It’s that time of year again.
A few weeks ago, a new crop of seminary students began the grueling month-long experience of Summer Greek. And, like all seminary students before them, they will begin to ask the question of why studying these ancient languages even matters. After all, a few years after graduation all will be forgotten. In the midst of a busy pastoral life, who could possibly maintain proficiency in the languages?
As a result of these questions, some students decide (very early on) that the biblical languages are just something to be endured. They are like a hazing ritual at a college fraternity. No one likes it, but you have to go through it to be in the club. And then it will be over.
Behind this “take your medicine” approach to the biblical languages are a couple of assumptions that need to be challenged. First, the characterization of pastoral ministry as somehow incompatible with the languages (due to busyness, or other causes), is an unfortunate misunderstanding of what a pastorate is all about.
No doubt, pastors should be busy shepherding their flock, meeting with ministry leaders, and running the church. But, the core of the calling is to be a “minister of the word.”
And if the pastoral call is to be a minister of the Word, then there is a significant component of pastoral life that should be devoted to serious study of the biblical text—beyond just the preparation for that week’s sermon.
Put differently, pastors should continue to be students. They need to be readers, thinkers, and theologians.
Unfortunately many modern pastors do not view themselves this way. This is evidenced by the language used to describe the place a pastor works at the church. In prior generations, it used to be called the pastor’s “study” (because that is what he did in there!). Now, it is called the pastor’s “office” (because pastors view themselves more as a CEO).
One of my biggest disappointments is when I go into a pastor’s office and see that there are no (or very few) books. It is like going into a carpenter’s shop and seeing no tools. I remind such pastors of the words of Cicero: “A room without books is like a body without a soul.”
If pastors recover their calling as ministers of the Word, then keeping up with the biblical languages should be a more natural part of their weekly activity. If they work in a “study” instead of an “office” then studying might just come more easily.
But, there is a second assumption behind the “take your medicine” approach to the biblical languages. Many students assume that the study of the languages is useless if the specifics are forgotten at a later point. Indeed, this may be the biggest assumption in the mind of today’s seminary students.
This assumption, however, is profoundly mistaken. Even if a student forgets every single vocabulary word and every verb paradigm, the intensive study of the languages during seminary still plays an enormously significant role. Put simply, it helps students think textually.
Prior to learning the languages, most of us simply do not know how to think on a textual level when it comes to studying the Scripture. But after learning Greek or Hebrew (even if we forget it), we now understand grammar, syntax, logical flow, and sentence structure. Moreover, we understand the way words work, how their meaning is determined (or not determined), the importance of context, and the avoidance of certain exegetical fallacies.
These factors alone are incredibly important for proper interpretation of the text and preparation of a sermon. And they are drilled into our heads when we take the biblical languages—even if we forget them later.
So, students and pastors should be encouraged. There are good reasons to think you can retain your knowledge of the languages, if your role as “minister of the Word” is properly understood. But, even if you don’t, many of the benefits still remain.
[Note: I post this article every year as seminary students arrive. I hope it will prove helpful for a new group of readers (or maybe even prior ones!)]
Cameron says
I really appreciate this article. I studied Greek in seminary and am about to begin learning Hebrew. However, I work as the children’s pastor at my church and it sometimes feels exactly as you said – like I am more of a program manager and recruiter of people than an actual minister and keeping up my study of the languages is not necessary when ministering to children. Is there any advice you would give to someone in my context of how to be a student of the languages and Word while most of my responsibilities center around programs and the recruiting and training of children’s ministry volunteers? Thanks!
Greg says
Hi Cameron. Because languages take a very long time to master, you may want to immediately focus your studies on learning the portions of the old and new testament that are immediately applicable towards teaching children and young adults. For example, teaching children that all of Scripture is θεόπνευστος (theopneustos) (God breathed-divinely inspired) can help initiate them in understanding that the Bible is the concrete foundation for objective truth, and without it, there is no reason to think that one view is better than another. This can transition into teaching children and young adults about atonement and the Lord’s supper. You can study and learn specific portions of the old testament Hebrew that explain atonement (kaphar) and how Israel was commanded to make a sacrifice in a specific way to serve as a covering of the sins. From this, you can transition into the Lord’s supper by explaining that the writer of Hebrews explains that the repetitive sacrifices of the old testament are an “anamnesis” – a reminder – of sin, but the sacrifice was not a perfect sacrifice because it had to be repeated over and over again in order to remind Israel of their sin. Then explain how the only other place in the New Testament where “anamnesis” is used is at the Lord’s supper, where Jesus broke the bread and gave it to his disciples saying “this is my body which is given for you, do this as an anamnesis (a reminder) of [Jesus]”. Meaning that the Lord’s supper is not a reminder of the sin or a repetitive sacrifice (which is what Catholics erroneously believe through their eucharist that is a re-presentation of the sacrifice, thereby making Jesus’ sacrifice repetitive), but instead the Lords supper is a reminder of the sin-bearer (Jesus) who gave a once for all time atoning sacrifice that covers the sins of those believers who repent and follow him. I have been using “The Bible Project” videos and some of their word studies to help convey Hebrew and Greek meanings. That way you can focus your study on specific areas of Hebrew and Greek for immediate application, and then eventually you can become well-versed in the entirety of the languages. Apologia Studios is also a great resource for providing material that engages youth more than pizza parties and secular entertainment.
