Living Stones and a Spiritual House
I’ve been thinking about 1 Peter 2:4-5 for some time now:
As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 2:4-5 ESV)
The phrase that I’d like you to consider is “as a spiritual house”. In this text of the Greek New Testament, the two words that the ESV translates “as a spiritual house” is οἶκος πνευματικὸς (oikos pneumatikos). There is a problem though: this phrase is in the nominative case, which is almost always the subject of the sentence. Now, if the verb was a linking verb (like “to be” or “to become”) then it would be proper to translate the nominative phrase as a predicate nominative – which would come after the verb in English.
So, if the verb (οἰκοδομέω – oikodomeo – “I build”) is a linking verb, or if it can take a predicate nominative, then the ESV’s translation (and, in fact, every translation that I checked) would be correct. Peter would be saying that his readers are being built “as a spiritual house.”
In fact, in the New Testament, this verb never takes a predicate nominative. It usually takes an accusative noun as a direct object (Acts 7:47), and occasionally takes a prepositional phrase (1 Thessalonians 5:11). Even in the LXX (the Greek translation of the Old Testament), the verb οἰκοδομέω (oikodomeo), does not take a predicate nominative, but instead takes an accusative noun or a prepositional phrase describing what is being built.
So, what does this mean? It means that Peter did not say that his readers were being built “as a spiritual house.” Instead, “spiritual house” is parallel to (in apposition to) the other nominatives in this sentence: “[You] yourselves” and “as living stones”. The sentence, then, would be this:
You yourselves, as living stones, that is, a spiritual house, are being built into a holy priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices which are pleasing to God through Jesus Christ.
Thus, Peter’s readers (and us by extension) are not being built into a spiritual house, we are a spiritual house, just like we are living stones. Instead, we are being built into a holy priesthood, so that we can offer sacrifices that please God.
(By the way, as the ISV points out, the “yourselves” could be emphatic or reflexive. If the “yourselves” is reflexive, then the sentence would be: “You, as living stones, that is, a spiritual house, are building yourselves into a holy priesthood to offer spiritual sacrifices which are pleasing to God through Jesus Christ.” I think either of these translations would be better than reading the “spiritual house” as a predicate nominative.)
So, this is obviously a grammatical argument. If you are familiar with Greek, I’d love to hear your opinion on this.
But, does it matter? Does it matter if we are already a spiritual house or if we’re being built into a spiritual house? What do you say?
Meaning in words, phrases, sentences, or paragraphs?
This topic is not limited to NT Greek. However, those who are translating/interpreting NT Scriptures should remember that meaning is not primarily found at the word level.
Meaning is very much a matter that depends on the relations among words (or their combinations), and their grammatical structure. It is also dependent on the situation of the utterance. Semantics [the study of language meaning] is therefore concerned with more than the meanings of words. When semantics is discussed, all the things that contribute to meaning must be explored and not just the semantics of words. All language units that have meaning are of concern to semantics – words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs, and so forth, even the total document or narrative. From a practical point of view it seems rather impossible to start immediately with the largest units, although this is the actual starting point in language performance. A speaker or writer naturally has something to say, that is, a theme which is worked out by using paragraphs, sentences, words, and so on. In analyzing what a speaker or document actually intended to convey it is merely practical to begin with the smaller units because they are more manageable, but we must work up to the structure as a whole. (J.P. Louw, Semantics of New Testament Greek (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1982), p. 68)
How will Louw’s conclusion affect translation, interpretation, and teaching?
The referents for ekklesia in the New Testament
In my previous three posts (“Greek Vocabulary – Definitions“, “Greek Vocabulary – Glosses“, and “Greek Vocabulary – Referents“), I discussed the differences between definitions, glosses, and referents. If someone is learning Greek vocabulary (or the vocabulary of any new language), it is important for that person to understand the difference in these terms.
Our goal is to translate/interpret the New Testament Greek text in a manner that our translation/understanding matches as close as possible to the author’s intentions. Yes, I understand that we will never know exactly what the author’s intended meaning was. However, there are certainly tools and methods that can help us approach the author’s meaning.
