Jesus and the Father Are One

Of all the things Jesus said to get himself in trouble with the religious leaders of his day (“Your sins are forgiven”, “Before Moses was, I am”, “The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath”, etc.) what he said in John 10:30 might have been the topper.

ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν.
I and the Father, we are one.

It’s a ridiculous thing to say… unless it’s true.

It was blasphemy for anyone to say that they were equal with the Father. The Father is God for goodness sake. How could Jesus possibly think that he ought to be thought of, seen, talked to, and experienced on the same level as the Father?

Did Jesus really expect those of his day to see him as the embodiment of the One they worshipped—the incarnation of Yahweh?

“You believe in God; believe also in me” (Jn 14:1, NIV)

It seems so.

A Church Called Love (Part 3) Love Reigns Supreme

what we have so far

We’ve looked at two ideas so far in our walk through 1 Corinthians 12:31b-13:13. The first that it doesn’t matter what we do (speaking in different languages (human and/or angelic), prophesying, understanding all there is to know, or giving all we have to the poor), if we do not have love it’s nothing and our “service” is nothing. The second idea was that love is fundamentally and foundationally others-focused. We are called to love God and love our neighbors (Mk. 2:30-31).

Now we come to the end of this short section of 1 Corinthians and find that Paul is circling back to one of the main themes that started this entire discussion: love reigns supreme.

Is this loving?

What would you consider to be the guiding principle of your life? Before you say or do anything is there something, some sort of filter, you automatically process any and all situations through? If you were talking to Paul about this, I think he would say that the filter for everything you and I say or do ought to be love. Paul would hope we’d be consistently asking ourselves: Is this loving? But why is this the case? He tells us.

Love never ends.

As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.

For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.

When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up childish ways.

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love. (1 Cor. 13:8-13, ESV)

not everything all-important, some things come to an end

I like to chew gum. It’s important for me to have some gum ready to go at all times (even while playing the drums). I also like to breathe. And, it’s also important for me to be able to breathe at all times. So, if I had to choose, would I pick chewing gum or breathing?

You know the answer.

You know the answer because you know that even though a lot of things can be really important, not everything is all-important. This is clear in the way Paul sets up his argument from verses 8 to 13.

Paul begins with a statement I’ve far to easily breezed over in the past: Love never ends. For you Greek lovers (like me) out there, Paul said that love never katargeō. It could be translated as never dies or never comes to an end. To put it positively, love lasts forever—it’s eternal.

There are things that will come to an end, though, and Paul gives us three: prophecies, tongues, and knowledge. These won’t last forever—they’re not eternal. Aside from tongues, which Paul says will cease, he uses the same Greek word as he did for the never ending nature of love. Prophecies and tongues will katargeō—they will come to an end.

Why, though? Why is it that prophecies, tongues, and knowledge will stop? Why will they not go on forever into the new heavens and new earth?

the partial must give way to the complete

Paul anticipates this question (as he often does throughout his letters) and explains why some things will end in three different, but related ways.

1. Some things will end because they are not complete, and what is not complete will not last.

2. Some things will end because, just as adults need to let go of childish things as they mature, some things need to be left behind for better things.

3. Some things will end because what we see now isn’t as clear as it will be one day.

We know in part and we prophesy in part, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away. There is coming a day in which all that is left to be completed will be completed. This is (in my understanding) the second coming of the Son of God and the restoration of all things. This is the day in which the Lord will return to rule here on earth as he has been ruling from his throne, but in a more perfect sense. One of the big differences between now and then will be that this rule will take place on a new earth as it is joined with a new heaven (i.e., realm of God). This new home will be one without corruption; this new home will be perfect—it will be complete. And, so, what isn’t perfect will come to an end.

The point must be made, however, that this is not the same thing as saying that prophecies, tongues, and knowledge are not worth valuing or pursuing today. They most definitely are as Paul makes clear elsewhere in 1 Corinthians. Prophecies are real today. Tongues are real today. Knowledge is real today. They are are useful, but none of them are complete; they are partial. This situation is not dissimilar to the way in which the Old Covenant gave way to the New. The Old was not made obsolete (as the writer to the Hebrews said) because there was anything wrong with it. On the contrary, it was holy. It was made obsolete because something better came along (the incarnate Christ and the New Covenant).

Prophecies, tongues, and knowledge are important, but they are not all-important and so they must give way to what is.

faith, hope, and love remain

How then shall we live?

And, of course, Paul helps us here as he writes: “And now remain: faith, hope, love--these three. But love reigns supreme.” (1 Cor. 13:13) In comparison to prophecies, tongues, and knowledge that will not last forever, faith, hope, and love—these three, together—will go on forever. At the completion of all things our faith, hope, and love that we have now will expand and continue forever. Any trust you have in God today will expand when forever gets here. Any hope you have in God will grow when forever gets here. And any love you have for God will increase when forever gets here.

So, then, why not live like that’s actually true today? Why not practice now what we will be doing forever?

Those are the questions for us. You may want to prophecy—God bless. You may want to speak in tongues—God bless. You may want to know all there is to know—God bless. But let’s not pursue those wonderful and good gifts at the expense of those that will last forever: faith, hope, and the greatest—love.

