-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Should we learn Greek?
- Thread starter Phillip
- Start date
Since many of the members of my military unit are LDS, I get a chance to informally visit with them about their whole system. Interesting is not the only word. WIERDO.
Our old corporal said they love to read the Bible and then have the elders tell them what it means. I ask how they define those good old words (atonement, reconciliation, redemption, etc) and they have all variant definitions.
Some years ago (think I've told this story on the BB) I ribbed Ron, a devout LDS, about "she shall be saved in childbearing" since they all have large families and the old LDS of course was polygamist. He only had two kids.
He was genuinely hurt. Said he got a special dispensation because of his wife's illness to limit their family. Then he looked at me and said he was going to spiritual marry MY WIFE so that in heaven, she could be saved and that they could have celestial children then.
I was more than hurt. He moved from Casper and should be glad since I was thinking of where a well-placed bayonet might fit . . .
Oops. Sorry this veered off topic a tad. LDS are definitely KJVonly, but with all kinds of new definitions of the words therein!
Our old corporal said they love to read the Bible and then have the elders tell them what it means. I ask how they define those good old words (atonement, reconciliation, redemption, etc) and they have all variant definitions.
Some years ago (think I've told this story on the BB) I ribbed Ron, a devout LDS, about "she shall be saved in childbearing" since they all have large families and the old LDS of course was polygamist. He only had two kids.
He was genuinely hurt. Said he got a special dispensation because of his wife's illness to limit their family. Then he looked at me and said he was going to spiritual marry MY WIFE so that in heaven, she could be saved and that they could have celestial children then.
I was more than hurt. He moved from Casper and should be glad since I was thinking of where a well-placed bayonet might fit . . .
Oops. Sorry this veered off topic a tad. LDS are definitely KJVonly, but with all kinds of new definitions of the words therein!
Gregory Perry Sr.
Active Member
Dr.Bob..I hear ya on the BAYONET!!! BUT...I will take exception on the LDS/KJVo connection.They are unbelieving heretical cultists who deny the Book,the Blood,and the Blessed Hope and just happen to "USE" the right book taken mostly out of context while doing it.They could just as easily be "using" some other version or translation...matter of fact I'll bet some of them do.I'll even bet some of them "use" Greek and Hebrew from time to time.To even remotely suggest a comparison between Bible-believing Christians who trust the Lord Jesus Christ as their Saviour and hold to the KJV as the perfect written Word of God and LDS cultists who deny the deity of Christ as well as all the other major doctrines of our faith....is well....wayyyy out there.And yes.....they are VERY WEIRD.An apology may be in order here.I'm not "mad" Doc....just somewhat amazed you'd even suggest a comparison.
Greg Sr.
Mormons use the KJV but don't believe it has been translated properly. Consequently, Mormons place little emphasis on the Bible and really don't understand it or get much out of it. They can't be classified KJVO because KJVO's believe that the King James has been translated perfectly.
Andy
Andy
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Gregory Perry Sr.: "I Thank God that he chose to make
sure I had an accurate copy of the Word of God
in MY LANGUAGE ... "
Amen Brother Gregory Pe4rry Sr. -- Preach it!
- For the 17th Century (1601-1700)
God provided the Geneva Bible
- For the 18th Century (1701-1800)
(it took 100 years for the KJV to become popular)
God provided the KJV1611
-For the 19th Century (1801-1900)
God provided the KJV1769s
-For the 21th Century (2001-2100)
God has provided the Christian Standard Bible
from Holman (HCSB)
The HCSB is God's assurance to the 21st Century
American English user that He has chosen for
us an accurate copy of the Written Word of God
in our Language. Amen.
I sure wouldn't roast a preacher who knows a
little Greek or Hebrew.
sure I had an accurate copy of the Word of God
in MY LANGUAGE ... "
Amen Brother Gregory Pe4rry Sr. -- Preach it!
- For the 17th Century (1601-1700)
God provided the Geneva Bible
- For the 18th Century (1701-1800)
(it took 100 years for the KJV to become popular)
God provided the KJV1611
-For the 19th Century (1801-1900)
God provided the KJV1769s
-For the 21th Century (2001-2100)
God has provided the Christian Standard Bible
from Holman (HCSB)
The HCSB is God's assurance to the 21st Century
American English user that He has chosen for
us an accurate copy of the Written Word of God
in our Language. Amen.
I sure wouldn't roast a preacher who knows a
little Greek or Hebrew.