A Greek term’s definitions can help us limit the possible meanings, but the definitions alone cannot tell us what a word or phrase means. Similarly, a gloss simply gives us a possible (or several possible) English words that overlap in meanings in some contexts. However, glosses often add ambiguity instead of helping fine tune the meaning of a word in context.
Thus, I concluded that we should seek the referents for a Greek word or phrase, and translate/interpret in such a way that the referent is clearly communicated. Let’s look at some examples with the Greek term á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia).
We have already looked at the three usages of á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in Acts 19:32, Acts 19:39, and Acts 19:41. (For the context, see Acts 19:29-41.) From the context, it is clear that the use of á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in Acts 19:32 and Acts 19:41 refer to the same group that was filled with confusion and rushed into the theater in Acts 19:29, and it refers to the same “crowd” that Paul wish to see in Acts 19:30. Thus, if we want to make sure that people understand the common references, we could translate á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in the same way that we translate “crowd” in Acts 19:30.
However, from the near context, it is also clear that the use of the term á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in Acts 19:39 refers to a different group. We would have to know the historical and even governmental background to identify the group in Acts 19:39, but we could probably interpret this usage as “governmental body” or even “legislative body” or “regular assembly” (which is how the ESV translates it).
Most of the usages of á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in the New Testament are similar to the one found in 1 Corinthians 1:2. (I’ll use 1 Corinthians as a test case.) In this instance, the author makes the referent to the term clear by using modifiers like “of God”, “in Corinth”, “sanctified in Christ Jesus”, and “called to be saints”. These phrases tell us that Paul is not addressing any group or assembly, but all the followers of Jesus Christ who live in Corinth.
The question is, unless specified in context, is there any reason to understand á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in any other way in the same letter (that is, once the author has defined what he means by the term). For example, in 1 Corinthians 4:17, the author makes it clear that he is referring to a different group (although that group may include the previous group). Similar arguments could be made for the usages of á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in 1 Corinthians 7:17, 1 Corinthians 11:16, 1 Corinthians 14:33-34, 1 Corinthians 16:1, and 1 Corinthians 16:19.
But, what about the usages of á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in other passages in 1 Corinthians 6:4, 1 Corinthians 10:32, 1 Corinthians 11:18, 1 Corinthians 11:22, 1 Corinthians 12:28, 1 Corinthians 14:4-5, 1 Corinthians 14:12, 1 Corinthians 14:19, 1 Corinthians 14:23, 1 Corinthians 14:28. Is there any reason to find a different referent in these verses than the referent described specifically in 1 Corinthians 1:2?
Of course, once we determine referents in the various usages of á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in 1 Corinthians, we then have one more important step… apply that referent to today. For example, if we determine that á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) refers to all the believers in a certain city, is it then valid to apply that passage to a subgroup of all the believers in a city today?
Obviously, there is much work left. But, notice what has changed… by beginning our interpretation by determining the referent for each use of á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia), we are no longer arguing or considering the various meanings of the English term “church.”
Greek Vocabulary – Referents
A few days ago, in a post called “Question about Greek Vocabulary,” I asked the following question: What is the difference between a definition, a gloss, and a referent? While this question is important concerning any language (even English), I’m asking this question in the context of New Testament (or Koine) Greek. In the first post of this series, “Greek Vocabulary – Definitions“, I discussed the importance of and difficulty in determining definitions of Greek words, even given the definitions supplied by standard lexicons. In the next post (“Greek Vocabulary – Glosses“), I discussed Greek glosses. But what about referents?
In linguistics, as the name implies, a “referent” is the object or idea referred to by a word or phrase. Given a word or phrase, the referent can be very general to very specific. In fact, it is possible for a word or phrase to refer to only one possible object.
For example, if I were to write the phrase, “I am typing a post on a computer,” the phrase “a computer” can only refer to a specific computer. It doesn’t matter that other computers could be referred to by the phrase “a computer,” because in my sentence the phrase refers to only one computer that exists or that has ever existed.