Richard UK says
Spot on
It means that pastors will realise that English versions are translations, sometimes with a considerable interpretative component.
It will encourage them to compare translations and possibly use esword.net which can be immensely helpful with only a limited recall of Greek
They can then see that words like ‘unpunished’ and ‘propitiation’ do not appear in Rom 3 v25-26. That will make them work at the passage more accurately!
Rev. John M. Young says
Heads up for those who might want to use this online resource, the URL has a hyphen in it… https://www.e-sword.net/
Tom Brown says
Appreciate the article very much
Stephen Thompson says
I think learning Greek and Hebrew was the single most valuable part of my time at RTS. I didn’t always feel that way.
After I finished Hebrew, I was at a conference and mentioned to a pastor I had just befriended that I was so glad to be done with Hebrew … and good riddance! He gently corrected me: “Let me see if I understand you … you want to teach the word of God, but don’t actually care whether you can read the word of God … is that right?”
It was a timely word. I’ve spent years now fighting to keep my knowledge of Greek and Hebrew current. It’s a hard discipline, but it is totally worth it.
Drew says
I think It’s very important for hermeneutics. I want to learn Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. One of Ehrman’s main attacks (even though he has debated with Dan Wallace that we can’t know what the original text says and argued with Darrel L Bock that Jesus didn’t speak Greek but thinks Jesus had an interpreter lol) that we don’t have the originals message of Jesus because he would have taught and spoken in Aramaic so conversation with Nicodemus didn’t happen, sermon on the mount didn’t happen, and goes on to say Mark Chancey has proven Greek in Galilee a myth. I didn’t find it all that convincing, but it would be nice to know them.
Glr says
Good stuff but one word on studies with books: ebooks.
I rarely buy hardcover commentaries these days. I want it on computer so it is always with me. I don’t like reading ebooks but i do study that way.
Mark Kistner says
As someone who does not have the opportunity to attend a class room setting for Biblical Greek or Hebrew does anyone have recommendations on a good intro for Greek?
Cedric Parsels says
Mr. Kistner,
I would recommend David Alan Black’s “Learn to Read New Testament Greek.” You can find lectures for each chapter of the book at: https://dailydoseofgreek.com/learn-biblical-greek/. After working through the course, daily mini-lessons can be found here: https://dailydoseofgreek.com/.
David Noe says
Lots of Greek here, biblical and otherwise, since the supposed divisions between dialects of Greek have been grossly exaggerated: latinperdiem.com/Greek
Mark Corbett says
To Mark Kistner: When my daughter was getting ready for 9th grade homeschool, she declared she wanted to learn New Testament Greek. I was delighted and terrified. I only had 3 semesters of Greek in seminary (many years ago) and was not qualified to teach it. We got video lectures (on DVD, perhaps now online?), books, and work books by Bill Mounce. They were great. It was a good review for me, and my daughter got a good introduction to Greek. I’m sure there are other good resources, but I would recommend materials by Bill Mounce, found here (I’m in no way connected to him): https://www.billmounce.com/
p.s. It must have been a good experience, as my daughter is now a junior in college majoring in Bible and applied linguistics.
Loren Golden says
Mr. Kistner,
RTS Virtual offers New Testament Greek I & II for students who do not have the opportunity to take the classes at any of its geographic campuses.
David says
Brother, how can you expect your congregation to trust the bibles they have (good English translations) if you don’t trust those translations yourself?
David says
Brother, how can you expect a congregation to trust the bibles they have (good, English translations) if their pastor doesn’t trust it themselves?
Richard says
Congregations should not blindly ‘trust’ their bibles, but should compare translations (and ideally use commentaries.
Translation is not a mechanical science and it always involves interpretation, conscious or not. Indeed churches switch bibles because they think one version is better than another. That is why we moved from the KJV, through the Good News and NIV etc, to the NASB (which is a good version and the ESV (which is not!)
