have been corrected by both the scribe and the author, and the end product will be considered and called the original. Archetype: A text used to make other copies.53 49
Ibid., 13 E. Randolph Richards, Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 13. 51 Scott L. McKenzie, Light on the Epistles: A Reader’s Guide (Chicago, Il: Thomas Moore Press, 1975), 14. 52 Many use the terms original and autograph interchangeably; the more technical understanding would be that the autograph would be in a rough form, and after being rewritten by a scribe, it would be read yet again, and corrections would be made by the scribe and author; thereafter, a copy would be made as the official copy to make other copies, this being known as the original. 53 The original would have been an archetype. 50
249
Exemplar: The authoritative text of a New Testament book from which other copies were made; if in a scriptorium, an archetype; if in a congregation or home, a master-copy. Scriptorium: A room where multiple scribes or even one worked to produce manuscript(s). A lector would read aloud from the exemplar, as the scribe(s) would write down the material. As has been establish an oral gospel had been proclaimed throughout the Roman Empire, and the written Gospels were penned because it was time to establish certainty of that message and for its posterity after the death of the apostles. The process was that the scribe would initially take down the authors letter or gospel in shorthand as he is being dictated to; thereafter, creating a rough draft, to be edited by both the scribe and the author. From there the scribe would create an official copy, which would be signed by the author, validating it as his work, this being known as the original or initial exemplar. We are aware of at least two scribes that worked with both Paul and Peter, and possibly James as well: Tertius (Ro 16:22) and Silvanus (1 Pet 5:12). The Tyndale Bible Dictionary states what we have already considered in the above from Comfort: ―At one point Papias states, ‗The Elder used to say this also: Mark became Peter‘s interpreter and wrote down accurately, though not in order, all that [Peter] remembered concerning the things both said and done by the Lord.‘‖54 So, here we have the possibility that Mark may have served as a secretary for Peter. If Mark spent the kind of time he did with Paul, with Peter, taking notes over an extended period of time for Peter; Mark would have had the material he needed to pen his Gospel, based on the inspired memories of Peter. John 14:26.
The Hypothetical Q Document (30 – 65 C.E.) The story of Q (German Quelle ―source‖) goes back to over 120-years ago. It originates as part of what is known as the ―two-source‖ theory of gospel origins. As history reports, the 1800s could be known as the period of ignorance, not the period of enlightenment. Nevertheless, during this time it was decided that the gospels were not historically dependable. As the Q Document theory goes: early on there were oral sayings and deeds of Jesus that were not down in writing (agrapha, ―not written‖); there being several examples of these supposed agrapha found in the writings of second century Church Fathers. It is the hypothetical Q Document, which is allegedly a collection of these oral sayings and deeds that were down in writing, which in turn, served as the source for Mark‘s Gospel and by extension Matthew and Luke. Because, it is further argued that Matthew and Luke did not pen their gospels from memory (or the memories of others), but instead from the use of the dual sources of Mark and this hypothetical document called Q. Some establish the Q document by looking to the verses in Matthew and Luke that are similar to each other, yet do not appear in the Gospel of Mark. As was stated above, 54
Walter A. Elwell and Philip Wesley Comfort, Tyndale Bible Dictionary, Tyndale reference library (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001), 857.
250
the premise is that Matthew and Luke used both the hypothetical Q document and Mark to pen their gospels. There is just one small problem with all of this; the so-called Q document is not in existence, and as far as evidence goes, there is none to show that it ever existed. For example, it has never been quoted by any of the Church Fathers. One would not know this by listening to the factual way the higher critics present their hypothetical document. The expressions below bring to life a nonexistent document that likely never exited: ―Q originally played a critical role‖ ―Q demonstrates‖ ―Q forces the issue‖ ―Q calls into question‖ ―Q is the most important text we have‖ ―Q tells us‖55 It should be noted that such scholars as B. F. Westcott (1825-1901), Theodor Zahn (1883-1933) and Adolf Schlatter (1852-1938) were not taken in by this ―two-source‖ theory, the latter two being German. As with most other damage done to the validity of the Bible, it started with German scholarship and was soaked up by other academic scholars of world. Eta Linnemann, who actually studied under Bultmann and Fuchs, was a supporter of the two-source hypothesis. Eventually, she would do her own extensive reevaluation, which contributed to her break with historical-critical scholarship, as well as her taking up the Independence View. She expresses her strong disapproval of the position today‘s seminary students find themselves in if they were to adopt the Independent View: ―What student in seminar discussion is going to risk being labeled as uncritical and hopelessly behind the times by raising the possibility that the three Gospels are equally original, in keeping with their own claims and early church tradition?‖56 . . . ―I am shocked when I look at the books of my former colleagues, which I used to hold in highest esteem, and examine the justification for their position. Instead of proof, I find only assertions. Instead of arguments there is merely circular reasoning.‖57 What are the facts about Q? No Church Father or early source makes a reference to any such source. If the Q Document was distributed so widely that Mark, Matthew and Luke had copies; why do we not even have a fragment? Paul in all likelihood did not know of the Gospel of Matthew; and definitely, not of Mark and Luke. But there is no reason why he would not have been aware of such a document that is claimed to have affected and played a very influential role on the start of Christianity and existed before he ever became a Christian; but Paul is dead silent on the Q Document. The Independent View stood as 55
Eta Linnemann, Biblical Criticism on Trial: How Scientific is “Scientific Theology”? (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1990), 20-21. 56 Linnemann. Is There A Synoptic Problem? Rethinking the Literary Dependance of the First Three Gospels. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1992, 45. 57 Ibid., 10
251
the dominant understanding until the era of enlightenment, when the philosophical minded giants, such as Grotius (1593-1645), Kant (1724-1804), Reimarus 1694-1768), Spinoza (1632-1677), and Tindal (1656-1733); brought us errancy of Scripture, Biblical criticism, and their views on the origins of the Synoptic Gospels, Two-Source Hypothesis.58 Papias (c. 110 C.E.) states: (3) I will not hesitate to set down for you . . . everything I carefully learned then from the elders and carefully remembered, guaranteeing their truth. For unlike most people I did not enjoy those who have a great deal to say, but those who teach the truth. Nor did I enjoy those who recall someone else‘s commandments, but those who remember the commandments given by the Lord to the faith and proceeding from the truth itself. (4) And if by chance someone who had been a follower of the elders should come my way, I inquired about the words of the elders— what Andrew or Peter said, or Philip, or Thomas or James, or John or Matthew or any other of the Lord‘s disciples59 (15) And the Elder used to say this: ―Mark, having become Peter‘s interpreter, wrote down accurately everything he remembered, though not in order, of the things either said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed him, but afterward, as I said, followed Peter, who adapted his teachings as needed but had no intention of giving an ordered account of the Lord‘s sayings. Consequently Mark did nothing wrong in writing down some things as he remembered them, for he made it his one concern not to omit anything which he heard or to make any false statement in them.‖ Such, then, is the account given by Papias with respect to Mark. (16) But with respect to Matthew the following was said: So Matthew composed the oracles in the Hebrew language and each person interpreted them as best he could. 60 Bart D. Ehrman, an agnostic Bible scholar, who has spent much of his career misleading the masses about the early text of the Greek New Testament, has the following to say about Papias: There‘s an even bigger problem with taking Papias at his word when he indicates that Mark‘s Gospel is based on an eyewitness report of Peter:
58
Thomas, Robert L. Three Views of the Origins of the Synoptic Gospels. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2002, 235-
41. 59
Michael William Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, Third ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2007), 735. 60 Ibid., 739-41
252
virtually everything else that Papias says is widely, and rightly, discounted by scholars as pious imagination rather than historical fact.61 While it is certainly true that Papias had exaggerated and expanded the death of Judas Iscariot based on Matthew27:5 and Acts 1:18. However, much of what we have on Papias is found in the New Testament, whether one likes it or not. Other aspects of Papias that concern the writers of the Gospels are validated by other writers, such as Irenaeus, who lived shortly thereafter, and would have had firsthand information. Many of these church fathers were renowned scholars, who had access to Papias and other sources that would validate the truthfulness of Papias‘ message. In short, if we were discounting all things Papias said, because he exaggerated, or tried to explain Judas Iscariot‘s death, we would discount every statement Dr, Ehrman has ever made based on the same principles. Ehrman has been found guilty of misrepresenting numbers on many occasions, for the sole purpose of manipulating the information, in an attempt to deceive.62 It is the Gospel of Matthew that was the most influential up unto the time of Irenaeus (c. 180 C.E.). If there was a Q document and Mark was penned first, with Matthew and Luke merely copying from Mark and Q, why is it that Matthew became the most popular among the congregations? Moreover, why is it that very same early group of congregations united in that it was Matthew‘s Gospel that was penned first, and giving him first place among the canon? We will look at just one example in Clement of Alexandria. It is Eusebius, the 4th century Church historian, who tells us of the tradition that Mark is one of the founders of the Alexandrian congregation: a congregation that Clement would later lead. Eusebius also informs us that Clement wrote of ―a tradition of primitive elders,‖ who gave him the order of the Gospels as Matthew, Luke, Mark and John, being penned in that order. Being that Mark was one of the founders, and Clement still placed him in third place, gives even more credence to Clement‘s words, as it would certainly be tempting to place your founding leader in the prominent place of first.
Is There Literary Dependence Found Within the Synoptic Gospels? Again, going back to the evidence of the Church Fathers, we find none who even address literary dependence, even when opportunity to do so was before them. The indepth answer is found in the publication by Eta Linnemann, Is There a Synoptic Problem? In short, she found absolutely no evidence whatsoever that either ―Matthew or Luke were literary dependent on Mark.‖ In the end of this investigation, there is nothing 61
Ehrman, Bart D. Peter, Paul and Mary Magdalene: The Followers of Jesus in History and Legend. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006. 62
“Scholars differ significantly in their estimates — some say there are 200000 variants known, some say 300000, some say 400000 or more! . . . There are more variations among our manuscripts than there are words in the New Testament.” (Ehrman 2005, 89-90) While the statement is true on the surface, it is very misleading to the lay churchgoer, Ehrman’s audience. He gets his high numbers by counting the variants in every manuscript. For example, say there is a Greek word misspelled in Luke 3:3. If that error is in 30 manuscripts, it is listed as 30 variants. In essence, it is one variant, in 30 manuscripts.
253
found that can negate the fact that they were composed independently of one another.63 She is joined by many prominent scholars, who have viewed the evidence, and find independence to be the preferred option: Louis Berkhof, Henry C. Thiessen, Robert G. Gromacki, Merrill C. Tenney, Jacob Von Bruggen, John M. Rist, John Wenham, and Bo Reicke. While listing world renowned scholars does not in and of itself prove anything, it does lend some credence to the Independent View. In the end, this chapter has not the space to extensively investigate the evidence for or against the dependence of either Matthew or Luke on Mark and the so-called Q document. The best we can offer is a short summary of Dr. Linnemann‘s findings. The final analysis in determining the amount of dependence, the findings are that there is no dependency. Mark contains 116 passages, of which 40 (3635 words, 32.28%), are not found in Matthew or Luke. Of the 76 passages that remain, 7625 words or 67.72%, occur in Matthew and Luke. Taking these 7625 words, we find that there are only 1539 words (20.19%) completely identical to Matthew, Mark and Luke. In Matthew and Mark alone, we find only 1640 word (21.51%) are completely identical. In Mark and Luke alone, it is a mere 877 words (11.50%). In Matthew and Luke it is 381 words (5.00%). There are words that are basic, and not relevant to literary dependency. In Biblical Greek, the definite article ―the‖ is the only article, and it plays a very large role, far different and more extensive than English. The definite article ―the‖ is found in the Greek New Testament as the most often occurring, at 19870 times, with the Greek word και ―and‖ coming in second at 9,153 times. If we were to remove the basic words of the article, και, and pronouns the percentage falls drastically. Looking at our 1539 identical words, we find the basic words of Matthew and Mark to be 530 (32.32%), with Mark and Luke having 286 words that are basic (32.61%), and Matthew and Luke at 91 words (23.88%). In the final analysis, we only find 970 words of importance in Matthew, Mark and Luke. In other words, a mere 12.72% of the 7695 have any bearing in the synoptic passages, and this is not even considering that there are another 3635 words or 32.28% of Mark that are not found in Matthew or Luke altogether. 64
63
Linnemann. Is There A Synoptic Problem? Rethinking the Literary Dependance of the First Three Gospels. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1992 , 155-91 64 Eta Linnemann, Biblical Criticism on Trial: How Scientific is “Scientific Theology”? (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1990), 42-72.
254
Bibliography Comfort, Philip. Encounterring the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography and Textual Criticism. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005. Ehrman, Bart D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. New York: Harper One, 2005. —. Peter, Paul and Mary Magdalene: The Followers of Jesus in History and Legend. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006. Elwell, Walter A, and Philip Wesley Comfort. Tyndale Bible Dictionary. Wheaton, Ill: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001. Fahlbusch, Erwin, and Geoffrey William Bromiley. The Encyclopedia of Christianity. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1999-2003. Holmes, Michael W. The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations. Grand Rapids: Baker Academics, 2007. Lea, Thomas D, and David Allen Black. The New Testament: Its Background Message. 2d ed. Nashville, TN: B & H Academic, 2003. Linnemann. Is There A Synoptic Problem? Rethinking the Literary Dependance of the First Three Gospels. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1992. Linnemann, Eta. Biblical Criticism on Trial: How Scientific is "Scientific Theology"? Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2001. McKenzie, John L. Light on the Epistles: A Reader's Guide. Chicago, IL: Thomas More Press, 1975. Myers, Allen C. The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary . Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1987. Orchard, Bernard. J. J. Griesbach: Synoptic and Text - Critical Studies . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1776-1976, 2005. Richards, E. Randolph. Paul And First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004. Thomas, Robert L. Three Views of the Origins of the Synoptic Gospels. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2002.
255
CHAPTER 27 HIGHER CRITICISM: DEBUNKING THE DOCUMENTARY HYPOTHESIS The higher critics tear it all apart—it being God‘s Word! Scripture quotations are from the American Standard Version (1901, ASV), the New American Standard Bible (1995, NASB), the English Standard Version (2001, ESV), the Holman Christian Standard Bible (2003, HCSB), and the New English Translation (2005, NET)
FOR
ABOUT 3,500 years, Moses‘ first five books have been the foundation of the Old
Testament, which itself had paved the way for the writing of the New Testament. These five books were actually the first mini-canon by which all other Bible books could be compared. Many scholars have claimed, however, that Moses was not the writer of the first five books of the Bible. Their claim is known as the Documentary Hypothesis. Moreover, this hypothesis also calls into question the writership of the books of Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel, and 1 and 2 Kings. Our entire discussion in this small book will be focused on the Documentary Hypothesis, which will be defined in section two below, and further explained and developed throughout the other sections in this book.
First, I think it best that we set down the Jewish and the conservative Christian viewpoints as to the writership of the first five books of the Bible. Second, I will lay out
a short history of the Documentary Hypothesis from the eleventh century C.E. forward, with the main contributors to its development living in the nineteenth century. It will only be noted here that from the second century forward there were those who doubted the writership of the Pentateuch, but it is nothing when compared to recent centuries. Third, we will briefly address the major arguments of higher critics as a case against the whole. Fourth, we will show both the internal and external evidence for Moses being the writer of the Pentateuch. As this book is intended initially as an e-Book, we will be doing the footnotes a bit differently.
256
Section One: The Conservative Jewish and Christian Viewpoints of the Writership of the First Five Books of the Bible The first five books of the Bible came to be called the Pentateuch (Greek for ―five rolls‖), which both Jewish and Christian conservatives view as being penned by the one writer, Moses. Originally, the Pentateuch made up one book; later this was divided into five rolls or scrolls, making it much easier to handle. In our English Bibles these five books came to be called Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. From the beginning, these writings were accepted by the nation of Israel as a canon. Moses‘ successor, Joshua, said: ―Be very strong, and continue obeying all that is written in the book of the law of Moses, so that you do not turn from it to the right or left. So be very diligent to love the LORD your God for your own well-being.‖ (Joshua 23:6, 11, HCSB) The Pentateuch with Moses as its writer is accepted by the Jews; this has been the case since 1,500 years before the birth of Jesus Christ. Later, Jesus Christ and the writers of the New Testament accepted the Pentateuch as entirely trustworthy, with Moses as its writer who was inspired of God.
Section Two: A Short History of the Documentary Hypothesis from the Eleventh Century Forward It was in the latter half of the nineteenth century that higher criticism began to be taken seriously. These critics rejected Moses as the writer of the Pentateuch, arguing instead that the accounts in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy were based on four other sources [writers] written between the tenth and the sixth centuries B.C.E. To differentiate these sources one from the other, they are simply known as the ―J,‖ ―E,‖ ―D,‖ and ―P‖ sources. The letters are an initial to the name of these alleged sources, as you will soon see. Source Criticism, a sub-discipline of ―Higher‖ Criticism, is an attempt by liberal Bible scholars to discover the original sources that the Bible writer(s) [not Moses] used to pen these five books. It should be noted that most scholars who engage in higher criticism start with liberal presuppositions. Bible scholar, theologian, and educator Gleason L. Archer, Jr., identifies many flaws in the reasoning of those who support the Documentary Hypothesis; however, this one flaw being quoted herein is indeed the most grievous, and lays the foundation for other irrational reasoning in their thinking. Identifying their problem, Archer writes: ―The Wellhausen school started with the pure assumption (which they have hardly bothered to demonstrate) that Israel‘s religion was of merely human origin like any other, and that it was to be explained as a mere product of evolution.‖65 In other words, Wellhausen and those who followed him begin with the presupposition that God‘s Word is not that at all, the Word of God, but is the word of mere man, and then they reason beyond this based on that premise. As to the affect, this
65. Gleason L. Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Moody Publishers, Chicago, 2007), 98.
257
has on God‘s Word and those who hold it as such; it is comparable to having a natural disaster wash the foundation right out from under your home. Liberal Christianity says that Moses did not pen every word from Genesis through Deuteronomy. They conclude that this is nothing more than a tradition that originated between the times that the Jews returned from their exile in Babylon in 537 B.C.E. and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. These source critics reason that there was and is a misunderstanding of Deuteronomy 31:9, which says that Moses ―[wrote] this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, that bare the ark of the covenant of Jehovah, and unto all the elders of Israel.‖ They argue that Deuteronomy only implies that Moses wrote the laws of Deuteronomy chapters 12–28; moreover, this was extended into a tradition that encompassed the belief that the entire Pentateuch was not written by Moses. In addition, these source critics put forth that the language of Deuteronomy chapters 12–18, as well as the historical and theological context, places the writing and completion of these five books centuries after Moses died. According to these critics, this alleged tradition of Moses being the author of the first five books of our Bible was completely accepted as fact by the time Jesus Christ arrived on the scene in the first-century C.E. These critics further argue that Jesus, the Son of God, was also duped by this tradition and simply perpetuated it when he referred to ―the book of Moses‖ (Mark 12:26), which to the Jews at that time counted Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy as a book. In addition, at John 17:23, Jesus spoke of ―the law of Moses,‖ which he and all others Jews had long held to be the Pentateuch. Thus, for the critic, Jesus simply handed this misunderstood tradition off to first-century Christianity. Who are these critical scholars and how has such extreme thinking as this Documentary Hypothesis come down to us, going from being a hypothesis to being accepted as law? What is the relationship between a hypothesis, a theory, and a law? In the physical sciences, there are several steps before a description of a phenomenon becomes a law. (1) Observation: ―I noticed that objects fall to the earth.‖ (2) Hypothesis: ―I think something must be pulling these objects to the earth. Let me call it gravity.‖ (3) Experimentation: ―Let me put this to the test by releasing different objects from that cliff. Umm, it seems that everything I let go falls. My hypothesis seems to be right.‖ (4) Theory: ―I have noticed that every time I release an object—and wherever I do it—over the sidewalk, from the 32nd floor of that office building and even from the cruise ship—they fall to the earth as if pulled by something. It happens often enough to be called a theory.‖ (5) Law: ―Well, this has consistently been occurring over the years. It must be absolutely true and therefore a Law.‖ Where does the ―Documentary Hypothesis‖ fit into this scheme? Wellhausen et al made certain Observations and then produced a Hypothesis to explain what they saw. I would argue that is as far as they got in following the formula for the scientific method. The Forefathers of Source Criticisms Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089–1164) Ibn Ezra was, by far, the most famous Bible scholar of medieval times. True enough, he may have questioned the idea that Moses 258
wrote the entire Torah; however, he chose not to do this in an outward way; he chose to be more subtle in presenting such an idea. For Ibn Ezra, several verses seemed not to have come from Moses, but one verse stood out above the others. Deuteronomy 1:1 reads: ―These are the words that Moses spoke to all of Israel beyond the Jordan.‖ The east side of the Jordan would be ―this‖ side with the west side being the ―other side.‖ (Numbers 35:14; Joshua 22:4) The point of his contention here being the fact that Moses was never on the other side of the Jordan, the west side, with the Israelite nation. Therefore, the question begs to be asked, Why would Moses pen ―beyond,‖ a seeming reference to the west side? This will be answered soon enough. Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) writes: ―It is therefore sufficiently evident that the five books of Moses were written after his time, though how long after it be not so manifest.‖ Is Hobbes a friend or foe of Christianity? Like Francis Bacon before him, he deepened the crack in the acceptance of the Bible being a source of divine authority.66 Benedict Spinoza (1632–1677) writes: ―It is thus clearer than the sun at noon the Pentateuch was not written by Moses but by someone who lived long after Moses.‖ Spinoza lays the groundwork for higher criticism based on logical or reasonable deduction, believing that thought and actions should be governed by reason, deductive rationalism.67 He writes that because ―There are many passages in the Pentateuch which Moses could not have written, it follows that the belief that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch is ungrounded and irrational.‖68 Moses was not the only Biblical author to lose his writership at the chopping block of Spinoza. ―I pass on, then, to the prophetic books. . . . An examination of these assures me that the prophecies therein contained have been compiled from other books . . . but are only such as were collected here and there, so that they are fragmentary.‖ Daniel did not fare so well either: he is only credited with the last five chapters of his book. Spinoza presents the notion that the 39 books of the Hebrew Old Testament were set down by none other than the Pharisees. Moreover, the prophets spoke not by God, being inspired, but of their own accord. As to the apostles, Spinoza wrote: ―The mode of expression and discourse adopted by [them] in the Epistles show very clearly that the latter are not written by revelation and divine command, but merely by the natural powers and judgment of the authors.‖ Did Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, fare any better? Hardly! Spinoza states: ―It is scarcely credible that God can have designated to narrate the life of Christ four times over, and to communicate it thus to mankind.‖ Spinoza had no respect for those he deemed fools because of their belief in miracles. He writes: ―Anyone who seeks for the true causes of miracles and strives to understand natural phenomena as an intelligent being, and not gaze upon them like a fool, is set down and denounced as an impious heretic by those, whom the masses adore as the 66. Garrett, Don, The Cambridge companion to Spinoza (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), 389. 67. Richard Elliot Friedman, Who Wrote The Bible (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1997), 21. 68. R. H. M. Elwes, A Theologico-political Treatise, and a Political Treatise (New York, NY: Cosimo Classics , 2005), 126.
259
interpreters of nature and the gods. Such a person knows that, with the removal of ignorance, the wonder which forms their only available means for proving and preserving their authority would vanish also. . . . A miracle, whether a contravention to, or beyond nature is a mere absurdity.‖69 Such a dogmatic disbelief in miracles is a contributing factor to Spinoza being the father of modern-day higher criticism. Richard Simon (1638–1712). This French Catholic priest accepted Moses as the author for most of the Pentateuch, but he is the first to notice repetition with certain portions that would come to be known as doublets. two different creation stories two stories of the Abrahamic covenant two stories where Abraham names his son, Isaac two stories where Abraham claims Sarah as his sister two stories of Jacob‘s journey to Haran two stories where God revealed himself to Jacob at Bethel two stories where God changes Jacob's name to Israel two stories of when Moses got water from a rock at Meribah Jean Astruc (1684–1766) This French physician and professor of medicine would, by a rather naïve observation, get the Documentary Hypothesis underway. While Astruc never denied Mosaic writership, he had observed that there seemed to be two sources for Moses‘ penning the early chapters of Genesis: one that favored the title God (Elohim), and another that favored the personal name of God (Jehovah). This theory seemed to carry even more support by duplicate material, as Astruc viewed Genesis chapter one as one creation account and Genesis chapter two as another. It should be kept in mind that Astruc credited Moses as the writer, but was simply looking for what Moses may have drawn on in penning the Pentateuch.70 David Hume (1711–1776) was an eighteenth century Scottish philosopher whose influence on the denial of divine authority, miracles, and prophecy has had a major impact that has reached down to the twenty-first century! Hume has three major pillars that hold up his refutation of divine authority. First, he writes: ―A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature.‖71 The laws of nature have been with man since his start. If a person falls from a high place, he will hit the ground. If a rock is dropped into the sea, it will sink. Each morning our sun comes over the horizon and each night it goes down, and so on. Without a doubt there are laws of nature that never fail to follow their purpose. Therefore, for Hume, there is nothing that would ever violate the laws of nature. This ‗conclusive evidence,‘ Hume felt, ―is as entire as any argument from experience‖ that there could never be miracles.
69. Norman L. Geisler, Inerrancy (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1980), 318. 70. Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible. Rev. and Expanded (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, c.1986, 1996), 156. 71. David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (Boston, MA: Digireads.com, 2006), 65.
260
Hume‘s second pillar is based on his belief that humankind is gullible. Moreover, he reasons that the masses of ‗religious persons‘ want to believe in miracles. In addition, there have been many who have lied about so-called miracles, which have been nothing but a sham. For his third pillar, Hume argues that miracles have occurred only in the time periods of ignorance; as the enlightenment of man grew the miraculous diminished. Hume reported: ―Such prodigious events never happen in our days.‖ Hume rejected the inspiration of Scripture on two grounds: (1) he denied the possibility of miracles and prophecy, and (2) he rejected the Bible‘s divine authority as a whole because, to him, it was based upon perception or feeling, rather than upon fact, nor could it be proved by observation and experiment. Thus, for Hume, the result is that the Bible ―contains nothing but sophistry and illusion.‖72 As we can see, Hume‘s conclusion is obvious: Because the Bible is, in fact, not inspired, it could never be a true source of knowledge that it claims, and it is certainly not God‘s Word for humankind. Johann Gottfried Eichhorn (1752–1827) took Jean Astruc‘s conjectures beyond Genesis to other books of the Pentateuch, arguing that the Pentateuch contained three primary sources that were distinct by vocabulary, style, and theological features. He also borrowed the phrase ―higher criticism‖ from Presbyterian minister and scientist Joseph Priestly, and he was the first to name these alleged sources ―E‖ (for Elohim) and ―J‖ for Jehovah.73 Karl Heinrich Graf (1815–1869), aside from Julius Wellhausen, was the person we look to most for the modern documentary hypothesis. For Graf the ―J‖ source was the earliest, composed in the ninth century B.C.E.; the ―E‖ source was written shortly thereafter. The author of Deuteronomy wrote shortly before Josiah‘s clearing away false worship in the seventh century B.C.E., and finally, the ―P‖ source was written in the sixth century after the exile. In 1878, the German Bible critic Julius Wellhausen (1844–1918), writing in Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels (Prolegomena to the History of Israel), popularized the ideas of the above scholars that the first five books of the Bible as well as Joshua were written from the 9th century into the 5th century B.C.E., over a millennium [1,000 years] after the events described.74 The capital letter ―J‖ is used to represent an alleged writer. In this case it stands for any place God‘s personal name, Jehovah, is used. It is argued that this author is perhaps a woman as it is the only one of their presented authors who is not a priest. (Harold Bloom, The Book of “J”) They date the portion set out to ―J‖ to c.850 B.C.E.* Some scholars place this author in the southern portion of the Promised Land, Judah.75 72. Ibid., 90. 73. Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible. Rev. and Expanded (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, c.1986, 1996), 157. 74. Ernest Nicholson, The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 36–47. 75. Mark F. Rooker, Leviticus: The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001), 23.
261
* Symbols: a. for ―after‖; b. for ―before‖; c. for ―circa,‖ or ―about.‖
Another writer is put forth as ―E,‖ for it stands for the portion that has Jehovah‘s title Elohim, God. Most higher critics place this author c.750–700 B.C.E. Unlike ―J,‖ this author ―E‖ is said to reside in the northern kingdom of Israel. As stated earlier, this author is reckoned to be a priest, with his lineage going back to Moses. It is also proffered that he bought this office. In addition, it is argued that an editor combined ―J‖ and ―E‖ after the destruction of Israel by the Assyrians but before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, which they date to about 722 BC.E.76 These same critics hold out that the language and theological content of ―D,‖ Deuteronomy, is different from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, thus they have another author. They argue that ―D‖ was gathered over several hundred years by the priests living in the northern kingdom of Israel; however, it wasn‘t until much later that ―D‖ was combined with the earlier works. It is also said that the ―D‖ writer (source) was also behind Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings (Dtr). It is suggested strongly that, in fact, this is the book found in the temple by Hilkiah the high priest and given to King Josiah. (2 Kings 22:8) It is further put forth that J/E/D were fused together as one document in about 586 B.C.E.77 The source critics use the capital letter ―P‖ for Priestly. This is because this portion of the Pentateuch usually relates to the priesthood. For instance, things like the sacrifices would be tagged as belonging to this author. Many scholars suggest that ―P‖ was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, which they date at 586 B.C.E. Others put forth that it was written during the exile of seventy years, the Priest(s) composing this holy portion for the people who would return from exile, while others say it was written after the exile, about 450 B.C.E. These liberal scholars find no consensus on when this supposed author ―P‖ wrote this portion of the first five books. The critics tell us that the final form of J/E/D/P was composed into one document about 400 B.C.E.78 The capital ―R‖ represents the editor(s) who put it together and may have altered some portions to facilitate their social-circumstances of their day. The ―R‖ comes from the German word Redakteur (Redactor), which is an editor or reviser of a work. With all the focus on Wellhausen and the impetus he has given to the Documentary Hypothesis, one would conclude that he had made an enormous, critical investigation of the text, which, in essence, moved him to cosign with his predecessors. If that is your conclusion, you will have to regroup, for it was simply a feeling that something wasn‘t quite right that moved Wellhausen to accept a system of understanding without any evidence whatsoever. In his book Prolegomena to the History of Israel, first published in 1878, Wellhausen helps his readers to appreciate just how he came about his expressed interest in the Documentary Hypothesis:
76. Ibid., 23. 77. Ibid., 23. 78. Ibid., 23–24.
262
In my early student days I was attracted by the stories of Saul and David, Ahab and Elijah; the discourses of Amos and Isaiah laid strong hold on me, and I read myself well into the prophetic and historical books of the Old Testament. Thanks to such aids as were accessible to me, I even considered that I understood them tolerably, but at the same time was troubled with a bad conscience, as if I were beginning with the roof instead of the foundation; for I had no thorough acquaintance with the Law, of which I was accustomed to be told that it was the basis and postulate of the whole literature. At last I took courage and made my way through Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and even through Knobel's Commentary to these books. But it was in vain that I looked for the light which was to be shed from this source on the historical and prophetical books. On the contrary, my enjoyment of the latter was marred by the Law; it did not bring them any nearer me, but intruded itself uneasily, like a ghost that makes a noise indeed, but is not visible and really effects nothing. Even where there were points of contact between it and them, differences also made themselves felt, and I found it impossible to give a candid decision in favour of the priority of the Law. Dimly I began to perceive that throughout there was between them all the difference that separates two wholly distinct worlds. Yet, so far from attaining clear conceptions, I only fell into deeper confusion, which was worse confounded by the explanations of Ewald in the second volume of history of Israel. At last, in the course of a casual visit in Göttingen in the summer of 1867, I learned through Ritschl that Karl Heinrich Graf placed the law later than the Prophets, and, almost without knowing his reasons for the hypothesis, I was prepared to accept it; I readily acknowledged to myself the possibility of understanding Hebrew antiquity without the book of the Torah.79
Martin Noth (1902–1968) A liberal twentieth-century German scholar who specialized in the pre-Exilic history of the Jewish people. Noth presented what he called the ―Deuteronomic Historian.‖ He argued that the language and theological outlook of Joshua, Judges, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings was the same as the book of Deuteronomy. Noth believed this writer lived during the exile because of a reference from 2 Kings to the exile. Modern critics, however, believed this writer lived before the exile, with 2 Kings 25:27 being a later addition. Frank M. Cross, Jr., Hebrew and Biblical scholar‘ muddies the water even more with his proposition that there was not one Deuteronomistic history, but two. The first he proposed to be written during the reign of the Judean King Josiah to aid him in cleaning up the false worship going on within Judah. After the destruction of Jerusalem, Cross says the same writer or possibly another goes back to edit this work, to add in the destruction of Jerusalem and the exile to Babylon. Redaction Criticism The bibliography of this book will contain books that will address the Redaction Theory in detail, thus I will only briefly touch on it here because of its relationship to the Documentary Hypothesis. As stated above in our alphabet soup of alleged authors (―J,‖ ―E,‖ ―D,‖ ―P,‖ and ―R‖), a redactor is an editor or reviser of a work. Redaction Criticism 79. Julius Wellhausen, Prolegomena to the History of Israel (1878), 3–4.
263
is another form of Biblical criticism that intends to investigate the Scriptures and draw conclusions concerning their authorship, historicity, and time of writing. This form of criticism as well as the others has really done nothing more than tear down God‘s Word. R. E. Friedman, the Documentary Hypothesis‘ biggest advocate, asserts that the ―J‖ document was composed between 922–722 B.C.E. in the southern kingdom of Judah, while the northern kingdom of Israel was composing the ―E‖ document during these same years. Friedman contends that sometime thereafter a compiler of history put these two sources together, resulting in ―J/E,‖ with the compiler being known as ―RJE.‖ Friedman states that shortly thereafter, the priesthood in Jerusalem put out yet another document, known today as ―P,‖ this being another story to be added to the above ―J/E.‖ Going back to their authors for the first five books of the Bible, Friedman and these critics claim a redactor, or editor put the whole Pentateuch together using ―D,‖ ―P,‖ and the combination of ―J/E.‖ For them this editor (Deuteronomist) used the written sources he had available to make his additions for the purpose of dealing with the social conditions of his day. They claim this editor‘s express purpose was to alter Scripture to bring comfort and hope to those who were in exile in Babylon. Wellhausen‘s theories, with some adjustments, have spread like a contagious disease, until they have consumed the body of Christendom. However, the real question is, Do these higher critics have any serious evidence to overturn thousands of years of belief by three major religious groups (Jews, Christians, and Muslims) that the Pentateuch was written by Moses? What these critics have are pebbles, each representing minute inferences and implications [circumstantial evidence at best] that they place on one side of a scale. These are weighed out against the conservative evidence of Moses‘ authorship of the Pentateuch. As unsuspecting readers work their way through the books and articles written by these critics, the scales seem to be tilted all to one side, as if there were no evidence for the other side. Thus, like a jury, many uninformed readers; conclude that there is no alternative but to accept the idea that there are multiple authors for the Pentateuch instead of Moses, who is traditionally held to be the sole author. Just what impact has the Documentary Hypothesis had on academia? Let us allow R. Rendtorf, professor Emeritus of the University of Heidelberg, to answer: Current international study of the Pentateuch presents at first glance a picture of complete unanimity. The overwhelming majority of scholars in almost all countries where scholarly study of Old Testament is pursued, take the documentary hypothesis as the virtually uncontested point of departure for their work; and their interest in the most precise understanding of the nature and theological purposes of the individual written sources seems undisturbed.80
Let us take a moment to look at many of these pebbles and see which side of the scale they are to be placed on. As stated at the outset, we will address the major arguments as a case against the whole. Some of these pebbles are major obstacles for honest-hearted Christians.
80. R. Rendtorff, ―The Problem of the Process of Transmission in the Pentateuch,‖ JSOT (1990): 101.
264
Section Three: Major Arguments of Higher Critics for the Documentary Hypothesis I will address four areas of argumentation from the higher critics: 1) the divine names, 2) discrepancies, 3) repetition, known as ―doublets,‖ and 4) differences in language and style. I will give at least one example of each and address at least one example under the evidence for Moses‘ writership. Divine Names The higher critics argue that every Bible verse that contains the Hebrew word for God, (‘Elo·him´), set off by itself has its own writer, designated by the capital ―E‖ (―Elohist‖). On the other hand, any verse that contains the Tetragrammaton, (Jehovah, Yahweh), God‘s personal name, is attributed to yet another writer, ―J‖ (―Jawist‖). (Cassuto, 18-21) Let us see how they explain this. The critics argue that ―God‖ (‘Elo·him´) is restricted in use exclusively in the first chapter of Genesis (1:1–31) in relation to God‘s creation activity, and that starting in Genesis 2:4 through the end of the second chapter we find God‘s personal name. R. E. Friedman speaks of a discovery by three men: ―One was a minister, one was a physician, and one was a professor. The discovery that they made ultimately came down to the combination of two pieces of evidence: doublets and the names of God. They saw that there were apparently two versions each of a large number of Biblical stories: two accounts of the creation, two accounts each of several stories about the patriarchs Abraham and Jacob, and so on. Then, they noticed that, quite often, one of the two versions of a story would refer to God by one name and the other version would refer to God by a different name.‖ (R. E. Friedman, 50) Different settings, however, require different uses. This principle holds true throughout the whole of the entire Old Testament. Moses may choose to use (‘Elo·him´) in a setting in which he wants to show a particular quality clearly, like power, creative activity, and so on. On the other hand, Moses may choose to use God‘s personal name (Jehovah, Yahweh) when the setting begs for that personal relationship between the Father and his children, the Israelites, or even more personable, a one-on-one conversation between Jehovah God and a faithful servant. The Divine Names: The weakness of claiming multiple authors because of the different names used for God is quite evident when we look at just one small portion of the book of Genesis in the American Standard Version (1901). God is called ―God Most High,‖ ―possessor (or maker) of heaven and earth,‖ ―O Lord Jehovah,‖ ―a God that seeth,‖ ―God Almighty,‖ ―God,‖ ―[the] God,‖* and ―the Judge of all the earth.‖ (Genesis 14:18, 19; 15:2; 16:13; 17:1, 3; 18:25) It is difficult to believe that different authors wrote these verses. Moreover, let us take a look at Genesis 28:13, which says: ―And, behold, Jehovah stood above it, and said, I am Jehovah, the God [―Elohim‖] of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed.‖ Another scripture, Psalm 47:5, says: ―God is gone up with a shout, Jehovah 265
with the sound of a trumpet.‖81 (ASV) In applying their documentary analysis, we would have to accept the idea that two authors worked together on each of these two verses. * The title ’Elo·him´ preceded by the definite article ha, giving the expression ha·’Elo·him´.
Many conservative scholars have come to realize that in a narrative format one will often find a ruler being referred to not only by name, but also by a title, such as ―king.‖ M. H. Segal observes: ―Just as those interchanges of human proper names and their respective appellative common nouns cannot by any stretch of the imagination be ascribed to a change of author or source of document, so also the corresponding interchanges of the divine names in the Pentateuch must not be attributed to such a literary cause.‖* If one were to look up ―Adolf Hitler‖ using Academic American Encyclopedia, within three paragraphs he will find the terms ―Führer,‖ ―Adolf Hitler,‖ and simply ―Hitler.‖ Who is so bold as to suggest that there are three different authors for these three paragraphs? * See also Psalm 46:11; 48:1, 8.
Dr. John J. Davis82 helps us to appreciate that there is ―no other religious document from the ancient Near East [that] was compiled in such a manner; a documentary analysis of the Gilgameŝ Epic or Enūma Eliŝ would be complete folly. The author of Genesis may have selected divine names on the basis of theological emphasis rather than dogmatic preference. Many divine names were probably interchangeable; Baal and Hadad were used interchangeably in the Hadad Tablet from Ugarit83 and similar examples could be cited from Egyptian texts.‖84 In fact, we now know that there were many deities in the ancient Near East that had multiple names. As stated above with the Babylonian Creation account, the Enuma Elish, the god Marduk (Merodach), chief deity of Babylon, also had some 50 different names. 85 It would not even be thinkable to apply any of the Documentary Hypothesis analysis to any of these works. Why? Not only because we can see that ancient writers are no different than modern writers and are able to use different names and titles interchangeably within their work, but they were written on stone, so to speak. If one has one clay tablet that has both a personal name, and two different titles for the same king, it would be difficult to argue that there were two or three different authors for the one tablet. Bible scholar Mark F. Rooker has the following to say about the use of Elohim and Yahweh in the Old Testament: Moreover, it is clear that throughout the Old Testament that the occurrence of the names of God as Elohim or Yahweh is to be attributed to contextual and semantic issues, not the existence of sources. This conclusion is borne out by the fact that the 81. See also Psalm 46:11; 48:1, 8. 82. John J. Davis, Paradise to Prison: Studies in Genesis (Salem: Sheffield, 1975), 22–23. 83 . G. R. Driver, Canaanite Myths and Legends (New York: T. & T. Clark, 1971), 70-72. 84. For example, see the ―Stele of Ikhernofret‖ in James B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 2nd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955, pp. 329–30. 85. K. A. Kitchen, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 424–5.
266
names consistently occur in predictable genre. In the legal and prophetic texts the name Yahweh always appears, while in wisdom literature the name for God is invariably Elohim. In narrative literature, which includes much of the Pentateuch, both Yahweh and Elohim are used.* Yet consistently the names do not indicate different sources but were chosen by design. The name Elohim was used in passages to express the abstract idea of Deity as evident in God‘s role as Creator of the universe and the Ruler of nature. Yahweh, on the other hand, is the special covenant name of God who has entered into a relationship with the Israelites since the name reflects God‘s ethical character. (Cassuto, 31) Given the understanding of the meaning of these names for God, it is no wonder that the source which contains the name Yahweh would appear to reflect a different theology from a selected group of texts which contained the name Elohim.‖86 * Similarly, Livingston has pointed out that the cognate West Semitic divine names il and ya(w) appear to be interchangeable in the Eblaite tablets. (The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment, 224.)
Let us, on a small scale, do our own analysis of the divine names in the first two chapters of Genesis. The Hebrew word (‘elo·him´) is most often agreed upon to be from a root meaning ―be strong,‖ ―mighty,‖ or ―power.‖87 It should be said too that by far, most Hebrew scholars recognize the plural form (im) of this title ’elo·him´ to be used as a plural of ―majesty,‖ ―greatness,‖ or ―excellence.‖ The Hebrew word (’elo·him´) is used for the Creator 35 times from Genesis 1:1 to 2:4a. Exactly what is the context of this use? It is used in a setting that deals with God‘s power, his greatness, his excellence, his creation activity, all of which seems appropriate, does it not? Moving on to Genesis 2:4b–25, we find God now being referred to by his personal name, the Tetragrammaton (YHWH, JHVH), which is translated ―Jehovah‖ (KJV, ASV, NW, NEB, etc.) or ―Yahweh‖ (AT, NAB, JB, HCSB, etc.). It is found in verses 4b–25 a total of 11 times; however, it comes before his title (‘elo·him´).* Why the switch, and what is the context of this use? This personal name of God is used in a setting that deals with his personal relationship with man and woman. This is not a second creation account; it is a more detailed account of the creation of man, which was only briefly mentioned in chapter one in passing, as each feature of creation was ticked off. In chapter two, the Creator becomes a person as he speaks to his intelligent creation, giving them the prospect of an eternal perfect life in a paradise garden, which is to be cultivated earth wide, to be filled with perfect offspring. Therefore, we see a personal interchange between God and man as He lays out His plans to Adam, which seems very appropriate, does it not, when switching from using a title in chapter one to using a personal name in chapter two? In chapter two, we have the coupling of the personal name ―Jehovah‖ with the title ―God,‖ to show that we are still talking about this ‗great,‘ ‗majestic,‘ ‗all powerful‘ Creator, but personalized as he introduces himself to his new earthly creation. *―Jehovah God.‖ Heb., Yehwah´ ‘Elo·him´. 86. Mark F. Rooker, Leviticus: The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001), 26–27. 87. Ibid., 27.
267
Thus, there is no reason to assume that we are talking about two different writers. No, it is two different settings in which a skilled writer would make the transition just as Moses did. It would be no different than if a modern-day news commentator was giving as a report about the United States President visiting Russia to meet with Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev, in which he used the title President predominately. The following week the same news commentator may be covering the President visiting a hospital with injured children who had survived a tornado, and refer to the President as President Obama. It isn‘t difficult to see that one is an official setting where the President needs to be portrayed as powerful, while in the other setting; he needs to be portrayed as personable. The same principles used herein apply to the rest of the Pentateuch and the Old Testament as a whole. Discrepancies Discrepancies, or should I say ―perceived‖ discrepancies, are the critic‘s favorite pebble. These perceived discrepancies set off an alarm for the critic, and then off he rushes with his pebble like a child to add it to the multiple-authors side of the scale. To differentiate between the supposed different sources texts, I will lay them out as follows: (―J‖) will be used to represent an alleged writer. In this case it stands for any place God‘s name Jehovah is used. (―E‖) will be for the portion that has Jehovah‘s title, Elohim, God. (―P‖) will be for the portion of priestly activities. (―D‖) Deuteronomy is different from Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, thus it has another author. (―RJE‖) will represent the compiler who put ―J‖ and ―E‖ together. (―R‖) will represent the editor(s), who put it all together and may have altered some portions to express their social circumstances of their day. (―U‖) will represent the alleged ―unknown independent texts.‖
―Narrative Discrepancy‖ (Genesis 12:1, ASV) Now Jehovah said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father‘s house, unto the land that I will show thee: (―J‖) (after Terah, Abram‘s father, died, Abram is commanded to leave Haran) (Genesis 11:26, ESV) When Terah had lived 70 years, he fathered Abram, Nahor, and Haran (―U‖). (When Terah was 70, Abram was born.) (Genesis 11:32, ESV) The days of Terah were 205 years (―U‖): and Terah died in Haran (―R‖). (Terah died at the age of 205, which would make Abraham 135 when he left Ur.) (Genesis 12:4, ASV) So Abram went, as Jehovah had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him (―J‖): and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out (―P‖) of Haran (―R‖). (12:4 has Abram being only 75 when he leaves Haran.)
Discrepancy: According to 11:32, Terah died at the age of 205; hence, Abram must have been 135 when he was called to leave Haran. However, 12:4 says that he was only 268
75 when he left Haran. The Source Critic informs us that this seeming contradiction is resolved if Genesis chapter 12 is of a different source from the genealogy of Genesis chapter 11. The above need not be a contradiction at all. True enough, it was at the age of 70 that Terah began having children (Genesis 11:26), but does Abraham have to be the firstborn child simply because he is listed first? Ask yourself, what weight does the names Nahor and Haran play in the Bible account? Now ask yourself, what about the name Abraham? He is considered to be the father and founder of three of the greatest religions on this planet: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. He is the third most prominent person named in God‘s Word. This practice, that of placing the most prominent son first in a list of sons even though they are not the firstborn is followed elsewhere in God‘s Word with other prominent men of great faith, for example Shem and Isaac. (Genesis 5:32; 11:10; 1 Chronicles 1:28) Therefore, let us keep it simple. Genesis 11:26 does not say that Abram was the firstborn; it simply says that Terah began fathering children, and then it goes on to list his three sons, listing the most prominent one first. Thus, it is obvious that Terah fathered Abram at the age of 130. (Genesis 11:26, 32; 12:4) In addition, it is true that Sarah was Abram‘s half-sister, not by the same mother, but by having Terah as the same father. (Genesis 20:12) Therefore, in all likelihood, it is Haran who is the firstborn of Terah, whose daughter was old enough to marry Nahor, another of Terah‘s three sons.—Genesis 11:29. ―Narrative Discrepancy‖ (Genesis 37:25–28, 36; 38:1; 39:1, YLT) (Genesis 37:25–28, YLT) And they sit down to eat bread (―E‖), and they lift up their eyes, and look, and lo, a company of Ishmaelites coming from Gilead, and their camels bearing spices, and balm, and myrrh, going to take [them] down to Egypt. 26 And Judah saith unto his brethren, ‗What gain when we slay our brother, and have concealed his blood? 27 Come, and we sell him to the Ishmaelites, and our hands are not on him, for he [is] our brother—our flesh;‘ and his brethren hearken (―J‖). 28 And Midianite merchantmen pass by and they draw out and bring up Joseph out of the pit (―E‖), and sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver. They took Joseph to Egypt (―J‖). (Genesis 37:36) And the Medanites have sold him unto Egypt, to Potiphar, a eunuch of Pharaoh, head of the executioners (―E‖). (Genesis 38:1) And it cometh to pass, at that time, that Judah goeth down from his brethren, and turneth aside unto a man, an Adullamite, whose name [is] Hirah (―J‖). (Genesis 39:1) And Joseph hath been brought down to Egypt, and Potiphar, a eunuch of Pharaoh, head of the executioners, an Egyptian man, buyeth him out of the hands of the Ishmaelites who have brought him thither (―J‖).
Discrepancy: In Genesis 37:25 the Ishmaelites are passing by at the opportune time mentioned in verses 26 and 27, with Judah suggesting that instead of killing Joseph they sell him to the Ishmaelites. Yet, verse 28 switches in midstride to the Midianites, as they drew Joseph from the pit, selling him to the Ishmaelites. In verse 36, the Medanites (likely a scribal error; almost every translation has Midianites, so we will accept that as so) are selling Joseph to Potiphar in Egypt. Yet, the discrepancy pushes the envelope even further, for Genesis 39:1 says it was, in fact, the Ishmaelites who delivered and sold 269
Joseph to Potiphar in Egypt. Was Joseph sold to Ishmaelites or to Midianites? In addition, who delivered and sold Joseph to Potiphar in Egypt? It seems that the higher critics are bent on using ambiguous passages (ambiguous at first glance to the casual reader) to facilitate their Documentary Hypothesis. You might say that these discrepancies are fuel for the engine that drives their Documentary Hypothesis locomotive. E. A. Speiser writes: The narrative is broken up into two originally independent versions. One of these (J) used the name Israel, featured Judah as Joseph‘s protector, and identified the Ishmaelites as the traders who bought Joseph from his brothers. The other (E) spoke of Jacob as the father and named Reuben as Joseph‘s friend; the slave traders in that version were Midianites who discovered Joseph by accident and sold him in Egypt to Potiphar.88
For Speiser, it is time to slice up the text and divide it up between our alleged ―J‖Text and ―E‖-Text writers. It is also hypothesized that our ―R‖-Redactor edits the two and slips in some additional information as well, suggesting that the Midianites are the ones who were actually passing by, selling Joseph later to the Ishmaelites. Thus, it would be the Ishmaelites who would deliver and sell Joseph to Potiphar in Egypt. Yes, at first glimpse, this would appear to make it all well, but we still have a problem: Genesis 37:36 states that it was the Midianites who sold Joseph to Potiphar in Egypt. Actually, when one looks below the surface reading, there is no discrepancy here at all. Ishmael (son of Hagar and Abraham) and Midian (son of Keturah and Abraham) were half-brothers. It is highly likely that there was intermarriage between the descendants of these two, allowing for an interchangeable use of the expression ―Ishmaelites‖ and ―Midianites.‖ (Genesis 25:1–4; 37:25–28; 39:1) We see this in the days of Judge Gideon when Israel was being attacked, with both terms ―Ishmaelites‖ and ―Midianites‖ being used to describe the attackers. (Judges 8:24; 7:25; 8:22, 26) Alternatively, even still you could have an Ishmaelite caravan encompassing Midianite merchants that were passing by, with the Midianites brokering the deal and delivering Joseph from the pit to the Ishmaelite caravan, where Joseph would be under the Ishmaelites‘ custody even if he was being detained by the Midianites. Once they arrived at Potiphar‘s place in Egypt, it would be the Midianites to broker the deal with Potiphar. Thus, it can be stated either way, the Ishmaelites or the Midianites delivered and sold Joseph to Potiphar in Egypt. Repetitions (Doublets) What are doublets? It is the telling of the same story twice, making the same events appear to happen more than once. For example, (1) there are two stories of the creation account, (2) two stories of God‘s covenant with Abraham, (3) two stories where Abraham names his son Isaac, 88. E. A. Speiser, Genesis, Anchor Bible (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1964), 293–4.
270
(4) two stories where Abraham claims Sarah is his sister, two stories of Jacob‘s journey to Haran, (5) two stories where God revealed himself to Jacob at Bethel, (6) two stories where God changes Jacob‘s name to Israel, (7) two stories of when Moses got water from the rock at Meribah, and a detailed description in Exodus 24–29 of how to build the tabernacle, then within five chapters a retelling of how they did it, repeating the details again in chapters 34–40. The critic goes on to point out that, there is more to this ―doublet‖ story than meets the eye; they argue that one of the doublets will contain the title for the Creator, God (Elohim); while the other doublet of the same story will contain the personal name for the Creator, Jehovah. Moreover, they argue that there are other defining features that are only within one side or the other. (Genesis 1:27, ESV) So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (Genesis 2:7, ASV) And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Within two chapters, we have two verses where the writer, if one person, informs us of the creation of man twice, the second as though the first was never mentioned at all. Again, the source critic will argue that there were two sources of the same information on the creation of man and the compiler allowed both to remain. What the source critic fails to tell his reader is that there are sense breaks within the various accounts in these first three chapters. Genesis 1:1–2:3 is the basic creation account. Genesis 2:4–25 is the restating of day three (verses 5, 6) and the subsequent preparation of the earth for the settling of man and woman in the Garden of Eden. Genesis 3:1–24 is specifically about the temptation, the entry of sin and death into the world, the promise of a seed to save humankind, a description of the conditions of imperfection and of man‘s loss of the Garden of Eden. Bible scholar Leon Kass, who supports the Documentary Hypothesis, had this to say about the creation account of Genesis chapters 1 and 2: Once we recognize the independence of the two creation stories, we are compelled to adopt a critical principle of reading if we mean to understand each story on its own terms. We must scrupulously avoid reading into the second story any facts or notions taken from the first, and vice versa. Thus, in reading about the origin of man in the story of the Garden of Eden, we must not say or even think that man is here created in God‘s image or that man is to be the ruler over the animals. Neither, when we try to understand the relation of man and woman in the Garden, are we to think about or make use of the first story‘s account of the coequal coeval creation of man and woman. Only after we have read and interpreted each story entirely on its own should we try to integrate the two disparate teachings. By proceeding in this way, we will discover why these two separate and divergent accounts have been juxtaposed
271
and how they function to convey a coherent, noncontradictory teaching about human life.89
Let us look at another example in which the critic has argued that one source says forty days, while the other speaks of 150 days: (Gen 7:12, NET) And the rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. (Gen 7:24, NET) The waters prevailed over the earth for 150 days.
Genesis 7:24 and 8:3 say the flood waters lasted for 150 days, yet; Genesis 7:4, 12 and 17 say it was only forty days. Once again, the difference is solved with a simple explanation. Each is referring to two different time periods. Let us look at these verses again (italics mine): (Gen 7:12, NET) And the rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights. [Notice that the 40-days refer to how long the rain fell—―the rain fell.‖] (Gen 7:24, NET) The waters prevailed over the earth for 150 days. [Notice that the 150-days refer to how long the flood lasted—―waters prevailed.‖] (Gen 8:3, NET) The waters kept receding steadily from the earth, so that they had gone down by the end of the 150 days. (Gen 8:4, NET) On the seventeenth day of the seventh month, the ark came to rest on one of the mountains of Ararat. (Gen 7:11; 8:13, 14, NET) In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month—on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst open and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. In Noah's six hundred and first year, in the first day of the first month, the waters had dried up from the earth, and Noah removed the covering from the ark and saw that the surface of the ground was dry. And by the twenty-seventh day of the second month the earth was dry.
By the end of the 150 days, the water had gone down [Gen 8:3]. Five months from the beginning of the rain, the ark comes to rest on Mount Ararat [8:4]. Eleven months later the waters dried up [7:11; 8:13]. Exactly 370 days from the start (lunar months), Noah and his family left the ark and were on dry ground. Yet another example is found in 2 Kings 24:10–16. Verses 10–14 say: ―At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up to Jerusalem, and the city was besieged. And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to the city while his servants were besieging it, and Jehoiachin the king of Judah gave himself up to the king of Babylon, himself and his mother and his servants and his officials and his palace officials. The king of Babylon took him prisoner in the eighth year of his reign and carried off all the treasures of the house of the LORD and the treasures of the king‘s house, and cut in pieces all the vessels of gold in the temple of the LORD, which Solomon king of Israel had made, as the LORD had foretold. He carried away all Jerusalem and all the officials and all the
89. Leon R. Kass, The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis (New York: Free Press, 2003), 56.
272
mighty men of valor, 10,000 captives, and all the craftsmen and the smiths. None remained, except the poorest people of the land.‖ Verses 15, 16 say: ―And he carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon. The king‘s mother, the king‘s wives, his officials, and the chief men of the land he took into captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon. And the king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon all the men of valor, 7,000, and the craftsmen and the metal workers, 1,000, all of them strong and fit for war.‖ Here we have a repetition of the same events back-to-back. Why? Is it multiple sources and the redactor simply keeping both? In an attempt to stave off the conservative view of Moses‘ writership, scholar and critic Richard Elliot Friedman writes: Those who defended the traditional belief in Mosaic authorship argued that the doublets were always complementary, not repetitive, and that they did not contradict each other, but came to teach us a lesson by their ‗apparent‘ contradiction. But another clue was discovered that undermined this traditional response. Investigators found that in most cases one of the two versions of a doublet story would refer to the deity by the divine name, Yahweh . . . , and the other version of the story would refer to the deity simply as ‗God.‘ That is, the doublets lined up into two groups of parallel versions of stories. Each group was almost always consistent with the name it used. Moreover, the investigators found that it was not only the names of the deity that lined up. They found various other terms and characteristics that regularly appeared in one of the other group. This tended to support the hypothesis that someone had taken two different old source documents, cut them up, and woven them together to form the continuous story in the Five Books of Moses.90
Ancient Semitic literature has other similar examples of repetition. Moreover, the use of Elohim in one instance and Jehovah in another is due to context and semantic issues. Notice Friedman‘s use of the phrases ―in most cases‖ and ―almost always.‖ Which is it? And as we will see, he is overstating his case to the point of exaggeration. Let us look at the most popular example in the ―Matriarch in Danger.‖ It has three occurrences in Genesis: Sarah in Egypt with Pharaoh (Genesis 12:10–20), Sarah in Gerar with Abimelech (Genesis 20:1–18), and Rebekah in Gerar with Abimelech (Genesis 26:7–11). Friedman would argue that we simply have one story with three different sources that had been maintained over time. The personal name of God, Jehovah, is used in the account of Sarah in Egypt with Pharaoh (vs. 17). The title Elohim is used in the account about Sarah in Gerar with Abimelech (vs. 3), but so is Jehovah (vs. 18). In the account of Rebekah in Gerar with Abimelech, neither Elohim nor Jehovah is used. So, Friedman‘s case is really no case at all, because both Jehovah and Elohim appear in one account with Sarah in Gerar with Abimelech and neither Jehovah nor Elohim appear in the account with Rebekah in Gerar with Abimelech. It should be noted that all three occurrences are in reference to Abimelech and Pharaoh, but both times that the name Jehovah is used, it is in reference to Jehovah executing a punishment of these rulers. If their best example does 90. Richard Elliot Friedman, Who Wrote The Bible (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1997), 22.
