Blog Archives

February 28th, 2021

2/28/2021

This week, with the Second Sunday in Lent, the Old Testament reading is quite close to the reading of the previous week. Last week’s reading was from Genesis 22; this one is slightly before that, from Genesis 17[:1-7, 15-16]. Both texts are about Abraham.

When the verse immediately after this text is included [verse 17], there are some interesting similarities and contrasts. In both verse 3 and verse 17, the text says that he fell on his face. I would imagine that he also stood up somewhere in between—since he falls down twice—although the text does not point that out. One contrast between these two verses is that, in verse 3, the text says that Abram fell on his face. In verse 17, the text says that Abraham fell on his face. His name was changed in the verses in between [see verse 5]. Another contrast is that, in verse 3, God spoke to Abram. In verse 17, the text says that Abraham ‘said in his heart.’

Once again, the Greek translation of the text brought out something that I had passed over in the past. The Greek translation says that Abraham said in his ‘thought’.

This text is a good reminder of the wide range that this Hebrew word ‘heart’ really has. In Holladay’s ‘concise’ lexicon, the definition of this word that is usually translated as ‘heart’ could be called lengthy. Here are some of the main parts of the different sections to this definition:

heart

physical organ

seat of vitality

inner self, seat of feelings & impulses

mind, character, disposition, inclination, loyalty, concern

determination, courage, (high) morale

intention, purpose

mind, attention, consideration, understanding

mind & mood in its totality, the self

conscience

(metaphorically) interior, middle

organizing power of the life/person [William L. Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1971; pages 171-2.]

The word obviously covers a wide range of things related to the human body. Since we are in the first book of the Bible, it might be an even better idea to see how this word is used before this text.

It only appears four times before this. The first time the word ‘heart’ appears in the Old Testament is at the start of the Flood story. And it is interesting that the first time it appears, it points to the evil of man. The second time it appears, it points to the hurt of the LORD—because of the evil of man. Here are somewhat-literal translations of the Hebrew, and they are quite similar in the Greek.

Genesis 6:5 And Yahweh saw that great was the evil of the man on the earth, and all the shaping of the thoughts of his heart were only evil all the day.

Genesis 6:6 And Yahweh was sorry that he made man on the earth, and he was hurt to his heart.

The next time the word ‘heart’ appears, it is at the end of the Flood story. The word appears twice within this verse, Genesis 8:21, and it starts out by being very similar to Abraham’s saying something in his heart—although this is the LORD doing it this time.

And Yahweh smelled the smell of the pleasant, and Yahweh said in his heart, ‘I will not add to curse again the ground for the sake of the man, that, shaping of the heart of the man is evil from his youth, and I will not add again to destroy all living things as I did.

Here is a Greek translation of that verse, also somewhat literally. Notice that it also uses the word ‘thought’ instead of ‘heart’ both times.

And Lord the God smelled a smell of sweetness. And Lord the God said, having thought, I will not still continue to curse the earth, because of the works of the men; because the thought of the man is carefully bent upon the evil from his youth; therefore, I will not continue to strike all living flesh, as I did.

There is a big difference between the heart and the mind, as any doctor would point out. It is interesting that, after a focus on the evil of the man, the focus was on the hurt of the LORD. It is easy to continue to focus either on the heart or the mind, especially if one of those things has something wrong with it. The LORD would have us focus on something even more important.

0 Comments

February 20th, 2021

2/20/2021

0 Comments

This year, with almost every Sunday in Lent, the Old Testament reading is from the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Old Testament. These five books were considered to be the first books translated into Greek, sometime in the third century B.C.

The reason I mention that is because sometimes the Greek brings a new perspective to the English translation. And the Greek was helpful for me with the Old Testament text for this First Sunday in Lent, from Genesis 22:1-18. This is the account of Abraham ALMOST sacrificing his son, Isaac.

Perhaps before this I was being influenced by the contemporary Jewish song, ‘Jehovah Jirah, my Provider….’ Most of the translations I have seen focus on the Lord PROVIDING for Abraham. But that verb, ‘to provide’, never shows up in the original language of the text—or even its Greek translation. The basic verb that appears in the text is ‘to see’.

To see is a very concrete way of choosing or selecting. Ultimately, seeing something (or someone) can lead to providing for something (or someone!). Sometimes for you to see something is important, and I would think you would agree that for someone who is important to see YOU is extremely important! In a very concrete way, the action of seeing leads to some meaningful and wonderful things. [For more details, you may wish to see Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans Publishing, 1988; page 328.]

