Cataloging the New Testament's Hebraisms: Part 2 (Luke 9:51-56)

This time, rather than looking at isolated words or expressions that appear to be Hebraisms, or, rather than examining a category, or type, of Hebraism, let’s take a complete story from the life of Jesus: Luke 9:51-56, a story found only in the Gospel of Luke. This approach will allow us to gain an impression of the density of Hebraisms that often exists in Gospel passages.

Relatively few of the Greek NT’s Hebrew (or Aramaic) idioms suggested by scholars constitute clear-cut proof for a Hebrew undertext, but a high density of Hebraisms in a given passage increases the probability that it is “translation Greek,” perhaps a descendant of a Greek translation of a Hebrew source, and raises the chances that any purposed Hebraism in such a passage was translated from a Hebrew source at some point in the transmission process rather than having been originally composed in Greek. I followed this approach in writing “Seeing (and Hearing!) the Kingdom of Heaven,” pointing out the density of Hebraisms in Matthew 13:16-17.

Here is a literal English translation of Luke 9:51-56:

And it came to pass in the fulfilling of the days of the going up of him and he the face put of to walk to Jerusalem, and he sent messengers before face of him. And going they entered into a village of Samaritans so as to prepare for him. And they did not receive him because the face of him was walking to Jerusalem. Seeing and the disciples James and John said: “Lord, do you want we may say fire to come down from the heaven and to destroy them?” Turning and he rebuked them. And they went to another village.

This is certainly unusual Greek. Just how unusual, we will now see as we detail the Hebraisms in this passage:

1. And it came to pass...and he the face set...and he sent...and going...and they did not receive...and the disciples James and John said...and he rebuked...and they went.... Notice in this passage the typical Hebrew “and...and...and...and” syntax (syntaxis and polysyndeton), rather than the subordination of clauses with participles and other particles (parataxis) that the Greek language prefers.

2. in the fulfilling of the days of. The expression “days were fulfilled” is Hebrew for “when the time came.” We find the form מלאת (melot, [the] fulfilling [of]) 5 times in the Hebrew Scriptures. Four of these times, it is followed by ימים (yamim, days), e.g. in Lev. 12:6, במלאת ימי טהרה (bimlot yeme tohorah, in the fulfilling of the days of her purification, i.e., when the days of her purifying are completed). Cf. Num. 6:13: “when the time of his separation has been completed.”

3. of the going up of him. A play on עליה (aliyah, going up), which in Hebrew also can have the senses “pilgrimage” and “ascension.” This is a Hebrew wordplay that probably indicates the author had in mind 2 Kings 1, the story of Elijah’s aliyah to Samaria (vs. 3) and his calling down fire upon the soldiers of Ahaziah, the king of Samaria (vss. 10, 12), and 2 Kings 2, the story of Elijah’s aliyah to heaven in a whirlwind (vs. 11).

4. he put his face. This is one of the many Hebrew “face” idioms. To "put one's face" simply means to "turn in the direction of.” This idiom appears many times in the Hebrew Bible (e.g., Gen. 31:21; 2 Kgs. 12:17; Jer. 49:15, 17; 51:12). Just like the verb “turn” in English, the Hebrew idiom “put one’s face” can be followed by “to” in the sense of “toward,” or by an infinitive (i.e., “to go,” “to come,” “to attack,” etc.), as in Luke 9:51.

A few translators have attempted to provide a more English flavor: "Jesus resolutely set out" (NIV); "He resolutely took the road" (Jerusalem Bible); "He proceeded with fixed purpose" (Weymouth); "He moved steadily onward with an iron will" (Living Bible). This unnecessary emphasis on resoluteness eventually resulted in this translation: "As the days drew near when Jesus would be taken up to heaven, he made up his mind [emphasis the author’s] and set out on his way to Jerusalem" (Good News for Modern Man). From this translation, one might get the impression that Jesus, after much soul searching, at last decided to go through with his crucifixion -- as if, until then, he had not been able to make up his mind. The Samaritan Villagers passage is clogged with literalisms such as Hebrew “face” idioms. Because the Greek verb translated “set” found in Luke 9:51 carries "fix" or "establish" as its particular shade of meaning, translators began to insert the idea of fixed purpose. The Hebrew idiom, however, does not connote resoluteness or firmness of purpose.

How should Luke 9:51 be translated? Literally, the text reads, "And when the days of his going up were fulfilled, and he put his face to go to Jerusalem." This is good Hebrew, but scarcely Greek or English. An accurate English translation would be: "When the time came for him to go on pilgrimage [to Jerusalem], he headed for Jerusalem." In other words, when the time came, Jesus went. This verse is simple narration, a description of events. It should not be made to imply that Jesus, after an inner struggle, finally found the courage to go to Jerusalem.