273
not even come close to their claims, then what are we to think of the others? Before moving on to the differences in language and style, we should close with one last point about the literature of the Ancient Near East (ANE). One of the features of ANE literature, which includes Hebrew, is its parallelism, repetition, the telling of stories that are similar to stress patterns that are important. Even in the book of Acts, you have three different accounts of Paul‘s conversion (Ac 9:3–8; 22:6–11; 26:12–18). It is repetition for emphasis. At the outset of this section we mentioned that chapters 24–29 of Exodus give a detailed description of how the tabernacle was built, and chapters 34–40 repeat the very same information. Chapters 24–29 contain the directions, and chapters 34–40 show how they did it; thus, the repetition is emphasizing that they did exactly what Jehovah had asked them to do. Differences in Language and Style Supporters of the Documentary Hypothesis would argue that within the Pentateuch we see such things as preferences for certain words, differences in vocabulary, reoccurring expressions in Deuteronomy that are not found in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, all evidence for the higher critics and their multiple source theory. Also, there are individual characteristics in grammar and syntax. Further, the critic describes ―P‖ as being very boring, completely lacking in interest or excitement, dry; while the writers of ―J‖ and ―E‖ are very vivid and lively, holding the readers interest in their storytelling. Additionally, ―D‖ uses expressions like ‗with all your heart and all your soul,‘ which the rest of the Pentateuch is lacking in those types of expressions. Their conclusion is that there is no alternative but to have multiple writers as the differences in language and style dictate. If the alleged writers of the Pentateuch were so narrow in their vocabulary and writing abilities that they would use only one given word for a given idea and never use another when dealing with that idea, it would be easy to suggest a division of actual sources. Yet this is not the case at all. The writers of the Hebrew Scriptures throughout ancient Israel actually expressed a great variety of words in their work. Douglas K. Stuart (Ph.D., Harvard University), Professor of Old Testament at Gordon–Conwell Theological Seminary, is of the same opinion: In fact, the contrary situation appears to be true. In ancient Israel there were four demonstrable indications of a preference for variety in written expression rather than for desire for stylistic consistency. (1) If there were two different ways of spelling a word the Israelites chose to preserve both spellings as valid and to include both of them frequently in any document. Thus with regard to spelling (orthography), ancient Israelites had no commitment to consistency to style, but the free use of alternative spellings was regarded as not only proper, but desirable. (2) In the case of common expressions, a similar phenomenon can be observed. Where variation was possible, it apparently was not avoided, but preferred. Alternative ways of forming a given multiword expression were employed commonly so that both alternatives were preserved. Thus, in the case of repeated phraseology in prose contexts, there was no commitment to consistency of style, but rather the alternative formulation was regarded not only proper, but desirable. (3) With regard to variation in
274
grammatical forms, a similar phenomenon is observed. If there existed two different ways of saying something, even in the case of a common verb form, both ways were used so as to preserve both in the common discourse. Again, the preference appears to have been for inclusion of variety rather than for consistency of one form if two existed. (4) The Masoretic system of Kethib-Qere represents a fourth indicator of the tendency in past times to preserve variance rather than to select one option and to employ it consistently—a tendency that extended into the medieval period when the Masoretes worked. This system arose from a desire to include, not merely side-byside, but actually within the same word, two variant readings rather than two select ones. The Masoretes provide the consonants of one text option in the vowels of another. They indicated their preferred reading, but did not omit the reading they regarded as inferior—they simply did not localize it.91
Differences in Style and Vocabulary: An investigator would not be honest if he were to simply reject these differences out of hand, as though they did not exist. So, rightly, we need to investigate these differences, giving an answer that has substance. I will cite one of their pillar examples, to demonstrate the principle that if they are so far off base here, then we can conclude their foundation in this area is really no foundation at all. Before we get started, let us do a little review of Biblical Hebrew, to be better able to address our example. (Qal): Qal is the simple form of the verb, meaning ―light‖ or ―easy.‖ This is the simple active stem of the verb. (Hiphil): This is generally called the ―causative” form because it reveals the causative action of the qal verb. The ―h‖ is prefixed to the stem, which modifies the root.
QAL HIPHIL
yalad (to give birth) holid (he caused to give birth)
Examples: Gen. 14:18: Irad begat (yalad) Mehujael Gen. 5:4: Adam after he begat (holid) Seth The advocates of the Documentary Hypothesis argue that to find yalad in the genealogy of Cain in Genesis chapter 4, the Table of Nations in Genesis chapter 10, and Nahor‘s family line in Genesis chapter 22 (all being of the ―J‖ author), while finding holid in Adam‘s history down to Noah in Genesis chapter 5 as well as the genealogy of Shem found in Genesis chapter 11 (being of the ―P‖ author) is nothing more than proof positive that there are two authors: ―J‖ and ―P.‖
91. Douglas K. Stuart, The New American Commentary: An Exegetical Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture: EXODUS (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006). See pp. 30–31 for examples of the above four points.
275
In short, we are not dealing with a word or phrase that is peculiar to an individual writer like ―J‖ or ―P.‖ No, this is nothing more than an example of following the basic rules of Hebrew grammar and syntax. In many cases, it could not have been written in any other way, because it is the socially accepted usage of the Hebrew language. When those who support the Documentary Hypothesis pull Hebrew words or even phrases out of their setting (as I have done above), looking at them in isolation, their reasoning becomes based solely on personal wishes, feelings, or perceptions, rather than on linguistic rules, reasons, or principles of the language itself. Hebrew, like any other language, conforms to the socially accepted style, with regular and specific order, or arrangement. The Hebrew language has its own rules and allowable combinations of how words are joined together to make sense to the Hebrew mind. Umberto Cassuto, also known as Moshe David Cassuto, (1883–1951), who held the chair of Biblical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem had this to say concerning the usage of yalad and holid: It will suffice to note the fact that the verb yaladh occurs in the signification of holidh only in the past tense [perfect] and the present [participle]. We say, ―so-and-so yaladh [mas. sing. perfect] so-and-so,‖ and we say yoledh [participle mas. Sing.: ―is begetting‖]; but we do not say in the future tense [imperfect] so-and-so yeledh [to signify: ―he will beget‖] (or wayyeledh [imperfect with waw conversive, to connote: ―and he begot‖]) so-and-so.‖ In the imperfect, the Qal is employed only with reference to the mother, for example, so-and-so teledh [―will give birth to‖] (watteledh [―and gave birth to‖]) so and so.‖ In connection with the father one can only say, yolidh [hiphil imperfect; ―he will beget‖] or wayyoledh [hiphil imperfect with waw conversive; ―and he begot‖] (although we find in Prov. xxvii 1: what a day may bring forth [―yeledh”; Qal imperfect] the verb is used there not in connotation of ―begetting‖ but actually in the sense of ―giving birth‖). Similarly, we do not say, using the infinitive, Aajare lidhto [to signify: ―after his begetting‖] but only Aajare lidhtah [―after her giving birth‖]; with regard to the father we can only say Aajare holidho [―after his begetting‖]. This is clear to anyone who is sensitive to the Hebrew idiom. In the genealogies from Adam to Noah and from Noah to Abraham, it would have been impossible to write anything else but wayyoledh and Aajare hoilidho; every Hebrew author would have had no option but to write thus and not otherwise. It is not a question of sources but of the general usage of the Hebrew tongue.92
Professor K. A. Kitchen, one of the leading experts on Biblical history, notes in his book Ancient Orient and Old Testament: ―Stylistic differences are meaningless, and reflect the differences in detailed subject-matter.‖ He says that similar style variations can also be found ―in ancient texts whose literary unity is beyond all doubt.‖93 A 1981 news report relates to this debate and provides some interesting facts. 94
92. Umberto Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis (New York, NY: Shalem Press, 2006), 55-56. 93. K. A Kitchen, Ancient Orient and Old Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1975), 125. 94. As published in the St. Petersburg Times: http://tinyurl.com/noke4m
276
TEL AVIV, Israel (UPI)—A five-year long computer study of the Bible strongly indicates that one author—and not three as widely held in modern criticism—wrote the book of Genesis. ―The probability of Genesis‘ having been written by one author is enormously high— 82 percent statistically,‖ a member of the research team said in an article published in Wednesday‘s Jerusalem Post. Professor Yehuda Radday, a Bible scholar from the Technion, a Haifa university, said more than 20,000 words of Genesis were fed into a computer which conducted a painstaking analysis of its linguistic makeup. Bible critics widely hold that Genesis had three authors—the Jawhist or ―J‖ author, the Elohist or ―E‖ author and a priestly writer, dubbed ―P.‖ ―We found the J and E narratives to be linguistically indistinguishable,‖ Radday told a news conference today. But the P sections differ widely from them. ―This is only to be expected, since dramatic tales and legal documents must necessarily display different ‗behavior,‘‖ he said. ―If you compared love letters and a telephone directory written by the same person, linguistic analysis would point to different authors.‖ The team combined statistical and linguistic methods with computer science and Bible scholarship to reach their conclusions. They used 54 analysis criteria, including word length, the use of the definite article and the conjunction ―and,‖ richness of vocabulary and transition frequencies between word categories. ―These criteria are a reliable gauge of authorship because these traits are beyond an author‘s conscious control and furthermore are countable,‖ Radday said. A mathematics expert on the team ran a computer check against classical German works by Goethe, Herder and Kant and found that the statistical probability of their being the sole authors of their own work were only 22 percent, 7 percent and 9 percent respectively.
As mentioned above, Jewish and Christian conservatives accept one writer for the first five books of the Bible, namely, Moses. The critics, however, argue that although Moses is definitely the main character of the Pentateuch, because they are unable to find any direct mention within it of Moses having written these five books, it is for them simply a tradition that Moses is the writer. I am certain that is not the impression you will have after reading the next section.
Section Four: Biblical, Internal and External Evidence for Moses Being the Writer of the Pentateuch First, it is obvious that Moses did not write every word of the Pentateuch. Why? The section that relates his death would be something that Joshua could have added after Moses‘ death. (Deuteronomy 34:1–8) In addition, to the critic, it would hardly seem very meek to pen these words about yourself: ―Now the man Moses was very meek, more than all people who were on the face of the earth.‖ (Numbers 12:3, ESV) Nevertheless, 277
consider that Jesus said of himself: ―I am gentle and lowly in heart‖ (Matthew 11:29, ESV), which no one would fault Jesus with as though he were boasting. Both Moses and Jesus were simply stating a fact. The amount of possible material that may have been added by Joshua, another inspired writer is next to nothing, and does not negate Moses‘ authorship. What Does the Biblical Evidence from the Old Testament Report?
Exodus 17:14 American Standard Version (ASV) And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua: that I will utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. 14
Exodus 24:4 American Standard Version (ASV) And Moses wrote all the words of Jehovah, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the mount, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. 7 And he took the book of the covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that Jehovah hath spoken will we do, and be obedient. 4
Exodus 34:27 American Standard Version (ASV) And Jehovah said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. 27
Leviticus 26:46 American Standard Version (ASV) These are the statutes and ordinances and laws, which Jehovah made between him and the children of Israel in mount Sinai by Moses. 46
Leviticus 27:34 American Standard Version (ASV) These are the commandments, which Jehovah commanded Moses for the children of Israel in mount Sinai. 34
Numbers 33:2 American Standard Version (ASV) And Moses wrote their goings out according to their journeys by the commandment of Jehovah: and these are their journeys according to their goings out. 2
Numbers 36:13 American Standard Version (ASV) These are the commandments and the ordinances which Jehovah commanded by Moses unto the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho. 13
Deuteronomy 1:1 American Standard Version (ASV) These are the words which Moses spake unto all Israel beyond the Jordan in the wilderness, in the Arabah over against Suph, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-zahab. 1
278
Deuteronomy 31:9 American Standard Version (ASV) And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, that bare the ark of the covenant of Jehovah, and unto all the elders of Israel. 9
Deuteronomy 31:22 American Standard Version (ASV) 22
So Moses wrote this song the same day, and taught it the children of Israel.
Deuteronomy 31:24-26 American Standard Version (ASV) And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished, 25 that Moses commanded the Levites, that bare the ark of the covenant of Jehovah, saying, 26 Take this book of the law, and put it by the side of the ark of the covenant of Jehovah your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee. 24
Joshua 1:7-8 American Standard Version (ASV) Only be strong and very courageous, to observe to do according to all the law, which Moses my servant commanded thee: turn not from it to the right hand or to the left, that thou mayest have good success whithersoever thou goest. 8 This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth, but thou shalt meditate thereon day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success. 7
Joshua 8:31 American Standard Version (ASV) as Moses the servant of Jehovah commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moses, an altar of unhewn stones, upon which no man had lifted up any iron: and they offered thereon burnt-offerings unto Jehovah, and sacrificed peace-offerings. 31
1 Kings 2:3 American Standard Version (ASV) and keep the charge of Jehovah thy God, to walk in his ways, to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his ordinances, and his testimonies, according to that which is written in the law of Moses, that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest, and whithersoever thou turnest thyself. 3
2 Kings 14:6 American Standard Version (ASV) but the children of the murderers he put not to death; according to that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, as Jehovah commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall die for his own sin. 6
2 Kings 21:8 American Standard Version (ASV) neither will I cause the feet of Israel to wander any more out of the land which I gave their fathers, if only they will observe to do according to all that I have 8
279
commanded them, and according to all the law that my servant Moses commanded them.
Ezra 6:18 American Standard Version (ASV) And they set the priests in their divisions, and the Levites in their courses, for the service of God, which is at Jerusalem; as it is written in the book of Moses. 18
Nehemiah 13:1 American Standard Version (ASV) On that day they read in the book of Moses in the audience of the people; and therein was found written, that an Ammonite and a Moabite should not enter into the assembly of God for ever, 1
Daniel 9:13 American Standard Version (ASV) As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet have we not entreated the favor of Jehovah our God, that we should turn from our iniquities, and have discernment in thy truth. 13
Malachi 4:4 American Standard Version (ASV) Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, even statutes and ordinances. 4
To reject Moses as the writer of the Pentateuch is to reject these inspired writers and suggest they are not reliable; moreover, this would mean they were not inspired, because those under inspiration would not make such errors. If these critics are correct, then all the above is merely a great conspiracy. This author hardly thinks so! What Does the Biblical Evidence from Jesus Christ Report?
Matthew 8:4 English Standard Version (ESV) And Jesus said to him, "See that you say nothing to anyone, but go, show yourself to the priest and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a proof to them." 4
Matthew 11:23-24 English Standard Version (ESV) And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You will be brought down to Hades. For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. 24 But I tell you that it will be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for you." 23
Matthew 19:4-5 English Standard Version (ESV) He answered, "Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5and said, 'Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? 4
280
Matthew 19:8 English Standard Version (ESV) He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 8
Matthew 24:37 English Standard Version (ESV) 37
For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.
Mark 1:44 English Standard Version (ESV) and said to him, "See that you say nothing to anyone, but go, show yourself to the priest and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to them." 44
Mark 7:10 English Standard Version (ESV) For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.' 10
Mark 10:5 English Standard Version (ESV) And Jesus said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart he wrote you this commandment. 5
Mark 12:26 English Standard Version (ESV) And as for the dead being raised, have you not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? 26
Luke 5:14 English Standard Version (ESV) And he charged him to tell no one, but "go and show yourself to the priest, and make an offering for your cleansing, as Moses commanded, for a proof to them." 14
Luke 11:51 English Standard Version (ESV) from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation. 51
Luke 17:32 English Standard Version (ESV) 32
Remember Lot‘s wife.
Luke 24:27, 44 English Standard Version (ESV) And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. 44Then he said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled." 27
John 5:46 English Standard Version (ESV) For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me.
46
281
John 7:19 English Standard Version (ESV) Has not Moses given you the law? Yet none of you keeps the law. Why do you seek to kill me?" 19
John 8:58 (BeDuhn, 2003) Jesus said to them, ―I tell you the solemn truth, I have been (since) before Abraham came to be.‖ How does one ignore the strongest evidence of Moses‘ writership of these five books, which is specifically referred to by Jesus Christ and numerous other inspired writers? Being on trial by the modern day critic, I am certain Moses would appreciate the numerous witnesses that can be called to the stand on his behalf.95 What Does the Biblical Evidence from the Apostles Report?
Acts 2:32 English Standard Version (ESV) This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.
32
Acts 6:14 English Standard Version (ESV) for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and will change the customs that Moses delivered to us." 14
Acts 15:5 English Standard Version (ESV) But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses." 5
Acts 26:22 English Standard Version (ESV) To this day I have had the help that comes from God, and so I stand here testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the prophets and Moses said would come to pass: 22
Acts 28:23 English Standard Version (ESV) When they had appointed a day for him, they came to him at his lodging in greater numbers. From morning till evening he expounded to them, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus both from the Law of Moses and from the Prophets. 23
Romans 10:5 English Standard Version (ESV) 95. Old Testament witnesses to Moses‘ writership of the Pentateuch: Joshua 1:7; 8:32–35; 14:10; 1 Kings 2:3; 1 Chronicles 6:49; 2 Chronicles 33:8; 34:14; 35:12; Ezra 3:2; 6:18; 7:6; Nehemiah 1:7, 8; 8:1, 14, 15; Daniel 9:11, 13; Malachi 4:4. New Testament witnesses to Moses‘ writership of the Pentateuch: Matthew 8:2–4; 19:7; Mark 1:44; 12:26; Luke 2:22; 16:29, 31; 24:27, 44; John 1:45; 7:22; 8:5; 9:29; 19:7 [Leviticus 24:16]; Acts 3:22; 6:14; 15:5; 26:22; 28:23; Romans 10:5; 1 Corinthians 9:9; Hebrews 9:19; 10:28.
282
For Moses writes about the righteousness that is based on the law, that the person who does the commandments shall live by them. 5
1 Corinthians 9:9 English Standard Version (ESV) For it is written in the Law of Moses, "You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain." Is it for oxen that God is concerned? 9
Hebrews 9:19 English Standard Version (ESV) For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book itself and all the people, 19
Hebrews 10:28 English Standard Version (ESV) Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. 28
What Does the Internal Evidence Report? If the writer(s) of the Pentateuch were, in fact, living from the ninth century into the fifth century B.C.E., more than a millennium [1,000 years] after the events described, they would have had to be thoroughly familiar with, even an expert in geology, geography,96 horticulture, archaeology, toponymy, onomatology (Archer, 1974), botany, zoology,97 climatology,98 and history. Alternatively, he would have to have been an eyewitness who walked through the events and situations detailed in the Pentateuch—thus, the writer. Here is how I defend these affirmations: He would need to have a thorough knowledge of Egyptian names and titles that match inscriptions. He would need to have been an expert in toponymy—the study of place-names. He would need to have been an expert in onomatology—the study of proper names of all kinds and the origin of names. He would need to be aware of the customs and cultures and religious practices of Egypt, desert dwellers, and life in Canaan 1,000 years into the past. He would need to have a thorough knowledge of the environment, climate, and the physical features of three regions. He would need to have a thorough knowledge of botany—being aware of naturally occurring plant life in three regions 1,000-years before his time. He would need to have a thorough knowledge of the environment, climate, and the physical features of three regions. This internal evidence deals with the proof within the Pentateuch about Moses: the customs and culture of some 3,500 years ago, literary forms used as well as the language itself, and the unity of these five books. As to dating the Pentateuch based on literary 96. Genesis 13:10; 33:18; Numbers 13:22. 97. Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. 98. Exodus 9:31, 32; Exodus 16–Deuteronomy.
283
forms, one needs look no further than the titles by which God is referred to within the Hebrew Scriptures. From the years of 850–450 B.C.E., we find the Hebrew expression Yeho·wah´ tseva·’ohth´, ―Jehovah of armies,‖ being used in a significant way. It is found 243 times, with variations, in the Scriptures: 62 times in Isaiah,99 77 in Jeremiah,100 2 in Micah,101 4 in Nahum,102 2 in Habakkuk,103 2 in Zephaniah,104 15 in Haggai,105 54 in Zechariah,106 and 25 in Malachi.107 This is the same time period in which higher criticism places the writing of the books of the Pentateuch. If they were penned or constructed during this time period, one would expect to find a high number of occurrences of the expression ―Jehovah of armies.‖ Yet, we find just the opposite: there is not one occurrence of this expression to be found in the five books of the Pentateuch. This evidence demonstrates that these books were written prior to the book of Isaiah, before 800 B.C.E., which invalidates the Documentary Hypothesis before it even gets out the gate, so to speak. Moreover, many aspects of the priesthood that had been adjusted over the centuries, under inspiration, would have been evident if the Pentateuch were written after David108 and others had made such adjustments. The building of the tabernacle at the foot of Mount Sinai fits in with the environment of that area. F. C. Cook stated: ―In form, structure, and materials, the tabernacle belongs altogether to the wilderness. The wood used in the structure is found there in abundance.‖109 The external evidence validates names, customs and culture, religious practices, geography, places and materials of the book of Exodus, which would have been privy only to an eyewitness. The geographical references by this writer are so vast, detailed, and tremendously precise that it is almost impossible to have him be anyone other than an eyewitness. Deuteronomy reads: ―Then we . . . went through all that great and terrifying wilderness.‖ This region in which the annual rainfall is less than 25 cm./10 in. is not different even today, which puts the nomadic traveler on a constant search for water and pasture. In addition, we have meticulous directions as to the encampment of the Israelites (Numbers 1:52, 53), the marching orders (Numbers 2:9, 16, 17, 24, 31), and the signals of the trumpet (Numbers 10:2–6) that directed their every move as evidence that these accounts were written in the ―great and terrifying wilderness.‖ Numbers 13:22 99. Writing covers circa 778–732 B.C.E. 100. Writing completed about 580 B.C.E. 101. Writing completed about 717 B.C.E. 102. Writing completed before 632 B.C.E. 103. Writing completed about 628 B.C.E. 104. Writing completed about 648 B.C.E. 105. Writing completed in 520 B.C.E. 106. Writing completed in 518 B.C.E. 107. Writing completed after 443 B.C.E.
108. David organized the tens of thousands of Levites into their many divisions of service, including a great chorus of singers and musicians.—1 Chronicles 23:1–29:19; 2 Chronicles 8:14; 23:18; 29:25; Ezra 3:10. 109. F. C. Cook, Exodus (1874), 247.
284
makes reference to the time Hebron was built, using the city of Zoan as a reference point: ―They went up into the Negeb and came to Hebron. Ahiman, Sheshai, and Talmai, the descendants of Anak, were there. (Hebron was built seven years before Zoan in Egypt.)‖ Moses ―was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians‖ (Acts 7:22), thus he would have knowledge of the building of Zoan, an Egyptian city, and of Hebron, a city on one of the trade routes between Memphis in Egypt and Damascus in Syria. From the internal evidence, it is only too obvious that the writer must have had an intimate knowledge of the desert, being an eyewitness to that environment. (See Leviticus 18:3; Deuteronomy 12:9; 15:4, 7; Numbers 2:1; Leviticus 14:8; 16:21; 17:3, 9.) The evidence is such, because it is something that cannot be retained for a thousand years, but must come from an eyewitness. The details are extremely exact and some would not have existed hundreds of years later: ―Then they came to Elim, where there were twelve wells of water and seventy palm trees, and they camped there by the water,‖ and ―ram skins dyed red, fine leather, acacia wood.‖—Ex 15:27; 25:5. Again, it should be noted that Moses ―was instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians.‖ (Acts 7:22) It is also obvious that the writer was quite familiar with Egyptian names: Pithom, meaning ―House of Atum;‖ On, meaning ―City of the Pillar‖ (the Greeks called the city Heliopolis); Potiphera,110 meaning ―He Whom Ra Has Given;‖ and Asenath, her name deriving from Egyptian, meaning: ―Holy to Anath.‖ In addition, the writer used Egyptian words generously. ―He had Joseph ride in his second chariot, and [servants] called out before him, ‗Abrek!’ So he placed him over all the land of Egypt.‖ (Genesis 41:43) The exact meaning of this expression transliterated from Egyptian into Hebrew has not yet been determined. Some feel that it is an Egyptian word meaning Attention! while others see it as a Hebrew word meaning Kneel or Bow down! One misstep and the writer will lose credibility. But this is never the case with the writer of the Pentateuch. He mentions the acacia tree, which is found in Egypt and Sinai but not in the land of Canaan. Moreover, this writer refers to numerous animals that are to be found primarily in Egypt or Sinai.—See Deuteronomy. 14:5; Leviticus 16:11. The old form of words in the Pentateuch are of the time frame of the fifteenth century B.C.E. as well, and had no longer been in use for centuries by the time of the supposed writer(s) and redactor(s) of the ninth to the sixth centuries B.C.E. Dr. John J. Davis gives us the most widely recognized example: ―The pronoun she, which appears as hiw’ instead of hî’. Another example is the word young girl, spelled na‛ar instead of na‛ărâ, the feminine form.‖111 All who engaged in idolatry or prophesying falsely were to be stoned to death, no exceptions. (Deuteronomy 13:2–11) This included not only individuals, but entire communities, every person within a city (verses 12–17). One has to ask, why would a writer include this if it were penned during the time period of 850–450 B.C.E. when 110. A funeral pillar (stele) discovered in 1935 and now in the Cairo Museum refers to a personage named Potiphare. 111. John J. Davis, Paradise to Prison: Studies in Genesis (Salem: Sheffield, 1975), 26.
285
most of the time Israel was shoulder deep in idolatry and false prophets abounded? This would mean certain destruction for every city in the kingdom. It would have been mere foolishness to incorporate these laws, which could never be enforced and would cause nothing but resistance to the law. But it makes perfectly good sense for laws such as these to be given to a people living in the time of Moses who had just exited an idolatrous nation and who were preparing to go in and conquer a number of other nations who lived and breathed idolatry. What Does the External Evidence Report? ―The book of the law of Moses,‖ as Joshua called the Pentateuch, was accepted by Jews, Christians, and Muslims as containing evidence of inspiration. The fact that Moses is the writer of these five books is not something that grew up out of tradition; it is something Moses himself claims, saying he wrote under the divine command of Jehovah God. Moreover, the Jewish communities throughout the Roman empire were in total harmony with the fact that Moses was the writer of the Pentateuch, this being supported by the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Palestinian Talmud, the Babylonian Talmud, the Apocrypha, Philo Judaeus (a contemporary of Jesus and Paul and the first century), and by Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (37–100 C.E.).112 What about the early Christian writers, who wrote about Christianity between 150 C.E. and 400 C.E.? Moses, the servant of God, recorded, through the Holy Spirit, the very beginning of the creation of the world. First he spoke of the things concerning the creation and genesis of the world, including the first man and everything that happened afterwards in the order of events. He also indicated the number of years that elapsed before the Deluge.—Theophilus (c. 180, E), 2.118. 113 The origin of that know ledge should not, on that account, be considered as originating with the Pentateuch. For knowledge of the Creator did not begin with the volume of Moses. Rather from the very first it is traced from Adam and paradise.—Tertullian (c. 207, W), 3.278.114 What portion of scripture can give us more information concerning the creation of the world than the account that Moses has transmitted?—Origen (c. 225, E), 4.341.115 The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by fire on account of their sins is related by Moses in Genesis.—Origen (c. 248, E), 4.505.116 Moses said, ―And the Lord God saw that the wickedness of men was overflowing upon the Earth‖ [Gen. 6:5–7].—Novatian (c. 235, W), 5.658.117
112. See Ecclesiasticus 45:5; 2 Maccabees 7:30; Philo (On the Life of Moses II; III, 12–14; IV, 20; VIII, 45–48, pp. 93–95); Josephus (The Antiquities of the Jews, 3.8.10); Exodus 17:14; 24:4. 113. David W. Bercot, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1998), 599. 114. Ibid., 600. 115. Ibid., 600. 116. Ibid., 600. 117. Ibid., 601.
286
It is contained in the book of Moses, which he wrote about creation, in which is called Genesis.—Victorinus (c. 280, W), 7.341.118 If you will look at the books of Moses, David, Solomon, Isaiah, or the Prophets who follow . . . . You will see what offspring they have left.—Methodious (c. 290, E), 6.333.119 Let the following books be considered venerable and holy by you, both of the clergy and the laity. Of the Old Testament: The five books of Moses— Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. . . .—Apostolic Constitutions (compiled c. 390, E), 7.505.120 Archaeology and the Bible Unlike higher criticism, archaeology is a field of study that has a solid foundation in physical evidence, instead of presenting only hypotheses, inferences, and implications. Within archaeology, one has both explicit and direct evidence as well as implicit evidence. There are many great publications that will undoubtedly go into this area in much greater detail, but suffice it to say that the Biblical events, the characters, geography, agriculture, plants and trees and settings are all in harmony with and accessible through archaeology. While archaeology is not a total vindicator, it has defended God‘s Word. No one can argue against the fact that our understanding of ancient times has increased tremendously over the past 150 years and is being continuously refined. At present, one could list thousands of events within the Scriptures that are in complete harmony with the archaeological record. In fact, Wellhausen had nothing like what is available to the modern scholar. If he had, one would have to wonder if he would have come to the same conclusions. Conveying this exact point, Dr. Mark F. Rooker, Professor of Old Testament and Hebrew, stated: Regarding the issue of differing divine names, it is now clear from archaeological data not available to Wellhausen and early critical scholars that deities in the ancient Near East often had multiple names. This fact is especially clear in the conclusion to the Babylonian Creation account, the Enuma Elish, where the god Marduk is declared to be preeminent and his fifty different names are mentioned in celebration of his conquest.22 No one has suggested that each name represents a different source, as was done in biblical studies. On the contrary, it would have been impossible to attribute these different names to different sources that have been pasted or joined together in the literary account because the Mesopotamian writing system involved inscription in stone! Moreover, it is clear that throughout the Old Testament the occurrence of the names of God as Elohim or 118. Ibid., 601. 119. Ibid., 601. 120. Ibid., 602.
287
Yahweh are to be attributed to contextual and semantic issues, not the existence of sources. This conclusion is borne out by the fact that the names consistently occur in predictable genre. . . . Thus through scientific discovery and analysis the criterion of the differing divine names, which gave rise to the Documentary Hypothesis, has been found wanting. If this information would have been known in the last years of the nineteenth century, it is safe to assume that the critical approach to the Pentateuch would never have seen the light of day.121
Much archaeological evidence as well as other forms of evidence has been uncovered to reveal the accuracy of the record. The ziggurat located at Uruk (Erech) was found to be built with clay, baked bricks for stone, and asphalt (bitumen) for mortar.* The Egyptian names and titles that Moses penned in the book of Exodus match Egyptian inscriptions. The book of Exodus shows that the Hebrew people were allowed to live in the land of Egypt as foreigners, as long as they kept separate from the Egyptians. Archaeology supports this custom. Likely, you will recall that Pharaoh‘s daughter bathed in the Nile (Exodus 2:5), which ―was a common practice in ancient Egypt,‖ according to Cook‘s Commentary. ―The Nile was worshipped as an emanation . . . of Osiris, and a peculiar power of imparting life and fertility was attributed to its waters.‖ *(Genesis 11:3, ESV) ―And they said to one another, ‗Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly.‘ And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar.‖ The fact that a king‘s daughter should bathe in the open river is certainly opposed to the customs of the modern, Mohammedan East, where this is only done by women of the lower orders, and that in remote places (Lane, Manners and Customs); but it is in harmony with the customs of ancient Egypt,* and in perfect agreement with the notions of the early Egyptians respecting the sanctity of the Nile, to which divine honours even were paid (vid., Hengstenberg‘s Egypt, etc. pp. 109, 110), and with the belief, which was common to both ancient and modern Egyptians, in the power of
121. Mark F. Rooker, Leviticus: The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001), 26–27.
288
its waters to impart fruitfulness and prolong life (vid., Strabo, xv. p. 695, etc., and Seetzen, Travels iii. p. 204).122 * Wilkinson gave a picture of a bathing scene in which an Egyptian woman of rank is introduced, attended by four female servants.
In addition, archaeologists have found bricks made with and without straw. History also testifies to the fact that magicians were a well-known feature of Egyptian life during the period of Moses.—Genesis 11:1–9; Exodus 8:22; 2:5; 5:6, 7, 18; 7:11.
Furthermore, the historical conditions and surroundings are in accord precisely with the occasions and assertions in the book of Numbers. We have references to Edom, Egypt, Moab, Canaan, Ammon, and Amalek, which are true to the times, and the names of places are free from error.123 Archaeology is never absolute proof of anything, but it continues to add evidence, weighty at times to the fact that Moses had to be the writer of the Pentateuch. Halley’s Bible Handbook writes: ―Archaeology has been speaking so loudly of late that it is causing a decided reaction toward the conservative view. The theory that writing was unknown in Moses‘ day is absolutely exploded. And every year there are being dug up in Egypt, Palestine and Mesopotamia, evidences, both in 122. Carl Friedric Keil and Franz Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2002), S. 1:278. 123. “Sirion . . . Senir.” These names appear in the Ugaritic texts found at Ras Shamra, Syria, and in the documents from Bogazköy, Turkey.
289
inscriptions and earth layers, that the narratives of the Old Testament are true historical records. And ‗scholarship‘ is coming to have decidedly more respect for the tradition of Mosaic authorship.‖124
124. Henry Halley, Halley's Bible Handbook (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988), 56.
290
The Silver Amulet is one of many archaeological nails in the coffin of the Documentary Hypothesis. Why? This portion of Numbers is argued by the critics to be 291
part of the ―P‖ document that was supposedly penned between 550 and 400 B.C.E. However, initially it was dated to the late seventh / early sixth centuries B.C.E. Of course, this dating was subsequently challenged by Johannes Renz and Wolfgang Rollig (Handbuch der Althebraischen Epigraphik, 1995) because the silver was cracked and blemished to the point of making many words and a few lines unreadable. This allowed these critics to argue for a date in the third to second centuries B.C.E. period, which would remove this stain on the lifeless body of their Documentary Hypothesis. Then it was shipped to the University of Southern California to be examined under photographic and computer imaging. The results? The researchers stated that they could ―read fully and [had] analyzed with far greater precision,‖ which resulted in the final analysis of being yet another vindication for Moses—the original dating stands: late seventh century B.C.E. Exodus 14:6, 7 (ESV) reads: ―So he [the Pharaoh] made ready his chariot and took his army with him, and took six hundred chosen chariots and all the other chariots of Egypt with officers over all of them.‖ Pharaoh, being the god of the world and the supreme chief of his army, personally led the army into battle. Archaeology supports this custom. Why are there no Egyptian records of the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt? The critics may also ask why is there no archaeological evidence to support the Israelite‘s 215year stay in Egypt (some of which was in slavery) and the devastation that was executed on the gods of Egypt. There is, in fact, one simple answer that archaeology has provided us: Any new Egyptian dynasty would erase any unflattering history prior to their dynasty, if such even existed, as it was their custom never to record any defeats that might be viewed as embarrassing or critical, which could damage the dignity of their people, for they were an extremely prideful empire.125 For example, Thutmose III ordered others to chisel Queen Hatshepsut out of the history books when he removed the name and representation of Queen Hatshepsut on a monumental stone record later uncovered at Deir al-Bahri in Egypt as well as from any other monuments she had built. Hatshepsut, daughter of Thutmose I, would eventually gain the throne upon her father‘s death even though Thutmose II (husband and halfbrother to Hatshepsut) technically ascended the throne in name only. At best, Thutmose II lasted only three or four years before dying of a skin disease. Thutmose III was too young to rule, thus Queen Hatshepsut simply held her own as the first female Pharaoh. Embarrassing for Thutmose III, indeed! Thus as he grew, his hatred mounted for Hatshepsut and Senmut (her lover). After her death, Thutmose III worked vigorously to remove her name and the name of her lover from Egyptian history. If this was embarrassing, how much more so would be the ten plagues that had humiliated numerous gods of Egypt, including the Pharaoh himself? The exodus of 600,000 male slaves and their families, plus Egyptians who had chosen Jehovah as God instead of the Pharaoh of Egypt would have been quite embarrassing, indeed!
125. Joseph P. Free, Archaeology and Bible History (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 1964).
292
Bricks have been found made with and without straw. This painting was found in the private tomb of Vizier Rekhmire (the highest official under Pharaoh) on the west bank of ancient Thebes. Archaeology also supports ―taskmasters—Egyptian overseers, appointed to exact labor of the Israelites,‖126 as well as strictly controlled or enforced quotas that had to be met. (Exodus 5:6) Moreover, Egyptian papyri express serious concern for the needed straw (which was lacking at times) to be mixed with the mud to make these bricks. (Exodus 1:13, 14) The Papyri Anastasi, from ancient Egypt, reads: ―There was no one to mould bricks, and there was no straw in the neighbourhood.‖127 In 1925, discoveries of clay tablets were made at the ancient town of Nuzi in northeastern Mesopotamia; it was here that archaeologists found a tremendous number of legal contracts dating to the fifteenth century B.C.E. These actually shed much light on the life of people of that time. Due to the slow-moving life condition of the ancient Near East, they reflect life conditions for many years on both sides of the fifteenth century. Thus, what we now possess and know from studies of these Nuzi Tablets is that there are numerous customs in the Patriarchal period that were very much in common practice among the ancient Hurrians who lived in northern Mesopotamia, encompassing Haran, which was the home of Abraham after he left Ur and where Isaac later found his wife Rebekah. Abraham‘s Contract. Eliezer was to be the legal inheritor of childless Abraham‘s property and position after Abraham‘s death. In fact, Abraham referred to Eliezer when he said, ―a slave born in my house will be my heir.‖ (Genesis 15:2, 3) Tablets from Nuzi discovered by archaeologists help the modern-day reader understand how a servant could become heir to his master‘s household. Mesopotamian records from the time of Abraham (2018–1843 B.C.E.); makes mention of the tradition of a childless couple adopting a son in their old age to have him take care of them up unto their death, and thereafter inheriting the household property. But if for some reason the couple would end up having a child, the child would become the primary heir instead, with the adopted servant or son getting a minor portion of the property as well. (Wood, 1996) In a culture that passed history down orally through its generations, we find Moses being only three generations removed from Abraham‘s great-grandson Levi (Levi, Kohath, Amram, and Moses), while our alleged ―J‖ was a thousand years removed from Abraham, and the redactor even further. It is only by means of modern-day archaeology that we are aware of just how accurate the Genesis account is with minor details such as the legal system of adoption rights in Mesopotamia from 2000 B.C.E. (time of Abraham) to 1500 B.C.E. (time of Moses), knowledge that would not be available to our alleged composers. Thus archaeology puts the Genesis account right back into the hands of its true writer, Moses. The Price of a Slave. Joseph was the son of Jacob by Rachel, the grandson of Isaac, and the great-grandson of Abraham, and was sold as a slave to some Midianite 126. Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown. A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, On the Old and New Testaments (Oak Harbor: Scranton & Company, 1997), 51. 127. Adolf Erman and H. M. Tirard. Life in Ancient Egypt (Whitefish: Kessinger, 2003), 117.
293
merchants for a mere 20 pieces of silver by his jealous brothers in about 1750 B.C.E. (Genesis 37:28; 42:21) Throughout the stream of time, we find inflation in the slave trade, and the Biblical account of the price for Joseph falls exactly where it should to be in harmony with secular archaeology, as you can see in chart 1. Again, our alleged ―J,‖ ―E,‖ ―D,‖ and ―P‖ composers would be a thousand years removed from Abraham, and ―R‖ (the redactor) even further; thus they would have no access to this information so as to have gotten it correct. Only the actual writer, Moses, would be aware of this information by family records or oral tradition. Chart 1: The Inflation of the Slave Trade in Biblical Times (Wood, 1996) SOURCE
DATE
PRICE OF A SLAVE IN SILVER
Akkad and 3rd 2000 B.C.E. Ur Dynasties
8–10 pieces of silver
Joseph (Genesis 1750 B.C.E. 37:2, 28)
20 pieces of silver
Hammurabi Code
1799–1700 B.C.E. 20 pieces of silver
Old Babylonian B.C.E. Tablets
15–30 pieces of silver
Mari tablets
1799–1600 B.C.E. 20 pieces of silver
Exodus 21:32
1520–1470 B.C.E. 30 pieces of silver
Nuzi tablets
1499–1400 B.C.E. 30 pieces of silver
Ugarit tablets
1399–1200 B.C.E. 30–40 pieces of silver
Assyria
First millennium 50–60 pieces of silver B.C.E.
2 Kings 15:20
790 B.C.E.
50 pieces of silver
Persia
750–500 B.C.E.
90–120 pieces of silver
Seti I began much like his father Ramses, as a military commander. His military prowess led to many triumphs that are recorded on the walls of the temple of Amon-Ra at Karnak. Here Seti I recorded his military triumphs; captives are shown being seized by their hair. As was expressed earlier, victories were proudly recorded on Egyptian monuments, but embarrassing or critical events were ignored, that is, never chiseled into their annals of history.
Concluding Thoughts I had given much thought to a conclusion that contained quotations from many reputable scholars who use thought-provoking points to support the writership of Moses for the Pentateuch, but what would that prove? Certainly, if you quote a reputable scholar you would add weight to an argument, but it does not make the case. It only 294
validates that you are not alone in your reasoning. Therefore, I have added quotations of only two scholars to make just that point. One does not count the number of people who believe one thing as opposed to another and those with the most votes win. No, the results should be based on evidence. In fact, the higher critics will infer that they are in the right by saying, ‗Today, you will hardly find one scholar in the world who will argue for the writership of Moses for the Pentateuch.‘ If that makes them in the right, it also makes them in the wrong. Why? Because for centuries, for millenniums, the majority of Bible scholars—in the Jewish world, the Christian world, and the Islamic world— accepted Moses‘ writership; that is, until the Age of Reason within the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when people started to question not only the writership of Moses but the very existence of God. Would any Christian living in 1700 C.E. have ever doubted the writership of Moses? Hardly! So how did the Documentary Hypothesis become Documentary Fact? All it took was for some leading professors at major universities to plant seeds of doubt within their students. Being at the entrance of the era of higher criticism and skepticism of the nineteenth century, this Documentary Hypothesis had a well-cultivated field in which to grow. It created a domino effect as a few scholars produced a generation of students, who would then be the next generation of scholars, and so on. As we moved into the twentieth century, these questions had become ―facts‖ in the eyes of many; in fact, it became in vogue to challenge the Bible. Leading schools and leading scholars of higher criticism were the norm, and soon the conservative Christian was isolated. The twentieth-century student received a lean diet from those few scholars who still accepted God‘s Word as just that, the Word of God, fully inerrant, with 40 writers of 66 books over a period of about 1,600 years. No, these students would now be fed mostly liberal theology, and any who disagreed were portrayed as ignorant and naïve. This planting of uncertainty or mistrust, with question after question bringing Moses‘ writership into doubt, with most literature focusing on this type of propaganda, would create the latest generation of scholars, and today they dominate the world of scholarship. How did this progressive takeover come off without a hitch? The conservative scholarship of the early twentieth century saw these liberal naysayers as nothing more than a fly at a picnic. Most did not even deem it necessary to address their questions, so by 1950–1970, the Documentary Hypothesis machine was in full throttle. It was about this same time that the sleeping giant finally awoke to find that conservative scholarship had taken a backseat to this new creature, liberal scholarship. It is only within the last 30–40 years that some very influential conservative scholars have started to publish books in a move to dislodge this liberal movement.* Is it too little, too late? *This is not to say that the 19th and early 20th century did not have any apologist defending against biblical criticism. There were some giants in this field, like R. A. Torrey.
It is possible to displace higher criticism, but many factors stand in the way. For one, any opposition is painted as uninformed and inexperienced regarding the subject matter. 295
Moreover, the books that tear down the Bible with all their alleged critical analysis sell far better than those do that encourage putting faith in God‘s Word. In addition, many conservative scholars tend to sit on the sideline and watch as a few leading scholars attempt to do the work of the many. In addition, there are liberal scholars continually putting out numerous articles and books, dominating the market. Unlike the conservative scholars in the first part of the twentieth century, these liberal scholars in the first part of the twenty-first century are not slowing down. Moreover, they have become more aggressive. The book Introduction to the Bible, by John Laux, explains just what the Documentary Hypothesis would have meant for the Israelites if it were true: The Documentary Theory is built up on assertions which are either arbitrary or absolutely false. . . . If the extreme Documentary Theory were true, the Israelites would have been the victims of a clumsy deception when they permitted the heavy burden of the Law to be imposed upon them. It would have been the greatest hoax ever perpetrated in the history of the world.128
It goes much further than that; it would mean that the Son of God was either fooled by what these higher critics argue, that there was a tradition of Moses being the writer of the Pentateuch, which developed through time and was accepted as reality during Jesus‘ day, or that Jesus was a liar, because he had lived in heaven prior to his coming down to earth and was aware of the deception but had continued a tradition that he knew to be false. The truth is that the Son of God was well aware that Moses was, in fact, the writer of the Pentateuch and he presented Moses as such because he was there at the time! So again, because Jesus taught that Moses was, in fact, the writer of the Pentateuch, we have three options: (1) Jesus knew Moses was the writer because Jesus was there, in heaven, prior to his Virgin birth and observed Moses as the writer; or (2) Jesus knew that Moses was not the writer and simply perpetuated a Jewish tradition that Moses was the writer; or (3) Jesus possessed a limited knowledge and simply believed something that was a tradition because he was unaware of it being such. So if Jesus knew Moses was not the writer and purposely conveyed misinformation for the sake of Jewish tradition, this makes Jesus a liar and therefore a sinner, which would contradict what Hebrews 4:15 says of him, that ―he was without sin.‖ If he was simply in ignorance and was mistakenly conveying misinformation, this certainly does away with Jesus having a prehuman existence. (John 1:1–2; 3:13; 6:38, 62; 8:23, 42, 58; Colossians 1:15–18; Revelation 3:14; Proverbs 8:22–30) Based on the scriptures and other evidence presented, we can conclude that Jesus was well aware that Moses was the writer, and that is what he truthfully taught. Duane Garrett makes the following observation concerning the Documentary Hypothesis: 128. John Laux, Introduction to the Bible (Chicago: Tan Books & Pub., 1992), 186.
296
The time has long passed for scholars of every theological persuasion to recognize that the Graf-Wellhausen theory, as a starting point for continued research, is dead. The Documentary Hypothesis and the arguments that support it have been effectively demolished by scholars from many different theological perspectives and areas of expertise. Even so, the ghost of Wellhausen hovers over Old Testament studies and symposiums like a thick fog. . . . One wonders if we will ever return to the day when discussions of Genesis will not be stilted by interminable references to P and J. There are indications that such a day is coming. Many scholars are exploring the inadequacies of the Documentary Hypothesis and looking toward new models for explaining the Pentateuch.129 These world-renowned scholars who have gone left of center are witty and able to express thoughts, ideas, and feelings coherently, having conviction that leads unsuspecting ones who are not aware of the facts to accept ideas that are made to appear as smooth-fitting pieces in a large puzzle, thinking that they are nothing more than long-awaited answers. Sadly, many unsuspecting readers have taken their words as absolute truth. Jesus quotes or alludes to 23 of the 39 books of the Hebrew Scriptures. Specifically, he quotes all five of the books attributed to Moses—the book of Deuteronomy 16 times alone, this obviously being one of his favorites. As we close this chapter, we are going to let our greatest witness take the stand. As you read Jesus‘ references to Moses and the Law you will undoubtedly notice that he viewed Moses‘ writership as historically true, completely authoritative, and inspired of God. If one does not accept, Moses, as the writer of the Pentateuch as Jesus did, is that not calling Jesus a liar. As Christians, we accept what the Bible teaches as true. By way of common sense and sound reasoning, the vast majority of the issues of higher criticism‘s Social Progressive Christian and Christian Modernists have been answered quite easily by the conservative scholar in absolute terms: for example, Craig A. Evans, Gleason L. Archer Jr., C. John Collins, K. A. Kitchen, Norman L. Geisler, and others. For the handful of issues left, we still have reasonable answers, which are not beyond a reasonable doubt at this time; we are quite content to wait until we are provided with the concrete answers that will make these few issues beyond all reasonable doubt. The last 150 years of evidence that has come in by way of archaeological discoveries, a better understanding of the original language, historical-cultural and contextual understanding, as well as manuscripts has answered almost all those doubtful areas that have been called into question by the higher critics. Therefore, because we lack the complete answers for a few remaining issues means nothing. Consider this: A critic raises an issue, but it is answered by a new archaeological discovery a few years later. The critic runs to another issue, and it is later answered by an 129. Garrett, Duane. Rethinking Genesis: The Sources and Authorship of the First Book of the Pentateuch (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1991), 13.
297
improved understanding of the original languages. Then he runs to look for yet another issue, and it is answered by thousands of manuscripts that are uncovered over a period of two decades. This has been the case with thousands of issues. What are we to think the agenda is of those who continue scouring God‘s Word looking for errors, discrepancies, and contradictions? How many times must they raise objections and be proven wrong before we stop listening to their cries? If that is the case, why do their books still outsell those that expose their erroneous thinking? Does that say something about the Christian community and their desire for tabloid scholarship (sensationalized stories)? Would the average Christian rather read an article or book by Dan Brown on how Jesus allegedly married and had sexual relations with Mary Magdalene and fathered children (false, of course), or read an article or book on the actual, even more fascinating account of Jesus‘ earthly life, based on the four Gospels? For today‘s Christian, there is no more important study than the life and ministry of the real, historical Jesus Christ. The writer of the book of Hebrews exhorts us to ―fix our eyes on Jesus,‖ to ―consider him who endured such opposition from sinful men.‖ Moreover, Jehovah God himself commanded: "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!" (NIV, bolding added) While an apologetic of the study of the ―Historical Jesus,‖ or ―The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus‖130 is certainly fine, the primary source of the four Gospels accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John should be first place, the starting point of any real investigation of Jesus‘ life and ministry. A life and ministry that viewed the Old Testament as historically true and of the greatest importance to his followers that he would leave behind after his ascension back to heaven. We return to Wellhausen, who investigated his documentary hypothesis under the worldview of Israelite religion from an evolutionary model: (1) at the beginning it was animistic and spiritistic, (2) gradually developing into polytheism, (3) moving eventually into henotheism (choosing one god out of many), and finally (4) gravitating to monotheism. Wellhausen could not accept that this development took place in a short period, but was an evolution that took more than a millennium. This evolutionary process is no longer held among today‘s critical scholarship. Another obstacle was that Wellhausen did not believe in the miraculous and could not accept prophetic statements (for example, Genesis 49) happening before the actual events. This mindset was the catalyst behind his research. 131 Consequently, Wellhausen investigated the text with this way of thinking and that state of mind contributed to his 130. Recommended: Darrell L. Bock, Studying the Historical Jesus: A Guide to Sources and Methods (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2002); Gary R. Habermas, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ (Joplin, MO: College Press, 1996); Gary R. Habermas, The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2004); Craig A. Evans, Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospels (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2006); Timothy Paul Jones, Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Books, 2007). Tremper Longman III, and Raymond B. Dillard, An Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 43–44. 131
298
discovering the Documentary Hypothesis issues of different uses of the divine name, discrepancies, repetitions (doublets), and differences in style and language, reading his views into the text (eisegesis). The above facts of this book have easily demonstrated that the evidence of the documentary hypothesis is really no evidence at all. The modern-day critic has to deal with the lack of consensus on the part of his colleagues, who lack in agreement for the explanation of the sources. This failure to achieve consensus is represented by the occasional division of source strata into multiple layers (see Smend‘s J1 and J2) that often occasions the appearance of new sigla (for instance, Eissfeldt‘s L [aienquelle], Noth‘s G[rundschrift], Fohrer‘s N [for Nomadic], and Pfeiffer‘s S [for Seir]. A further indication of the collapse of the traditional documentary hypothesis is the widely expressed doubt that E was ever an independent source (Voz, Rudolph, Mowinckel; cf. Kaiser, IOT, 42 n. 18). Similar disagreements are also found in the dating of the sources. J has been dated to the period of Solomon by Von Rad, though Schmidt would argue for the seventh century, and Van Seters (1992, 34) has advocated an exile date. While most scholars believe P is postexilic, Haran has argued that it is to be associated with Hezekiah‘s reforms in the eighth century BC.132 While the lack of consensus is not in and of itself capable of disproving the proposition of sources other than Moses for the writing of the Pentateuch, it does cast even more doubt on the critical scholar‘s proposal that the new school of the Documentary Hypothesis has any more to offer than the old school of Wellhausen. As this book has clearly demonstrated, Moses is the inspired author of the Pentateuch. At best, we can accept that it is likely that Joshua may have updated the text in Deuteronomy chapter 34, which speaks of Moses‘ death, and it is possible that Joshua may have made the reference in Numbers 12:3 that refer to Moses as being ‗the humblest man on the face of the earth.‘* In addition, we can accept that a later copyist [or even possibly Ezra, another inspired author] updated Genesis 11:28, 31 to read ―of the Chaldeans,‖ a name of a land and its inhabitants in the southern portion of Babylonia that possibly was not recognized as Chaldea until several hundred years after Moses. The origin of the Chaldeans is uncertain but may well be in the west, or else branches of the family may have moved there (cf. Job 1:17). The general name for the area in the earliest period is unknown, since it was part of Sumer (see SHINAR); so it cannot be argued that the qualification of Abraham‘s home city UR as ―of the Chaldeans‖ (Gen. 11:28, 31; 15:7; as later Neh. 9:7; cf. Acts 7:4) is necessarily a later insertion in the text. 133 132. Ibid., 49–50. 133
Geoffrey W. Bromiley, vol. 1, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988; 2002), 630. 299
The same would hold true of a copyist updating Genesis 36:31, which reads: ―Now these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the sons of Israel.‖ Moses and Joshua were long gone for hundreds of years before Israel ever had a king over them.** The same would hold true again for Genesis 14:14, which reads: When Abram heard that his relative had been taken captive, he led out his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen, and went in pursuit as far as Dan. Dan was an area settled long after Moses death, after the Israelites had conquered the Promise Land. This too is obviously an update as well, making it contemporary to its readers.*** * For the possibility of Moses penning these words, see my comments in the first paragraph of section four. ** It should be noted that even this statement could belong to Moses, even though there were no kings in Israel at this time. How? He would be aware that Jehovah had promised Abraham that he would be so great that kings would come out of him (Gen 17:6) and the preparation for such is mentioned at Deuteronomy 17:14-20. *** It should be noted that this author does not accept higher criticisms unending desire to find source(s) for a book, because they have dissected it to no end. While there are a few details that may have been updated by a copyist, or even the inspired writer Ezra (writer of Chronicles and the book that bears his name), this does not mean that we accept the update, if it is such, as the inspired material that was originally written, unless it was done by another inspired writer like Joshua, Ezra, or Nehemiah, or even possibly Jeremiah. It is also possible that it could be an explanatory addition. Reference to ―Ur of the Chaldeans‖27 (11:28) identifies the native land of Haran but not necessarily of Terah and his sons Abram and Nahor. In fact, the inclusion of this information for Haran may suggest the ancestral home was elsewhere (for this discussion see comments on 12:1). ―Ur of the Chaldeans‖ occurs three times in Genesis (11:28, 31; 15:7) and once elsewhere (Neh 9:7). Stephen identified the place of God‘s revelation to Abram as ―Mesopotamia‖ from which he departed: ―So he left the land of the Chaldeans and settled in Haran‖ (Acts 7:3–4). The ―land [chōra] of the Chaldeans‖ rather than ―Ur of the Chaldeans‖ is the Septuagint translation, as reflected in Stephen‘s sermon, which can be explained as either a textual slip due to the prior phrase ―land of his birth‖ or the ancient translator‘s uncertainty about the identity of the site. J. W. Wevers proposes that due
Hb. ―Chaldeans‖ ַּכשְׂדִּיםis kaldu (Akk.) in Assyrian texts, and the Gk. has καλδαιοι; the original sd has undergone a change to ld (see R. S. Hess, ―Chaldea,‖ ABD 1.886–87). 27
300
to the apposition of ―land of his birth,‖ the translator interpreted ―Ur‖ as a region.29134 As we have already stated, the critic is fond of finding portions of the text that lack secular support, and then summarily dismissing it as not being a real historical account. Once evidence surfaces to support their dismissal as being wrong and premature, they simply never mention this section again, but move on to another. The question that begs to be asked by the logical and reasonable mind is, how many times must this take place before they stop and accept the Bible as sound and reliable history? Let us look at the historicity of the above account of Abraham‘s men defeating the Mesopotamian kings, for it is historically sound. Information had become known in the 20th century that vindicates this account as being historically true, and removes yet another arguing point from those supporters of the documentary hypothesis: The name of Chedorlaomer, King of Elam, contains familiar Elamite components: kudur meant ―servant,‖ and Lagamar was a high goddess in the Elamite pantheon. Kitchen (Ancient Orient, p. 44) generally prefers the vocalization Kutir instead of Kudur and gives the references for at least three Elamite royal names of this type. He equates tidal with a Hittite name, Tudkhaliya, attested from the nineteenth century B.C. As for Arioch, one King of Larsa (―El-Larsa‖) from this era was Eri-aku (―Servant of the Moon-god‖), whose name in Akkadian was Arad-Sin (with the same meaning). The Mari tablets refer to persons by the name of Ariyuk. The cuneiform of the original of Amraphel, formerly equated with Hammurabi of Babylon, is not demonstrable for the twentieth century (Hammurabi himself dates from the eighteenth century, but there may possibly be a connection with Amorite names like Amud-pa-ila, according to H. B. Huffman. . . . It should be added that according to G. Pettinato, the leading epigraphist of the Ebla documents dating from 2400–2250 B.C., mention is made in the Ebla tablets of Sodom (spelled Si-da-mu), Gomorrah (spelled in Sumerian cuneiform I-ma-ar), and Zoar (Za-e-ar). He feels that quite possibly these may be the same cities mentioned in the Abrahamic narrative.135 W. F. Albright comments: In spite of our failure hitherto to fix the historical horizon of this chapter, we may be certain that its contents are very ancient. There are several words and expressions found nowhere else 29
J. W. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Genesis, Septuagint and Cognate Studies 35 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993), 158. 134
K. A. Mathews, vol. 1B, Genesis 11:27-50:26, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2007), 99–100. 135. Gleason L. Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982), 90–91. 301
in the Bible and now known to belong to the second millenium. The names of the towns in Transjordania are also known to be very ancient.136 In the final analysis, based on both the internal and external evidence, we can feel quite confident that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch. The minor additions of Joshua, who was himself an inspired writer, as well as the handful of updates in the text to make it clearer to the then-current reader does no harm to the inspired message that Jehovah God wished to convey.
. H. C. Alleman and E. E. Flack, Old Testament Commentary (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1954), 14.
136
302
1. BIBLIOGRAPHY Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody, 1974. _________. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982. Bercot, David W. A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1998. Bock, Darrell L. Studying the Historical Jesus: A Guide to Sources and Methods. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2002. Davis, John J. Paradise to Prison: Studies in Genesis. Salem: Sheffield, 1975. Driver, G. R. Canaanite Myths and Legends. New York: T. & T. Clark, 1971. Elwell, Walter A. Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988. Elwes, R. H. M. A Theologico-political Treatise, and a Political Treatise. New York, NY: Cosimo Classics , 2005. Enns, Paul P. The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago: Moody Press, 1997. Erman, Adolf, and H. M. Tirard. Life in Ancient Egypt. Whitefish: Kessinger, 2003. Evans, Craig A. Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospels. Downers Grove, IL: InterVaristy Press, 2002. Flemings, Hal. Examining Criticisms of the Bible. Indiana: Author House, 2008. Friedman, Richard Elliot. Who Wrote The Bible. San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1997. Garrett, Don. The Cambridge Companion to Spinoza. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Garrett, Duane. Rethinking Genesis: The Sources and Authorship of the First Book of the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1991. Geisler, Norman L. Inerrancy. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1980. Geisler, Norman L, and William E. Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Rev. and Expanded. Chicago, IL: Moody Press, c.1986, 1996. Habermas, Gary R. The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2004. _________. The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1996. Halley, Henry. Halley's Bible Handbook. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988. Hayes, John H., and Carl R. Holladay. Biblical Exegesis: A Beginner's Handbook. Lousiville, KY: Westminister John Knox Press, 2007. Hoerth, Alfred. Archaeology and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998. Hume, David. An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Boston, MA: Digireads.com, 2006. Jamieson, Robert, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown. A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, On the Old and New Testaments. Oak Harbor: Scranton & Company, 1997. 303
Jay, Nancy. Throughout Your Generations Forever: Sacrifice, Religion, and Paternity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. Jones, Timothy Paul. Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2007. Kass, Leon R. The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis. New York: Free Press, 2003. Keil, Carl Friedric, and Franz Delitzsch. Commentary on the Old Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2002. Kitchen, K. A. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003. _________. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1975. Laux, John. Introduction to the Bible. Chicago: Tan Books & Pub., 1992. Longman, Tremper III, and Raymond B. Dillard. An Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006. McKenzie, Stephen L., and Stephen R. Hayes. To Each Its Own Meaning: An Introduction to Biblical Criticism and Their Application. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1999. Morris, Henry M. The Genesis Record: A Scientific and Devotional Commentary on the Book of the Beginnings. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1976, 2007. Murray, Hiebert D. 100 Reasons to Trust Old Testament History. Galdstone: Westborne Study Center, 2005. Nicholson, Ernest. The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century: The Legacy of Julius Wellhausen. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Price, Randall. Searching for the Original Bible. Eugene: Harvest House, 2007. Pritchard, James B. Ancient Near Eastern Texts, 2nd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1955. Rendtorff, R. ―The Problem of the Process of Transmission in the Pentateuch.‖ JSOT, 1990: 101. Rooker, Mark F. Leviticus: The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2001. Speiser, E. A. Genesis: Anchor Bible 1. Garden City: Doubleday, 1964. Spinoza, Benedict de. Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (Gephardt Edition 1925). Leiden: Brill Academic, 1997. Stuart, Douglas K. The New American Commentary: An Exegetical Theological Exposition of Holy Scripture: EXODUS. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2006. Wood, D. R. W. New Bible Dictionary (Vol. 1). Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1996.
