We continue the exciting series of Forum discussions for readers who want to learn more about Jesus: a fourth synoptic question has been posted in the JP Discussion Forum. This is part of our ongoing effort to keep our Forum subscribers engaged and challenged. Each month we present a new synoptic riddle.
This month’s question is: “What were Jesus' twelve disciples to do when they arrived at one of their preaching points?” What did Jesus command these twelve emissaries to say to the townspeople and villagers they met, and how were they to behave? Here are the four parallel accounts of Jesus’ instructions (according to the NRSV):
“As you go, proclaim the good news, ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near.’ Whatever town or village you enter, find out who in it is worthy, and stay there until you leave. As you enter the house, greet it. If the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it; but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you.” (Mt 10:7, 11-13)
“He said to them, ‘Wherever you enter a house, stay there until you leave the place.‘” (Mk 6:10)
“Whatever house you enter, stay there, and leave from there.” (Lk 9:4)
“Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peace to this house!’ And if anyone is there who shares in peace, your peace will rest on that person; but if not, it will return to you. Remain in the same house, eating and drinking whatever they provide, for the laborer deserves to be paid. Do not move about from house to house. Whenever you enter a town and its people welcome you, eat what is set before you; cure the sick who are there, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’” (Lk 10:5-9)
Forum members who participated in the last three months of discussions probably are exhausted, having worked so diligently. Even the many who followed the discussions, without posting their thoughts, have studied hard. All are happy, though! Nothing is more rewarding than learning more and more about Jesus!
Throughout the last month, we discussed the question: “In healing Peter’s mother-in-law, did Jesus touch her?”
The previous month’s discussion question was: ”What did Jesus forbid his twelve disciples to take with them on their famous training mission of healing and proclamation of the Kingdom of Heaven?”
The month before last, JP Forum participants enjoyed an exciting discussion on the topic, ”Where did the wicked tenants kill the son?”
To date, there have been more than 8,000 views of these three topics.
The above 4 discussions (along with 411 others) are ongoing and completely open and without charge. Join the more than 700 members of the JP Forum. If you are not a registered member of the Forum, please read this FAQ: ““How do I register for the Forum?”
Join fellow disciples of Jesus as they try to better understand Jesus’ words. Read the thoughts of others, and contribute your own ideas.
We continue the series of Forum discussions for readers who want to learn more about Jesus: a third synoptic question has been posted in the JP Discussion Forum. This is part of our ongoing effort to keep our Forum subscribers engaged and challenged. Each month we present a new synoptic riddle.
This month’s question is: “In healing Peter’s mother-in-law, did Jesus touch her?” There are three versions of the story.
“And when Jesus entered Peter’s house, he saw his mother-in-law lying sick with a fever; he touched her hand, and the fever left her, and she rose and served him” (Matt 8:14-15; RSV).
“And immediately he left the synagogue, and entered the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John. Now Simon’s mother-in-law lay sick with a fever, and immediately they told him of her. And he came and took her by the hand and lifted her up, and the fever left her; and she served them” (Mark 1:29-31; RSV).
“And he arose and left the synagogue, and entered Simon’s house. Now Simon’s mother-in-law was ill with a high fever, and they besought him for her. And he stood over her and rebuked the fever, and it left her; and immediately she rose and served them” (Luke 4:38-39; RSV).
Jesus’ healing of Peter’s mother-in-law, a tender story, and a unique glimpse of Jesus’ tremendous compassion, took place in Peter’s house in Capernaum on the northwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee.
This new Forum discussion, about a healing where, according to Luke, Jesus “rebuked,” not a demon, but a fever, is only just getting underway. The topic was opened on January 17, and already there have been 10 posts, and more than 450 views.
Hebrew University professor, the late David Flusser, suggested that Jesus never healed by mechanical means, but rather healed by the spoken word, as Luke here reports; but, Mark says that Jesus took hold of the woman’s hand and raised her up, while Matthew records that Jesus only touched her hand. The account of the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law is one of the places where we can test Flusser’s hypothesis.
The second question in this series of discussion questions was posted only a month ago: “What did Jesus forbid his twelve disciples to take with them on their training mission of healing and proclamation of the Kingdom of Heaven? And what items did he allow them to take?” To date, there have been more than 1500 views of this topic by our readers.
The first question was posted only two months ago: “Where did the wicked tenants kill the son?” Already there have been more than 4,000 views of this topic by readers.
The three debates (along with 2,380 other discussions) are ongoing and open for you to participate. Join the more than 700 members of the JP Forum today. If you are not a registered member of the Forum, please read the following FAQ: “How do I register for the Forum?”
Join fellow disciples of Jesus in their search for a better understanding of his words. Read the thoughts of others, and contribute your own thoughts.
]]>As part of Jerusalem Perspective's ongoing attempt to actively engage students living outside Israel — in those countries in which we conduct infrequent seminars and workshop, such as England and the United States, and in those countries in which, unfortunately, we conduct none — we pose this month's discussion question: "What did Jesus forbid his twelve disciples to take with them on their famous training mission of healing and proclamation of the Kingdom of Heaven?"
Study Jesus' instructions to the twelve apostles (Matt 10:9-10; Mark 6:8-9; Luke 9:3), then join the debate.
P.S. For the past month JP Forum participants have enjoyed an exciting discussion on the topic, "Where did the wicked tenants kill the son?"
]]>2. "Map of the Conjectured Life of Yeshua" (10 pp.)
3. "Counting the Cost of Discipleship" complex (text and commentary, 118 pp.)
4. "Preparations for Eating the Passover Lamb" (text and commentary, 83 pp.)
5. "The Disciples' Prayer" (text and notes, 36 pp.)
6. "Blessedness of the Disciples" (text and notes, 28 pp.)
Altogether, more than 300 pages of the commentary have now been published.
The above portions of the commentary (as downloadable PDF files) are available at no charge to Premium Content subscribers. Unfortunately, for technical reasons, we have not found a way to make individual files available to non-subscribers through our Bookstore. Hopefully, individual files can be made available soon.
Read a sample portion of the Life of Yeshua text.
Read a sample portion of the Life of Yeshua commentary.
Help to underwrite publication of this new commentary by subscribing to our Premium Content service, and by becoming a "Friend of Jerusalem Perspective". We depend on "Friends" and PC subscribers for the means to continue our research and writing.
]]>However, there is a pedagogical problem. Jerusalem Perspective has created a bad learning situation. Here’s what happens: Bivin comes to a city to present a workshop. Students get excited as they participate in two days of interactive study. Unfortunately, Bivin is unable to return each month to conduct additional studies. Excitement wains, and students discover how difficult it is to find a "study buddy" with the same deep desire to dig into the Scriptures. Study drops off, or ceases entirely.
Here's a partial solution: each month we will send to the addresses in our online database a stimulating synoptic problem, and we will open a topic in our online Discussion Forum. There, David and interested students will interact to solve the problem.
This month, we will examine a difficulty found in the "Parable of the Wicked Tenants" (Matthew 21:33-46; Mark 12:1-12; Luke 20:9-19; Throckmorton pericope number 204; Aland 278): Do the tenants take the son out of the vineyard and kill him, or do they kill him inside the vineyard, and, afterward, dump his body outside?
