from previous post... continued.
There is also something else that happens to cause wrong
interpretation. The concordances are keyed to the English text in
the King James Bible. This would not necessarily be bad except that
the numbers are keyed to words that are sometimes not actually in
the Hebrew/Greek text. For instance, if you look up the English
word "praise," you will find a reference to Jud 5:3 " . . . I will
sing priase to the LORD, . . ." even though the word is not found
in the Hebrew text. It is important to know that the translation
from Hebrew/Greek into the KJV is not wrong. The reason we don't
get the "picture" is that the translation is basically
word-for-word, one English word for one Hebrew/Greek word. However,
in an attempt to make the translation make sense, the interpreters
added words like "own, as, it, but, etc." This word-for-word
approach almost always leaves out the picture, which can cause us
to miss the intended meaning. Of course if the Bible was translated
this way, you would have to lug it around on a dolly.
The Bible was written from a conceptual point of view as apposed to
our Western abstract point of view. The Greek and English
"abstract" approach lends itself to pulling a single word,
scripture, passage or book out of the text and letting it stand on
its own. Further, if the scripture says that something means one
thing, and it is turned around, it will have the opposite meaning.
For example, a pastor once told his congregation that Mat. 28:
19-20 says, "19. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost: 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have
commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of
the world. Amen. (KJV)" Then he told the congregation, "No go, no
lo." He was literally telling his congregation that if they didn't
go and preach the gospel, God would not be with them. Now we know
that Heb.13:5 says, " . . . I will never leave thee, nor forsake
thee." So this man couldn't have been more wrong. Conceptual
writing and thinking has never lent itself to this abstract
approach because nothing will stand on its own. Every concept is
built from a single thread that winds itself through the Bible
developing a single concept, and if the thread is not followed in
this manner, understanding the scripture may not be in line with
the intended meaning.
Hebrews wrote the Bible, Genesis to Revelation, from a conceptual
point of view. There is a possibility that Luke was not a Hebrew,
but it is not likely even though his name is Greek. Many Jews to
this day have non-Hebrew names. Some scholars believe that most, if
not all, of the original letters were initially written in Hebrew
or Aramaic then translated to Greek. Those who have only studied
Greek tend to believe that the various writers of the New Testament
were somewhat less than fluent in their Greek because there are so
many grammatical errors in the text, but what they do not know is
that the sentences containing the errors are grammatically perfect
in Hebrew. For example, in Matthew 6:13 it says, "For thine is the
kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. (KJV)" This
sentence is written improperly in the Greek and English languages
because of the use of the conjunction, and, but this sentence would
be completely proper in the Hebrew language. It is apparent to
those who read Hebrew that the text was written in a Semitic
language from a conceptual point of view and translated into Greek
for the Gentiles who could not read the original letters.
There is a difference between interpretation and application. There
can only be one correct interpretation of scripture, but there are
countless applications to a single interpretation. The difference
is subtle but important. For instance, if I interpret Eph 5:1, "Be
ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;" (KJV) to mean
that I am to act like a small child, my application will be
different than if I have interpreted it to mean "beloved
offspring." There is a big difference in being told to act like
small children and being told to act like the offspring of a King.
The offspring are going to act like they are loved and belong, and
perhaps more importantly, they will act their age, as well as act
in a manner appropriate for a child of a king.
It takes specialized training to correctly interpret Biblical text.
It is important to recognize each of the Hebrew/Greek symbols,
dots, and dashes. A fairly good knowledge of Hebrew/Greek grammar
as well as the ability to recognize which binyan/stem the
individual word is using is also important. It doesn't take four
years in a specialized Bible college to learn this approach of
studying. Actually anyone can learn in a short amount of time over
the internet from books or through someone who teaches locally.
Some of these courses are free, and you can meet some fascinating
people.
Some would say that relying on the Holy Spirit is all that is
needed for interpretation, but this approach is not Biblical. The
scriptures make it clear that we are to study. 2nd Tim 2:15 tells
us to study, but more important than study is proper training.
Peter speaks to this in 2nd Peter 3:15-17. In this scripture, Peter
tells us that some things Paul wrote are hard to understand, and
those who are (amathes), pronounced {am-ath-ace'}, unlearned or
uneducated, interpret the scriptures to their own destruction. You
can get the job done without the proper tools, but it will not be
done to exact standards or with any great precision. Peter was
aware that the Spirit of God was our teacher and that all flesh was
filled with the Spirit of God. He was there! Yet he still concludes
that improper training can lead a Spirit-filled believer to his own
destruction.
I am not saying that people cant teach the Bible without first
learning proper methodology for translating the Hebrew and Greek
text. We can teach the gospel from an abstract point of view and be
correct. It can and does lead sinners to salvation and believers to
a deeper relationship and understanding, but it still lacks the
depth and beauty of the Biblical languages. By taking the time to
learn the languages and the customs of Biblical times, we can
transcend time and experience the stories of the Bible almost as
though we were there. If you don't have the time to do this, find a
teacher who does. It will be worth the effort.
Shalom,
Robert Allon