304
CHAPTER 28 THE AUTHORSHIP AND UNITY OF ISAIAH In Isaiah 1:1, we are introduced to Isaiah in his own words as ―the son of Amoz,‖ informing his readers that he served as God‘s prophet ―in the days of Uzziah [52 years], Jotham [16 years], Ahaz [16 years] and Hezekiah [28 years], kings of Judah.‖ The total reign of these four kings would be 112 years, which means that Isaiah likely began toward the end of Uzziah‘s reign. He was one of the longest serving prophets to the southern kingdom of Judah, no fewer than 46 years, about 778732 B.C.E. Very little is known of the personal life of Isaiah, as opposed to what we know of the other prophets of the Old Testament. He was married to a ―prophetess.‖ (8:3) ―It is possible that the ‗prophetess‘ simply refers to the prophet‘s wife, though there are no other examples of this in Scripture. It is possible that Isaiah‘s wife had a prophetic gift, but this gift is not affirmed elsewhere.‖137 There are other women within the Old Testament that held the office of a prophetess, making it likely that Isaiah‘s wife may very well of had this same assignment. Judges 4:4; 2 Kings 22:14. Amoz was Isaiah‘s father, this being the only detail of Amoz that is known. (1:1) We are not told of Isaiah‘s birth or death, though strong Jewish tradition has it ―that the prophet Isaiah was cut in half with a wooden saw. This happened during the reign of King Manasseh. The Old Testament has no record of this incident.‖138 (Compare Hebrews 11:37.) His prophetic book places him in Jerusalem with at least two sons with prophetic names and his prophet wife. (Isa. 7:3; 8:1, 3) His years of prophesying for the southern kingdom likely run from 778 B.C.E through the 14th year of Hezekiah‘s reign, a little after 732 B.C.E. (1:1; 6:1; 36:1) Some contemporary prophets of Isaiah were Micah in land of Judah and, to the north, Hosea and Oded. Micah. 1:1; Hos. 1:1; 2 Chron. 28:6-9. Life in Judah throughout these 46 years for Isaiah was unstable and chaotic to say the least. The political element was in constant turmoil, the courts were corrupt to no end, and the religious structure of the nation was filled with pretense and duplicity. Scattered throughout the hill country of Judea were pagan altars to false gods. A case in point would be King Ahaz, who not only allowed this idolatrous worship, ―but was an active participant, not only duplicates the sins of Israel‘s kings, but he also sacrifices his son ‗in
137
E. Ray Clendenen, New American Commentary: Isaiah 1-39 (B & H Publishing Group, 2007), 222. 138
Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen, vol. 15, New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Hebrews, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-2001), 355. 305
the fire,‘ perhaps as an offering to the god Molech.‖139 (2 Kings 16:3, 4; 2 Chronicles 28:3, 4) Sadly, this is only a continuation of a people that were supposed to be in a covenant relationship with Jehovah. Exodus 19:5-8. We need not leave the impression that all was lost, for some of Isaiah‘s contemporaries were working for the restoration of true worship. For instance, King Uzziah, ―did that which was right in the eyes of Jehovah.‖ However, this was not enough, because ―the high places were not taken away: the people still sacrificed and burnt incense in the high places.‖ (2 Kings 15:3, 4) King Jotham followed in his father‘s footsteps and ―did that which was right in the eyes of Jehovah.‖ And like in the case of Uzziah, the people of Jotham‘s reign ―followed corrupt practices.‖ (2 Chronicles 27:2) Sadly, Isaiah spent much of his career in a spiritually defunct kingdom. While some kings promoted false worship, others worked for the return of pure worship, with no real effect on the people. As one can imagine, presenting this prophetic message to such stiffnecked people was going to prove none too easy. Some have looked to the style throughout the book of Isaiah and have suggested two Isaiah‘s, a ―Second Isaiah,‖ ―the idea of a multiple authorship of Isaiah has arisen only in the last two centuries. Its simplest, most persuasive form is the ascription of chs. 1–39 to Isaiah and 40–66 to an anonymous prophet living among the sixth-century exiles in Babylonia.‖140 There is an enormous amount of evidence that there is only one Isaiah, who penned the entire book, centuries before the Babylonian exile.141 Chapters 1 to 6 give the reader the historical setting within Judah and Jerusalem, emphasizing the guilt of Judah before God, as well as the commissioning of Isaiah. Chapters 7 to 12 cover the continuous threats of an invasion, giving the people a hope by means the Prince of Peace, authorized by Jehovah. Chapters 13 to 35 comprise a succession of announcements against numerous nations and a prophecy of salvation, which is to come from Jehovah. Chapters 36 to 39 cover with significant dealings of Hezekiah‘s reign. Chapters 40 to 66 deal with a release from the Babylonian Empire, 142 the return of the Jewish people to Judah and Jerusalem, restoring Zion.
Multiple Authorship for the Book of Isaiah Man is unable to foretell the future with any inevitability. Repeatedly their struggles at prophecy are unsuccessful in the extreme. Therefore, a 139
Paul R. House, vol. 8, 1, 2 Kings, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001), 336. 140
D. A. Carson, New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, 4th ed. (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill., USA: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994). 141
For additional verbal agreements and similarities within Isaiah, cf. G.L. Robinson and R.K. Harrison, ―Isaiah,‖ in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. 2 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), pp. 895–898.141 142 who at the time of prophecy is merely an unknown entity, who is yet to grow into an Empire, unseating the current Assyrian Empire 306
book full of prophetic books, if true, would attract interest, and even attack. The Bible is just such a book. The primary cause behind questioning Isaiah‘s writership is the same for all other prophetic books, it is their prophetic nature (detailed history written in advance), which is impossible to the Bible critic or liberal scholar. (Isaiah 41:21-26; 42:8, 9; 46:8-10) If we are to understand the critic, we must examine his thinking. Therefore, let us look at some aspects of his reasoning. Prophecy is Contemporary, Meaningful and Applicable to the People The important truth for the Bible critic is the understanding that in all occurrences, prophecy pronounced or written in Bible times meant something to the people it was spoken or written to; it was meant to serve as guidance for them if they heeded its counsel. Frequently, it had specific fulfillment in that time, in many examples, being fulfilled throughout the lifetime of that very generation. This is actually true; the words always had some application to the very people who heard them. The words of Isaiah‘s chapters 40 to 66 were that the Jewish people would see the destruction of their beloved Jerusalem, be taken into exile to Babylon for 70-years, yet freed by the MedoPersians, Cyrus, the leader of Persia specifically. Thereafter, the Jewish people would be released to their homeland, to rebuild. All of this took place 200 years plus after the days of Isaiah. Therefore, for the critic, there must have been a second Isaiah writing in 540 B.C.E., just before the return of the Israelites to Jerusalem.143 That Isaiah penned the book that bears his name was never thought otherwise until the 12th century C.E. This was not the position of Jewish commentator Abraham Ibn Ezra.144 ―He states in his commentary on Isaiah that the second half of the book, from chapter 40 on, was the work of a prophet who lived during the Babylonian Exile and the early period of the Return to Zion.‖ (Pfeffer 2005, 28) Progressively, throughout the 143
It should be noted that the words of Jehovah by way of Isaiah were very much applicable to his audience of the eighth-century B.C.E. The exile to Babylon (150 years away), was applicable for Isaiah and his audience and started the moment he penned the words. It was a process, which began with their guilt before Jehovah, as outlined in chapters 1:1-6:13. Judah and Jerusalem‘s guilt; the commission of Isaiah (1:1–6:13) Hostile intentions of an enemy invasions and promise of relief (7:1–12:6) Declaring international desolations (13:1–23:18) Judgment on the whole world, promise of salvation by Jehovah (24:1–35:10) Jehovah delivers Judah from Assyria; Babylonian exile foretold (36:1–39:8) Release from Babylon by the Jehovah God through Cyrus, restoration of Israel, Messiah to come (40:1–66:24) 144 Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089-1164) was a Jewish scholar of the Middle Ages, who penned a commentary on ever Old Testament book, as well as poetry and grammatical treatise, being more read than all, with the exception the greatest Jewish scholar of that period, Rashi. 307
next two centuries, more and more scholars were adopting this view. The New Bible Dictionary notes: Many scholars nowadays deny great portions of the book to Isaiah, not only in the sense that he did not write them down, but in the sense that their subject-matter does not come from him at all. Even chs. 1–35 are believed by some to contain much non-Isaianic material. Some scholars go farther than others, but there is a wide measure of agreement that Isaiah cannot be credited with chs. 13:1–14:23; 21; 24–27; 34–35. In addition, critical scholars are practically unanimous in the view that chs. 40–66 do not come from Isaiah.145
A Dissecting of Isaiah The Bible critics were not going to stop with this Isaiah II. No, they would go on to challenge Isaiah authorship even further. The above theory, known as the Second Isaiah, or Deutero-Isaiah, only led to a suggested Isaiah III. If Isaiah 40 to 66 could not belong to the First-Isaiah, because of the foreknowledge; then, chapters 13 and 14 must be set aside for the very same reason. The critique goes even further still as they continue to cut up the book of Isaiah, with chapters 15 and 16 also receiving a writer of its own as well, another unknown prophet. Chapters 23 to 27 have been set aside as well, belonging to yet another. Another critic argues that chapters 34 to 35 could have not belonged to the 8th century prophet either, as it resembles chapter 40 to 66 that had already been set aside as not being the First-Isaiah. Bible scholar Charles C. Torrey briefly sums up the result of this irrational reasoning. ―The once great ‗Prophet of the Exile,‘‖ he says, ―has dwindled to a very small figure, and is all but buried in a mass of jumbled fragments.‖ (Blenkinsopp 2003, 27) It should be noted that while Torrey brought down the number of alleged Isaiah writers, he still held many of the liberal positions. Nevertheless, not all scholars agree with such dismembering the prophet book that was penned in its entirety by one Isaiah, from the 8th century B.C.E. The idea that the composer of Isaiah II lived in Babylon was losing with some scholars. As Gleason Leonard Archer points out, ―the references to geography, flora, and fauna found in Deutero-Isaiah were far more appropriate to an author living in Syria or Palestine.‖146 Professor Bernard Duhm (1847-1928) introduced the world to three Isaiah, with none of them being the Isaiah of the 8th century B.C.E., nor having lived in Babylon. Duhm argues that Isaiah II penned chapters 40-55 about 540 B.C.E., near the region of Lebanon. Isaiah III, in Jerusalem, penned chapters 56 to 66 at the time of Ezra, 450 B.C.E. Duhm would go on to argue that some of the data within Isaiah was even further removed from Isaiah I, some belonging to the first-century B.C.E. Once they settled on at 145
D. R. W. Wood and I. Howard Marshall, New Bible Dictionary, 3rd ed. (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 514. 146
Gleason Leonard Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 3rd. ed.]. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1998), 368. 308
final set of dates for the dissected Isaiah, it was this criticism that George Adam Smith (1856 – 1942), accepted in his The Book of Isaiah (The Expositor’s Bible; 2 vols., 1888, 1890). This criticism would receive one serious blow, only five years after the death of Smith. Prior to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest manuscripts of the Old Testament were dated to about the ninth and tenth centuries C.E., known as the Masoretic texts (MT).147 The Isaiah scrolls identified as ―IQisaa‖ and ―IQIsab‖ are complete copies of the book of Isaiah, but the latter is the earliest known copy of a complete Bible book, and dates to about 175 B.C.E. Both are from cave 1 of the Dead Sea area. Thus, the idea that some portion of the book of Isaiah was penned in the first-century B.C.E. is not long attainable. Gleason Archer had this to say about the two Isaiah scrolls that ―proved to be word for word identical with the standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95% of the text. The 5% of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling.‖ (Archer 1994, 19) It should be added that this criticism of Isaiah did not go unchallenged, as numerous scholars throughout the nineteenth-century established that there was but one Isaiah, and he lived and wrote in the eighth century B.C.E.
Entering the Twentieth-Century The twentieth-century scholars have attempted to move the date of Isaiah out of the first-century B.C.E., closer toward Isaiah I, in an attempt at lowering the number of Isaiah‘s. Dr. C. C. Torrey mentioned above, argued for just one writer for chapters 34 to 66, who lived in Jerusalem at the close of the fifth century. Torrey did not see these chapters as addressing the exiles, but addressing the people who lived right there in Palestine. To him the mere five mentions of Cyrus and Babylon, were interpolations, 148 and could be ignored.
Different Themes and Subject Matter The Bible scholar often uses the Latin term a priori, which means to work from something that is already known or self-evident to arrive at a conclusion. Another common term among the scholars can possibly further clarify this biased position. A preconception is an idea; an opinion formed in advance, based on little or no information and reflects bias. The Bible critic approaches the study of the book of Isaiah with his or her own preconception that there is no such thing as advanced knowledge events, history written in advance, prophecy. Therefore, the critic will accept, reject, ignore, or fail to mention evidence based on whether or not it fits the preconceived notion of their antisupernatural mindset. For the critic, it is feasible that a Jewish writer living about 540 B.C.E would be able to surmise the rise of Cyrus the Great, to overthrow Babylon (44:28; 45:1), as he could surmise this from his observation of 147
Hebrew Bible: the traditional text of the Hebrew Bible, revised and annotated by Jewish scholars between the 6th and 10th centuries C.E. 148 An interpolation is to alter or deliberately falsify a text by adding a comment or extra words to it. 309
current affairs. However, it is impossible to the critical mind that a Jewish writer of the eighth century could make such observations, because Babylon was not even an empire, and Cyrus was yet to be born for some 150 years. The idea that God‘s Word prophesied so specifically as to mention Cyrus by name 150 years in advance, may seem foreign to the average Bible reader. However, it is not as uncommon as one might think. God‘s Word is known to mention people and places hundreds of years in advance. God‘s prophecy regarding Josiah called for some successor of David to be named as such, and it predicted his acting against false worship in the city of Bethel. (1Ki 13:1, 2) Over three hundred years later, a king named Josiah fulfilled this prophecy. (2Ki 22:1; 23:15, 16) Of course, the same critics would just argue that we have another interpolation. However, this argument can be used only so much, before we run into a case that it will not work against. In the eighth century B.C.E., Isaiah‘s contemporary, the prophet Micah predicted that a great leader would be born in the unimportant town of Bethlehem. However, there were two towns in Israel that were named Bethlehem, but this prediction identified which one: Bethlehem Ephrathah, the place of King David birth. (Micah 5:2; Lu 2:1-7) This is not so easily dismissed, as the Jewish scribes of Herod the Great was aware of these facts. The book Archaeology and Old Testament Study states the following concerning the future of Babylon after Cyrus conquered it: ―These extensive ruins, of which, despite Koldewey‘s work, only a small proportion has been excavated, have during past centuries been extensively plundered for building materials. Partly in consequence of this, much of the surface now presents an appearance of such chaotic disorder that it is strongly evocative of the prophecies of Isa. xiii. 19–22 and Jer. l. 39 f., the impression of desolation being further heightened by the aridity which marks a large part of the area of the ruins.‖―Thomas 1967, 41. Presuppositions The critic will argue that Isaiah 2:2-4 contains the conversion of the non-Jew, which is hardly of the eighth-century B.C.E., and is hundreds of years later. Therefore, this passage and all similar ones actually come from a later era in Israelite history. The critic will argue that Isaiah 11:1–9 contains the idea of world peace, and must be removed as belonging to Isaiah I. The critical will argue that a verse like Isaiah 14:26, which speak of judgment that is to befall the whole earth is to be removed, as it is not of the mindset of Isaiah‘s day. The critic will argue that the apocalyptic nature Isaiah chapters 24 to 27 are of a time in the fifth-century Jewish mindset.
Evidence of One Isaiah The name of Jehovah God ―the Holy One of Israel‖ is found 12 times in Isaiah chapters 1 to 39 and 13 times in Isaiah chapters 40 to 66, yet this name appears only 6 times in the rest of the Hebrew Old Testament. This interconnects the so-called two Isaiah‘s together as one. This expression being repeated throughout the whole of the book is of great value in establishing that we have one book, written by one prophet of 310
the eighth-century.―Isa. 1:4; 5:19, 24; 10:20; 12:6; 17:7; 29:19; 30:11, 12, 15; 31:1; 37:23. Also, 41:14, 16, 20; 43:3, 14; 45:11; 47:4; 48:17; 49:7; 54:5; 55:5; 60:9, 14. Compare 2 Kings 19:22; Psa. 71:22; 78:41; 89:18; Jer. 50:29; 51:5. Another similarity between chapters 1 to 39 and chapters 40 to 66 is a ―way‖ or ―highway.‖ (11:16; 35:8; 40:3; 43:19; 49:11; 57:14; 62:10) Yet, another similarity runs through the whole of Isaiah is the idea of a ―remnant‖ or ―remaining ones.‖ (1:9; 6:13; 10:20, 21, 22; 11:11, 12, 16; 14:22, 30; 15:9; 16:14; 17:3, 6; 21:17; 28:5; 37:31; 46:3; 65:8, 9) There is also a recurring reference to ―Zion,‖ a term used 29 times in chapters 1 to 39 and 18 times in chapter 40 to 66. (2:3; 4:5; 18:7; 24:23; 27:13; 28:16; 29:8; 30:19; 31:9; 33:5, 20; 34:8; 46:13; 49:14; 51:3; 11; 52:1; 57:13; 59:20; 60:14; 62:1; 11; 65:11; 25; 66:8) Even more, there is another distinctive figure of speech such as the expression, ―pangs of a woman in labor.‖ 13:8; 21:3; 26:17, 18; 42:14; 54:1; 66:7.
Literary Style Another expression found only in Jeremiah 9:12 and Micah 4:4 as well as crossing through both chapters 1 to 39 and 40 to 66: ―the mouth of Jehovah hath spoken it.‖ (1:20; 40:5; 58:14) Another title found only in Isaiah also crosses the same chapters: ―the Mighty One of Israel.‖ (1:24; 49:26; 60:16) Another phrase found only in Exodus 7:19; Psalm 1:3, 119:136, Pro 5:16, Lam 3:48, as well as Isaiah is ―streams of water.‖ (30:25; 44:4) The style of this author was to use what was known as emphatic duplication. (2:7, 8; 6:3; 8:9; 24:16, 19; 40:1; 43:11, 25; 48:15; 51:12; 57:19; 62:10) This evidence could be repeated with other terms, some less distinctive, yet nevertheless, it authenticates the book as being of one author. There is another aspect to the Cyrus evidence that actually works against the two Isaiah criticisms. We are to believe that this Second-Isaiah or some redactor149 of about 540 B.C.E. is so skilled at smoothing out a document, attempting to make it as though it were one document, by having numerous terms and phrases show up throughout the alleged two Isaiah‘s, to then develop the Cyrus of Persia situation. Throughout chapters 41 to 48, there are numerous specific references to Cyrus, or allusions to him and his kingdom. In these references, Cyrus‘ character and person is developed, as well as there being a prophetic element to his actions that is presented as though being far into the future. If written in the midst of the current affairs, it would be pointless to build a character that is extremely well known, unless you presented him as being a product of prophecy. Once we get past the idea that such devious thinking would be within the mind of some mysterious writer, who then had the tremendous skills to carry it out; we then must believe that this composer would have to have had knowledge that was beyond his circumstances. Little does the critic realize but he is giving just as much power to the mysterious composer as was given to Isaiah the prophet by Jehovah God. This redactor, or Second-Isaiah would have had to of had extensive knowledge of governmental affairs 149
A redactor is a person who edits or revises a document in preparation for publication. 311
of Israel from the eighth-century to the sixth century, the ability to deduce from current affairs that Cyrus would level Babylon, and release a remnant to return to Jerusalem (Zion), to rebuild. Further, he has shown knowledge of Canaanite idolatry that is reflective of the first 39 chapters; a subject that had long been a dead issue to the Israelites of the sixth-century. Moreover, that he would see the Messiah the leader centuries later, to die for transgressions of others.―Matt 4:15-16. The critic would have his listeners believe that chapters 40 to 66 have no connection to the eighth-century B.C.E. This could not be further from the truth, as one considers Isaiah 44:23f.; 45:8; 50:1; 55:12f.; 56:1; 57:1; 59:3; 61:8; 63:3f.f As was stated earlier Micah is a contemporary of Isaiah, his writing being completed about 16-years after Isaiah, covering 777 – 716 B C.E. There is a great resemblance between what Isaiah wrote in chapters 40 to 66 and what Micah penned: Isaiah 41:15f. and Micah 4:13; Isaiah 47:2f. and Micah 1:11; Isaiah 48:2 and Micah 3:11; Isaiah 49:29 and Micah 7:17; Isaiah 52:12 and Micah 2:13; Isaiah 56:10 and Micah 3:5; Isaiah 58:1 and Micah 3:8. On this Old Testament scholar R. K. Harrison wrote: Obviously the same glorious expectation of the future under divine providence, the same broad conception of the nations of the Near East, and the confident expectation that a renewed Israel would return from exile, were characteristic of both prophets. (Harrison 2004, 779)
An Anthology of one Author An anthology is a book that consists of essays, stories, or poems by different writers.150 If one considers that Isaiah likely did not write the entirety of his book in one setting, but different sections over a forty-six year prophetic career. Therefore, his book is a collection of his different writings throughout his life. For instance, Isaiah may have penned a section of the work at the age of twenty, and another at the age of thirty, and another at forty-three, and another at fifty-two and the final at sixty-five. This alone would explain the differences in style and literary expression, as we are literally different people through our seventy to eighty year life. Moreover, if this anthology of the book of Isaiah has each section being written under different circumstances and in different historical settings, then the critical argument would be even less effective. The following analogy illustrates in modern terms how the book of Isaiah was written over time. Imagine a newspaper writer, at the age of twenty-three, writing an assignment in 1935 about The Great Depression. Then imagine the same writer, in his forties, embedded with the troops and writing articles about World War II from 19421945. Next, imagine the writer in his seventies being asked to come out of retirement to cover the Vietnam Conflict in 1969. Then, in 1991, this same writer in his nineties, who had seen the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, decides to pen one last article in his life. The writer dies in 1995 and several years after his death, a 150
Inc Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary., Eleventh ed. (Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003). 312
compilation of his articles is published in an anthological book about life in the twentieth-century. Isaiah 1:1 (English Standard Version) The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. Isaiah 2:1 (English Standard Version) The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. Isaiah 13:1 (English Standard Version) The oracle concerning Babylon which Isaiah the son of Amoz saw.
The Bible Takes the Witness Stand for Isaiah As the Bible is a collection of 66 smaller books, all of which are inspired of God, it deserves the opportunity to get on the stand for itself, to testify in its own behalf. It is obvious that first-century Christians believed that the book of Isaiah had just one author. Luke was the writer of the book bearing his name, the Gospel of Luke as well as the Book of Acts. In the Book of Acts, Luke tells of an Ethiopian official, who ―had come to Jerusalem to worship and was returning, seated in his chariot, and he was reading the prophet Isaiah.‖ (Chapter 53) This is the very portion of Isaiah that is attributed to the Deutero-Isaiah.‖ Acts 8:26-28 Luke 1:1-4 (English Standard Version) Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, 2just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, 3it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught. 1
Acts 1:1-2 (English Standard Version) In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, 2until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen. 1
―The general consensus of both liberal and conservative scholars is that Luke is very accurate as a historian. He‘s erudite, he‘s eloquent, his Greek approaches classical quality, he writes as an educated man, and archaeological discoveries are showing over and over again that Luke is accurate in what he has to say.‖―John McRay (Strobel 1998, 97) Luke Wrote Luke 4:17 (English Standard Version) And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written, 17
313
The words that Jesus would go on to read in verse 18-19 of Luke chapter 4 are found in Isaiah 61:1-2. Does Luke attribute this to the alleged Deutero-Isaiah? No, he specifically says ―the prophet Isaiah.‖ Matthew wrote Matthew 3:1-3 (English Standard Version) In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, 2"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand." 3For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah when he said, "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord; make his paths straight.'" 1
These prophetic words come from Isaiah 40:3. Does Matthew attribute these prophetic words to some unknown prophet, some Deutero-Isaiah? No, he clearly states that it was ―Isaiah the Prophet.‖ Mark wrote Mark 1:1-3 (English Standard Version) The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. 2As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, "Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way,151 3the voice of one crying in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight,'" 1
The latter portion of that quotation comes from Isaiah 40:3. Peter played a major role in helping Mark with his Gospel. Therefore, in one verse, we can get the assessment of two prominent Christians. Neither shows any knowledge of there being another Isaiah, the so-called Deutero-Isaiah. John Wrote John 12:36-43 (English Standard Version) While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light." When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. 37Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, 38so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled: "Lord, who has believed what he heard from us, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?" 39Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said, 40"He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them." 41Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him. 42Nevertheless, many even of the authorities believed in him, but for fear of the Pharisees they did not confess it, so that they would not be put out of the synagogue; 43for they loved the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God. 36
151
On a textual note, the first part of Mark‘s quote is actually from Malachi 3:1, the second portion from Isaiah 40:3. His attributing all of it to Isaiah was likely because his Roman audience would like be more familiar with Isaiah. Regardless, Mark does not acknowledge and Deutero-Isaiah.
314
The apostle John drew from both sides of the alleged two Isaiah‘s: John 12:38 in Isaiah 53:1 and John 12:40 in Isaiah 6:1. There is no indication that two separate writers were being considered. Paul wrote Romans 10:16; Romans 10:20; Romans 15:12 (English Standard Version) But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?" 16
Then Isaiah is so bold as to say, "I have been found by those who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me." 20
And again Isaiah says, "The root of Jesse will come, even he who arises to rule the Gentiles; in him will the Gentiles hope." 12
In Paul‘s letter to the Romans, Paul refers to Isaiah 53:1 in Romans 10:16, Isaiah 65:1 in Romans 10:20, and Isaiah 11:10 in Romans 15:12. Thus, we can see that Paul makes references to both chapters 1-39 and chapters 40-66. The context is quite clear that he is referring to the same writer throughout. Obviously, the writers of the New Testament never had any idea of two, three, or more writers for the Book of Isaiah. Let us look again to the Dead Sea Scrolls, particularly the Isaiah scroll mentioned earlier, which dates to about 175 B.C.E. This one scroll especially refutes the critical claim of a Deutero-Isaiah. How? Within this document, chapter 40 begins on the last line of a column, with the opening sentence being completed in the next column. Therefore, this suggests that the copyist was not aware of a change from a Proto-Isaiah to a DeuteroIsaiah, or some sort of division at this point.
First-Century Jewish Historian Flavius Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian makes it quite clear the prophecies concern Isaiah belonged to Isaiah the prophet, but come from the eighth-century B.C.E. as well. ―These things Cyrus knew,‖ Josephus writes, ―from reading the book of prophecy which Isaiah had left behind two hundred and ten years earlier.‖ It is also Josephus‘ position that these very prophecies may have been what contributed to Cyrus releasing the Jews, to return to their homeland, for Josephus writes that Cyrus was ―seized by a strong desire and ambition to do what had been written.‖ Jewish Antiquities, Book XI, chapter 1, paragraph 2.
Isaiah the Prophet―Trustworthy Having looked at a small portion of the evidence, what conclusions should we draw? One inspired writer, who lived in the eighth-century B.C.E., whose father was Amoz, penned the book of Isaiah. This book for 2,000 years was never questioned as belonging to more than one writer. Yes, we openly acknowledge that the style shift from chapter 40 forward. However, as was stated earlier, the prophet worked on sections of this writing for 46 years, living in different historical settings. In a lifetime, all of us are different people. Therefore, the way this writer may express something at 21 years of 315
age, would certainly be penned differently at the age of 44. Moreover, Isaiah was commissioned to deliver a variety of messages, some coming as warnings, others as judgment, still others as: ―Comfort, comfort my people, says your God.‖ (Isaiah 40:1) There is no doubt that the Israelites were comforted at the promise that they would be released after 70-years of exile in Babylon, to return to their homeland. Below the reader will find four specifically selected books, which offer a far more extensive amount of evidence that the Book of Isaiah is but one Isaiah, from the eight-century B.C.E.
316
Recommended Reading Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody, 1994. Harrison, R. K. Introduction to the Old Testament. Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 2004. Lasor, William Sanford, David Allan Hubbard, and Frederic Williams Bush. The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament: Old Testament Survey (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1996. Torrey, R. A., Charles Lee Feinberg, and Warren W. Wiersbe. The Fundamentals: The Famous Sourcebook of Foundational Biblical Truths (Vol. 1, ). Los Angeles: Bible Institute of Los Angeles, 1917.
317
Bibliography Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody, 1994. Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Isaiah 56-66: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. New York: Anchor Bible, 2003. Carson, D. A. New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition. 4th ed. Downers Grove: Inter-Varisity Press, 1994. Clendenen, E. Ray. New American Commentary: Isaiah 1-39. Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing Group, 2007. Harrison, R. K. Introduction to the Old Testament. Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 2004. House, Paul R. The New American Commentary: 2 Kings . Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001. Kistemaker, Simon J, and William Hendriksen. New Testament Commentary: vol. 15, Exposition of Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-2001. Lasor, William Sanford, David Allan Hubbard, and Frederic Williams Bush. The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament: Old Testament Survey (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1996. Longman, Tremper III, and Raymond B Dillard. An Introduction to the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006. Pfeffer, Jeremy I. Providence In The Book Of Job: The Search For God's Mind . Eastbourne: Sussex Academic Press, 2005. Robinson, G. L., and R. K. Harrison. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. 2. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982. Strobel, Lee. The Case For Christ. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998. Thomas, D. Winton. Archaeology and Old Testament Study (Jubilee Volume of the Society for Old Testament Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967. Torrey, R. A., Charles Lee Feinberg, and Warren W. Wiersbe. The Fundamentals: The Famous Sourcebook of Foundational Biblical Truths (Vol. 1, ). Los Angeles: Bible Institute of Los Angeles, 1917. Whiston, William. The Works of Josephus. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1987.
318
CHAPTER 29 DEFENDING JOB AS A HISTORICAL PERSON Writer: Moses Place Written: Wilderness Writing Completed: c.152 1473 B.C.E. Time Covered: Over 140 years between 1657 and 1473 B.C.E. Before defending Job as a real historical person, we might take a couple paragraphs, to answer why we have said that Moses is the author of Job and have established an about date as the time of writing, especially when source books have this to say, ―no one knows when or by whom Job was written.‖153 The oldest tradition among the Jewish and early Christians scholars has Moses as the author. Job lived in Uz, ―the evidence supports the conclusion that Job‘s land of Uz was E of Edom in the Arabian Desert.‖154 Job‘s trial can be inferred to have come sometime after Abraham‘s day, because it was a time when ―there [was] none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil.‖ (1:8) This time period would fit logically between the death of Joseph (1657 B.C.E.), a man like Job, and the time of Moses, who is like Job as well, ―blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil.‖ Job surpassed all others in pure worship at a time, when Israel was polluted by the demon worship of Egypt. Moreover, the context of Job chapter one is indicative of patriarchal times, as opposed to the period after the Exodus from Egypt, in which there was the Mosaic Law. (Amos 3:2; Eph. 2:12) ―For not only does he not mention the Law or the exodus, but he is pictured as a wealthy nomad (Job 1:3; 42:12) who is still offering sacrifices himself (Job 1:5; 42:8).‖155 Therefore, when we consider the long life of Job, the book covers a time between 1657 B.C.E. and 1473 B.C.E., the year they entered the Promised Land, and the death of Moses. Thus, Moses penned the book of Job after the death of Job, but just before they entered the Promised Land, of which Moses was not privileged. Job 1:8; 42:16, 17.
152
c. is an abbreviation for circa (used before dates) to indicate that it is approximate or estimated 153 David S. Dockery, Trent C. Butler, Christopher L. Church et al., Holman Bible Handbook (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 1992), 312. 154 Geoffrey W. Bromiley, vol. 4, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988; 2002), 959. 155
Chad Brand, Charles Draper, Archie England et al., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003), 924. 319
The book of Job uses a dynamic genuine style of Hebrew poetry, which makes it apparent that it was originally composed in the language of Moses, Hebrew. In addition, the parts that is in what is in prose, language that is not poetry, bear stronger similarity to the Pentateuch than the rest of the Bible. Once Moses turned forty, he would spend the next forty years of his life in Midian, which was located not too far from Uz, the homeland of Job. While there for four decades, Moses could have gained the details that went into the writing of Job. Moses would later pass by Job‘s homeland while the Israelites were wondering in the wilderness for forty years, at which point, he could have obtained the details that concluded the book. Job‘s trial was about 1613 B.C.E., and he lived for 140-years after the trial, meaning his death was about 1473 B.C.E., the very year the Israelites entered the Promised Land. The supernatural forces that afflict Job and his family, as well as the poetic form in 39 out of 42 chapters of Job give some scholars their justification to question Job as a real historical person. Job is thought to be a fictional character, which is used like an extended parable, to give meaning to those who were in Babylonian captivity. They propose that the book was composed sometime after 537 B.C.E., after their return from exile in Babylon. The reason offered for such a late date of composition is that there are frequent loan words from Aramaic, as well as pure monotheism in the mindset of the five persons, involved in the interchange, within the story of Job. 320
It should be observed that the person who makes such propositions is under the weight of defending his or her position, and the Christian needs to leave that weight to them, making them do the work that they thought was going to be on us, by their offering up an accusation such as this. However, for now, we will offer an answer to such a skeptical theory of a fictional person, written almost a thousand years after its actual date of being written. Thus, there is ample evidence to establish Job as a real historical person, as well the details of his life. We begin with the fact that if we look to verse one of the book of Job, it clearly states that Job actually existed. There are no literary suggestions as to other than, we are dealing with real history. Job 1:1 English Standard Version (ESV) There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil. 1
As was stated, the author, Moses, wrote in such a matter of fact way, being no different from other places within Scripture that is taken as being historically true. 1 Samuel 1:1 English Standard Version (ESV) There was a certain man of Ramathaim-zophim of the hill country of Ephraim whose name was Elkanah the son of Jeroham, son of Elihu, son of Tohu, son of Zuph, an Ephrathite. 1
Luke 1:5 English Standard Version (ESV) In the days of Herod, king of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, of the division of Abijah. And he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 5
If we are taking the other statements within Scripture, such as those found in 1 Samuel and Luke, as well as elsewhere, as being historical, it only seems reasonable that we give Job the same consideration. Other portions of Scripture rise up, as a witness to Job being a real historical person. Ezekiel 14:14, 20, Job is named by God along with Daniel and Noah as examples of righteous ones. In the book of James (5:11), there is a reference to job as an example of patience in the midst of difficult times. If Job were not a real historical person, it would invalidate God or James using him as such, making these verses meaningless. Ezekiel 14:14, 20 English Standard Version (ESV) even if these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it [Israel], they would deliver but their own lives by their righteousness, declares the Lord GOD. 20even if Noah, Daniel, and Job were in it, as I live, declares the Lord GOD, they would deliver neither son nor daughter. They would deliver but their own lives by their righteousness. 14
James 5:11 English Standard Version (ESV)
321
Behold, we consider those blessed who remained steadfast. You have heard of the steadfastness of Job, and you have seen the purpose of the Lord, how the Lord is compassionate and merciful. 11
In Ezekiel, the reader discovers God confirming Job as being just as historical as either Noah or Daniel. If one argued that Job was only a mythological character, this would throw a shadow of doubt on Noah and Daniel as well. Worse still, it could be suggested that even God was deceived as to Job‘s historicity, by his use of him as a real historical character, while the modern-day critic got it right! To discount Job because of the debate between Jehovah and Satan the Devil at outset of the book is no reason for discounting the book as historical. If this were case, how are we to handle the gospels of Matthew and Luke, with their giving us temptation and conversation between Jesus Christ and Satan the Devil? As to linguistic argument, Bible scholar Gleason L. Archer penned the following:
the the the the
The linguistic argument based on the presence of terms more characteristic of Aramaic than Hebrew is tenuous indeed. The Aramaic language was evidently known and used in North Arabia for a long period of time. The numerous first-millennium inscriptions of the North Arabian Nabateans are almost invariably written in Aramaic, and commercial relations with Aramaic-speaking peoples probably began before 2000 B.C. Jacob‘s father-in-law, Laban, was certainly Aramaic speaking (cf. Gen. 31:47). Commercial contacts with the great Syrian center of Ebla were very extensive as early as 2400 B.C. (though the Eblaites themselves seem to have spoken an Amorite dialect, rather than Aramaic). Furthermore, it should be pointed out that the extent of Aramaic influence has been somewhat overrated. A. Guillaume (―The Unity of the Book of Job,‖ Annual of Leeds University, Oriental Sec. 14 [1962–63]: 26– 27) has convincingly argued that there are no demonstrable Aramaisms in the speeches of Elihu (Job 32–37), which reputedly have the highest incidence of them. He contends that nearly all of them are terms existing in Arabic that happen to have cognates in Aramaic as well. He deals with no less than twenty-five examples of this, citing the Arabic originals in every case. Since the setting of the narrative is in Uz, located somewhere in North Arabia, this admixture of Arabic and Aramaic vocabulary is exactly what should be expected in the text of Job, whether it was originally composed in Hebrew (which is rather unlikely), or whether it was translated out of an earlier text written in the language prevalent in North Arabia during the pre-Mosaic period.156 Having considered the above evidence, there is no alternative, but to accept the book of Job as a historical work, with real historical persons, and historical events 156
Gleason L. Archer, New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Zondervan's Understand the Bible Reference Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982), 236.
322
between 1657 B.C.E. and 1473 B.C.E. Thus, Jehovah God used this historical hero, in the same way He used Noah and Daniel. The same holds true for James use of Job as an example of how we should react when under difficult times. From James, we learn that Jehovah God was ‗compassionate and merciful to Job,‘ extending his life, restoring his health, and giving him more children. This is hardly possible if Job were a fictional character.
Bibliography Alden, Robert L. Job, The New American Commentary, vol. 11 . Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001. Archer, Gleason L. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982. Brand, Chad, Charles Draper, and England Archie. Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary: Revised, Updated and Expanded. Nashville, TN: Holman, 2003. Bromiley, Geoffrey W. International Stndard Bible Encyclopedia: A-D. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979. Geisler, Norman L., and Thomas Howe. The Big Book of Bible Difficulties. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1992.
323
CHAPTER 30 DANIEL MISJUDGED You have a critical body that has formulated an opinion of the Bible, especially prophetic books, long before they have ever looked into the evidence. The liberal critical scholar is antisupernatural in their mindset. In other words, any book that would claim to have predicted events hundreds of years in advance are simply misrepresenting itself, as that foreknowledge is impossible. Therefore, the book must have been written after the events, yet written in such a way, as to mislead the reader that it was written hundreds of years before. This is exactly what these critics say we have in the book of Daniel. However, what do we know about the person and the book itself? Daniel is known historically as a man of uprightness in the extreme. The book that he penned has been regarded highly for thousands of years. The context within says that it is authentic and true history, penned by Daniel, a Jewish prophet, who lived in the seventh and sixth centuries B.C.E. The chronology within the book shows that it covers the time period of 616 to 536 B.C.E., being completed by the latter date. For instance, The New Encyclopædia Britannica acknowledges that the book of Daniel was once ―generally considered to be true history, containing genuine prophecy.‖ However, the Britannica asserts that in truth, however, Daniel ―was written in a later time of national crisis—when the Jews were suffering severe persecution under [Syrian King] Antiochus IV Epiphanes.‖ The encyclopedia dates the book between 167 and 164 B.C.E. Britannica goes on to assert that the writer of the book of Daniel does not prophesy the future but merely presents ―events that are past history to him as prophecies of future happenings.‖ How does a book and a prophet that has enjoyed centuries of a reputable standing, garner such criticism? It actually began just two-hundred years after Christ, with Porphyry, a philosopher, who felt threatened by the rise of Christianity. His way of dealing with this new religion, was to pen fifteen books to undercut it, the twelfth being against Daniel. In the end, Porphyry labeled the book a forgery, saying that it was written by a second-century B.C.E. Jew. Comparable attacks came in the 18th and 19th centuries. German scholars, who were prejudiced against the supernatural, are the ones who started modern objections to the Book of Daniel. As has been stated numerous times in this section, the higher critics and rationalists start with the presupposition that foreknowledge of future events is an impossibility. As was stated earlier in the chapter on Isaiah, the important truth for the Bible critic is the understanding that in all occurrences, prophecy pronounced or written in Bible times meant something to the people it was spoken or written to; it was meant to serve as guidance for them if they heeded its counsel. Frequently, it had specific fulfillment in that time, in many examples, being fulfilled throughout the lifetime of that very generation. This is actually true; the words always had some application to the very people who 324
heard them. However, the application could be a process of events, starting with the moral condition of the people in their relationship with Jehovah God, which precipitates the prophetic events that are about to unfold, even those prophetic events that are centuries away. Having said that, it must be noted that both Daniel and Isaiah are both prophetic books, but Daniel is also known as an apocalyptic book, as is the book of Revelation. This is not to say that Isaiah does not contain some apocalyptic sections (e.g., Isa 24–27; 56–66) What is assumed by the critical scholar is that there is a rule that a prophet is understood in his day, to be only speaking of the immediate concerns of the people. They are looking at it more like a proclamation, instead of a future event that could be centuries away. Before addressing this concern, let us define apocalyptic for the reader: Apocalyptic. Term derived from a Greek word meaning ―revelation,‖ and used to refer to a pattern of thought and to a form of literature, both dealing with future judgment (eschatology). Two primary patterns of eschatological thought are found in the Bible, both centered in the conviction that God will act in the near future to save his people and to punish those who oppress them. In prophetic eschatology, the dominant form in the OT, God is expected to act within history to restore man and nature to the perfect condition which existed prior to man‘s fall. Apocalyptic eschatology, on the other hand, expects God to destroy the old imperfect order before restoring the world to paradise.
Origins of Apocalypticism. In Israel, apocalyptic eschatology evidently flourished under foreign domination. From the early 6th century B.C., prophetic eschatology began to decline and apocalyptic eschatology became increasingly popular. The Book of Daniel, written during the 6th century B.C., is the earliest example of apocalyptic literature in existence. 157 The problem with the modern critic is that he is attempting to look at the Biblical literature through the modern-day mindset. His first error is to believe that a prophetic book was viewed only as a proclamation of current affairs. The Jewish people viewed all prophetic literature just as would be expected, as a book of prophecy. The problem today is that many are not aware of the way they viewed the prophetic literature. While we do not have the space to go into the genre of prophecy and apocalyptic literature
157
Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1988), 122. 325
extensively, it is recommended that you see Dr. Stein‘s book in the bibliography at the end of the chapter.
Some rules for prophecy: One needs to identify the beginning and end of the prophecy. The reader needs to find the historical setting. The Bible is a diverse book when it comes to literary styles: narrative, poetic, prophetic, and apocalyptic; also containing parables, metaphors, similes, hyperbole, and other figures of speech. Too often, these alleged errors are the result of a reader taking a figure of speech as literal, or reading a parable as though it is a narrative. Many alleged inconsistencies disappear by simply looking at the context. Taking words out of context can distort their meaning. Determine if the prophet is foretelling the future. On the other hand, is he simply proclaiming God‘s will and purpose to the people. (If prophetic, has any portion of it been fulfilled?) The concept of a second fulfillment should be set aside in place of implications. Does the New Testament expound on this prophecy? The reader needs to slow down and carefully read the account, considering exactly what is being said. The Bible student needs to understand the level that the Bible intends to be exact in what is written. If Jim told a friend that 650 graduated with him from high school in 1984, it is not challenged, because it is all too clear that he is using rounded numbers and is not meaning to be exactly precise. Unexplained does not equal unexplainable. Digging into the ancient Jewish mindset, we find that it is dualistic. It views all of God‘s creation, either on the side of God or Satan. Further, the Jewish mind was determined that regardless of how bad things were, God would come to the rescue of his people. The only pessimistic thinking was their understanding that there had to be a major catastrophe that precipitated the rescue. In combining this way of thinking, they believed that there are two systems of things: (1) the current wicked one that man lives in, and (2) the one that is to come, where God will restore things to the way it was before Adam and Eve sinned. Jehovah impressed upon his people, to see His rescue as imminent. The vision that comes to Daniel in the book of Daniel and John in the book of Revelations, comes in one of two ways: (1) in a dreamed vision state or (2) the person in vision is caught up to heaven and shown what is to take place. Frequently, Isaiah, Daniel and John did not understand the vision; they were simply to pen what they saw. (Isa 6:9-10; 8:16; 29:9-14; 44:18; 53:1; Dan 8:15–26; 9:20–27; 10:18–12:4; Rev 7:13–17; 17:7–18) The people readily recognized the symbolism in most prophetic literature, and the less common symbolisms in apocalyptic literature were far more complex, which by design, heighten the desire to interpret and understand them. There are two very important points to keep in mind: (1) some were not meant to be understood fully at the 326
time, and (2) only the righteous ones would have insight into these books, while the wicked would refuse to understand the spiritual things. Daniel 8:26-27 (English Standard Version) The vision of the evenings and the mornings that has been told is true, but seal up the vision, for it refers to many days from now." 26
And I, Daniel, was overcome and lay sick for some days. Then I rose and went about the king‘s business, but I was appalled by the vision and did not understand it. 27
Daniel 10:14 (English Standard Version) and came to make you understand what is to happen to your people in the latter days. For the vision is for days yet to come." 14
Daniel 12:3-4 (English Standard Version) And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever. 4But you, Daniel, shut up the words and seal the book, until the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase." 3
Daniel 12:9-10 (English Standard Version) He said, "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are shut up and sealed until the time of the end. 10Many shall purify themselves and make themselves white and be refined, but the wicked shall act wickedly. And none of the wicked shall understand, but those who are wise shall understand. 9
2 Corinthians 4:3-4 (English Standard Version) And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing. 4In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. 3
One of the principles of interpreting prophecy is to understand judgment prophecies. If a prophet declares judgment on a people, and they turn around from their bad course, the judgment may be lifted, which does not negate the trueness of the prophetic judgment message. There was simply a change in circumstances. There is a principle that most readers are not aware of: Jeremiah 18:7-8 (English Standard Version) If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, 8and if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I intended to do to it. 7
Another principle that needs to be understood is the language of prophecy. It uses imagery that is common to the people, with the exception of the highly apocalyptic literature. One form of imagery is the cosmic.
327
Isaiah 13:9-11 (English Standard Version) Behold, the day of the LORD comes, cruel, with wrath and fierce anger, to make the land a desolation and to destroy its sinners from it. For the stars of the heavens and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be dark at its rising, and the moon will not shed its light. I will punish the world for its evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; I will put an end to the pomp of the arrogant, and lay low the pompous pride of the ruthless. 9
It is often assumed that this sort of imagery is talking about the end of the world, and this just is not always the case. Using Isaiah 13 as our example, it is talking about a pronouncement against Babylon, not the end of the world, as can be seen in verse 1. This type of terminology is a way of expressing that God is acting in behalf of man. At times figurative language can come across as contradicting to the modern-day reader. For example, in chapter 21 of Revelation the walls of Jerusalem are described as being 200 feet thick. The walls are an image of safety and security for the New Jerusalem. However, in verse 25 we read that the gates are never shut. This immediate leads to the question of why have walls that cannot be penetrated, and then leave the gates open? Moreover, if gates are the weakest point to defend, why have twelve of them (vs. 12)? To the modern militaristic mind, this comes off as contradictory, but not to the JewishChristian mind of the first-century. Both present the picture of safety. It is so safe that you can leave the gates open. What about the idea of a ―fuller meaning‖ that the prophet was not aware of? As we saw in the above that there would be symbolism meant for a day far into the future, but generally speaking, most prophets proclaimed a message that was applicable to their day, and implications for another day. Dr. Robert Stein addresses this issue: There are times when a prophetic text appears to have a fulfillment other than what the prophet himself apparently expected. (The following are frequently given as examples: Matt. 1:22–23; 2:15, 17–18; John 12:15; 1 Cor. 10:3–4.) Is it possible that a prophecy may have a deeper meaning or ―fuller‖ sense than the prophet envisioned? . . . Rather than appealing to a ―fuller sense‖ distinct and different from that of the biblical author, however, it may be wiser to see if the supposed sensus plenior is in reality an implication of the author‘s conscious meaning. Thus, when Paul in 1 Corinthians 9:9 quotes Deuteronomy 25:4 (―do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain‖) as a justification for ministers of the gospel living off the gospel, this is not a ―fuller‖ meaning of the text unrelated to what the author sought to convey. Rather, it is a legitimate implication of the willed pattern of meaning contained in Deuteronomy 25:4. If as a principle animals should be allowed to share in the benefits of their work, how much more should the ―animal‖ who is made in the image of God and proclaims the Word of God be allowed to share in the benefits of that work! Thus, what Paul is saying is not a fuller and different meaning from what the writer of Deuteronomy meant. On the contrary, although this specific implication was unknown to him, it is part of his conscious and 328
willed pattern of meaning. Perhaps such prophecies as Matthew 1:22–23 and 2:15 are best understood as revealing implications of the original prophecies in Isaiah 7:14 and Hosea 11:1. Whereas in Isaiah‘s day the prophet meant that a maiden would give birth to a son who was named ―Immanuel,‖ that willed meaning also allows for a virgin one day to give birth to a son who would be Immanuel. Whereas God showed his covenantal faithfulness by leading his ―son,‖ his children, back from Egypt to the promised land in Moses‘ day so also did he lead his ―Son,‖ Jesus, back from Egypt to the promised land. 158 Getting back to Daniel, we can clearly see that his book is prophetic and the only Old Testament apocalyptic book at that, which makes him a special target for the Bible critic. The critic has deemed that Daniel did not pen the book that bears his name, but another did centuries later.159 These attacks have become such a reality that most scholars accept the late date of 165 B.C.E., by a pseudonym. As we have learned throughout this book, it is never the majority that establishes something as being true. It is the evidence. If the evidence proves that Daniel did not write the book, then the words are meaningless, and the hope that it contains is not there. For example, take the allegation made in The Encyclopedia Americana: ―Many historical details of the earlier periods [such as that of the Babylonian exile] have been badly garbled‖ in Daniel. Really? We will take up three of those alleged mistakes.
Claims That Belshazzar Is Missing From History Daniel 5:1; 5:11; 5:18; 5:22; 5:30 (English Standard Version) King Belshazzar made a great feast for a thousand of his lords and drank wine in front of the thousand. 1
There is a man in your kingdom in whom is the spirit of the holy gods. In the days of your father, light and understanding and wisdom like the wisdom of the gods were found in him, and King Nebuchadnezzar, your father—your father the king—made him chief of the magicians, enchanters, Chaldeans, and astrologers, 11
O king, the Most High God gave Nebuchadnezzar your father kingship and greatness and glory and majesty. 18
158
Robert H. Stein, A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1994), 97. 159
Some Bible critics attempt to lessen the charge of forgery by saying that the writer used Daniel as a false name (pseudonym), just as some ancient noncanonical books were written under assumed names. In spite of this, the Bible critic Ferdinand Hitzig held: ―The case of the book of Daniel, if it is assigned to any other [writer], is different. Then it becomes a forged writing, and the intention was to deceive his immediate readers, though for their good.‖ 329
And you his son, Belshazzar, have not humbled your heart, though you knew all
22
this,
That very night Belshazzar the Chaldean king was killed.
30
In 1850 German scholar Ferdinand Hitzig said in a commentary on the book of Daniel, confidently declaring that Belshazzar was ―a figment of the writer‘s imagination.‖160 His reasoning was that Daniel was missing from history, only found in the book of Daniel itself. Does this not seem a bit premature? Is it so irrational to think that a person might not be readily located by archaeology, a brand new field at the time, especially from a period that was yet to be fully explored? Regardless, in 1854, there was a discovery of some small cylinders in the ancient city of Babylon and Ur, southern Iraq. The cuneiform documents were from King Nabonidus, and they included a prayer for ―Belshazzar my firstborn son, the offspring of my heart.‖ This discovery was a mere four years after Hitzig made his rash judgment. Of course, not all critics would be satisfied. H. F. Talbot making the statement, ―This proves nothing.‖ The charge by Talbot was the Belshazzar was likely a mere child, but Daniel has him as being king. Well, this critical remark did not even stay alive as long as Hitzig‘s had. Within the year, more cuneiform tablets were discovered, this time they stated he had secretaries, as well as a household staff. Obviously, Belshazzar was not a child! However, more was to come, as other tablets explained that Belshazzar was a coregent king while Nabonidus was away from Babylon for years at a time.161 One would think that the critic would concede. Still disgruntled, some argued that the Bible calls Belshazzar, the son of Nebuchadnezzar, not the son of Nabonidus. Other suggests that Daniel nowhere mentions Nabonidus. Once again, both arguments are dismantled with a deeper observation. Nabonidus married the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, making Belshazzar the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar. Both Hebrew and Aramaic language do not have words for ―grandfather‖ or ―grandson‖; ―son of‖ also means ―grandson of‖ or even ―descendant of.‖ (See Matthew 1:1.) Moreover, the account in Daniel does infer that Belshazzar is the son of Nabonidus. When the mysterious handwriting was on the wall, the horrified Belshazzar offered the third place in his kingdom, to whoever could interpret it. (Daniel 5:7) The observant reader will notice that Nabonidus held first place in the kingdom, while Daniel held the second place, leaving the third place for the interpreter.
Darius the Mede
160
Das Buch Daniel. Ferdinand Hitzig. Weidman (Leipzig) 1850. When Babylon fell, Nabonidus was away. Therefore, Daniel was correct that Belshazzar was the king at that time. Critic still try to cling to their Bible difficulty by stating that no secular records state Belshazzar was a king. When will they quit with this quibbling. Even governs in the Ancient Near East were stated as being kings at times. 161
330
One would think that the critic would have learned his lesson from Belshazzar. However, this is just not the case. Daniel 5:31 reads: ―and Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.‖ Here again, the critical scholar argues that Darius does not exist, as he has never been found in secular or archaeological records. Therefore, The New Encyclopædia Britannica declares that this Darius is ―a fictitious character.‖ There is no doubt that in time; Darius will be unearthed by archaeology, just as Belshazzar has. There is initial information that allows for inferences already. Cuneiform tablets have been discovered that shows Cyrus the Persian did not take over as the ―King of Babylon‖ directly after the conquest. Rather he carried the title ―King of the Lands.‖162 W. H Shea suggests: ―Whoever bore the title of ‗King of Babylon‘ was a vassal king under Cyrus, not Cyrus himself.‖ Is it possible that Darius is simply a title of a person that was placed in charge of Babylon? Some scholars suggest a man named Gubaru was the real Darius. Secular records do show that Cyrus appointed Gubaru as governor over Babylon, giving him considerable power. Looking to the cuneiform tablets again, we find that Cyrus appointed subgovernors over Babylon. Fascinatingly, Daniel notes that Darius selected 120 satraps to oversee the kingdom of Babylon.—Daniel 6:1. We should realize that archaeology is continuously bringing unknown people to light all the time, and in time, it may shed more light on Darius. However, for now, and based on the fact that many Bible characters have been established, it is a little ridiculous to consider Darius as ―fictitious,‖ worse still to view the whole of the book of Daniel as a fraud. In fact, it is best to see Daniel as a person, who was right there in the midst of that history, giving him access to more court records.
King Jehoiakim Daniel 1:1 (English Standard Version) In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it. 1
Jeremiah 25:1 (English Standard Version) The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah (that was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon), 1
Jeremiah 46:2 (English Standard Version) About Egypt. Concerning the army of Pharaoh Neco, king of Egypt, which was by the river Euphrates at Carchemish and which Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon defeated in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah: 2
162
This evidence is found in royal titles in economic texts, which just so happens to date to the first two years of Cyrus‘ rule. 331
The Bible critic finds fault with Daniel 1:1 as it is not in harmony with Jeremiah, who says ―in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah (that was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon).‖ The Bible student that looks a little deeper will find that there is really no contradiction at all. Pharaoh Necho first made Jehoiakim king in 628 B.C.E. Three years would pass before Nebuchadnezzar succeeded his father as King in Babylon, in 624 B.C.E. In 620 B.C.E., Nebuchadnezzar conquered Judah and made Jehoiakim the subordinate king under Babylon. (2 Kings 23:34; 24:1) Therefore, it is all about the perspective of the writer and where he was when penning his book. Daniel wrote from Babylon; therefore, Jehoiakim‘s third year would have been when he was made a subordinate king to Babylon. Jeremiah on the other hand, wrote from Jerusalem, so he is referring to when Jehoiakim was made a subordinate king under Pharaoh Necho. This so-called discrepancy really just adds more weight to the fact that it was Daniel, who penned the book bearing his name. In addition, it must be remembered that Daniel had Jeremiah‘s book with him. (Daniel 9:2) Therefore, we are to believe that Daniel was this clever forger, and at the same time, he would contradict the well-known book of Jeremiah, especially in verse 1.
Positive Details There are many details in the book of Daniel itself, which give credence to its authenticity. For example, Daniel 3:1-6 tells us the Nebuchadnezzar set up a huge image of gold, to have his people worship. Archaeology has found evidence that credits Nebuchadnezzar with attempts to involve the people more in nationalistic and religious practices. Likewise, Daniel addresses Nebuchadnezzar‘s arrogant attitude about his many construction plans. (Daniel 4:30) It is not until modern-day archaeology uncovered evidence that we now know Nebuchadnezzar was the one who did much of the building in Babylon. Moreover, his boastful attitude is made quite evident by his having his name stamped on the bricks. This would have not been something a forger from 167-63 B.C.E. would know about. The writer of Daniel was very familiar with the differences between Babylonian and Med-Persian law. The three friends of Daniel were thrown into the fiery furnace for disobeying the Babylonian law. While Daniel decades later under Persian law, was thrown into a lion‘s pit for violating the law. (Daniel 3:6; 6:7-9) Archaeology has again proven to be a great help, for they have uncovered an actual letter that shows the fiery furnace was a form of punishment. However, the Medes and Persians would have not used this form of punishment; as fire was sacred to them. Thus, they had other forms of capital punishment. Another piece of inside knowledge is that Nebuchadnezzar passed and changed laws as he pleased. Darius on the other hand was unable to change a law once it was passed, even one that he himself had commissioned. (Daniel 2:5, 6, 24, 46-49; 3:10, 11, 29; 6:1216) Historian John C. Whitcomb writes: ―Ancient history substantiates this difference between Babylon, where the law was subject to the king, and Medo-Persia, where the king was subject to the law.‖ 332
Daniel 5:1-4 (English Standard Version) King Belshazzar made a great feast for a thousand of his lords and drank wine in front of the thousand. 2Belshazzar, when he tasted the wine, commanded that the vessels of gold and of silver that Nebuchadnezzar his father had taken out of the temple in Jerusalem be brought, that the king and his lords, his wives, and his concubines might drink from them. 3Then they brought in the golden vessels that had been taken out of the temple, the house of God in Jerusalem, and the king and his lords, his wives, and his concubines drank from them. 4They drank wine and praised the gods of gold and silver, bronze, iron, wood, and stone. 1
Archaeology has substantiated these kinds of feasts. The fact that stands out is the mention of women being present at the feast, the ―wives, and his concubines‖ were present as well. Such an idea would have been repugnant to the Greeks and Jews of 16767 B.C.E. era. This may very well be why the Greek Septuagint version of Daniel removed the mention of these women.163 This so-called forger of Daniel would have live during this same time of the Septuagint.