I completely understand the nuance of what Craig was saying and how it technically applies. And I understand your original premise. Perhaps I have misconstrued some of the remarks that followed. What I disagree with is the attitude that says one must study the languages to "really" study the Bible. Perhaps no one has meant this and I simply misunderstood. But I think you will find that some of the others have also misunderstood - if we truly have.
Again, I agree that language studies can be beneficial to overall Bible study - but I disagree that it is a necessity. Not even for "intense" Bible study.
Charles Meadows
New Member
I think one of the benefits of studying the basics of biblical languages is just seeing "how it works".
I'm still not convinced that these "nuances" are essential for studying the bible.
Many of the "standard" Greek grammars used date back to the early 1900s. Many of these authors, while being scholars of the highest magnitude, studied Greek in the light of Latin. The use of modern linguistics has really opened things up in the field - consider the works of Buist Fanning, Stanley Porter, D A Carson etc.
Consider the English words "like" and "love". They are different. Love is generally alot stronger and deeper than is like, which is seemingly more superficial. But the sematic domains of these words have considerable overlap.
I say, "I love pizza. Oh and I also like spending time with my kids".
Does knowing the "nuances" of English allow me to see deeper meaning. In truth pizza means more to me than my kids? Certainly not!
And this same scheme applies to reading a foreign language. To discern these differences takes huage amounts of experience and study.
We can see how someone who has had seminary Greek for 2 years can make a statement about the "slight difference" in meaning of two Greek words and be completely off base. Thus he might WRONGLY exegete the passage. In truth he'd have been better off had he not employed his knowledge of Greek to this passage.
I'm still not convinced that these "nuances" are essential for studying the bible.
Many of the "standard" Greek grammars used date back to the early 1900s. Many of these authors, while being scholars of the highest magnitude, studied Greek in the light of Latin. The use of modern linguistics has really opened things up in the field - consider the works of Buist Fanning, Stanley Porter, D A Carson etc.
Consider the English words "like" and "love". They are different. Love is generally alot stronger and deeper than is like, which is seemingly more superficial. But the sematic domains of these words have considerable overlap.
I say, "I love pizza. Oh and I also like spending time with my kids".
Does knowing the "nuances" of English allow me to see deeper meaning. In truth pizza means more to me than my kids? Certainly not!
And this same scheme applies to reading a foreign language. To discern these differences takes huage amounts of experience and study.
We can see how someone who has had seminary Greek for 2 years can make a statement about the "slight difference" in meaning of two Greek words and be completely off base. Thus he might WRONGLY exegete the passage. In truth he'd have been better off had he not employed his knowledge of Greek to this passage.
Actually LDS is very akin to KJVonly positions. They use only that version because of the archaic and difficult-to-understand words. They WANT the people to read and say "Huh?"
Then the LDS elders can "explain" the meaning with their perverse doctrine.
BTW, if some are offended, I did not mean to demean good born-again Christians who are caught up in false doctrine (onlyism, any version) with the evil LDS cult.
They are much closer to the SDA cult where the false teaching of KJVonlyism originated.
Then the LDS elders can "explain" the meaning with their perverse doctrine.
BTW, if some are offended, I did not mean to demean good born-again Christians who are caught up in false doctrine (onlyism, any version) with the evil LDS cult.
They are much closer to the SDA cult where the false teaching of KJVonlyism originated.
Oh, my. Anti-intellectualism rears its head! Sans logic.
And the preacher might end a sentence in a preposition or split an infinitive. Guess it would be better if he had never taken English.
Even a LITTLE knowledge of what God said (rather than depending on a group of paedo-baptizing Anglican priests) is better.
Never met a preacher in my life who regretted "one minute" of studying God's Word in the original languages.
Met a lot whose preaching [pathetically] showed that they could have used even "one minute" . .
And I have heard ALOT of preachers spend so much time with "the greek says this and means this here or that there" that they get completely bogged down in their "puffed up knowledge" and the WHOLE message of the sermon is clouded by "the greek this and the greek that".
Does that mean EVERY preacher who uses the Greek definitions in his sermons is bad? Certainly not. Likewise, I submit, that although Dr. B has a point, it in no way means that every preacher who DOES NOT use greek in his preaching is bad.
Maybe you don't mean it that way sir. It sure reads that way.
The 'agape/phileo' hobby horse is an excellent example of this. One clown thought he would impress folks with the greek and now everybody thinks they know what Jesus was REALLY trying to tell Peter.
Puhleeze!
