Now that I have been out of Seminary for about four months, I am beginning to get some perspective on what I learned and how useful it is for life and ministry. I am sure this perspective will continue to mature and develop, but below is something my wife and I were talking about the other day…
Most seminary programs place a high emphasis on learning the Biblical languages of Greek and Hebrew. The theory is that knowing Greek and Hebrew will aid the student in understanding the text better, and therefore, being able to teach it better. It is for this reason I studied them, even though learning languages has always been a struggle for me. In seminary, I easily spent just as much time on my Hebrew and Greek classes as I did on all my other classes combined. On an average night, I would spend 4-6 hours on homework, and usually, 3-4 of these were on learning Greek or Hebrew.
The question for me now is whether knowing such languages will actually prove helpful for understanding the Biblical text? I think to some degree it has. But given the wide variety of good English translations, the vast availability of Greek and Hebrew study tools (both in book and digital format), and the large number of good commentaries that have been written, I expect that knowing Greek and Hebrew is not going to be super beneficial to me personally. I will most likely use it in my studies, but one thing learning Greek and Hebrew taught me is that unless you are an expert, using Greek and Hebrew is rather dangerous. Since I will never be a Greek and Hebrew expert, I must tread lightly when using the languages in my study.
One other thing I have become convinced of in using Greek and Hebrew is that a pastor must almost never use Greek and Hebrew in his public teaching. This gives the impression to those listening that unless they know Greek and Hebrew, they cannot truly understand Scripture. Today, Greek and Hebrew is like Latin was in the Middle Ages. They are the languages of the Bible scholars and have effectively taken the Bible out of the hands of the “laity,” requiring them to go to the trained “clergy” for proper interpretation. The teacher or pastor who frequently says “…now in the Greek (or Hebrew)…” is taking the Bible away from the people.
I do, of course, think that language studies should be a part of every seminary education. However, if I am looking to be a better teacher of Scripture, I think that languages like Spanish, Chinese, and Hindi might be better than Greek and Hebrew. If one purpose of seminary is to help prepare students to “go into all the world and preach the gospel” it seems that learning the languages of “all the world” might better prepare us to do that then learning dead languages that nobody speaks any longer.
What do you think?
I think you’re one smart cookie, Jeremy! And you’ve acquired a fair degree of wisdom as well. I cringe when pastors fling the “original meaning of the greek word” blahblahblah. It’s as if they are implying that the collective scholarship of the various teams of biblical interpreters was somehow insufficient, naive, biased or at the very least less informed than their own interpretation of the word. It often comes across as arrogant. I love your humility regarding this:
“I will most likely use it in my studies, but one thing learning Greek and Hebrew taught me is that unless you are an expert, using Greek and Hebrew is rather dangerous. Since I will never be a Greek and Hebrew expert, I must tread lightly when using the languages in my study.”
Amen brother. Amen.
Well, mostly I agree. But, honestly, 1 John is pretty hard to preach without some of that explanation, precisely because it has been screwed up in so many of the english translations. I try to keep it out as much as possible, and I don’t usually mention it in terms of “original word says etc…” but rather just explain what it means.
I get irritated by it in large doses, but sometime you gotta do it…
Josh,
Yeah, I will agree with you there. First John is full of unfortunate mistranslations.
Jeremy,
When it comes to preaching, I’m right there with you all the way. In fact, that was a major issue when I first started pastoring; the people were so accustomed to Greek and Hebrew priestcraft in the sermon that they thought I didn’t value the languages because I didn’t do it. That’s the issue that made me start writing pastoral position papers, because it kept coming up, and I either had to write something, or wage a relentless campaign of homiletical apologetics from the pulpit week after week. I couldn’t see wasting preaching time on it, so I wrote.
On the importance of the languages generally, your parting shot there really rankles. It’s not an either/or kind of issue — if you learn Swahili instead of Greek, you’ll be able to talk to Africans, but what are you going to *say*? We’re carrying the message from the revelation God gave us, in the languages He chose to use, all the way to the hearers God sent us to, in the languages He is pleased to have them speak. It isn’t as though we can afford to drop any of the links in the chain. Time was, the church didn’t seem to think this was particularly onerous — it’s just what you did to prepare for handling the Scriptures.
