The Biblical Languages in Life and Ministry

As a layman, and as one that has only studied Greek and Hebrew in a very limited fashion, and as one who has read the cautions of one studying the original languages of the Bible at that level, I still appreciate and feel enriched by that exposure. I think it was the preaching of Dr. Roy O. McClain of First Baptist Church of Atlanta in 1959, when I was a freshman at Ga. Tech., where I was first exposed to the rich treasures of N.T. Greek. He would translate into English directly from the Greek N.T. from the pulpit. He did so in such a way that was not showing off his knowledge at all - I don't think he even said from the pulpit that was what he was doing - but it was something that inspired me to want to be able to understand at that level.

I then spent many hours with a set A.T. Robertson, "Word Studies...", a set of which the BSU at Ga. Tech had in their library. I was hooked.

So if the pastor can gently and humbly encourage the believers to dig deeper into scripture and do so in such a way as to not intimidate them, nor try to build himself up in their eyes, then it is very good to do so.

I would encourage such effort be done with the same attitude that Dr. Mounce does in his teaching as seen in the CD that comes with "Basics of Biblical Greek". He encourages and motivates without intimidation to study the Greek.

Blessings on you all.
Boyd
http://brightmysteries.net

I had this come up last night in a Bible Study when I asked a question. I wondered what people thought submission meant and a guy posed the question is that the right word to use? Instead of saying "of course because hypertasso means this here", I simply stayed quiet because I didn't want to establish the problem you talked about. It is a fine line.

I am a layman that started studying the Bible languages to counter the psuedo-knowledge of cultist who came to my door. It is tough to respond when you have no idea of what they are saying.

Later, I have four very fine Pastors encourage me to take studies in the Church that were Bible College level. Their motive was to equip their members to get the most out of their Bible Study, to be effective witnesses and to discover the nuances of the Bible languages and translation to English.

I can say this experience enriched my Christian walk and deepened my knowledge, appreciation for God's word, and helped me to better defend the faith against "knowledge so called."

After four semesters each of Hebrew and Greek during my M.Div studies, I have found it both burdensome and essential to my present ministry as a pastor in the local church. I am at present trying to deepen my facility with both languages, so that my reading is faster and my exegetical work more efficient and less time-consuming. I personally believe that, where it's possible, language-study is indispensable to the preaching/teaching/counseling labors of pastoral ministry... skip the "ministry practicums" and take more exegesis courses!

I still, though wrestle with the tension of how that knowledge is to be displayed and have found little help. I usually receive some admonition similar to the one posted here (i.e., you will destroy people's confidence in their Bibles) or something along Robertson's line (i.e., "the New Testament is the Greek Testament"). My hunch is modern evangelicals have not reconciled competing desires that flow from our Reformational heritage, namely, affirming the soul-competency of each Christian and ensuring our faith and practice is based on the actual text of Scripture, which was given in Hebrew (Aramaic!) and Greek. At present, I personally lean more toward the latter emphasis, since I have a suspension that we often use "priesthood of the believer" to support a Western individuality that is foreign to the submission-authority framework of the NT. Yet, I have no interest in being the "expert cleric" in my congregation. I am not even that fond of "Pastor Steve," just "Steve" is fine.

What am I supposed to do, though, when the right understanding of a passage hinges on some particular lexical or syntactical nuance of the original that is not reflected in the major versions? For example, I am finishing my exposition of Malachi this Lord's Day with 3:13-4:6. One of the distinct features of the pericope are the parallel niphal of dabar ("spoke to one another / together") in vv. 13, 16, which indicate reciprocal speaking by two groups amongst God's people. However, the reciprocal sense is not reflected in any of the versions largely represented in my congregation (NASB, ESV), though every last commentator I have consulted notes it (so, I'm not just making it up!). It is not essential, but it does convey some of the tension/factions that the Lord through Malachi is trying to address. Do I just leave it out? Spend all that time studying to bring my people the Word of God, but restrict myself to the constraints of an English translation, which often trades literalness for style? If that is the case, then why not just forget the languages all together and go KJV-only? Any thoughts?

Hi Bill,

I've been reading your blog for a while now and I really enjoy it. I wrote a post on your post today.

There is certainly great value in knowing the original languages, and I just wish I had kept it up after I left Bible college. You see, after Bible college, due to circumstances I ended up working in the I.T. field and I haven't left yet. I have been trying to get back into Biblical Greek. I even bought your Basics of Biblical Greek. It is going terribly slow. However, I know how much I enjoyed it back in college and how much I learnt from it. Because of that, I must just push through the barriers.

Thanks for your many thought provoking posts and for bringing clarification.

Truly a great post--thanks!

I've been going at Hebrew and Greek for a little while now. And after a long while, when I finally started to "get it" (and I've only begun), I've found Greek to be thoroughly enjoyable, both academically and spiritually. One way I've found this to take place in life has been as I study Greek, for instance, in a more academic way, I find things that apply to my spiritual life. For example, after understanding that a present verbal generally conveys a continual action, when I come across words like "believe [in Christ]" in the present indicative, I am reminded that faith is a continual thing.

I know biblical languages is not the end-all of exegesis. But I find that it's a necessary component to understanding God's word with more depth and meaning--both for me and for those with whom I share the gospel.

With regard to teaching, I sometimes teach adults on Sunday mornings. I always try to incorporate my Greek (or Hebrew) study into what I teach. I avoid any mention of Greek or Hebrew syntax or words (and even the words "Greek" and "Hebrew" [as in languages] themselves), but I try to convey the idea of something with phrases like, "The idea here is ..." or "The author seems to have had in mind ..." or "The hearers would have likely heard or understood it in this way: ..." That seems to take the edge off of my "being the expert" and allows me to tell them in a more casual manner what I've found in my study.

Thanks for starting this discussion. I find a tension in preaching when, having made a decision based on the original languages, I have to communicate that interpretation in the pulpit. The only justification I can give for my decision is something that may not be helpful for people to hear because it may convey that one must have the Biblical languages in order to understand a passage. And yet at the same time I want them to see that interpretive decisions are made for good reason. I want them to do their own serious thinking as they study Scripture.
So even for a pastor who desires to be helpful and teach exegesis by example, I find myself in a bind about how much to share in order to do that effectively.