Here is a somewhat-literal translation of the Hebrew and the Greek of two, somewhat obscure (and difficult) verses of the text; these translations use a concrete way of providing or selecting, using the verb ‘to see’:

Genesis 22:8

And Abraham said, “God will see to it for him, the lamb for an offering-up, my son.” And they walked, two of them, together.

Then Abraam said, “The God will see to it for himself, a sheep for the whole flesh-offering, son.” And going, both, at the same time….

Genesis 22:14

And Abraham called a name of that place, Yahweh Yireh (Yahweh will see), which it will be said, the day, ‘On the mountain, Yahweh, it will be seen.

And Abraam called [or ‘began to call’] the name of that place, ‘The Lord has seen,’ that they might say today, ‘In the mount, Lord, it was seen.’

This text does not seem to talk about the Lord being seen, although some translations can give that emphasis. Perhaps that is a good reason for using the word provide.

Like some other texts, this one has, as its main figure, the ‘angel of the Lord’. That type of angel appears in other places, not only in Genesis and the Old Testament, but it has also been seen several times in the New Testament.

The word ‘angel’ means messenger. And what I find very interesting about this text in Genesis 22 is that this angel calls to Abraham from heaven (see verses 11, 15). My question is: If this angel is a messenger, why does he not COME DOWN to deliver the message?

This happens one other place in the book of Genesis, in a very similar account (see Genesis 21). This time though, this messenger is called ‘the angel of God’ (verse 17). Hagar and Ishmael, Abraham’s other son, were sent away, and the text says that God heard the boy crying, and ‘the angel of God calls to Hagar from heaven….’ But why does he not show up as well?

Just perhaps those two events were not THAT important. It all worked out, both times in Genesis, for the angel to call from the heavens. With Abraham, the LORD certainly blesses him, and that can be done from a distance. With Hagar, the text even says that ‘God was with the boy, Ishmael (see Genesis 21:20a). God’s presence is so much better than the presence of an angel for just a few minutes.

Things all worked out in the rest of the Old Testament, so that the line of Abraham continued. And it does seem like it also worked out well in the New Testament.

The main messenger in the New Testament who was also God’s Son came down to deliver a very important message. He did not stay in heaven. He did not call down from the heavens. He went ALL the way down, and then, after a little while, he was lifted ALL the way up on an instrument of torture.

Special words about that very special messenger began to spread after that. Acts 5 relates the account of ALL the apostles being jailed, and an angel of the Lord shows up during the night to get them out. He not only leads them out, but he gives them instructions regarding what to do. And the word continues to spread … even today.

0 Comments

February 13th, 2021

2/13/2021

0 Comments

This year there are two options for the Old Testament reading for the Sunday of the Transfiguration, and those two readings connect with the two Old Testament figures who appear with Jesus, that of Elijah [2 Kings 2:1-12] and Moses [Exodus 34:29-35]. Both people are obviously significant within the Old Testament, but only in the Gospel according to Mark are the two initially described in this way: 'Elijah with Moses’ [verse 4]. In the two other (very similar) accounts, they are described as ‘Moses and Elijah’ [Matthew 17:3; Luke 9:30]. It may seem like a small difference, but little things may be important when the focus is ultimately the supposed ‘Son of God [Mark 1:1]’.

What perspective of Jesus in the Gospel according to Mark would put Elijah ahead of Moses? Elijah is usually compared to John the Baptist, and Elisha with Jesus; there are even some similarities with their names.

Jesus, in the Gospel according to Mark, has been compared to the living creature of the lion. The more actions that Jesus does within this account, and the distance that he puts between himself and his disciples, those two characteristics help to show Jesus as that lion figure. And perhaps it could be said of Elijah that he had some characteristics of a similar animal. This quote from the Concordia Self-Study Bible may be helpful:

Elijah’s rugged figure became a model of the ideal prophet in Israel. Jesus fulfilled 40 days and nights of desert fasting as Elijah had done; many believed he was a reincarnated Elijah (1 Ki 19:8; Mt 4:2; 16:14) [St. Louis, Missouri; Concordia Publishing House, 1986; page 512].

The typical text that is used for this Sunday [2 Kings 2:1-12] has Elijah handing over the work to Elisha. It seems like a pretty nice text. But there were lots of events that happened before and after that show how difficult it was for the prophets of the LORD in that situation. It may be good to review some of those events sometime.

There are also some significant differences between the Hebrew Old Testament of this historical section of the Bible and the intertestamental translation of those four historical books into Greek. What is interesting, first of all, is that some of those differences with the Greek have been seen in the Hebrew manuscripts found at Qumran. More work needs to be done in this area.