Speaking from the other side of the fence as a (former) seminary instructor, what you’re saying is the exact same thing we hear from *every* student that didn’t master one or both languages. For normal students in a good program, it takes two years of hard work to get to the point where they can really use their Greek, and it’s only at that point that they have a ghost of a chance of mastering the language. Another year or two will drive it home, and a rapid reading course somewhere in there (preferably very close to the end) will cement it.
If you stop anywhere short of being able to really use it, you won’t make it.
If you don’t get to the point where you can use it efficiently, you’ll probably be better the day you graduate than you ever will again.
That’s why our program required 4 years of Greek — there’s a much better chance of getting good enough to really *stay* good at that point.
And you’re right, too, that if someone is going to stop short of real expertise, they’re better off just learning to cheat as hard as they can, and spending the rest of their time in seminary on other things. Why spend all that time learning to parse like a machine if, five years from now, you’re gonna let a machine do all your parsing anyway? Shoulda taken Hindi after all…
Thing is, using the tools well is not as easy as it sounds, either. For example: BADG says that peitho can mean “obey”. It’s one thing to skim the entry and say “Well, it can mean ‘obey’ according to BADG.” It’s another thing to read the entry well, and note that they’re only saying that about the passive and middle forms (and not in the perfect). And it’s another thing again to study the entry and learn *why* they say it — that is, to look up the examples and be able to say “Yes, this is a good argument” or “No, this is not.”
Is that still necessary? Yes — if only to check and see whether there *is* an argument. Winer relegated the Granville Sharp rule to obscurity for nearly a hundred years with nothing more than a disparaging mention in a footnote — sheer scholarly intimidation, and not a scintilla of actual argument. The fine art of argument-by-bald-assertion did not die with Winer; Wallace has some real howlers, too, as does every grammar in between. (Mind you, I like Wallace.) The tools don’t eliminate the work; they make you pay for life for the fact that you didn’t master the language.
Thanks for the comment. I knew this post would get a reaction from you! Ha ha.
Knowing Greek and Hebrew is one of those areas of study where no matter how much you know, it is never enough for those who know more than you.
When people who don’t know Greek say it is unnecessary, those who do know it jump all over them and say “You are only saying that because you don’t know Greek. If you knew it, you would see how valuable it was.”
Then when someone does actually learn the languages, and then says they are not worthwhile, people who have studied them longer jump all over them and say, “Well, if you had only taken four years instead of two.” (Note that this is what you basically say above: “…what you’re saying is the exact same thing we hear from *every* student that didn’t master one or both languages. …our program required 4 years of Greek…”
Even when someone has 4 years of Greek, and they say it isn’t very helpful, they are disparaged by people who have Ph.D’s. And then even among people with Ph.D’s., those who had a Ph.D. in New Testament Greek look down upon those who just have plain Ph.D’s in Bible Exposition or Old Testament, etc. (I can’t tell you how often I heard my DTS profs make such comments about colleagues in other departments.)
And then, even among people who have devoted their entire lives to studying NT Greek, to be “credible” you have to write Grammars, Dictionaries, and Lexicons. The bottom line is that no matter how much Greek a person knows, it is never enough to satisfy those who know more than you.
So while I am grateful for those people who have devoted their lives to studying Greek, I know that I will never be able to “compete” on their level, and so for my Bible teaching efforts, learning Chinese, Spanish, or Hindi would have bee much more valuable so that I could communicate with the people who are in my neighborhood.
Whew! A lot more could be written…
Jeremy,
Okay, so I’m being totally predictable, and in the main, I think your observation is correct: the 4th-year student says to the M.Div., “If you’d only had one more year…” The M.Div. says the same to the M.A., and so on down the line. But while there can certainly be a bit of scholarly one-upmanship in it, I’m not sure that’s all that’s going on there.
I’d see the tendency you’re observing as a spectacular demonstration of the fact that no matter how much (or how little) Greek you know, “More wouldn’t be helpful” is a pretty foolish thing to say, and those who know more than you do can prove it to you. And, not knowing what you don’t know, how are you going to argue? About the best you could do is to say “You guys always say that…” — but maybe that’s because it’s true.
I’m not saying we should all be the next Granville Sharp. We all have limits, both to our capacities and our tastes. I barely made it through advanced algebra, and in my chemistry class I either disproved the first law of thermodynamics or screwed up the lab something horrible — I do believe my teacher had a definite opinion on which. In my own field, I’ve mucked about all I care to with textual criticism; if I never have to touch it again, I’ll be perfectly happy. I don’t like it and I don’t want to mess with it. But I’m not such a sap as to tell my engineer friends that more math wouldn’t benefit me, or to tell Niemela, or Zane, that knowing more about textual criticism wouldn’t have any value for me. First of all, even if it’s true, how in blazes would I know?
