I am taking the summer off to work on a new Greek grammar. I will resume blogging in September.  --Bill

The translation of σάρξ has caused lots of grief over the years. BDAG gives it the semantic range of “flesh, physical body, a living being with flesh, human/mortal nature, earthly descent, the outward side of life.” Paul often uses it to describe the weak, sinful, human condition. So how should it be translated?

The formal equivalent group says, just use “flesh” and let the reader figure it out. The dynamic group says this can produce meaningless translations, or at worse misleading translations.

It would be wonderful if we had a single word in English that corresponded to all the uses of σάρξ, but sadly the word does not exist.

Please understand a bit of obscurity, but I am not in a country where I cannot be too specific, but I have been having an incredible experience with language and wanted to share it with you.

In Chinese, the word for “he,” “she,” and “it” are all pronounced the same: “TA.” They are written differently but pronounced the same. So you can imagine the challenge of the translator trying to communicate my lectures. At one level, it is easy; TA does not have to distinguish between genders and can be “gender inclusive” without trying. But when I say something that is specifically male or female, the translation always takes longer. It sure would make English Bible translation easier if we had a similar word that was natural to our ears.

Here is a great example of the challenges of a substantival adjectives.

Paul writes, “Pursue love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts (τὰ πνευματικά), especially that you may prophesy” (1 Cor 14:1; ESV). πνευματικός is an adjective meaning “spiritual,” often referring to the divine spirit, the Holy Spirit. This is the topic of the end of the verse and also the entire chapter, and this is how every major translation views the verse.

One of the important steps every Greek student must make is to move beyond the formal structures of first and even second year Greek, and start considering other issues such as the meaning of a word.

Take for example 1 Cor 3:6. “I planted, Apollos watered, but God has been causing the growth (ηὔξανεν).” Because ηὔξανεν is an imperfect — past time; imperfective aspect — every first year Greek teacher would expect an explicitly durative translation: “has been causing.”

This is great for first year Greek, but let me ask the question. Isn’t the actual meaning of “grow” a durative idea? Do we have to explicitly say “has been causing” to get the durative idea across? Of course not.

The sermon yesterday was on the need for solitude, planned margin. Always a good reminder for those of us who tend to define ourselves by what we do — do I hear the amens?

The passage was Mark 1:45. “Jesus could no longer openly enter a town, but stayed out in unpopulated areas (ἐρήμοις τόποις; NASB).”

What caught my eye was the NASB’s use of “unpopulated.” For a translation that tends away from excessive interpretation (although all translations are interpretive), their use of “unpopulated” was a very good choice.

A little textual criticism. Paul writes, “If I give away everything I own, and if I surrender (παραδῶ) my body in order to boast (καυχήσωμαι), but do not have love, it benefits me nothing.”

As soon as you check other translations, you see that there is a textual issue. The NASB has, “surrender my body to be burned,” following the reading of the καυθήσομαι (along with the ESV, KJV). Two letter difference.

Others translate καυχήσωμαι (HCSB, NIV, NRSV, NLT). Metzger (Textual Commentary) argues that it is more likely that the original καυχήσωμαι (“to boast”) was changed to καυθήσομαι (“to burn”) once martyrdom by burning became more frequent. His argument seems conclusive. (The external evidence is not conclusive either way.)

I got caught ignoring my own advice. I have always said that before you preach or teach on a topic, you should check multiple translations to see if there is any significant difference in the text. This is especially true if you use the KJV, or if your church uses it and you read from a more modern translation.

I was lecturing on the spiritual blessings in Ephesians 1. I have always taught out of the ESV, but this time through I was trying the NIV. Paul calls us to praise God for all our spiritual blessings (v 3), and then he praises him by enumerating those blessings:

The NIV footnote to Jude 1 alerted me to a great example of the challenges of the dative case.

The second part of the salutation reads, “To those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father (τοῖς ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις) and kept for Jesus Christ (Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις).”

The NIV goes with “in” for ἐν, although its meaning is not immediately apparent, and it goes with “for” for the dative Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ. The footnote reds, “Or by; or in.”

We don’t talk much about ellipsis in first year Greek, but it is a grammatical fact that occurs more than you might think.

An ellipsis is when words are left out, and the assumption is that the context is sufficient to fill in the gaps. It especially happens in the second of two parallel thoughts, words from the first assumed in the second.

But John 12:7 gives us a good example of ellipsis when there is no parallel. Mary anoints Jesus’ feet, Judas objects, and Jesus responds, “Leave her alone…. It was intended that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial” (NIV). ἄφες αὐτήν, ἵνα εἰς τὴν ἡμέραν τοῦ ἐνταφιασμοῦ μου τηρήσῃ αὐτό. In other words, the words “It was intended” is the NIV’s guess as to what “should” have been before the ἵνα.

Semantic range can be a pesky fellow. Take for example the range of meaning held by λαμβάνω.