Why is love the greatest?

And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” (Matthew 22:37-40, ESV)

Let all that you do be done in love. (1 Corinthians 16:14, ESV)

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. (Galatians 5:6, ESV)

Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us. (1 John 4:7-12, ESV)

So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him. (1 John 4:16, ESV)

Do you see the persistent theme throughout these portions of the Bible? Love reigns supreme.

Whether it be the truth that the entire Old Covenant law is dependent and fulfilled in love. Or whether it be that in everything Paul insists we do it in love. Or whether it be that neither circumcision or uncircumcision is greater than love. Or whether it be that God’s love for us is perfected in us as we love. Or whether it be that God is love and if we make our home in love we live in God and God in us.

In all of these, love is the greatest.

This will be the major reality of the new heavens and new earth. The eventual home of God on this planet with his people like it has never been before.

It will be a world ruled by love, through the one who is love, with those who live in love.

He Descended to Hell?

“He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried; he descended to hell.”

Excuse me? Jesus went to hell? Really?

According to the Apostles’ Creed (or better said, a particular interpretation of a particular translation of the Apostles’ Creed) Jesus descended to hell after his death. But, is this what Bible actually says? Furthermore, does the original wording of the Apostles’ Creed actually even say that Jesus went to hell? We’ll look at those two questions in order.

As Jesus was dying on the cross two criminals were on each side of him, both receiving the same earthly sentence as Christ—crucifixion until death. One of them demanded Jesus rescue him from this terrible fate. “Aren’t you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!”(Lk 23:39) The other, somehow knowing that there was more going on than met the eye, rebuked the first and then turned to Jesus with these words: “…remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Lk 23:42) To which Jesus responded, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.” (Lk 23:43)

Didn’t we just see from the creed that Jesus descended to hell after his death? And here we have Jesus saying that this penitent criminal will be with him today (σήμερον) in paradise (παράδεισος). Surely there can’t be a confusion between hell and paradise. Those two realities are more different than quite possibly anything else we could imagine. Jesus either descended to hell or descended to paradise. There doesn’t seem to be a third direction.

What’s say we add a little more detail to this study?

In 1 Peter we find this most intriguing section of scripture that reads: “For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits—to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.” (1 Pet 3:18-20a)

There it is then, right? Jesus went to hell.

Not so fast. Again we find mention of Jesus’s location after his death, but the word hell doesn’t show up. This time we’re told that Jesus, being made alive in the spirit, went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison (φυλακή). Now, there is much to say about this proclamation that was made, but that isn’t the topic of this article. What is, is the location of Christ after his death.

To be fair, prison doesn’t sound like paradise. Does it?

I think we get help in this area from a source that some have thought a little unreliable for this discussion. In Luke 16:19-31 we get the famous “parable” of the rich man and Lazarus. Now, just as the topic of this study isn’t about the proclamation to the imprisoned spirits, it’s not about whether or not this section of Luke 16 is a parable or some other type of teaching. (I will continue to call it a parable, but not as a way to insist that it is one.)

Jesus tells of a rich man who had everything and a beggar named, Lazarus, who was covered with sores and longed to eat the food that fell from the rich man’s table. They both died and while Lazarus was brought to Abraham, the rich man was in torment. The weird thing about this setting is that although there was a great chasm between the two dead men, the “place” where they both were is called ᾅδης (Hades, which is pronounced hah-dayce in Greek). The difference in their locations was that Lazarus was comforted while the rich man was in agony.

What I think we can gather from this “parable” is an understanding of the realm of the dead (Hades) as existing with two distinct “regions”. One is a region of suffering and seems to be occupied by those who have rejected the revelation of God. The second is a region of comfort and seems to be occupied by those who have accepted the revelation of God. That being said, neither of these regions within Hades is final. In no passage that we’ve looked at so far has there been any language of finality. What we have is simply the state of the person or people immediately following death.

That is not the same thing as saying finality language is absent from the Scriptures.

In a difficult passage in a difficult to understand book we read, “The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades (ᾅδης) gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done. Then death and Hades (ᾅδης) were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death. Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire.” (Rev 20:12b-15)

Note just a few things that I think are extremely helpful for our quick study here. In Revelation John writes that death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them. Death and Hades are both listed as “places” in which the dead exist. Next, death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. Don’t miss the pronouncement of justice here. Death and the realm of the dead are judged by being thrown into the lake of fire. Death is the great enemy of God and his people and Hades the realm of the dead that, in this situation of Revelation 20, remains only occupied by those who have not been resurrected to new life with God (i.e., those whose names were not found written in the book of life). Both of them are consigned to the lake of fire. This is final judgment. This is hell.

Okay, so what’s up with the Apostles’ Creed?

Here I think we have a couple things working against us. The first being that hell did not mean then (when the English form of the creed was established) what it means now. Hell then was simply a way to talk about the realm of the dead. That sounds impossible to use because hell has come to mean nothing other than final judgement for those who have denied the one true God who has revealed himself in Jesus.