Second, what are the odds that I’m right? Not too good, I’m afraid. In my experience, there’s not really such a thing as “useless knowledge.”
It’s a stewardship question — is the time I’d have to invest worth the payoff for the Lord’s work, relative to other things I could be doing with that time? Right now, for me, on those issues? No way. Later, in a different ministry situation? Maybe so — we’ll see what the Lord has for me. (But I have definite hopes, on both subjects…)
I had a student once, wanted to learn Greek. But he didn’t — he was a pastor, and he was up to his eyeballs in juvenile delinquents, pregnant teenagers, battered wives, deadbeat husbands…you name it. He barely had time to sleep, much less 10 hours a week for Greek. He made the right decision. Another of my students did 2 years of Greek, then stopped and went to the mission field. Already in his late 50s, he figured he’d gotten enough to keep him busy for a couple of decades — which is about all the time he’s got, anyway. Not a bad choice either, and I encouraged him.
But you’re a young guy, you’ve got time, and you went to seminary to get the skills you’ll use for the rest of your life. I think you know I like you and admire you, but it frosts me something horrible to hear a young guy fresh out of seminary give up hope on proficiency in the languages. You didn’t go to seminary for the swanky student housing and the scintillating social scene.
If you’d gone to auto mechanics school, and come out saying “Yeah, there’s just something about steering I don’t really get, but that’s all right; I’m grateful that other people have devoted their time to it and can do it,” that would be pretty ridiculous, right? Same thing — we’re not talking about the ability to be the next Danker here; we’re talking about being able to read the Bible in the languages it’s actually written in. It’s a common-sense requirement for ministering the Word.
Look, I know what it’s like; despite three years of classes, my Hebrew is still not really up to a self-sustaining level of proficiency. But I’m not giving up on it; I’m slugging away until I get there — two-thirds of the Bible is in Hebrew, and I’m only 33. I’m gonna learn that language.
Tim,
Great thoughts, and in many ways I agree with you.
But here is my issue, and the one which brought about this blog post:
Let’s say I have 10 hours per week for language study (I don’t…but let’s say I do), and I want to learn the one language that will help me the most in reaching my neighborhood (most of which is Hispanic and doesn’t speak English). Would my time be better spent learning Greek or Spanish?
Jeremy,
Believe me, I understand the pinch. Mind if I rephrase the question slightly to remove the bias? 😉
“Let’s say I have 10 hrs/wk for language study, and I want to learn the one language that will help me the most in fulfilling the Great Commission in my neighborhood: would my time be better spend learning Greek or Spanish?”
The operative word in the question is “my,” and the answer depends on your circumstances and aims. My answering question is, “When do you plan to minister, and what sort of ministry are you going to do?” If you’re going to do basic evangelism and discipleship, starting tomorrow (i.e., the sort of thing implied in your phrasing “reach my neighborhood”) — Spanish, obviously. If you’re going to plant a church, five years from now — Greek now, Spanish in a few years.
If you’re ministering what God said, which is in Greek and Hebrew, to people who speak Spanish, then how could you claim that any of the three languages is dispensable? You could as well ask, “I’m going to feed the hungry in my neighborhood, but I only have 10 hours a week. Should I spend that 10 hours cooking food, or carrying the food to the people who are going to eat it?” In that sense, it’s not really an either/or question.
Practically, of course, that’s exactly what it is, because most people don’t have time to learn three languages. But you don’t have to do the job by yourself, either. If God has called you to be on the Spanish-speaking end of the chain, and hasn’t given you the time to also master Greek and Hebrew, then learn Spanish, and rely on people you trust who know Greek and Hebrew. If he’s given you the time, learn Greek and Hebrew too.
If he’s called you to the other end of the chain, learn Greek and Hebrew, minister to the English-speaking community, and be a resource for the guys who know Spanish. And if He’s called you to all of it, then put in the necessary development time to learn all three languages, and be glad it’s only that, and not chasing sheep through the deserts of Midian until you’re 80, like Moses did for his preparation. Could be worse….
I don’t know a young missionary who doesn’t chafe at the amount of time spent in language study, and daily curse the tower of Babel. But this is just wishing to live in some other world than the one we have — understandable, but ultimately pointless.
His,
Tim