How do we determine what a word or phrase refers to? While the definition of a word or words can help, in fact the context is extremely important in determining the referent.
Consider the passages from the first post in which we found the Greek terms á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in Acts 19:32, Acts 19:39, and Acts 19:40. The same word is used in each verse, but from the context it is clear that Acts 19:32 and Acts 19:40 refer to the same group of people, while Acts 19:39 refers to a different group of people.
When interpreting or translating, it is extremely important to determine referents. In fact, it would probably be better to translate based on referent instead of on the specific term or even the definition of the word used.
As an extreme example, consider idioms. An idiom is a word or phrase that is used in certain contexts in which the meaning is not related to the definitions of the word or words used. One English idiom is “raining cats and dogs.” When translating or interpreting this phrase, it is not important to translate the words “cats” and “dogs” correctly. Instead, the entire phrase should be translated together and then translated in a way that conveys the meaning “raining very hard.”
So, when we run across the word á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in the Greek text of the New Testament, we must determine the referent by examining the context, then interpret/translate the term in context in a way that we express the meaning/referent with as little ambiguity as possible.
The problem with translating the word á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) as “church” is that we end up with double ambiguity – the ambiguity found in the word á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) and the ambiguity found in the modern term “church.” Since there are so many definitions of the English term “church” that do not overlap the definitions of the Greek term á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) the ambiguity and confusion is usually multiplied.
Thus, in the end, determining referents may be the most important step in the translating / interpreting process.
Greek Vocabulary – Glosses
A few days ago, in a post called “Question about Greek Vocabulary,” I asked the following question: What is the difference between a definition, a gloss, and a referent? While this question is important concerning any language (even English), I’m asking this question in the context of New Testament (or Koine) Greek. In the previous post, “Greek Vocabulary – Definitions“, I discussed the important of and difficulty in determining definitions of Greek words, even given the definitions supplied by standard lexicons. But what about glosses?
Most people who study Greek are first associated with glosses. A gloss is a word or phrase in English that is associated with a word or phrase in another language, such as Greek (i.e. á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± or ekklÄ“sia = “church”, “assembly”, “legislative body”). The gloss does not define the original word, but the two words should share some overlap in their semantic domain.
Here, I must talk briefly about semantic domain. A word’s definitions does not give us its meaning. Instead, definitions give us ranges of meaning, that is, its semantic domain.
So, students must be careful when they study Greek vocabulary not to mistakenly learn that “á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia)” means “church”. Very few words mean the same thing, especially words in the different language. Instead, the best that we can say with any Greek term and its glosses is that the glosses overlap the allowed meanings of the Greek term in some instances.
For example, we could say that the Greek term á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) can be translated with the English term “church,” given certain usages of the word á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) and certain definitions of the word “church.” However, we cannot say that á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) and “church” mean the same thing. Instead, we must pay attention to the usage and definitions and even the referents of both words in each context.
Of course, since Greek writers often use the same words with different meanings and referents, and since English readers often read English words with different meanings and referents, the use of glosses (while necessary) can lead to confusion and misunderstanding.
Interpreters often try to use different glosses to designate different meanings and referents for certain words. German translators did this for the Greek term á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) by using different glosses: kirche (organizational?) and gemeinde (community?). While this can be beneficial, it can also add to the confusion… since both kirche and gemeinde also have ranges of meanings.
Consider an English example for the Greek verb παÏακαλÎω (parakaleÅ). This verb is variously glossed as “I summon,” “I encourage,” “I exhort,” or “I comfort.” Now, the gloss “I summon” is often used when translating a different range of meanings than the other translations. But the last three glosses (“I encourage,” “I exhort,” and “I comfort”) can all be used somewhat interchangeably, although they have different ranges of meanings in English.
So, why did I go into all this? Students of Greek (or any other language) must recognize from the beginning that the English word written on the back of their Greek vocabulary card does not represent the definition of the Greek term, nor does it generally represent all the possible translation options for that particular Greek term. Translation and interpretation are much more complicated than exchanging a Greek word for an English gloss.