5. And it was (καὶ ἐγένετο, kai egeneto) when the days were fulfilled, and he set his face. This syntactical structure is probably the most important Hebraism in the NT! Gustaf Dalman stated that one should begin any discussion about possible Hebrew sources behind the Greek of the Gospels with an analysis of the καὶ ἐγένετο (“and it came to pass,” lit., “and it was”) structure. (Die Worte Jesu, 2nd ed., 1930). We find this structure in the Hebrew Bible in two variations:

1) subjectless ἐγένετο (egeneto, was, happened) + time phrase + finite verb (not an infinitive, participle or gerund). This variation occurs twice in Mark (Mk 1:9; 4:4); 5 times in Matthew (Mt 7:28; 11:1; 13:53; 19:1; 26:1); 22 times in Luke (Lk 1:8, 23, 41, 59; 2:1, 6, 15, 46; 7:11; 9:18, 28, 33, 37; 11:1, 14, 27; 17:14; 19:29; 20:1; 24:30; 24:51).

2) subjectless ἐγένετο + time phrase (here, in Lk. 9:51: “when the days were fulfilled”) + kai (and) + finite verb (here, in Lk. 9:51: “he set”). This variation occurs once in Matthew (Mt 9:10) and 11 times in Luke (Lk 5:1, 12, 17; 8:1, 22; 9:51; 14:1; 17:11-12; 19:15; 24:4; 24:15).

For an example of variation 1, see Gen. 8:5: “And it came to pass at the end of forty days, Noah opened the window of the ark....” For an example of variation 2, see Josh. 24:30 (29): “And it came to pass at that time, and Abimelech...spoke....” These are the same Greek structures we find in the Synoptic Gospels, a reflection of the corresponding Hebrew structure from which the Greek of the LXX was translated. Both constructions are Septuagintal equivalents of the biblical ויהי (vayehi, “it was, it happened, it came to pass”) structures. Both are non-Lukan in style since they do not occur in Acts, in other words, they probably originated in a source Luke used, rather than being composed by Luke.

The importance of the Hebrew structure embedded in the Greek of Lk 9:51 cannot be overestimated. Wherever one of these unique structures occurs in the New Testament, it constitutes strong evidence for an underlying Hebrew tradition, a telltale sign of translation Greek. (I apologize for the use of technical terms, but this egeneto structure must be defined precisely to avoid confusion with other similar non-Hebraic structures.)

Note that there are 41 examples of this structure in the synoptic Gospels. It occurs so frequently that we will meet it again and again in our discussions of Hebraism in the NT.

6. his face was walking. Walking faces? (See no. 13 below.) The Hebrew language is especially fond of idioms that incorporate the names of body parts such as head, hands, feet and eyes. "Face" (פנים, panim) is incorporated in scores of Hebrew idioms. Hagar fled from “the face of" Sarai (Gen. 16:6, 8), Jacob from “the face of” Esau (Gen. 35:1, 7) and Moses from “the face of” Pharaoh (Ex. 2:15). Moses "hid his face" in fear (Ex. 3:6). God sometimes "hides his face" in anger (Dt. 31:17, 18; Jer. 33:5). God "sets his face against" idolaters (Lev. 20:3, 5, 6). He can "make his face shine upon" (deal kindly with) someone (Num. 6:25; Ps. 31:16) or "turn away his face" (2 Chron. 30:9). Joseph, in grief, "fell on the face of" his father (Gen. 50:1). But before a king, one falls upon one's own face (2 Sam. 9:6). King Joash wept over “the face of" the dying Elisha (2 Kgs. 13:14). Jehu "lifted up his face" to the window out of which Jezebel was looking (2 Kgs. 9:32).

In Hebrew, faces can even walk! Moses was willing for God to bring him and the people of Israel to the promised land on condition that God's “face would walk” with them (Ex. 33:15). It is interesting that the expression "the angel of His Face" is once used in Scripture as a synonym for “the Angel of the LORD (Isa. 63:9). Notice that in this expression, “His face” is replaced by “His presence” in almost all English versions of the Bible. “Presence,” however, is only the attempt of English translators to give sense to the Hebrew word for “face.” Actually, in Hebrew, “His face” is just another way of saying “the Lord.” What reader of the KJV does not remember the famous “shewbread” (archaic English for “showbread”)? Modern English translations of the Bible, such as the RSV and the NIV, generally prefer “bread of the Presence” to “shewbread,” but both “shewbread” and “bread of the Presence” result from the difficulty in translating a Hebrew “face” idiom -- in this case, “bread of the face.” A more idiomatic English translation would be simply “the bread of the LORD.” As we would expect, the table on which the “bread of the face” rested was called the “table of the face” (Num. 4:7).

7. and he sent messengers. This is characteristic Hebrew word order: “and” + verb (with subject following the verb, or included in the verb) + direct object.

8. before face of him. Here “face” is missing its article because, we may suppose, it is part of another Hebrew “face” idiom: לפניו (lefanav, “before his face,” that is, “before him”).

9. and going they entered into. This construction with two verb, one of them superfluous, is similar to such Hebraisms as “and he lifted up his eyes and saw.”