Let's begin the discussion! Please go to the topic, "Where did the wicked tenants kill the son?" in the Jerusalem Perspective Discussion Forum:
http://forum.jerusalemperspective.com/viewtopic.php?p=2948#2948
Join fellow students in an online discussion. Read the thoughts of others, and contribute your own thoughts.
Next month we will publish the answer(s) to this months problem, and present a new synoptic difficulty.
Here's good news for those who couldn't make it to one of workshops just completed: Steve Sullivan (the son of the late Denny Sullivan, of blessed memory) created a Web page while taking part in the Zeeland, MI workshop discussions.
http://sites.google.com/site/bivinzeeland/
Browse the links on this exciting page. Clicking on the link, "Workshop Outline," for example, will enable you to download the 17-page workshop handout, which includes the texts workshop participants studied, as well as the workshop bibliography.
]]>An antithetical parallelism is composed of balancing couplets, each of which is the antithesis of the other. This type of parallelism is distinguished by the contrast between the construction’s ribs, or sides. The elements of an antithetical parallelism express opposite sides of the same idea.
Before looking at possible examples of antithetical parallelism in the New Testament, let’s get a feel for it by examining instances where it exists in the Hebrew Scriptures:
The parallels are “integrity,” “the upright” and “guides them” and their antitheses, “crookedness,” “the treacherous” and “destroys them,” that is:
integrity | the upright | guides them
crookedness | the treacherous | destroys them
unjust man | an abomination to the righteous
he whose way is straight | an abomination to the wicked
he who lays in store | during the summer | a capable son
he who sleeps | during the harvest | an incompetent son
Not every element of one rib of an antithetical parallelism need be the antithesis of its parallel element in the other rib. Here, “summer” is a synonym for “harvest,” and not its antithesis.
the memory | of the righteous | is a blessing
the name | of the wicked | will rot
Here, one of the parallelism’s three elements, “memory,” is a synonym for “name,” and not its antithesis.
the way | a lazy man | a hedge of thorns
the path | the upright | paved
Here, “way” is a synonym for “path,” and not its antithesis.
Let’s search for examples of antithetical parallelism in the New Testament. Such examples are not difficult to find:
finds | will lose
loses | will find
This saying of Jesus appears another 4 times in the Synoptic Gospels (Mt. 16:25; Mk. 8:35; Lk. 9:24; 17:33), but Mt. 10:39 is the most Hebraic, and thus, apparently, the closest to the conjectured Hebrew undertext.
exalts | will be humbled
humbles | will be exalted
A second version of this saying is found in Mt. 23:12, but Lk. 14:11 appears to be the earlier form of the saying.
speaks a word against | the Son of Man | will be forgiven;
blasphemes against | the Holy Spirit | will not be forgiven
A second version of this saying is found in Mt. 10:32-33, but Lk. 12:8-9 appears to be the earlier form of the saying.
Like other types of parallelism, antithetical parallelism can be very complex and more extended than a single couplet. It is often compound, with many more lines of text than the examples above. Sometimes the parallel lines are arranged in such a way that if, for example, there are 6 lines, these are placed so that the 1st line corresponds to the 4th, the 2nd to the 5th, and the 3rd to the 6th. Thus, we get an ABCABC arrangement, e.g.,
a. Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth,
b. where moth and rust consume
c. and where thieves break in and steal,
a. but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven,
b. where neither moth nor rust consumes
c. and where thieves do not break in and steal. (Mt. 6:19-20; RSV)
A knowledge of Hebrew parallelism is one additional aid to investigators of the Synoptic Gospels since, when two or more versions of a saying of Jesus have been preserved, the greater perfection of the parallelism in one version may be key in determining it is the earliest, the closest to the text of that lost Hebrew biography of Jesus of which early church sources speak. Luke’s Gospel, like Matthew’s, contains the “treasures in heaven” saying. In Luke, it is: “Sell your possessions, and give alms; provide yourselves with purses that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys” (Lk. 12:33; RSV). However, the perfect balance and symmetry of Matthew’s version and its more numerous antitheses, indicate that Matthew’s version more faithfully preserves the supposed Hebrew undertext. Therefore, it is probable that Luke 12:33 is a revision of a text like Matthew 6:19-20.
Jesus often taught using intricate antithetical parallelisms like Mt. 6:19-20. Below are two more striking examples of extended antithetical parallelism found in the teaching of Jesus:
a. No one can serve two masters;
b. for either he will hate the one
c. and love the other,
c. or he will be devoted to the one
b. and despise the other.
a. You cannot serve God and mammon. (Mt. 6:24; RSV)
Here we find inverted antithetical parallelism, in an ABCCBA arrangement, with the first and last lines standing in synonymous parallelism.
An abbreviated version of this saying appears in Luke’s Gospel (Lk. 13:24). Matthew’s version is considerably more Hebraic than Luke’s, and its many antitheses, “wide gate” - “narrow gate,” “easy way” - “hard way,” “destruction” - “life,” “enter” - “find” and “many” - “few,” make it probable that Matthew has preserved an earlier version of the saying.
In the next blog, we will expand our discussion to include the third type of Hebrew parallelism, Synthetical Parallelism.
(Readers are free to send this article to friends or post it on a website without requesting permission.)
]]>Scholars have investigated Hebrew poetry, including parallelism, for hundreds of years. They have classified parallelisms into 3 categories: 1) Synonymous Parallelism, 2) Antithetical Parallelism, and 3) Synthetical Parallelism. On the history of research into Hebrew parallelism, see, for example, C. F. Burney, The Poetry of Our Lord: An Examination of the Formal Elements of Hebrew Poetry in the Discourses of Jesus Christ (Oxford: Clarendon; 1925), 15-16. For an excellent article on Hebrew poetry, see James Muilenburg, “Hebrew Poetry,” Encyclopaedia Judaica (Jerusalem, 1972), 13:671-81. See also the superb online article, “Parallelism in Hebrew Poetry,” in the Jewish Encyclopedia (article written by the Editorial Board of the encyclopedia).
In this blog we will survey the first of the above three categories, Synonymous Parallelism. Synonymous parallelism is the repetition of a thought in different but synonymous, or equivalent, words. Let’s look at examples of synonymous parallelism in the Hebrew Scriptures before suggesting that similar structures are found in the New Testament.