There is certainly also a place for Amplified and for Literal bible versions
Stephen Thompson says
David, the problem is, what do you do when somebody in your church comes to you with an NIV and ESV and asks, “Can you help me understand Mark 1:40-41?”
NIV: A man with leprosy came to him and begged him on his knees, “If you are willing, you can make me clean.” Jesus was indignant. He reached out his hand and touched the man. “I am willing,” he said. “Be clean!”
ESV: And a leper came to him, imploring him, and kneeling said to him, “If you will, you can make me clean.” Moved with pity, he stretched out his hand and touched him and said to him, “I will; be clean.”
Now which is it? Was Jesus indignant because of the leper’s request or was he moved with pity? It’s a pretty important difference, isn’t it? When you want to talk with somebody who is sick, are you pointing them to an indignant Jesus or a compassionate Jesus? If you are only going to stay at the English translation level, how do you make any progress here?
Kenneth Abbott says
Odd. My 1984 NIV says our Lord was “filled with compassion.” There’s no text variant footnote, either.
Stephen Thompson says
Right, this is a change made in NIV 2011. But hopefully you see what I’m saying.
Richard UK says
Perhaps a more powerful example would be Rom 3:25
Some versions have ‘propitiation’ (highly interpretative), others have ‘atoning sacrifice’ whereas the correct translation is ‘mercy seat’ (and ‘hilasterion’ is usually translated as mercy seat when it occurs in Hebrews)
Benjamin Murray says
I am wondering how many people who are simply thinking “I’ll forget this” or “it’s just something I have to do” are people who are stuck in the mindset that topical sermons are acceptable on a consistent basis.
To put it simply: How can someone believe in expositional preaching yet disregard the biblical languages?
Maurice A. Robinson says
As Spurgeon noted (Sword and Trowel, Aug. 1885, 431):
“Every member of our churches, who has a fair English education, should aim to acquire sufficient Greek to read the New Testament; we specially include in this exhortation our sisters in Christ. Every vestry should have its Greek class.”
Also (Sword and Trowel, Aug. 1888, 438):
“It is a great pity that more Christian people do not resolve to master New Testament Greek. It would be an infinitely more profitable use of time than that which is found in the fashionable recreations of the hour, or in reading the superabundant fiction of the period.”
Roy Kerns (member Providence OPC, Tulsa) says
So far no one commenting on this thread has noted anything about what I think one of if not the most significant factors affecting the issue: technology.
Suppose one wishes to understand a particular Bible passage. One’s list of tools and steps would (should) include at least the following (much condensed) list:
1) An awareness of the general idea asserted by the passage itself. This requires a translation no more accurate than a paraphrase or even an acknowledged bad translation provides. Of course the better the translation, the greater the likelihood of a) recognizing key words, ideas, themes, and b) not having to discover that the thrust provided by the translation needs correction. But this likelihood is not an “either or” with some translations utterly outside the pale and others completely and always inside. Otherwise, why even wonder about original languages? Just get the translation that’s always correct. Furthermore, it does not take a great deal of experience or education to learn which translations one ought, in general, avoid. I would not recommend translations from the so-called Marcion Canon and suggest not relying on TLB or NEB (even tho I have Ray Dillard’s comment in my wife’s and my guest book “I like the NEB”, a partial jest, I think, referring to a discussion over dinner at our home that evening).
In fact, rather than asserting that every word has to be exactly correctly understood, that every word all by itself carries all the meaning, that one has to master and recall, say, TWNT (Theological Words of the New Testament) in order to read Greek, I suggest that one understands communication in contexts of phrases, sentences, even paragraphs. (Contra TWNT, eg, cf James Barr, ‘Semantics of Biblical Language’, a comparison I’m thankful to Greg Bahnsen for having suggested to me.)
2) Sensitivity to the passage’s place in context, awareness of its pericope, its *telos*. This requires knowing about the whole Bible. It depends on at least several interrelated factors. One should have read the whole Bible. The more times, the better. The more recollection, the better. The more meditation on the interconnectedness of the whole, the better. Also, the better grasp of systematics, the better grasp of biblical theology, the better. All of these factors usually improve somewhat with age, especially if that aging includes lots of interaction with others sweating over understanding scripture. But none of this yet hinges on an extremely precise translation, especially not one done by oneself. Further, I’m willing to assert that most of the significant questions about a passage do not stem from translation problems as much as from the sorts of issues that connect to this second item on my list.
3) A first rate translation of the specific passage, the particular pericope in view. Does this mean that one necessarily reaches anything less than accuracy if one does not themselves translate every word, down to the articles?
