Let’s look at an example of Paul writing Hebrew thoughts in the Greek language. Keep in mind that Paul grew up bilingual in Greek and Aramaic (the “Hebrew” of his day), and appears to have been familiar with a couple other languages. He was highly educated, and his intellect was quite substantial. His background was Pharisaical, with all the Hellenized reasoning, but he would have been familiar with what was still then a strong competing viewpoint that was more ancient and eastern. Once he met the Lord on the Road to Damascus, and then spent another three years with the risen Lord in the Arabian wilderness, he was transformed into one who sought to restore the ancient Hebrew approach to religion.
The teaching of Jesus was distinctly aimed at restoring the Ancient Hebrew approach to reality. It’s only natural Paul would have absorbed that. We will look at a short passage in Ephesians 4:17-24.
This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind, having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart; who, being past feeling, have given themselves over to lewdness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.
But you have not so learned Christ, if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught by Him, as the truth is in Jesus: that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness. (NKJV)
Every English translation I have ever examined makes the same basic mistake. It is not enough to focus on the Greek meaning of the words Paul uses; you must try to see through those word choices to the Hebrew style thinking behind them. Thus, most English translations miss the point of some word choices.
The word translated “Gentiles” in Greek is actually ethnos — “nations.” In some contexts, a Hebrew man would use that word to indicate Gentiles versus Jews, but not here. Paul’s emphasis is that his readers, mostly Gentiles with a few Hebrew Christians, should not walk like the world they left behind. It would be more appropriate for us to read that as “other nations” in the sense of “the fallen world” — a fallen world that includes Talmudic Judaism. It’s not just the Gentiles that have left something behind, but the Hebrew Christians also have left the perverse atmosphere in Judaism. We are no longer have an identity based on our ethnic background and human identity, but a new identity as citizens of Eternity. Our human ethnic identity no longer matters so much.
Sure, there’s nothing wrong with certain habits from the former life. But it requires discerning what can follow you into your new identity. You can’t use human reason to get there.
Paul’s emphasis here is on heart-led consciousness, something not common in the Greek-speaking world. That heart-led awareness was more common in the ANE (especially Hebrew culture), at least among the better educated folk. He thus refers to the futility of trusting your intellect, in the sense of trusting human capabilities outside of revelation. The ability to make sense of the world had been darkened and such people find a life led by the Holy Spirit to be alien. They find it alien because the limited grasp of reality available to the fallen fleshly intellect is simply not enough, and it blinds them to the leading of their hearts.
The term “past feeling” is an idiom of the Greek language; we would say “insensible.” The image is someone who will reliably come up with the wrong answers when they try to process by fleshly reckoning the inputs of the five senses. They lack the revelatory insight that shows us how God designed reality. So without the moral guidance of the Creator, they do what makes sense to their fallen fleshly nature. In that fallen nature, immoral behavior makes good sense when you take into consideration the lusts of the flesh (“greediness”). The concept of what is good versus what is evil is entirely different from a fleshly reckoning.
This is not what you learn from Jesus Christ. If you have had that mystical spiritual encounter with the Holy Spirit of Christ, as Paul did, you cannot continue living that old life. You come under conviction and find that your own soul rejects that kind of life. Jesus isn’t a bunch of propositions the mind can process; He’s a genuine Person who comes to live in your spirit, and speaks through your convictions. Only your heart can understand Him, and your heart must awaken and take the lead in your decisions. He renovates your life, rearranging and rebuilding you from inside out. People who knew your old self will realize you aren’t the same person any more.
Your focus is pleasing your Master. You discover a sense of being separate (holy) from the old ways, and you look for ways to manifest this new Presence in your soul. You try to discern what is appropriate for this new situation. You have a burning desire for what is right.
This is just a small sample of Paul’s renewal of Ancient Hebrew thinking expressed in Greek language.
Out of curiosity, do you (or have you ever) read the Lamsa Bible? I really enjoy it, not for its absolute accuracy, but the way that it more accurately translates Aramaic idioms and culture into English. I feel like it gets to the heart of the Bible better than others. YMMV.
Never heard of it. I’ll have to look that up.
The Peshitta is a considered a 2nd century translation of the OT from Hebrew into Syriac and the OT from Greek into Syriac. In a sense, the NT went from spoken Aramaic into Greek, and then back into written Aramaic (Syriac), so many of the idioms, cultural facts, and transliterations were well understood at the time of translation because the translators were native speakers.
The textual criticisms of the Peshitta are that it is subject to a greater range of variants and textual corruptions or the manuscripts we have are more recent and less complete than that for the other manuscript families.
George Lamsa was a native speaker of Aramaic, and translated the Peshitta into English. It is the best such translation that exists. But, because of the alleged textual flaws, I usually only use it to cross reference different translations.Nevertheless, every time I read it it seems to speak to me more than other translations. I find that I want to spend more time meditating on it.
I don’t know if this is just me or there is something more to it. Given what you do here, I thought you might want to check it out. If you do, I’d appreciate a comment or review because I would sincerely appreciate your insight.
Well, I’ve looked over the text with a few random passages and I’m not moved. I’m familiar with the background of the Peshitta from my Christian college days; textual analysis and all those manuscripts was a big deal when I went. We had some ugly and bitter feuds on my campus over higher and lower critical forms, etc. It seems almost funny how the JEPD Theory was such a big deal, and now you never hear of it any more. I recall that Syriac and Aramaic are similar, but they arose in quite different times and places. Still, I can see how such a text would move you. I sometimes don’t feel like I have read an Old Testament passage until I’ve seen it in the Hebrew or Aramaic form.
Fair enough. Thank you for your analysis. I’ve spent less time with the Lamsa Bible on the Old Testament. I mostly read it for its New Testament rendering. It often feels more alive than modern from-Greek-to-English translations.
Despite all those debates people have over this or that (like JEPD or translation choices), I find that those things don’t seem to matter much: God speaks regardless… and differently to different people and at different times.
I have extremely minimal experience with the original languages of the OT, but I’ve always enjoyed reading it in English.