The parallels are “portion” = “share,” and “David” = “Jesse’s son,” thus:
portion | David
share | Jesse’s son
roars | Zion
shouts aloud | Jerusalem
rejoice greatly | O daughter of Zion
shout aloud | O daughter of Jerusalem
In this parallelism, “gather you” is the synonym for “bring you home.”
your festivals | mourning
your songs | dirge
corrects | scoffer | gets himself |abuse
reproves | wicked man | incurs | injury
Now, let's turn to examples of synonymous parallelism in the Gospels:
my soul | magnifies | the Lord
my spirit | rejoices in | God my Savior
In this verse, “go,” that is, “travel,” is a synonym for “enter,” and “Gentile roads” is a synonym for “Samaritan cities.” Assuming a Hebrew undertext, the singular nouns “way” and “city” probably should be understood as carrying a plural sense: “ways” and “cities.” In Hebrew, the singular of a noun is often used with plural meaning. In Ezekiel 20:47, for instance, “tree” means “trees.” See Bivin, “Jesus and the Enigmatic ‘Green Tree.’”
killing | the prophets
stoning | those sent to you
covered up | revealed
hidden | known
dead | alive
lost | found
bread | stone
fish | snake
nation | against | nation
kingdom |against | kingdom
judgment you judge | you will be judged
measure you measure | it will be measured to you
widows in Israel | [the prophet] Elijah
lepers in Israel | the prophet Elisha
is not with me | is against me
does not gather with me | scatters
makes sun rise | on the evil and good
sends rain | on the just and unjust
In the Hebrew of Jesus’ time “ask” was a synonym for “tell.” That knowledge helps us understand this passage, and also helps explain the story about Jesus in the Temple at age 12: he was “sitting among the sages, listening to them and asking them questions; and all who heard him were amazed at...his answers” (Lk. 2:46-47). Strange, logically we would expect, “were amazed at...his questions.” However, in Jewish discussion and debate, asking the right question demonstrated knowledge of the answer! “Questions” were “answers”!
Synonymous parallelism is often more extended than just one couplet, for example:
Below are striking examples of extended synonymous parallelism found in the teaching of Jesus:
Here, in Luke 13:2, 4, as in the Lord’s prayer, “debtors” is the equivalent of “sinners.”
It is likely that the petitions Jesus taught his disciples, “hallowed be thy name,“ “thy kingdom come,“ and, “thy will be done“ (Mt. 6:9-13), constitute a three-part synonymous parallelism. If so, these three phrases would not be different requests, but rather, a 3-part parallelism, with the request repeated in typical Hebraic fashion in three nearly synonymous ways, with each of the three reinforcing the idea of the other two, or explaining more fully the implications of the other two. See Brad Young, “The Lord's Prayer (9): ‘Lead Us Not Into Temptation.’” Therefore, “May your kingdom come” would mean the same as “May your name be sanctified,” and “May your will be done.” If this threesome is a Hebraism, we would learn that “doing God’s will” is the same as “bringing His rule into the hearts of people as more and more persons accept His rule in their lives. “Thy Kingdom come” is not a petition for God to initiate Armageddon, but means the same as, “Hallowed be thy name” and “Thy will be done.”
In Psalms 1:1, we find a 3-part synonymous parallelism:
walks | counsel | the wicked
stands | way | sinners
sits | seat | scoffers
The Beatitudes (Mt. 5:3-10) are even more extended, an 8-part synonymous parallelism!
Each beatitude is equal to and has the same sense as the other seven. In eight ways Jesus says the same thing! For instance, “the meek” is the equivalent of “the poor in spirit,” and “be comforted” is another way of saying, “be satisfied.” Notice, too, that the 1st and 8th beatitudes end with “for theirs is the kingdom of heaven,” a nice way of bracketing Jesus’ beautiful, poetic creation. The Beatitudes all refer to kingdom people, members of Jesus’ movement. In order to be, and remain, in his movement, his disciples had to be the kind of people who continually seek God with all their heart, hungering and thirsting for His salvation.
In the next blog, we will expand our discussion to include Antithetical Parallelism.
(Readers are free to send this article to friends or post it on a website without requesting permission.)
]]>One important Hebrew form of doubling is known as “parallelism,” expressing the same thought in two or more different, though synonymous, ways. “Parallelism” is the hallmark of Hebrew poetry.
Rather than invest energy in refining a definition of “parallelism,” let’s gain a feeling for this feature of Hebrew by looking at a few examples from the Hebrew Scriptures.
The Book of Psalms is full of parallelism. The book's first verse contains a 3-part parallelism:
Blessed is the man
who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked,
or stand in the way of sinners,
or sit in the seat of mockers. (Ps. 1:1; NIV)
The prophet Amos transmits God’s message:
”But let justice roll down like waters,
and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.” (Amos 5:24; RSV)
Again God speaks in parallelism through the mouth of Moses:
“They have stirred me to jealousy with what is no god;
they have provoked me with their idols.” (Deut. 32:21; RSV)
Mary used parallelism in her poetic praise of God:
“My soul magnifies the Lord,
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.” (Lk. 1:46-47; RSV)
Each of the two sides, or ribs, of a parallelism has the meaning of the other. Roughly speaking, whatever one side of a parallelism means, its other side means the same. More than half the words in the Hebrew Bible appear only once or twice, but happily, often in a parallelism. Sometimes, the only clue scholars have to a rare biblical vocabulary item’s meaning is its known equivalent, its opposite found in a parallelism.
"Parallelism" is the essence of Hebrew poetry, thus pervading the poetic portions of the Bible. A biblical prophet, it appears, had to have the muse of poetry as well as the spirit of prophecy: a prophet could scarcely open his or her mouth without parallelisms popping out. Surprisingly, parallelisms also permeate the Greek synoptic Gospels, especially the sayings of Jesus, one indication that the Greek of these Gospels is derived from a Greek source translated from Hebrew.
Here is a sampling of the many doublets and parallelisms we find in the sayings of Jesus:
“The wise and understanding“ (Lk. 10:21); “prophets and apostles” (Lk. 11:49); “kings and governors” (Lk. 21:12); “two men will be in the field...two women will be grinding with a hand mill” (Mt. 24:40-41); “look at the birds of the heaven...consider the lilies of the field” (Mt. 6:26, 28); “they make their phylacteries wide...and their tassels long” (Mt. 23:5); “when you see a cloud rising in the west...when you see the south wind blowing” (Lk. 12:54, 55); “a reed shaken by the wind...a man dressed in fancy clothes” (Mt. 11:7-8; Lk. 7:24-25); “eating and drinking...a glutton and a drunkard...tax collectors and sinners” (Mt. 11:19; Lk. 7:34); “you are the salt of the earth...you are the light of the world” (Mt. 5:13, 14); “as it was in the days of Noah...as it was in the days of Lot” (Lk. 17:26, 28); and “nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom” (Mt. 24:7; Mk. 13:8; Lk. 21:10).
Please fill in the blanks in the following parallelisms:
“A disciple is not above his teacher and a _____ is not above his ______” (Mt. 10:24-25).
“My yoke is easy and my ______ is _____” (Mt. 11:30).
“Foxes have holes, and the _____ __ ___ ___ have _____” (Mt. 8:20; Lk. 9:58).
“You build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the _________ of the righteous” (Mt. 23:29).
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets, and stoning _____ ____ __ ___” (Mt. 23:37; Lk. 13:34).
“The master of that slave will come on a day he [the slave] does not expect and at an hour __ ____ ___ ____” (Mt. 24:50; Lk. 12:46).
In coming installments of “Cataloging the New Testament’s Hebraisms,” we will look at parallelisms that are more complex than those above. A sensitivity to Hebrew parallelism allows scholars to interpret correctly a number of Jesus’ sayings, e.g., “Do not give the holy to the dogs, and do not throw your pearls before the pigs, lest they trample them with their feet, and turning, rend you” (Mt. 7:6).