I think not. I think we have available tools that were not available 40 years ago much less 400 yrs ago. First, one can use nearly any of several relatively recent translations, tho each has identifiable problems, to get a good start on identifying which words or phrases invite further study. I mean here the NIV, the ESV (and would even extend back to the 1901 ASV). I mean here also the use of any of several interlinear sources along with some version of the original language.
Suppose at this point one has met a specific problem in translation. I’m willing to bet that very, very few people would have run into that specific problem unless they had done steps 1 and 2 first, unless they had some hint other than their own memory as to that problem’s existence, say a hint from a commentary or a footnote or a marginal comment. But the problem has come up. Now what?
Even the best scholars, those with recognizably world class educations who have credentials proving master of the original language, are going to do what I’m going to do: use my computer and one of several tools in conjunction with that computer. Even *they* will not rely on their memory, their learned language skills. Here’s a tool not available 20 yrs ago and, in some ways, not even 5 yrs ago. It gives immediate, direct access to information that the greatest scholar of only a generation ago probably did not have. At all. Much less by recall.
4) Observe, further, a significant factor which makes that last tool far more powerful. One does not have a continually different corpus to translate. One is not looking to use a computerized translator to provide an understanding of a periodical in another language, or a book chosen at random from a library. Instead, one has a single (even if big) book in view.
Two caveats:
The minor caveat: my comments need modification if applied to those whose native tongue or linguistic skills do not include English (since that is the language of the tools I cited). They also need modification if applied to those laboring in ministry other than pastoral to those speaking the pastor’s native tongue, eg, advanced degrees or specialized research.
The major caveat: I think the labor of understanding the Bible from the original languages does require one not yet mentioned (in 1 and 2 above) skill not directly derivable from keystrokes at a terminal or from books. One has to have awareness of what it means to translate from one language to another, egs, that one cannot always go word for word, that thought for thought may both remove information and put in information, that idioms carry information that may not directly translate. This awareness requires one to have skills in their *own* language. It means one needs exposure to ideas such as grammar, syntax, conjugation, tenses, and to language usage such as simile, metaphor. The fastest, most practical way to gain this ability is to, well, learn a language other than one’s native tongue. (I’d suggest one could wisely do this by learning a second language one would likely use in ministry to a local community. In the U.S. Spanish comes to mind. But there are many other possibilities.)
Conclusions:1) I do not think that anything I’ve suggested diminishes the *absolutely foundational concern one must have to make sure that, as far as they can tell, they have understood what the Bible’s text says*. Indeed, I wish seminaries spent more time warning against saying anything either less than or more than what the text says. I’ve merely proposed what I think a far more efficient means of getting to that end. Although I can, I don’t do engineering calculations via a slide rule much less with pencil and paper. Why should I insist pastors not use the finest available tools?
2) I’d recommend that seminaries (or those teaching pastors via other means) expect incoming students to have taken (have a demonstrable ability in) some language foreign to them, preferably one in which they might have a future need or ministry. (FWIW: in addition to English, I speak conversational German; can sight translate Spanish newspapers, technical literature; at one time could sight translate nearly any place in the Hebrew OT or Greek NT.)
3) I’d recommend that the same groups have Hebrew and Greek courses which equip students with the skills needed to use the available tools. That means these foundational skills (probably more): mastery of the relevant alphabet (so that one can use dictionaries and lexicons, and recognize words in other resources), ability to pronounce words (since this significantly aids use of available tools), awareness of and perhaps the ability to recognize verb tenses and their significance, same same re gender information, re various other parts of speech, mastery of some selected currently available computer tools.
Mark Corbett says
Many good reasons for studying Greek have been mentioned. In addition, I found that during the study of Greek, because I was being forced to pay close attention to the text, I sometimes noticed details and truths I might have otherwise missed. These truths can be seen in the English text (most of the time), but I may have missed them if I hadn’t been studying Greek. A fun example happened while I was studying Greek with my daughter in homechool (her idea!). We were surprised by how many times the Greek word for foot is used. We joked about “foot theology.” I finally turned this into a blog post:
http://parresiazomai.blogspot.com/2018/08/foot-theology.html
Michael Farmer says
If we truly believe Scripture is the word of God, I don’t see how we can not be interested in learning at least something about the words God chose to use. No translation can give you all of the nuances of the original. I don’t preach, but I do listen to preachers, and have found it very useful to compare what I hear from to pulpit with the original text. I would certainly never want to attend a church where the pastor did not seem to have an interest in the Biblical languages.
Paul says
Hebrew and Greek were the best part of my seminary experience, 3 semesters of each. Now in my 6th year of ministry, I still translate a word, phrase, or verse or two that are important to the message to be sure it says what I think it says.