Do External Factors Prove Daniel Is A Forgery? One of the most common arguments against the book of Daniel involves its place in the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures. The ancient rabbis arranged the books of the Hebrew Scriptures in three groups: the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. They listed Daniel, not among the Prophets, but among the Writings. This means, the critics argue, that the book must have been unknown at the time when the works of the other prophets were collected. It is grouped among the Writings supposedly because these were collected later. 22
Nevertheless, not all Bible researchers agree that the ancient rabbis divided the canon in such a rigid manner or that they excluded Daniel from the Prophets. But even if the rabbis did list Daniel among the Writings, would this prove that it was written at a later date? No. Reputable scholars have suggested a number of reasons why the rabbis might have excluded Daniel from the Prophets. For instance, they may have done so because the book offended them or because they viewed Daniel himself as distinct from other prophets in that he held secular office in a foreign land. In any case, what really matters is this: The ancient Jews had deep regard for the book of Daniel and held it to be canonical. Moreover, the evidence suggests that the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures was closed long before the second century B.C.E. Later additions were simply not allowed, including some books written during the second century B.C.E. 23
Ironically, one of these rejected later works has been used as an argument against the book of Daniel. The apocryphal book Ecclesiasticus, by Jesus Ben Sirach, was evidently composed about 180 B.C.E. Critics like to point out that Daniel is omitted from the book‘s long list of righteous men. They reason that Daniel must have been unknown at the time. This argument is widely accepted among scholars. But consider this: The 24
163
Hebrew scholar C. F. Keil writes of Daniel 5:3: “The LXX. have here, and also at ver. 23, omitted mention of the women, according to the custom of the Macedonians, Greeks, and Romans.”
333
same list omits Ezra and Mordecai (both of whom were great heroes in the eyes of postexilic Jews), good King Jehoshaphat, and the upright man Job; of all the judges, it names only Samuel.164 Because such men are omitted from a list that makes no claim to be exhaustive, occurring in a noncanonical book, must we dismiss all of them as fictitious? The very notion is preposterous.
Sources in Favor of Daniel Ezekiel‘s references to Daniel must be considered one of the strongest arguments for a sixth-century date. No satisfactory explanation exists for the use of the name Daniel by the prophet Ezekiel other than that he and Daniel were contemporaries and that Daniel had already gained notoriety throughout the Babylonian Empire by the time of Ezekiel‘s ministry. 165 We have in chapter 9 a series of remarkable predictions which defy any other interpretation but that they point to the coming of Christ and His crucifixion ca. A.D. 30, followed by the destruction of the city of Jerusalem within the ensuing decades. In Dan. 9:25–26, it is stated that sixty-nine heptads of years (i.e., 483 years) will ensue between a ―decree‖ to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, and the cutting off of Messiah the Prince. In 9:25– 26, we read: ―Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks.… And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.‖166
The Greatest Evidence for Daniel First of all, we have the clear testimony of the Lord Jesus Himself in the Olivet discourse. In Matt. 24:15, He refers to ―the abomination of desolation, spoken of through [dia] Daniel the prophet.‖ The phrase ―abomination of desolation‖ occurs three times in Daniel (9:27; 11:31; 12:11). If these words of Christ are reliably reported, we can only conclude that He believed the historic Daniel to be the personal author of the prophecies containing this phrase. No other interpretation is possible in the light of the preposition dia, which refers to personal agency. It is significant 164
The apostle Paul’s inspired list of faithful men and women mentioned in Hebrews chapter 11, by contrast, does seem to allude to events recorded in Daniel. (Daniel 6:16-24; Hebrews 11:32, 33) However, the apostle’s list is not exhaustive either. There are many, including Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, who are not named in the list, but this hardly proves that they never existed. 165
Stephen R. Miller, vol. 18, Daniel, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001), 42-43. 166
Gleason Leonard Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 3rd. ed.]. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1998), 445. 334
that Jesus regarded this ―abomination‖ as something to be brought to pass in a future age rather than being simply the idol of Zeus set up by Antiochus in the temple, as the Maccabean theorists insist.167 While this has certainly been an overview of the evidence in favor of the authenticity of Daniel, there will never be enough to satisfy the critic. One professor at Oxford University wrote: ―Nothing is gained by a mere answer to objections, so long as the original prejudice, ‗there cannot be supernatural prophecy,‘ remains.‖ What does this mean? It means that the critic is blinded by his prejudice. However, God has given them that free will choice. The Bible critics are ever so vigilant today. They are more prepared than most Christians, and witness about their doubts far more than your average Christian witnesses about his or her faith are. For those that enjoyed these overview chapters, it is highly recommended that you look into some of the recommended books, as well as those listed in the bibliographies. 1 Peter 3:15 (English Standard Version) but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, 15
167
Gleason Leonard Archer, A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, 3rd. ed.]. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1998), 444. 335
Bibliography Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody, 1994. Harrison, R. K. Introduction to the Old Testament. Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 2004. Lasor, William Sanford, David Allan Hubbard, and Frederic Williams Bush. The Message, Form, and Background of the Old Testament: Old Testament Survey (2nd ed.). Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1996.
336
PART 5 BASICS OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM CHAPTER 31 TEXTUAL CRITICISM: THE FUNDAMENTALS TEXTUAL CRITICISM is both an art and a science. It is a science because it has principles or guidelines that must be followed. Additionally, it is an art because it is all about balance in applying those principles. It is the careful comparison of all known original language manuscripts (including lectionaries) and versions of the Bible in other languages (for example, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and Armenian), as well as patristic quotations in order to determine the original reading. This would include the elimination of any additions that may have crept into the text, as well as restoring any portion removed by accident or knowing that rightly belongs in the text. This work is often referred to as ―lower criticism,‖ which is constructive criticism; it should be set apart from ―higher criticism,‖ which is typically destructive criticism.
An Immense Amount of Manuscripts Today, we have a veritable storehouse of manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures that is the envy of those looking at restoring secular authors of the ancient world. By comparison, a mere handful of manuscripts, represent other ancient writings, and these are centuries removed from their originals. Fifty manuscripts can be attributed to the plays of Aeschylus, with 100 going to Sophocles, a mere one manuscript each to Titus‘ Greek Anthology and Annals, three to Catullus‘ poems, and about 400 spread out to such authors as Euripides, Cicero, Ovid, and Virgil. On the other hand, the New Testament has some 5,700 manuscripts in Greek, 8,000 in Latin, and 1,000 in other languages, giving us a total of close to 15,000 manuscripts. Of course, it needs to be mentioned that many are fragments, although others are a sizeable portion, and some are whole. It must be kept in mind that the 27 books of the Christian Greek Scriptures were originally penned in the latter part of the first century [50–100 C.E.]; with over 100 of these papyrus manuscripts that are extant (still in existence), having been dated between 110 and 300 C.E.
Defining Some Important Terms Before beginning, we should review at least several main terms. Autograph:168 The first written text by the New Testament author, or by the scribe as he was dictated to by the author; the scribe would take it down in shorthand and turn it into a rough draft that would be corrected by both the scribe and author. 168. Many use the terms original and autograph interchangeably; the more technical understanding would be that the autograph would be in a rough form, and after being written or dictated to a scribe, it
337
Original: The text by one of the New Testament writers when it was initially taken down by a scribe or penned by the author. After it was corrected, it would have been used as the first archetype for making copies. Rough Draft: The copy that was created from the shorthand copy taken down by a scribe. This would have been corrected by both the scribe and the author, and the end product will be considered and called the authorized text. Authorized Text (Archetypal Manuscript): A text used to make other copies.169 Exemplar: The authoritative text of a New Testament book from which other copies were made; if in a scriptorium, an archetype; if in a congregation or home, a master-copy. Scriptorium: A room where multiple scribes or even one worked to produce manuscript(s). A lector would read aloud from the exemplar, as the scribe(s) would write down the material. Corrector: One who checked the manuscripts for needed corrections. Corrections could be by three primary persons: (1) the copyist himself, (2) by the official corrector of the scriptorium, and (3) by the person who had purchased the copy. Hand: This refers to the person who is making the copy, distinguishing his level of training. Paleographers have set out four basic levels of handwriting. First, we have the common hand of a person who is untrained in making copies. Second, there is the documentary hand of a person who is trained in preparing documents. Third, there is the reformed documentary hand of a person who is experienced in the preparation of documents and copying literature; and fourth, the professional hand of a person who is a professional scribe.170 Autographs: As most Bible scholars are well aware, but most churchgoers may not be, the autographs, which were penned by the actual Bible writers (Paul, Peter, John, Luke, and so on), or dictated to a scribe by the actual Bible writer, are no longer available. For example, the apostle Paul would have dictated what was to become 1 and 2 Thessalonians to Silas, his scribe, who would have taken things down in shorthand. Afterward, Silas would have created a rough draft from the dictation notes, at which point, he and Paul would have made corrections. Thereafter, Silas would have made a master-copy, which is known as the originally published work, the official copy, from which other copies would be made. The apostle John and others, who penned their own original, would create a published version as well, meaning that there would not be that much difference between the autograph and the original. These were written on perishable materials that soon decayed or were destroyed by enemies within the first two centuries of the Christian era.171 would be reread, and corrections would be made by either or both the scribe and author; thereafter, a copy would be made as the official copy to make other copies, this being known as the authorized text. 169. The authorized text would have been an archetype. 170 The signs he leaves behind quickly identify the professional scribe: such as stichoi markings (the totaling of the number of lines, in relation to his receiving payment for his work)
171. P. W. Comfort, Encountering the Manuscripts (Nashville, Broadman & Holman, 2005), 6–7.
338
Original: As stated above, the originally published work was a master-copy, used to make other copies. Therefore, we can draw comfort from the fact that copies were made while the original was still available. Tertullian (c.160–230 C.E.) was a highly productive writer in defense of Christianity against the heretics of his day as well the author of writings intended to urge or persuade other Christians. In one of his detailed written accounts against heretics he comments on the actual autographs embedded in context as though they were still available: Come now, you who would indulge a better curiosity, if you would apply it to the business of your salvation, run over the apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the apostles are still pre-eminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them severely.172—Emphasis added.
Ancient Manuscripts and Materials Throughout the time period of the first five books of the Bible being penned by Moses (beginning in the late sixteenth century B.C.E.), and down unto the time of the printing press (1455 C.E.), almost 3,000 years, many forms of material have been used to receive writing: bricks, sheets of papyrus, animal skin, broken pottery, metal, wooden tablets with or without wax, and much more.
Stylus: The stylus is used to write on a waxed codex tablet. The stylus could be made of bone, metal, or ivory. It would be sharpened at one end for the purpose of writing and have a rounded knob on the other for making corrections. The stylus could be used to write on wax, soft metal, or clay.
Reed Pen: The reed pen was used with ink to write on papyrus or parchment manuscripts. Καλαμας (Kalamos) is the Greek word for ―pen.‖ (2 John 12; 3 John 13) There is no doubt that all our early extant papyrus manuscripts were copied with a reed pen, which writing has the potential to be impressive and pleasing to the eye. 172. A. Robertson and J. Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, Henrickson publishers, Inc. 1994), Vol. 3, 260.
339
Quill Pen: The quill pen came into use long after the reed pen. Quill would have been unsatisfactory for writing on papyrus, while parchment would have been an excellent surface for receiving writing from a quill pen. Of course, history shows that as parchment more fully displaced papyrus, the quill pen did likewise to the reed pen. The quill was sharpened for use much like that of the reed, by having the tip sharpened and slit.
Papyrus: Papyrus is writing material used by the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans that was made from the pith of the stem of a water plant. It was cut in strips, with one layer being laid out horizontally and the other vertically. Scholarship has suggested that paste may have been used between layers as a type of adhesive, placing a large stone placed on top until dry, creating a sheet of papyrus paper between 6–9 inches in width and 12–15 inches long. These sheets would then be glued from end to end until they had enough length to copy the book they were working on. Writing was done only on the horizontal side and it was rolled so that the writing would be on the 340
inside. As you can visualize, there would be great difficulty, if one were to attempt writing across the vertical side because of the fibers of the papyrus. The scribe or copyist would have used a reed pen to write on the papyrus sheets. (3 John 13) The papyrus plant was the main product used to receive writing until about 300 C.E. It was used with the roll, as well as the codex form. With an introductory book on New Testament textual criticism, the Bible student will discover that the early papyrus manuscripts, such as P45, P46, P47, P52, P66, P73 and P75 (to mention just a few, all date before 300 C.E., from as early as 110 C.E. On the other hand, the manuscripts, like codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus from about 350 C.E. were made with parchment, a creamy or yellowish material made from dried and treated sheepskin, goatskin, or other animal hide. One may wonder why more New Testament manuscripts have not survived. It must be remembered that the Christians suffered horrible persecution off and on for the first 300 years from Pentecost 33 C.E. With this persecution from the Roman Empire came many orders to destroy their texts. In addition, these texts were not stored in such a way as to secure their preservation; they were used by the Christians and in the congregation, and were subject to wear and tear. Furthermore, moisture is the enemy of papyrus, causing them to disintegrate over time. This is why you will discover that the manuscripts that have survived have come from the dry sands of Egypt. Lastly, it never entered the minds of those early Christians to preserve their documents, for their solution was just to make another copy. This coupled with the transition of making copies with a more durable animal skin, which would last much longer. Of those that have survived, especially those from 300 C.E. and earlier, are the path to restoring the original Greek New Testament.173 Animal Skin: About the fourth century C.E., Bible manuscripts made of papyrus began to be superseded by the use of vellum, a high quality parchment made from calfskin, kidskin, or lambskin. Manuscripts such as the famous Codex Sinaiticus ( )אand the Codex Vaticanus (B) of the fourth century C.E. are parchment, or vellum, codices. This use of parchment to receive writing continued for almost a thousand years, until it was replaced by paper. The advantages of parchment over papyrus are many, such as 1) it was much easier to write on smooth parchment, 2) one could write on both sides, 3) parchment lasted much longer, and 4) the old writing could be scraped off and written on yet again.
173. J. H. Greenlee, Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995), 11.
341
Scroll or Roll: The scroll dominated until the beginning of the second century C.E., at which time they were being replaced by the papyrus codex. Papyrus enjoyed another two centuries of use until it was replaced with animal skin (vellum), which proved to be a far better material to receive writing. The writing on the scroll was done in 2- to 3-inch columns, which allowed the reader to have it opened, or unrolled, only partially. Although movies and television have portrayed having the scroll being opened while holding it horizontally, this is not the case; scrolls were opened vertically. For the Greek and Latin reader it would be rolled to the left, as those languages were written left to right. The Jewish lector would roll it to the right, as Hebrew was written right to left. The difficulty of using a scroll should be quite apparent. If you have a long book and attempt to locate a certain section, it would not be user friendly. The ancient saying was: ―A great book, a great evil.‖ An account in the book of Luke tells us: ―And he [Jesus] came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up. And as was his custom, he went to the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and he stood up to read. And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written, ‗The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord‘s favor.‘ And he rolled up the scroll and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on him. And he began to say to them, ‗Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.‘‖ (Luke 4:16–21; Isaiah 61:1, 2)
Codex: The trunk of a tree that bears leaves only at its apex was called a ―caudex.‖ This name would be applied to a tablet of wood that had raised edges, with a coat of wax placed within those raised edges. This dried wax would then be used to receive writing with a stylus. You might compare it to the schoolboy‘s slate such as seen in many Western movies. (Isaiah 8:1) Around the fifth century B.C.E., several of these were being
342
used and attached by strings that were run through its edges. It is because these bound tablets resembled a tree trunk that they were to take on the name codex. As you can imagine, this bulky item also was not user friendly! Sometime later, it would be the Romans who would develop a lighter more flexible material, the parchment notebook, which would fill the need before the development of the later book-form codex. The Latin word membranae (skins) is the name given to such notebooks of parchment. In fact, at 2 Timothy 4:13, the apostle Paul requested of Timothy that he ―bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books [scrolls], and above all the parchments [membranae].‖ One might ask why Paul used a Latin word and in a Latin sense? This would be because there was no Greek word that would serve as an equivalent to what he was requesting. It was only later that the transliterated ―codex‖ was brought into the Greek language as a reference to what we would know as a book.
Handwriting Styles: Greek New Testament manuscripts can be divided into two basic writing styles: uncial and minuscule. The uncial is dated from the first century up unto the ninth century C.E. It is written in all large capital letters, which are written 343
separate from each other. Also, note that there are no breaks between the words. Also, early on, there were few punctuation or accent marks used. The minuscule (cursive) handwriting style began to develop in the sixth century, but did not become the standard script until the ninth century C.E. This running or cursive handwriting style was primarily used early on for non-literary material. These lowercase letters were joined together in a cursive script, and stayed in favor as the standard style until the invention of the printing press in the fifteenth century.
Nomina Sacra [Sacred Names] Nomina Sacra: There are various contractions and abbreviations that are found in our earliest manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures. The type that is most important to this discussion is what has become known as the sacred names, or nomina sacra, such as Jesus, Lord, Christ, God, and Jerusalem. These sacred names are abbreviated by keeping the first letter or two and the last letter or two. Another important feature is the horizontal line placed over these letters to help the reader know that they are dealing with a contraction. Why, how, and when did this distinctive form of writing these fifteen names develop? Was it isolated to a certain area of the Roman Empire? Which of these sacred names came first and which followed thereafter? There are multiple reasons given by the textual scholars in an attempt to answer the above questions; however, I believe that two of these reasons may be combined to provide the best answer. History shows that the early Christians were very much interested in setting themselves apart from the Jews of their day, in an attempt at being a distinct group and not being viewed as a branch or offshoot of Judaism. These early Christians believed that Christ was the new way to God, and that there was a new spiritual Israel, and that the old fleshly Israel had been abandoned and was no longer the way to God. In fact, Jesus had prophesied just that: Matthew 21:42, 43; 23:37, 38 (ESV): Jesus said to them, ―Have you never read in the Scriptures: ‗The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord‘s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes‘? Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.‖ ―O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen 344
gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not! See, your house is left to you desolate.‖ Daniel 9:24–27 covers a prophetic time period during which (1) Jerusalem would be rebuilt, (2) the Messiah would appear and then be cut off, and (3) seven years were allowed for admitting only Jews into the newly founded Christian congregation. Following that period the city as well as the holy place would be made desolate. In short, the prophecy states that it would be 7 weeks (or 49 years)174 from the word going forth to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. This word went forth in 455 B.C.E., and by 406 B.C.E Jerusalem would be rebuilt. The prophecy goes on to state that in an additional 62 weeks (or 434 years) the Messiah would appear and then be cut off. Again, this was the case, because Jesus was baptized in 29 C.E., exactly 483 weeks (or years) from the word going forth to restore and rebuild Jerusalem in 455 B.C.E. However, the prophecy dealt with 490 years, and we have only covered 483 years, leaving seven years. Daniel 9:27 reads: And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator. This seven-year period begins at the end of the other 62 weeks of years, or 483 years. So, while the baptism of Christ in 29 C.E. ends the 483 years, it begins the 70th week, or week of seven years. These seven years would thus run from 29–36 C.E. Of course, all will recognize that Christ put an end to sacrificial offerings by means of his death, bringing the Mosaic Law to nothing. (Romans 10:4; Galatians 4:9–11; Ephesians 2:13–16; Colossians 2:13–16) Again, this amazing prophecy is very precise; at the end of those three and a half years of this seven-year period, the Messiah was cut off in death, bringing the Mosaic Law to an end. So what is this ―strong covenant‖ and who are the ―many‖? The covenant cannot be the Mosaic Law covenant, because that ended in the middle of these seven years, so it must refer to the Abrahamic covenant. Genesis 22:17, 18 (ESV): I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies, and in your offspring shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have obeyed my voice. It is because of this Abrahamic covenant that God continued to bless the Jews throughout this seven year period. From 29–36 C.E. only those of the Hebrew offspring, Samaritans and Jewish proselytes were brought into the Christian congregation. At the 174
. These are not weeks of days, but of years. A number of modern translations help us to appreciate that each week is seven years. For example, “seventy weeks of years” is a rendering indicated by a footnote on Daniel 9:24 in Tanakh—The Holy Scriptures, published by The Jewish Publication Society. An American Translation reads: “Seventy weeks of years are destined for your people and for your holy city.”
345
end of this seven-year period, the apostle Peter preached to an Italian man named Cornelius. His entire household and other Gentiles were baptized into the Christian congregation. This ended the seven years, and from this incident forward people of all the nations were to receive the good news of the Kingdom.―Acts 3:25, 26; 10:1–48; Galatians 3:8, 9, 14. Therefore, there seems to be a combination of two motivations for the inception of the sacred names. Certainly, there would have been a reverence for the sacred name of God in their Hebrew Old Testaments or the Septuagint translations that they used. However, by the end of the first century or the beginning of the second century, the desire to be set apart from the Judaism of their day likely moved them to represent the names God and Jesus in a separate way. One of the earliest Apostolic Fathers, Barnabas, wrote the following in his Epistle: ―For it says: ‗And Abraham circumcised ten and eight and three hundred men of his household.‘ What, then, is the knowledge that was given to him? Observe that it mentions the ‗ten and eight‘ first, and then after an interval the ‗three hundred.‘ As for the ‗ten and eight,‘ the ‗I‘ is ten and the ‗H‘ is eight; thus you have ‗Jesus.‘ And because the cross, which is shaped like the ‗T,‘ was destined to convey grace, it mentions also the ‗three hundred.‘ So he reveals Jesus in the initial two letters and the cross in the latter one.‖175 This allegorical176 way of interpreting the scriptures was quite popular at the time, and has really continued throughout Christianity up until the present. However, for the most part, it was abandoned during the Reformation, and a literal (obvious) understanding was adopted. In other words, the intended meaning is that which the author meant to convey by the words he used, and what he expected his readers to understand by the use of those words. When we say ―literal,‖ we do not mean that we take figurative language literally, as when John speaks of Jesus as being the ―Lamb.‖ (John 1:29) In these cases we seek the literal meaning meant by the use of figurative language. Let us see how Barnabas may have arrived at his allegorical interpretation and determine whether it sheds any light on the origin of the nomina sacra. Genesis 12:7; 22:18 (ASV): And Jehovah appeared unto Abram, and said, [to your] seed will I give this land . . . . And in [your] seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. Because [you have] obeyed my voice. Galatians 3:16, 29 (ASV): Now to Abraham were the promises spoken, and to his seed. [It does not say], And to seeds, as [referring to] many; but as of one, And to [your] seed, which is Christ. And if [you] are Christ‘s, then [you] are Abraham‘s seed, heirs according to promise. The promise had been given to Abraham that all the nation of the earth would be blessed because he had obeyed Jehovah‘s voice. The apostle Paul brings this home, in 175
. It should be noted that Barnabas is using the Septuagint, just as Paul had done and by far most of the references and quotations (900+) in the New Testament come from the Septuagint. However, these same numbers in Hebrew would represent the name Eliezer (Genesis 15:2).—The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, Third Edition, 2007. 176 . Allegory is a method of interpretation that goes beyond the plain meaning of a text.
346
that this seed is Jesus Christ. Yes, Jesus personally says that he is ―the resurrection and the life.‖ (John 11:25) T = 300 I = 10 H=8
First, let me say that we have manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures dating from as early as the beginning of the second century (P4, P64, P67, P32, P46, P66, P75, P90), and manuscripts of the Greek Old Testament done by Christians from as early as the beginning of the second century that contain some form of the nomina sacra.177 Also, there are other early writings of the Christians that contain the nomina sacra.178 179 Again, let us focus our attention on the horizontal supralinear line above these contractions. This alone belongs to the Christians. It should be noted that outside of this, the horizontal line is only used if Greek numbers are represented by letters, having this supralinear line above it. If you look at P. Chester Beatty III (P47), the many numbers of texts in Revelation are characteristically written as letters with the supralinear stroke. Rev 13:18: 666 is written as
177
. P. Chester Beatty VI, Numbers, Deuteronomy; P. Baden 4.56 (P. Heidelberg inv. 8), Exodus and Deuteronomy; P. Antinoopolis 7, Psalms; PSI 921, Psalms; P. Oxyrhynchus 1074, Exodus; P. Chester Beatty Papyrus VIII, Jeremiah; P. Chester Beatty Papyrus IX, Ezekiel, Daniel, Esther. 178 . P. Geneva 253, Christian homily; P. Egerton 2, Unknown Gospel; P. Oxyrhynchus 405, Fragment of Irenaeus; P. Oxyrhynchus 406, Christian homily. 179. P. Comfort, Encounterring the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography and Textual Criticism (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005), 200–203.
347
Looking at Revelation 13:18 as an example of how one might find meaning in numbers, many commentators have given the number ―6‖ the meaning of ―falling short of perfect,‖ while the number ―7‖ is considered to represent perfection. Some have suggested that three is emphatic (6–60–600), arriving at gross imperfection with ―666.‖ Now, with it being a ―man's number,‖ it is taken further to mean mankind that is alienated from God, and thus grossly missing the mark of perfection. Yet, exactly how did Barnabas get there with his understanding of the 318 trained servants of Abraham and what impact may it have had on the convention of the nomina sacra? IH = 18 of Genesis is also a suspension180 for Jesus [Nomen Sacrum] The Hebrew word for life is numerically 18
Jesus, as was expressed in the above, is ―the resurrection and the life.‖ (John 11:25) There has to be a reason for the development of the nomina Sacra with the supralinear line above it. As stated previously, it was used in Greek to tell the reader that the Greek letters were representing numbers. So, the proposition by Larry W. Hurtado,181 regarding the rise of using it over the nomina Sacra is explained as follows: I propose that the suspended form of Jesus' name (IH) was likely the originating device from which the whole scribal practice of the nomina sacra then developed. . . . It is an advantage of this proposal that it 180
. An abbreviation is a way of writing a shortened form of a word. In the Greek manuscripts this took place in four different forms: 1) a contraction in which the first and last letter is kept, while the middle letters are removed (“Dr.”); 2) suspension in which the end of the word is dropped off (“Dec.”); 3) ligatures, where you combine two or more letters (“ff”); and 4) symbols to stand in place of a word (“@” for “at.”). 181. L. W. Hurtado, The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), 115–16.
348
accounts well for features often not otherwise explained. In particular, we have a cogent explanation for the puzzling supralinear stroke that became characteristic in Christian nomina sacra. According to the view advocated here, this mark began its special Christian usage with the writing of Jesus‘ name as IH, and originally functioned in its more familiar capacity as a signal to readers that this two-letter compendium could also be read as a number, eighteen. Then, however, as Christian piety quickly sought to extend a similar scribal treatment to other key designations of God and Jesus. . . . This supralinear stroke came to function as a distinctly Christian device that functioned simply to highlight nomina sacra forms, signaling readers that these various compendia were abbreviations of these words. Ftn: I propose that in its initial usage the IH compendium was read as ―Jesus‖ written in a manner designed also to allude to his significance as a divine vehicle of ―life‖ for believers. The development of the nomina sacra was rather fast and as C. H. Roberts182 phrases it: This ―presupposes a degree of control and organization. . . . The establishment of the practice would not have been left to the whims of a single community, still less to that of an individual scribe. . . . The system was too complex for the ordinary scribe to operate without rules or an authoritative exemplar.‖ Roberts goes on to say that the nomina sacra ―belong to the oldest stratum of the Christian faith and may well be contemporary with the first authorized or authoritative Christian writings.‖183 Roberts had said nine years earlier that ―the markedly uniform system of nomina sacra . . . suggest that at an early date there were standard copies of the Christian scriptures.‖184 The nomina sacra negates the idea that the early copying was somehow free185 and that the copyists were without skills in the task of copying.
Paleography [Dating Manuscripts]
182
. C. H. Roberts, Manuscript, Society, and Belief in Early Christian Egypt (London: Oxford University Press, 1979), 45–46. 183 . This writer and this journal do not accept this last thought as a reality. We would say that it is mere speculation because there are no autographs or originally authoritative copies to make such a claim. There is just as much external and internal evidence to suggest that the authors Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul, James, and Jude would have used the Hebrew Tetragrammaton in texts that reference Jehovah God, in these writers’ quotations and references from the Hebrew Scriptures, for example in Acts 2:21; Romans 10:13; Joel 2:32. 184. C. H. Roberts, “Books in the Graeco-Roman World and in the New Testament” in the Cambridge History of the Bible, Vol. 1, From the Beginnings to Jerome (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), 64. 185 . According to Kurt and Barbara Aland in the Text of the New Testament (1987, 1989, 55– 71, 106) a free text is ‘a text dealing with the original text in a relatively free manner with no suggestion of a program of standardization’ (for example, P45). The Alands are saying that the earliest scribes felt free to alter the text to what they felt, as they “considered themselves filled with the spirit.”
349
This section will serve as an introduction, as chapter 17 will cover this subject indepth. How do textual scholars know that a manuscript dates to the second, third, or fourth century C.E., or to any other century? If you were to pull any book from your bookshelf and turn a few pages in it, you would find the date of publication on the copyright page. If you bought a used book that was missing the copyright page, you would have no idea of when it had been published. It is only because of modern technology that you could date the book. Extant ancient literary manuscripts hardly ever, if at all, had dates on them. However, ancient documentary manuscripts do and this is crucial in our ability to be able to date the undated literary manuscripts. It is by means of the art and science of paleography that we can arrive at an approximate date for when a manuscript was written. Paleographers could be viewed as manuscript detectives; through their knowledge of the writing of ancient texts, its form and its style, we get a reasonably close idea of when a manuscript was copied. As an example, when looking at our modern languages today, we can see that within every generation or two there are subtle changes. That holds true of ancient languages as well. Through painstaking comparison of hundreds of small features within an ancient manuscript, a paleographer can provide us with a date that is within 25 to 50 years on either side of his recommended date. Certain periods can be distinguished by such features as the amount of punctuation within a manuscript, abbreviations, and the amount of spacing between words. There are certain documents such as receipts, letters, leases, and petitions that do contain dates. It is these that have formed a library of letters with the styles that go into making each letter during different time periods.186 On the left is P52, the fragment of John‘s Gospel. If you were to look closely at the actual copy, you would see that this copyist added a little hook or embellishment to his manuscript, for example, a loop or curly line, while also omitting certain marks, incorporating a special type of cross-stroke and rounded stroke of particular letters, which places this fragment into the early part of the second century C.E. While some textual scholars may not agree, there are 14 codices that are now placed within the second century C.E., with another 31 codices that are dated to the third century. These are surely some of the most valuable manuscripts in establishing the original text of the Christian Greek Scriptures. As you have likely noted, each papyrus manuscript is designated with a capital or Gothic P and a superscript numeral by which they are known internationally. While the act of copying the Vaticanus codex itself dates to about 350 C.E., Westcott and Hort argued that the material (the written text, not the handwriting style 187) therein was much earlier, or even original. Let me offer a generic example so we can understand how a manuscript can be dated to 350, and yet at the same time, can be spoken of as 186
. John F. Oates, Alan E. Samuel, and Bradford C. Welles, Yale Papyri in the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library (New Haven, American Society of Papyrologists, 1967), 1:4. 187 . Handwriting styles are different from one time period in comparison to another, and by matching a Greek Christian NT manuscript’s style to a secular manuscript that contains a date, or a known style of a certain period, one can reasonably date an undated NT Greek manuscript.
350
containing a written text itself that is much earlier. Let us say that we have four hypothetical manuscripts: P002 (c.125), P0045 (c.200), P0067 (c.275), and Codex Z (c.325). One feature of dating manuscripts is by the style of handwriting comparison as we explained above, that is, by the way the letters are formed.188 Basically, the paleographer will find other Greek texts that have dates on them and match the handwriting in the text. Imagine that there are ten non-New Testament Greek manuscripts with the date of 100 C.E. on them that match our P002 (c.125). It is best then to date the manuscript up to 25 years in both directions, between 75–150 C.E. Now, setting aside the date of the manuscript as to when it was made, we find that each of these manuscripts will have a written text that is similar to others of that time period. We are not talking about handwriting styles that are used to date the text‘s time of being copied, we are talking about features: the way words are spelled, added material, missing material, notes from correctors, and the like. As a result, say we have our codex Z that dates to 325 because the handwriting style places it at this date, thus being the date it was copied, yet the features, some of which are mentioned above, are not like the other manuscripts of 325, but are exactly the same as those of our earlier P002, dating at 125 C.E. Hence, going to our codex Vaticanus, we would say it dates to being copied about 350 C.E. based on the writing style (form of letters), but its written text (spelling, format, corrections, added/missing material) is earlier, dating to about 150– 200 C.E., because it is almost exactly like P75. 188
. This is called paleography. The textual scholar studies the handwriting style (the form of the letters) of ancient manuscripts. A paleographer must have an extensive knowledge of the different handwriting styles; the more so, the more accurate his dating will be. Philip Wesley Comfort and David P. Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts. A corrected, enlarged ed. of The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House, 2001), S. 24. Handwriting Analysis Paleographers have been able to distinguish four major kinds of handwriting, each of which reveals something about the training (or lack thereof) of the copyist who produced it. The four types are as follows: 1.) Common: The work of a semiliterate writer who is untrained in making documents. This handwriting usually displays an inelegant cursive. 2.) Documentary: The work of a literate writer who has had experience in preparing documents. This has also been called “chancery handwriting” (prominent in the period A.D. 200–225). It was used by official scribes in public administration. 3.) Reformed documentary: The work of a literate writer who had experience in preparing documents and in copying works of literature. Often, this hand attempts to imitate the work of a professional but does not fully achieve the professional look. 4.) Professional: The work of a professional scribe. These writings display the craftsmanship of what is commonly called a “book hand” or “literary hand,” and leave telltale marks of professionalism such as stichoi markings (the tallying of the number of lines, according to which a professional scribe would be paid), as are found in P46. Various handwriting styles are more pronounced in one time period over another and thereby help in dating manuscripts.
351
Ironically, many scholars prior to P75 (published in 1961) felt that Westcott and Hort‘s belief that Vaticanus‘ written text was earlier, perhaps even original, was a bit presumptuous; therefore, these scholars believed that Vaticanus reflected a third- or fourth-century text, from the time of its being copied. However, after the publishing of P75, it was openly acknowledged that they are, in fact, essentially the same, vindicating Westcott and Hort. The Vaticanus itself was copied about 350 C.E., but its written text was from the middle of the second century at least, if not earlier. Hort‘s view, that the Vaticanus is essentially original minus a few discrepancies, is not so farfetched after all.
The Publication of a Book, a Collection, and a Whole of the Greek New Testament First, it must be understood that the synoptic Gospels were published orally for many years before the written text came to market. With many of the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures, you have the author himself penning the book (rough draft), making needed corrections, and then producing the ‗authorized‘ text. From this authorized text, other copies were made. For those authors who dictated their writings, the scribe would take it down initially in shorthand and then create a rough draft to be corrected by the author and himself. From this, the scribe would produce the authorized text for the author to sign in his own hand. After the individual books had been in circulation for a few decades, the community of Christians throughout the Roman Empire started to form collections, such as combined books of the Gospels, and compilations of the apostle Paul‘s letters. These groupings were accomplished by 125 C.E., with the total collection of the 27 books of the Christian Greek Scriptures coming together by 325 C.E. There is no doubt that throughout this process of publishing, copying, collecting, and canonizing of the Christian Greek Scriptures, those involved recognized these writings as being authoritative, no less than the graphē [Scriptures] of the Hebrew Old Testament books.
The Christian Codex A codex is an ancient manuscript that is in book form. In all likelihood, soon after the first century C.E., the Christians developed the use of the codex. Why do we say that it had to be shortly after the first century? For two reasons: 1.) All early manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures were written on codices; some of these dating to the beginning of the second century; 2.) and the apostle John writing the book of Revelation about 96 C.E., closed his book this way: ―I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book [scroll, βιβλιοσ].‖ Why do we say in all likelihood? It should be noted that the apostle Paul wrote Timothy about 65 C.E. and requested he ―bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books [scrolls, biblia, likely of the Old Testament], and above all the parchments [codices, membranas]. (2 Timothy 4:13, ESV) Therefore, the evidence shows that the Christians adopted the codex to preserve their writings of the Greek Scriptures. Evidence from archaeology is quite clear that the finding from classical writers of the second century show less than three percent being in
352
the form of the codex, while 100 percent for their Christian counterpart.189 It is quite likely that the Christian community dropped the scroll in place of the codex so as to set themselves apart from Jews. It is obvious in other ways that they wanted to be separated from the Jewish system of things, but there are other benefits in adopting the codex as well. The codex made it much easier for these early Christians to follow Jesus last command to them to ―go therefore and make disciples of all nations . . . teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.‖ (Matthew 28:19, 20, ESV) Codices in a book form would certainly be more conducive to this commission in that one could have all four Gospels in one book and moving through it to share information would be much easier.
Some Variations Within the Text Manuscript copying prior to the invention of the printing press in 1455 was done by hand. As all are imperfect humans, it was inevitable that some minor mistakes began to creep in to the text. The earliest copyists were accomplishing a far greater task than can be imagined. If you find it difficult to grasp just how difficult, imagine copying 138,020 words in which there are no breaks between words and sentences, and all written in capital letters. This could cause confusion at times, and variants.190 For an English example, consider GODISNOWHERE. Does it read ―God is nowhere‖ or ―God is now here‖? The variations within the Greek manuscripts are not as extensive as some would like you to think (that is, Bart D. Ehrman). As this chapter is a summary, I am not able to go into detail, but I will recommend other publications at the end of this chapter that are written with the purpose correcting Ehrman‘s exaggeration of scribal variations. For now, let us say that we can rate these variations on three different levels: insignificant, significant without effect, and significant. Insignificant: These variations are too small and irrelevant to be considered important. These variants are unintentional blunders that even a professional scribe might make at times: the wrong division of words (because there were no spaces between them), mistaking one letter for another, the scribe‘s eyes moving to a similar ending further down the page (leaving out all in between), writing the same word or letter twice or writing it once when it should have been twice, switching letters or words around, subconsciously substituting a synonym, overlooking an abbreviation and spelling and grammar. To offer an example, we turn to Matthew 1:18. Is it ―the birth of [the] Jesus Christ‖ or ―the birth of the Christ‖ or ―the birth of the Christ Jesus‖ or ―the birth of [the] Jesus‖? Another example can be found at Matthew 27:2. Is it ―Pilate the governor‖ or ―Pontius Pilate the governor‖? Still, another example can be found at Acts 15:40. Is it ―the grace of the Lord‖ or ―the grace of God‖? The insignificant variations are by far the vast majority of variants to be found in our manuscript decision, and we have such 189
. C. H. Roberts and T. C. Skeat, The Birth of the Codex (London: Oxford University Press, 1987), 184–6. 190. Merriam-Webster, Inc: Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Eleventh ed. Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003: var•i•ant ver-ē-ənt adj varying usu. slightly from the standard form 〈variant readings〉〈variant spellings〉
353
evidence that make them so negligible that they are not even mentioned in the footnotes of our study Bibles. Significant Yet Ineffective: What makes these variants ineffective is that we have such strong manuscript evidence that establishing the correct reading is of no concern. Our first example would be the familiar story of the adulterous woman at John 7:53– 8:11. Certainly, so many verses are significant and the story is very old. Almost all modern translations make an effort to highlight the doubt of this story as being original. Why? The adulterous story does not have the support of our earliest and most reliable Greek manuscripts, nor any of the early versions. Another example comes from 1 Timothy 3:16. Is it ―who was manifested in the flesh‖ or ―which was manifested in the flesh‖ or ―God was manifested in the flesh‖? As any reader can see, this one had serious implications for the Trinity doctrine, thus it is significant, but again the manuscript evidence has spoken. Some ambitious scribes changed Ος (―he who‖) to Θς (―God‖). Another intentional alteration that has absolutely no manuscript evidence prior to the fourteenth century of our common era is found at 1 John 5:7: ―The father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.‖ This interpolation is not cited by any of the early Greek Church fathers, not even during the great Trinity controversy of the fourth century C.E. Significant: We will look at only one significant reading here, which is the common long ending of Mark chapter 16, verses 9–20. There are multiple endings for the Gospel of Mark, which it ended abruptly with these words: ―And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.‖ While verses 9–20 are an interpolation to writer of this chapter, it is not so easy for some textual scholars to accept this. For them the evidence is equally strong for and against, unlike our earlier examples. I know that most Bible readers are unable to fully appreciate the evidence in the table below, so it would be most prudent for them to buy out the time to read some of the recommended reading books at the end of this chapter.
EVIDENCE AGAINST MARK 16:9–20 (1) The two best uncial manuscripts, Vatican and Sinaitic, do not contain verses 9–20. (2) Some of the earliest witnesses, such as the Old Syriac and the earliest Latin Vulgate, and many Armenian manuscripts do not contain verses 9–20. (3) There are about 20 terms in verse 9–20 that do not fit Mark‘s style of writing. Some of these are not found in all of the New Testament. (4) Verse 8 does not transition well with verse 9, jumping from the women disciples to Jesus‘ resurrection appearance. Jesus does not need to appear because Mark ended with the announcement that he had. We only want that because the other Gospels give us an appearance. So we expect it.
354
(5) Clement of Alexandra, Origen, and Ammonius show no knowledge of verses 9–20, while other church fathers state that the section is absent from their Greek copies of Mark. (6) The original form of the Eusebian sections make no provision for verses 9–20.
Separated Into Families As a summary, there are four text-types: Alexandrian, Western, Caesarean, and Byzantine. These text-types are based on where they developed. The original penmen were inspired of God, and error free. The copyists were not inspired and errors did show up in the texts as a result. It is these errors that help us to place these texts into certain families. Very early on copies of the originals worked their way to these four major religious centers, and the copying traditions that distinguish these text-types began to take place. The Alexandrian text-type is the earliest and reflects the work of professional and semi-professional scribes who treated the copying process with respect. The text is simple, without added material, and lacking the grammatical stylistic polish of the Byzantine text. The Western text-type is early second century. These manuscripts reflect the work of scribes that were given to paraphrasing. Scribes freely changed words, phrases, clauses, and whole sentences as they felt it necessary. At times, they were simply trying to harmonize the text, or even add apocryphal material to spice it up a bit. The Caesarean text-type is a mixture of Western and Alexandrian readings. The Byzantine text-type shows the hand of scribes that looked to smooth things out in both grammar and style, often with a view to making it easier to understand. These scribes also combined differing readings from other manuscripts that contained variants.
The Corrupt Byzantine Text Becomes the Standard Our focus in this chapter is from 40 C.E. to 325 C.E. However, to round out our understanding of this early history, we need at least a short overview of what happened thereafter. After Constantine legalized Christianity, giving it an equal status with the pagan religions, it was much easier for those having manuscripts copied. In fact, Constantine had ordered 50 copies of the whole of the Bible for the church in Constantinople. Over the next four centuries or so, the Byzantine Empire and the Greekspeaking church were the dominant factor as to why this area saw their text becoming the standard. It had absolutely nothing to do with it being the better text, that is, the more accurate text. From the eighth century forward, the corrupt Byzantine text was the standard text and had displaced all others; it makes up about 95 percent of all manuscripts that we have of the Christian Greek Scriptures. Sadly, after the invention of the Guttenberg printing press in 1455, it would be this Byzantine text that would become our first printed edition by way of Desiderius Erasmus in 1516, so much so that it was to be referred to as the Textus Receptus, or the ―received text.‖ Over the next four centuries, many textual scholars attempted to make minor changes to this inferior text based on the development of the science of textual criticism, but to no real affect on its status as the Greek text of the church. Worse still, it would be this corrupt text that lay at the foundation of all English translations until the Revised 355
English Version of 1881 and the American Standard Version of 1901. It was not until 1881 when two Cambridge scholars, B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, replaced the Textus Receptus with their critical text. It is this critical edition of the Westcott and Hort text that is the foundation for all modern translations and critical editions of the Greek New Testament—UBS4 and the NA27.
356
RECOMMENDED READING Aland, K., and B. Aland. The Text of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. Chadwick, H. The Early Church (Revised Edition). London: Penguin Books, 1993. Colwell, E. C. Scribal Habits in Early Papyri: A Study in the Corruption of the Text. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965. Comfort, P. Encounterring the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography and Textual Criticism. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005. Comfort, P. W. New Testament Text and Translation Commentary. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, 2008. ———. The Quest for the Original Text of the New Testament. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 1992 Comfort, P., and D. Barret. The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001 Ehrman, B. D. Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why. New York: Harper One, 2005 Greenlee, J. H. Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995. ———. The Text of the New Testament. Peabody: Henrickson, 2008. Hurtado, L. W. The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006. Lightfoot, N. R. How We Got the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1963, 1988, 2003. Metzger, B. M. The Text of the New Testament: Its transmission, Corruption, and Transmission. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 1968, 1992. ———. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. New York: United Bible Society, 1994. Metzger, B. The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, & Content. Nashville: Abingdon Books, 1965, 1983, 2003. Richards, E. R. Paul And First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004. Roberts, C. H. Manuscript, Society, and Belief in Early Christian Egypt. London: Oxford University Press, 1979. Roberts, C. H., and T. C. Skeat. The Birth of the Codex. London: Oxford University Press, 1987. Wegner, P. D. The Journey from Text to Translation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1999. ———. A Student's Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible: Its History Methods & Results. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2006.
357
CHAPTER 32 PALEOGRAPHY: THE DATING OF ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS TEXTUAL CRITICISM is both an art and a science. It is a science because it has principles or guidelines that must be followed. Additionally, it is an art because it is all about balance in applying those principles. It is the careful comparison of all known original language manuscripts (including lectionaries) and versions of the Bible in other languages (for example, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and Armenian), as well as patristic quotations in order to determine the original reading. This would include the elimination of any additions that may have crept into the text, as well as restoring any portion removed by accident or knowing that rightly belongs in the text. This work is often referred to as ―lower criticism,‖ which is constructive criticism; it should be set apart from ―higher criticism,‖ which is typically destructive criticism.
An Immense Amount of Manuscripts Today, we have a veritable storehouse of manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures that is the envy of those looking at restoring secular authors of the ancient world. By comparison, a mere handful of manuscripts, represent other ancient writings, and these are centuries removed from their originals. Fifty manuscripts can be attributed to the plays of Aeschylus, with 100 going to Sophocles, a mere one manuscript each to Titus‘ Greek Anthology and Annals, three to Catullus‘ poems, and about 400 spread out to such authors as Euripides, Cicero, Ovid, and Virgil. On the other hand, the New Testament has some 5,700 manuscripts in Greek, 8,000 in Latin, and 1,000 in other languages, giving us a total of close to 15,000 manuscripts. Of course, it needs to be mentioned that many are fragments, although others are a sizeable portion, and some are whole. It must be kept in mind that the 27 books of the Christian Greek Scriptures were originally penned in the latter part of the first century [50–100 C.E.]; with over 100 of these papyrus manuscripts that are extant (still in existence), having been dated between 110 and 300 C.E.
Greek Paleography and Its Beginnings Bernard de Montfaucon (1655-1741), a French Benedictine monk, who established the new discipline of paleography, laying the groundwork for the meticulous study of Greek manuscripts. He is also viewed as the originator of modern archaeology. As time passed, other scholars would make their contributions as well. Tischendorf would comb Europe and its libraries, cataloging and discovering manuscripts along the way. During several trips to the Middle East, he had the opportunity to investigate several hundred other manuscripts. In the end, he would publish his findings in several critical editions of the Greek text, but his eighth (1869-72), to this day is used by textual scholars as a colossal thesaurus of variant readings. The 20th century saw an explosion of tools that have served as helps to the paleographers. You have the Schoenberg Database of Manuscripts (SDBM), the Marcel 358
Richard list of some 900 catalogs that describe 55,000 Greek manuscripts, The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, the Institute for New Testament Textual Criticism in Münster, Germany. All of these are found on the internet, giving access to all, who own a computer. The textual scholar, the paleographer, this storehouse of information has made the job of determining a manuscripts age much easier and more precise.
How do Paleographers Date the Manuscripts? Imagine that you are a paleographer rummaging through the library of an old monastery, one that goes back to the third century C.E. As you move books aside you discover that there are other pages within the book itself. As you pull out the pages, you have discovered what looks to be an ancient uncial Greek document. As you continue to work your way through the books, looking for more pages, you are wandering at the age of this document. To your delight, the last page provided a clue that would establish the date within 50 years. It was not the same manuscripts, but it was the same hand, the same style, the same handwriting, the same punctuation, as well as other features that would establish this as the same person who made the other Biblical manuscript. However, this manuscript has a date on it. Sadly, it was not a practice of the scribe to place dates in their manuscripts after they had completed it. Thus, the textual scholar must compare other documents that have dates, both Biblical and non-Biblical documentary texts,191 to determine from an investigation of the handwriting, punctuation, abbreviations, and so on. What you may have at times is a literary text on one side of the page, and a documentary text on the other side, making it easier to establish the date of the literary text.
Handwriting Investigation How do textual scholars know that a manuscript dates to the second, third, or fourth century C.E., or to any other century? If you were to pull any book from your bookshelf and turn a few pages in it, you would find the date of publication on the copyright page. If you bought a used book that was missing the copyright page, you would have no idea of when it had been published. It is only because of modern technology that you could date the book. Extant ancient literary manuscripts hardly ever, if at all, had dates on them. However, ancient documentary manuscripts do and this is crucial in our ability to be able to date the undated literary manuscripts. It is by means of the art and science of paleography that we can arrive at an approximate date for when a manuscript was written. Paleographers could be viewed as manuscript detectives; through their knowledge of the writing of ancient texts, its form and its style, we get a reasonably close idea of when a manuscript was copied. As an example, when looking at our modern languages today, we can see that within every generation or two there are subtle changes. That holds true of ancient languages as well. Through painstaking comparison of hundreds of small features within an ancient 191
A documentary text is one that contains documentary information, like the date.
359
manuscript, a paleographer can provide us with a date that is within 25 to 50 years on either side of his recommended date. Such features can distinguish certain periods as the amount of punctuation within a manuscript, abbreviations, and the amount of spacing between words. There are certain documents such as receipts, letters, leases, and petitions that do contain dates. It is these that have formed a library of letters with the styles that go into making each letter during different time periods.192 On the left is P52, the fragment of John‘s Gospel. If you were to look closely at the actual copy, you would see that this copyist added a little hook or embellishment to his manuscript. For example, a loop or curly line, while also omitting certain marks, incorporating a special type of cross-stroke and rounded stroke of particular letters, which places this fragment into the early part of the second century C.E. While some textual scholars may not agree, 14 codices are now placed within the second century C.E., with another 31 codices that are dated to the third century. These are surely some of the most valuable manuscripts in establishing the original text of the Christian Greek Scriptures. As you have likely noted, each papyrus manuscript is designated with a capital or Gothic P and a superscript numeral by which they are known internationally. While the act of copying the Vaticanus codex itself dates to about 350 C.E., Westcott and Hort argued that the material (the written text, not the handwriting style 193) therein was much earlier, or even original. Let me offer a generic example so we can understand how a manuscript can be dated to 350, and yet at the same time, can be spoken of as containing a written text itself that is much earlier. Let us say that we have four hypothetical manuscripts: P002 (c.125), P0045 (c.200), P0067 (c.275), and Codex Z (c.325). One feature of dating manuscripts is by the style of handwriting comparison as we explained above, that is, by the way the letters are formed.194 Basically, the paleographer
192
. John F. Oates, Alan E. Samuel, and Bradford C. Welles, Yale Papyri in the Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library (New Haven, American Society of Papyrologists, 1967), 1:4. 193 . Handwriting styles are different from one time period in comparison to another, and by matching a Greek Christian NT manuscript’s style to a secular manuscript that contains a date, or a known style of a certain period, one can reasonably date an undated NT Greek manuscript. 194 . This is called paleography. The textual scholar studies the handwriting style (the form of the letters) of ancient manuscripts. A paleographer must have an extensive knowledge of the different handwriting styles; the more so, the more accurate his dating will be. Philip Wesley Comfort and David P. Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts. A corrected, enlarged ed. of The Complete Text of the Earliest New Testament Manuscripts (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House, 2001), S. 24. Handwriting Analysis Paleographers have been able to distinguish four major kinds of handwriting, each of which reveals something about the training (or lack thereof) of the copyist who produced it. The four types are as follows: 1.) Common: The work of a semiliterate writer who is untrained in making documents. This handwriting usually displays an inelegant cursive.
360
will find other Greek texts that have dates on them and match the handwriting in the text. Imagine that there are ten non-New Testament Greek manuscripts with the date of 100 C.E. on them that match our P002 (c.125). It is best then to date the manuscript up to 25 years in both directions, between 75–150 C.E. Now, setting aside the date of the manuscript as to when it was made, we find that each of these manuscripts will have a written text that is similar to others of that time period. We are not talking about handwriting styles that are used to date the text‘s time of being copied, we are talking about features: the way words are spelled, added material, missing material, notes from correctors, and the like. As a result, say we have our codex Z that dates to 325 because the handwriting style places it at this date, thus being the date it was copied, yet the features, some of which are mentioned above, are not like the other manuscripts of 325, but are exactly the same as those of our earlier P002, dating at 125 C.E. Hence, going to our codex Vaticanus, we would say it dates to being copied about 350 C.E. based on the writing style (form of letters), but its written text (spelling, format, corrections, added/missing material) is earlier, dating to about 150– 200 C.E., because it is almost exactly like P75. Ironically, many scholars prior to P75 (published in 1961) felt that Westcott and Hort‘s belief that Vaticanus‘ written text was earlier, perhaps even original, was a bit presumptuous; therefore, these scholars believed that Vaticanus reflected a third- or fourth-century text, from the time of its being copied. However, after the publishing of P75, it was openly acknowledged that they are, in fact, essentially the same, vindicating Westcott and Hort. The Vaticanus itself was copied about 350 C.E., but its written text was from the middle of the second century at least, if not earlier. Hort‘s view, that the Vaticanus is essentially original minus a few discrepancies, is not so farfetched after all. Paleographers divide ancient Greek handwriting into two basic categories—book hand, which is elegant and formal, and cursive, a form of running, or flowing, writing used in nonliterary documents. Greek scribes also used various styles of letters, which can be categorized as capitals, uncials (a form of capitals), cursives, and minuscules. One form of book hand, uncial writing, was used from the fourth century B.C.E. till the eighth or ninth century C.E. Minuscule writing, a small form of book hand, was employed from the 8th or 9th century C.E. till the middle of the 15th century, when printing by means of 2.) Documentary: The work of a literate writer who has had experience in preparing documents. This has also been called “chancery handwriting” (prominent in the period A.D. 200–225). It was used by official scribes in public administration. 3.) Reformed documentary: The work of a literate writer who had experience in preparing documents and in copying works of literature. Often, this hand attempts to imitate the work of a professional but does not fully achieve the professional look. 4.) Professional: The work of a professional scribe. These writings display the craftsmanship of what is commonly called a “book hand” or “literary hand,” and leave telltale marks of professionalism such as stichoi markings (the tallying of the number of lines, according to which a professional scribe would be paid), as are found in P46. Various handwriting styles are more pronounced in one time period over another and thereby help in dating manuscripts.
361
movable type began in Europe. Minuscule script could be written more rapidly and compactly, which saved both time and parchment. Paleographers have their preferred methods of dating manuscripts. They first take an overall look at the script—wide-angle views, as it were—and then they examine it more closely, analyzing individual letters. Because it usually took a long time for significant changes to occur in the general style of handwriting, a close examination of the script, while useful, provides only a broad indication of the time of writing. Thankfully, there are other ways to narrow down the date. These include identifying and dating the introduction of certain handwriting practices. For instance, in Greek texts after the year 900 C.E., scribes began to increase the use of ligatures (two or more characters joined). Scribes also began to use infralinear writing (the writing of certain Greek letters below the line) as well as pronunciation aids called breathing marks. A person‘s handwriting tends to remain constant throughout his life. Therefore, texts often cannot be dated to within 50 years. What is more, scribes sometimes used earlier manuscripts as models, making the copy seem older than it is. Despite the many challenges, however, dates have been assigned to a number of important Bible manuscripts.
Dating Key Greek Bible Manuscripts Codex Alexandrinus (A) is a handsome codex, now in the British Library, is the most investigated manuscript, as it was the first major Bible manuscript that was made available to the scholars. It contains most of the Old and New Testament, written in uncials on vellum, a high quality of parchment made from calfskin. Paleographers date this codex to about the fifth century C. E. This is mostly because of the changes that took place in uncial writing in the middle of the fifth and sixth centuries, as illustrated in a dated document called the Dioscorides of Vienna. Codex Sinaiticus (X) was discovered by textual scholar Constantin Von Tischendorf at the monastery of St. Catharine on Mount Sinai. Sinaiticus was also penned in Greek uncials on parchment. At present part of the Greek Old Testament has perished, with the whole of the New Testament surviving, Of this codex, 43 leaves are held in Leipzig, Germany; 347 leaves at the British Library in London; and portions of 3 leaves in St. Petersburg, Russia. Paleographers have dated Codex Sinaiticus to about 360 C.E. They arrive at this date, in part, because of the marginal tables (cross-references) in the Gospels, which were invented by fourth-century historian Eusebius of Caesarea, known as the Eusebian Canons. Codex Vaticanus (B) is the most valuable of all manuscripts, which contained the entire Bible at one time. As is indicated by its name, it is housed in the Vatican Library at Rome, first becoming known in 1475. It too was penned in Greek uncials on 759 leaves of parchment. Today, it still contains most of the Old Testament, except most of Genesis, and Part of Psalms. It is missing some portions of the New Testament as well. It is dated to about 340 C.E. One indicator being that the writing is similar to the Sinaiticus. 362
However, it is seen as belonging to the earlier part of the fourth century, as it is lacking the Eusebian Canons mentioned earlier.
Treasure from a Garbage Dump In 1920, the John Rylands Library of Manchester, England, attained a heap of papyruses recently discovered in an ancient Egyptian garbage dump. As he sorted the pieces of unpublished papyri, which encompassed letters, receipts, and census documents, scholar Colin H. Roberts caught sight of a fragment inscribed with text he recognized—a few verses from John chapter 18. Based on the style of the script, Robert‘s dated this scrap as the earliest Christian Greek text identified up to that time, even to date. It is the early date of P52, which holds its greatest value. The Bible critic had argued that the Gospel of John was not penned until the second century, which would mean that the apostle John would not be its author. The finding of P52 establishes that John had to be written before the close of the first century C.E., to be copied in Fayum or Oxyrhynchus, Egypt about 110-125 C.E. This fragment came to be known as the John Rylands Papyrus 457, being designated as P52 because of its being penned on papyrus.195 It was written in Greek uncials, it has been dated to about 110-125 C.E.—within just a few decades of the original writing of the Gospel of John! Significantly, even though the text only comprises a few verses, the text agrees almost exactly with the Alexandrian family of manuscripts. Its contents include John 18:31-33, 37-38.
Ancient but Accurate! In his book A General Introduction to the Bible, apologetic scholars Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix wrote concerning the Greek New Testament ―has not only survived in more manuscripts than any other book from antiquity, but it has survived in a purer form than any other Greek book―a form that is 99.5 percent pure.‖ (Geisler and Nix 1996, 367) Similarly, regarding the integrity of the Hebrew Scriptures, scholar William H. Green stated, ―It may be safely said that no other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted.‖ (Free 1964, 15) Those observations call to mind the words of the apostle Peter: ―All flesh is like grass, and all its glory like the flower of grass; the grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord remains forever.‖—1 Peter 1:24, 25, ESV.