(Readers are free to send this article to friends or post it on a website without requesting permission.)
]]>In Israel, when a Hebrew speaker doesn’t know the name for something, the person asks, איך קוראים לדבר לזה (ech kor’im la-davar ha-zeh; literally, “How are they calling to this thing?”). When an English-speaking immigrant to Israel wants to know the Hebrew word for something, for instance, “table,” the immigrant turns to a native speaker and asks, ...איך אומרים בעברית (Ech omrim “table” be-Ivrit), literally, “How are they saying ‘table’ in Hebrew?”), that is, “How do you say ‘table’ in Hebrew?” or “What’s the word for ‘table’ in Hebrew?” A person asks the question using the 3rd-person plural active form of the verb. (Throughout this article, the 3rd-person plural active form of the verb is emphasized by italics.) In such a context, the “they,” which in Hebrew is included in the verb, is indefinite, that is, “they” does not refer to anyone specifically.
I once saw an advertisement promoting purchase of listings in the Israeli Yellow Pages. The ad had the banner headline: בדפי זהב רואים אותך (Be-dapei zahav ro’im otcha, literally, “In the Yellow Pages, they are seeing you”). Here, too, the “they” does not refer to any specific individuals: it is indefinite and impersonal. From an English speaker’s standpoint, such a sentence is unclear. English speakers would not make the appeal in this way; they probably would employ a passive construction, for instance, “[If you buy a listing in the Yellow Pages,] you will be seen,” or, more likely, “You will get exposure.”
The use of this Hebrew idiom is very ancient. It was used in written and spoken Hebrew in biblical times, was common in post-biblical Hebrew, was still in use in the time of Jesus, was frequent in Mishnaic Hebrew, continued its use in the Middle Ages, and, as my examples above indicate, is still widely used in the language of modern Israel. (This Hebrew idiom also exists in Aramaic, a close sister Semitic language. The construction is found in English, although not as frequently as in Hebrew: compare the vague “they,” referring to an undefined subject, e.g., “They tell me that....”)
In the Hebrew Scriptures we find this idiom in, for example, 1 Chron. 11:7: “David stayed in the stronghold; therefore, they called it the City of David.” Compare the much more idiomatic rendition of JPS: “David occupied the stronghold; therefore it was renamed the City of David.” (Amazingly, 1 Chron. 11:7 exhibits the same Modern Hebrew expression, “they call,” that we noted in the first paragraph of this article.) Another good example of the idiom is found in 2 Chron 25:27 (see also 2 Sam. 9:2; Isa. 47:1).
For post-biblical, pre-first century, examples of the idiom, see the Hebrew fragments of Ben Sira, also known as Ecclesiasticus (ca. 180-132 B.C.), for example: “When a rich man is speaking, all are silent and his understanding they exalt to the clouds. When a poor man speaks they say, ‘Who is this?’” (Sir. 13:23).
The idiomatic use of the 3rd-person plural active form of the Hebrew verb continued its existence into Jesus’ time, as the many NT examples below will show. The idiom is very common in rabbinic literature. One interesting example is found in the Mishnah: במידה שאדם מודד בה מודדין לו (ba-midah she-adam moded bah, modedim lo; “With the measure that a man measures with it, they are measuring to him”; m. Sotah 1:7), that is, “With the measure that a man uses to measure with, it is measured to him.” (Note the necessary shift in English to the passive “it is measured,” since in the Hebrew saying, no particular individuals are intended.) In other words, if a man is liberal in his giving to the poor, God will be generous to him. (God is frequently the intended subject when this idiom is employed.) This rabbinic saying has a familiar ring to readers of the New Testament because Jesus uttered a similar saying: “With the measure you measure, it will be measured to you” (Mt. 7:2; cf. Lk. 6:38). For a full discussion of Jesus’ saying, see Joseph Frankovic’s article, “Measure For Measure.”
According to the Gospel of Luke, Jesus said, “How are they saying that the messiah is the son of David?” (τι λέγουσιν...; Lk. 20:41). This is strange Greek, but very much like the “How are they saying” idiom of Modern Hebrew (mentioned in paragraph 1). Apparently, this Greek preserves the literal Greek equivalent of Jesus' Hebrew words! Were we to assume that behind the Greek text of Luke 20:41 is a Hebrew saying that was translated very literally to Greek, we would reconstruct the conjectured Hebrew as, “How is it said that...,” or, “How can it be said that the messiah is the son of David?” The “they” does not refer to the Pharisees, or the Sadducees, or anyone in particular, but is simply an idiomatic way of avoiding a passive construction such as, “How is it said....”
Another striking example of this idiom is found in the Parable of the Dishonest Manager: “so that they may receive me into their houses...so that they may receive you into eternal tents” (Lk. 16:4, 9). In the parable, Jesus likens God to the manager’s master, a rich man. All the world’s wealth belongs to God. Jesus is interested in teaching that we should use God’s money to make friends, that is, we should give it away to help the poor. (In another place Jesus says: “Lay up treasure in heaven,” a teaching about giving to the poor.) Notice that the master praised his fraudulent manager (Lk. 16:8): God loves it when we give His money away!. When money fails, that is, when we die, we’ll have a friend upstairs who will take care of us.
An example I discussed in “Jesus and the Enigmatic ‘Green Tree’” is, “Ιf in the green tree these things they do....” (Lk. 23:31). Assuming a Hebrew origin for this saying, we probably have another case of the 3rd-person plural active form of the verb employed to avoid a passive construction. The clause, “If they do these things in the green tree” could mean, “If these things are done in the green tree.”
Other good examples of this idiom in the Gospels are: “Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished” (Mt. 17:12; NKJV); “Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you, and say all kinds of evil against you” (Mt. 5:11; NKJV); “they [do not] light a lamp and put it under a basket” (Mt. 5:15; NKJV); “Are they gathering grapes from thorn bushes...?” (Mt. 7:16; my trans.); Nor do they put new wine into old wineskins.... But they put new wine into new wineskins” (Mt. 9:17; NKJV); “If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub....” (Mt. 10:25; NKJV); John came neither eating nor drinking, and they say...the Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say....” (Mt. 11:18-19; NKJV); “Elijah has come already, and they did not know him but did to him whatever they wished” (Mt. 17:12; NKJV); “they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you” (Mt. 24:9); “they receive you...they do not receive you....” (Lk. 10:8, 10; my trans.); “when they bring you to the synagogues and magistrates and authorities” (Lk. 12:11; NKJV); “in this night the soul of you they are demanding from you” (Lk. 12:20; my trans.); “they are throwing it outside....” (Lk. 14:35; my trans.); “they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud” (Lk. 21:27; NKJV); “the days are coming when they will say...they will begin to say to the mountains...." (Lk. 23:29-30; RSV).
A Hebrew speaker expresses him- or herself differently than speakers of European languages, such as English or ancient Greek. Thus, if we were to hear a person say in English, or read in an English piece of writing, “How are they calling to such-and-such?” or, “How are they saying such-and-such a thing?” we could suspect the speaker or writer is either thinking in Hebrew, or, translating a Hebrew text literally.