And WHY would you constantly repeat the mantra of "paedo-baptizing priest" when you yourself know that Calvin and Knox were paedo-baptizers?
That fact seems to escape you. As if a paedo-baptizer is automatically DISQUALIFIED FOR HIS CONTRIBUTION TO CHRISTENDOM. Your logic escapes me. Help me out with the apparent contradiction in your philosophy please.
In HIS service;
Jim
Does that mean EVERY preacher who uses the Greek definitions in his sermons is bad? Certainly not. Likewise, I submit, that although Dr. B has a point, it in no way means that every preacher who DOES NOT use greek in his preaching is bad.
Maybe you don't mean it that way sir. It sure reads that way.
The 'agape/phileo' hobby horse is an excellent example of this. One clown thought he would impress folks with the greek and now everybody thinks they know what Jesus was REALLY trying to tell Peter.
Puhleeze!
And WHY would you constantly repeat the mantra of "paedo-baptizing priest" when you yourself know that Calvin and Knox were paedo-baptizers?
That fact seems to escape you. As if a paedo-baptizer is automatically DISQUALIFIED FOR HIS CONTRIBUTION TO CHRISTENDOM.
Your logic escapes me. Help me out with the apparent contradiction in your philosophy please.In HIS service;
Jim
Calvin is no hero of mine. I see his flaws. I recognize that his writings are tainted with his theology.
The KJVonlt sect cannot see the flaws; they accept every word as "Gospel" (pun intended).
And yes, Jim, I paint with a broad brush. And evidently hit a soft spot. But mark it - I won't stop mentioned that 'rasmus was a catholic humanist who sucked verses out of his thumb or that EVERY translator of the AV1611 was a paedo-baptizing Anglican priest that would have been and WERE rejected by Baptists of that day . . and revered and their work held as "perfect" by Baptists today.
Talk about disonance.
The KJVonlt sect cannot see the flaws; they accept every word as "Gospel" (pun intended).
And yes, Jim, I paint with a broad brush. And evidently hit a soft spot. But mark it - I won't stop mentioned that 'rasmus was a catholic humanist who sucked verses out of his thumb or that EVERY translator of the AV1611 was a paedo-baptizing Anglican priest that would have been and WERE rejected by Baptists of that day . . and revered and their work held as "perfect" by Baptists today.
Talk about disonance.
Charles Meadows
New Member
Hey Dr Bob - I'm not one of the KJVO! remember?
Now I haven't said that there's anything wrong with learning Greek. I think every pastor should have an intro to languages.
But I disagree with your assertion that learning Greek will (necessarily) allow one to detect "nuances" not discernible in the English. This may be true for those of us who have studied the language in detail for years. But this is not the case for someone who has only a basic intro to the subject. This can lead to alot of wrong and potentially misleading statements.
And a misapplication is worse than no application.
That being said I think that pastors should learn the language, with the understanding that language is a very complex and fluid thing, not easily mastered in 1-2 years.
Now I haven't said that there's anything wrong with learning Greek. I think every pastor should have an intro to languages.
But I disagree with your assertion that learning Greek will (necessarily) allow one to detect "nuances" not discernible in the English. This may be true for those of us who have studied the language in detail for years. But this is not the case for someone who has only a basic intro to the subject. This can lead to alot of wrong and potentially misleading statements.
And a misapplication is worse than no application.
That being said I think that pastors should learn the language, with the understanding that language is a very complex and fluid thing, not easily mastered in 1-2 years.
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
Dr. Meadows,
My question to you is how a student of the New Testament is going to understand the differences between Stanley E. Porter’s views on verbal aspect and those of Buist Fanning without first learning to read Greek, and how is one to appreciate Fanning’s Aktionsart without taking the plunge into the study of New Testament Greek? As for D. A. Carson, he actively encourages and helps Chritstians to take the initial plunge. I do not understand why you seem to be so hesitant to encourage Christians to do so.
Gregory Perry Sr.
Active Member
To all you educated fellers(southern for "fellows"),I think much of this greek/hebrew stuff is fine if you have the time and desire to dig into it....but I seriously doubt it will make any of us "more spiritual" in the long run.I think the greatest truths in the Word of God are those that God stated simply and plainly even though we all know the the darkened minds and hearts of the lost of this world can't understand them without the illumination of the Holy Spirit.What is plain to us makes no sense at all to them until AFTER they get saved.Personally,I think all of us would better spend our time if we pushed stuff like this into the background and focused on holding one another up in prayer and try to support one another in our needs.I'd far rather listen to a preacher who can show me from the Word of God HOW to have victory over my sins and the flesh and get to know My Lord better.I don't think knowing greek or hebrew will make me any better of a brother to any of you nor help me to live a godly,righteous,holy life in this present world.I'll take a broken humble brother or sister in Christ who shines forth the Love of Christ and daily remembers how unworthy he or she REALLY is over an over-educated,puffed-up scholar who thinks his/her "knowledge" makes them something ANYDAY.Education is fine...as long as it doesn't go to your head.Jesus wasn't too complimentary of the "Dr's. of His day.Think about it folks.