10. they did not receive him. “Receive” in this context is a Hebraism meaning “welcome.” The Hebrew idiom “receive his face” is common, so perhaps the Hebrew form of this passage had: “he set his face...they did not receive his face because his face was walking to Jerusalem....”

The Samaritans refused to extend Jesus their hospitality: “You are headed for Jerusalem” (where, in Samaritan teaching, a false temple had been located. According to Samaritan belief, God’s true temple was in Samaria on Mt. Gerizim).

Jesus’ disciples were likely not serious, but tongue-in-check, when they said, “Lord, do you want us to call down fire from heaven to destroy them?” However, they just couldn’t refrain from hinting at the famous story of Elijah and thinking of the punishment these inhospitable Samaritans deserved. Given the situation, it is understandable that the disciples recalled the story of Elijah and his calling down fire from heaven, an event that also took place in Samaria. It was a distasteful jest and Jesus immediately reprimanded them.

There was bad blood between Jews and Samaritans in the first century, as the following quotations from Josephus illustrates:

Now there arose a quarrel between the Samaritans and the Jews on the occasion following: -- It was the custom of the Galileans, when they came to the holy city at the festivals, to take their journeys through the country of the Samaritans; and at this time there lay, in the road they took, a village that was called Ginea, which was situated in the limits of Samaria and the great plain, where certain persons thereto belonging fought with the Galileans, and killed a great many of them.... (Josephus, Antiq. 18:19, trans. Louis H. Feldman in LCL).

Although in the time of Jesus there was considerable tension and ill-will between these two nations, Jesus’ mission was to save lives, not destroy them. Similarly, later in Jerusalem, when Jesus’ disciples said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords” (Lk. 22:38; cf. Lk. 22:51), Jesus reprimanded them with what was probably just one word: “מספיק” (maspik), that is, “Enough!” “Enough of that!” “Enough of that kind of talk.” (Notice that Jesus’ disciples were armed! See my article, “Jesus’ View of Pacifism.”) Although his words are not recorded, in Samaria Jesus may have use the same word of reprimand he used in Jerusalem.

11. his face was walking to Jerusalem. (See no. 6 above.)

12. do you want us to say. In post-biblical Hebrew, “say, speak” also could have the sense “command”; therefore, here we should suppose the sense is: “Do you want us to command fire to fall on these Samaritans?”

We have noticed at least 11 Hebraisms in a story of just 6 verses. One non-grammatical comment needs to be added: in Luke 9:56, the conclusion of the Samaritan Villagers story, we find these words: “and they went to another village.” Jesus knew that not every Samaritan, or Samaritan village, was hostile to Jewish pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem. Compare, for instance, Jesus’ Good Samaritan parable (Lk. 10:30-37) in which a Samaritan is cast in a positive light as a merciful human being. Jesus did not leave Samaria, which, depending on the lateness of the hour, might have been a physical impossibility, but simply moved on to the next Samaritan village.

As a summary of this discussion, let’s try to make a new English translation based on the Hebrew idioms we have noticed:

Idiomatic (as literal as possible while still being acceptable English): When time came for his [Jesus’] pilgrimage, he turned and began walking on his way to Jerusalem. He [Jesus] sent messengers before him who set out and went into a village of Samaritans to prepare for him. But they (the Samaritan villagers) didn’t welcome him because he was on his way to Jerusalem. When his disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do you want us to command fire from heaven to destroy them?” Turning, Jesus rebuked them. And they went on to another (Samaritan) village.

Dynamic (reflecting what a modern English-speaker might have written had he originally recorded the story): When it came time for the pilgrimage, Jesus headed for Jerusalem. He sent messengers on ahead. They reached a Samaritan village and entered it to get things ready for his arrival. But the Samaritan villagers didn’t extend to him their hospitality because he was clear he was on his way to Jerusalem. When his disciples James and John observed this (the Samaritans’ response), they asked, “Lord, do you want us to call down fire and burn them up?” Turning, Jesus reprimanded them for what they had said. Then they proceeded to another Samaritan village.

What’s the bottom line, the personal application? We learn that disciples of Jesus are not to seek revenge, try to “get even,” “get back at.” He said, “Don’t complete with evildoers” (Mt. 5:39). “If anyone forces you to go a mile, go with him two miles” (Mt. 5:41). Jesus didn’t seek revenge on the Samaritan villagers; instead, he moved on to another village. This action reminds us of Jesus’ advice to his disciples about how to deal with their coming persecution: “When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next. Amen! I tell you, you won’t get through all the towns of Israel...” (Mt. 10:23). In other words, “You won’t run out of towns!” a glimpse at the subtle, but powerful, humor of Jesus.

Also applicable, and along the same lines, are Jesus’ words to Martha about worry: “Relax! Don’t be anxious, don’t worry. God will take care of you tomorrow, and in each of the coming days, just as He has done every day until now” (Lk. 10:41; and see Mt. 6:25 = Lk. 12:22-23). Just move on in faith!

We will discuss more Hebraisms in “Cataloging the New Testament’s Hebraisms: Part 3.”

Posted by David Bivin at September 26, 2010 04:59 PM