When speaking English, a Hebrew-speaker of today will often say, “I’m afraid from something,” rather than the idiomatic, “I’m afraid of something.” My wife and I speak only English to our 4 Israeli grandsons (ages 4 to 8) so that when they grow up, they will be fluent in English as well as Hebrew. I notice that our grandsons will often say, for instance, “I am bigger from you,” instead of “I am bigger than you.” Their “from” is great Hebrew, but less than idiomatic English! When the grandsons give thanks to God for food, they often will pray, in good Hebrew idiom, “Thank you God on the food,” rather than, “Thank you God for the food.” Such unidiomatic English signals that the speaker is thinking in Hebrew and translating his thoughts to English. A Hebrew idiom that suddenly appears in an English sentence lets us know that the speaker is not a native English speaker. Likewise, Hebrew idioms in the Greek of the New Testament are telltale signs of a Greek author’s Hebrew-speaking origins, or, an indication that the author’s Greek is “translation Greek,” Greek that was originally composed in Hebrew and later, at some stage of the text’s transmission, translated to Greek.
In summary, awareness of the most insignificant grammatical features of the Hebrew language may pay huge dividends when we approach the Hebrew-sounding Greek words of Jesus. Each potential Hebraism in the Gospels should be examined carefully, since each may prove to be a treasure of new understanding.
What’s the bottom line? By reading this article, you have been sensitized to occurrences in the NT of “3rd-person plural active forms of verbs” that have no apparent preceding subject. In the future, when reading the NT, if you meet such a verb in an English translation, you will probably stop, reread, and ponder for a moment whether or not you have discovered another Hebrew idiom in Greek guise. In any case, you won’t automatically make an attempt to supply a subject for the plural verb of the idiom (to specific the subject of the verb). Instead, you will experiment with the sentence making the direct object of the sentence its subject and turning the verb of the sentence into a passive. For example, you will consider changing “if they do these things to the green tree” into “if these things are done to the green tree.”
Often English translators of the Bible have disguised a potential Hebraism by translating the “they” of a Greek 3rd-person plural verb freely as “men” or “people” -- or worse, supplied an assumed subject such as “Pharisees.” The only way an English reader can be certain the word for “men” or “people” really exists in the Greek text is to learn to read Greek -- a task that requires only a few hours of one’s time since nearly half the Greek alphabet’s 24 letters look and sound the same as their English counterparts. :-)
We will discuss other Hebraisms in “Cataloging the New Testament’s Hebraisms: Part 4.”
]]>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.”
]]>According to the Mirriam-Webster Online Dictionary, a “Hebraism” is “a characteristic feature of Hebrew occurring in another language.” For this series of blogs, a “Hebraism” will refer to a feature of Hebrew discovered in the Greek text of the NT.
Hebrew idioms leap off every page of Jesus’ life story, and I began cataloging them years ago. I discussed a number of them in the Appendix to Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus, for example: “bring out your name bad” (Lk 6:22), “the appearance of his face was altered” (Lk 9:29), “lay these things in your ears” (Lk 9:54), and “he set his face to go” (Lk 9:51).
I discussed many additional gospel Hebraisms in the 56 issues of Jerusalem Perspective magazine, published between 1987 and 1999. See, for example, my “Hebrew Idioms in the Gospels”; “Hendiadys in the Synoptic Gospels”; “Noun Chains in the Gospels”; ”Seeing (and Hearing!) the Kingdom of Heaven”; and “‘Prophets and Kings,’ the Evangelist Luke’s Curious Doublet.” For those who enjoy the study of Hebrew idioms, I recommend that you begin with Pieter Lechner’s excellent tutorial, “Significance of Idioms”.
Why is there such interest in these Hebraisms? Probably because such Hebrew idioms and grammatical structures may point to lost Hebrew scrolls that were used indirectly by authors of books of the NT.
Most readers are not interested in a reasoned, scholarly presentation of the NT’s Hebraisms. As one Christian businessman told me, “I’m not interested in how you got there. Just give me the bottom line! Just tell me the meaning of each Hebraism.” This man wasn’t interested in the sometimes fascinating story of the discovery -- he was confident that we had done our homework -- he was only interested in the practical results of the research.
In this series of blogs, I will try to present these “practical results,” the essence of each Hebraism, omitting details of the research. I will attempt to explain only the Hebrew idiom’s meaning and the resultant, clearer English meaning.
Hebraisms can be found in all books of the NT -- after all, most, if not all, of these books were authored by Jews living in the land of Israel in the first century -- but the vast majority of the NT’s Hebraisms lie buried in the Greek texts of Matthew, Mark and Luke. Isolated idioms do not prove Hebrew origins, just as a French word or idiom in American English does not prove Americans speak French. No single Hebraism can support the supposition that a NT book was originally written in Hebrew; however, masses of Hebraisms in a NT book tend to indicate a Hebrew ancestor.
Why Hebraisms, and not Aramaisms? Doesn’t everyone know that Jesus spoke Aramaic, and that, if there existed a pre-NT source for one of the books of the NT, it was written in Aramaic? True, most scholars assume Aramaic, and standard NT reference works inform us that, when mentioned in the NT, the Greek words for “Hebrew” and “in the Hebrew language” (10xx) refer, in fact, to “Aramaic.” Despite “Aramaic” not being mentioned in the NT, and early church tradition (e.g., Papias, 70-160 A.D.) that Jesus’ disciple Matthew wrote a gospel in Hebrew, it is assumed by a majority of authorities that Jesus and his disciples were Aramaic speakers.
Since the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (79% of which are written in Hebrew), the Hebrew Ben-Koseba letters, and other epigraphical materials, there has been a dramatic change in scholarly thinking, with more and more NT scholars giving Hebrew a place in the multilingual situation that existed in the land in the first-century.
Common nouns, such as “mammon” (Mt 6:24; Lk 16:9, 11, 13), “abba” (Mk 14:36), and “corban” (cf. Mk 7:11), are used in both languages. Most transliterated proper nouns such as “Gethsemane” (Mt 26:36; Mk 14:32), and “Tabitha” (Acts 9:36, 40), do not distinguish Hebrew from Aramaic: the same word is used in both languages. The word “rabbouni” (Mk 10:51; Jn 20:16) is correctly called “Hebrew” by John. Most NT scholars assume this word is Aramaic, but it is good, first-century Hebrew, as shown by E. Y. Kutscher (Hebrew and Aramaic Studies [Jerusalem: Magnes, 1977], 268-271).
A number of transliterated Aramaic words are found in the NT: “talitha koum” (Mk 5:41); “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani” (Mk 15:34); “Hakeldamach” (Acts 1:19); and “maran atha” (1 Cor 16:22). Martin G. Abegg, Jr., comments on the transliteration “ephphatha”: “A third verbal instance pointed out by scholars, Ephphatha, ‘Be opened’ (Mark 7:34), is ambiguous and by form more likely Hebrew than Aramaic” (“Hebrew Language,” in Dictionary of New Testament Background [Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2000], 462).
