What’s in a Word?

I’ve been thinking about the value of word studies in the Bible’s original languages. There are definitely pros and cons.

There is a potential problem inherent in the style of platform ministry that commences every attempt at exposition by telling the audience which Greek or Hebrew words underlie the most significant words in your text, and to what extent their meaning differs from the closest possible English equivalents.

You probably identified that danger zone right away. Invariably, one of two things happens.

Into the Danger Zone

On the one hand, telling the audience all about your hours of sermon prep in cases where your study of the original language merely confirms what most translations already say is wasted energy and will probably bore them to tears. Yes, you discovered it for yourself. Sadly, you were 1,000 years behind the best people who have written on the subject. In that case it’s better (not to mention humbler) to move along to the actual point of your message, always assuming you have one. However, wasting too much time stating the obvious doesn’t hurt anything but your reputation as a scintillating speaker. It’s minor, if a bit irritating.

On the other hand, because few words in any language have precise semantic equivalents in all others, Bible teachers often come across situations where a helpful nuance in meaning of the original word is missing in the English translation, or a misleading shade of meaning in the not-quite-equivalent English substitute demands to be ruled out. Also, because usage evolves over time, there do exist rare situations in which older English translations no longer accurately communicate the author’s intended meaning at all, or even invert it. The temptation for the Bible teacher is to share these differences to help the audience better understand the passage.

But you can see the danger. Doing so may send the message that technical expertise is a prerequisite for understanding your Bible. It may even undermine the confidence of young readers in the reliability of our English translations and discourage them from trying to dig into the word of God for themselves.

Taking Responsibility

What to do? Is it more irresponsible to let the audience get a few passages wrong, or to risk turning them off Bible study entirely? Which bad choice is worse? Personally, I always opt for the truth, even if it may be difficult for some to hear. The reality is that no matter which translation you read and study, the text of our English Bibles is not inspired. The Holy Spirit did not breathe out God’s word in English. That quickly becomes obvious when you are reading from the ESV and the fellow on the platform is reading from the NASB or NKJV. You will hear so many differences that I sometimes put down my Bible and just listen. That alone should tell you some translations get closer to technical accuracy than others.

The doctrine of inspiration concerns the Greek and Hebrew originals, which no longer exist. Even if they did, no native English speaker, including the experts, could read and comprehend them precisely as did their original audience in its day.

Inspired vs Trustworthy

That should not discourage people so long as they understand that the vast majority of English translations are substantially correct. Even where a word or two may actually mean subtly different things in the original language, careful attention to context can steer you in the right direction and eliminate foolish or inadequate interpretations. A mature Christian audience, such as you might find at a weekly prayer meeting or midweek Bible study, generally grasps this concept and will be untroubled if a speaker makes a few rabbit trails into the Greek or Hebrew.

I feel a little differently about deep dives into the original language at meetings where there may be large numbers of visitors and untaught believers, as often happens at my own local church on Sunday mornings at 11:00. Studying the original language in preparation for such a gathering is extremely useful for the speaker. It ensures that he emphasizes the most important truths in his text and presents them accurately. But there is no pressing need to show all your background work to the audience unless the wording they see on the page of their own Bible stands to cause them serious cognitive dissonance. There are many English translations, so you cannot possibly know when their personal favorite version presents a problem until they tell you. Leave that until they’re mature enough to investigate the issue for themselves.

What Would Jesus Do?

As far as we can tell, when the Lord Jesus quoted scripture to large numbers who lacked formal religious training, he didn’t talk about the translation issue at all. I cannot find a single example of Jesus going there, despite the existence of at least one major translation in his day. In the first century, the Septuagint had actually replaced the Hebrew Old Testament as the primary authoritative text for both Jews and Gentiles. Believe me, there are meaningful differences between those two documents. Still, Jesus gave his audience the intended meaning of the original without once explaining to them how he got where he was going. As one writer has put it, “His usage of scripture is allusive, paraphrastic, and — so far as it can be ascertained — eclectic.” That’s not wrong: the Lord Jesus paraphrased. Regard it as fact. We should not be afraid to do the same with younger audiences, so long as our own paraphrases are responsible, prayerful and carefully researched. I’ve heard more than a few that, sadly, were not.

Now, had the Lord been sitting in a room full of Pharisees, he may have taken a different approach to any given translation issue. Or not. We have no way of knowing.

Word studies in the Bible’s original languages can be edifying, clarifying and corrective. They are rarely critical to the salvation of the soul. The distinctions they help us make will not usually change the way we live, though there are rare exceptions.

An Example

An example may help. The biblical concepts of mediation, intercession and advocacy have certain similarities, but these words are not synonyms. Unfortunately, translators have not been consistent in using a single English word to translate each distinct Greek or Hebrew concept. Moreover, the use of, say, “mediator” in the OT may not align in every way with the use of “mediator” in the NT, because one lonely English word is trying to fill the shoes of two different words from two very different languages.

Furthermore, in English, “mediation” has a lawyerly connotation almost completely absent from the original languages. Concentrating on the modern English usage in a sermon (as you might if you think you can just pull your definition of biblical mediation out of The Oxford Dictionary) may lead the speaker to inadvertently portray God as an angry judge in need of being perpetually placated. If we are talking to unbelievers about the need for them to get saved, that may be a passable gloss. If we are talking to believers about their relationship with their Father in heaven, it isn’t.

If you want to understand the distinctions between these three roles — as every serious Christian should the moment he or she discovers they are ministries of Christ — you have to get there by studying the original languages. I have explored that subject in detail here.

When It Doesn’t Matter and When It Does

Now, how important is the knowledge that Christ’s mediation with God on our behalf was once-for-all and in the past, while his high priestly ministries of intercession and advocacy are both ongoing? It will not break the bank, as we say. It’s not critical to salvation or service. It’s useful information, and some of us will find meditating on it encouraging. Overall, not the biggest deal in the world, but I’m glad I’ve discovered it.

On the other hand, if an inaccurate understanding of biblical mediation pulled in haste out of an English dictionary causes you to present God the Father to impressionable Christian children as a terrifying patriarchal presence in constant need of being talked down from his wrathful state by our good buddy Jesus, you have done them a tremendous disservice. That error has marked some good friends and affected their enjoyment of the faith for years. I will certainly see them in heaven, so it’s all good. Nobody died over it. But approaching God in prayer might have been easier for them if they had only once heard a faithful, attentive presentation of the scripture on the subject.

That’s the value of word study in the original languages. Don’t overemphasize it. Don’t discount it.