Dating the Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah In the spring of 1947, a Bedouin shepherd threw a stone into a cave, marking an event that would be heard around the world, making the name ―Dead Sea Scrolls‖ more known than any other associated with archaeology. As he released one of his rocks into the cave, the sound of a
195
The sources of to the Greek New Testament can be broken up into the categories: (1) papyrus (1 – 6th century C.E.), (2) vellum (4th – 14th century), and (3) paper. st
363
breaking earthenware jar came back at him. Upon further examination, he discovered the first of the Dead Sea Scrolls. What are the Dead Sea Scrolls? Between the year 1947 and 1956, this proved to be one of the most important in the history of discovering ancient manuscripts, in this case, the Hebrew Old Testament, nearly 800 manuscripts. These Jewish manuscripts were written in Hebrew, some in Aramaic, and a few in Greek. Several of these scrolls and fragments are over 2,000 years old. Many were written as early as 275 B.C.E. – 100 B.C.E. Prior to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest manuscripts of the Old Testament were dated to about the ninth and tenth centuries C.E., known as the Masoretic texts (MT).196 The Hebrew Old Testament was complete in the middle of the fifth century B.C.E., over 1,400 years earlier than these MT. Therefore, the question begs to be asked, ‗can we trust this MT as really being the Word of God?‘ A member of the international team of editors of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Professor Julio Trebolle Barrera, states: ―The Isaiah Scroll [from Qumran] provides irrefutable proof that the transmission of the biblical text through a period of more than one thousand years by the hands of Jewish copyists has been extremely faithful and careful.‖ (Martínez, Barrera and Barrera 1995, 99) The Isaiah scrolls (IQIsa; IQIsb) are complete copies of the book of Isaiah, but the latter is the earliest known copy of a complete Bible book. Both are from cave 1. Gleason Archer had this to say about the two Isaiah scrolls that ―proved to be word for word identical with the standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95% of the text. The 5% of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling.‖ (Archer 1994, 19) Up to now, over 200 Biblical manuscripts have come out of the Qumran caves; representing portions of every Old Testament book except Esther. The Isaiah scrolls of Cave 1 are an exception to the rule, as most of the others are mere fragments, containing less than 10% of any given book. The books that are the most often quoted in the New Testament are, in fact, the most popular among the Qumran community: Psalms (36 copies), Deuteronomy (29 copies), and Isaiah (21 copies). Aside from establishing that the Hebrew Old Testament has not undergone some radical changes over the last 1,400 years, the Dead Sea Scrolls also reveal two other important pieces to some long-standing questions. They provide evidence that there were different versions of the Hebrew Bible texts used by the Jews in the Second Temple period (537 B.C.E to 70 C.E.), each one of them containing its own variations. Of the scrolls, not all are identical in spelling and wording to the MT. Some of them are more in line with the Greek Septuagint,197 also known by the Roman numerals for seventy,
196
Hebrew Bible: the traditional text of the Hebrew Bible, revised and annotated by Jewish scholars between the 6th and 10th centuries C.E. 197 Greek version of Hebrew Bible: a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible made between 280 and 150 B.C.E. to meet the needs of Greek-speaking Jews outside Palestine.
364
LXX.198 It had been thought by scholars prior to 1947 that the differences in the LXX were the result of errors on the part of the scribes, even possibly intentional alterations by the translators. When the Dead Sea Scrolls became known, it was revealed that these differences were due to the variations of the different Hebrew versions. Further, this could possibly explain why writers from the New Testament quote from the Hebrew Bible texts using wording different than the MT.—Exodus 1:5; Acts 7:14. Hence, the storehouse of thousands of fragments and Biblical scrolls affords the textual scholar an excellent basis in their studying the transmission of the Hebrew Bible text. Additionally, the Dead Sea Scrolls have established the worth of both the Septuagint and the Samaritan Pentateuch for textual comparison. As all modern Bible are based on the Masoretic Text, they also provide added bases for these translation committees to consider emending (correcting) their translations and the MT.
198
Because of the tradition about 72 translators, this Greek Bible translation came to be known as the Septuagint, based on a Latin word meaning ―Seventy.‖
365
Bibliography Aland, Kurt and Barbara. The Text of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. Chadwick, Henry. The Early Church (Revised Edition). London: Penguin Books, 1993. Colwell, Ernest C. Scribal Habits in Early Papyri: A Study in the Corruption of the Text. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965. Comfort, Philip. Encounterring the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography and Textual Criticism. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005. Comfort, Philip W. New Testament Text and Translation Commentary. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, 2008. Comfort, Philip, and David Barret. The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001. Free, J P. Archaeology and Bible History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1964. Geisler, Norman L, and William E Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Chicago: Moody Press, 1996. Greenlee, J Harold. Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995. —. The Text of the New Testament. Peabody: Henrickson, 2008. Hurtado, Larry W. The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006. Lightfoot, Neil R. How We Got the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1963, 1988, 2003. Martínez, Florentino García, Julio C. Trebolle Barrera, and Julio Trebolle Barrera. The people of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Boston, MA: Brill Academic Publishers, 1995. Metzger, Bruce M. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Transmission. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 1968, 1992. Metzger, Bruce. The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, & Content. Nashville: Abingdon Books, 1965, 1983, 2003. Richards, E. Randolph. Paul And First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004. Roberts, Colin H. Manuscript, Society, and Belief in Early Christian Egypt. London: Oxford University Press, 1979. Roberts, Colin H., and Theodore C. Skeat. The Birth of the Codex. London: Oxford University Press, 1987. 366
Wegner, Paul D. A Student's Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible: Its History Methods & Results. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2006.
367
SECTION SEVEN: TEXTUAL CRITICISM CHAPTER 33 THE EARLIEST SKILLED CHRISTIAN COPYISTS AND THEIR WORK Today there are almost two billion people that call themselves Christian, who carry a little black book around with them: the Bible. Most are unaware of just how that book came down to them, yet they would be the first to claim that it is inspired of God, and possesses no errors, mistakes, or contractions. Herein, we will take a brief look at how the early Christians went about the work of making copies of what would become known as New Testament books, books that they felt were Scripture, just like the inspired Hebrew Scriptures. Such background cannot only build confidence that you have been carrying the very Word of God, but it also affords you the opportunity to ‗be prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.‘ (1 Pet 3:15) One might say that the 127 New Testament papyrus manuscripts that have survived up unto today,199 is hardly a notable amount.
Papyrus is writing material used by the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans that was made from the pith of the stem of a water plant. It was cut in strips, with one layer 199
First, there are close to one million papyrus fragments in various libraries throughout the world that have not been published. Since only about one percent of all papyri have been published (about 10,000), there is a very high degree of probability that some of the remainder will be NT fragments. The last NT papyrus to be published was papyrus 127 or P127, a fifth century fragment of Acts. It was discovered in 2009. Therefore, when you speak of how many have "survived," you can understand that the question is not that easy to answer. NT scholars use the term "extant" to describe MSS that have survived. It means that some have survived and are known to exist. With that definition, you might think that 127 is the number. However, there is a slight problem with that, too. Some fragments, such as P64 and P67, were later determined to belong to the same manuscript. This happens a few times for NT MSS, but mostly for minuscules (of which we now have extant about 2900). However, most scholars don't wrestle with such details. Therefore, 127 is the answer you are looking for. As for dates, the papyri range in date from early second century to early seventh century. I have worked up a chart of all NT MSS through the 8th century: as much as 43% of all the verses of the NT are attested by the end of the third century in the extant papyri.―Dr. Daniel B. Wallace of The Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts.
368
being laid out horizontally and the other vertically. Scholarship has suggested that paste may have been used between layers as a type of adhesive, placing a large stone placed on top until dry, creating a sheet of papyrus paper between 6–9 inches in width and 12– 15 inches long. These sheets would then be glued from end to end until they had enough length to copy the book they were working on. Writing was done only on the horizontal side and it was rolled so that the writing would be on the inside. As you can visualize, there would be great difficulty, if one were to attempt writing across the vertical side because of the fibers of the papyrus. The scribe or copyist would have used a reed pen to write on the papyrus sheets. (3 John 13) The papyrus plant was the main product used to receive writing until about 300 C.E. It was used with the roll, as well as the codex form. With an introductory book on New Testament textual criticism, the Bible student will discover that the early papyrus manuscripts, such as P45, P46, P47, P52, P66, P73 and P75 (to mention just a few, all date before 300 C.E., from as early as 110 C.E. On the other hand, the manuscripts, like codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus from about 350 C.E. were made with parchment, a creamy or yellowish material made from dried and treated sheepskin, goatskin, or other animal hide. One may wonder why more New Testament manuscripts have not survived. It must be remembered that the Christians suffered horrible persecution off and on for the first 300 years from Pentecost 33 C.E. With this persecution from the Roman Empire came many orders to destroy their texts. In addition, these texts were not stored in such a way as to secure their preservation; they were used by the Christians and in the congregation, and were subject to wear and tear. Furthermore, moisture is the enemy of papyrus, causing them to disintegrate over time. This is why you will discover that the manuscripts that have survived have come from the dry sands of Egypt. Lastly, it never entered the minds of those early Christians to preserve their documents, for their solution was just to make another copy. This coupled with the transition of making copies with a more durable animal skin, which would last much longer. Of those that have survived, especially those from 300 C.E. and earlier, are the path to restoring the original Greek New Testament. From an Oral Gospel to the Written Record Jesus had commanded his disciples to, ―Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age." (Matt 28:19-20, ESV) Nevertheless, how was this good news to be made known? During the forty-day period between Jesus‘ resurrection and his ascension, Jesus instructed his disciples in the teaching of the gospel.
369
Accordingly, he prepared them for the tremendous task that awaited them on and after Pentecost.200 There was only ten days after Jesus ascension and Pentecost, when ―they were all filled with the Holy Spirit.‖ Jesus put it this way, in his own words, it being only ―a few days.‖ This time would have been filled with the process of replacing Judas Iscariot, prayer, and the established gospel message, which would be the official oral message, until it was deemed necessary to have a written gospel some 10 to 15 years later. The gospel message was quite simple: ‗Christ died for our sins according to Scripture, was buried, and he was resurrected on the third day according to scripture.‘―1 Corinthians 15:1-8. 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 English Standard Version (ESV) Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you— unless you believed in vain. Those who were commissioned to pen the 27 New Testament books of the New Testament. From Pentecost 33 C.E. up unto the destruction of Jerusalem by Rome in 70 C.E., all of the books of the Greek New Testament were written, with the exception of those penned by the apostle John. Reliable history of Christianity has the Gospel of Matthew being penned first, in about 41 C.E., with the Gospel of Luke coming about 5658 C.E., and the Gospel of Mark between 60 to 65 C.E. These are known as the synoptic Gospels, as they are similar in content, while the Gospel of John chose to convey other information, being that he wrote his gospel to the second generation of Christian in about 98 C.E. Luke informs us of just how the very first Christians received the gospel message. Very few translations make explicit the exact process. Luke 1:1-4 Amplified Bible (AMP) SINCE [as is well known] many have undertaken to put in order and draw up a [thorough] narrative of the surely established deeds which have been accomplished and fulfilled in and among us, Exactly as they were handed down to us by those who from the [official] beginning [of Jesus' ministry] were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word [that is, of the doctrine concerning the attainment through Christ of salvation in the kingdom of God], It seemed good and desirable to me, [and so I have determined] also after having searched out diligently and followed all things closely and traced accurately the course from the highest to the minutest detail from the very first, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, [My purpose is] that you may know the full truth and understand with certainty and security against error the accounts 200
Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen, vol. 17, New Testament Commentary : Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1953-2001), 47-48.
370
(histories) and doctrines of the faith of which you have been informed and in which you have been orally [katechethes] instructed. Acts 18:24-25 English Standard Version (ESV) 24Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, competent in the Scriptures. 25He had been [orally, katechethes] instructed in the way of the Lord. And being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John. Galatians 6:6 English Standard Version (ESV) One who is [orally, katechethes] taught the word must share all good things with the one who teaches. We can see clearly from the above that Both Theophilus and Apollos received the initial gospel message, just as all Christians did in the early years, and even after the written gospels were available, being taught the gospel of Jesus by oral instruction (katechethes). In time, it was deemed that there was a need for a written record, which is the reason Luke gives for his Gospel. This was not to discount what Theophilus had be orally instructed about, but to give credence to that oral message that he had received. Of course, the New Testament was not limited to these gospels. The publishing of these New Testament books in written form would have come about in the following stages: (1) the inspired author would have used a well trusted, skilled Christian scribe, to take down what they had to say, by shorthand; (2) the scribe would then make a rough draft; (3) which would then be read by both the scribe and author, making corrections; (4) thereafter, the scribe would make what is known as the authorized text, to be signed by the author; (5) which would then be used to make other copies. Romans 16:22 English Standard Version (ESV) I Tertius, who wrote this letter, greet you in the Lord. 2 Thessalonians 3:17 English Standard Version (ESV) I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. This is the sign of genuineness in every letter of mine; it is the way I write. 1 Peter 5:12 English Standard Version (ESV) By Silvanus, a faithful brother as I regard him, I have written briefly to you, exhorting and declaring that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it. Both Tertius and Silvanus were skilled Christian scribes, who assisted the writers of the New Testament. It is unlikely that Paul literally penned any of his letters that were of 371
great length. It is clear that Peter used the trained Silvanus to pen his first letter, and like the second letter was the result of Jude‘s penman skills, as it is very similar in style to the letter by Jude. This may explain the differences in style between First and Second Peter. As an aside, it is very likely that the inspired author would give some latitude to their skilled Christian scribe and coauthor, as to word choices. While we know that Mark was used to pen his gospel, it is likely that he wrote as Peter spoke. It is Silvanus (Silas), who penned the letter from the elders in Jerusalem, to the congregation in Antioch, which we find in Acts chapter 15. Papyrus or Parchment The Hebrew Old Testament that would have been available to the early Christians was written on the processed hide of animals with the hair removed, and smoothed out with a pumice stone.201 It was leather scrolls that were sent to Alexandria, Egypt in about 280 B.C.E., to make what we now know as the Greek Septuagint.202 Most of the Dead Sea scrolls that were discovered between 1947 to 1956 are made of leather, and it is almost certain that the scroll of Isaiah that Jesus read from in the synagogue was all well. Luke 4:17 English Standard Version (ESV) And the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was given to him. He unrolled the scroll and found the place where it was written, The oldest extant leather scrolls date to about 1500 before Jesus was born. Both leather and papyrus was used down to the first century Christians. Vellum is a high quality parchment made from calfskin, kidskin, or lambskin. After the skin was removed, it would be soaked in limewater, after which the hair would be scraped off, the skin then being scraped and dried, being rubbed afterwards with chalk and pumice stone, creating a fine smooth writing material. During the first three hundred years of Christianity, the secular world viewed parchment as being inferior to papyrus, it being relegated to notebooks, rough drafts, and other non-literary purposes. A couple myths should be dispelled before moving on. It is often repeated that papyrus is not a durable material. Both papyrus and parchment are durable under normal circumstances. Another often repeated thought is that papyrus was fragile a brittle, making it an unlikely candidate to be used for a codex,203 which would have to be folded in half. Another argument that should be sidelined is which was more expensive to produce, papyrus or parchment. Presently there is no data to aid in that evaluation. We know that papyrus was used for all of the Christian codex manuscripts up unto the fourth century, at which time you find the two great parchment codices, the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus manuscripts. Parchment of good quality has been called ―the finest writing material ever devised by man.‖ (Roberts and Skeat, The Birth of the Codex 1987, 201
A very light porous rock formed from solidified lava, used in solid form as an abrasive and in powdered form as a polish. 202 A Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible started in about 280 and completed about 150 B.C.E. to meet the needs of Greek-speaking Jews outside Palestine. 203 A codex is a collection of ancient manuscript texts, especially of the Biblical Scriptures, in book form.
372
8) Why then did parchment take so long to replace papyrus. This may be answered by some quotations from R. Reed, Ancient Skins, Parchments and Leathers: It is perhaps the extraordinary high durability of the product, produced by so simple a method, which has prevented most people from suspecting that many subtle points are involved… The essence of the parchment process, which subjects the system of pelt to the simultaneous action of stretching and drying, is to bring about peculiar changes quite different from those applying when making leather. These are (1) reorganization of the dermal fibre network by stretching, and (2) permanently setting this new and highly stretched form of fibre network by drying the pelt fluid to a hard, glue-like consistency. In other words, the pelt fibres are fixed in a stretched condition so that they cannot revert to their original relaxed state. (Reed 1973, 119-20) Where the medieval parchment makers were greatly superior to their modern counterparts was in the control and modification of the ground substance in the pelt, before the latter was stretched and dried… The major point, however, which modern parchment manufacturers have not appreciated, is what might be termed the integral or collective nature of the parchment process. The bases of many different effects need to be provided for simultaneously, in one and the same operation. The properties required in the final parchment must be catered for at the wet pelt stage, for due to the peculiar nature of the parchment process, once the system has been dried, and after-treatments to modify the material produced are greatly restricted. (Reed 1973, 124) This method, which follows those used in medieval times for making parchment of the highest quality, is preferable for it allows the grain surface of the drying pelt to be ―slicked‖ and freed from residual fine hairs while stretching upon the frame. At the same time, any process for cleaning and smoothing the flesh side, or for controlling the thickness of the final parchment may be undertaken by working the flesh side with sharp knives which are semi-lunar in form… To carry out such manual operations on wet stretched pelt demands great skill, speed of working, and concentrated physical effort. (Reed 1973, 138-9) Enough has been said to suggest that behind the apparently simple instructions contained in the early medieval recipes there is a wealth of complex process detail which we are still far from understanding. Hence it remains true that parchment-making is perhaps more of an art than a science. (Reed 1973, 172) The Christian Codex
373
Going back to the first-century once again, let us take a moment to deal with the invention of the codex. Was it the first-century Christians, who invented the codex, or at least put it on the stage of the world scene? The writing tablet of ancient times was made from two flat pieces of wood, held together by a thong hinge, which looks something like our modern book. It had its limits, because of the impracticalness of fastening more than a few such tablets together. The center of the tablet pages would have been slightly hollowed, to receive a wax coating. A stylus is a common instrument used to write on these waxed tablets. The stylus was made of metal, ivory or bone, and was sharpened to a point on one side, while have a rounded knob on the other, for erasing, and making corrections. This is the oldest for of writing of the Greeks, who borrowed it from the Hittites. History and evidence credits the Romans with replacing the wooden tablet with the parchment notebook. The apostle Paul is the only Greek writer of the first-century C.E. to mention the parchment notebook. 2 Timothy 4:13 English Standard Version (ESV) When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments [membranai, parchment notebooks]. However, it should be recognized that the parchment notebook was not used for literature in the first two centuries before the Christian era (B.C.E.), this went to the roll or scroll. Even though the codex was commonly used for books, the first indication that it was going to displace the roll came toward the end of the first century C.E. (Roberts and Skeat, The Birth of the Codex 1987, 24) Thus, again, the Jews of the late first century C.E. and thereafter, used scrolls, while the Christians on the other hand used codices. One must consider that many of the first Christians were Jewish, and likely read their Old Testament from a scroll. Before becoming a Christian, the apostle Paul was a Pharisee and would have use scrolls. However, he also made a transition to the codex after his conversion to Christianity. Only a handful of manuscripts of the New Testament that are still in existence, were written on scrolls. (P13, P18, and P98) However, these were written on the back of other writings, so they were not really composed in the scroll form. P22 was written on the roll, and we await more research there, as it is an peculiarity among the group of papyri. All other New Testament manuscripts were written on codices. As there is evidence that the second century Christians were trying to set themselves apart from the Jews, so they likely made the transition in part, because they wished to be different. We say in part, because it is quite evidence that the first Christians grouped their writings together, the gospels, and Paul‘s letters. The codex afford them the means of doing this, while a scroll of the gospels would be far too long and bulky, and finding a locating a portion of desired text, would be near impossible. For example, P46 dating to about 150 C.E., contained ten of Paul‘s letters. P45 dates to about 225 C.E. and originally contained all four Gospels and the book of Acts. In the end, it can be said that the Christians adopted the codex (1) to be different from the Jews, (2) to have the Gospels and the Apostle 374
Paul‘s letters all in one book, (3) because of the ease of being able to find a portion of text, and this made the spread of the good news much more convenient. We do learn quite a bit from the New Testament. The apostle Peter writes, ―. . . just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. . .‖ (2 Pet 3:15-16, about 64 C.E.) This shows the earliness of having Paul‘s letters together. The apostle John wrote, ―Though I have much to write to you, I would rather not use paper and ink. Instead I hope to come to you and talk face to face, so that our joy may be complete.‖ (2 John 12, about 98 C.E.) This shows that John used papyrus in writing to a sister congregation. The Greek word chartou means ―papyrus,‖ ―a sheet of paper.‖204 The apostle Paul wrote Timothy and asked him, ―when you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books [likely scrolls of OT books], and above all the parchments [codices].‖ (2 Tim 4:13, about 65 C.E) While it is thought by most scholars that Paul was talking about two different items here, it is very possible; he was referring to only one, which is Skeat‘s position. Let us look at the verse again: 2 Timothy 4:13 English Standard Version (ESV) When you come, bring . . . the books, and above all the parchments. When you come, bring . . . the books―that is my parchment notebooks. If the second version above is true, Paul was looking to get some of his notebooks, possible rough drafts that he had left behind. The Old Testament books could have been located right where he was, but he would have been highly interested in unpublished works that he wanted to get out before his execution. Of course, this latter thought is the formation of judgments based on incomplete or inconclusive information. However, one thing is certain, that Paul was asking for either asking for codices in complete book form, or in notebook form. This tells us that Paul was the first to have his books collected into codex form. We can draw some conclusions, even on our limited evidence: (1) The codex was being used by the end of the first century C.E. (2) The Christians were using the codex at the end of the first century. (3) Point 2 is because all extant (still in existence) early Christian manuscripts were written on the codex. The Greek New Testament The Old Testament for Christian use Noncanonical (not authorized or not inspired) writings The Church Fathers Other theological writings Were the Early Copyist Trained? 204
William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1081.
375
The perception expressed in the above heading is a long held belief that is mistaken. The early Christian congregations were not isolated from one another. The Roman roads and maritime travel connected all the regions from Rome to Greece, to Asia, to Syria and Palestine and Egypt,205 from the days of Pentecost onward, Jewish or Jewish proselyte Christians returned to Egypt with the good news of Christ. (Acts 2:10) Three years thereafter, the Ethiopian eunuch traveled home with the good news as well. (Acts 8:26– 39). Apollos of Alexandria, Egypt, a renowned speaker, came out of Egypt with the knowledge of John the Baptizer, and arrived in Ephesus in about 52 C. E. (Acts 18:24, 25) The apostle Paul traveled over 20,000 miles throughout the Roman Empire establishing congregations. The apostles were a restraint to the apostasy and division within the whole of the 1st century Christian congregation. (2 Thessalonians 2:6, 7; 1 John 2:18) It was not until the 2nd century that the next generation of religious leaders gradually moved left of center. Conservative Christianity was strong and centered against Gnosticism, Roman persecution, and Jewish hatred. It is conceivable that by 55 C.E. there would have been a thriving congregation in Alexandrian Egypt, with its huge Jewish population.206 (Acts 11:19, ESV) ―Now those who were scattered because of the persecution that arose over Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except Jews.‖ While this indicates a traveling north to Antioch, it does not negate a traveling south to Egypt. Antioch is obviously mentioned because it played the major role as a commencement for 1st century Christianity, especially for the apostle Paul. The Coptic Church claims the Gospel writer Mark as its founder and first patriarch. Tradition has it that he preached in Egypt just before the middle of the 1st century. At any rate, Christianity spread to Egypt and North Africa at an early date. In fact, it became a prominent religious center, with a noted scholar named Pantaenus, who founded a catechetical school in Alexandria, Egypt, about 160 C.E. In about 180 C.E. another prominent scholar, Clement of Alexandria, took over his position. Clement really put this religious educational institution on the map as the possible center for the whole of the Christian congregation throughout the Roman Empire. The persecution that came about the year 202 C.E. forced Clement to flee Alexandria, but one of the most noted scholars of early Christian history, Origen, replaced him. In addition, Origen took this scholarly environment to Caesarea in 231 C.E. and started yet another prominent school and scriptorium. What does all of this mean? Of course, we cannot know absolutely, but textual scholars Philip W. Comfort,207 Larry W. Hurtado,208 and Eldon Jay Epp believe that the 205
People of the first three centuries sent and received letters and books from all over the Roman Empire. To give just two examples: the Shepherd of Hermas was written in Rome and found its way to Egypt within a few decades; Irenaeus‘ Against Heresies was written in Gaul and made it to Egypt (Oxyrhynchus) within short order. 206 Macquarie University, Ancient History Documentary Research Center (AHDRC), Papyri from the Rise of Christianity in Egypt (PCE), http://www.anchist.mq.edu.au/doccentre/PCEhomepage.html. 207 Philip W. Comfort, The Quest for the Original Text of the New Testament (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1992).
376
very early Alexandrian manuscripts that we now possess are a reflection of what would have been found throughout the whole of the Greco-Roman Empire from about 85–275 C.E. In other words, if we were to discover early manuscripts from other regions (Rome, Greece, Asia, and Palestine), they would be very similar to the early Alexandrian manuscripts. This means that these early papyri are the means of establishing the original text, and we are in a far better position today than were Westcott and Hort. Those who have abandoned all hope of such a venture would argue differently, saying that ‗oldest is not necessarily best.‘ For these scholars, the original reading could be found in any manuscript. They continue with the approach that the reading that produced the other readings is likely the original. While on the surface this sounds great, it is not as solid a principle as one might think. On this issue, Comfort writes: For example, two scholars, using this principle to examine the same variant, may not agree. One might argue that the variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author‘s style; the other could claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author‘s style. Or, one might argue that a variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another might claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodoxical or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.209 Either reasoned eclecticism or the local-genealogical method210 will lean more heavily on internal evidence, setting off external evidence as being of less importance. However, as Ernest Colwell suggested in 1968, we need to get back to the principles of Westcott and Hort. Hort wrote in his 1882 Introduction: ―Documentary attestation has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour as against internal evidence.‖211 Trustworthiness of Early Copyists It has become common to suggest that the earliest copyists were of two sorts: (1) semiliterate and unskilled in the work of making copies; (2) feeling the end was nigh and therefore taking liberties with the text in an attempt to strengthen orthodoxy. The former would undoubtedly lead to many unintentional changes, while the latter would certainly escalate intentional changes. J. Harold Greenlee had this to say:
208
Larry W. Hurtado, The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 2006). 209 P. W. Comfort (1992), 38–39. 210 This method holds that a variant can be established as original and can come from any given manuscript(s). 211 Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek, Vol. 2: Introduction, Appendix, (1882), 17.
377
In the very early period, the NT writings were more nearly ―private‖ writings than the classics . . . the classics were commonly—although not always—copied by professional scribes, the NT books were probably usually copied in the early period by Christians who were not professionally trained for the task, and no corrector was employed to check the copyist‘s work against his exemplar (the MS from which the copy was made). . . . It appears that copyist sometimes even took liberty to add or change minor details in the narrative books on the basis of personal knowledge, alternative tradition, or a parallel account in another book of the Bible. . . . At the same time, the importance of these factors in affecting the purity of the NT text must not be exaggerated. The NT books doubtless came to be considered as ―literature‖ soon after they began to be circulated, with attention to the precise wording required when copies were made.212 Greenlee had not changed his position 14 years later, when he wrote the following: The New Testament, on the other hand, was probably copied during the earliest period mostly by ordinary Christians who were not professional scribes but who wanted a copy of the New Testament book or books for themselves or for other Christians.213 Generally, once an established concept is set within the world of textual scholars it is not so easily displaced. During the start of the 20th century (1900–1930), there were a handful of papyri discovered that obviously were the work of a copyist who had no training in making copies. It is during this time that Sir Frederic Kenyon, director and principal librarian of the British Museum for many years, said: The early Christians, a poor, scattered, often illiterate body, looking for the return of the Lord at no distant date, were not likely to care sedulously for minute accuracy of transcription or to preserve their books religiously for the benefit of posterity.214 The first papyri discovered showed this to be the case. However, as more papyri came to light, it proved to be just the opposite, prompting Sir Frederic Kenyon to write: We must be content to know that the general authenticity of the New Testament text has been remarkably supported by the modern discoveries which have so greatly reduced the interval between the original autographs and our earliest extant manuscripts, and that the differences of reading,
212
J. Harold Greenlee, Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism (Revised Edition, 1995),
51–52.
213
J. Harold Greenlee, The Text of the New Testament: From Manuscript to Modern Edition (2008), 37. 214 F. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (1895), 157.
378
interesting as they are, do not affect the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith.215 Some of the earliest manuscripts that we now have shown that they were copied by a professional scribe. Many of the other papyri give evidence that they were copied by a semiprofessional hand, while most of these early papyri give evidence of being done by a copyist that was literate and experienced. Therefore, the vast majority of our early papyri were done by either literate or semiprofessional copyists, with some being done by professionals. As it happened, the few poorly copied manuscripts came to light first, establishing a precedent that was difficult for some to shake when the truckload of evidence came forth that showed just the opposite. The writers of the 27 books comprising the Christian Greek Scriptures were Jews. (Romans 13:1, 2) These men were either apostles, intimate traveling companions of the apostles, or picked by Christ in a supernatural way, such as the apostle Paul. Being Jewish, they would have viewed the Old Testament as being the inspired, inerrant Word of God. When Paul said that ―all Scripture is inspired of God,‖ he was likely referring to the Septuagint as well as the Hebrew Old Testament. These writers of the 27 New Testament books would have viewed the teachings of Jesus, or their books expounding on his teachings, as Scripture as well as the Old Testament. The teachings of Jesus came to most of these New Testament writers personally from Jesus, being taught orally; thereafter, they would be the ones who published what Jesus had said and taught orally. When it came time to be published in written form, it should be remembered that Jesus had promised them: ―The Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you. John 14:26, ESV. The early first-century Hebrew Christian [or Gentile] copyists were very much aware of the traditions that the Jewish scribes followed in meticulously copying their texts. These copyists would have immediately understood that they were copying sacred texts. In fact, our early papyri show evidence of shared features with the Jewish Sopherim, those men who copied the Hebrew Scriptures in Jesus‘ day. You will find common features when you compare the Jewish Greek Old Testament and the Christian Old Testament with the Christian Greek Scriptures―such things as an enlarged letter at the beginning of each line, and the invention of the nomen sacrum to deal with God‘s personal name. Instead of penning the Tetragrammaton from the Greek Septuagint in front of them, the copyists invented the nomen sacrum KC. Marginal notes, accents, breathing marks, punctuation, corrections, double punctuation marks (which indicate the flow of text); all of this indicates an adoption of scribal practices of the Sopherim by Jewish Christian writers and scribes. With the exception of Matthew, all writers of the New Testament published their books in koine, the common Greek of the day. Matthew initially published his Gospel in Hebrew, and shortly thereafter in koine Greek. In his, work Concerning Illustrious Men, 215
F. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (1962), 249.
379
chapter III, Jerome says: ―Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed.‖216 Early in the 3rd century, Origen, in discussing the Gospels, is quoted by Eusebius as saying that the ―first was written . . . according to Matthew, . . . who published it for those who from Judaism came to believe, composed as it was in the Hebrew language.‖217 Initially, the primary focus of the first seven years of Christianity was to bring in fellow Jews; thereafter, the Gentile population became more the target audience. Therefore, we see that Matthew‘s publishing of his Gospel in two languages was simply responding to two audience needs. We might ask if these writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures were bringing their material to their audience in any way different from the other writers of their time. The Apostle Paul‘s formal letters were styled after such Greek notables as Isocrates and Plato. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John followed the form of the Greek historian Herodotus. Many of these New Testament writers used professional scribes to bring their works to market: Tertius with Paul, Silas with Peter, Silas composing the letter from the governing body of elders in Jerusalem to Antioch, Theophilus funding Luke‘s two productions. Philip Comfort helps us to appreciate the following: As recorded by Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 3:24:5–7), Irenaeus tells us that Mark and Luke ―published their Gospels‖ using the Greek word ekdosis, the standard term for the public dissemination of any writing. Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3:1:1) also said, ―John, the disciple of the Lord, he who had leaned on his breast, also published [ekdoke] the Gospel, while living at Ephesus in Asia.‖ For John to publish his Gospel means that he (with the help of the Johannine community) made a distribution of multiple copies of his Gospel.218
216
Translation from the Latin text edited by E. C. Richardson and published in the series ―Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur,‖ Leipzig, 1896, Vol. 14: 8–9. 217 The Ecclesiastical History, VI, XXV, 3–6. 218 P. W. Comfort (1992), 45.
380
Bibliography Colwell, Ernest C. Scribal Habits in Early Papyri: A Study in the Corruption of the Text. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965. Comfort, Philip. Encounterring the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography and Textual Criticism. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005. Comfort, Philip Wesley. The Quest for the Original Text of the New Testament. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 1992. Greenlee, J Harold. Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995. —. The Text of the New Testament. Peabody: Henrickson, 2008. Kenton, F. Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts . London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1895. Metzger, Bruce M. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Transmission. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 1968, 1992. Reed, R. Ancient Skins, Parchments and Leathers. New York: Academic Press Inc, 1973. Roberts, Colin H. Manuscript, Society, and Belief in Early Christian Egypt. London: Oxford University Press, 1979. Roberts, Colin H., and Theodore C. Skeat. The Birth of the Codex. London: Oxford University Press, 1987.
381
CHAPTER 34 ESTABLISHING THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT In Search of the Original The majority of scholars today believe that recovering the original Greek New Testament is outside the realm of possibility. Lee Martin MacDonald writes: ―The traditional goal of textual criticism has been to establish the ‗original‘ or earliest possible biblical text, but the overwhelming number of textual variants and the overlapping of several textual traditions make that goal a significant if not impossible challenge. Some scholars continue the hope of recovering the originals and eliminating all ambiguities in the present texts, but they appear to be in the minority.‖219
What do we mean by ‗in search of the original‘? Because the terms original and autograph are used interchangeably, it can cause confusion at times if not differentiated. As was explained in chapter seven of this book, there is a difference between the two terms ‗autograph‘ and ‗original.‘ The autograph is the very initial penning of the book by the writer, or what he has dictated to his scribe, who has taken it down in short hand. Once finished, this autograph would be corrected by the author and the scribe if there was one. After being corrected the scribe or the author would produce the corrected version and sign it. This corrected version is actually the original, the published version. It should be mentioned again that this original can be referred to as an exemplar (one from which further copies are made) as well. It is the original that we wish to get back to, the corrected published edition, not the autograph. Some critics have caused further confusion by the fact that our copies are not inspired, and thousands of variations crept into them over the first fourteen centuries. While this is certainly true, it is not the complete picture, because we have the next four centuries of restoration, work done by hundreds of textual scholars around the world. If asked, ―Are our copies inspired, without error?‖ the short answer would have to be No. However, that answer does need to be qualified with the thought of ‗what do we have if we have the exact representation of the original?‘ If we can get back to what was written in the originals, the exact wording of that corrected edition that was first published, ‗what do we have?‘ Can we then claim to have an inspired copy? We know 2 Timothy 3:16 informs us with an inspired statement that it is the Scripture, the words that were inspired in the autographs, yet there was still a need for the scribe and author to review it and make needed corrections, creating the corrected edition. We do not have 219
L. M. McDonald, Forgotten Scriptures: The Selection and Rejection of Early Religious Writings (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, July 13, 2009), 184.
382
any such confirmation that any textual committee NA/UBS has inspired results. However, a critical edition that has the potential to give us the exact wording of the original is nothing short of the original itself, correct? Today we have a storehouse of external evidence: original language manuscripts, versions, apostolic quotations, and lectionaries that take us ever closer to the recovery of the original. Textual scholar Paul D. Wegner, author of A Student’s Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible, has addressed this for both the Old and the New Testaments: Careful examination of these manuscripts has served to strengthen our assurance that our Modern Greek and Hebrew texts are very close to the original autographs, even though we do not have those autographs.220 (2006, 301)* *It seems that Dr. Wegner is using “autograph” interchangeably here, as we had stated above, to mean the first correct published edition.
Believing that Establishing the Original is Possible B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort believed that they had established the original text with their New Testament in the Original Greek (1881). The producers of the 4th edition of the Greek New Testament, United Bible Societies‘ Corrected Edition (1993),* and Kurt and Barbara Aland in their 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek-English New Testament (1993),** believed that these critical texts are the closest anyone has achieved in establishing the original. Westcott and Hort looked to the earliest manuscripts of their day as their foundation for the original text; the Alands, while appreciating the early texts, did move away to the reasoned eclectic approach.*** Sadly, many modern textual scholars have abandoned the hope of ever establishing the original text, or accepting that the above-mentioned texts are anywhere near living up to that claim. This author personally finds it ironic that the idea of establishing the original text became less and less of a concern to the textual scholar over the 20th century as liberal progressive scholarship consumed conservative scholarship throughout that same century. The reader must determine his own view regarding the correlation. *Referred to as UBS4 **Referred to as NA27. It should be noted that the Greek text of the NA and the UBS4 are exactly the same, but their apparatuses are different. The NA27 is more for the scholar, the pastor, and the Bible student and deals with far more variants and offers more evidence for each variant, while the UBS4 is more for the Bible translator and considers only the variants they deem important to Bible translation. 27
***This approach addresses textual criticism by looking to internal and external evidence. However, many with this approach do lean too heavily on internal evidence. Also, while they value early manuscripts, they choose Paul D. Wegner, A Student’s Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible (InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove 2006), 301. 220
383
the best reading from a consideration of all manuscripts, believing that anyone can carry the original, avoiding preferences. Westcott and Hort sought to establish the original text by choosing the most faithful text or family of texts, the Alexandrian family [specifically the Codex Vaticanus, designated B] and worked from there to establish their critical text. Again, modern-day scholarship has abandoned both the idea of establishing the original and of choosing a trusted text or family of texts as a foundation. They have adopted the new approach of ‗reasoned eclecticism.‘ In this, all manuscripts are placed on equal footing. They simply look to all text-types and decide which variant gave rise to all others. They also give more weight to internal evidence over the external evidence of manuscripts. This writer feels that this transition has caused the greatest harm to textual criticism over all else. Philip Wesley Comfort, an author who wrote a book featured at the end of the chapter as a recommended reading, has not given up that it is possible to establish the original text. He finds this hope in the very earliest papyri, the Alexandrian text. It is his position, shared by others such as Larry W. Hurtado and Eldon Jay Epp, that the very early Alexandrian (Egyptian) text represents what the whole of the Christian writings must have looked like at that time. Writings of the early church fathers such as Irenaeus, Marcion, and Hippolytus reflect the Alexandrian form of the text.
The Westcott and Hort Approach It appears that the answers to establishing the original text of the Christian Greek Scriptures lie within the Westcott and Hort approach. There are 13 papyrus manuscripts that date from about 85–200 C.E. and there are another 31 papyrus manuscripts that date from the 3rd century C.E. It is from these manuscripts, especially the earliest ones that we are going to be able to establish the original text. Tregelles, Tischendorf, and Westcott and Hort hung their textual hats on the two best manuscripts of their day, the Sinaiticus (c. 360) and the Vaticanus (c. 350), and rightly so. P75 (c.150–200) contains most of Luke and John and has vindicated Westcott and Hort for their choice of Vaticanus as the premium manuscript for establishing the original text. After a careful study of P75 against the Vaticanus codex, scholars have found that they are just short of being identical. In his introduction to the Greek text, Hort argues that the Vaticanus codex is a ―very pure line of very ancient text.‖221 Of course, Westcott and Hort were not aware of P75 that would be published in 1961, about 80 years later.
Were the Early Copyist Trained? The perception expressed in the above heading is a long held belief that is mistaken. The early Christian congregations were not isolated from one another. The regions from Rome to Greece, to Asia, to Syria and Palestine and Egypt, were all connected by the Roman roads and maritime travel.* From the days of Pentecost onward, Jewish or Jewish proselyte Christians returned to Egypt with the good news of Christ. (Acts 2:10) 221 B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort, Introduction [and] Appendix, Vol. 2 of New Testament in the Original Greek (London: Macmillan and Company, 1881), 251.
384
Three years thereafter, the Ethiopian eunuch traveled home with the good news as well. (Acts 8:26–39). Apollos of Alexandria, Egypt, a renowned speaker, came out of Egypt with the knowledge of John the Baptizer, and arrived in Ephesus in about 52 C. E. (Acts 18:24, 25) The apostle Paul traveled over 20,000 miles throughout the Roman Empire establishing congregations. The apostles were a restraint to the apostasy and division within the whole of the 1st century Christian congregation. (2 Thessalonians 2:6, 7; 1 John 2:18) It was not until the 2nd century that the next generation of religious leaders gradually moved left of center. Conservative Christianity was strong and centered against Gnosticism, Roman persecution, and Jewish hatred. *People of the first three centuries sent and received letters and books from all over the Roman Empire. To give just two examples: the Shepherd of Hermas was written in Rome and found its way to Egypt within a few decades; Irenaeus’ Against Heresies was written in Gaul and made it to Egypt (Oxyrhynchus) within short order. It is conceivable that by 55 C.E. there would have been a thriving congregation in Alexandrian Egypt, with its huge Jewish population.222 (Acts 11:19, ESV) ―Now those who were scattered because of the persecution that arose over Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia and Cyprus and Antioch, speaking the word to no one except Jews.‖ While this indicates a traveling north to Antioch, it does not negate a traveling south to Egypt. Antioch is obviously mentioned because it played the major role as a commencement for 1st century Christianity, especially for the apostle Paul. The Coptic Church claims the Gospel writer Mark as its founder and first patriarch. Tradition has it that he preached in Egypt just before the middle of the 1 st century. At any rate, Christianity spread to Egypt and North Africa at an early date. In fact, it became a prominent religious center, with a noted scholar named Pantaenus, who founded a catechetical school in Alexandria, Egypt, about 160 C.E. In about 180 C.E. another prominent scholar, Clement of Alexandria, took over his position. It is Clement who really put this religious educational institution on the map as the possible center for the whole of the Christian congregation throughout the Roman Empire. The persecution that came about the year 202 C.E. forced Clement to flee Alexandria, but he was replaced by one of the most noted scholars of early Christian history, Origen. And it was Origen who took this scholarly environment to Caesarea in 231 C.E. and started yet another prominent school and scriptorium. What does all of this mean? Of course, we cannot know absolutely, but textual scholars Philip W. Comfort,223 Larry W. Hurtado,224 and Eldon Jay Epp believe that the very early Alexandrian manuscripts that we now possess are a reflection of what would 222 Macquarie University, Ancient History Documentary Research Center (AHDRC), Papyri from the Rise of Christianity in Egypt (PCE), http://www.anchist.mq.edu.au/doccentre/PCEhomepage.html. 223 Philip W. Comfort, The Quest for the Original Text of the New Testament (Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1992). 224 Larry W. Hurtado, The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 2006).
385
have been found throughout the whole of the Greco-Roman Empire from about 85–275 C.E. In other words, if we were to discover early manuscripts from other regions (Rome, Greece, Asia, and Palestine), they would be very similar to the early Alexandrian manuscripts. This means that these early papyri are the means of establishing the original text, and we are in a far better position today than were Westcott and Hort. Those who have abandoned all hope of such a venture would argue differently, saying that ‗oldest is not necessarily best.‘ For these scholars, the original reading could be found in any manuscript. They continue with the approach that the reading that produced the other readings is likely the original. While on the surface this sounds great, it is not as solid a principle as one might think. On this issue, Comfort writes: For example, two scholars, using this principle to examine the same variant, may not agree. One might argue that the variant was produced by a copyist attempting to emulate the author‘s style; the other could claim the same variant has to be original because it accords with the author‘s style. Or, one might argue that a variant was produced by an orthodox scribe attempting to rid the text of a reading that could be used to promote heterodoxy or heresy; another might claim that the same variant has to be original because it is orthodox and accords with Christian doctrine (thus a heterodoxical or heretical scribe must have changed it). Furthermore, this principle allows for the possibility that the reading selected for the text can be taken from any manuscript of any date. This can lead to subjective eclecticism.225 Either reasoned eclecticism or the local-genealogical method* will lean more heavily on internal evidence, setting off external evidence as being of less importance. However, as Ernest Colwell suggested in 1968, we need to get back to the principles of Westcott and Hort. Hort wrote in his 1882 Introduction: ―Documentary attestation has been in most cases allowed to confer the place of honour as against internal evidence.‖226 *This method holds that a variant can be established as original and can come from any given manuscript(s).
Trustworthiness of Early Copyists It has become common to suggest that the earliest copyists were of two sorts: 1) semiliterate and unskilled in the work of making copies; 2) feeling the end was nigh and therefore taking liberties with the text in an attempt to strengthen orthodoxy. The former would undoubtedly lead to many unintentional changes, while the latter would certainly escalate intentional changes. J. Harold Greenlee had this to say: "In the very early period, the NT writings were more nearly ―private‖ writings than the classics . . . the classics were commonly—although not always—copied by professional scribes, the NT books were probably usually copied in the early period by Christians who were not professionally trained for the task, and no corrector was P. W. Comfort (1992), 38–39. Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in the Original Greek, Vol. 2: Introduction, Appendix, (1882), 17. 225 226
386
employed to check the copyist‘s work against his exemplar (the MS from which the copy was made). . . . It appears that copyist sometimes even took liberty to add or change minor details in the narrative books on the basis of personal knowledge, alternative tradition, or a parallel account in another book of the Bible. . . . At the same time, the importance of these factors in affecting the purity of the NT text must not be exaggerated. The NT books doubtless came to be considered as ―literature‖ soon after they began to be circulated, with attention to the precise wording required when copies were made."227 Greenlee had not changed his position 14 years later, when he wrote the following: "The New Testament, on the other hand, was probably copied during the earliest period mostly by ordinary Christians who were not professional scribes but who wanted a copy of the New Testament book or books for themselves or for other Christians."228 Generally, once an established concept is set within the world of textual scholars it is not so easily displaced. During the start of the 20th century (1900–1930), there were a handful of papyri discovered that obviously were the work of a copyist who had no training in making copies. It is during this time that Sir Frederic Kenyon, director and principal librarian of the British Museum for many years, said: “The early Christians, a poor, scattered, often illiterate body, looking for the return of the Lord at no distant date, were not likely to care sedulously for minute accuracy of transcription or to preserve their books religiously for the benefit of posterity.”229 The first papyri discovered showed this to be the case. But as more papyri came to light, it proved to be just the opposite, prompting Sir Frederic Kenyon to write: “We must be content to know that the general authenticity of the New Testament text has been remarkably supported by the modern discoveries which have so greatly reduced the interval between the original autographs and our earliest extant manuscripts, and that the differences of reading, interesting as they are, do not affect the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith.”230 Some of the earliest manuscripts that we now have show that they were copied by a professional scribe. Many of the other papyri give evidence that they were copied by a semiprofessional hand, while most of these early papyri give evidence of being done by a copyist that was literate and experienced. Therefore, the vast majority of our early papyri were done by either literate or semiprofessional copyists, with some being done 227
J. Harold Greenlee, Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism (Revised Edition, 1995), 51–
228
J. Harold Greenlee, The Text of the New Testament: From Manuscript to Modern Edition (2008),
229
F. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (1895), 157. F. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (1962), 249.
52. 37. 230
387
by professionals. As it happened, the few poorly copied manuscripts came to light first, establishing a precedent that was difficult for some to shake when the truckload of evidence came forth that showed just the opposite. The writers of the 27 books comprising the Christian Greek Scriptures were Jews. (Romans 13:1, 2) These men were either apostles, intimate traveling companions of the apostles, or picked by Christ in a supernatural way, such as the apostle Paul. Being Jewish, they would have viewed the Old Testament as being the inspired, inerrant Word of God. When Paul said that ―all Scripture is inspired of God,‖ he was likely referring to the Septuagint as well as the Hebrew Old Testament. These writers of the 27 New Testament books would have viewed the teachings of Jesus, or their books expounding on his teachings, as Scripture as well as the Old Testament. The teachings of Jesus came to most of these New Testament writers personally from Jesus, being taught orally; thereafter, they would be the ones who published what Jesus had said and taught orally. When it came time to be published in written form, it should be remembered that Jesus had promised them: ―The Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.―John 14:26, ESV. The early first-century Hebrew Christian [or Gentile] copyists were very much aware of the traditions that the Jewish scribes followed in meticulously copying their texts. These copyists would have immediately understood that they were copying sacred texts. In fact, our early papyri show evidence of shared features with the Jewish Sopherim, those men who copied the Hebrew Scriptures in Jesus‘ day. You will find common features when you compare the Jewish Greek Old Testament and the Christian Old Testament with the Christian Greek Scriptures―such things as an enlarged letter at the beginning of each line, and the invention of the nomen sacrum to deal with God‘s personal name. Instead of penning the Tetragrammaton from the Greek Septuagint in front of them, the copyists invented the nomen sacrum KC. Marginal notes, accents, breathing marks, punctuation, corrections, double punctuation marks (which indicate the flow of text); all of this indicates an adoption of scribal practices of the Sopherim by Jewish Christian writers and scribes. With the exception of Matthew, all writers of the New Testament published their books in koinē, the common Greek of the day. Matthew initially published his Gospel in Hebrew, and shortly thereafter in koinē Greek. In his work Concerning Illustrious Men, chapter III, Jerome says: ―Matthew, who is also Levi, and who from a publican came to be an apostle, first of all composed a Gospel of Christ in Judaea in the Hebrew language and characters for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed.‖231 Early in the 3rd century, Origen, in discussing the Gospels, is quoted by Eusebius as saying that the ―first was written . . . according to Matthew, . . . who published it for those who from Judaism came to believe, composed as it was in the Hebrew language.‖232 Initially, the 231
Translation from the Latin text edited by E. C. Richardson and published in the series ―Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur,‖ Leipzig, 1896, Vol. 14: 8–9. 232 The Ecclesiastical History, VI, XXV, 3–6.
388
primary focus of the first seven years of Christianity was to bring in fellow Jews; thereafter, the Gentile population became more the target audience. Therefore, we see that Matthew‘s publishing of his Gospel in two languages was simply responding to two audience needs. We might ask if these writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures were bringing their material to their audience in any way different from the other writers of their time. The apostle Paul‘s formal letters were styled after such Greek notables as Isocrates and Plato. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John followed the form of the Greek historian Herodotus. Many of these New Testament writers used professional scribes to bring their works to market: Tertius with Paul, Silas with Peter, Silas composing the letter from the governing body of elders in Jerusalem to Antioch, Theophilus funding Luke‘s two productions. Philip Comfort helps us to appreciate the following: As recorded by Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 3:24:5–7), Irenaeus tells us that Mark and Luke ―published their Gospels‖ using the Greek word ekdosis, the standard term for the public dissemination of any writing. Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3:1:1) also said, ―John, the disciple of the Lord, he who had leaned on his breast, also published [ekdoke] the Gospel, while living at Ephesus in Asia.‖ For John to publish his Gospel means that he (with the help of the Johannine community) made a distribution of multiple copies of his Gospel.233
Public Reading Public reading is yet another serious inference that the first century Christian congregation valued the books that were being produced by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James, and Jude, and copied for future generations. Matthew 24:15 (ESV): So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), . . . This parenthetical ―let the reader understand‖ is reference to a public reader within the congregations. 1 Timothy 4:13 (ESV): Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, to teaching. Again, this is Paul exhorting Timothy in public reading that would be before the Christian congregation. Revelation 1:3 (ESV): Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear, and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near. This reference to the ―one who reads aloud‖ is to the public reader of those in each of the seven mentioned congregations. Another factor is how the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures view their own published works.
233
P. W. Comfort (1992), 45.
389
2 Peter 3:16 (ESV): . . . as he does in all his [Paul’s] letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.— (Italics added.) Here, about 64 C.E., we have the apostle Peter, who has just canonized Paul‘s letters, grouping them together as a collection. This is evidence of their being viewed as having authority. At 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:20 (ESV), both the apostles Paul and Peter appear to be referring to both the Hebrew Old Testament and the Christian Greek writings as [graphe] ―Scripture.‖ Please take note that Peter is comparing Paul‘s letters to ―the other Scriptures.” What exactly does that mean? Both Jesus and the other writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures often used graphe in their references to Moses‘ writings and the prophets, viewing them as having authority from Jehovah God, being inspired. Many times Jesus designates these Old Testament books as a whole as graphe, ―Scripture.‖ (Matthew 21:42; 22:29; Mark 14:49; John 5:39; Acts 17:11; 18:24, 28, ESV) At other times the singular for ―Scripture‖ was used when quoting a specific text to make a point, referring to it as a whole of writings encompassing our 39 books of the Hebrew Old Testament. (Romans 9:17; Galatians 3:8) Still, at other times ―graphe‖ is used in a single text reference, such as Jesus‘ reference when dealing with the Jewish religious leaders: ―Have you not read this [graphe] Scripture: ‗The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.‘‖ (Mark 12:10) Jesus‘ use of ―graphe‖ in such an authoritative way only strengthens my point that immediately the writings of the Christian Greek Scriptures were viewed as ―graphe.‖ With what we have already discussed as to the level of skilled copying of the early papyri, obviously the scribal practices of Alexandria, Egypt, have played a large role in this. As historical records have shown, Alexandria had a huge Jewish population. We can imagine a large, predominately Jewish, Christian congregation early on as the Gospel made its way throughout that land. This congregation maintained serious ties with their brothers in Jerusalem and Antioch. Then, there was the Didaskelion catechetical school of Alexandria that had some of the most influential Church Fathers as head instructors, as has already been stated, but is worth repeating: Pantaenus took over and was in charge from about 160–190 C.E., Clement being his greatest student, and Origen, who took this school to Caesarea in 231, establishing a second school and scriptorium. As the Greek Septuagint originates from Alexandria, and the vast majority of the earliest New Testament papyri also originate in Egypt [Fayum and Oxyrhynchus], it is quite clear that the above-mentioned Church Fathers would have accessed the Septuagint and the Christian Greek Scriptures in their writings and evangelistic work. Origen, who learned from both Clement and Pantaenus, has written more than most early leaders of Christianity, and his writings are a reflection of the early New Testament papyri, as is true with Clement and his writings. Being that Clement studied under Pantaenus, it is not difficult to surmise that his would as well. So, it truly is not a stretch to suggest that going in reverse chronologically, Origen, Clement, Pantaenus, and those who studied with Pantaenus and brought him into Christianity from Stoic philosophy, were using texts that 390
were mirror-like reflections of the original texts of the Christian Greek Scriptures. Church historian Eusebius helps us to appreciate just how early this school was; note how he expresses it: About the same time, the school of the faithful was governed by a man most distinguished for his learning, whose name was Pantaenus. There had been a school of sacred learning established there from ancient times, which has continued down to our own times, and which we have understood was held by men able in eloquence and the study of divine things. The tradition is that this philosopher was then in great eminence, as he had been first disciplined in the philosophical principles of those called stoics. 234 What does all of this mean? It means that in the second and third centuries C.E., the scholarship and scribal practices of Alexandria had a tremendous impact on all of Egypt and as far south as the Fayum and Oxyrhynchus. It means that a standard text of the Christian Greek Scriptures reflecting the originals came up out of Egypt during the second century. The Alexandrian Library had been a force for influencing stringent scholarship and setting high standards from the third century B.C.E. onward. Is it mere coincidence that the four greatest libraries and learning centers were located in the very places that Christianity had its original growth: Alexandria, Pergamum near Ephesus, Rome, and Antioch? The congregations within these cities and nearby ones would be greatly influenced by their book production. F. J. A. Hort, of the Westcott and Hort text, wrote: The great bulk of the words of the New Testament stand out above all discriminative processes of criticism, because they are free from variation, and need only to be transcribed. . . . If comparative trivialities . . . are set aside, the words in our opinion still subject to doubt can hardly amount to more than a thousandth part of the whole New Testament.235 Sir Frederic Kenyon made this reassuring statement in the introduction to his seven volumes entitled The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri: The first and most important conclusion derived from the examination of them [the Papyri] is the satisfactory one that they confirm the essential soundness of the existing texts. No striking or fundamental variation is shown either in the Old or the New Testament. There are no important omissions or additions of passages, and no variations which affect vital facts or doctrines. The variations of text affect minor matters, such as the order of words or the precise words used. . . . But their essential importance is their confirmation, by evidence of an earlier date than was hitherto available, of the integrity of our existing texts. In this respect they are an acquisition of epoch-making value.236 In reference to the Christian Greek Scriptures, Kenyon stated:
234
Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5:10:1. 235 The New Testament in the Original Greek, Vol. I (1974), 561. 236 London, Fasciculus I (1933), 15.
391
―The interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.‖237 Of interest are these further comments of Kenyon: “We must be content to know that the general authenticity of the New Testament text has been remarkably supported by the modern discoveries which have so greatly reduced the interval between the original autographs and our earliest extant manuscripts, and that the differences of reading, interesting as they are, do not affect the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith.”238 Professor Kurt Aland wrote: ―It can be determined, on the basis of 40 years of experience and with the results which have come to light in examining . . . manuscripts at 1,200 test places: The text of the New Testament has been excellently transmitted, better than any other writing from ancient times; the possibility that manuscripts might yet be found that would change its text decisively is zero.‖239 While these chapters on textual criticism and establishing the original text of the Christian Greek Scriptures are far from exhaustive; they are to awaken the reader to the possibilities. Below you will find further reading should you desire to take an investigative look into this matter. To sum up, what can we say of the textual integrity and authenticity after twenty centuries of transmitting our New Testament text by hand and the printing press since 1455? We not only have over 5,700 manuscripts of the original languages but the past 70 years has seen the discovery of papyri that can take us back within ten years of the Apostle John‘s authorized letters, 110 C.E. Then, there are the more than 8,000 manuscripts of various other languages, as well as the quotations from the church fathers. This treasure-trove has given us a dependable Greek text within the NA27 and the UBS4 editions. However, there are some improvements that can be made to these critical texts, because the 26th and 27th editions of the Nestle-Aland text decided to make revisions to set itself further apart from the Westcott and Hort text of 1881. In this they have ignored the testimony of the earliest manuscripts and codex Vaticanus, and have rejected
237 238
F. Kenyon, The Bible and Archaeology (New York, London: Harper & Brothers, 1940), 288–9. F. Kenyon, Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts (New York, London: Harper & Brothers, 1962),
249. 239 K. Aland, Das Neue Testament—zuverlässig überliefert [The New Testament—Reliably Transmitted] (Stuttgart, 1986), 27–28.
392
hundreds of readings by relegating them to the margin, or to the critical apparatus, leaving the inferior reading in the main text within brackets. I will close on a positive note, for what we have is essentially the original text, and for those who refuse to focus on such, the evidence is there for translators to disagree with the critical edition of Nestle-Aland when their committee sidesteps the earliest evidence. While the original authors were inspired, the copyists were not. Therefore, we have had hundreds of textual scholars over four centuries pouring through these thousands of manuscripts to establish the original readings so as to provide us with the very word of God.
393
Recommended Reading Aland, K., and B. Aland. The Text of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. Bauckham, R. The Gospel for All Christians: Rethinking the Gospel Audience. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. Brinton, L. J. The Development of English Aspectual Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Casson, L. Travel in the Ancient World . London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994. Colwell, E. C. Hort Redivivus: A Plea and a Program. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1968. ———. Scribal Habits in Early Papyri: A Study in the Corruption of the Text. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965. Comfort, P. Encountering the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography and Textual Criticism. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005. Comfort, P. W. New Testament Text and Translation Commentary. Carol Stream: Tyndale House Publishers, 2008. ———. P. W. The Quest for the Original Text of the New Testament. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 1992. Comfort, P., and D. Barret. The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001. Epp, E. J. Textual Criticism. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989. Fee, G. D. P75, P66, and Origen: The Myth of the Early Textual Recension in Alexandria. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974. Fee, G. D. The Textual Criticism of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979. Finney, P. C. Art, Archaeology, and Architecture of Early Christianity. New York: Garland, 1993. Gamble, H. Y. Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts. New Haven: New Haven University Press, 1995. Greenlee, J. H. Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995. Holmes, M. W. New Testament Textual Criticism. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989.
394
Hurtado, L. W. The Earliest Christian Artifacts: Manuscripts and Christian Origins. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006. Lightfoot, N. R. How We Got the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1963, 1988, 2003. McDonald, Lee Martin. Forgotten Scriptures: The Selection and Rejection of Early Religious Writings. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press , July 13, 2009. Metzger, B. M. The Text of the New Testament: Its transmission, Corruption, and Transmission. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 1968, 1992. Nobbs, A. M.-M. Ancient History Documentary Research Centre (AHDRC), June, 2005. Retrieved August 22, 2009, from Papyri from the Rise of Christianity in Egypt (PRCE): http://www.anchist.mq.edu.au/doccentre/PCEhomepage.htm. Olsen, M. B. A Semantic and Pragmatic Model of Lexical and Grammatical Aspect. Florence: Routledge, 1997. Roberts, C. H. Manuscript, Society, and Belief in Early Christian Egypt. London: Oxford University Press, 1979. Roberts, C. H., and T. C. Skeat. The Birth of the Codex. London: Oxford University Press, 1987. Ryken, L. Bible as Literature. Wheaton: Tyndale, 1992. Westcott, B. F., and F. J. A. Hort. The New Testament in the Original Greek, Vol 1. London: Macmillan, 1881. ———. The New Testament in the Original Greek, Vol. 2: Introduction, Appendix. London: Macmillan, 1882. Zuntz, G. The Text of the Epistles: A Disquisition upon the Corpus Paulinum. London: Oxford University Press, 1953.