Another interesting point regarding this Greek translation is that the historic present is EXTREMELY frequent here. (That is when, instead of saying ‘he said this’, the text says, ‘he says this’.) To be more specific though, it is frequent within only SOME parts of the text.

Some have thought that this is just a matter of having two different translators, one earlier (who used the historic present) and one later (who did not). Another option would be two different literary themes within the book.

There are many times in Jesus’ ministry when the text in a particular gospel account has a lot of historic presents, but when he institutes the Lord’s Supper and when Jesus is on the cross, those are times that are basically without historic presents. (The only exception to this is Jesus’ speaking to John and his mother, so that he would take care of her after his death; see John 19:26-27.) These are very serious times, and the focus is on what is happening at that ONE time in ‘his story’.

Another literary possibility would be that sections of the historical text, those without the historical presents, the more serious and focused sections, those at approximate points of one-third and two-thirds, those two sections may imitate a layout of the tabernacle, that there is a place for sacrifice and then a place for the ‘Holy of Holies’. This serious progression through the text leads us on to a much better story, that of the Lord’s chosen people eventually returning from the Exile and coming back to the Promised Land. The point of all this is so that there can be the Promised ONE.

0 Comments

February 6th, 2021

2/6/2021

0 Comments

The Old Testament reading for the fifth Sunday after the Epiphany of our Lord goes back to Isaiah, chapter 40[:21-31]. The first eleven verses of this chapter was the Old Testament text a few weeks ago, for the second Sunday in Advent. This chapter is important enough to go back to hear from it again.

The fortieth chapter of Isaiah is the start of some very good news. And it comes quite clearly. That may be especially easy to see in the Greek translation of this chapter. Here is a somewhat-literal translation of the Greek of the first two verses and the ninth through the eleventh verses:

‘Comfort, comfort my people,’ says the God. ‘Priests, speak into the heart of Jerusalem; comfort her, because her lowliness has been fulfilled; her sin has been forgiven, because she has received from the hand of the Lord double, her sins.’

Upon a high mountain, go up, the evangelizing one of Zion. Raise with strength your voice, the evangelizing one of Jerusalem. Raise it up, fear not. Say to the cities of Judah, ‘Behold, your God! Behold, Lord! Lord comes with power, and the arm with lordship. Behold, his wage is with him, and the work is before him. Like a shepherd, he will tend his flock, and in his arm he will gather lambs, and those having in womb [i.e., pregnant] he will comfort.

Things that are repeated are important. Right at the beginning, there is the repetition of the word ‘comfort’. That is also in the Hebrew text. But the entire sentence in Hebrew is this: “’Comfort, comfort my people,’ says your God.” The Greek translation leaves out the word ‘your’. It is interesting that, with this word left out, a greater emphasis is given to the word ‘my’. And that seems like a good emphasis to have.

There is a famous Italian saying, ‘Traduttore, traditore.’ It basically means that a translator is a traitor. And that basically means that any translation cannot give everything that is in the original text. Something must be left aside, and that decision of what to leave aside is left in the hands of the translator. If something is left out of the translation, the translator is to be blamed.

It seems that this translator of Isaiah wanted to emphasize the good news. This is also seen in the use of the word ‘evangelizing’. We often think of the word of someone who is evangelizing as someone who is described after the New Testament started, but an evangelizing one in the Old Testament is a messenger who had a very important message, usually authorized by the king. The basic word in the Hebrew is the word for ‘flesh’ and emphasizes the importance of a person bringing the message. But we see in the Greek word ‘evangelizing’ the importance of it being GOOD news.

There are basically two opposite emphases within the verses of the text. There is the reminder that God, like a king, has power, and there is also the reminder of God’s love—more specifically, his comfort. In the above Greek translation, the word ‘comfort’ appears four times, but it is only in the Hebrew twice, the first two words of the text. In the second half of the first verse, the word ‘comfort’ is used instead of the word ‘proclaim’. At the very end of the eleventh verse, the word ‘comfort’ is also used, but this time it appears instead of the word ‘guide’ or ‘lead’. A similar word is used in Isaiah 7:19 and is usually translated as ‘watering places’ [See the work by William L. Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971; page 230]. There are some wonderful and comforting pictures within these words, whatever language they are.

With these slight changes within the Greek translation, some people have thought that the original Hebrew text that the Greek translators had was not the same one as the text that we have today. But there is another option. Traduttore, traditore. The translator may have betrayed the language in favor of the good news.

0 Comments

A Sabbath Day's Journey

February 28th, 2021

February 20th, 2021

February 13th, 2021

February 6th, 2021

Archives