Let us Reason Together: Troubles with Greek
Mark Roberts
A friend of mine who owned a Bible bookstore once told me of a Pentecostal preacher who happened in his shop. My friend had seen this preacher’s local television show and knew who he was. Browsing, the Pentecostal preacher came across some Greek dictionaries and lexicons. My friend explained what the books were, and they were promptly and enthusiastically purchased. A few weeks later my friend happened on this preacher’s television show, and was amazed to find the man had become a veritable Greek scholar. His preaching was full of definitions and discussion of word usage, all backed up by lengthy quotes from the very books that only a few weeks before had been gathering dust in the bookstore!
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated occurrence. Even among brethren “Greek-itis” can break out with terrible results both in correct reasoning and with the Scriptures. With the onset of computer Bible programs, Greek and Hebrew language helps are often only a click away. This makes it easier than ever before to research words in the original languages and to use the results of that research. More and more we are hearing “the Greek says” in discussion of biblical matters. For example, any talk about instrumental music will pretty quickly detour into a conversation about what the Greek word psallo means. Many answer arguments for baptism’s necessity in Acts 2:38 with discussion of the preposition eis. What do we make of all the Greek and Hebrew being thrown around these days? Instead of just saying “It’s Greek to me!” let us think about using original language in our study of the Bible.
First, let us dispense with the common idea that there is a “hidden” New Testament available only to those who know Greek. The way some talk, it sounds as if reading the New Testament in Greek reveals new meanings and understanding the “common man” will never see. Few would own up to this directly, I suspect, but endless talk about “Greek this” and “Hebrew that” leaves one feeling that way, doesn’t it? I must confess that I certainly believed such was true. In college I elected to leave behind being a “commoner,” and learn New Testament Greek. I couldn’t wait to see all that new stuff in the Greek Bible! After a year of Greek, the class’s last project was to translate the first chapter of 1 John. When I had completed my translating I found, to my amazement, that my chapter read almost exactly like the chapter in my New King James Version! There were no significant differences (which is why I got an “A,” if there had been differences it would have indicated I had made an error!). This is certainly not to say there is no place for original language study, or for defining words from Greek or Hebrew. It is to emphatically say that to act as if there is some “hidden” meaning in the Bible that lies beneath the English text, available only to the educated elite, is dead wrong. Anything we do or say that gives such an impression does a grave disservice to the Bible and its readers. There may have been a time when each Bible student had to do his own translating to be certain of his text, but that is hardly the case now. There are several reliable translations widely available today that have been done by teams of extraordinary scholars who did a fantastic job. No translation is perfect, of course. However, not only can ordinary people read their English Bible and please God without ever worrying about Greek and Hebrew, an ordinary person can become a fine student of the Word with understanding of deep and difficult subjects still without knowing original languages. I have noted with some sadness pulpits that rang out with scathing denunciations of those who teach one can only understand their Bible with the Church’s interpretation or by the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, only to turn around in another sermon and strongly imply “If you want to really know what the Bible says you must learn Greek.” Nonsense!
Second, a lot of what is done with original languages today is often misguided and wrong. Ever heard a preacher or teacher read a verse from a regular English translation, then announce that Thayer gives five definitions for one of the words in the verse, and that, sadly, the translators missed it this time? The pseudo-scholar announces the word of his choice, and explains at length how this changes the passage’s meaning. The audience is left to marvel at such depth and scholarship. It may sound impressive but rarely is Bible translation so simple. There is much more to determining word choice than simply looking up a word in a dictionary, examining the definitions and plugging one in that we like (or that makes the point we want). Let us try that with a language we all know, English. What if a character on TV sees a beautiful girl, does a wolf whistle and says “She is hot!” We look up “hot” in Webster’s and find that it means “heated, having a high temperature.” So we sub in that definition and we have a woman with a high temperature. Conclusion? She has a fever! That didn’t work out so well, did it? It didn’t work because language involves much more than etymology (definitions). In 1855 Pedro Carolina authored “English As She is Spoke.” His Portuguese to English phrase book was to help Portuguese speakers master English . The problem was that Pedro did not actually know English. He did, however, have a Portuguese- French phrase book, and a French-English dictionary. So via a rather circuitous route he produced such gems as “Names for body part: Of the man: the inferior lip, the superior lip. Eatings: vegetables boiled to a pap. Swimming instructions: For to swim: I row upon the belly on the back and between two waters." Translating is not a mere mechanical process of looking at the word, finding the definition in the lexicon, and then simply writing down the English word, is it? Using a dictionary is just no substitute for knowing a language.
