When I entered MOODY BIBLE
INSTITUTE in 1965 I enrolled in the General Bible Curriculum since I
wanted to understand the Bible personally rather than depend on others to tell
me what it means. It seemed like a logical choice. One of my first
courses was Bible Interpretation and my professor made a statement that changed
my life: You cannot really understand the Bible without knowing the
biblical languages. The next semester I changed my course to the
Missionary Bible Languages major since that was the only curriculum that
included both Hebrew and Greek. I never looked back!
Subsequently I not only succeeded in
mastering these languages, but I embarked on a career of teaching them in
undergraduate and graduate schools, mostly the latter. I could go on, but this
article is intended to answer the question “Why I read and study the Bible in
the biblical languages and not utilizing the many English translations?” The
following quotes provide answers for myself and for my former students and
colleagues in pulpits and classrooms as well as for anyone motivated to teach
the Bible. I pray that these comments will prove that a good knowledge of
Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek is imperative for anyone desiring to teach the
Scriptures with confidence. I begin with a hard-hitting quote borrowed from The
Expository Times (date and author unknown):
“If the Bible is what we profess to believe it to be, it is worth the effort to read it in the original. One who made it his life's work to interpret French literature, but who could only read it in English translation, would not be taken seriously; yet it is remarkable how many ministers of religion week by week expound a literature that they are unable to read save in translation!”
Undeniable
facts: (1) The Bible is Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek literature. English is the
means whereby the English-speaking world accesses it. (2) Every translation of
the Bible in any language is an interpretation. That interpretation may be good
or bad, but it is undeniably an interpretation. (3) It is impossible for any
translation to transmit all that the original languages communicate because
languages do not communicate in the same manner. In evaluating translations,
therefore, one can only speak of varying degrees of gain and loss, and no
translation consistently maintains its degree of gain or loss. Some Bible passages
are admirably translated ; others less so. (4) Without a working knowledge
of the biblical languages one may never know if he or she is communicating the
Word of God or their own opinions. The following quotations focus largely on
the deficiencies of the seminaries that produce pastors and teachers. If there
is a weakness in the pulpit it may stem from their education, lack of
education, or simply laziness.
”Seminarians of the current and
coming generations may well become the most ‘ignorant’ generation of preachers
in the later history of the Church.”Abraham deVries, “Ignorant Preachers,” Christianity
Today, 1970
Critique of Theological Seminaries
“Making this language study optional implies, of course,
that it is of only secondary importance in the training of the minister. Given
that implication, the seminarian is understandably reluctant to subject himself
to such rigorous courses.”
Justifications for Making Language Study
Optional
“One line of reasoning given for making language study optional begins with
the complexities of modern civilization and begrudges time devoted to study of
Greek and Hebrew; this time might better be spent, it is said, in the study of
sociological disciplines. Another line of reasoning is based on the ready
availability of many translations and exegetical studies. Both these arguments
rest . . . upon fallacies. The first fallacy is that extensive knowledge of man
in his world is adequate for effective ministry. The second is that
translations and exegetical studies are adequate for “rightly dividing the word
of truth.”
The First Fallacy
“Making man the locus of theology
greatly diminishes the need for study of the Scriptures . . . . The Bible,
then, is no longer ‘the only rule for faith and practice,’ . . . but simply
another sourcebook for man’s quest of knowledge about himself. As a
consequence, knowledge of the original languages, sufficient to enable one to
interpret ‘lexically, syntactically, contextually, historically, and according
to the analogy of Scripture’ . . . is no longer important.”
The Second Fallacy
“The assumption that the multiplicity of available translations gives one
all the tools he needs for ‘rightly dividing the word of truth’ is fallacious
also. Translators suffer from the same vagaries of thought, the same occasional
spiritual sloth, the same variations of belief and conviction that are the lot
of us all. They take the Word, subject it to their own abilities and belief,
and translate it into words and phrases adequate for them—but perhaps woefully
insufficient for others.”
Dependence upon translations
“How can a preacher really know what the Scriptures say to the world today
if he must always depend upon a translator?”
The Original Glory of the Bible
“If we believe that God, who inspired the writing of his Word, will also illumine it to our hearts and souls and life, then obviously the first requirement for rightly dividing the word of truth is simply to know that Word, in all its original glory.”
“The Church, the world, and the Kingdom will always be poorer for lack of
able exegetes. Intellectual integrity should not allow men to preach, daring to
be spokesmen for God, while willingly lacking first-hand knowledge of his Word.”
Rigors of study
“Coming face to face with eternal truth, in such first-hand experience,
changes us. And when it has changed us and spoken to our hearts, we are ready
to say, ‘Thus saith the Lord!’ We can then lead a congregation to feed on his
Word. Then the immense value of those long hours of agonizing work with
conjugations, declensions, and vocabulary drills becomes clear.”
Concluding Comments
“A potential preacher will not deliberately choose ignorance if he wants to
become, as the Today’s English Version of Second Timothy 2:15 has it, a ‘worker
who is not ashamed of his work, one who correctly teaches the message of God’s
truth.’”
My purpose for this article is not to criticize any seminary
or church or preacher but to ignite or reignite a consuming passion at all levels
for the central place of the Word of God in revealing all its original glory. Learning
Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek may be time consuming and hard work and temptations
to rationalize them away are not hard to find. In teaching these courses at the
undergraduate and graduate level I discovered at least two kinds of students. The
first wants to know the languages; the second needs to know the
languages. We are determined to get what we need regardless of the cost,
but there are limits to what we will do to get what we want. Therefore I make
it a teaching point to try to move all my students from wanting to needing.
Many of my blogspot articles have this as an underlying motivation.