Greg Sr.
Charles Meadows
New Member
Craig,
My question to you is how a student of the New Testament is going to understand the differences between Stanley E. Porter’s views on verbal aspect and those of Buist Fanning without first learning to read Greek, and how is one to appreciate Fanning’s Aktionsart without taking the plunge into the study of New Testament Greek? As for D. A. Carson, he actively encourages and helps Chritstians to take the initial plunge. I do not understand why you seem to be so hesitant to encourage Christians to do so.
I am not against Christians learning Greek. I think they should. In fact I taught greek grammar at our last church (that was a hoot!).
What I disagree with is the notion that if one learns SOME Greek he/she will be able to discern lots of little nuances that are not apparent in the English. This is true for the intelligent individual who puts in lots of hours and has a knowledge of general linguistics as well. This is NOT true for the person who has a year of two at a small seminary using books from the early 1900s.
Many exegtical fallacies (D A Carson's term) have resulted from misapplication of Greek. These are not always little booboos - they can affect doctrine! This is particularly significant in terms of tense/aspect and semantic domains. Does every use of "epiblepo" mean the same thing? Does the use of the perfect tense signal a "completed action with relevance to the present"?
While I agree with Dr Bob et al that learning Greek is a positive thing I do not agree that students should be led to think that since they've been through Mounce's book or even Daniel Wallace's that they are on par with the mainstream textual critics. As I'm sure you know language is a plastic entity, filled with idiom and colloquialism. Students should not only have a knowledge of the language but a respect for it.
My question to you is how a student of the New Testament is going to understand the differences between Stanley E. Porter’s views on verbal aspect and those of Buist Fanning without first learning to read Greek, and how is one to appreciate Fanning’s Aktionsart without taking the plunge into the study of New Testament Greek? As for D. A. Carson, he actively encourages and helps Chritstians to take the initial plunge. I do not understand why you seem to be so hesitant to encourage Christians to do so.
I am not against Christians learning Greek. I think they should. In fact I taught greek grammar at our last church (that was a hoot!).
What I disagree with is the notion that if one learns SOME Greek he/she will be able to discern lots of little nuances that are not apparent in the English. This is true for the intelligent individual who puts in lots of hours and has a knowledge of general linguistics as well. This is NOT true for the person who has a year of two at a small seminary using books from the early 1900s.
Many exegtical fallacies (D A Carson's term) have resulted from misapplication of Greek. These are not always little booboos - they can affect doctrine! This is particularly significant in terms of tense/aspect and semantic domains. Does every use of "epiblepo" mean the same thing? Does the use of the perfect tense signal a "completed action with relevance to the present"?
While I agree with Dr Bob et al that learning Greek is a positive thing I do not agree that students should be led to think that since they've been through Mounce's book or even Daniel Wallace's that they are on par with the mainstream textual critics. As I'm sure you know language is a plastic entity, filled with idiom and colloquialism. Students should not only have a knowledge of the language but a respect for it.
Oh, my. Anti-intellectualism rears its head! Sans logic.
And the preacher might end a sentence in a preposition or split an infinitive. Guess it would be better if he had never taken English.
Even a LITTLE knowledge of what God said (rather than depending on a group of paedo-baptizing Anglican priests) is better.
Never met a preacher in my life who regretted "one minute" of studying God's Word in the original languages.
Met a lot whose preaching [pathetically] showed that they could have used even "one minute" . . </font>[/QUOTE]I would like to see what the ratio is of 'people who have NOT studied Greek' and those that 'don't want people to study Greek'.
'twould be interesting Phillip.
Also, I found a huge number of men who flocked to the KJVonly-greek-is-bad who (1) never learned Greek, (2) never learned much of anything, (3) flunked out of school, (4) call seminary a 'cemetery', and (5) are anti-intellectual.
Greek is not the be-all or end-all and it sure doesn't make you spiritual (I've cussed mentally over conjugating irregular verbs more than once) but it does help you to understand God's Word better . . and helps you not to have to rely like a second grader on what others tell you.