In John 5:31 Jesus starts by saying, “If I bear witness about myself, my testimony is not deemed true.” Then two verses later he says, “You have sent messengers to John, and he has borne witness to the truth” (5:33). So it sounds like Jesus is pointing people to what John said about him.

Jesus then concludes, “Not that I accept (λαμβάνω) human testimony; but I mention it that you may be saved” (NIV).

Wait minute. Jesus just citeed John as witnessing to him, so why then would he say, “Not that I accept human testimony.” Of course he does! He just did.

I just attended the Global Access Conference hosted by Joni and Friends. Everybody needs to attend something like this because it will make you sensitive to things that you might not otherwise see.

If you are not aware of Joni and Friends, you need to check them out. They are the main Christian disability ministry, helping the church understand how to serve and be served by people with disabilities.

One of the things that I saw this week was exegetical. Paul is talking about the different gifts in the body (i.e., the church). He writes, “those members of the body that seem (δοκοῦντα) to be weaker are indispensable (ἀναγκαῖα)” (1 Cor 12:22).

Allowing for the fact that we all hear words a little differently, I was surprised to read that in many translations the Israelites really did not cross the Red Sea on dry ground. We’ve been tricked all these years!

At least that is how I hear the “as” in Heb 11:29.

The ESV reads, “By faith the people crossed the Red Sea as on dry land.” Was it dry land, or was it “as if” it were dry ground? How do you hear it? I can only hear “as if it were.”

Several translations use “as” (NIV). The NRSV and NET are even more confusing; they say “as if.” As if it were dry? What does that mean? Was it really wet, and the people pretended it was dry?

Paul tells the young Thessalonian church, “For what is our hope or (ἤ) joy or (ἤ) crown of boasting before our Lord Jesus at his coming? Is it not you?” (ESV; see also the NASB, HCSB, and NRSV). What’s wrong with that?

Given the normal use of “or” in English, Paul is asking if the Thessalonians are one of three things. What is our hope? Or, what is our joy? Or, what is our crown? Presumably the Thessalonians are one of those three things, two of those things, or perhaps all three of those things. We certainly understand it is the latter contextually, but you have to fight through the odd use of “or.”

Lately I have been fascinated by the more subtle methods of translation. One of the problems of first year Greek training is that we have to over-simplify the process. If we don’t, there is simply too much to learn. But somewhere along the process each of us needs to learn to read Greek in larger chunks.

Take for example paragraphs. We know that the original documents did not have paragraphs, so this and other editorial formatting are modern inventions and not inspired. We have them because English readers require them. Sometimes they help; other times they get in the way. Here are two examples, both from the NIV.

Peter concludes a discussion on suffering with these words. “Therefore, let those suffering in accordance with God’s will entrust (παρατιθέσθωσαν) themselves (τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτῶν) to a faithful Creator, while continuing to do good” (1 Pet 4:19, NRSV).

I came across a great “divine passive” that has some interesting implications for how we study the Bible and train our seminarians and preach to our people.

“Divine passive” is more of a theological category than grammatical. In form and basic meaning, it is simply a passive, but when God is the author of the verb, we call it a “divine passive.”

Paul prays for the Ephesians that God “may grant (δῷ, active) you to be strengthened (κραταιωθῆναι, divine passive) with power through his Spirit in your inner being” (3:16). God does the granting and the empowering.

The desired result is that “Christ may dwell (κατοικῆσαι) in your hearts through faith, rooted and grounded in love” (v 17).

When Mary anointed Jesus’ feet, Judas objected to the extravagant waste of money. Jesus responds, “‘Leave (Ἄφες) her alone,’ Jesus replied. ‘It was intended (ἵνα) that she should save this perfume for the day of my burial’” (NIV).

One of the interpretive challenges of the verse is ἵνα. The NIV (above) keeps the normal force of the ἵνα to indicate purpose, but in doing so it makes it sound as if Mary really had no choice in the matter. It removes the value of her choice and makes it sound like she was simply responding to God’s preordained plan.

Here is a great example of why translation involves interpretation, and why a “word-for-word” approach can often fail.

When Jesus’ parents finally find Jesus, he responds, “Didn’t you know I had to be (δεῖ εἶναί με) in my Father’s house (ἐν τοῖς τοῦ πατρός μου)? (NIV).

As you can see from the Greek, there is no word for “house,” and yet every modern translation supplies “house.” The KJV is alone in suggesting another interpretation. “I must be about my Father’s business?”

It is amazing what difference a little word like “a” can make. Since Greek does not have the indefinite article, we primarily use it according to English style; but it can still seriously impact the meaning of a sentence.

Jesus has just finished healing the man with paralysis. In Matt 9:8 we read, “When the crowds saw it, they were afraid, and they glorified God, who had given such authority to men” (ESV, see also the NASB, NET, HCSB). “Men” is the translation of the plural τοῖς ἀνθρώποις; and at first glance this seems fine, especially if you think “word-for-word” is the best. But in this case, it seems to me that word-for-word seriously miscommunicates.