The Aramaic supposition hangs by two very thin threads:
1. Three supposedly Aramaic place names: Bethzatha, Gabbatha and Golgotha (Jn 5:2; 19:13, 17). Place names, however, cannot distinguish Hebrew from Aramaic. “San Francisco” is the name of a famous city and used daily in English conversation, but is the name really English? The name of the biblical city Beit-shan (1 Sam 31:10-12; 2 Sam 21:12) was preserved for thousands of years (from the early Canaanite period) as conquerors (speaking various languages), one after another, inhabited the location. When the town of about 5,000 Arabs fell to Jewish militias in 1948, it carried the Arabic name Beisan, remarkably similar to the place's biblical name. Place names tend not to change. Anyway, John calls the place names Bethzatha, Gabbatha and Golgotha “Hebrew.” Why not assume that John knew the difference between Hebrew and Aramaic?
2. “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani.” Randall Buth has shown in a forthcoming article that the Hebrew “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani” (Mt 27:46) and its parallel, the Aramaic “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani” (Mk 15:34), both derive from a Hebrew tradition.
Enough about the Aramaic-Hebrew debate. Let’s look at 2 examples of Hebraisms in the NT.
Example One
In Luke 14:26 Jesus says: “If someone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother...he cannot be my disciple.”
Here is a modern English translation of the passage: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother...he cannot be my disciple” (NIV).
From the NIV translation, it appears that Jesus desired his disciples to despise their parents; however, that seems difficult to suppose, since honoring father and mother is one of the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:12). In the Luke 14:26 context, the word “hate” does not carry the meaning it normally has in English usage, but seems to be used in a Hebraic sense. If we found these words in a first-century Hebrew inscription or manuscript, we would translate them to English as follows: “If a person comes to me and doesn’t love his father and mother less (than me)...he cannot be my disciple.”
In Hebrew, “hate” can also mean “love less” or “put in second place,” and “love” can mean “love more” or “prefer.” For example, Genesis 29:31 states that Leah was “hated” (by Jacob), but the context indicates that Leah was not unloved, but rather loved less than Jacob’s other wife Rachel. Rachel was Jacob’s favorite wife. Notice that the preceding verse specifically says that Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah.
A second illustration of this particular Hebraic shade of meaning of the word “hate” is found in Deuteronomy 21:15: “If a man has two wives, one loved and the other hated….” Here, too, the context shows that the “hated” wife is only second in affection and not really hated in the English sense of the word.
In summary, the meaning of Jesus’ saying might be: “If a person comes to me and does not love me more than his father and mother...he cannot be my disciple.” Perhaps Jesus was saying that his disciples should make him (or, make study with him) their first priority?
What’s the bottom line? The meaning of Jesus’ important saying could be almost the exact opposite of the Greek, and its usual English translation! Instead of “hate,” the meaning of the verb might be “put in second place.” This would make more sense and solve a difficult textual problem.
Example Two
In his desperation, the prodigal son thought to himself: “I will get up and go to my father, and I will say to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you’... and he got up and came... ‘and give a ring on his hand’” (Lk 15:18-22).
Here is a modern English translation of the same passage: “I will arise and go to my father, and I will say to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you...’ And he arose and came... ‘and put [Greek: “give”] a ring on his hand’” (RSV).
“I have sinned against heaven and before you.” Strange. “Sinned against heaven”? “Before you”? This passage is full of what look like Hebraisms. “Arise and go” appears to be idiomatic Hebrew, and if so would simply means “go” in English. “Heaven” is a euphemism for “God,” a way of avoiding the tetragrammaton. “Before you” is a Hebrew idiom meaning “against you.” “Arise and came,” like “arise and go,” is probably idiomatic Hebrew, and should be rendered in English simply as “came.” Instead of “give a ring on the hand,” the English idiom is “put a ring on the finger.”
In summary, the meaning of Jesus’ words in Luke 15:18-22 might be: “I will go to my father and say to him, ‘Abba, I have sinned against God and against you’... and he went... ‘and put a ring on his finger....’”
What’s the bottom line? Asking, “What might Jesus have said in Hebrew?” has caused us to consider other, much different possible English translations of this text.
We will discuss more Hebraisms in “Cataloging the New Testament’s Hebraisms: Part 2.”
]]>How can you be so positive in your assessment of the Pharisees? Remember that Jesus was pleased with the kneeling prayer of the tax collector and rebuked the prideful prayer of the Pharisee (Luke 18:10-14). He also told us not to address anyone as “Rabbi”; we have only one teacher. And finally, Jesus consistently called the Pharisees a “brood of vipers” (Matt 12:34; 23:23) and said that “they have already received their reward” (Matt 6:2, 5, 16).
Without reading the Scriptures carefully, and without a familiarity with Second Temple-period extra-biblical sources, a simple reader of the New Testament might assume that a majority of the Pharisees were hypocrites and that the Pharisees as a movement were indeed a “brood of vipers.” As a result of this common Christian assumption, the word “Pharisee” has become a synonym for “hypocrite” in the English language.
However, this widespread Christian misreading of the New Testament is a terrible mistake, which, in the course of the last two millennia, often has resulted in appalling consequences for the Jewish community.
Who did Jesus say were sitting on Moses’ seat (Matt 23:2)? Answer: the Pharisees and their scribes. Jesus said: “The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so do and keep everything they say to you (in Hebrew, כל מה שהם אומרים לכם, meaning, “Observe their rulings, commandments). The verb λέγειν (say) can be a Hebraism for “rule” or “command.” The Greek verbs ποιεῖν (do) and τηρεῖν (keep) are a parallelism and both refer to observing the biblical commandments as interpreted by the Pharisees (their Oral Torah).
Jesus himself observed the Oral Torah of the Pharisees. For example, not only was it his custom to say a blessing after eating, as commanded in the Torah (Dt 8:10), but he also said a blessing before eating, an innovation of the Pharisees. (See David Bivin, “Jesus and the Oral Torah: Blessing.”)
Shmuel Safrai commented:
In other areas of daily life the rulings of the Pharisees also were practiced, and although there were bitter controversies, eventually the Pharisaic halachah prevailed even in the major areas of Temple worship. Josephus states that “all prayers and sacred rites of divine worship are performed according to their [the Pharisees’] exposition” (Antiquities 18:15), and that the Sadducees “submit to the formulas of the Pharisees, since otherwise the masses would not tolerate them” (Antiquities 18:17). (“Safrai’s ‘Sabbath Breakers’ Article”)
Who was it that warned Jesus about Herod’s intention to kill him? Answer: the Pharisees (Luke 13:31).
Who was it that saved the lives of Jesus’ disciples by urging tolerance in the Sanhedrin when Peter and the other apostles were brought before it (Acts 5:33-39)? Answer: a Pharisee name Gamaliel, none other than Rabban Gamaliel the Elder.
Who was it that sided with Paul against the Sadducees in the Sanhedrin, saying, “We find nothing wrong with this man. What if a spirit or an angel has spoken to him?”(Acts 23:6-9)? Answer: the Sanhedrin’s Pharisees. (Read Shmuel Safrai’s “Insulting God’s High Priest.”)