Also, I found a huge number of men who flocked to the KJVonly-greek-is-bad who (1) never learned Greek, (2) never learned much of anything, (3) flunked out of school, (4) call seminary a 'cemetery', and (5) are anti-intellectual.
Greek is not the be-all or end-all and it sure doesn't make you spiritual (I've cussed mentally over conjugating irregular verbs more than once) but it does help you to understand God's Word better . . and helps you not to have to rely like a second grader on what others tell you.
Example: Gal. 1:6-7 AV1611 "I marueile, that you are so soone remoued from him, that called you into the grace of Christ vnto another Gospel: Which is not another; but there bee some that trouble you, and would peruert the Gospel of Christ."
People are removed to another Gospel which is not another. Hmmmm.
Try to understand THAT verse/doctrine if you don't know the synonyms allos and eperos and the distinction/nuances of those simple Greek words.
[BTW, short Greek lesson for any interested - . . soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another = eperos or generically different kind of gospel: Which is not another = allos or numerically different but of the same sort . . ]
Now THAT will preach and help people understand what God is truly saying.
Hope that helps to show why I am so adamant about understanding a little Greek and Greek resources. Wouldn't it be great for EVERY PREACHER and EVERY LAYMAN to have enough knowledge that what I just said would be redundant - that we would KNOW FOR THEMSELVES what God said, rather than stumble with an awkward translation or wait for someone to tell them? This is the FREEDOM I want folks to have!
People are removed to another Gospel which is not another. Hmmmm.
Try to understand THAT verse/doctrine if you don't know the synonyms allos and eperos and the distinction/nuances of those simple Greek words.
[BTW, short Greek lesson for any interested - . . soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another = eperos or generically different kind of gospel: Which is not another = allos or numerically different but of the same sort . . ]
Now THAT will preach and help people understand what God is truly saying.
Hope that helps to show why I am so adamant about understanding a little Greek and Greek resources. Wouldn't it be great for EVERY PREACHER and EVERY LAYMAN to have enough knowledge that what I just said would be redundant - that we would KNOW FOR THEMSELVES what God said, rather than stumble with an awkward translation or wait for someone to tell them? This is the FREEDOM I want folks to have!
Trotter
<img src =/6412.jpg>
Greg,
One does not have to have a doctorate in Greek in order to understand it enough to help his or her bible study. Just a basic understanding of the tenses and a working knowledge of how to look up words in various resources can yield a bountiful crop!
A preacher need not go on and on about what this Greek word means, and what that Greek word means. Most of the time I have dipped into the Greek, it never was mentioned in the sermon. Oh, the fruit from the study was there, in that I had a much better understanding of what the text was saying, and that enabled me to get into the meat of it. But I did not have to stop and explain that I had researched this particular word, which stems from this one, which has a broad meaning of this, and its tense shows us... No need for that, but the knowledge gleened from it helped me in my preperation and delivery by allowing me to be clear and direct, not to mention confident.
Should we learn Greek? If you have the opportunity, yes.
In Christ,
Trotter
One does not have to have a doctorate in Greek in order to understand it enough to help his or her bible study. Just a basic understanding of the tenses and a working knowledge of how to look up words in various resources can yield a bountiful crop!
A preacher need not go on and on about what this Greek word means, and what that Greek word means. Most of the time I have dipped into the Greek, it never was mentioned in the sermon. Oh, the fruit from the study was there, in that I had a much better understanding of what the text was saying, and that enabled me to get into the meat of it. But I did not have to stop and explain that I had researched this particular word, which stems from this one, which has a broad meaning of this, and its tense shows us... No need for that, but the knowledge gleened from it helped me in my preperation and delivery by allowing me to be clear and direct, not to mention confident.
Should we learn Greek? If you have the opportunity, yes.
In Christ,
Trotter
Gregory Perry Sr.
Active Member
Trotter...That's fine...I have no problem with that at all.You just have to remember WHEN you "stand and deliver" that most of the brethen (and sistern..lol)are layman that speak plain english and appreciate things being said that are relevant to everyday circumstances,trials,tribulations,and sufferings that they are experiencing.In my own experience,the best and most useful truths I have learned were the ones that were put out there in plain,simple language.Some preachers seem to feel the need to impress people with the constant use of greek terms in their sermons.In a room full of college professors that may be ok...but in the average congregation it will definitely have its limits.The good ones know not to overdo it.
Greg Sr.
Greg Sr.