Greek Vocabulary – Definitions
A few days ago, in a post called “Question about Greek Vocabulary,” I asked the following question: What is the difference between a definition, a gloss, and a referent? While this question is important concerning any language (even English), I’m asking this question in the context of New Testament (or Koine) Greek. In the next few posts, I’m going to begin answering my question and begin considering the implications for translation and interpretation.
What is a definition?
a concise explanation of the meaning of a word or phrase or symbol – http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu
a statement of the meaning of a word or phrase – http://en.wikipedia.org/
a statement of the meaning of a word or word group or a sign or symbol – http://en.wiktionary.org
the formal statement of the meaning or significance of a word, phrase, etc. – http://dictionary.reference.com
So, we see that a definition describes the meaning of a word or phrase. The difficulty is that most words (almost all words) have more than one definition. And, a definition is never a precise statement. Instead, a definition may set the boundaries of possible meanings, but a definition alone can never convey precise meaning.
Another problem with definitions is that most words (almost all words) have more than one definition. Considering, for example, the English word “board.” There are many definitions for this word, and for each definition, the word can be used with different meanings. (The board will board the ship on a board.) This is not a peculiarity of English. Instead, words from all languages can carry many definitions, sometimes drastically different definitions.
However, even though a definition does not provide a precise meaning, knowing a word’s definitions is very helpful in determining meaning. Interestingly, it has only been in the past few decades that Greek lexicons began including the definitions for a world. Before that, only glosses were included. (I’ll talk about glosses in the next past in this series.)
Even the standard Greek lexicon (BDAG) does not include the definitions of all of the words in the lexicon. However, it does include definitions for most of the Greek words.
Even when a lexicon does include definitions of a word, we must deal with the fact that a definition is made up of other words, each of which has various definitions of its own. So, when a word in one language is defined using ambiguous or difficult words in another language, confusion or misunderstanding can ensue.
For example, consider the Greek term á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia). According to BDAG, the word has three definitions:
- a regularly summoned legislative body
- a casual gathering of people
- people with shared belief
The difficulty lies in the fact that the editors of BDAG can only find one use of á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in the NT that corresponds to definition #1 – Acts 19:39. Similarly, the editors only find two uses of the term that correspond with definition #2 – Acts 19:32 and Acts 19:40. According to the editors, these two uses are different than one in Acts 19:39 because of the use of the term “lawful.” This raises the question, can an adjective change the definition of a word, or does it simply narrow the meaning within the same definition, or perhaps even clarify the referent?
Another problem occurs when we consider definition #3. As an example of a use of á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) outside of the NT with the definition “people with shared belief,” the editors say, “Orpheus forms for himself τὴν á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¯Î±Î½ (tÄ“n ekklÄ“sian), a group of wild animals, who listen to him, in the Thracian mountains where there are no people.” Thus, for definition #3, the editors use an example that contradicts that very definition because Orpheus’ group is composed of animals (not people) which do not have shared beliefs.
So, why would the editors choose the definition “people with shared belief” to cover the majority of the uses of the term á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) in the NT? They say that in the NT it specifically indicates a people with common interest in the God of Israel. It is very possible that in the NT the word á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) refers to groups of people who together have a common interested in the God of Israel, but it seems the editors have confused definition with referent again. While the word may be used to “refer” to a group of people with a specific belief or interest, that does not mean the word is “defined” as a group of people with a specific belief or interest.
In both instances (all three definitions), the editors seems to have allowed the term’s referent to control the term’s definition.
If we do not allow the referent to control the definition, we find that á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia) would be defined very similarly to the English word “assembly”: a group gathered together for a purpose. The identity of the group and the purpose can only be determined by the context. But – and a very important point – neither the identity of the group nor the purpose of the group is carried in the definition of the word á¼ÎºÎºÎ»Î·ÏƒÎ¹Î± (ekklÄ“sia).