395
CHAPTER 35 THE FACTS ABOUT THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS In the spring of 1947, a Bedouin shepherd threw a stone into a cave, marking an event that would be heard around the world, making the name ―Dead Sea Scrolls‖ more known than any other associated with archaeology. As he released one of his rocks into the cave, the sound of a breaking earthenware jar came back at him. Upon further examination, he discovered the first of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The discovery of the scrolls rise to fame has been partly fueled by the controversy among scholars and the media. Sadly, this has left a public scandal, where those not in the know, are thrown back and forth by confusion and misinformation. Stories have spread about an enormous conspiracy, driven by anxiety that the scrolls disclose details that would damage the faith of Christians and Jews as well. Nevertheless, what is the real importance of these scrolls? More than 63 years have now gone by; is it possible that the facts can be known?
The Dead Sea Scrolls: What are They? The Dead Sea Scrolls are manuscripts of the Old Testament. Many of them are in Hebrew, with some being in Aramaic, and a small number in Greek. Many of these scrolls and fragments date to the third and second Century B.C.E., almost 300 years before the birth of Jesus Christ. There were seven lengthy manuscripts in various stages of deterioration that had been acquired from the Bedouin. Soon other caves were being searched, with new discoveries of scrolls and fragments in the thousands. A total of eleven caves near Qumran, by the Dead Sea, were discovered between 1947 and 1956 Since, it has been determined that there are actually 800 manuscripts, once all the scrolls and fragment are considered. About 200 manuscripts, or about twenty-five percent, are copies of portions of the Old Testament. The other seventy-five percent, or 600 manuscripts, belong to ancient non-Biblical Jewish writings, divided between Apocrypha240 and Pseudepigrapha.241 Various scrolls that produced the greatest interest for the scholars were formerly unknown texts. Among these were the interpretations on matters of the Jewish law, detailed instructions for the community of the Qumran sect, eschatological works that disclose interpretations about the outcome of Bible prophecy and the end times, as well 240
―The Protestant designation for the fourteen or fifteen books of doubtful authenticity and authority that are not found in the Hebrew Old Testament but are in manuscripts of the LXX; most of these books were declared canonical by the Roman Catholic church at the Council of Trent in 1546, and they call these books deuterocanonical (second canon).‖―Geisler 1986, 637. 241 ―A word meaning ―false writings‖ and used to designate those spurious and unauthentic books of the late centuries B.C. and early centuries A.D. These books contain religious folklore and have never been considered canonical by the Christian church.‖―Geisler 1986, 642.
396
as liturgical poems and prayers. Among them too were unique Bible commentaries, the oldest examples of verse-by-verse242 commentary on Biblical passages.
The Dead Sea Scrolls: Who Wrote Them? After carefully dating these fragile documents, it has been determined that they were copied or composed sometime between the third century B.C.E and the first century C.E. A handful of scholars have suggested that these scrolls were hidden in the caves by Jews that fled just before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 C.E. However, the vast majority of scholars find this to be mere speculation, because the content of the scrolls tells something quite different. For example, many scrolls reveal an outlook and customs that were in conflict to the religious leaders in Jerusalem. The Dead Sea Scrolls disclose a community that held the belief that God did not approve of the priests and temple service in Jerusalem. On the other hand, they believed that God saw their form of worship in the desert as a substitute temple service until the return of the Messiah. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that the authorities at Jerusalem‘s temple would be in possession of such scrolls. The Qumran community likely had a scriptorium (a room in a monastery for storing, copying, illustrating, or reading manuscripts), it is likely that people who became a part of the community brought scrolls in with them when they joined. Therefore, the Dead Sea Scrolls are a broad library collection. As is true of any extensive collection of books, the subject matter will be a wide range of thought, which will not reflect the thinking, or religious worldview of any give reader within the community. Nevertheless, those texts, which encompass numerous copies, are more likely to reflect the general beliefs of the Qumran community as a whole.
The Qumran Residents: Were they Essenes? Now that we have determined that, the Dead Sea Scrolls were the library of Qumran community, who were its people? Early on, in 1947 Professor Eleazar Sukenik obtained three scrolls from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem; thereafter, suggesting that these scrolls had belonged to The Essene Community. First century writers Josephus, Philo of Alexandria, and Pliny the elder are our main source of information for this Jewish sect, the Essenes. There is no real consensus on their origin, but most scholars agree that they seem to have arisen following the Jewish Maccabean revolt in the second century B.C.E. The first century Jewish historian Josephus described their existence during that period as he sketched their religious views as opposed to the Pharisees and Sadducees. On the other hand, Pliny talks about the whereabouts of a community of Essenes by the Dead Sea between Jericho and En-gedi. Professor James VanderKam, a Dead Sea Scroll scholar, suggests, ―the Essenes who lived at Qumran were just a small part of the larger Essene movement,‖ 243 which
242
Of course, there are no verses in these ancient text, it is simply running text.
397
Josephus numbered to about four thousand. While this certainly does not perfectly fit the picture, what comes from the Qumran texts appears to match the Essenes better than any other known Jewish group in that period. While dismissed by most scholars, a few have suggested that Christianity grew up out of the Qumran community. However, the differences between these two communities are far too great, to even take serious such suggestions. For example, the Qumran writing contains an ultra-strict Sabbath regulations and an almost fanatical obsession with ceremonial purity. (Matthew 15:1-20; Luke 6:1-11) This would hold true as well with the Essenes‘ isolation from society, their position on the immortality of the soul, the stress they place on celibacy and spiritual concepts about sharing with angels in their worship. All of this puts them at odds with Jesus and the early Christian congregation.—Matthew 5:14-16; John 11:23, 24; Colossians 2:18; 1 Timothy 4:1-3.
No Conspiracy, No Secret Scrolls Contrary to the cover-up theorists, after the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, numerous publications were released over the years that made those first finds accessible to scholars around the world. Nevertheless, the thousands of fragments from Cave 4 were proving far more awkward. These were not getting beyond the hands of a small international group of scholars operating in East Jerusalem (then part of Jordan) at the Palestine Archaeological Museum. The Jewish and Israeli scholars were strangely missing from this team. Fueling this cover-up theory, the team established a rule of not permitting access to the scrolls up until they published the official results of their research. The amount of scholars on the group was reserved to a fixed maximum. At the time of a group member‘s death, only one scholar would be added in his place. The volume of work required a considerably larger team, and in some cases, more expertise was badly needed in ancient Hebrew and Aramaic. James VanderKam worded it this way: ―Tens of thousands of fragments were more than eight experts, however skilled, could handle.‖244 East Jerusalem and its scrolls came under Israeli jurisdiction after the Six-Day war in 1967. However, this did not result in a different policy change. This delay in publish the scrolls of cave 4 went from years to decades, scholars around the world were in an uproar. Professor Geza Vermes of Oxford University, in 1977, called it the academic scandal par excellence of the 20th century. Stories were now spreading that the Catholic Church was deliberately concealing information that would shatter the long held beliefs of Christianity. The team of scholars was expanded to twenty in the 1980‘s. Then, in the 1990‘s, Emmanuel Tov, the newly appointed chief of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, was
243
James VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today. (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2010), 127. 244
Ibid., 232
398
able to get the number of scholars to fifty. At this point, they set a strict schedule for publishing the remaining scrolls. However,, in 1991, the development everyone had been waiting for arrived suddenly. First, A Preliminary Edition of the Unpublished Dead Sea Scrolls was published. This was put together through the assistance of a computer program, which reconstructed Cave 4 texts from a decades-old concordance. Thereafter, the Huntington Library in San Marino, California, announced that they would make available to any scholars their whole set of photographs of the scrolls. After a short time, with the publication of A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, photographs of the formerly unpublished scrolls became available with no trouble. Therefore, for the last two decades, all the Dead Sea Scrolls have been accessible for investigation. The examination discloses that there was no conspiracy; no secret scrolls that would have affected Christianity. Nevertheless, what significance does this investigation have for the average Bible student?
The Dead Sea Scrolls: Why Would They be of Interest Us? Prior to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest manuscripts of the Old Testament were dated to about the ninth and tenth centuries C.E., known as the Masoretic texts (MT).245 The Hebrew Old Testament was complete in the middle of the fifth century B.C.E., over 1,400 years earlier than these MT. Therefore, the question begs to be asked, ‗can we trust this MT as really being the Word of God?‘ A member of the international team of editors of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Professor Julio Trebolle Barrera, states: ―The Isaiah Scroll [from Qumran] provides irrefutable proof that the transmission of the biblical text through a period of more than one thousand years by the hands of Jewish copyists has been extremely faithful and careful.‖ (Martínez, Barrera and Barrera 1995, 99) The Isaiah scrolls identified as ―IQisaa‖ and ―IQIsab‖ are complete copies of the book of Isaiah, but the latter is the earliest known copy of a complete Bible book. Both are from cave 1. Gleason Archer had this to say about the two Isaiah scrolls that ―proved to be word for word identical with the standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95% of the text. The 5% of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling.‖ (Archer 1994, 19) Up to now, over 200 Biblical manuscripts have come out of the Qumran caves; representing portions of every Old Testament book except Esther. The Isaiah scrolls of Cave 1 are an exception to the rule, as most of the others are mere fragments, containing less than 10% of any given book. The books that are the most often quoted in the New Testament are, in fact, the most popular among the Qumran community: Psalms (36 copies), Deuteronomy (29 copies), and Isaiah (21 copies).
245
Hebrew Bible: the traditional text of the Hebrew Bible, revised and annotated by Jewish scholars between the 6th and 10th centuries C.E.
399
Aside from establishing that the Hebrew Old Testament has not undergone some radical changes over the last 1,400 years, the Dead Sea Scrolls also reveal two other important pieces to some long-standing questions. They provide evidence that there were different versions of the Hebrew Bible texts used by the Jews in the Second Temple period (537 B.C.E to 70 C.E.), each one of them containing its own variations. Of the scrolls, not all are identical in spelling and wording to the MT. Some of them are more in line with the Greek Septuagint,246 also known by the Roman numerals for seventy, LXX.247 It had been thought by scholars prior to 1947 that the differences in the LXX were the result of errors on the part of the scribes, even possibly intentional alterations by the translators. When the Dead Sea Scrolls became known, it was revealed that these differences were due to the variations of the different Hebrew versions. Further, this could possibly explain why writers from the New Testament quote from the Hebrew Bible texts using wording different than the MT.—Exodus 1:5; Acts 7:14. Hence, the storehouse of thousands of fragments and Biblical scrolls affords the textual scholar an excellent basis in their studying the transmission of the Hebrew Bible text. Additionally, the Dead Sea Scrolls have established the worth of both the Septuagint and the Samaritan Pentateuch for textual comparison. As all modern Bible are based on the Masoretic Text, they also provide added bases for these translation committees to consider emending (correcting) their translations and the MT. It has long been held that there was not just one form of Judaism in the first century C.E. The portion of the Dead Sea Scrolls that describe the rules and beliefs of the Qumran community further validate that position. The Pharisees and Sadducees were far different from the Qumran sect.248 Some extreme differences are likely, what led the sect to withdrawal into the wilderness. They saw themselves as the fulfillment of Isaiah 40:3: Isaiah 40:3 (American Standard Version) ―3 The voice of one that crieth, Prepare ye in the wilderness the way of Jehovah; make level in the desert a highway for our God.‖ Numerous scroll fragments state that the Messiah‘s coming was imminent. Bible student should find this interesting as Luke commented that ―the people were in expectation, and all were questioning in their hearts concerning John, whether he might be the Christ [Messiah].‖—Luke 3:15, ESV. The Dead Sea Scrolls also help us better understand the historical setting in the life and times of Jesus Christ. They are also beneficial in the comparative study of Bible texts and ancient Hebrew. Nevertheless, not all of the Dead Sea Scrolls have been analyzed. 246
Greek version of Hebrew Bible: a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible made between 280 and 150 B.C.E. to meet the needs of Greek-speaking Jews outside Palestine. 247 Because of the tradition about 72 translators, this Greek Bible translation came to be known as the Septuagint, based on a Latin word meaning ―Seventy.‖ 248 Actually, there were more forms of Judaism. There were the Herodians, who were Jewish partisans or party followers of the Herodian dynasty. In addition, there were the Zealots, who advocated a Jewish kingdom completely independent of Roman control.
400
Therefore, more light may come out of the wilderness. Absolutely, these scrolls were one of the greatest archaeological discoveries of the 20th century, which remains to motivate both scholars and Bible students as we have now entered into the 21st century.
401
Bibliography Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Chicago: Moody, 1994. Cook, Edward M. Solving the Mystery of the Dead Sea Scrolls: New Light on the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994. Freedman, Dabid Noel, and Pam Fox Kuhlken. What are the Dead Sea Scrolls and Why Do They Matter? Grand Rapids, MI: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2007. Geisler, Norman L, and William E Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Chicago: Moody Press, 1996. Lim, Timothy H, Larry W Hurtado, A. Graeme Auld, and Alison M. Jack. The Dead Sea Scrolls in Their Historical Context . London; New York: T&T Clark, 2004. Martínez, Florentino García, Julio C. Trebolle Barrera, and Julio Trebolle Barrera. The people of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Boston, MA: Brill Academic Publishers, 1995. Price, Randall. Secrets of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1996. Scanlin, Harold P. The Dead Sea Scrolls and Modern Translations of the Old Testament . Wheaton, Ill: Tyndale House Publishers, 1993. Scott, Julius J. Jr. Jewish Backgrounds of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1995. Wise, Michael, Martin Jr Abegg, and Edward Cook. A Translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. New York, NY: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996, 2005.
402
PART 6 BASICS OF BIBLE TRANSLATION CHAPTER 36 BASICS OF BIBLE TRANSLATION John Wycliffe (1330?-84), was a Catholic priest and renowned Oxford theologian. He is credited with producing the first complete English Bible. Of course, this was a handwritten edition, and produced from the Latin Vulgate and not the original language of Hebrew and Greek. It is William Tyndale (1494–1536), who produced the first printed edition of the New Testament from the original languages of Hebrew and Greek. From the 1901 American Standard Version, we have seen many varieties of English translations. Those who wish to read the Bible, likely only have access to a translation, as it was originally written in ancient Hebrew, some Aramaic, and Greek. As of 2010, there are 6,900 languages spoken in the world today, with 2,100 still needing the Bible translated into their language. (Wycliffe Translators)249 The English-speaking world has over 100 different translations, while others have just one. In fact, the Bible has even been translated into Klingon, the made-up language of the television show Star Trek. If we are one of the fortunate ones who have a choice, we certainly want to choose the Bible that is literal, accurate, clear, natural, and easy-to-understand. The question that begs to be asked is, ‗why the need of so many English translations?‘ There are several reasons, but as is true with many things in life, it can be taken to the extreme. The primary reason is that the English language changes over time. We no longer speak the way of the King James Version or the American Standard Version. Another reason is that other styles of translations have come on the scene in the 1950s, which has really caused a plethora of new translations: the easy-to-read dynamic equivalents and the paraphrases. The most basic reasons that even literal translation will differ in minute ways is because of textual, literary and grammatical problems that translators must make choices over.
The Manuscripts Textual criticism is both an art and a science. It is a science because it has principles or guidelines that must be followed. Additionally, it is an art because it is all about balance in applying those principles. It is the careful comparison of all known original language manuscripts (including lectionaries) and versions of the Bible in other languages (for example, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and Armenian), as well as patristic quotations in order to determine the original reading. This would include the elimination of any additions that may have crept into the text, as well as restoring any portion removed by accident or knowing that rightly belongs in the text. This work is often referred to as ―lower
249
http://www.wycliffe.org/About/Statistics.aspx
403
criticism,‖ which is constructive criticism; it should be set apart from ―higher criticism,‖ which is typically destructive criticism. Manuscript copying prior to the invention of the printing press in 1455 was done by hand. As all are imperfect humans, it was inevitable that some minor mistakes began to creep in to the text. The earliest copyists were accomplishing a far greater task than can be imagined. If you find it difficult to grasp just how difficult, imagine copying 138,020 words in which there are no breaks between words and sentences, and all written in capital letters. [ZDVHRIUJFHKJGUYGKNHUGHJGGBOHH] This could cause confusion at times, and variants.250 For an English example, consider GODISNOWHERE. Does it read ―God is nowhere‖ or ―God is now here‖? The variations within the Greek manuscripts are not as extensive as some would like you to think (that is, Bart D. Ehrman). As this chapter is a summary, I am not able to go into great detail, but we will recommend other publications at the end of this chapter that are written with the purpose correcting Ehrman‘s exaggeration of scribal variations. (see Jones, Evans and Price) For now, let us say that we can rate these variations on three different levels: insignificant, significant without effect, and significant. Insignificant: These variations are too small and irrelevant to be considered important. These variants are unintentional blunders that even a professional scribe might make at times: the wrong division of words (because there were no spaces between them), mistaking one letter for another, the scribe‘s eyes moving to a similar ending further down the page (leaving out all in between), writing the same word or letter twice or writing it once when it should have been twice, switching letters or words around, subconsciously substituting a synonym, overlooking an abbreviation and spelling and grammar. To offer an example, we turn to Matthew 1:18. Is it ―the birth of [the] Jesus Christ‖ or ―the birth of the Christ‖ or ―the birth of the Christ Jesus‖ or ―the birth of [the] Jesus‖? Another example can be found at Matthew 27:2. Is it ―Pilate the governor‖ or ―Pontius Pilate the governor‖? Still, another example can be found at Acts 15:40. Is it ―the grace of the Lord‖ or ―the grace of God‖? The insignificant variations are by far the vast majority of variants to be found in our manuscript decision, and we have such evidence that make them so negligible that they are not even mentioned in the footnotes of our study Bibles. Significant yet Ineffective: What makes these variants ineffective is that we have such strong manuscript evidence that establishing the correct reading is of no concern. Our first example would be the familiar story of the adulterous woman at John 7:53– 8:11. Certainly, so many verses are significant and the story is very old. Almost all modern translations make an effort to highlight the doubt of this story as being original. Why? The adulterous story does not have the support of our earliest and most reliable Greek manuscripts, nor any of the early versions. Another example comes from 1 Timothy 3:16. Is it ―who was manifested in the flesh‖ or ―which was manifested in the 250
Merriam-Webster, Inc: Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. Eleventh ed. Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003: var•i•ant ver-ē-ənt adj varying usu. slightly from the standard form 〈variant readings〉〈variant spellings〉
404
flesh‖ or ―God was manifested in the flesh‖? As any reader can see, this one had serious implications for the Trinity doctrine, thus it is significant, but again the manuscript evidence has spoken. Some ambitious scribes changed Ος (―he who‖) to Θς (―God‖). Another intentional alteration that has absolutely no manuscript evidence prior to the fourteenth century of our common era is found at 1 John 5:7: ―The father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one.‖ This interpolation is not cited by any of the early Greek Church fathers, not even during the great Trinity controversy of the fourth century C.E. Significant: We will look at only one significant reading here, which is the common long ending of Mark chapter 16, verses 9–20. There are multiple endings for the Gospel of Mark, which it ended abruptly with these words: ―And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.‖ While verses 9–20 are an interpolation to writer of this chapter, it is not so easy for some textual scholars to accept this. For them the evidence is equally strong for and against, unlike our earlier examples. Many Bible readers are unable to appreciate the evidence, so it would be most prudent for them to buy out the time to read some of the recommended reading books at the end of this chapter. (See Greenlee, Metzger, Wegner, and Comfort)
The Words and Their Meaning After the translation committee has established, which critical [master] text they are going to work from, they must still work the evidence of each word that has significant variants. Once it has been determined what the original language word is, its meaning must be established. The Hebrew Old Testament has hundreds of words that have not been found outside of the Old Testament itself. Let us look at an example. 1 Samuel 13:21 (King James Version) Yet they had a file [Heb., pim] for the mattocks, and for the coulters, and for the forks, and for the axes, and to sharpen the goads. 21
What was a pim? It would not be uncovered until 1907, when archaeology discovered the first pim weight stone at the ancient city of Gezer. The translation, like the above King James Version struggled in their translation of the word ―pim.‖ Today, translators know that the pim was a weight measure of about 7.82 grams, or as the English Standard Version has it, ―two-thirds of a shekel,‖ a common Hebrew unit of weight that the Philistines charged for sharpening the Israelites plowshares and mattocks. 1 Samuel 13:21 (English Standard Version) and the charge was two-thirds of a shekel [Heb,. pim] for the plowshares and for the mattocks, and a third of a shekel for sharpening the axes and for setting the goads. 21
The Greek New Testament does not face the same challenges, as there are a mere handful of words that does not appear outside of the New Testament literature. We can look at one example though from Jesus‘ model prayer. 405
Matthew 6:11 (English Standard Version) Give us this day our daily [Gr., epiousion] bread,
11
Here, ―epiousion‖ is defined in the lexicon as either ―daily‖ bread or ―bread for tomorrow.‖251 The policy of almost all modern translations is to use both words, if a given Hebrew or Greek word can be taken in two different ways. Generally, they select one for the translation, the other will be placed in a footnote as ―or.‖
The Punctuation in Translation For centuries, there was no punctuation in the earliest Greek manuscripts of the Bible. Punctuation marks started to be introduced by copyist and translators, as to the context, and their understanding of Bible doctrine. There is one verse, which captures the seriousness of the modern translator, making the choice of punctuation, Luke 23:43. Depending on where the translation places the comma, you have a completely different outcome. (1) Jesus answered him, ―Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.‖ Alternatively, (2) Jesus answered him, ―Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in paradise.‖ With number (1), you have Jesus telling the criminal that sided with him eventually, ―today you will be with me in paradise.‖ With number (2), you have Jesus telling the criminal today, ―you will be with me in paradise.‖ In other words, number (2) tells us that the criminal was being told this day that he would be with Jesus in paradise. This would mean that the criminal would die with the guarantee of a future resurrection.
The Grammar in Translation The grammar of Hebrew and Greek can present multiple problems. The initial problem is which words should be transliterated. The Hebrew word ʼadam′, means ―Adam‖ or ―man.‖ When should it be translated ―Adam,‖ and when should it be translated ―man.‖ Genesis 1:26 (English Standard Version) Then God said, "Let us make man [ʼadam] in our image, after our likeness.
26
Genesis 3:17 (English Standard Version) And to Adam [ʼadam] he said,
17
By looking at both the ancient translations, as well as the modern ones, we see a major disagreement. At Genesis 2:7 the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan uses ―Adam.‖ The Greek Septuagint does not use Adam until 2:16; and the Latin Vulgate, at 2:19. Moving to modern translations, we find the New International Version at 2:21; the New English 251
William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 376.
406
Bible at 3:21; and the New Revised Standard Version at 5:1. Other difficult choices are with the Greek word Christos, which means ―Christ,‖ or ―anointed one.‖ Should the Greek verb baptize, be transliterated as ―baptize,‖ or translated as ―immerse?‖ Should the Hebrew word sheol and the Greek word hades be transliterated, it translated confusingly as ―hell,‖ as ―death,‖ ―grave,‖ as well as other renderings? Should Gehenna, Tartarus, and others be transliterated as opposed to translated? Another translation issue of late is the gender-inclusive issue. The question before a translation committee is whether the masculine oriented Bible should stay that way. What these gender-inclusive translators fail to understand is this: to deviate, in any way, from the pattern, or likeness of how God brought his Word into existence, merely opens the Bible up to a book that reflects the age and time of its readers. If we allow the Bible to be altered because the progressive woman's movement feels offended by masculine language, it will not be long before the Bible gives way to the homosexual communities being offended by God's Words in the book of Romans; so modern translations will then tame that language, so as to not cause offense. I am certain that we thought that we would never see the day of two men, or two women being married by priests, but that day has been upon us for some time now. In fact, the American government is debating whether to change the definition of marriage. Therefore, I would suggest that the liberal readers not take my warning here as radicalism, but more as reality.
The Most Important Choice If we are to make an informed choice in this matter, we need to consider the following questions. What are the different types of translations available to us, and how is each to be best used? Of the different types, what are the strong points and weaknesses? Thus, if there are weaknesses, why should you be cautious? For the purpose of this chapter, we are only considering the English language translation. In addition, while we could demonstrate with both Hebrew and Greek, to keep it simple we will only use Greek in the examples. In addition, we will not use the actual Greek font, but will use a, English transliteration; this refers to the spelling of Greek words with letters of the English alphabet. In most instances, it is simply a letter-for-letter substitution. The different types of translations cover a wide-range of styles, but there are really four basic categories. One can look at these four different styles of translations as different stages in Bible translation. The interlinear stage is a very rough stage of sorts, in that it does not have a smooth flow, clear, natural, nor is it easy-to-understand. However, the interlinear is a tool, and not meant to be smooth, as you will see below. The literal translation is a much smoother and clear translation when compared with a paraphrase, but again this is a study Bible, which is not necessarily a negative. The dynamic equivalent is much smoother and easy-to-read, with the paraphrase being very conversational-informal (everyday). However, one has to ask, at what point are we moving beyond the Word of God, and into a smooth, clear, easy-to-understand translation, that has hidden or obscured the original language text. 407
Hyper-Literal
KJV-ASV-NASB
Literal
ESV
Three Quarters
HCSB
Half-Way
NET-NIV
Dynamic Equivalent
NLT-TEV-CEV
Hyper-Dynamic
MSG-TLB
On the literal end of the spectrum, there is the interlinear translation. This translation could be known as a hyper-literal translation. This translation follows the original language without and concern for English grammar and syntax. Beneath the Hebrew or Greek words of the original language text, depending upon which testament you are working, the lexical English equivalent is placed.―The Greek New Testament, 2004 (UBS4); The Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 2004 (NA27); The Lexham GreekEnglish Interlinear New Testament, 2008-2010 (LGNTI); The Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Old Testament, 2004 (LHB). The literal or essentially literal translation is the next stage in the spectrum of Bible translation. The word-for-Word translation philosophy (essentially literal) translation seeks to render the original language words and style into a corresponding English word and style. Again, they seek to retain the original syntax and sentence structure, and the style of each writer as far as possible. King James Version, 1611 (KJV); American Standard Version, 1901 (ASV); Revised Standard Version, 1952 (RSV); New American Standard Bible, 1995 (NASB); English Standard Version, 2001 (ESV); the Lexham English Bible, 2010 (LEB). The dynamic or functional equivalent is the next stage in the spectrum of Bible translation. The thought-for-thought translation philosophy (dynamic equivalent) seeks to render the biblical meaning of the original language text as accurately as possible into an English informal (conversational) equivalent. Today‘s English Version, 1976 (TEV, GNB); Contemporary English Version, 1995 (CEV); New Living Translation (second edition), 2004 (NLT). Paraphrase translations are at the furthest removed from the interlinear stage. The translators of these Bibles, if we dare to call them such, render the original language into the target language as freely as they feel it needs to be, with the target audience being their most important concern. The Living Bible, 1971 (TLB); The Message Bible, 2002 (MSG). A fifth category holds to the translation philosophy that endeavors to strike a balance between the dynamic equivalent and the literal translation. These versions of the 408
Bible endeavor to express the words as well as the meaning and essence of the originallanguage expressions while also making the text easier to read. New English Translation, 1996 (NET); Holman Christian Standard Bible, 2003 (HCSB); New International Version, 2011 (NIV).
Interlinear Translation The interlinear Bible page is set up with the left column where you will find the original language text, with the English word-for-word translation beneath each original language word; generally, the right column contains an English translation like the ESV, NASB, or the NIV. The interlinear translation in the left column and the modern-day English translation in the right column are parallel to each other. This allows the student to make immediate comparisons between the translation and the interlinear, helping one to determine the accuracy of the translation. The interlinear and the English equivalent in the left column is not generated by taking the English word(s) from the translation on the right, and then placing them under the original language text. Whether we are dealing with Hebrew or Greek as our original language text, each word will have two or more English equivalents. What factors go into the choice of which one will go under the original language word? One factor is the time period the book was written in, as the New Testament was penned in the firstcentury, during the era of Koine Greek, as opposed to classical Greek of centuries past. The context of what comes before and after the word under consideration. Therefore, the translator will use his training in the original language, or a lexicon to determine if he is working with a noun, verb, definite article, adjective, adverb, preposition, conjunction, participle, and so on. Further, say he is looking at a verb, it must be determined what mood it is in (indicative, subjunctive, imperative, etc.), what tense (present, future, aorist, etc.), what voice (active, middle, passive, etc.), what case (nominative, genitive, dative, etc.) gender, person, singular or plural. In addition, the English words under the original language text are generated from grammatical form, the alterations to the root, which affect its role within the sentence, for which he will look to a Hebrew or Greek grammar. The best lexicon is the 3rd edition Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, (BDAG) ten years in the making, this extensive revision of Bauer―the standard authority worldwide―features new entries, 15,000 additional references from ancient literature, clearer type, and extended definitions rather than oneword synonyms. Providing a more panoramic view of the world and language of the New Testament, it becomes the new indispensable guide for translators. The second best lexicon is the Greek-English Lexicon: With a Revised Supplement, 1996: Ninth Revised Edition - Edited By H.G. Liddell, R. Scott By: H.G. Liddell & R. Scott. Each word is given in root form along with important variations, and an excellent representation of examples from classical, Koine, and Attic Greek sources follows. This lexicon is appropriate for all classical Greek and general biblical studies. By far the best traditional Hebrew lexicon currently available is The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (HALOT) (vols. 1-5; trans. M. E. J. Richardson; Brill, 1994-2000). However, 409
the price is beyond most students and scholars. A more affordable edition, which I highly recommend, is available, Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Unabridged 2-Volume Study Edition) (2 vols. trans. M. E. J. Richardson; Brill, 2002). There are numerous lexicons on the market, which would be fine tools for the Bible student. Many scholars would concur that Biblical lexicons have four main weaknesses: (5) They are geared toward the translations of the 20th century, as opposed to new translations. (6) They primarily contain only information from the Bible itself, as opposed to possessing information from Greek literature overall. (7) They are too narrow as to the words of say the New Testament, attempting to harmonize a word and its meaning. The problem with this agenda is that a word can have numerous meanings, some being quite different, depending on its context, even within the same author. (8) Most Biblical lexicons have not escaped the etymological fallacy, determining the meaning of a word based on its origin and past meaning(s). Another aspect being that the meaning of a word is based on the internal structure of the word. A common English example of the latter is ―butterfly.‖ The separate part of ―butter‖ and ―fly‖ do not define ―butterfly.‖ John 3:7 (1881 Westcott-Hort New Testament)* me thaumases hoti eipon soi dei humas gennethenai anothen
7
not to be astonished that I said to you it is necessary you to give birth to from above Do not be astonished that I said to you, ‗It is necessary for you to be born from above.252 7
As you can see the interlinear translation to the left reads very rough, as it is following the Greek sentence structure. The Lexham English Bible rearranges the words according to English syntax on the right. Do not be surprised that at times words may need to be left out of the English translation, as they are unnecessary. For example, The Greek language likes to put the definite article ―the‖ before personal name, so in the Greek you may have ―the Jesus said.‖ In the English, it would be appropriate to drop the definite article. At other times, it may be appropriate to add words to complete the sense in the English translation. For example, at John 4:14, the LEB has ―But an hour is coming—and now is here*—when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for indeed the Father seeks such people to be his worshipers.‖ *The word ―here‖ is not in the Greek text but is implied, so it is added to complete the sense.
Essential Literal Translation Once the interlinear level of translation has taken place, it is now time to adjust them into sentences. Each word will possess its own grammatical indicator. As the translator 252
W. Hall Harris, III, The Lexham English Bible (Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2010), Jn 3:7.
410
begins to construct his English sentence, he will adjust according to the context of the words surrounding his focus. As you will see shortly, in the examples below, the translator must transition the words from the Greek order, to correct English grammar and syntax. This is the delicate balance faced by the literal translation team, how close do we cling to the Hebrew or Greek word order in our English translation. The reader will find that the KJV, ASV and the NASB will allow a little roughness for the reader, for them an acceptable sacrifice, as they believe that meaning is conveyed by the word order at times. An overly simplified example might be Christ Jesus as opposed to Jesus Christ, with the former focusing on the office (―Christ‖ anointed one), while the latter focuses on the person. Even though it is impossible to follow the word order of the original in the English translation, the translator will attempt to stay as close as possible to the effective and persuasive use of the style of the original language. In other words, what is said is rendered into the English, as well as the way that it is said, as far as possible. This is why the literal translation is known as a ―formal equivalence.‖ As the literal translation, ―is designed so as to reveal as much of the original form as possible. (Ray 1982, 47) It should be noted that this writer favors the literal translation over the dynamic equivalent, and especially the paraphrase. The literal translation gives you what God said, there is no concealing this by going beyond into the realms of what a translator interprets these words as saying. It should be understood that God‘s Word to man is not meant to be read through like a John Grisham novel. It is meant to be meditated on, pondered over, and absorbed quite slowly; using many tools and helps along the way. There is a reason for this, it being that the Bible is a sifter of hearts. It separates out those who really want to know and understand God‘s Word (based on their evident demonstration of buying out the opportune time for study and research), from those who have no real motivation, no interest, just going through life. Having said that, there are two weaknesses of the literal translation, if taken too far. There are times when a literal word-for-word translation is not only in the best interest of the reader, but would convey a meaning contrary to the original. (3) As we have established throughout this chapter, but have not stated directly, no two languages are exactly equivalent in grammar, vocabulary, and sentence structure. Ephesians 4:14 (American Standard Version) As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery [lit., dice playing] of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming 14
The Greek word kybeia that is usually rendered ―craftiness‖ or ―trickery,‖ is literally ―dice-playing,‖ which refers to the practice cheating others when playing dice. If it was rendered literally, ―carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery dice playing of men,‖ the meaning would be lost. Therefore, the meaning of what is meant by the ‗dice playing‘ must be the translator‘s choice. 411
Romans 12:11 (English Standard Version) Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent [lit., boiling] in spirit, serve the Lord.
11
When Paul wrote the Romans, he used the Greek word ―zeontes‖, which literally means ―boil,‖ ―seethe,‖ or ―fiery hot.‖ While some very serious Bible students may pick up on the thought of ―boiling in spirit,‖ as being ―fervent in spirit,‖ or better ―aglow with the spirit,‖ or ―keep your spiritual fervor.‖ Therefore, for the sake of making sense, it is best to take the literal ―boiling in spirit‖, determine what is meant by those words, ―keep your spiritual fervor‖, and render it thus. Matthew 5:3 (New International Version, ©2011) 3
―Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:3 (GOD‘S WORD Translation) ―Blessed are those who [are poor in spirit] recognize they are spiritually helpless. The kingdom of heaven belongs to them. 3
This one is really a tough call. The phrase ―poor in spirit‖ carries so much history, and has been written as to what it means, for almost 2,000 years that, even the dynamic equivalent translations are unwilling to translate its meaning, not its words. Personally, this writer is in favor of the literal translation of ―poor in spirit.‖ Those who claim to be literal translators, should not back away because ―poor in spirit‖ is ambiguous, and there are a variety of interpretations. The above dynamic equivalent translation, God‘s Word, has come closest to what was meant. Actually, ―poor‖ is even somewhat of an interpretation, because the Greek word ―ptōchoi‖ means ―beggar.‖ Therefore, ―poor in spirit‖ is an interpretation of ―beggar in spirit.‖ The extended interpretation is that the ―beggar/poor in spirit‖ is aware of his or her spiritual needs, as if a beggar or the poor would be aware of their physical needs. (4) As we have also established in this chapter a word‘s meaning can be different, depending on the context that it was used. 2 Samuel 8:3 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) David also defeated Hadadezer son of Rehob, king of Zobah, who went to restore his control [hand] at the Euphrates River. 3
1 Kings 10:13 (English Standard Version) And King Solomon gave to the queen of Sheba all that she desired, whatever she asked besides what was given her by the bounty [hand] of King Solomon. So she turned and went back to her own land with her servants. 13
Proverbs 18:21 (English Standard Version) Death and life are in the power [hand] of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruits. 21
The English word ―hand‖ has no meaning outside of its context. It could means, ―end of arm,‖ ―pointer on a clock,‖ ―player‘s cards,‖ ―round in a card game,‖ ―part in 412
doing something,‖ ―round of applause,‖ ―member of a ship‘s crew,‖ or ―worker.‖ The Hebrew word ―yad,‖ which means ―hand,‖ has many meanings as well, depending on the context, as it can mean ―control,‖ ―bounty,‖ or ―power.‖ This one word is translated in more than forty different ways in some translations. Let us look at some English sentences, to see the literal way of using hand, and then add what it means, as a new sentence. Please give a big hand for our next contestant. Please give a big applause for our next contestant. Your future is in your own hands. Your future is in your own power. Your future is in your own possession. Attention, all hands! Attention, all ship’s crew! She has a good hand for gardening. She has a good ability or skill for gardening. At times, even a literal translation committee will not render a word the same every time it occurs, because the sense is not the same every time. The only problem we have is that the reader must now be dependent on the judgment of the translator to select the right word(s) that reflect the meaning of the original language word accurately and understandably. Let us look at the above texts from the Hebrew Old Testament again, this time doing what we did with the English word ―hand‖ in the above. It is debatable if any of these verses really needed to be more explicit, by giving the meaning in the translation, as opposed to the word itself. who went to restore his hand at the Euphrates River – who went to restore his control at the Euphrates River she asked besides what was given her by the hand of King Solomon - she asked besides what was given her by the bounty of King Solomon Death and life are in the hand of the tongue - Death and life are in the power of the tongue
Dynamic Equivalent Translation Translators who produce what are frequently referred to as paraphrase Bibles, or free translations, take liberties with the text as presented in the original languages. How so? They either insert their opinion of what the original text could mean or omit some of the information contained in the original text. Paraphrase translations may be appealing because they are easy to read. However, their very freeness at times obscures or changes the meaning of the original text. Consider the way that one paraphrase Bible translates Jesus‘ famous model prayer: ―Our Father in heaven, reveal who you are.‖ (Matthew 6:9, The Message: The Bible in Contemporary Language) A more accurate translation of Jesus‘ words renders this passage: ―Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.‖ Note, too, the way that John 17:26 is rendered in some Bibles. According to one free translation, on the night of his arrest, Jesus said to his Father in prayer: ―I made you known to them.‖ (Today‘s English Version) However, a more faithful rendering of Jesus‘ prayer reads: ―I 413
have made your name known to them.‖ Can you see how some translators actually hide the fact that God has a name that should be used and honored?
Paraphrase Translation A paraphrase is ―a restatement of a text, passage, or work giving the meaning in another form.‖253 The highest priority and characteristic is the rephrasing and simplification. Whatever has been said in the above about the dynamic equivalent can be magnified a thousand fold herein. The best way to express the level this translation will go to is to select some paraphrases and set them side-by-side with the dynamic equivalent and literal translations. It is recommended that you read verses 1-4 in the Message Bible, then in the New Living Translation, and then in the English Standard Version. Thereafter, read verses 5-9 in the same manner, followed by verses 10-12, and 13-17. This way you will taste the flavor of each with just a small bit at a time, so you do not lose the sense of the previous one by too much reading.
Isaiah 1:1-17 The Message (MSG) The vision that Isaiah son of Amoz saw regarding Judah and Jerusalem during the times of the kings of Judah: Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah. 2-4Heaven and earth, you're the jury. Listen to God's case: "I had children and raised them well, and they turned on me. The ox knows who's boss, the mule knows the hand that feeds him, But not Israel. My people don't know up from down. Shame! Misguided God-dropouts, staggering under their guilt-baggage, Gang of miscreants, band of vandals— My people have walked out on me, their God, turned their backs on The Holy of Israel, walked off and never looked back. 1
"Why bother even trying to do anything with you when you just keep to your bullheaded ways? You keep beating your heads against brick walls. Everything within you protests against you. From the bottom of your feet to the top of your head, nothing's working right. Wounds and bruises and running sores— 5-9
253
Inc Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary., Eleventh ed. (Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003).
414
untended, unwashed, unbandaged. Your country is laid waste, your cities burned down. Your land is destroyed by outsiders while you watch, reduced to rubble by barbarians. Daughter Zion is deserted— like a tumbledown shack on a dead-end street, Like a tarpaper shanty on the wrong side of the tracks, like a sinking ship abandoned by the rats. If God-of-the-Angel-Armies hadn't left us a few survivors, we'd be as desolate as Sodom, doomed just like Gomorrah. "Listen to my Message, you Sodom-schooled leaders. Receive God's revelation, you Gomorrah-schooled people. 10
"Why this frenzy of sacrifices?" God's asking. "Don't you think I've had my fill of burnt sacrifices, rams and plump grain-fed calves? Don't you think I've had my fill of blood from bulls, lambs, and goats? When you come before me, whoever gave you the idea of acting like this, Running here and there, doing this and that— all this sheer commotion in the place provided for worship? 11-12
"Quit your worship charades. I can't stand your trivial religious games: Monthly conferences, weekly Sabbaths, special meetings— meetings, meetings, meetings—I can't stand one more! Meetings for this, meetings for that. I hate them! You've worn me out! I'm sick of your religion, religion, religion, while you go right on sinning. When you put on your next prayer-performance, I'll be looking the other way. No matter how long or loud or often you pray, I'll not be listening. And do you know why? Because you've been tearing people to pieces, and your hands are bloody. Go home and wash up. Clean up your act. 13-17
415
Sweep your lives clean of your evildoings so I don't have to look at them any longer. Say no to wrong. Learn to do good. Work for justice. Help the down-and-out. Stand up for the homeless. Go to bat for the defenseless. Isaiah 1:1-17 New Living Translation (NLT) These are the visions that Isaiah son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. He saw these visions during the years when Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah were kings of Judah. 1
Listen, O heavens! Pay attention, earth! This is what the LORD says: ―The children I raised and cared for have rebelled against me. 3 Even an ox knows its owner, and a donkey recognizes its master‘s care— but Israel doesn‘t know its master. My people don‘t recognize my care for them.‖ 4 Oh, what a sinful nation they are— loaded down with a burden of guilt. They are evil people, corrupt children who have rejected the LORD. They have despised the Holy One of Israel and turned their backs on him. 2
Why do you continue to invite punishment? Must you rebel forever? Your head is injured, and your heart is sick. 6 You are battered from head to foot— covered with bruises, welts, and infected wounds— without any soothing ointments or bandages. 7 Your country lies in ruins, and your towns are burned. Foreigners plunder your fields before your eyes and destroy everything they see. 8 Beautiful Jerusalem stands abandoned like a watchman‘s shelter in a vineyard, like a lean-to in a cucumber field after the harvest, 5
416
9
like a helpless city under siege. If the LORD of Heaven‘s Armies had not spared a few of us, we would have been wiped out like Sodom, destroyed like Gomorrah.
Listen to the LORD, you leaders of ―Sodom.‖ Listen to the law of our God, people of ―Gomorrah.‖ 11 ―What makes you think I want all your sacrifices?‖ says the LORD. ―I am sick of your burnt offerings of rams and the fat of fattened cattle. I get no pleasure from the blood of bulls and lambs and goats. 12 When you come to worship me, who asked you to parade through my courts with all your ceremony? 13 Stop bringing me your meaningless gifts; the incense of your offerings disgusts me! As for your celebrations of the new moon and the Sabbath and your special days for fasting— they are all sinful and false. I want no more of your pious meetings. 14 I hate your new moon celebrations and your annual festivals. They are a burden to me. I cannot stand them! 15 When you lift up your hands in prayer, I will not look. Though you offer many prayers, I will not listen, for your hands are covered with the blood of innocent victims. 16 Wash yourselves and be clean! Get your sins out of my sight. Give up your evil ways. 17 Learn to do good. Seek justice. Help the oppressed. Defend the cause of orphans. Fight for the rights of widows. 10
Isaiah 1:1-17 English Standard Version (ESV) The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. 1
Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth; for the LORD has spoken: "Children have I reared and brought up, 2
417
but they have rebelled against me. The ox knows its owner, and the donkey its master‘s crib, but Israel does not know, my people do not understand." 3
Ah, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, offspring of evildoers, children who deal corruptly! They have forsaken the LORD, they have despised the Holy One of Israel, they are utterly estranged. 4
Why will you still be struck down? Why will you continue to rebel? The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. 6 From the sole of the foot even to the head, there is no soundness in it, but bruises and sores and raw wounds; they are not pressed out or bound up or softened with oil. 5
Your country lies desolate; your cities are burned with fire; in your very presence foreigners devour your land; it is desolate, as overthrown by foreigners. 8 And the daughter of Zion is left like a booth in a vineyard, like a lodge in a cucumber field, like a besieged city. 7
If the LORD of hosts had not left us a few survivors, we should have been like Sodom, and become like Gomorrah. 9
Hear the word of the LORD, you rulers of Sodom! Give ear to the teaching of our God, you people of Gomorrah! 10
418
"What to me is the multitude of your sacrifices? says the LORD; I have had enough of burnt offerings of rams and the fat of well-fed beasts; I do not delight in the blood of bulls, or of lambs, or of goats. 11
"When you come to appear before me, who has required of you this trampling of my courts? 13 Bring no more vain offerings; incense is an abomination to me. New moon and Sabbath and the calling of convocations— I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly. 14Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hates; they have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them. 15When you spread out your hands, I will hide my eyes from you; even though you make many prayers, I will not listen; your hands are full of blood. 16 Wash yourselves; make yourselves clean; remove the evil of your deeds from before my eyes; cease to do evil, 17learn to do good; seek justice, correct oppression; bring justice to the fatherless, plead the widow‘s cause. 12
Essentially Literal Contrasted With Dynamic Equivalent In short, the dynamic equivalent translator seeks to render the biblical meaning of the original language text as accurately as possible into an English informal (conversational) equivalent. Alternatively, the essentially literal translation seeks to render the original language words and style into a corresponding English word and style. Before we delve into the basics of Bible translation, it would be best to define a couple common acronyms that are commonly used in these sorts of technical discussions. We are going to offer more terms in an appendix at the end of this section, which will be beneficial to you as you move throughout this book and others on Bible translation. Source Language (SL) is the language from which a translation is being produced in 419
another. Therefore, if one is translating from Hebrew into English, then Hebrew is the SL. Receptor Language (RL) is just the opposite; it is the language into which the translation is being produced. Therefore, if one is translating from Greek into English, then English is the RL. As you can see from the above, the terms Source and Receptor language have the acronym SL and RL. Also, keep in mind that the text that the translator is rendering into another language is the source text. Please do not confuse the Source Language with the Original Language. True, the Source Language can be the Original Language of say Hebrew or Greek. However, if there is a case of a translator making a Chinese translation of the New Testament, but has chosen to make it from English, the Source Language would be English. Yet, the Original language of the Old Testament is Hebrew, and the New Testament is Greek. We will get more into the differences in translations in chapter 2 and 4, but for now, know that there are two major divisions as mentioned above. You have the word-forword and the thought-for-thought. A literal translation is one-step removed from the original and something is always lost or gained, because there will never be 100 percent equivalent transference from one language to the next. A thought-for-thought translation is one more step removed than the literal translation in many cases, and can block the sense of the original entirely. A thought-for-thought translation slants the text in a particular direction, cutting off other options and nuances. A literal word-for-word translation makes every effort to accurately represent the authority, power, vitality and directness of the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures and to transfer these characteristics in modern English. The essentially literal translations have the goal of producing as literal a translation as possible where the modern-English idiom permits and where a literal rendering does not conceal the thought. Comparison of Word-for-Word and Though-for-Thought Translations Essentially Literal Translation Though-for-Thought Translation Focuses on form
Focuses on meaning
Emphasizes source language
Emphasizes receptor language
Translates what was said
Translates what was meant
Presumes original context
Presumes contemporary context
Retains ambiguities
Removes ambiguities
Minimizes interpretative bias
Allows for interpretative bias
Valuable for serious Bible study
Valuable for commentary use
Awkward receptor language style
Natural receptor language style
1 Kings 2:10 Essentially Literal Translation (ASV, RSV, ESV, NASB)
And David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David. And David slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David. 420
Then David slept with his fathers and was buried in the city of David. Then David slept with his fathers and was buried in the city of David. 1 Kings 2:10 Though-for-Thought Translation (GNB, CEV, NLT, MSG)
David died and was buried in David's City. Then he died and was buried in Jerusalem. Then David died and was buried with his ancestors in the City of David. Then David joined his ancestors. He was buried in the City of David. One could conclude that the thought-for-thought translations are conveying the idea in a more clear and immediate way, but is this really the case? There are three points that are missing from the thought-for-thought translation: In the scriptures, ―sleep‖ is used metaphorically as death, also inferring a temporary state where one will wake again, or be resurrected. That idea is lost in the thought-forthought translation. (Ps 13:3; John 11:11-14; Ac 7:60; 1Co 7:39; 15:51; 1Th 4:13) Sleeping with or lying down with his father also conveys the idea of having closed his life and having found favor in God‘s eyes as did his forefathers. When we leave out some of the words from the original, we also leave out the possibility of more meaning being drawn from the text. Missing is the word shakab (―to lie down‖ or ―to sleep‖), ’im (―with‖) and ‗ab in the plural (―forefathers‖). Psalm 13:3 (American Standard Version) Consider and answer me, O Jehovah my God: Lighten mine eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death; John 11:11-14 (American Standard Version) These things spake he: and after this he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus is fallen asleep; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. The disciples therefore said unto him, Lord, if he is fallen asleep, he will recover. Now Jesus had spoken of his death: but they thought that he spake of taking rest in sleep. Then Jesus therefore said unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead. Acts 7:60 (American Standard Version) And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep. 1 Corinthians 7:39 (New World Translation) A wife is bound during all the time her husband is alive. But if her husband should fall asleep (koimethe) [in death], she is free to be married to whom she wants, only in [the] Lord.* * The ASV, ESV, NASB, and other literal translation do not hold true to their essentially literal policy here. This does not bode well in their claim that essential literal is 421
the best policy. I am speaking primarily to the ESV translators, who make this claim in numerous books. 1 Corinthians 15:51 (American Standard Version) Behold, I tell you a mystery: We all shall not sleep, but we shall all be changed, 1 Thessalonians 4:13 (American Standard Version) But we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning them that fall asleep; that ye sorrow not, even as the rest, who have no hope. Those who argue for a though-for-thought translation will say the literal translation ―slept‖ or ―lay down‖ is no longer a way of expressing death in the modern English speaking world. While this may be true to some extent, the context of chapter two, verse 1: ―‖when David was about to die‖ and the latter half of 2:10: ―was buried in the city of David‖ really resolves that issue. Moreover, while the reader may have to meditate a little longer, or indulge him/herself in the culture of different Biblical times, they will not be shorted of the full potential that a verse has to convey. (Grudem, Ryken, Collins, Polythress, & Winter, 2005, 21-22)
A Word of Caution The dynamic equivalent can and does obscure things from the reader by overreaching in their translations. This can be demonstrated on the moral standards found in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (The Message) Don't you realize that this is not the way to live? Unjust people who don't care about God will not be joining in his kingdom. Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it, don't qualify as citizens in God's kingdom. 9-10
1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (English Standard Version) Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 9
If you compare the MSG with the ESV, you will notice that the MSG does not even list the specifics defined by the apostle Paul on precisely what kind of conduct we should shun are not even mentioned. Matthew 7:13 (Today‘s English Version) ―Go in through the narrow gate, because the gate to hell is wide and the road that leads to it is easy, and there are many who travel it. 13
422
Matthew 7:13 (English Standard Version) "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 13
The Greek word apōleian means ―destruction,‖ ―waste,‖ annihilation, ―ruin.‖ Therefore, one has to ask, ‗why did the TEV translation committee render it ―hell‖? It is doctrinal bias, plain and simple. The translation committee is looking to promote the doctrine of eternal torment, not destruction. The objective of the translator is to render it the way that it should be rendered. If it supports a certain doctrine, so be it, if not, so be it. The policy is that God does not need an overzealous translator to convey his doctrinal message. 1 Co. 11:10: LGNTI (Interlinear)
Because of this ought the woman authority to have on her head because of the angels 1 Co. 11:10: NASB (Literal)
Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 1 Co. 11:10: TEV (Dynamic Equivalent)
On account of the angels, then, a woman should have a covering over her head to show that she is under her husband‘s authority. 1 Co. 11:10: CEV (Dynamic Equivalent)
And so, because of this, and also because of the angels, a woman ought to wear something on her head, as a sign of her authority. As you can see the interlinear is completely literally carried over into the Source Language word for word, keeping the exact form. This is called a gloss in the world of the Bible translator. While this does not convey very little meaning to the average English reader, it does to one who has studied Biblical Greek. However, the serious Bible student would have a literal translation as a study Bible. The literal translation, as you can see, will keep the form as far as is possible, as well as the wording. The dynamic equivalent advocates will argue that this does not sound natural. Well, for those that want the word of God in its undiluted form, as accurately as possible, we will take a little unnatural sounding. Soon, our example will convey the danger of going beyond translation into interpretation. Our literal translation contains ambiguity. Is the writer talking about women or wives? Is the woman to have her own authority, or is something or someone else to have authority over her? This actually just fine, because it ambiguity has many benefits, as you will see. First, as a quick aside, the work of interpretation will weed out those pseudo-Christians, who do not want to put any effort into their relationship with God, who do not want to buy out the time to understand. Now, the reader has the right to determine for himself or herself which is the correct interpretation. This should not be 423
stolen from him or her by the translator, for he or the committee could be wrong, and life or death hangs in the balance. Seeing two dynamic equivalents side-by-side helps you to see that they have arrived at two different conclusions and both cannot be right. The Today’s English Version believes that the ―woman‖ here is really the ―wife,‖ as it refers to the ―husband.‖ It also believes that the wife is to be under the husband‘s authority. On the other hand, the Contemporary English Version does not commit to the argument of ―woman‖ versus ―wife,‖ but does understand the verse to mean the woman has her own authority. She has the authority to act as she feels she should, as long as she wears something as a sign of this. A good translation will do the following: Accurately render the original language words and style into the corresponding English word and style that were inspired by God. Translate the meaning of words literally, when the wording and construction of the original text allows for such a rendering in the target language. Transfer the correct meaning (sense) of a word or a phrase when a literal rendering of the original-language word or a phrase would garble or obscure the meaning. In considering the first three points here, as far as possible, use natural, easyto-understand language that inspires reading. Are there such translations available on the market? Yes, this book recommends the following translations below, as every Bible student should have multiple translations, and at least one from every style. Literal Translations for Bible Study and Research ESV: English Standard Version (2001) NASB: New American Standard Version (1995) AS V: American Standard Version (1901) LEB: Lexham English Bible (2010) Semi-Literal Translations HCSB: Holman Christian Standard Bible (2003) NET: New English Translation (1996) Translations Between Literal and Dynamic Equivalent NIV: New International Version (2011) Dynamic Equivalent Translations NLT: New Living Translation (2004) CEV: Contemporary Version (1995) 424
TEV: Today’s English Version (1976) Paraphrase Translation MSG: The Message Bible (2002)
425
Bibliography Barnwell, Katharine. Bible Translation: An Introductory Course in Translation Principles. Kenya: SIL International, 1975. —. Introduction to Semantics and Translation. England: SIL, 1974. BeDuhn, Jason. Truth In Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament. Lanham: University Press of America, 2003. Beekman, John, and John Callow. Translating the Word of God. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974. Comfort, Philip. Encounterring the Manuscripts: An Introduction to New Testament Paleography and Textual Criticism. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2005. Evans, Craig A. Fabricating Jesus: How Modern Scholars Distort the Gospels. Downers Grove, IL: InterVaristy Press, 2002. Greenlee, J Harold. Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995. —. The Text of the New Testament. Peabody: Henrickson, 2008. Grudem, Wayne, Leland Ryken, John C Collins, Vern S Polythress, and Bruce Winter. Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005. Jones, Timothy Paul. Misquoting Truth: A Guide to the Fallacies of Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus. Downer Groves: InterVarsity Press, 2007. Metzger, Bruce M. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Transmission. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 1968, 1992. Metzger, Bruce. The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001. —. The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, & Content. Nashville: Abingdon Books, 1965, 1983, 2003. Porter, Stanley E, and Mark J Boda. Translating the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009. Porter, Stanley E, and Richard S Hess. Translating the Bible: Problems and Prospects. New York, NY: T&T Clark International, 2004. Price, Randall. Searching for the Original Bible. Eugene: Harvest House, 2007. Ray, Vernon. "The Formal vs Dynamic Equivalent Principle in New Testament Translation." Restoration Quarterly 25, 1982: 46-56. 426
Ryken, Leland. Choosing a Bible: Understanding Bible Translation Differences. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005. —. The Word of God in English. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2002. —. Understanding English Bible Translation: The Case for an Essentially Literal Approach. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2009. Scorgie, Gen G, Mark L Strauss, and Stephen M Voth. The Challenge of Bible Translation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003. Wegner, Paul D. A Student's Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible: Its History Methods & Results. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2006. —. The Journey from Text to Translation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 1999.
427
CHAPTER 37 DIFFERENT KINDS OF BIBLE TRANSLATIONS Word-for-Word Translation Philosophy (essentially literal) translation seeks to render the original language words and style into a corresponding English word and style. Again, they seek to retain the original syntax and sentence structure, and the style of each writer as far as possible. Thought-for-Thought Translation Philosophy (dynamic equivalent) seeks to render the biblical meaning of the original language text as accurately as possible into an English informal (conversational) equivalent. Of course, as any translation continuum chart will show, many translations fall throughout this spectrum. For example, the ASV and the NASB are far more literal than say the ESV, and the MSG and CEV are far closer to a paraphrase instead of a translation than say the NLT. In addition, you have the NIV trying to work right in the middle of these two philosophies. Moreover, if you are still following the picture, the HCSB attempts to fall between the NIV and the ESV. Both of these translation philosophies have their strengths and weaknesses if the translator goes to the extreme in either direction. Hyper-Literal
KJV-ASV-NASB
Literal
ESV
Three Quarters
HCSB
Half-Way
NET-NIV
Dynamic Equivalent
NLT-TEV-CEV
Hyper-Dynamic
MSG-TLB
The main strengths of the literal translation are that they are trying to preserve the original text, the ancient expressions, how the words are joined together and rendering the words consistently. All of this allows the reader to determine what the meaning is, and not have to depend on the translator to do his work for him. This also ties the Bible together as a whole, and the reader is better able see the Old Testament in the New Testament. The main strengths of the thought-for-thought translation are simply that they get the meaning immediately, as would have the original readers. As the original readers would not have had to struggle with grammar and syntax, or idiomatic expressions, so it is too, the modern reader of a thought-for-thought translation has all of these points of 428
concern modernized for them in an easy to read translation. At first gland, this may appear the ideal approach. The statement that ―all translation is interpretation,‖ is so abused by those that favor the thought-for-thought form of translation. Of course, one must interpret the Scriptures before they can even begin the process of translation. Interpretation is a verbal or written expression of a reader‘s understanding of the writer‘s meaning. However, what is never brought to the forefront is that there are different levels of interpretation. The scholar, who puts together an interlinear, or a lexicon are what we might call the barest of interpreters. These scholars are only concerned with the range of meaning that a word has in isolation. The literal or essential literal translator could be called essentialist of interpreters. We are now concerned with how these words are joined together in the style of the writer being translated [grammar, syntax, and idiom of both the original and the English], to convey the sense of what was written. The use of a word or phrase to convey the best attainable equivalence from one language to another will inevitably cut off, to some extent, other possibilities. John, in response to his wife‘s question of ―is it raining,‖ says, ―just a dribble‖ or ―just a trickle.‖ While these two verbs are synonymous, small details are lost or gained by the person‘s choice of ―dribble‖ or ―trickle.‖ The Dynamic Equivalent or thought for thought translation could be called superfluous of interpreters. This translator goes beyond in hopes of expressing the original meaning in a natural way to the modern reader. What the unsuspecting reader is not aware of is that it is the translator‘s complete interpretation that is conveyed. In other words, the reader is being removed from the need to interpret Scripture, because it is being done for him. The question that begs to be asked is ―what if the translator is wrong?‖ ―The [translator‘s] first task was to understand correctly the meaning of the original. The next task was to express that meaning in a manner and a form easily understood by readers.‖ – GNB ―…a thought for thought translation‖ – NLT. ―…to reclothe the meaning of the original in the words and structure of American English‖ – SEB. ―The first concern of the translators has been fidelity to the thought of the Biblical writers‖ – NIV. As stated in the above, the essentially literal translations feel the need to be faithful to what was written in word and structure. As you can see from the above quotes, this is not the concern of the thought for thought translator. His chief aim is to express his understanding of the meaning of the original into natural English. Sadly, most persons at the bookstore, browsing through the NLT, NIV, TNIV, TEV, CEV, SEB, NCV and MSG are unaware that these translators have gone beyond the pale of Bible translation and are really dabbling in commentary. They pick up the NLT and start to read a portion. There is this twofold sensation: (1) a feeling of familiarity and (2) a thrill that they can read and read and read without have to pause and consider what they are reading. What they are unaware of is that this is a subjective translation based on the interpreter‘s 429
understanding of Scripture, which they now believe to be the very words of God because the cover reads New Living Translation Holy Bible. ―After ascertaining as accurately as possible the meaning of the original, the translator's next task was to express that meaning in a manner and form easily understood by the readers‖ – GNB. ―Metaphorical language is often difficult for contemporary readers to understand, so at times we have chosen to translate or illuminate the metaphor‖ – NLT. ―Because for most readers today the phrase ‗the Lord of hosts‘ and ‗God of hosts‘ have little meaning, this version renders them ‗the Lord Almighty‘ and God Almighty‘‖ – NIV. ―Ancient customs are often unfamiliar to modern readers‖ – NCV. ―We have used the vocabulary and language structures . . . of a junior high student‖ – NLT. ―The Contemporary English Version has been described as a ‗user-friendly‘ and ‗mission-driven translation that can be read aloud without stumbling, heard without misunderstanding, and listened to with enjoyment and appreciation, because the language is contemporary and the style is lucid and lyrical.‖ Eugene Nida, the father of thought for thought translation, had this to say about essentially literal translators in Christianity Today: ―This ‗word worship‘ helps people to have confidence, but they don't understand the text. And as long as they worship words, instead of worshiping God as revealed in Jesus Christ, they feel safe.‖254 The real facts are that the likes of Nida worship the modern reader instead of respecting the Author of the Bible and his Word choices. Bible scholar John MacArthur states: thought for thought translations ―diminish the glory of divine revelation by being more concerned with the human reader than the divine author.‖ The thought for thought proponents have gone beyond translation by modifying words that they feel to be too difficult for the modern reader to comprehend; to taking the metaphorical language of say 2 Kings 2:7: ―Then the captain on whose hand the king leaned said to the man of God . . .‖ (ESV), to ‗the personal attendant of the king said to Elisha. . .‖ (GNB). Rather than even modernize the idea of the ancient custom of kings or men of authority to lean on the hand or arm of a servant or one in an inferior position, they simply removed this thought from God‘s word. They also assume ignorance on the part of the modern-day reader by taking states that they believe would be misunderstood and expressing them so as to be easily understood. In addition, they have removed gender language that feel is offensive as we have already seen from our above evaluation of the TNIV.
