Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
The source of biblical theology comes from the biblical languages. So imperative is the study of the Bible’s original languages, that I will make this declaration: as soon as a Christian university or seminary gives up the necessary study of Hebrew and Greek, its theology will move from its foundations. The reason? If there is no original word from which our words come, then biblical theology can easily become a man-made theology. As I’ve argued in other Truth in Two episodes, languages, definitions, interpretation, and care for words are essential. Find these and other links at the end of this Truth in Two.
The Protestant reformer, Martin Luther knew the importance of language. In a letter to a friend he wrote,
“I am convinced that without knowledge of literature pure theology cannot at all endure. I see that there has never been a great revelation of the Word of God unless He has first prepared the way by the rise and prosperity of languages.”
And in one of Luther’s most famous statements about Christian education, he said,
“Let us thank God for this precious treasure, and guard it well. For though the Gospel has come through the Holy Spirit alone, we cannot deny that it has come by means of the languages, by which the gospel was spread and by which it must be preserved. As we prize the gospel, let us guard the languages. And let us be sure of this: we shall not long preserve the gospel without the languages. The languages are the sheath in which this sword of the Spirit is contained.”
So, we should thank God for scholars who study the original languages, words essential to the foundation of The Church. When Scripture says, “It is written,” remember: the original languages are the well from which we draw the living water of God’s Word. For the Comenius Institute, this is Dr. Mark Eckel, Executive Director of the Center for Biblical Integration at Liberty University, personally seeking truth wherever it’s found. [First published at MarkEckel.com]
AFTERWORD
References for Luther’s comments come from, first, Martin Luther, in a letter to Eoanus Hessus, quoted by Leland Ryken in Worldly Saints: The Puritans As They Really Were (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1986), p. 258, ftnt. 71; second, from Martin Luther, “To the Councilmen of All the Cities in Germany, That They Establish and Maintain Christian Schools,” quoted from Armin Panning, “Language Requirements for a Gospel Ministry,” Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly, vol 80, no. 2 (Spring, 1983), pp. 116-17.
References to our Truth in Two include, “Book Burning,” “Language,” “Control,” “Definitions,” “Interpretation,” “Words,” “Words-2,” and “Caring for Words.”
Discussion (27)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Very much so. Translations can only go so far.
On a side note, I watched a presentation the other day where one scholar was also talking about the literary atmosphere in which the Gospels were presented. He was comparing passages in the Homeric epics to passages in the Gospels, especially Mark and Luke. It was obvious the authors had known the literature and were drawing parallels. Thus, knowing the language and the literary traditions brings out more richness than the language alone, and certainly more than a translation without context.
Likewise, George Lamsa, a native Aramaic speaker from the Middle East, also explained the culture that he came from and that was closely related to that of Jesus. It brings a lot of light to the subject.
MODERATOR
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
All the points about knowing the original languages, and of understanding the literature and culture of both the Hebrews of the time and of the peoples and cultures that surrounded them are very valid. However, I am still grateful for the translation of the Bible into all the languages of the world. Selfishly, I am most grateful for the translation into English.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Yup. Listening to or reading Messianic and Orthodox Jewish scholars commenting on the NT is also very enlightening. The "living water" discourse especially benefits from an understanding of the Hebrew language and Second Temple Judaism.
As for translation: I don't buy the "untranslatability" argument for any word or concept. There are words or phrases that are difficult to translate and require some circumlocation, sure. I do that all the time and have made quite a good living at it for most of the past 16 years. But utterly untranslatable? Nah. I don't buy it. The Welsh "hiraeth", some claim, is not adequately rendered by "homesickness". Fair enough, but it can be adequately rendered in English with "longing for home" or "longing for that which is lost". Dw yn gallus siarad Cymraeg, in case you were wondering. In any case, the idea that somehow that emotion cannot be conveyed in words in English, Dutch, German, Spanish, Norwegian, etc. is simply not true.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
There are some words in Chinese philosophy that don't translate very straightforwardly. A footnote or two will still clear up most of it.
And I'm not sure someone untrained and careless but reading the original would know what wu-wei means any better than a careful foreigner who relies on translation.
The sentence at the end of Analects Book 6 is subtle and probably has dozens or hundreds of different plausible translations in English. But there's no way of translating it as "Kill your parents," and every translation will probably at least hint that this is the Golden Rule here.
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Oddly, I think I know what you're talking about. If it's what I think it is, the translation I saw was "That which you would not want another to do to you, do not to the other." - Does that read right?
You're seeing five of 27 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.