Josephus reports that, after James was lynched by the conniving Sadducean high priest Hanan (Annas), the Pharisees protested to the Roman governor. David Flusser writes:
A similar clash between the Pharisees and Annas the Younger, probably the brother-in-law of Caiaphas, took place in the year 62 C.E. Annas the Younger “convened the Sanhedrin of judges and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called Christ, and certain others [probably Christians]. He accused them of having transgressed the Torah and delivered them to be stoned” (Antiq. 20:200-203). The Pharisees, who Josephus describes as the “inhabitants of the city who were considered the most tolerant and were strict in the observance of the commandments,” managed to have the high priest Annas the Younger deposed from his position as a result of the illegal execution of James. (David Flusser, “…To Bury Caiaphas, Not to Praise Him”)
Flusser also writes:
In contrast to what we know about Caiaphas and his faction, especially from John 11:47-53, the Pharisees of his time did not launch persecutions of Jewish prophetic movements. This is attested by Jesus himself (Mt. 23:29-31), according to whom the Pharisees of his day used to say, “If we had lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.” Indeed, when one reads the gospels critically, one becomes aware that the Pharisees did not play a decisive role in Jesus’ arrest, interrogation and crucifixion. The Pharisees are not even mentioned by name in the context of Jesus’ trial as recounted in the first three gospels, with the exception of the story about the guard at Jesus’ tomb (Mt. 27:62). (Flusser, “…To Bury Caiaphas, Not to Praise Him”)
The Pharisees were acutely aware of the dangers of hypocrisy. Their self-criticism was even more biting than that of Jesus. They even caricatured themselves saying that there were seven classes of Pharisees (j. Ber. 14b, chap. 9, halachah 7; j. Sot. 20c, chap. 5, halachah 7):
The “shoulder Pharisee”, who packs his good works on his shoulder (to be seen of men); the “wait-a-bit” Pharisee, who (when someone has business with him) says, Wait a little; I must do a good work; the “reckoning” Pharisee, who when he commits a fault and does a good work crosses off one with the other; the “economising” Pharisee, who asks, What economy can I practise to spare a little to do a good work? the “show me my fault” Pharisee, who says, show me what sin I have committed, and I will do an equivalent good work (implying that he had no fault); the Pharisee of fear, like Job; the Pharisee of love, like Abraham. The last is the only kind that is dear (to God). (English translation by George Foot Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim [2 vols.; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1927], 2:193)
Only one of the seven classes of Pharisees is righteous and acceptable to God: the Pharisee who serves God from love. Compare the saying of Antigonus of Socho, a sage who lived at the beginning of the second century B.C.: “Do not be like slaves who serve their master [i.e., God] in order to receive a reward; rather be like slaves who do not serve their master in order to receive a reward” (m. Avot 1:3). To the saying of Antigonus, cf. the phrase found in Derech Eretz Rabbah 2:13 (ed. Higger, 284): עושין מאהבה (those who do [i.e., perform good deeds] out of love).
“They preach, but they do not practice” (Matt 23:3). The Pharisees were the conservatives of their day, the Bible teachers and preachers of Jesus’ society. The Pharisees knew that their greatest danger was the sin of hypocrisy, just as today’s conservative Christians understand that hypocrisy is their greatest danger. We sincere and devout followers of Jesus are the hypocrites of our day. There cannot be hypocrites where there are no beliefs and standards to which one is accountable to God.
Notice that Jesus did not criticize the Pharisees for tithing of their garden herbs (Matt 23:23), a commandment of the Oral Torah, but for neglecting weightier matters. Jesus’ criticism of the Pharisees appears to be “in-house” criticism, constructive criticism driven by love and respect. The Pharisees, in contrast to the Sadducees, held beliefs that were similar to Jesus’.
The expression “brood of vipers” appears four times in the New Testament, three times in Matthew’s Gospel and one time in Luke’s. (There are no parallels to any of these four sayings in Mark’s account.) According to Luke’s Gospel (Luke 3:7), the expression is the address of John the Baptist to the “crowds” who came to him at the Jordan River. However, according to Matthew, John the Baptist’s stinging rebuke was addressed to “Pharisees and Sadducees” (Matt 3:7). Apparently, this detail was added for color by the author of Matthew, who then put it in the mouth of Jesus twice more. Luke’s Gospel along with Mark's provide evidence that this strong expression was used by the fiery John the Baptist, and not by Jesus.
Jesus’ words, ἀπέχουσιν τὸν μισθὸν αὐτῶν (“they are getting their reward/pay”) is a refrain that is repeated three times (Matt 6:2, 5, 16). The implication is that such hypocrites will not receive a reward in the World to Come -- perhaps will not even be in the World to Come! Rather than being a condemnation of the Pharisees, this threesome proves that Jesus’ theology was similar, or identical, to that of the Pharisees.
The three most important commandments in the eyes of the Pharisees were almsgiving, prayer and fasting, in that order, the most important being צדקה (tsedakah; almsgiving). Jesus gives this trio in his Sermon on the Mount. Although Jesus’ point is that one should not be ostentatious when giving to the poor, when praying, and when fasting, in passing, we learn something about Jesus’ theology: Jesus stressed the same three commandments that were so important to the Pharisees. Notice that the centurion, Cornelius, was a God-fearer (Acts 10:2, 22). He gave alms and prayed much (Acts 10:2, 4) and fasted (Acts 10:30).
Regarding Jesus’ command to his disciples not to be called “rabbi” (my teacher), see the FAQ, “What did Jesus mean by ‘Call no man your father on earth’ (Matt 23:9)?”
For further reading, see Shmuel Safrai, “Jesus and the Hasidim”; Shmuel Safrai, “Sabbath Breakers”; David Flusser, “…To Bury Caiaphas, Not to Praise Him”; and David Bivin, “Rabbinic Literature: A Spiritual Treasure.”
]]>Good news! Jerusalem Perspective.com has published several exciting new articles. Never before available on the Internet, and exclusively available to Premium Content subscribers, these articles are among the most important we have published.
The two most significant new articles, 21,633 words and 7,230 words in length, respectively, were penned by Shmuel Safrai, the legendary Hebrew University scholar. These articles are monumental in scope, and from a scholarly standpoint, revolutionary.
Professor Safrai’s conclusions will come as a shock to most New Testament scholars. For example, the prevailing opinion among today’s scholars is that first-century Galilee was culturally and spiritually deprived, and that, therefore, Jesus came from an underdeveloped and backward Jewish region of the land of Israel. In “The Jewish Cultural Nature of Galilee in the First Century,” Safrai shows that Galilee was the Jewish cultural center in the time of Jesus; that almost all famous rabbis of the first century hailed from the Galilee, not Judea; and that the level of Torah study in Galilee surpassed all other regions of the land. [The article originally appeared in the journal Immanuel 24/25 (1990), 147-186. Jerusalem Perspective graciously received permission to publish the article in electronic format.]
In “The Value of Rabbinic Literature as an Historical Source,” Safrai destroys the notion that because rabbinic sources were only put in writing after 200 A.D., they are not reliable historical witnesses to events that took place in the first century A.D., and before.