1 Timothy 6:17 English Standard Version (ESV)
254
Nida, Eugene: Meaning-full Translations. Christianity Today, October 7, 2002: 46-49.
430
As for the rich in this present age, charge them not to be haughty, nor to set their hopes on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly provides us with everything to enjoy. 17
1 Timothy 6:17 New American Standard Bible (NASB) Instruct those who are rich in this present world not to be conceited or to fix their hope on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly supplies us with all things to enjoy. 17
1 Timothy 6:17 New Living Translation (NLT) Teach those who are rich in this world not to be proud and not to trust in their money, which is so unreliable. Their trust should be in God, who richly gives us all we need for our enjoyment. 17
1 Timothy 6:17 Contemporary English Version (CEV) Warn the rich people of this world not to be proud or to trust in wealth that is easily lost. Tell them to have faith in God, who is rich and blesses us with everything we need to enjoy life. 17
Why do both the NLT and the CEV feel the need to add words that is not in the Greek text: ―we need‖? Is it because they feel the inexperienced reader will abuse the text? Is there some liberal progressive mindset that cannot allow a person to have more than what they need? Paul is simply stating that we can enjoy all of God‘s creation, not just what we need.
James 3:1-2 English Standard Version (ESV) Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. 2For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body. 1
James 3:1-2 New American Standard Bible (NASB) Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment. 2 For we all stumble in many ways. If anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able to bridle the whole body as well. 1
James 3:1-2 Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) Not many should become teachers, my brothers, knowing that we will receive a stricter judgment; 2 for we all stumble in many ways. If anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a mature man who is also able to control his whole body. 1
James 3:1-2 The Message (MSG) Don't be in any rush to become a teacher, my friends. Teaching is highly responsible work. Teachers are held to the strictest standards. And none of us is perfectly qualified. We get it wrong nearly every time we open our mouths. If you could find 1-2
431
someone whose speech was perfectly true, you'd have a perfect person, in perfect control of life. Okay, raise your hand if you want to trust the Bible after reading in The Message Bible that James and other teachers like the apostles get it wrong nearly every time we open our mouths? I could go on and on with literally hundreds of examples of the changes that go into God‘s word by means of these creative translators, who ‗get it wrong nearly every time they translate.‘ The last comment was meant as comedic sarcasm, and may be a bit of an exaggeration.
Translation Process Horizon of Understanding: knowledge common to a person. Presupposition pool: knowledge that is common to a group of persons based on their common understanding of a language and historical setting. Ancient Presupposition pool: knowledge that is common to a group of persons in some ancient time and place according to their common understanding of the language and historical setting. Modern Presupposition pool: knowledge that is common to a group of persons in some modern time and place according to their common understanding of the language and historical setting. Our example texts below are well chosen as they demonstrate the differences in translation principles. Keep in mind that the ESV is an essentially literal translation, and its translation team has penned numerous books and articles emphasizing the value of the essentially literal approach, yet at the same time, it tends to abandon that approach all too quickly, and runs to the idiomatic (DE) side of the fence. After we read the texts below, let us ask what a tutor is. Does our modern-day understanding of tutor correspond with what Paul meant? Did the Galatians have a different understanding of a tutor? Does "guardian" or "charge" solve the problem? Well, read the texts below as follows: from the left to the right. Please do not look to the right first. After reading the text, I want you to reflect on what each translation did for you? After the ASV and the NASB's use of "tutor", did you have impression that the law was a teacher? And what happened to that impression after reading the ESV? What about after the NIV, did it cloud your mental grasp up even more? Then, look at the notes below that.
Galatians 3:23-25 American Standard Version (ASV) But before faith came, we were kept in ward under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. 24 So that the law is become our tutor to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now faith that is come, we are no longer under a tutor. 23
Galatians 3:23-25 New American Standard Bible (NASB) But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. 24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor to 23
432
lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. are no longer under a tutor.
25
But now that faith has come, we
Galatians 3:23-25 English Standard Version (ESV) Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. 25But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, 23
Galatians 3:23-25 New International Reader's Version (NIRV) Before faith in Christ came, we were held prisoners by the law. We were locked up until faith was made known. 24 So the law was put in charge until Christ came. He came so that we might be made right with God by believing in Christ. 25 But now faith in Christ has come. So we are no longer under the control of the law. 23
Literal: The literal translation will bring over from the Greek [paidagogos, tutor], the structure of the original text (SL) and the presupposition pool of the author and original readers. However, if understanding would be next to impossible, only then would the literal translation step over to the idiomatic translation. Idiomatic: The idiomatic, also known as dynamic equivalent, also known as thought for thought translation will take the structure of the original and the presupposition pool of the original author and reader ["tutor"] and will bring it over into the structure and presupposition pool of the modern reader "guardian." 1: a tutor i.e. a guardian and guide of boys. Among the Greeks and the Romans the name was applied to trustworthy slaves who were charged with the duty of supervising the life and morals of boys belonging to the better class. The boys were not allowed so much as to step out of the house without them before arriving at the age of manhood.* * Strong, James: The Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible: Showing Every Word of the Text of the Common English Version of the Canonical Books, and Every Occurrence of Each Word in Regular Order. electronic ed. Ontario : Woodside Bible Fellowship., 1996, S. G3807 Note: Notice in the above that our literal rendering would be the ancient presupposition pool of "tutor" and the i.e. "a guardian or guide of boys." i.e. stands for "that is to say: ...." In other words our i.e. is our modern presupposition pool "guardian." However, does "guardian" help us anymore than did "tutor"? Yes, it would, but it is not the complete picture. In addition, a person reading "tutor" would tend to think in a modern way and come home with the idea that the "law" was a teacher in some way. This would be incomplete too. Like the childhood tutor of the first-century, the Mosaic Law was a guardian that protected the Israelites from their surrounding neighbors up unto Christ. Like the guardian of boys, the Law [tutor] also taught some lessons about life along the way, as well as disciplining the child. There is no doubt that upon the Exodus
433
from Egypt, one would view the nation of Israel as nothing other than a child, in a world of raptorial nations and people. There is no doubt that the Bible is simple and easy to understand at times, but this is very rare, it is far more often than not: extremely complex, difficult and sophisticated. Having said that, it should be understood that God‘s Word to man is not meant to be read through like a John Grisham novel. It is meant to be meditated on, pondered over, and absorbed quite slowly; using many tools and helps along the way. There is a reason for this, it being that the Bible is a sifter of hearts. It separates out those who really want to know and understand God‘s Word (based on their evident demonstration of buying out the opportune time for study and research), from those who have no real motivation, no interest, just going through life.
434
CHAPTER 38 SO MANY NEW BIBLE TRANSLATIONS: WHY? The last 60-years have seen the release of one new English Bible translation after another. Here we go again, as if we need another translation! It has become quite the big business to keep putting out the latest, updated, new version, new translation. However, it goes even deeper than that, because we now have: church Bibles and ministry Bibles, family Bibles, study Bibles, topical Bibles, apologetic Bibles, audience geared Bibles, and so on. In addition, one can now determine where they want their Bible to be on the scale of just how literal it is. After making the point that there seems to be no end to the line of new English translations, it must be said that there will always be a need for new translations. ‗Why‘ you may be asking? If we were to turn to the many translators in the field of Bible translation, they would offer at least three good reasons: (1) the manuscripts that have been discovered over the centuries are always being studied and better understood, then this increased knowledge may mean adjustments in the translation. (2) Our knowledge of the Bible languages just keeps improving over the years, and once again this can lead to more accurate translations. (3) Languages are living and growing and change over time, altering the meaning of words, in some case, to the opposite. In 1611, ―let‖ in ―I let John go to school‖ meant ―stop‖ or ―restrain.‖
Translating the Word of God is No Easy Task While it is true that technology may have made the task somewhat easier, it still takes years to bring a translation to the market. Some things that most may have not considered is (1) the task of what will be used to make the translation (2) who is the audience that the translation will be directed toward (the target audience); and (3) what type of translation is it to be: literal (ESV, NASB), dynamic equivalent (NLT, TEV), or something in between (NIV, HCSB)? Below we will take a brief look at each of these.
What are the Sources behind the Translation? Many are aware that there are Hebrew and Greek manuscripts that are used in Bible translation, but are not aware of the extent. As some also know, there is not one single manuscript of the original Hebrew Old Testament or the Greek New Testament still in existence. Yet, there are thousands of copies manuscripts of the original language Old Testament and New Testament, and thousands of copies of it in other languages, as well as quotations from the early church Fathers. Are these what the modern translator will consider? Yes, they are a part of the tools within their tool chest, but some of the world‘s leading scholars have already considered them extensively for 200-years. In this, they have created a critical text* for both testaments. 435
* Critical should not to be misconstrued in a negative sense in this instance. It involves comments and opinions that analyze are judging each word of the Old or New Testament as being original or not, in an extremely detailed way, which we do not have time to cover herein. For an introduction in textual studies, see the end of the article under Resources for Additional Research. Today‘s translation committees have access to a number of critical texts. However, most modern English translations depend on the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible as found in the BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (2nd ed., 1983), and the Greek text as found in the WH NU Westcott and Hort of 1881 and the Nestle Aland Greek New Testament (27th ed., 1993), as well as the United Bible Societies (4th edition, 1993). The work is far faster today than 50 years ago, as the translator today has access to Bible software as well as internet access.
Target Audience―Who is it? In the days of the Tyndale-King James Version, where one translation served the purpose of the many, this would seem to be a strange question. However, for any who have ventured in the bookstore to pick out a Bible, it is immediately clear. You have a church Bible, a family Bible, a Children‘s Bible, a study Bible, an archaeological study Bible and many others. One might ask, ‗why can we not just have one Bible for everyone?‘ The dynamic equivalent translator would argue that the scholar must have a translation that is targeted to him (ASV, NASB); the teacher must have a translation (ESV), while his Bible student must have another (NIV), and the churchgoer yet another (NLT). In the house, the father may have a specific form of translation (NIV), while the wife another NIV Women‘s Bible), and the teenager his own (NIV Teen Bible, TNIV), with the younger children still yet another (NIV Boy‘s Bible, The Action Bible, My Little Bible). Then, there is also the African American Bibles. The questions are simple, are the Bibles to be adapted to the people needs, or are the people expected to adapt to the Bible? William Tyndale (1494 – 1536), he brought us our first printed English Bible. His translation philosophy would be followed for the next 420 years. His objective audience was all English speaking people. On one occasion, Tyndale, heard an educated man say that it would be better to be without God‘s law than without the law of the Pope. Tyndale answer back by avowing that if God permitted him the time, he would make sure that even a plowboy would have more knowledge of the Bible than the educated man. Tyndale‘s translation of the Greek New Testament was easy enough for a plowboy to understand in his time. However, does this mean that he dumbed down the translation, so that the plowboy could easily understand the Bible? No, Tyndale did not make a translation to appease the needs of the plowboy; he expected the plowboy to buy out the time, to make the effort to be able to understand God‘s Word. He made no adjustments; his translation was informal when that was the case with the original, and formal when that was the case as well. At times his translation 436
ranges from complex to highly complex. Tyndale translated what the original text said, not what he determined it meant. Unlike: Ps 24:4 (ESV) He who has clean hands and a pure heart; Ps 24:4 (CEV) only those who do right for the right reasons; or Phil 4:1 (ESV) my joy and crown; Phil 4:7 (TEV) How happy you make me, and how proud I am of you. Tyndale did not give way to the less educated, even though that was the largest portion of the population at the time. He expected the less educated to grow in their understanding of the English language.
The Type of Translation What is the method of translating the critical texts of the Old and New Testament that the translation committee will follow as they produce their new Bible translation? Will the committee use other translations as their foundational text; if so, how closely will these be followed? Other translation committees may choose to make a completely new revision. If it were the former, an example would be the 1946-1952 Revised Standard Version (RSV), which is a revision of the 1901 American Standard Version (ASV). The RSV would have had the intentions of removing the archaic language and correcting any inaccuracies. Another example would be the 1990 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), a revision of the Revised Standard Version. Both the ASV and the RSV continued in the translation philosophy of William Tyndale, sometimes with the exact wording. Sadly, the NRSV has abandoned those principles, being a considerably less literal translation. If the committee is following the latter, and producing a new translation, completely from the original language texts; it would still consider other translations. However, it would give most of its attention to the BHK and BHS for the Old Testament* and the WH, UBS4, NA27 for the New Testament.** Other tools would be textual commentaries, Hebrew and Greek dictionaries, grammars, exegetical commentaries, translation handbooks, special investigations, and so on. Many translators that have had experience in the field of translation would certainly prefer to produce a new translation, as opposed to making a revision. * ―BHK‖ refers to Kittel‘s Biblia Hebraica and ―BHS‖ refers to Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. ** ―WH‖ refers to The New Testament in the Original Greek. ―UBS‖ refers to The Greek New Testament, by United Bible Societies. ―NA‖ refers to the Nestle-Aland Greek Text. Another choice that comes before those producing this new or revised translation is the option of a literal translation or a dynamic equivalent (or functional) translation. The literal translation has the aim to capture the accurate wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer, as far as possible. In other words, they want to reproduce what the Bible writer penned in both word and style. The dynamic equivalent method seeks to transmit interpretive opinions of the original text, focusing on the message. The literal translation is focused on the reproduction of the text and the dynamic equivalent translation is focused on the reader. 437
If the Bible translation committee is commissioned to do a literal translation, they must then determine just how literal the translation will be, without sacrificing the sense of the original. Another concern is the consistency of the rendering of the words in the original. If the context permits, each time a Hebrew or Greek word appears, the same word should be given to it in the translation. Another aspect for the team is that they must try to capture the different styles of the New Testament writers. The 27 books of the New Testament consist of multiple writers that all have distinct ways of writing. For instance, the gospel writers Matthew, Mark and Luke, cover Jesus‘ life and ministry, but differ in the words they choose to use and the arrangement of those words. Mark writes a fresh and natural Greek of high quality. He tends to keep it simple but certainly animated and exciting. Luke, on the other hand has the pen of a professional, using terms that show he is far more careful about small details. His being a physician is the reason for his extensive use of medical terms. He also appears to be very familiar with seafaring, as is evidenced by Acts 27-28. Matthew appears to be in between Mark and Luke when it comes to style. There is a complication to maintaining the style of a given author, as he may change his style. Being that the Apostle Paul has penned far more books than the other New Testament writers have, he is the most noted for this. A professor of classical languages, who is also a member of the Swedish Bible Committee, comments on this, ―He has an enormous register: elevated prose poem as in 1 Corinthians 13, moving eloquence as in Romans 8:31-39, but also dry explanations. . . . His vocabulary is great (900 words that are specific only for him). He was a brilliant master of speech.‖ The NET Bible (New English Translation) has over 60,000 translator notes; while other translations have over 10,000 footnotes to help the reader better understand their Bible. The footnotes are used to further explain such areas as custom and culture, textual problems, translation issues, original language words, basic language meanings, valuable alternative renderings. Also, meaning of names of Bible books, persons and places, as well as geographical data. Money, weights, measures and calendar dates are converted into modern terms. Obviously, this would take extensive research, aside from the translation itself. Moreover, these are just a few of the problems that are faced when one contemplates a new translation. Some of the other basics that most may not consider are, the text on the pages, the organization of chapters and verses, the font, and so on.
The Need for New Translations If the gospel is to be preached in all the earth, new translations are always going to be necessary, in many languages. Yet, as was demonstrated in the above, this is no easy task. The labor involved in such a task takes years, and by dozens of people, even with today‘s technology. The need for new English translations are not really as paramount. The ones that we have are more than we could ever need, and only need to be revised and updated periodically.
438
CHAPTER 39 THE MAKING OF A WORTHY TRANSLATION Exactly why are we making other translations beyond the King James Version of 1611? The King James Version has been the primary translation of the Christian community for 400 years (1611-2011). There is no doubt that this Bible alone has affected the lives of hundreds of millions and has influenced the principles in Bible translation for the past four centuries. Before we delve into what makes for a good translation, let us pause to consider the translation policy of the KJV translation committee. We can hardly talk about the KJV without looking at the translator William Tyndale (1494-1536), the man who published the first printed New Testament from the original language of Greek. In the face of much persecution, William Tyndale of England followed with his English translation from Erasmus‘ Greek New Testament text, completing this while in exile on the continent of Europe in 1525. Tyndale respected and treasured the Bible. However, in his days, the religious leaders insisted on keeping it in Latin, a language that had been dead for centuries. Therefore, with the purpose of making it available to his fellow citizens, Tyndale was determined to translate the Bible into English. While the idea of Bible translation being against the law may be unfamiliar to the modern mind, this was not the case in Tyndale‘s day. He was educated at Oxford University and became an esteemed instructor at The Cambridge University, who then had to flee from his academic career, escaping the Continent. His life became one of a fugitive, completing the New Testament and some of the Old Testament, before he was finally arrested, imprisoned for heresy, and strangled at the stake, with his body being burned afterwards. Tyndale‘s work sparked a widespread translation project that produced a new revision every couple of years, or so it seemed. The Coverdale Bible of 1536, the Matthew‘s Bible of 1537, the Great Bible of 1539, the Taverner‘s Bible of 1539, the Geneva Bible of 1560 (went through 140 editions), the Edmund Becke‘s Bible of 1549, the Bishop‘s Bible of 1568, and the Rheims-Douay Bible of 1610. The King James Version is a revision of all these translations, as they too were of their predecessor, the Tyndale translation. The KJV translation committee was ordered to use the Bishop‘s Bible as their foundation text, and was not to alter it unless Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew, Cranmer or the Great Bible, and the Geneva agreed, and then they were to assume that reading. Thus, the King James Version is unquestionably 90 percent William Tyndale‘s translation. There is no other translation, which possesses more literary beauty than the King James Version. However, there are several reasons as to why there was a need to revise the King James Version. The first point is its textual bases, which is from the period of 439
1611. The Greek text behind the KJV New Testament is what is known as the Textus Receptus, a corrupt Greek text produced by a scholar in the 16th century, Desiderius Erasmus. Concerning this text, Dr. Bruce Metzger wrote that it was ―a handful of late and haphazardly collected minuscule manuscripts and in a dozen passages its reading is supported by no Greek witnesses.‖ (Metzger 2003, 106) While most of the corruptions are considered insignificant, others are significant (1 Tim 3:16; 1 John 5:7; John 7:53-8:11; Mark 16:9-20) However, we cannot lay the blame at the feet of the translation committee of the KJV, for they did not have the textual evidence that we possess today. The second reason is that it comes from the 17th century and contains many archaic words that either obscure the meaning or mislead its reader: ―howbeit.‖ ―thee,‖ ―thy,‖ ―thou,‖ ―thine,‖ and ―shambles.‖ An example of misleading can be found in the word ―let,‖ which meant to ―stop,‖ ―hinder‖ or ―restrain‖ in 1611, but today refers to ―to allow‖ or ―to permit.‖ Therefore, when the KJV says that Paul ‗let the great apostasy come into the church,‘ it is completely misleading. In 1611 ―let‖ meant that he ‗restrained or prevented the apostasy.‘ (2 Thess 2:7) The KJV at Mark 6:20 inform us ―Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him.‖ Actually, the Greek behind ―observed him‖ means that Herod ―kept him safe.‖ The third reason is that the KJV contains translation errors. However, like the first reason, here again; it is not the fault of the translators, as Hebrew and Greek were just resurfacing as subjects of serious study after the Dark Ages. The discovery of papyrus writings in Egypt, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries has helped us better understand the common (Koine) Greek of the first century C.E. These discoveries have shown the everyday words were not understood as well as had been thought. The KJV at Matthew 5:22 informs the reader ―whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council . . .‖ The ESV renders it, ―whoever insults his brother will be liable (ftn. a term of abuse) to the council . . .‖ Scholar Walter C. Kaiser has said, ―the actual insult mentioned by Jesus is the word ‗Raca‘ as it stands in the KJV. The precise meaning of ‗Raca‘ is disputed; it is probably an Aramaic word meaning something like ‗imbecile‘ but was plainly regarded as a deadly insult.‖255 The translators that have come after the King James Version can draw much direction in what makes a worthy translation by considering the principles of translation that were followed in the production of the world‘s most influential Bible. The translators endeavored to discover the corresponding English word for the actual original language word of Hebrew and Greek. According to Alister McGrath, the translators felt obligated to . . . 1) Ensure that every word in the original was rendered by an English equivalent; 2) Make it clear when they added and words to make the sense clearer, or to lead to better English syntax. . . . 255
Kaiser, Walter C, Peter H Davids, and Frederick Fyvie , Brauch, Manfred T Bruce. Hard Sayings of the Bible. Downer Groves, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 1996. P. 359.
440
3) Follow the basic word order of the original wherever possible.256
A Worthy Translation is an Accurate Translation If asked what the number one priority in translation is, most translators would argue that the biggest responsibility is accuracy. However, if this conversation were between a translator of a literal or verbal corresponding (word-for-word) mindset and one of the dynamic equivalent (sense-for-sense, meaning-based) mindset, the next question would be, ‗what do you mean by accuracy?‘ The dynamic equivalent translator would most certainly say, ‗to render the Biblical meaning of the original language text as accurately as possible into English.‘ The literal side would return with, ‗to render the words and style of the original language text into a corresponding English equivalent word or phrase as accurately as possible.‘ The dynamic equivalent translator is attempting to re-express what they believe the original language text meant into English, removing the need of interpretive reading for the modern-day Bible student; the literal translator wants to reexpress what the original language text says into a corresponding English equivalent, leaving it up to the reader, to determine the meaning for himself.* * ―The translator must re-express the meaning of the original message as exactly as possible in the language to which he is translating.‖ (Barnwell 1975, 23) ―a translation that strives to translate the exact words of the original-language text in a translation, but not in such a rigid way as to violate the normal rules of language and syntax in the receptor language.‖ (Ryken 2002, 19) How does the Bible reader know what the Bible means if they do not know what it says? If the reader is given what a translator has determined the meaning as, and not what it says, how does the reader determine its meaning as being accurate? Are they not shortchanging the reader from the right of having access to the very words of God; but instead, feeding them a regurgitated interpretation of what another thinks it means? A word-for-word corresponding equivalent translator expects the reader to ascertain the meaning of the words that were used by studying and researching the text, with helps of course: word study dictionaries, lexicons, commentaries, and the use of exegetical principles, as well as by the Christian that is carrying on the Bible study with them. The sense-for-sense translator must believe that the reader is too ignorant and too lazy to ascertain the meaning by study and reaching within those helps, so they provide it for them. If the reader has the meaning already in front of him by way of the translator, he has no way of getting back to what the texts says, to determine if the meaning is, in fact, correct. All translators know that there is theological bias in all of us, and we will at times, bend things to have it our way. Looking at the worst-case situation first, some translators violate grammar and syntax to get a theologically important verse
256
McGrath, Alister. In the Beginning: The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture. New York: Anchor, 2002, p. 250.
441
to read according to their doctrinal position, and we are to trust them to give us a translation already interpreted for us? 1 John 2:5, 15; 3:17; 4:9; 5:3 (New American Standard Bible, ©1995) in him the love of God has truly been perfected If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him how does the love of God abide in him By this the love of God was manifested in us For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments 1 John 2:5, 15; 3:17; 4:9; 5:3 (New International Version, ©2010) love for God is truly made complete If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them how can the love of God be in that person This is how God showed his love among us this is love for God: to keep his commands 1 John 2:5, 15; 3:17; 4:9; 5:3 (New Living Translation, ©2004) . . . obey God‘s word truly show how completely they love him when you love the world, you do not have the love of the Father how can God’s love be in that person God showed how much he loved us Loving God means keeping his commandments ―Love of God‖ and ―love of the Father‖—what did the apostle John mean when he penned those words? Was he referring to the love that God has for us, or to our love for God, or the love that comes from God and is expressed through us to others? B. F. Westcott understood this to mean ―the love that God has made known,‖ while F. F. Bruce came to an opposite conclusion: as meaning ―our love for God.‖257 The reader of John‘s epistle would have had to determine what John meant by the words that he used. Today‘s reader should be given the same opportunity and responsibility; he must determine what was meant by the corresponding English words in an essentially literal translation. The sense-for-sense dynamic equivalent translations have come to opposite conclusions, meaning that both cannot be right. Therefore, it is best that the reader be given what was said, and carry the responsibility of determining what was meant by what was said.
Words and Meaning The dynamic equivalent translator believes that somehow meaning exists apart from words. When asked in an interview for Christianity Today Magazine, ―What do you consider your most important contribution to Bible translation?‖ Eugene A. Nida 257
B. F. Westcott, Epistles of St. John, 48-49; F. F. Bruce, The Epistles of John. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1970, 51-2.
442
responded: ―To help people be willing to say what the text means—not what the words are, but what the text means.‖ The interviewer goes on to ask, ―How did you develop your ideas about Bible translation 50 years ago?‖ Nida replied: When I was at the University of California, Los Angeles, our professors would never let us translate literally. They said, "We want to know the meaning. We don't want to know just the words." I found that a number of the Greek classics had been translated very meaningfully, much better than the Bible had been translated. I thought it a tragedy to have the Scriptures in a form that most people misinterpret. Why should the Bible be so much more poorly translated than secular texts? I studied linguistics, Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, and I decided that we've got to approach the Scripture as though it is the message and try to give its meaning, not just to repeat the words.258 What Nida left out of this discussion is that the goal of every literal translator is to convey the meaning of the Biblical language into the English language. The difference is that they believe this is best accomplished by giving the reader what was said, while Nida and his followers believe that the translator has to go beyond what is said into the realms of translating what is meant by what was said, because ―they [you the reader] don't understand the text,‖ so says Nida. Does the translation seek to render into English what was said in the original language as correspondingly as possible? Take note that an accurate translation is not one that is going beyond the English equivalent, in search of rendering the meaning of those words, but is one that seeks to render the words of the original language text into an English equivalent (corresponding) word or phrase as accurately as possible. A translation is certainly inaccurate if the English edition does not correspond to the original, as a mirror reflection, in any of the following ways: (1) if all of the original words are not accounted for by an English equivalent; (2) if the translation has added to or taken away from the original in any way (this does not negate the fact that words may need to be added to complete the sense in the English translation); (3) Finally, if the meaning that the reader could derive by the corresponding English words has been affected, changed, in any way by an interpretive method.* * These three means of inaccuracy are qualified by the phrase, ‗as far as possible.‘ Certainly, there will be exceptions to the rule. Roughly, six months after John started preaching, Jesus comes to him at the Jordan. Jesus asks John to baptize him. At once John is in opposition to such an idea: "I have need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?"‖ Yet, despite John‘s objection, Jesus insists:
258
Nida, Eugene A. "Meaning-full Translations." Christianity Today, October 07, 2002: 46-49.
443
Matt 3:15 (NU)259—having answered, but the Jesus said to him, ―allow now thusly for fitting it is to us to fulfill all rightness‖ Then he allowed him. Matt 3:15 (LEB)260—But Jesus answered and said to him, ―Permit it now, for in this way it is right for us to fulfill all righteousness.‖ Then he permitted him. Matt 3:15 (CEV)—Jesus answered, "For now this is how it should be, because we must do all that God wants us to do." Then John agreed. The reader of the Lexham English Bible, ESV, NASB, and RSV will be reading the very words of God as they correspond in English: ―to fulfill all righteousness.‖ The reader of the Contemporary English Version will get the interpretation of God‘s words as, ―do all that God wants us to do,‖ which TEV renders as ―do all that God requires.‖ The TEV‘s interpretation is similar to a number of other dynamic equivalent translations (NEB, NLT, and NIRV). The literal translations give us the corresponding English words of what the Bible says, while the dynamic equivalent translations interpret those very words to mean ―obedience‖, as understood by these translation committees. What is meant by ―permit it now‖, by ―for in this way‖, by ―it is right‖, or by ―for us to fulfill all righteousness‖? It is up to each reader of the Bible, to determine what is meant by these words. It is not the job of the translator to interpret what was said, but to give the reader what was said, for interpretation. Just looking at one of the phrases, what is meant by ―to fulfill all righteousness‖? Is it referring to the doing of all that God asks or requires, in other words, obedience? Does it mean that John and Jesus were righteous individuals? Does it mean, by baptism that Jesus would be entering a path of a right relationship with his Father, a symbol of presenting himself to doing the will of his Father? Again, it is up to the reader to make the determination as to what was meant by the words that Jesus used. Sadly, the reader of the CEV, TEV and other dynamic equivalent translations do not have that choice, because a committee has made the choice for them.
A Worthy Translation Must Be Clear The dynamic equivalent translators have given a high priority to the quality of being clear in their translation(s). In the process of expressing these worthy goals, they also infer that only the translation philosophy of dynamic equivalence can do this, and to be literal, is to be unclear. In addition, they further infer that the literal translation is willing to sacrifice being clear for the sake of ―word worship.‖ These inferences could not be further from the truth. From the first printed translation of William Tyndale (1536), to the present, the goal of literal translations has been to be clear. KJV 1611: Make it clear when they added and words to make the sense clearer, or to lead to better English syntax. . . . NKJV: ―. . . an English text that is both accurate and readable.‖ NASB: ―. . . a clear and accurate rendering of divinely-revealed truth.‖ 259 260
Nestle-Aland 27th edition and United Bible Societies 4th edition Greek Interlinear W. Hall Harris, III, The Lexham English Bible (Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2010), Mt 3:15.
444
ESV: ―. . . to ensure the fullest accuracy and clarity.‖ The dynamic equivalent camp would make the argument that to be clear is to be immediately understandable. When they ask if the translation communicates the meaning that the author intended, they are focused on there being absolutely no barriers between the reader and the translation: Idioms: a land that is ―flowing with milk and honey‖ as opposed to ―live in that rich and fertile land‖ of the TEV. Deuteronomy 6:3 Similes: ―you are the light of the world;‖ this is a very effective figure of speech, so effective that the functional equivalent translators do generally not set it aside. Metaphors: ―he is like a tree planted by streams of water.‖ Psalm 1:3 Technical Terms: ―mediator‖ of the NASB for ―he‖ of the CEV. Galatians 3:19, NASB Vocabulary Level: ―their condemnation is just‖ of the ESV for ―but God is fair and will judge them as well‖ of the CEV. Romans 3:8 Religious Vocabulary: ―to give his life as a ransom for many" of the ESV for ―will give his life to rescue many people‖ of the CEV. Matthew 20:28 For the dynamic equivalent translator, ―being clear,‖ means that nothing in the words of their translation is to be difficult to understand. They hold to this concept, even in the face of the Apostle Peter‘s words about the Apostle Paul‘s letters: ―there are some things in them that are hard to understand.‖ (2 Pet 3:16) Why did Peter find Paul‘s letters hard to understand? The 27 books of the New Testament were written on different levels. However, one could argue for the most part, they are not literary, and they are not common as a whole, more in the middle. For instance, Paul wrote at times in a literary Koine,* as is true of Luke as well. Peter, Mark and John on the other hand, wrote on a much lower level. Regardless of this, idioms were still idioms, similes were still similes, metaphors were still metaphors, technical terms were still used, as well as higher levels of vocabulary, and religious terms. * From about 300 B.C.E. to about 500 C.E. was the age of Koine, or common Greek, a mixture of differing Greek dialects of which Attic was the most influential. Being clear to the dynamic equivalent translator also means transparent (able to see through). In other words, they are simplifying and removing on all levels, to allow today‘s reader to see through time, and fully grasp what was meant [as per the translator‘s interpretation], by the words of the original writer to the original reader, as though they were there. This is a fallacy in thinking, as we just learned from Peter, who did not readily understand Paul‘s letters, even though he was an apostle of the Christian congregation at that time, let alone your lay congregation member of the first-century. Therefore, obviously, it is too much to assume that all the early readers of the Greek New Testament readily understood the text, because they readily understood the Greek of the day. 445
For the essentially literal translator, they too see being clear as being transparent (able to see through). However, they work to bring the text to the reader, not the reader to the text. They wish to make the original text transparent to today‘s reader, by using words that correspond to the original. However, it is much more than bringing the original language words of Hebrew and Greek to the modern reader in a corresponding English word. The Bible is full of idioms like ―flowing with milk and honey.‖ The simplest figure of speech is the simile (―you are the light of the world‖). Though simple, it is very effective. The Bible is rich with metaphors, like ―he is like a tree planted by streams of water.‖ The world of the Bible is filled with whole other cultures that span 4,000 years of time, covering a variety of residences, foods and meals, clothing, home life, marriage, health, education, cities and towns or a nomadic lifestyle, and ways of spending time. We will investigate some scriptural examples, with the purpose of seeing if any of the following three principles are violated: If all of the original words are not accounted for by an English equivalent; If the translation has added to or taken away from the original in any way; Finally, if the meaning that the reader could derive by the corresponding English words has been affected, changed, in any way by an interpretive method. The literal translation gives us the corresponding English words of what the Bible actually says,
The functional equivalent translations interpret those very words to mean . . . . , as understood by the translation committees.
Psalm 34:5 (English Standard Version)
Psalm 34:5 (Contemporary English Version)
Those who look to 5 Keep your eyes on the him are radiant, and LORD! You will shine their faces shall never be like the sun and never ashamed. blush with shame. 5
Psalm 63:11 (English Standard Version)
Psalm 63:11 (Contemporary English Version)
But the king shall 11 Because of you, our rejoice in God; God, the king will all who swear by him celebrate with your shall exult, faithful followers, but 11
446
for the mouths of liars liars will be silent. will be stopped. Ecclesiastes 9:8 (English Standard Version)
Ecclesiastes 9:8 (New Living Translation)
Wear fine clothes, with Let your garments be always white. Let not oil a splash of cologne! be lacking on your head. 8
Romans 1:5 (English Standard Version) through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, 5
8
Romans 1:5 (New Century Version) Through Christ, God gave me the special work of an apostle, which was to lead people of all nations to believe and obey. I do this work for him. 5
A Worthy Translation is Consistent Consistency is of the highest importance when it comes to finding a worthy translation. True the translation does not want to take this principle to the extreme, but is has been almost completely removed from the dynamic equivalent sense-for-sense translations, and should be considered more in your literal translations as well. As has been well observed, ―There must be consistency in the translation of technical words with a rather sharply fixed content of meaning, not allowing translation to blur the distinctions carried by different words in the original. In the New Testament, there is a distinction between ‗Hades‘ and ‗Gehenna‘. The former is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew ‗Sheol,‘ the world of the dead; the latter is the final place of punishment for the wicked.‖—Why So Many Bibles, American Bible Society. (Interlinear) United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, Fourth Revised Edition, 1993 Matt 5:22: will be liable to the fore of Gehenna Matt 10:28: can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna Matt 11:23: will be brought down to Hades 447
Matt 16:18: and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it How do the modern translations perform in reflecting the original language words of Gehenna and Hades? Do they use more than one English word to translate Hades? Do they translate both Gehenna and Hades as ―hell‖? Those that are consistent are the NIV, NASB, ASV and the HCSB translate both Gehenna (5:22; 10:28), as hell, and both Hades (11:23; 16:18), as Hades. Those that are inconsistent are the ESV, translating both Gehenna (5:22; 10:28), as hell, but rendering only 11:23 as Hades, with 16:18 being rendered as hell. The NLT goes even further by translating both Gehenna (5:22; 10:28), as hell, but rendering only 11:23 as ‗the place of the dead,‘ with 16:18 being rendered as hell. Ironically, the NW translation, the Bible that scholarship condemns the most, did the best in this exercise. They translate both Gehenna (5:22; 10:28), as Gehenna, and both Hades (11:23; 16:18), as Hades. Another example of inconsistency can be found in the translation of doulos,261 a purchased slave, diakonos,262 a servant or minister. The Bible refers to Christians as slaves, as they were bought with the price of Jesus Christ‘s blood; making them slaves of the heavenly Father and his Son, both being the master over these purchased slaves. A slave of Christ is not to be confused with hired servants, who may choose to quit when they please. The ESV, NASB, NIV, ASV, RSV, TEV CEV all shy away from using the word ―slave‖ as a reference to Christians. However, who are we to set aside the choice of words by the inspired Bible writers, who chose ―slave‖ over ―servant.‖ Among the few that have not sidestepped this tough decision are the NLT and HSCB. (Rom. 1:1; 1 Cor. 7:23) Either we choose a translation that reflects what was written, or a diluted version of what was written, or worse still, we chose an interpretation of what was written. Repeated Units Repeated units are one marker or signal that help the exegete (interpreter, you), to determine a books theme, by recognizing its boundaries and layers between the constituent parts of the whole. Matthew 7:28 (English Standard Version) And when Jesus finished these sayings, the crowds were astonished at his teaching,
28
Matthew 11:1 (English Standard Version)
261
William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 260. 262 William D. Mounce, Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), 632.
448
When Jesus had finished instructing his twelve disciples, he went on from there to teach and preach in their cities. 1
Matthew 13:53 (English Standard Version) And when Jesus had finished these parables, he went away from there,
53
Matthew 19:1 (English Standard Version) Now when Jesus had finished these sayings, he went away from Galilee and entered the region of Judea beyond the Jordan. 1
Matthew 26:1 (English Standard Version) When Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said to his disciples,
1
Matthew 5:21-22 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said to . . . 22But I say to you that . . .
21
Matthew 5:27-28 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said to . . . 22But I say to you that . . .
21
Matthew 5:31-32 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said to . . . 22But I say to you that . . .
21
Matthew 5:33-34 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said to . . . 22But I say to you that . . .
21
Matthew 5:38-39 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said to . . . 22But I say to you that . . .
21
Matthew 5:43-44 (English Standard Version) "You have heard that it was said to . . . 22But I say to you that . . .
21
These markers are far more likely to be lost in the dynamic equivalent sense-for-sense translations, and far less likely to be lost in your literal translations. If lost in translation, their usefulness in helping to determine a book‘s theme is lost with them. Therefore, you can either use a consistent literal translation, or learn to read Hebrew and Greek. 449
A Worthy Translation is Faithful What exactly do we mean by faithful, and faithful to what or whom? By faithful, we mean unwavering to the original, to the Author Himself. However, there are times when translation committees chose to be unfaithful to the original text. Obviously, theological bias should not affect its rendering. Romans 9:5 (Revised Standard Version)
Romans 9:5 (New Living Translation)
to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.
5
5
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are their ancestors, and Christ himself was an Israelite as far as his human nature is concerned. And he is God, the one who rules over everything and is worthy of eternal praise! Amen.
Romans 9:5: The Revised Standard Version takes ho on [―the one who is‖] as the opening of a separate, stand-alone sentence or clause that is independent of Christ, which is referring to God and pronouncing a blessing upon him for the provisions he made. Here and in Ps 67:19 LXX the predicate eulogetos [blessed‖] occurs after the subject Theos [―God‖]. Textual scholar Bruce M. Metzger made the following point: On the other hand, in the opinion of others of the Committee, none of these considerations seemed to be decisive, particularly since nowhere else in his genuine epistles does Paul ever designate ho khristos [―the Christ‖] as Theos [―God‖]. In fact, on the basis of the general tenor of his theology it was considered tantamount to impossible that Paul would have expressed Christ‘s greatness by calling him God blessed forever.263 A detailed study of the construction in Ro 9:5 is found in The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays, by Ezra Abbot, Boston, 1888, pp. 332-438. On pp. 345, 346 and 432 he says: ―But here ho on [―the one who is”] is separated from ho khristos [―the Christ‖] by to kata sarka [―according to the flesh‖], which in reading must 263
Bruce Manning Metzger and United Bible Societies, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition a Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (4th Rev. Ed.) (London; New York: United Bible Societies, 1994), 461-62.
450
be followed by a pause,—a pause which is lengthened by the special emphasis given to the kata sarka [―according to the flesh‖] by the to [―the‖]; and the sentence which precedes is complete in itself grammatically, and requires nothing further logically; for it was only as to the flesh that Christ was from the Jews. On the other hand, as we have seen (p. 334), the enumeration of blessings which immediately precedes, crowned by the inestimable blessing of the advent of Christ, naturally suggests an ascription of praise and thanksgiving to God as the Being who rules over all; while a doxology is also suggested by the Amen [―Amen‖] at the end of the sentence. From every point of view, therefore, the doxological construction seems easy and natural. . . . The naturalness of a pause after sarka [―flesh‖] is further indicated by the fact that we find a point after this word in all our oldest MSS. that testify in the case,— namely, A, B, C, L, . . . I can now name, besides the uncials A, B, C, L, . . . at least twenty-six cursives which have a stop after sarka [―flesh‖], the same in general which they have after aionas [―forever‖] or Amen [―Amen‖].‖ Therefore, Romans 9:5 in the Revised Standard Version is correct in its ascribing praise and thanksgiving to God. The problem is compounded by the fact that there is practically no punctuation in the ancient manuscripts and we must decide for ourselves whether it is better to put a comma or a full stop after ―flesh‖; the former ascribes deity to Christ, the latter makes for a doxology to the Father. The grammatical arguments almost all favor the first position, but most recent scholars accept the second on the grounds that Paul nowhere else says explicitly that Christ is God; he may come near it, but, they say, he always stops short of it.264
Acts 20:28 (Revised Standard Version)
Acts 20:28 (New Living Translation)
Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son.
28
28
So guard yourselves and God‘s people. Feed and shepherd God‘s flock—his church, purchased with his own blood—over which the Holy Spirit has appointed you as elders.
264
Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press, 1988), 349.
451
Acts 20:28:* The RSV reads that the church was purchased with ―the blood of his [God‘s] own Son.‖ On the other hand, the NLT reads that the church was purchased with ―God‘s . . . own blood.‖ Before we can begin determining which of these two renderings is correct, it should be noted that we have two textual problems within this verse. As we are a publication for the lay reader, we will cover the issues, but if any wishes a more technical answer, see A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (2nd ed.), by Bruce M. Metzger (1993), or the New Testament Text and Translation Commentary by Philip W. Comfort (2008). * J. H. Moulton in A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. 1 (Prolegomena), 1930 ed., p. 90, says: ―Before leaving ἴδιος [i′di·os] something should be said about the use of ὁ ἴδιος [ho i′di·os] without a noun expressed. This occurs in Jn 111 131, Ac 423 2423. In the papyri we find the singular used thus as a term of endearment to near relations . . . . In Expos. VI. iii. 277 I ventured to cite this as a possible encouragement to those (including B. Weiss) who would translate Acts 2028 ‗the blood of one who was his own.‘‖ Acts 20:28a has three different readings within the Greek New Testament manuscripts: variant (1) ―the church of God‖, variant (2) ―the church of the Lord‖, and variant (3) ―the church of the Lord and God‖. Variant 1 has the better manuscript support, and is the choice of the Textus Receptus of 1551, Westcott and Hort text of 1881, the text of Nestle-Aland and the Greek New Testament of the United Bible Society of 1993. The expression ―the church of the Lord‖ is found nowhere in the New Testament. ―the church of God‖ is found eleven times, all by the Apostle Paul, and Luke, the writer of Acts, was his traveling companion. The textual criticism principle of what reading led to the other will be discussed in two parts. There is no doubt that variant 3 is simply a conflation (combination of variant 1 and variant 2). If ―the church of the Lord‖ is the original reading, it could be that a copyist familiar with Paul made the change to ―the church of God‖. On the other hand, if ―the church of God‖ is the original reading, there is the slight chance that a copyist was influenced by the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint), and changed it to ―the church of the Lord‖. However, our other principle of textual criticism, ‗the more difficult reading is to be preferred‘ (more difficult to understand), seems to be most helpful. This principle is also related to ‗the reading that led to the other,‘ as the copyist would have moved to an easier reading. The reason being is that it was the tendency of scribes to make difficult readings easier to understand. There is no doubt that ―the church of God‖ is the more difficult reading. Why? The following clause, which will be dealt with shortly could have been taken as ―which he purchased with his own blood‖. This would almost certainly cause pause for any copyist, asking himself, ‗does God have blood?‘ Thus, the original was ―the church of God‖, which was changed to ―the church of the Lord‖, because the 452
idea of saying ‗God had blood‘ would have been repugnant. All things being considered (internal and external evidence), the correct reading is ―the church of God‖. Acts 20:28b has two different readings within the Greek New Testament Manuscripts: (1) [literally, the Greek reads ―which he purchased with the blood of his own‖] ―which he [God] purchased with the blood of his own [Son]‖ or ―which he [God] purchased with his own blood‖ and, (2) [literally, the Greek reads ―which he purchased with the own blood‖] ―which he purchased with his own blood‖ Variant one has the best manuscript evidence by far, and there is no question that it is the original reading. Therefore, we will not use space debating the two, but will spend our time determining how it should be understood. Textual scholar Bruce Metzger had this to say, This absolute use of ho idios [―his Own‖] is found in Greek papyri as a term of endearment referring to near relatives. It is possible, therefore, that ―his Own‖ (ho idios) was a title that early Christians gave to Jesus, comparable to ―the Beloved‖; compare Ro 8:32, where Paul refers to God ―who did not spare tou idiou huiou [―his own Son‖] in a context that clearly alludes to Gn 22:16, where the Septuagint has agapetou huiou [―beloved Son‖]. It may well be, as Lake and Cadbury point out, that after the special meaning of ho idios [―his Own‖] (discussed in the previous comment) had dropped out of Christian usage, tou idiou [―of his own‖] of this passage was misunderstood as a qualification of haimatos (―his own blood‖). ―This misunderstanding led to two changes in the text: tou haimatos tou idiou [―the blood of his own‖] was changed to tou idiou haimatos [―his own blood‖] (influenced by Heb. ix. 12?), which is neater but perverts the sense, and Theou [―God‖] was changed to κσρίοσ [―Lord‖] by the Western revisers, who doubtless shrank from the implied phrase ‗the blood of God.‘‖265 In the end, we must draw the conclusion from all of the evidence; the Revised Standard Version has followed the evidence, with its rendering: ―Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son.‖ On the other hand, it seems that the New Living Translation publisher or committee has allowed theological bias, once again, to blind them from the evidence, as their rendering makes clear: ―So guard yourselves and God‘s people. Feed and shepherd God‘s flock—his church, purchased with his own blood—over which the Holy Spirit has appointed you as elders. 265
Bruce Manning Metzger and United Bible Societies, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition a Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (4th Rev. Ed.) (London; New York: United Bible Societies, 1994), 427.
453
Dr. Robert H. Stein said in a lecture at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, ‗God does not need our help [in translation]. Simply render it as it should be, whether it supports your position or not.‘ Another translation that is no longer being used, but can illustrate a lack of faithfulness to the original is Moffatt‘s New Translation of the Bible. Repeatedly he arranges chapters and verses in a way to suit himself in both the Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Greek Scriptures. Particularly is what he does with the book of Isaiah open to censure, rearranging the chapters and verses to suit himself. The Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah, going back, as it does, about a thousand years earlier than the accepted Masoretic text, leaves Dr. Moffatt without any justification whatever for such rearranging of Isaiah. This makes it difficult to find certain Bible texts.
A Worthy Translation is Helpful It is perfectly acceptable to insert words into the translation to complete the sense in the English text. However, this should be done sparingly and very cautiously, as one could intentionally or unintentionally misinform the reader. An example of this is found in the Today’s English Version, attempting to make what they felt was implied, explicit. At 1 John 3:2 they have replaced ―he‖ with ―Christ.‖ However, this has misinformed their readers, as God is the one referred to here not Jesus Christ. The context of verse 1 and the first part of verse 2 make this clear. The Bible reader today has a plethora of English translations to choose from, seeking the one that is beneficial. Numerous translations convey the very word of God (ESV, NASB, ASV, HCSB, LEB) On the other hand, there are numerous translations that have become very popular because they are easy to read, sound very modern, and are immediately understandable. However, as we saw from the above examples, they also contain many errors by taking too many liberties in their translation principles. Accuracy, dependability, and being clear are best reflected in literal translations, as they are giving the reader what was said, not what another feels the author meant by what was said. Any serious Bible student should be interested in getting the Word of God, as opposed to an interpretation of those words. If we want an interpretation, we should buy a commentary. In fact, this is exactly what the dynamic equivalent translations are, mini commentaries. We are not suggesting that our readers not possess a dynamic equivalent Bible. What we recommend is that for study of God‘s Word, use 2-3 very good literal translations, and 2-3 dynamic equivalents as a sort of quick commentary on Scripture. As to the literal translations, we would recommend the English Standard Version, 2001 (ESV), The Updated New American Standard Bible, 1995 (UNASB), the American Standard Version, 1901 (ASV), the Holman Christian Standard Bible, 2003 (HCSB), as well as the Lexham English Bible, 2010 (LEB). As to the dynamic equivalent, we recommend the New Living Translation, 2007 (NLT), the Good News Bible, 2001 (GNB), and the Contemporary English Version, 1995 (CEV). We would also recommend two translations that are between the dynamic equivalent and the literal translation: The New International Version, 2011 (NIV) and the New English Translation, 2010 (NET). 454
Bibliography Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Barnwell, Katharine. Bible Translation: An Introductory Course in Translation Principles. Kenya: SIL International, 1975. —. Introduction to Semantics and Translation. England: SIL, 1974. Beekman, John, and John Callow. Translating the Word of God. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974. Bruce, F. F. The Epistles of John. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970. Grudem, Wayne, Leland Ryken, John C Collins, Vern S Polythress, and Bruce Winter. Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, Peter H Davids, and Frederick Fyvie , Brauch, Manfred T Bruce. Hard Sayings of the Bible. Downer Groves, IL: Inter Varsity Press, 1996. McGrath, Alister. In the Beginning: The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture. New York: Anchor, 2002. Metzger, Bruce M. The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Transmission. New York: Oxford University Press, 1964, 1968, 1992. Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. New York: United Bible Society, 1994. Morris, Leon. The Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids: Inter-Varsity Press, 1998. Moulton, J. H., and Nigel Turner. A Grammar of New Testament Greek Vol. III. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark Publishers, 1952. Mounce, William D. Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006. Nida, Eugene A. "Meaning-full Translations." Christianity Today, October 07, 2002: 4649. Porter, Stanley E, and Mark J Boda. Translating the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2009. Porter, Stanley E, and Richard S Hess. Translating the Bible: Problems and Prospects. New York, NY: T&T Clark International, 2004. Poythress, Vern S. Grudem, Wayne A. The TNIV and The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy. Nashville: Boardman & Holman, 2004. 455
Ryken, Leland. Choosing a Bible: Understanding Bible Translation Differences. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005. —. The Legacy of the King James Bible: Celebrating 400 Years of the Most Influential English Translation. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2011. —. The Word of God in English. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2002. —. Understanding English Bible Translation: The Case for an Essentially Literal Approach. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2009. Scorgie, Gen G, Mark L Strauss, and Stephen M Voth. The Challenge of Bible Translation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2003.
456
CHAPTER 40 GENDER-INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE IN BIBLE TRANSLATION The reader of this book has continuously read interpretive and translation principles that are not only sound, but also aid the Christian in understanding the Bible more fully. One such principle is that meaning is what the original writer, by way of the words that he used, intended and that he meant those words to be understandable to his readers. When we look at the controversy of gender-inclusive language and the use of plurals, the above principles come into play, as does the historical-grammatical approach, which means that God personally chose the time, the place, the language, and the culture into which his Word was to be inspirationally penned. Who are we to disrespect that because we wish to appease the modern man or woman, who may be offended? Their offense is nothing more than self-centeredness, refusing to wrap their mind around the idea that the Creator of all things chose the setting, the language and time in which his Word was to be introduced to man. D. A. Carson in the publication: The Challenge of Bible Translation wishes to address the issue of gender-inclusive language and singular and plurals forms, in which he addresses comments made by Wayne A. Grudem and Vern S. Poythress. We will be addressing Carson's comments. The chief principle that supersedes all others is accuracy, accuracy, and accuracy! In the above, I define Biblical meaning as the original author‘s intended meaning, by the words he chose to use; therefore, the translator seeks to accurately represent the exact wording and personal style of the original text and find the corresponding English equivalent as far as the differences in grammar, syntax and idiom will allow. In other words, he seeks ‗to render the words of the original language text into an English equivalent (corresponding) word or phrase as accurately as possible.‘ The translator wants to re-express what the original language text says into an English equivalent, leaving it up to the reader, to determine the meaning for himself. Therefore, it seeks to allow the reader to see the original text through the English equivalent. Liberal-progressive Christianity has taken the driver's seat of the car of Christendom, and has conservative Christianity riding in the back seat, if not the trunk. The liberalprogressive mindset of homosexuality being an accepted alternative lifestyle, the belief that the Bible is nothing more than a book by man, and inspiration is not being led by ―Holy Spirit,‖ but simply being moved to pen something extraordinary, no different than a Shakespeare or even a John Grisham novel. Therefore, they accept the Bible as being full of errors, that Adam and Eve are nothing more than allegorical (fictional) persons. What these gender-inclusive translators fail to understand is this: to deviate, in any way, from the pattern, or likeness of how God brought his Word into existence, merely opens the Bible up to a book that reflects the age and time of its readers. If we allow the Bible to be altered because the progressive woman's movement feels offended by 457
masculine language, it will not be long before the Bible gives way to the homosexual communities being offended by God's Words in the book of Romans; so modern translations will then tame that language, so as to not cause offense. I am certain that we thought that we would never see the day of two men, or two women being married by priests, but that day has been upon us for some time now. In fact, the American government is debating whether to change the definition of marriage. Therefore, I would suggest that the liberal readers not take my warning here as radicalism, but more as reality. Additionally: One has to consider the whole scope of translation issues. Let us look at the arguments directly from a modern thought-for-thought translation: Eugene Peterson: While I was teaching a class on Galatians, I began to realize that the adults in my class weren't feeling the vitality and directness that I sensed as I read and studied the New Testament in its original Greek. Writing straight from the original text, I began to attempt to bring into English the rhythms and idioms of the original language. I knew that the early readers of the New Testament were captured and engaged by these writings and I wanted my congregation to be impacted in the same way. I hoped to bring the New Testament to life for two different types of people: those who hadn't read the Bible because it seemed too distant and irrelevant and those who had read the Bible so much that it had become 'old hat.' As you can see, the focus here is on the reader, and trying to appease them, both new and old readers alike. Let us take a quick look at the words of the apostle Peter before commenting: 2 Peter 3:16 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) He [the apostle Paul] speaks about these things in all his letters, in which there are some matters that are hard to understand. The untaught and unstable twist them to their own destruction, as they also do with the rest of the Scriptures. 16
The Bible is a very complex and deep book. There are literally dozens of books available on how to interpret the Bible. Some of these books are over 600 pages long, with very small print. To read these books, one has to have a dictionary in one hand and their hermeneutics book in the other. Do you, not find it a bit ironic that one has to slow down and meditatively ponder through a book on how to understand the Bible, yet we wish to put the Bible itself, in sixth grade language. Many of the words in these hermeneutic books are foreign to the lay reader: amanuensis, chiasm, exegesis, contextualization, criticism, didactic, etymology, genre, hermeneutics, hyponoia, metaphor, metonymy, pericope, perspicuity, proof-text, rhetoric, semantics, structuralism, synecdoche and so on. How many of these words do you think the new Bible reader knows offhand, without going to a dictionary?
458
Herein is where the real problem lies. In the first century, all Christians were ministers. All Christians were obligated to be teachers of the good news, to make disciples. (Matthew 24:14, 28:19-20; Ac 1:8) Bible scholar John R. W. Stott noted: Our failure to obey the implications of this command is the greatest weakness of evangelical Christians in the field of evangelism today. He added: We tend to proclaim our message from a distance. We sometimes appear like people who shout advice to drowning men from the safety of the seashore. We do not dive in to rescue them. We are afraid of getting wet. Imagine this scenario: if every member of Christendom took on their responsibility to teach new persons, there would be no need to write a Bible translation on the sixth grade level. Another factor to consider is, 'why are we so bent on adjusting God's Word to appease man that we neglect to be respectful of God's choice of when, how, and in what way his Word was to be made known?' Hebrews 2:6 (English Standard Version) It has been testified somewhere, ―What is man, that you are mindful of him? or the son of man, that you care for him? 6
Hebrews 2:6 (Today's New International Version) But there is a place where someone has testified: "What are mere mortals that you are mindful of them, human beings that you care for them? 6
Psalm 8:4 (English Standard Version) [8:5 in the Hebrew text] 4
him?
What is man, that you are mindful of him? and the son of man that you care for
Psalm 8:4 (Today's New International Version) [8:5 in the Hebrew text] what are mere mortals that human beings that you care for them?