Similarly, when inspired Bible writers employ a certain term, there is a great deal more than just knowing the definitions of that word to determine its meaning. Translators must grapple with word order, the flow of thought, the word choices of the author, themes, syntax, grammar and context. To do that properly one needs years of training and an extraordinary level of Greek knowledge far beyond what one gets from reading a lexicon. I read of one preacher who “over-ruled” the translators only to find one of the translators was in his audience. When later asked for his reasoning he cited the four dictionary definitions. The translator then cited thirteen other matters that affected the translation of that one word! To be clear, I am not arguing that the translators are never in error. I am saying we need to be very, very careful about the conclusions we draw about original languages. I am also emphatically saying pulling words out of a Greek dictionary and plugging them directly into the text of Scripture often is simply mistaken and may well result in wresting the Scriptures.
Perhaps this would be a good time to deal with the “root word” fallacy. We have all heard people discuss the root meanings and origins of Bible words to shed light on their meaning. Sometimes root words do convey meaning, but not always. For example, did you know the root word for the English term nice means “ignorant?” So, the next time someone says to you “Have a nice day!” should you be offended that they want you to have a day of ignorance? D.A. Carson says, in his excellent book Exegetical Fallacies, that we cannot assume that “a root once, discovered, always projects a certain semantic load onto any word that incorporates that root.” It can get even worse. Perhaps you have heard someone note that the Greek word for “power” (dunamis) is the term from which we get the English term “dynamite?” That is true, but what happens when someone then says “so the Gospel is God’s power to save (Romans 1:16) which means it is God’s dynamite?” We cannot take the Greek word, note its use in English, and then push that English meaning back into the original Greek!
These are the kind of mistakes that can occur when amateurs (and I am certainly including myself here) work with Greek or Hebrew. We don’t know the structure, the syntax, the context, the grammar or the vocabulary but sometimes we freely draw conclusions and make distinctions the text simply doesn’t warrant.
Finally, many of the authorities commonly cited are terribly dated. Strong’s, Vine’s and Thayer’s are the works most often cited by those beginning in Greek, but while these are very fine works, they have their limitations. James Strong and his team put together their fabulous concordance in the late 1800’s. Henry Thayer’s famous lexicon was published in 1890. W.E. Vine published his classic Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words in 1939. That does not mean these works are of no value by any means. It is to say, however, that these works were unable to take advantage of some enormously significant finds that have been made since their publication, like many papyri and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Yet sometimes these three are cited as if they are infallible, and the absolute last word. In short, they aren’t. Again, these are good works, but genuine scholarship would not rely on them in discussion of original language issues.
Where does all of this lead? One might conclude that the thing to do is throw away all the lexicons and dictionaries and just read an English Bible happily. That would be a terrible mistake. There is real value in language study. It has its place and role, but those with little experience with original language need to be careful. If we are “improving” on the translation done by scholars with years and years of experience and education we ought to do so only after much study. Further, let’s not act as if the “common man” cannot really understand what the Bible means without the benefit of our brilliant Greek skills. Perhaps even more important, let’s not get sold on some theological point or doctrine made from faulty (but impressive sounding) arguments from original languages. H. Leo Boles was famous for saying “If you can’t prove it in the English, you can’t prove it from the Greek.” I believe many Greek scholars would heartily concur. I know of no point of New Testament doctrine that is established solely by relying on the knowledge of original languages. Pounding Greek or Hebrew may just mean the point cannot be established by legitimate argument, and thus should not be established at all!
Let us be thankful that we have such fine translations available to us, and thankful as well for good language tools. But let’s be cautious using them, and when they are wielded by well-meaning amateurs, let’s make sure we add a grain of salt to all that Greek we hear!