Notes on Koine Greek
Michael at pisteuomen has done us all (especially those just learning Greek) a great service by posting his “Notes on Koine Greek.” (That is a link to his first “note.” So far, he’s published 41 notes.)
Primarily, Michael follows Dave Black’s Learn to Read New Testament Greek. When I first took a Greek class, we did not use this book as the textbook. However, it was highly recommended by others, so I purchased it as a supplement. Black’s morphological approach makes so much sense to me that I use his book whenever I teach NT Greek.
Question about Greek Vocabulary
I primarily write these posts about New Testament (or Koine) Greek for people who are just starting to learn Greek, or for people who are thinking about learning Greek. Hopefully, I’ll be able to help some people who are struggling to learn the language (either in a class or on their own) and who are struggling to use it.
For now, think about Greek vocabulary. In a previous post (“Memorizing Vocabulary“), I explained the way that I study vocabulary. In the post, I said that I made cards for each Greek vocabulary word, putting the Greek word on one side and a gloss (or several glosses) on the other side. Why did I say “gloss” instead of “definition” or “meaning”? Well, because there’s a big difference.
And, this is important for people to understand as they are learning vocabulary for any language. I’m working on a series of posts in which I will discuss the differences (and connections) between a word’s definitions, glosses, and referents. I will also discuss why it is important for us (even new students of Greek) to recognize the differences.
For now, I ask you this question: What is the difference between a definition, a gloss, and a referent?
Memorizing Vocabulary
When studying NT Greek (or any new language), vocabulary is often an early hurdle… and a hurdle that can trip up even the brightest among us. When facing the daunting task of learning hundreds or thousands of new words, it’s best to have a plan in place. This is a short description of the method that I use to learn new vocabulary words.
Write each new Greek vocabulary word on one side of a card. (I use plain, unlined index cards. Use whatever kind of card works best for you.) On the other side, write a “gloss” for that Greek word. (A “gloss” is not a definition or a meaning, but one possible way to translate the word.) For a word with a wide range of meanings, you may need to write more than one “gloss.”
Begin by dividing your vocabulary words into three stacks of cards with one Greek word written on each card. (When you begin, you will probably only have one stack. But, you should move that one stack into two, then three, stacks as soon as possible.) Here is a description of the three stacks:
Stack #1: This stack is for new words. Each time you add new Greek words to your list, you should make a stack for these new words. Study these words several times each day. I usually study these words in groups of ten until I can recall all ten words. (Ten may not work for you. Find a number that works well for you.) I put those ten in the back of Stack #1 and continue with the next ten words. This is the stack of vocabulary cards that you should carry around with you. You can work on these cards whenever you have nothing to do. When you learn a new word in such a way that you instantly recognize the word and instantly know its glosses, then move it to Stack #2.
Stack #2: This stack is for words that you know, but you’re not completely comfortable with them yet. You should study these words (again ten at a time, or whatever works best for you) at least once per day. If this stack gets too large, then you may need to review them more than once per day. As you begin to recognize a word and know its glosses immediately, you can move that card into Stack #3.
Stack #3: This stack is for words that you know very well. In other words, when you see the word, you instantly recognize the word and know its glosses. You should review the words in this stack two or three times per week at the least. When you are reviewing these words, if you come across a word that you have forgotten or that is causing you trouble, move it back to Stack #2 so that you can review it more often. Do not forget to study this stack of words regularly, or you will not retain your past vocabulary.
Finally, when you are reviewing the words in your stacks of vocabulary cards, shuffle the cards in each stack regularly. Do not study the words in the same order each time, or you will begin to remember the order and not the vocabulary word itself.
Online Greek New Testament
For those studying Greek, or wanting to learn Greek, there are many, many terrific online resources. For example, try the “Online Greek Bible.” Once you search for a passage, you can then click each Greek word for a short lexicon entry, which also includes parsing information for verbs and case/number/gender for nouns and adjectives.
While this resource will probably not replace a printed Greek New Testament and a good lexicon, it is a great online resource. Plus, you can cut and paste the Greek text.