4
you
are
mindful
of
them,
In the Gospel accounts, the expression ―son of man‖ is found over 80 times, with no scholar in denial that every instance it is applied Jesus Christ, being used by him to refer to himself. (Mt 8:20; 9:6; 10:23) There are several occurrences outside the Gospels, one being our above Hebrews 2:6. The apostle Paul applied Psalm 8 as prophetic of Jesus Christ. In the book of Hebrews (2:5-9), Paul quoted the verses, which read: ―What is man [enohsh] that you are mindful of him, and the son of man [benadham] that you care of him? Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings [―angels‖ Septuagint; ―a little lower than angels,‖ at Hebrews 2:7] and crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under his feet.‖ (Ps 8:4-6; compare Ps 144:3, ESV) There is no doubt that Paul was applying this prophetic Psalm to Jesus, and stating that it had been fulfilled in him, as Jesus was made ―a little lower than angels,‖ and becoming a mortal ―son of man,‖ in order that he may die and 459
thereby ―taste death for everyone.‖ (Heb. 2:8-9) The TNIV has removed Christ from this prophesy at Psalm 8:4 and its application to him by Paul, with its mere mortals, them, human beings, and them. How do Carson and other gender inclusive translators rationalize such a move? Carson writes: In Psalm 8, the overwhelming majority of commentators see the expression as a gentilic, parallel to the Hebrew word for ―man‖ in the preceding line. . . . In the context of the application of Psalm 8:4 to Jesus in Hebrews 2, one should at least recognize that the nature of the application to Jesus is disputed. Scanning my commentaries on Hebrews, over threequarters of them do not think that ―son of man‖ here functions as a messianic title but simply as a gentilic, as in Psalm 8.266 If this exegesis is correct (and I shall argue elsewhere and at length that it is), Jesus is said to be ―son of man,‖ not in function of the messianic force of that title in Daniel 7:13-14, but in function of his becoming a human being – which all sides recognize is one of the major themes of Hebrews 2. (Scorgie, Strauss, & Voth, 2003, bolding mine) The gentilic criterion requires one of two constructions: (1) It must end with, hîreq-yod or (2) take the definite article. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia [Literal English Translation] you remember him that and son of man you remember him that man what (is) Take note that ben-adam of Genesis 8:4 fit neither of the gentilic criterions: (1) It must end with, hireq-yod or (2) take the definite article. In addition, Carson claims that ‗most commentators hold that it is not a messianic title, but apply it to the messiah.‘ In response to that, I suggest that we skip what most people think, because much of mankind‘s tragedies have come in what people have thought to be the case, when, in fact, they were just plain wrong. Also, why block the reader from the possibility? Why not let the reader have the literal words, instead of a translator‘s interpretation of, and allow the reader to decide through their own exegesis, what the writer of Hebrews meant by those words. Moreover, the writer of Hebrews would likely have been aware of Matthew‘s Gospel written in Hebrew and the Greek edition as well, in which ―son of man‖ is used some 31 times. In addition, the readers of the book of Hebrews, the Jewish Christians, would be reading the Greek phrase huios anthrōpou (―son of man‖) in the Greek Septuagint at Psalm 8 as well. Moreover, by now the Gospels had been published orally for almost 30 years and would know that Jesus referred to himself as huios anthrōpou (―son of man‖). If Jesus applied this title to himself, it should be evident that the writer of Hebrews was doing no less, and at least the original readers had a chance to reach this conclusion, because the exact words were not hid from them. 266
This writer has found about forty of them that think otherwise. Moreover, the principle of scholarship is that you never count anything, with the majority winning, or being right. For example, I do not say a certain reading in the manuscripts is correct, because the majority of the manuscripts have that reading. I choose the best reading based on evidence.
460
The TNIV and its plural ―human beings‖ for huios anthrōpou (―son of man‖) go beyond translation, and gets into playing the role of a commentary. First, you have the rendering of a singular as a plural. Second, ―human beings‖ inappropriate though it may be is meant to convey the idea of humankind, but we have a word that is left out: huios in the Greek of Hebrews 2:6 and bēn in the Hebrew of Psalm 8:4. In this, we are losing the father son relationship. Those who speak and read English enjoy the benefit of having more than 100 different English translations. If one translation does not fit our preconceived notion of what a particular passage says, we can simply choose another, and another, until we find a translation that reads the way we want it to. If we search through the translations until we find the rendering of our choice; then, what have we learned that we already did not know? God‘s Word is a loving letter from our heavenly Father. It was written in such a way, to … (1) Help the reader draw closer to his Creator (2) Comprehend the issues within creation (3) Understand why we are here and how we are to achieve a good life while we are still within Satan‘s system of things (4) Direction to help us achieve life in the new heavens and earth to come under Christ and his governmental arrangement We are to mold ourselves to God‘s Word, to achieve the best possible life now and a hope at everlasting life when this system ends. How is that to be done if our translators are busy adjusting his Word to suit the modern reader; instead, of our adjusting ourselves to fit His Word, a Word rendered to reflect God‘s choosing of the time, the place, the language, and the culture? It seems that sales and the need to please man [or woman in this case] have taken on more significance than the accurate message of God‘s Word.
Bibliography Grudem, W., Ryken, L., Collins, J. C., Polythress, V. S., & Winter, B. (2005). Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation. Wheaton: Crossway Books. Poythress, V. S. (2004). The TNIV and The Gender-Neutral Bible Controversy. Nashville: Boardman & Holman. Ryken, L. (2002). The Word of God in English. Wheaton: Crossway Books. Scorgie, G. G., Strauss, M. L., & Voth, S. M. (2003). The Challenge of Bible Translation. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
461
CHAPTER 41 IDIOMS IN BIBLE TRANSLATION Idioms are a fixed expression with nonliteral meaning: a fixed distinctive expression whose meaning cannot be deduced from the combined meanings of its actual words. A drop in the bucket is a very small part of something big or whole. All in the same boat is when everyone is facing the same challenges. An axe to grind is to have a dispute with someone. Field day is an enjoyable day or circumstance. Method to my madness is strange or crazy actions that appear meaningless but in the end are done for a good reason. Idioms are by far the most difficult for of literature to interpret and translate. ―Between the Devil and the deep blue sea‖ is equivalent to our ―between a rock and a hard place.‖ Both mean that someone is in a serious dilemma of two very undesirable choices. Have you ever had to tell someone, ‗look you are beating a dead horse,‘ meaning the continuation of the discussion is futile. On the other hand, how about, ‗listen, you are preaching to the choir,‘ which means you are trying to convince your listener of something that he probably holds more strongly to than you do. Let us see one option that some dynamic equivalents have tried to use in dealing with an idiom at: 1: Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea was written by Ted Koehler and Harold Arlen, and recorded by Cab Calloway in 1931. Idioms can present unique problems to translators because there is the difficult decision of whether it should be rendered literally or be interpreted for the reader. An example would be the English expression ―bite your tongue‖. This expression in any other language would be taken literally to mean the act of biting one‘s tongue, thus resulting in the infliction of pain to the tongue. Yet most of the American English-speaking community understands that the phrase actually means to ‗refrain from speaking.‘ Below is a Biblical example of a Hebrew idiom in a literal translation wherein the idiom was rendered literally, and a dynamic equivalent translation that presents the same verses using more interpretation for the reader. Psalm 10:15 (English Standard Version)
Psalm 10:15 (New Century Version)
15
15 Break the arm of the wicked and Break the power of wicked people. evildoer; call his wickedness to account Punish them for the evil they have done. till you find none.
Deuteronomy 5:6 (American Standard Version) 6
I am Jehovah thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. [(land of) slavery] Judges 3:28 (American Standard Version) 462
28
And he said unto them, Follow after me; for Jehovah hath delivered your enemies the Moabites into your hand. And they went down after him, and took the fords of the Jordan against the Moabites, and suffered not a man to pass over. [defeat them for you] 1 Samuel 10:9 (American Standard Version) 9
And it was so, that, when he had turned his back to go from Samuel, God gave him another heart: and all those signs came to pass that day. [changed his attitude, feel like a different person, transformed him] 2 Kings 4:29 (American Standard Version) 29
Then he said to Gehazi, Gird up thy loins, and take my staff in thy hand, and go thy way: if thou meet any man, salute him not; and if any salute thee, answer him not again: and lay my staff upon the face of the child. [get ready, preparation for vigorous activity] What must be understood is that all societies, past and present, have figures of speech that are commonly used to express meaning, just as did those in Bible times. Moreover, figures of speech convey a meaning that is no different from if it was used literally. This is not to say that we take the figurative speech literally, but when someone says that this is a figure of speech, he does not mean that its meaning is ambiguous (can contain more than one meaning), it is specific and has one intended meaning just as other forms of speech do.267 Take for example; ‗off the top of your head,‘ ‗by the skin of his teeth,‘ and ‗the handwriting on the wall‘ all are English examples of idioms.
How Should the Idiom be Translated? Figures of speech as well as the subcategory idiom268 add something to a language that could really be said no other way to get that color and depth. The idiom of ―a land flowing with milk and honey‖ is so descriptive that even the most zealous dynamic equivalent translations dare not alter it:
267
Figure of speech is different from literal in that it contains a nonliteral sense of a word or words (e.g., a cup of mud does not mean a cup of we dirt, but a cup of coffee), but it is similar in that the figurative meaning (a cup of coffee) is to be taken literally, and there is only one intended meaning. 268 Figures of speech: nonliteral expression or use of language: an expression or use of language in a nonliteral sense in order to achieve a particular effect. Metaphors, similes, idioms and hyperbole are all common figures of speech. Idiom: fixed expression with nonliteral meaning: a fixed distinctive expression whose meaning cannot be deduced from the combined meanings of its actual words.
463
Deuteronomy 6:3 (New American Standard Bible) 3
"O Israel, you should listen and be careful to do it, that it may be well with you and that you may multiply greatly, just as the LORD, the God of your fathers, has promised you, in a land flowing with milk and honey. [a fertile land, a land of plenty] Jeremiah 31:29 (New American Standard Bible) 29
"In those days they will not say again, 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, And the children's teeth are set on edge.' [Lit., ―got blunted 269 (dulled)].‖
Jeremiah 31:29 (The Message) 29
"When that time comes you won't hear the old proverb anymore, Parents ate the green apples, their children got the stomachache.
Jeremiah Jeremiah 31:29 (New Living 31:29 (Contemporary Translation) English Version) 29
―The people will no longer quote this proverb: ‗The parents have eaten sour grapes, but their children‘s mouths pucker at the taste.‘
29
No longer will anyone go around saying, "Sour grapes eaten by parents leave a sour taste in the mouths of their children."
The above NASB leaves the Hebrew idiom ―teeth are set on edge‖; this means an irritating or upsetting experience. In the days just before the destruction of Jerusalem by Babylon, this was a common saying, in which the sons were saying the father‘s wickedness put them in this predicament, ‗setting their teeth on edge.‘ In this, they were trying to shift the blame to the fathers. 270 The dynamic equivalent translations attempted to modernize the idiom in the receptor language translation, English in this case, and substitute it in place of the Hebrew idiom. This process is one option, but one can see that even with the use of more modern terms, the meaning is still the same, though perhaps easier for some readers to understand. With this in mind, one can see how this option can be helpful, yet still leave opening the possibility of distorting the meaning of the idiom. Another option is to simply interpret the idiom and place that interpretation in place of the idiom as depicted in the following example: Isaiah 13:18 (RSV) (literal) ―. . . they will have no mercy on the fruit of the womb‖ (RSV)
269
William D. Mounce, Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006), 1031. 270
Timothy M. Willis, Jeremiah/Lamentations, College Press NIV commentary. (Joplin, Mo.: College Press Pub. Co., 2002), 253-55.
464
Isaiah 13:18 (NEB) (interpreted) ―. . . [they] have no pity on little children.‖ Either of these two options should be used as a last resort, and only if a misunderstanding is the end result. The Bible is meant to be studied by the student. It is best to stay with what was written as the translator may alter the meaning of God‘s Word by choosing to replace ancient idioms with modern-day language. One must realize that languages aside from the original can distort the idiom intact. For example Luke 2:51 reads, ―. . . his mother kept all these things in her heart.‖ In Nigeria‘s Kilba language, this would be understood as ―to bear a grudge about something.‖ Thus, for them, it has been rendered: ―his mother went on thinking about these things.‖271 As to Bible translation, every effort should be made to maintain the literal wording of idioms, unless it will adversely affect the understanding of the message for the modern-day reader. If so, it can either be rendered by the interpretation (adding any alternative possibilities in a footnote), or it can be rendered by the use of a modern-day idiom that carries a similar meaning such as in the example of equivalents used earlier, ―between the Devil and the deep blue sea‖ and ―between a rock and a hard place.‖
Biblical Idioms and Body Parts Today, we use the body in a figurative way to convey a message that if heard outside of those who know what these strange phrases mean, would be quite confused. Such as, we might say, ―He risked his neck for him.‖ ―He is my own bone and flesh.‖ ―She was only tickling their ears.‖ These idioms add a vivid word picture to speech, often bringing it to life as it were. This plants the message more clearly and permanently in the listener‘s mind. Therefore, it seems quite appropriate the Jehovah God the creator of human communication should fill his Word to us, with such an array of idioms. For instance, the apostle Paul asked that the Roman congregation give greetings to his fellow Christians Prisca and Aquila, ―who risked their necks [their lives] for my life.‖ (Rom. 16:4) Laban said of Jacob, ―Surely you are my bone and my flesh,‖ which meant that they were related, Laban being Jacob‘s uncle. (Gen. 29:14; 2 Sam. 5:1) In addition, Paul wrote of persons who were ―wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires.‖ Which meant that these ones only wanted teachers that would say what they wanted to hear.—2 Tim. 4:3.
Destruction and Protection
271
Katharine Barnwell, Bible Translation: An Introductory Course in Translation Principles. (Dallas, TX.: SIL International. 1986), 19.
465
The human neck is a weak part of the human body that leaves a us vulnerable. Therefore, in Scripture, it is often associated with the destruction of life by the defeat of an enemy. When Jacob was on his deathbed, he offer this expression in a blessing to his son Judah, ―your hand shall be on the neck of your enemies,‖ which meant, God will give your enemies into your hand. (Gen. 49:8) Likewise, King David praised God in Song, saying, ―You gave me my enemies‘ necks‖ or God was the One who ―will certainly give me the back of [my enemies‘] neck.‖ [made my enemies run] As you can see, the expression likely comes from the enemy running away; thus, all they are seeing is the back of the enemy‘s neck as he is running away. (2 Sam. 22:41; Ps. 18:40, ESV ftn.) Again, this illustrates the danger of translation idioms, as the New Living Translation reads, ―you placed my foot on their necks.‖ This would tend to paint more of a picture of a battle, with defeat as the result. Then, Jehovah God warned of the coming Assyrians against Judah in these ominous terms, ―It will reach even to the neck.‖ This simply meant that the Assyrian army was coming so strongly, with so many troops that they would be should deep in them.—Isa. 8:8; 30:28. Another expression is that of placing one‘s foot on the neck of your enemy. Both the Egyptian and Assyrian monuments have depictions, where monarchs are pictured in battle with their foot on the enemy‘s neck. We find this with Moses replacement, Joshua, the leader and commander of the Israelites. Joshua 10:24 (New American Standard Bible) 24
When they brought these kings out to Joshua, Joshua called for all the men of Israel, and said to the chiefs of the men of war who had gone with him, "Come near, put your feet on the necks of these kings." So they came near and put their feet on their necks. In addition the removal of one‘s hair and beard represented imminent destruction. The Ancient Near East viewed the possession of such as a prize. The Israelites viewed the beard as manly dignity. (1 Chron. 19:5) It was only during extreme sorrow, shame, or humiliation that a beard would be mutilated or removed. (Ezra 9:3; Isa. 15:2; Jer. 41:5; 48:37) Therefore, we can better understand King David‘s strategy of . . . 1 Samuel 21:13 (New American Standard Bible) 13
So he disguised his sanity before them, and acted insanely in their hands, and scribbled on the doors of the gate, and let his saliva run down into his beard. Now that we have this Bible background, we can better understand the conquest of Assyria: Isaiah 7:20 (English Standard Version) 20
In that day the Lord will shave with a razor that is hired beyond the River—with the king of Assyria—the head and the hair of the feet, and it will sweep away the beard also. Assyria was going to invade and conquer Judah like they had Samaria and the rest of the region, but for the fact that . . . 466
Isaiah 37:33-38 (English Standard Version) 33
"Therefore thus says the LORD concerning the king of Assyria: He shall not come into this city or shoot an arrow there or come before it with a shield or cast up a siege mound against it. 34By the way that he came, by the same he shall return, and he shall not come into this city, declares the LORD. 35For I will defend this city to save it, for my own sake and for the sake of my servant David." 36
And the angel of the LORD went out and struck down a hundred and eighty-five thousand in the camp of the Assyrians. And when people arose early in the morning, behold, these were all dead bodies. 37Then Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and returned home and lived at Nineveh. 38And as he was worshiping in the house of Nisroch his god, Adrammelech and Sharezer, his sons, struck him down with the sword. And after they escaped into the land of Ararat, Esarhaddon his son reigned in his place. The destruction of Jerusalem had finally come at the hands of the Babylonians, more than a century later, it being illustrated this way . . . Ezekiel 5:1-2 (English Standard Version) 1
"And you, O son of man, take a sharp sword. Use it as a barber‘s razor and pass it over your head and your beard. Then take balances for weighing and divide the hair. 2A third part you shall burn in the fire in the midst of the city, when the days of the siege are completed. And a third part you shall take and strike with the sword all around the city. And a third part you shall scatter to the wind, and I will unsheathe the sword after them. The burning in the fire, striking with the sword and scattering to the wind of the three portions of hair signified that a third of the people would die of pestilence and be consumed with famine, a third were to die by the sword and the final third would be scattered to all the winds. Ezekiel 5:12 (English Standard Version) 12
A third part of you shall die of pestilence and be consumed with famine in your midst; a third part shall fall by the sword all around you; and a third part I will scatter to all the winds and will unsheathe the sword after them. At the opposite end, one who was able to keep his hair meant that he would not die, and signifies complete safety or guaranteed protection. The Israelite military loved Jonathan, his life was in danger, and they proclaimed, 1 Samuel 14:45 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) 45
But the people said to Saul, "Must Jonathan die, who accomplished such a great deliverance for Israel? No, as the LORD lives, not a hair of his head will fall to the ground, for he worked with God's help today." So the people rescued Jonathan, and he did not die. Jesus said to his disciples, Luke 21:18 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) 467
18
but not a hair of your head will be lost.
King Solomon said, 1 Kings 1:52 (Holman Christian Standard Bible) 52
Then Solomon said, "If he is a man of character, then not a single hair of his will fall to the ground, but if evil is found in him, then he dies."
Idioms Involving the Hips and Loins 1 Kings 18:46 (New American Standard Bible) 46
Then the hand of the LORD was on Elijah, and he girded up his loins and outran Ahab to Jezreel. The people of Bible times wore a loose and flowing style of clothing. If one were to engage in some form of physical activity, it was common to gather up the skirt, pulling them forward between the legs and tucking them in the belt that was around their hips. We find this in the case of Elijah, as he prepared for a long and arduous run. Therefore, the idiom to ―gird up your loins‖ signified preparation for vigorous activity. The Israelites preparing to exodus Egypt after eating the Passover lamb, Exodus 12:11 (New American Standard Bible) 11
'Now you shall eat it in this manner: with your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it in haste--it is (A)the LORD'S Passover. Elisha sends his servant Gehazi on an important mission, saying, 2 Kings 4:29 (New American Standard Bible) 29
Then he said to Gehazi, "Gird up your loins and take my staff in your hand, and go your way; if you meet any man, do not salute him, and if anyone salutes you, do not answer him; and lay my staff on the lad's face." Elisha sending a prophet to anoint Jehu, 2 Kings 9:1 (New American Standard Bible) 1
Now Elisha the prophet called one of the sons of the prophets and said to him, "Gird up your loins, and take this flask of oil in your hand and go to Ramoth-gilead. Jeremiah be commission by Jehovah God Himself, to prepare for vigorous activity in in serving as a prophet. Therefore, what was an actual activity of girding one‘s loins to prepare for some physical activity like running, or working in the field, was not a idiomatic expression about and vigorous undertaking. Jeremiah 1:17 (New American Standard Bible) 17
"Now, gird up your loins and arise, and speak to them all which I command you Do not be dismayed before them, or I will dismay you before them. 468
While the human neck may be weak and vulnerable, the muscles in the hips and loins are quite strong. That is why Proverbs 31:17 says of the capable wife, ―She girded her loins with strength.‖ (ASV) Thus, we see the Prophet Nahum use the hips in an idiomatic sense as he warns those who were about to get invaded, ―He that dashes in pieces is come up against you: keep the fortress, watch the way, make thy loins strong, fortify thy power mightily.‖ (Nah. 2:1, ASV) This is a figurative expression of strength and power. Jehovah God would use Cyrus the Great, the Persian conqueror, to destroy kings and their kingdoms, which He expresses this way, ―to Cyrus, whose right hand I have [taken hold of], to subdue nations before him, and I will lose the loins of kings; to open the doors before him, and the gates shall not be shut.‖ The idiomatic expression means that Jehovah will remove the strength and power of these kings, giving Cyrus the victory. Ones in such a condition are referred to as having wobbling or shaking hips.—Ps. 69:23; Ezek. 21:6; 29:7. This expression means that God would take away the strength or power of these kings, so that Cyrus would be victorious. Those who have had their power removed and are in a weakened condition are therefore said to have breaking, quaking or shaking hips. Psalm 69:23 (American Standard Version) 23
Let their eyes be darkened, so that they cannot see; And make their loins continually to shake. Ezekiel 21:6 (American Standard Version) 6
Sigh therefore, thou son of man; with the breaking of thy loins and with bitterness shalt thou sigh before their eyes. Ezekiel 29:7 (New American Standard Bible) 7
"When they took hold of you with the hand, You broke and tore all their hands; And when they leaned on you, You broke and made all their loins quake." In a sense, you can see how an idiom can grow into other areas, taking its meaning with it. As the apostle Peter literally said, wherefore girding up the loins of your mind, be sober and set your hope perfectly on the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ.‖ (1 Pet 1:13, ASV) In this idiomatic expression of ―girding up the loins of your mind,‖ he meant for them to ―prepare their minds for action.‖
Idioms Involving One’s Bosom or Breasts The human body has always been used to express certain qualities and emotions. It has been the custom, all throughout human history, to hold a cherished loved one to one‘s bosom or breast. (Ruth 4:16; Song of Sol. 1:13) That position came to signify favor and intimacy. John 1:18 (New American Standard Bible) 469
18
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. Luke 16:22-23 (New American Standard Bible) 22
"Now the poor man died and was carried away by the angels to Abraham's bosom; and the rich man also died and was buried. 23"In Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torment, and saw Abraham far away and Lazarus in his bosom. Isaiah 40:11 (English Standard Version) 11
He will tend his flock like a shepherd; he will gather the lambs in his arms; he will carry them in his bosom, and gently lead those that are with young. Deuteronomy Deuteronomy 13:6 (American Standard 13:6 (English Standard Version) Version) 6
If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, that is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;
6
"If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son or your daughter or the wife you embrace or your friend who is as your own soul entices you secretly, saying, 'Let us go and serve other gods,' which neither you nor your fathers have known,
Deuteronomy Deuteronomy 28:54 (American Standard 28:54 (English Standard Version) Version) 54
54
The man that is tender among you, and very delicate, his eye shall be evil toward his brother, and toward the wife of his bosom, and toward the remnant of his children whom he hath remaining;
The man who is the most tender and refined among you will begrudge food to his brother, to the wife he embraces, and to the last of the children whom he has left,
Deuteronomy 28:56 (American Standard Version)
Deuteronomy 28:56 (English Standard Version)
Deuteronomy 13:6 (New Living Translation) 6
―Suppose someone secretly entices you—even your brother, your son or daughter, your beloved wife, or your closest friend—and says, ‗Let us go worship other gods‘—gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known.
Deuteronomy 28:54 (New Living Translation) 54
The most tenderhearted man among you will have no compassion for his own brother, his beloved wife, and his surviving children.
Deuteronomy 28:56 (New Living Translation) 56
The most tender and The tender and The most tender delicate woman among delicate woman among and refined woman among you—so delicate she would 56
56(A)
470
you, who would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter,
you, who would not venture to set the sole of her foot on the ground because she is so delicate and tender, will begrudge to the husband she embraces, to her son and to her daughter,
not so much as touch the ground with her foot—will be selfish toward the husband she loves and toward her own son or daughter.
The intestines or bowels are linked with deep feeling and emotions in both Biblical Hebrew and Greek. This is likely the case because that emotional distress caused abdominal distress. The bad reports regarding the coming disaster upon Israel caused Jeremiah to exclaim ―My anguish [―intestines‖], my anguish [―intestines‖]! I am pained at my very heart.‖ (Jer. 4:19, ASV) When the time of Jerusalem‘s destruction came, the abundant sorrow that Jeremiah felt caused excruciating uproar within, causing him to lament, ―My very intestines are in a ferment.‖—Lam. 1:20; 2:11.
Compassion and Pity Jeremiah 31:20 (American Standard Version) 20
Is Ephraim my dear son? is he a darling child? for as often as I speak against him, I do earnestly remember him still: therefore my heart yearned for him [literally, that is why my intestines have become boisterous for him]; I will surely have mercy upon him, said Jehovah. Isaiah 63:15 (American Standard Version) 15
Look down from heaven, and behold from the habitation of thy holiness and of thy glory: where are thy zeal and thy mighty acts? The yearning of thy heart [Literally, the agitation of your intestines] and thy compassions are restrained toward me. 1 Kings 3:26 (American Standard Version) 26
Then spoke the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her heart yearned over her son [for her inward emotions were excited toward her son], and she said, Oh, my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, It shall be neither mine nor thine; divide it. Philippians 2:1 (American Standard Version) 1
If there is therefore any exhortation in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercies [if any bowels] and compassions, 1 John 3:17 (English Standard Version) 471
17
But if anyone has the world‘s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him[ he might shut up the bowels of him], how does God‘s love abide in him? Colossians 3:12 (English Standard Version) 12
Put on then, as God‘s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassionate hearts [bowels of compassion], kindness, humility, meekness, and patience, The entire Bible from beginning to end uses the body and its parts in an idiomatic figurative sense. There is little doubt that such phrases are colorful and vivid, such as ―bowels of compassion.‖ In many cases it is possible to leave the literal rendering, while others would only cause major confusion. Regardless, most literal translations either give the sense of the meaning either in the main text, or in a footnote.
Bibliography of Hermeneutic Books Cottrell, Peter, and Maxwell Turner. Linguistics and Biblical Interpretation. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1989. Duvall, Scott J, and Hays J Hays. Grasping God's Word: A Hands-On Approach to Reading, Interpreting, and Applying the Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001, 2005. Kaiser, Walter C, and Moises Silva. Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics: The Search for Meaning. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, 2007. Klein, William W, Craig L Blomberg, and Robert L Jr. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Inc., 2004. Ocborne, Grant R. The Hermeneutical Spiral. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1991, 2006. Stein, Robert H. A Basic Guide to Interpreting the Bible: Playing by the Rules. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1994. Thomas, Robert L. Evangelical Hermeneutics. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 2002. Virkler, Henry A, and Karelynne Gerber Ayayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1981, 2007.
Bibliography of Translation Books Barnwell, Katharine. Bible Translation: An Introductory Course in Translation Principles. Kenya: SIL International, 1975. Grudem, Wayne, Leland Ryken, John C Collins, Vern S Polythress, and Bruce Winter. Translating Truth: The Case for Essentially Literal Bible Translation. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2005. 472
Mounce, William D. Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2006. Ryken, Leland. The Word of God in English. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2002. —. Understanding English Bible Translation: The Case for an Essentially Literal Approach. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2009. Willis, Timothy M. Jeremiah/Lamentations, College Press NIV commentary. Joplin: College Press Pub. Co., 2002.
473
PART 7 UNDERSTANDING OUR IMPERFECTIONS CHAPTER 42 TWELVE DISTORTED THOUGHTS Read the list below of Twelve Distorted Thoughts and Ten Cognitive Distortions. They are somewhat similar. However, the names of the Twelve Distorted Thoughts were developed with the idea of focusing on the culprit that is guilty of the distortion (self), and what it is (thinking). As you work your way through this book or any self-help book, like the Feeling Good Book, please have the Twelve Distorted Thoughts in front of you (mentally that is, memorized). Either you can consider both lists to the point where you can easily identify the Ten Cognitive Distortions and the Twelve Distorted Thoughts, or you can pick the list that makes you feel more comfortable.
Twelve Distorted Thoughts 1. SELF-ABSOLUTE (THINKING) With this frame of mind, there is no middle ground. One who has a setback in life sees it as nothing more than a life-ending result. To receive one bad mark on a work evaluation is the same as receiving all bad marks. 2. SELF-SWEEPING (THINKING) If a bad event happens to you, you say: ―This is the story of my life.‖ You see your life as a never-ending series of negative events. For you one bad event might as well be a thousand, because you blow it up in your mind. 3. SELF-BRANDED (THINKING) You own every negative event that happens in your life as being your fault. You carry the weight of the world on your shoulders. If something positive happens it is a freak accident, because nothing good happens for you. 4. SELF-CLASSIFYING (THINKING) As these negative events unfold on you, owning those that are not even yours, you begin to classify yourself as a ―loser,‖ a ―total failure,‖ a ―disappointment,‖ a ―let down.‖ It is to the point that you even begin to question why you were even born. 5. SELF-RATIONALIZING (THINKING) You perceive life in a negative manner even though much of your life may be just fine. You refuse to acknowledge the good in your life, or the possibility of it becoming good. 6. SELF-PROPHECY (THINKING) You see everything as ending negatively, so you end up fulfilling your own negative thinking. A negative event happens to you and you have already mapped out in your mind the dreadful course, followed by a tragic ending. John calls to tell you he can make the dinner date tonight. At once, you are offering reasons as to why he has broken of the date: ‗he doesn‘t like me;‘ ‗he has found someone else‘ and on and on.
474
7. SELF-PSYCHIC (THINKING) You assume that someone is thinking badly of you, or talking badly about you without any evidence. You assume that bad things just always happen to you. 8. SELF-AMPLIPHYING (THINKING) Small negative things, events happen to each of us every day, but these are amplified to unrealistic measures by our overactive thinking. 9. SELF-FOCUS (THINKING) You focus in on the negative details, seeing nothing else. You refuse to see the bright side of any situation. If one attempts to point to some positive aspect of anything, you negate them and their audacity even to consider such a thing. 10. SELF-PROJECTING (THINKING) Jim should have done this. Jane should have said this. Mark should not have done that. This is simply projecting you on everyone else. 11. SELF-LABELING (THINKING) I am no good! I am not a good mother. I am a poor student. I am stupid. 12 SELF-PERSONALIZING (THINKING) With no evidence, you make yourself the scapegoat, because you will always blame yourself for everything. Thinking, ‗If only I were a better wife,‘ or as verbally abused wife, you think, ‗it‘s my fault; I must be doing something wrong.‘ In addition, the wife may scream at the husband habitually, so much so that he loses his self-esteem, ―I can never do anything right.‘
Definitions of Cognitive Distortions 1. ALL-OR-NOTHING THINKING: You see things in black and white categories. If your performance falls short of perfect, you see yourself as a total failure. 2. OVERGENERALIZATION: You see a single negative event as a never-ending pattern of defeat. 3. MENTAL FILTER: You pick out a single negative detail and dwell on it exclusively so that your vision of all reality becomes darkened, like the drop of ink that discolors the entire beaker of water. 4. DISQUALIFYING THE POSITIVE: You reject positive experiences by insisting they ―don‘t count‖ for some reason or other. In this way you can maintain a negative belief that is contradicted by your everyday experiences. 5. JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS: You make a negative interpretation even though there are no definite facts that convincingly support your conclusions. a. Mind Reading. You arbitrarily conclude that someone is reacting negatively to you, and you don‘t bother to check this out. b. The FortuneTeller Error. You anticipate that things will turn out badly, and you feel convinced that your prediction is an already established fact.
475
6. MAGNIFICATION (CATASTROPHIZING) OR MINIMIZATION: You exaggerate the importance of things (such as your goof-up or someone else‘s achievement). Or you inappropriately shrink things until they appear tiny (your own desirable qualities or the other fellow‘s imperfections). This is also called the ―binocular trick.‖ 7. EMOTIONAL REASONING: You assume that your negative emotions necessarily reflect the way things really are: "I feel it, therefore it must be true." 8. SHOULD STATEMENTS: You try to motivate yourself with shoulds and shouldn‘ts, as if you had to be whipped and punished before you could be expected to do anything. ―Musts‖ and ―oughts‖ are also offenders. The emotional consequence is guilt. When you direct should statements toward others, you feel anger, frustration, and resentment. 9. LABELING AND MISLABELING: This is an extreme form of over-generalization. Instead of describing your error, you attach a negative label to yourself: ―I‘m a loser.‖ When someone else‘s behavior rubs you the wrong way, you attach a negative label to him: ―He‘s a damn louse.‖ Mislabeling involves describing an event with language that is highly colored and emotionally loaded. 10. PERSONALIZATION: You see yourself as the cause of some negative event, which in fact you were not primarily responsible for.―Burns, David D. Feeling Good. Morrow, 1999
476
CHAPTER 43 WHO IS TO BLAME? It is a difficult thing to determined, who or what is at fault behind our difficult times, which includes our health and fitness issues. With our imperfections, and the violent oppressive world that we live in, there is little wonder why we find no happiness, or at least very little. Who or what is to blame for all of this? Moreover, is there anything that we can do to remove some of the problems we have, or at least limit them? Yes, there are answers as to where the fault lies, and what we can do to improve our circumstances. There are four factors to our stress and difficult times (1) We are imperfect and live in an imperfect world, compounded with the fact that God‘s Word says we are mentally bent and lean toward doing bad. We read, ―When the LORD saw that the wickedness of man on the earth was great, and that the whole bent of his thinking was never anything but evil, the LORD regretted that he had ever made man on the earth.‖ (Gen. 6:5, AT) (2) We have a wicked spirit creature, Satan the Devil, who is misleading the entire world of humankind. We read, ―Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.‖ (1 Pet 5:8, ESV) (3) We live in a world that caters to the imperfect flesh. We read, ―For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions, is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever.‖ (1 John 2:16-17) (4) We are unable to understand our inner person, which the Bible informs us is wicked: ―The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?‖ The apostle Paul tells us, ―just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned.‖ There is only one factor in the four part equation that will have an effect on the other two, You. Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 5:12. Yes, we create our own stress. Because (1) we do not understand our true imperfection, and our imperfection is easily mislead by point number (2), Satan. Moreover, we are easily enticed by point number (3-4), the world and its desires, as well as our heart. We read, ―But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire) when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.‖ (Jas 1:14-15, ESV) Only by an active faith in Christ, and a true understanding of our imperfection, can we hope to function in an imperfect world, defeat Satan, gain control over our imperfect flesh, allow God to read our heart and help us not to not fall victim to our own desires of the eyes. It does not take long for us to realize that we live in an imperfect world, imperfect in the extreme! For example, we think of 911, the holocaust, or a natural disaster that wipes out hundreds of thousands of lives. Crimes so intense, they paralyze us. Two men break into a home, where they make the father of the children watch as they rape his wife, followed by his two daughters. Thereafter, they butcher the wife in front of the two daughters and the husband. Then, they tie the two daughters to their beds and set the 477
house on fire, the father being helpless as he escapes, watching his two daughters‘ burn alive. One may wonder how a loving God can allow thousands of years of this to go on, and at the same time, we are told, ―God is love.‖ (1 Jo 4:8, ESV) Before the end of this publication, you will find the answer to that seeming contradiction: a loving God allowing thousands of years of pain and suffering. For now, we will address the only thing that is perfect in our world of imperfection, truth. It is here that secular mental-health will be separating from us, as they see our troubles as a societal issue. Of course, we do not deny that as we grow within society: school, friends, neighbors, work, news media, and entertainment; we are affected and influenced by those around us. However, the secular humanist would have us shift all the responsibility over onto society. A kind of ‗he made me do it,‘ he being society. Our environment can be a contributing factor, but never a cause. In other words, Johnny grew up in the ghetto-slums of Chicago, Illinois; his father being a drug dealer and a gangster, his mother was being a prostitute to support her drug addiction, and his five older brothers getting into gangs, selling drugs. All of this may very well contribute to Johnny becoming the next gang member and selling drugs. Nevertheless, this home environment will not cause it, making it inevitable. (1) If we have some personality disorders, bad habits, and so on, it becomes easier, or so we think, to say, ‗it is societies fault,‘ it‘s my childhood,‘ ‗life has kicked me in the teeth,‘ ‗it my parents fault.‘ (2) ‗I am very concerned about my problems, which no one seems to understand, and appreciate.‘ (3) ‗My problems are a part of who I am; I simply have to live with them.‘ I have tried for years to change, and it is useless.‘ The answer to our problems does not lie within others, society, or your childhood. If this is not accepted as a reality, there will be no progress. The answer to our problems is staring back at us each morning as we look in the mirror, getting ready for our day. Yes, we are the answer to our problem, and it is all about us taking an active approach in us. We read, ―Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.‖ (Eph. 6:13, 17, ESV)
478
CHAPTER 44 DESTRUCTIVE SELF-TALK Self-talk is what we tell ourselves in our thoughts. In fact, it is the words we tell ourselves about people, self, experiences, life in general, God, the future, the past, the present; it is specifically all the words you say to yourself all the time. As we will repeatedly stress just how destructive depression can be―mood slumps, your self-worth plummeting, your body feeling sluggish, your will to accomplish even the tiniest of things is not to be realized and your actions defeat you. Intense negative thinking will always lead to a depressive episode, or simple painful emotion. Your thoughts based on a good mood will be entirely different from those based on your being upset. Negative thoughts that flood your mind are the actual contributors of your self-defeating emotions. These very thoughts are what keep you sluggish and contribute to your feeling worthless. Therefore, this thinking is the key to your relief. Every time you feel down about something, attempt to locate the corresponding negative thought you had to this feeling down. Because it is these thoughts that have created your feelings of low self-worth, by learning to offset them and replace them with rational thoughts you can actually change your mood. Remember the thoughts that move through your mind, with no effort, this is the easiest course to follow. It is so subconscious that they even go unnoticed. The centerpiece to it all is the mind. Your moods, behaviors and body responses result from the way you view things. It is a proven fact that you cannot experience any event in any way, shape, or form unless you have processed it with your mind first. No event can depress you; it is your perception of that event that will depress you. If you are only sad over an event, your thoughts will be rational; but if you are depressed or anxious over an event, your thinking will be bent and irrational, distorted and simply wrong. It may be difficult for each of us to wrap our mind around it, but we are very good at telling ourselves outright lies and half-truths, repeatedly throughout each day. In fact, some of us are so good at it that it has become our reality and leads to depression and anxiety. It is the job of this chapter to help you to start identifying these lies and halftruths. I am dumb I am unattractive No one really likes me I have no talent 479
I am miserable This always happens to me This is the story of my life Life is never going to change I am so lonely I am no good Consider Paula, a Christian who endured crippling episodes of intense sadness before her depression was diagnosed. ―Sometimes after Christian meetings,‖ she says, ―I would rush out to my car and weep, for no reason at all. I just had this overwhelming sense of loneliness and pain. Although all the evidence showed that I had many friends who cared for me, I was blind to it.‖ Something similar happened to Ellen, whose depression required that she be hospitalized. ―I have two sons, two lovely daughters-in-law, and a husband—all of whom I know love me very much,‖ she says. Logic, it seems, would tell Ellen that life is good and that she is precious to her family. But on the battlefield of depression, dark thoughts—no matter how irrational—can overwhelm the sufferer. Psychiatrist William Gaylin said: ―A denigrated self-image is a tar baby. The more we play with it, embrace it, the more bound we are to it.‖ It is true; each destructive word is just another layer of tar, which will eventually consume us. A famous theologian once said that the best way to know if a stick is crooked is not to argue about it, debate about it, but to lay a straight stick next to it for comparison. 1. Self-degrading: I am so stupid I never get anything right. Everything I do seem to fail. Even when I do all I can to make someone love me; they just end up rejecting me. 2. Situation degrading: Life is the same every day; I do not even know why I bother getting up! Life just kicks me in the face every day―it stinks! 3. Future degrading: I am never going to make it in life; I do not know why I even try. It is a waste of time! I will never find happiness like everyone else. Hope, what is that! 480
Dr. David Burns wrote, ―feelings are not facts!‖ You can be easily tricked by your own thinking. Regardless of what line your depressed brain tells you, you will swallow it as total truth. In fact, it does not take but a partial second to establish these irrational thoughts with you. Therefore, in many cases you are unlikely even to notice it taking places. These negative thoughts feel so right and give credibility to the lie.
481
Daily Record of Thinking Errors Situatio n give me a short descripti on of what lead up to the emotion
Emotion (s)1. Specific: sad, anxious, angry
At work, a customer talks down to me like a piece of trash and actually cusses at me.
Angry: 95%
2. R ate the degree of your emotion 1-100%
Sad: 65%
Thoughts:
Thinking Error
Write the thoughts that leaped into your head and the emotions
From the above list, identify which error it is
1. I hate my Job.
SelfAbsolute
2. I would love to smack that SOB 3. I must have said something
SelfAmplifyin g
Correct Thought Write out the correct thinking in place of the error
Results:
I was employee of the moth
Angry 50%
Rate your emotions after you have gone thru the rational thinking, has it lowered 1100%
Sad 20%
He acted rude, but we all do sometimes .
I am not going to let him ruin my day.
I treated him no different personali than any zing of the other customers, don‘t worry. NOTE: When you have an unpleasant emotion, note the situation that Self-
482
brought it on. Then, note the erroneous thinking that went with it; rating the degree of emotion.
483
CHAPTER 45 SELF-DEFEATING THOUGHTS While many are well aware that self-defeating thoughts and behavior(s) are harmful to themselves, they also know that resisting and overcoming them is another story. Selfdefeating thoughts and behaviors can become deeply rooted over the years and can be extremely resistant to efforts to change them. Trying to curb such thinking can be exhausting and even painful, spiraling into depression in and of itself. Humans being in the state of imperfection should not expect perfection in this endeavor. Our genetic heritage, inbred weaknesses, and experiences make it impossible for us to avoid all self-defeating thoughts and behaviors. Therefore, lovingly, we do not demand perfection of you, nor should you of yourself. However, this consideration on our part does not absolve us of our responsibility to control our thinking and thus our feelings that lead to moods and behaviors. Behavioral scientists say that self-defeating thoughts, like good ones, are learned and developed over time. If that is correct, then self-defeating thoughts can just as surely be unlearned! Of course, ridding ourselves of self-defeating thoughts that may have dominated our lives for years will be difficult. We should not underestimate the struggle ahead of us. There will certainly be setbacks and failures. However, rest assured, things usually get easier with time. The more you work at it, the more your new behavior will become a part of you. How? Life: Common every day events, both positive and negative
Thoughts: Each of these events are interpreted by your thinking throughout the day
Mood: It is developed not by the day‘s events; no, it is developed by your perception of those events, your thinking.
Proverbs 23:7 For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he Every bad feeling that we have is a direct result of our bent thinking. If one finds themselves embedded in day-in-and-day-out of negative thinking, there is most certainly going to be a depressive episode follow. We will not be so bold as to use the word ―cause,‖ but instead we will say contribute. Thus, you will find that those continual negative thoughts will contribute to emotional spiral until it arrives at the bottom floor of a depressive episode.
Breaking Away From Bent Thinking 484
1. Identify and own your bent thinking. You have to self-analyze your days. You must slow down and identify what thinking error you are having and write it down. This is called journaling. If you are careful and wisely analyze, you can skip the journaling. Simple identify the thinking error, and internally discuss the irrational thought. Why is it irrational thinking? What would be the rational thought? 2. Replace the bent (irrational) thinking with rational thinking. You start selfbranding yourself: ―I am no good,‖ ―I am lazy.‖ You should immediately stop and start to rationally reason with yourself. ―No I am not, this is doing nothing but making me feel worse, I am a good person who makes mistakes like everyone else.‖ Positive self-talk should be done at length, keeping it real, and aloud if possible. 3. Keep Records. Each day write down the episodes of negative self-abuse bent thinking that you go through, as well as the forms. In addition, the time spent in rationalizing with the negative thoughts. At the end of the day, summarize it in a short paragraph. You should see a decrease almost immediately in that first week. 4. Let others know. Keep your friends and family in the loop of what you are attempting to do. Periodically ask them if they notice a change in attitude and mood. Explain to them that it is best if they are honest with you. Also, prepare yourself mentally for a possible negative feedback. Simply use the feedback as a instrument and know you need more work. 5. The most important key is to be practical and balanced. It took many years to achieve your way of thinking; it is not going to change overnight. In addition, if you put 50% into the putting on a new personality, you will get 50% out of it. If you put 100% in, you will get 100% out of it. You should notice a small difference in a week, but you should see tremendous changes in about a four months period, some maybe six months to a year. 6. Pray to God if you believe in one. You need to bring God into the picture, for him, nothing is impossible.―Ps 55:22; Lu 18:27.
485
CHAPTER 46 AM I MENTALLY BENT? The person who is depressed often needs to take the initiative by seeking out an empathetic person in whom to confide. This one should be a good listener and be very patient. He or she should avoid lecturing the depressed one or making judgmental statements, such as, ‗You shouldn‘t feel like that‘ or, ‗that‘s the wrong attitude.‘ The depressed person‘s emotions are fragile, and such critical comments will only make him feel worse about himself. This page is going to come across as seeming difficult, but it is not really. An extra effort has been made to define complicated material. The beginning of understanding any mental disorders, is understanding the human condition. Therefore, it would be most beneficial if you were to read ALL of what is below. As you read, please write down anything that you do not fully understand, or questions you may have, or something that you need to be further explained. Also, write a very small paragraph afterward, summarizing what you think this page is saying, just an overall picture. Once you fully understand this material, you will be able to make greater progress.
Control the Mind – Control the Feelings and Actions ―Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.—Rom. 12:2, ESV. Unless otherwise indicated, all Bible quotations are from the English Standard Version (ESV, 2001) or the American Standard Version (ASV, 1901). Modern-day cognitive therapy (i.e., ―how you think is how you will feel and behave‖) is only about to celebrate its 80th birthday. Really, it got its modern-day start in the 1930s. However, the real credit goes back 2,000 – 3,500 years in the most comprehensive book on how to control oneself in the imperfect world that we live in. This book is none other than the Bible―God‘s Word. First, I think it is prudent to understand briefly, why we are here, how humankind has fallen to such a dreadful condition and a little about that condition.
God‘s Original Purpose for the Earth and Humans (Gen 1:27-29) 27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. 28And God blessed them. And God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that moves on the earth." 29And God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food. (Gen 2:7, 9, 15) 7And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living 486
soul.9And out of the ground the LORD God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 15The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and keep it.
Rebellion and Rejection of God‘s Right to Rule (Gen 2:9, 15) 16 And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Gen 3:6, 19) 6So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. 19By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return." (Rom 5:12) 12Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— (Ezek 18:20) 4Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die. (Eccl 3:1820) 18 I said in my heart with regard to the children of man that God is testing them that they may see that they themselves are but beasts. 19For what happens to the children of man and what happens to the beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts, for all is vanity. 20All go to one place. All are from the dust, and to dust all return.
Has God Changed His Mind? (Is 45:18) 18For thus saith Jehovah that created the heavens, the God that formed the earth and made it, that established it and created it not a waste, that formed it to be inhabited: I am Jehovah; and there is none else. (Ps 115:16) 16 The heavens are the heavens of Jehovah; But the earth hath he given to the children of men. (Eccl 1:4) 4A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever. (Ps 104:5) 5He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved. Sin: (Heb., chata; Gr., hamartano) aside from anything that is out of harmony with, contrary to, God‘s personality, standards, ways, and will; anything marring one‘s relationship with God; sin also conveys the idea of missing, in the sense of not reaching a goal, mark, or way. In other words, fallen humans are missing the mark of that original perfection that Adam and Eve possessed.
The Mental Bent of Humankind‘s Mind Initially, Adam and Eve‘s mental disposition, or inclination was not toward evil or bad―sin. Hence, while imperfect humans are inclined, lean toward wrongdoing, it was just the opposite for our first human parents; their natural inclination was toward doing good. This is just the opposite of their descendants, for we have inherited the disease of sin, missing the mark, or standard of perfection. (Gen 6:5, AT) ―When the Lord saw that the wickedness of man on the earth was great, and that the whole bent of his 487
thinking was never anything but evil . . . .‖ (Gen 8:21, AT) ―. . . the bent of man‘s mind may be evil from his very youth. . . .‖ (Jer 17:9) 9The heart is deceitful above all things, and it is exceedingly corrupt: who can know it?
―The Man We Are Inside.‖ (John 13:35) 35 By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." ―Disciple,‖ ―pupil,‖ ―student‖ and ―learner: (One who loves discipline) mathetes (1 John 1:8) 8 If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. ―Sin,‖ ―miss‖ hamartia (Missing the mark of perfection) (Rom 7:22) 22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being. ―The inside man,‖ ―the man I am within,‖ ―inward being,‖ ―inward man‖ ton eso anthropos (Eph 4:23) 23 and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds. Lit. ―The spirit of the mind‖ ―made new in the force actuating your mind,‖ ―renewed in the spirit of your mind,‖ (Eph 2:15) 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace. Lit. ―New man,‖ ―new self,‖ ―new personality‖ (1 Co 2:14) 14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. Lit. ―soulical,‖ ―physical man,‖ ―natural man,‖ PSUCHIKOS He is ―soulical‖ in that he follows the desires of the human soul to the exclusion of spiritual things. (Rom 8:6-7) 6 For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God‘s law; indeed, it cannot. Lit, ―minding,‖ ‗way of thinking, mindset, aim, aspiration, striving.‘ phronema When we couple our leaning toward wrongdoing with the fact that Satan the devil, who is ―the god of this world,‖ (2 Co 4:4) has worked to entice these leanings, the desires of the fallen flesh, we are even further removed from our relationship with our loving heavenly Father. During these ‗last days, grievous times‘ has fallen on us as Satan is working all the more to prevent God‘s once perfect creation to achieve a righteous standing with God and entertaining the hope of everlasting life.―2 Timothy 3:1-5. Our conscience thinking (aware) and subconscious thinking (present in our mind without you being aware of it) originates in the mind. For good, or for bad, our mind follows certain rules of action, which if entertained one will move even further in that direction until they are eventually consumed for good or for bad. In our imperfect state, our bent thinking will lean toward wrong, especially with Satan using his system of things, with so many forms of entertainment that simply feeds the flesh. (Pro 23:7) for as he thinks in his heart, so is he; (Jam 1:14-15) But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire [Or, ―caught as by bait.‖ Lit., 488
―being baited on‖]. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death. (1 John 2:16) For all that is in the world--the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions--is not from the Father but is from the world. (Matt 5:28) But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Rom 13:14) But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no plans to satisfy the fleshly desires. (1 Pet 1:14) As obedient children, do not be conformed to the desires of your former ignorance. If we do not want to be affected by the world of mankind around us, which is alienated from God, we must apply the Apostle Paul‘s Words. He writes, (Rom 12:2) ―Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.‖ Just how do we do that? This is done by taking in an accurate knowledge of Biblical truth, which enables us to me God‘s current standards of righteousness. (Titus 1:1) This Bible knowledge, if applied, will enable us to move our mind in a different direction, by filling the void with the principles of God‘s Word, principles that guide our actions, especially ones that guide moral behavior. – Ps 119:105. The Biblical truths that lay in between Genesis 1:1 and Revelation 22:21 will transform our way of thinking, which will in return affect our mood and actions and our inner person. It will be as the apostle Paul set it out to the Ephesians. We need to ―to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness. . . .‖ (Ephesians 4:22-24) This force that contributes to our acting or behaving in a certain way, for our best interest is internal.
How Can We Bring This Transformation About? As state earlier, the mind is the mental ability that we use in a conscious way to garner information and to consider ideas and come to conclusions. Therefore, if we perceive our realities based on the information, that surrounds us, generally speaking, most are inundated in a world that reeks of Satan‘s influence. This means that our perception, our attitude, thought, speech and conduct are in opposition to God and his Word. Most are in true ignorance to the changing power of God‘s Word. The apostle Paul helps us to appreciate the depths of those who reflect this world‘s disposition. He writes, 17 Therefore, I say this and testify in the Lord: You should no longer walk as the Gentiles [nations] walk, in the futility of their thoughts [emptiness, idleness, vanity, foolishness, purposelessness]. 18 They are darkened in their understanding [mind being the center of human perception], excluded from the life of God [not Godless, but less God], because of the ignorance that is in them [due not to a lack of opportunity but deliberate rejection] and because of the hardness of their hearts [hardening as if by calluses, unfeeling]. 19 They became callous [cease to feel moral pain] and gave themselves over to promiscuity for the practice of every kind of impurity with a desire for more and more [no remorse and still asking for more]. —Eph. 4:17-19, HCSB. 489
Hebrews 4:12 (New International Version, ©2011) For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. 12
By taking in this accurate knowledge of God‘s Word, we will be altering our way of thinking, which will affect our emotions and behavior as well as our lives now and foe an eternity. This Word will influence our minds, making corrections in the way we think. Colossians 3:9-11 (English Standard Version) Do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old self with its practices and have put on the new self, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its creator. 11Here there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all. 9
10
Science has certainly taken us a long way in our understanding of how the mind works, but it is only a grain of sand on a beach in comparison to what we do not know. Yet, we have enough in these basics to understand some fundamental processes. When we open our eyes to the light of a new morning, it is altered into and electrical charge by the time it arrives at the gray matter of our brain‘s cerebral cortex. As the sound of the morning birds reaches our gray matter, it arrives as electrical impulses. The rest of our senses (smell, taste, and touch) arrive as electrical currents in the brain‘s cortex as well. The white matter of our brain lies within the cortex of gray matter, used as a tool to send electrical messages to other cell(s) within other parts of the gray matter. Thus, when anyone of our five senses detects danger, at the speed of light, a message is sent to the motor section, to prepare us for the needed action of either fight or flight. Here lies the key to altering our way of thinking. Every single thought, whether it is conscious or subconscious makes an electrical path through the white matter of our brain, with a record of the thought and event. This holds true with our actions as well. If it is a repeated way of thinking or acting, it has no need to form a new path; it only digs a deeper, engrained, established path. This would explain how a factory worker who has been on the job for some time, gives little thought as they perform their repetitive functions each day, it becomes unthinking, automatic, mechanical. These repeated actions become habitual. There is yet another facet to considered; the habits, repeated thoughts and actions become simple and effortless to repeat. Any new thoughts and actions are more difficult to perform, as there needs to be new pathways opened up. The human baby starts with a blank slate, with a minimal amount of stabled paths built in to survive those first few crucial years. At the boy grows into childhood, there is a flood of pathways established, more than all of the internet connections worldwide. Our five senses are continuously adding to the maze. Ps. 139:14: ―I will give thanks to you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. . . .‖ (NASB) So, it could never be over stated as to the importance of the foundational thinking and behavior that should be established in our children from infancy forward. 490
Life: Common every day events, both positive and negative
Thoughts: Each of these events are interpreted by your thinking throughout the day
Mood: It is developed not by the day‘s events; no, it is developed by your perception of those events, your thinking.
Maintain the Renewed Mind (Rom. 7:19-25) ―19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 21So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, 23but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. 24Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin. I have highlighted the Apostle Paul‘s expressions, ―law of my mind‖ and ―the law of sin that dwells in my members‖. As was stated at the outset, we have inherited ―sin,‖ a missing the mark of perfection, the ability to live up to God‘s perfect standards for man. Under sin, our natural inclination is toward wrong. So, the question needs to be asked: ‗how do we get this inherited sin under control?‘ The apostle goes on to give us that very answer, with the mind one can maintain a righteous standing before God, but with the flesh, we serve sin. Just as sin acts as a dictator, moving us in the way of evil, so to a renewed mind of Christ will move us in the image of God, taking on this new personality. However, you now see the conflict that Paul was expressing. You will have a new mind in a body that desires the opposite of your new mental disposition. Therefore, your new mind will desire to follow a course that cannot be perfected as long as this system lasts and Satan is the God of the world. Therefore, you will slip off into sin‘s law at times, which will revolt you at the thought with your new sensitive conscience. The Apostle John addresses this: (1 John 2:1-3) My little children, I am writing YOU these things that YOU may not commit a sin. Yet, if anyone does commit a sin, we have a helper with the Father, Jesus Christ, a righteous one. 2 And he is a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins, yet not for ours only but also for the whole world‘s. 3 And by this we have the knowledge that we have come to know him, namely, if we continue observing his commandments. 491
It is sad but true; our minds will easily gravitate to sin, as it is an inclination. Once we have the renewed mind, we must continue to take in this life-saving knowledge. Thus, we are taking these new Bible principles and making them our own, sounding them down in our heart. We must not let mental sluggishness cut us off from establishing good mental, rational thinking. If we become this new ‗law of the mind,‘ it will control and dominate, overrule the flesh that wishes to serve the law of sin. Once we have achieved this ―mind of Christ,‖ which was at all times put in motion by the proper force, his mental inclination always being spiritual, we will not want our minds to revert back toward wrong thinking, being ―men corrupted in mind.‖ (2 Tim 3:8) Thus, we must maintain our new ‗law of the mind.‘ (Rom 8:5-7) 5For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God‘s law; indeed, it cannot. (Phil. 3:18, 19) 18For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ. 19 Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. It is perfectly fine to be overly concerned with the corrupting influence of self and the world that surrounds us: ―But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. (2 Cor. 11:3) If you recall from above, Eve‘s natural desire was to do good, her thinking was not bent in the least. Yet, with Satan by way of the serpent planting improper thoughts in her mind, she entertained those until she chose the wrong course: ―14But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.‖ – James 1:14-15. Once we have this new ‗law of the mind‘ and doggedly, decisively, stubbornly, definitely, purposefully stick to the rational thinking of the new mind, it will bar us from entertaining wrong thinking, which we will dismiss it: (Col. 1:21 and Eph. 2:2, 3) 21 And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. Of course, while we are a part of the world by way of its attitude, thought, speech and behavior, we did not ―love God with our whole mind.‖ (Matt. 22:37) Again, what we entertain, negative thinking, worldly thinking, fleshly things, or conversely, spiritual things will move us to feel a certain way and react in a certain way. 492
Renewed Thinking One must be realistic, for it is nothing short of a battle to have a rational mind today, when the world is inundated in bent thinking and are only asking for more. It is a form of selfishness, as they are largely focused on themselves. Before we achieve our new ‗law of the mind,‘ we were so susceptible to entertaining our bent thinking repeatedly. The more this is done, the deeper those pathways are formed and the longer it takes to fill them and form a new way of thinking. Of course, this is not a healthy frame of mind and this chapter has simply touched on some of the issues and has laid out how this can be overcome.
493
CHAPTER 47 DEALING WITH OUR IMPERFECTIONS Depression is an illness and not necessarily part of healthy living. Moreover, it is not curable per se. However, the important aspect is that it can be overcome by learning some simple methods that will elevate your moods. The techniques that you will be leaning have been proven to reduce the symptoms of depression much faster than conventional mental-health therapy or drugs even. Cognitive therapy has been around since the early 1900s and is always being improved upon. God‘s Word and cognitive therapy can help you control the symptoms that lead to depression and help you to recreate a completely new personality. We will call it putting on the new personality and removing the old. 1. Swift Improvement of Thinking Errors: For those suffering from a milder form of depression or anxiety, control of thinking and the new personality can be achieved in as little as three months. 2. The Ability to Fully Grasp: In the end, you will fully grasp exactly why your moods alter and have at your disposal, numerous principles to apply in controlling these mood swings. You will understand the difference between bent-thinking and rational thinking and be able to recognize the level of your mood. 3. Control Not Removal: Our irrational thinking is a part of the person; it can only be controlled, not cured. However, there will be new life-skills that you will learn to cut off and control the distorted thinking and emotion before they consume you. 4. New Personality: This new personality can be maintained, but you have to always be aware of the symptoms, events and situations that can contribute to a setback. First, one needs to recognize that ALL of their moods are brought on by their internal self-talk. This is based on the way one looks at something: perceptions, mental attitudes and beliefs. The way you feel at this very moment is based on the self-talk that is going on between your ears. Second, when one is depressed or anxious; really any negative mood, their thoughts are dominating the mood. You perceive not only yourself, but also the entire world in such a way that it regulates your moods. Moreover, you will buy into this false reality. If you have hit a low, you will move into the stage that this is who I am and it has always been this way. As you reflect on the past, only those bad moments will surface. In addition, you will project this bad past as an ongoing reality for your future, creating a feeling of hopelessness. Third, you must realize that this thinking that creates your moods, are really a gross distortion of reality; this is why you are so affected by them. Although they appear valid at present, you will find that they are irrational and just downright wrong. Your mind is like a transmission in a car, your thinking is a result of mental slippage and not accurate perception. As we progress in this program and you begin to master methods that will 494
help you identify this mental slippage, you will begin to remove that way of thinking and you will begin to feel better for longer periods of time, until it is the norm. Fourth, If you are suffering from any mood disorder, or and mild form thereof, please visit my Amazon bookstore, which will recommend some of the better books that can allow you to take control of your life. If you are suffering from a far greater depression, please click on anyone of the many links therein, this will link you to The American Association of Christian Counselors. For fear that, the above link to our Amazon store may not work here is the web address:272 i
w09 8/1 p. 15
272
http://astore.amazon.com/bibletranslat-20?_encoding=UTF8&node=554
495