Another intriguing new article (3,329 words in length), “From Melchizedek to Jesus: The Higher Eternal Priest in Jewish Second Temple Literature,” was written by Dr. Moshe Navon. Navon discusses one of the most fascinating Dead Sea Scrolls. Known as “Pesher Melchizedek,” the scroll focuses on a biblical figure mentioned only twice in the Hebrew Scriptures (Gen. 14:18; Ps. 110:4). In this amazing scroll, Melchizedek combines the roles of kingly messiah, priestly messiah, messiah of the spirit, end-time judge, and even God. Pesher Melchizedek is extremely exciting for New Testament readers because the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews makes an equation between Melchizedek and Jesus (Heb. 5-7).
David Bivin contributed two new articles, of 8,916 words and 14,241 words in length, respectively. “Jesus and the Enigmatic ‘Green Tree’” is a study of Jesus’ saying, “For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall be done in the dry?” (Lk. 23:31). If it is true that during a moment of intense mental anguish and physical pain, Jesus employed the “green tree” motif to stress his messiahship, then it cannot be true that by this time in his life he had already realized his messianic pretentions had come to nothing. We can assume that Jesus viewed his death as an integral part of his messianic mission. Jesus had not been disillusioned by his arrest, scourging, and the prospect of a cruel death, but marched to Golgotha confident of his divinely ordained task.
*Note: Each article added to the site means Premium Content subscribers receive greater value for their subscription price: $60, $45 or $20. (These prices have remained unchanged from the beginning.)
*Note: Links to our 7 newest articles can be found at the top of the Jerusalem Perspective front page.
*Note: To read the above articles, there is no need to become a subscriber! You can purchase any, or all, of the articles individually in downloadable PDF format for as little as $.99.
Of course, I do have to spend a few dozen hours a week maintaining the website, and a few dozen more researching and writing articles. In addition, at my age, one shouldn’t forget that regular aerobic and strength conditioning is important. With so little to occupy my time (smile), I decided to devote several hours a week to learning to speak Koine Greek, the Greek that was spoken in the Mediterranean world at the time Jesus lived.
Following the lead of my colleague, fellow Jerusalem School of Synoptic Research member and JerusalemPerspective.com author, Randall Buth, I began trying to internalize ancient Greek by speaking it and hearing it spoken, rather than just passively reading the text of the New Testament.
Why would anyone want to do that?! Why would anyone in his or her right mind want to speak a “dead” language, a language that no one speaks? (Modern Greek speakers cannot understand their ancient tongue.) The answer: Because only by speaking a language does one internalize it, and it was high time, Randall and I felt, having tasted fluency in Hebrew, that we should gain an active knowledge of one of the other two biblical language. When we started this endeavor, Randall and I had been studying and reading Greek for approximately thirty years; however, we still didn’t have the active command of the language that a New Testament scholar should be expected to have, so that if someone were to have asked us to tell in Greek what we were doing last week we wouldn’t have been able to do it. That situation, although not uncommon among New Testament scholars, is intolerable.
Randall explains all this on his website. See his article at http://www.biblicalulpan.org/ that explains how he determined the Greek pronunciation used in the first century, which we’d later use as our pronunciation. He’s created textbooks (the series is titled Living Biblical Greek) and recordings (already 48 hours of Greek listening!). View a sample lesson from his Koine Greek course. His Biblical Language Center offers summer and spring-break Greek programs here in Israel.
Randall, I and a few other similarly “mad” students meet each week to read and discuss Koine Greek texts. Over the last eight months we’ve read The Shepherd of Hermas (a work of the Church Fathers) and we’ve just completed (end of May) reading The Testament of Abraham, a book belonging to the Pseudepigrapha.
Since January, we've held three- and four-day retreats every five to six weeks at Beit Bracha in Migdal, overlooking the Sea of Galilee. During these mini-retreats we allow ourselves to communicate only in Koine Greek. Last summer, Randall, I and three other students spent two weeks on the Greek island of Cos (see Acts 21:1) listening to and speaking only Greek.
We make slower progress than we would were we learning to speak a modern language, because, for one thing, we lack native informants. We have no one to ask, “How do you say this or that word in Greek?" but, thanks be to our Heavenly Father, we’re slowly becoming στωμύλοι (fluent). In fact, our improving ability to “read between the lines” of the New Testament is very exciting! Almost every week we notice points in the text that had escaped our attention during previous years of study.
For example, when Paul arrives back in Jerusalem (Acts 21:17) at the end of his third evangelistic journey, the very next morning he reports on his work among the Gentiles to James (the brother of Jesus) and the other elders (Acts 21:18-19). According to the NIV, the Jerusalem elders say to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them are zealous for the law.” However, the Greek text doesn’t read “thousands [χίλιοι],” but “tens of thousands [μυριάδες]” — Greek, like Hebrew, has a special word for “10,000.” The NIV is not alone in rendering μυριάδες as “thousands.” Most English versions of the New Testament, including KJV, ASV, RSV, NLT, NRSV, NAB, NASB, REB, TEV, AMP, ESP, GWORD and NET, translate “tens of thousands” as “thousands.” The NKJV and YNG translate with the word “myriads,” while the MESSAGE renders “thousands upon thousands.” Only CEV and CJB render μυριάδες literally as “tens of thousands.” While μυριάδες, like the English “myriads,” can sometimes be rendered “innumerable,” the English reader is unaware that the Greek text literally reads “tens of thousands.” (Notice that translators render μυριάδες literally in Acts 19:19: “five tens of thousands.”)
Suffice it to say, there’s a great difference between 7,000-8,000 and 70,000-80,000 Jewish believers in an estimated mid-first-century Jerusalem population of 250,000! Could one out of every four or five people on the streets of first-century Jerusalem have been a follower of Jesus? Translators of the New Testament have decided for us that Greek myriads couldn’t possibly be understood literally — there couldn’t have been that many Jewish followers of Jesus at that time. Without a note from the translators indicating they’re not translating the literal meaning of the word, the English-speaking reader is oblivious to other translation possibilities.
Is learning to speak Koine Greek worth it? Yes! For someone of my age? Yes! Τοῦ θεοῦ θέλοντος (Lord willing), my improved understanding of the Greek text of the New Testament will be apparent in my interpretations of the living words of Yeshua.
]]>First do a search by “Keyword or Phrase” or by “Biblical or Ancient Reference” on our home page (search box at the top of the page). You might want to read the blog, “Searching JerusalemPerspective.com Revolutionized!”
Such a search will turn up articles, blogs, or posts (in Jerusalem Perspective Online’s Discussion Forum) that have discussed the word (for example, “single eye”) or Scripture (for example, “Matthew 6:22-23) for which you are looking. Using these very powerful search engines, you will find answers to most of your questions. I myself would be almost helpless without them. I can’t remember in detail the contents of an article I myself wrote only a few weeks ago. ☺
If keyword and reference searches returns no results, then go to the site's FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions) page for possible answers to your queries.
One question we often receive is: "Which is the most accurate English translation of the New Testament?" Readers sent us this question so often we wrote a detailed answer and published it as an FAQ.
Finally, if you don't find an answer to your question in our online articles or FAQs (to which we are constantly adding), post it in our Online Discussion Forum.
Your question may be so provocative that it moves one (or more!) of the 500 registered members of our online Discussion Forum to respond. Your post will cause a lot of excellent Bible students to dig deeper into the Word. One of them often is able to provide answers or suggest avenues for further study.
]]>