I never cease to be amazed at the literary quality of the NIV. Yes, I know, I am on the committee, but I am thinking about verses that I find periodically that were written before I came on.

In class last week I came across a couple. Paul is talking about divisions in the church and warns the Corinthians about the seriousness of their divisiveness. The ESV reads, “Do you not know that you* (ἐστε) are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you (ἐν ὑμῖν)?” The footnote on “you” indicates it and the other pronouns are plural.

One of the great conundrums in the Synoptics is the issue of whether Jesus told his disciples to take a staff, not take a staff, or don't take an extra staff. I don't have a complete answer, but in my reading part of the answer occurred to me and it illustrates the need for common sense in exegesis.

In Mark 6:8–9 Jesus says, "Take nothing for the journey except a staff (εἰ μὴ ῥάβδον μόνον)—no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. Wear sandals but not an extra shirt (ὑποδεδεμένους σανδάλια, καὶ μὴ ἐνδύσησθε δύο χιτῶνας)."

In Luke 9:3 he told them, “Take nothing for the journey—no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra shirt (Μηδὲν αἴρετε εἰς τὴν ὁδόν, μήτε ῥάβδον μήτε πήραν μήτε ἄρτον μήτε ἀργύριον μήτε [ἀνὰ] δύο χιτῶνας ἔχειν)."

One of the benefits of working with Joni and Friends is that I have developed some sensitivities to the disability community. What I once dismissed as political correctness is now an important shift in thinking.

Take the NASB translation of Matt 9:32. “a mute, demon-possessed man.” What is wrong with that? It is certainly better than the KJV, “dumb man.” Just because the person has a disability does not mean he is “dumb.” Of course, back then “dumb” meant “mute,” but the KJV today is using a word whose meaning is no longer correct.

There is no question that "they" is becoming the pronoun of choice to refer back to either a singular or plural antecedent. Like it or not, I've seen the statistics and it is where the language is going.

For many people, "he" and "man" is still generic, referring back to men and women. But for an increasing majority of English speakers around the world, "he" and "man" can only refer back to males. Like it or not, this is the way the language is going.

I hear "they" used this way all the time in spoken English. I fact, I have heard it so many times that I doesn't register quite like it used to. But here are the problems. 

I know. καί and pain in the same title. Strange bedfellows.

I still remember a few years back when my family was going through a time of deep pain and sadness. A good friend asked me, “Bill, why are you hanging on to the edge of the pool? Just let go and sink.” A strange idea in the midst of pain, but it has stuck with me, and it was some of the best advice I have ever received. Here’s the exegesis behind it.

Paul is telling the Philippians that no matter what he had been able to (humanly) achieve, he gladly lost all of it for the sake of knowing Christ.

ξύλον is an extremely difficult word to translate, although from its entry in BDAG you wouldn’t think so. It gives three basic meanings:

1. Wood
2. Something made of wood, such as a pole, club, stocks, cross
3. Tree

Gal 3:13 in the NIV reads, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: ‘Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.’” The use of “pole” is, shall we say, unexpected since we know the shape of the cross. Since there are always reasons for a translation, you have to ask yourself why the NIV did this. How could Jesus have been hung on a pole when the wounds in his hands require a cross?

The third angel cries, “If anyone worships the beast and its image and (καί) receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he also will drink the wine of God’s wrath ... and they have no rest, day or night, these worshipers of the beast and its image, and (καί) whoever receives the mark of its name” (Rev 14:9-11).

I was asked if there are one or two groups of people who will be punished: those who worshipped the beast; those who received the mark. What raised the question was the differences in translations.

This is actually a great example of how to deal with a word’s etymology and meaning.

When the disciples could not exorcize the demon, Jesus responded, “O unbelieving (ἄπιστος) and perverse generation, how long am I to be with you?” (Matt 17:17).

After the exorcism, the disciples asked him why they could not perform the exorcism. Jesus replied, “Because of the poverty of your faith (διὰ τὴν ὀλιγοπιστίαν ὑμῶν). I tell you the truth, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed (ὡς κόκκον σινάπεως), you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you” (17:20).

It’s good to be back. I have had a great vacation, time to rest, and time to clear my head. Hope you have been enjoying the archived blogs.

Before starting, I do want to ask for your prayers this week. We are video recording Bruce Waltke teaching on Proverbs. This is for BiblicalTraining.org and we are trying an experiment of recording in our home. If this works, it will save BiblicalTraining potentially a lot of money. Hopefully, the class will be on the site in a few months.

I was reminded the other day about how important word choice is. I am not talking about getting the right word; I am talking about getting just the right word. So much can lost in translation despite the best efforts of the translators.

I will be taking a break from blogging until the beginning of September. I need to focus on finishing my next book. See you in the Fall. —Bill