The second is that the Greek of the Apostles’ Creed, which it was originally written, does not have the Greek word for hell (γέεννα) that is used in other places throughout the New Testament  (almost entirely in the gospels). What it does say is that Jesus was crucified (σταυρωθέντα), was dead (θανόντα), was buried (ταφέντα) and descended (κατελθόντα) into the deepest (κατώτατα). This last word, the deepest (κατώτατα) is where (as I said earlier) both improper interpretation and translation run alongside each other. κατώτατα does not mean hell at all; instead, it means the deep—the deepest of the deep. In other words, it means the place where the dead are after this life but prior to the second coming of Christ—the resurrection of those found in him.

Talk about taking the long way round to an answer to a simple question.

Let’s try it a little bit quicker this time.

Did Jesus go to hell?

Absolutely not.

Why? Because he went to paradise. And because no one is in hell right now, because hell is final judgement.

Introduction to New Testament Greek with Kevin

Years ago I worked in landscaping. And over a few summers I got to lend a hand in installing new lawns, putting a lot of plants and trees in the ground, and building things like brick paver patios and retaining walls. Our specialty was boulder retaining walls. These things were impressive and they should last a long, long time.

Back then my boss would remind me that the service we were providing for people was a luxury. What he meant was that people needed to cut their grass and they needed to clean up fallen leaves, but they didn’t need a boulder retaining wall. But, oh man, a nice retaining wall is pretty cool.

That’s not unlike Greek.

We need to read our Bibles. We need to pray. We need to meet with God’s people on a regular basis. Not everyone needs to learn New Testament Greek. But, oh man, it’s pretty fun.

So, where does that leave you?

Do you need to learn Greek? No, you don’t. It may not even be a good use of your time if it gets in the way of other, more important things. But…you may want to. And, if you do, I want to help you.

Beginning March 20 I’m going to be leading a small group through an introduction to New Testament Greek, using this book, which you will need to purchase. We’ll meet one day a week (Monday evenings, from 6:30-7:30) through June 26. After that time, you will be well on your way to being able to read the New Testament, in Greek, on your own.

If you’d like to join in on the fun, please let me know.

Possible Spring Greek Course at LWCH

Those who are interested in New Testament Greek but don’t take up the challenge of learning it don’t do so because they don’t believe it’s doable. I, for sure, was one of those people. For so long I dreamed of what it would be like to be able to open the Greek New Testament and read, but I didn’t take a step toward making that happen because I didn’t think I was capable of it.

I was wrong…really wrong.

It wasn’t because I’m some secret biblical language savant. It’s hilarious to me to even think that! I’d say I’m probably pretty close to average when it comes to learning Greek. The wonderful thing is that the times are great for us average folks to learn Greek (or Hebrew, for that matter) because we have access to resources today that just weren’t around 10-years ago.

You don’t have to enroll in a college or seminary to learn Greek. In fact, all you would need to do is purchase one textbook and carve out a few months this spring to dig in at Living Waters Church.

In just over 3.5 months, you could know enough Greek to understand all the vocabulary and grammar of probably the most famous gospel opening: Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν. I won’t tell you where this is from yet, you’ll have to take that step forward to find out!

If you’re interested in learning Greek, reach out to me. I’d love to chat about it with you to see if it would make sense for you to take some time this spring in a class to really give it a shot.

A Church Called Love (Part 2): What is love?

definitions are tricky

If I say I hate asparagus, pretty much everyone knows what I mean. It means I really don't like it (which is absolutely true). Now watch what happens when I switch out asparagus for something else. If I say I hate Eric, pretty much everyone knows what I mean then, too. And pretty much everyone would agree that I don’t mean the same thing as when I said I hated asparagus. Why’s that? The same word was used. Even my tone (which can’t be captured here) could have remained the same and you would still understand the second usage of hate as something quite a bit stronger than the first. This works with love, as well.

I love my wife. And by that I mean that I have chosen to happily and without hesitation lay down my life for her. To which you, after reading that sentence, would probably be totally fine with that usage of love. What do I mean, though, when I say that I love roller coasters? Hopefully not the same thing as when I said I love my wife. Further, what do I mean when I say I love God?

What do we find if we turn to the dictionary (which, just to make sure there isn’t any confusion, I think is a good idea) for a definition of love? Several options.

an intense feeling of deep affection
a great interest or pleasure in something
a warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion
a score of zero

Feelings, pleasure, attachment, enthusiasm, devotion. All these definitions give us a sense of what love can mean, but none of them paint the entire picture. Love can mean you’re totally devoted to a person or it could mean you’re about to lose a game of tennis. I can say I love my wife and I love roller coasters and mean different things, because definitions are tricky.

context is king

What do we do when we can’t figure out what a word means in the Bible? A word study, of course!

Whether or not someone knows Greek (the language in which the New Testament was originally written), they probably know that ἀγάπη (agape) is a Greek word for love. And they probably know it’s used a lot in the New Testament. For instance, Paul uses it (and the verb cognate, ἀγαπάω (agapao)) 9-times in 13-verses in 1 Corinthians 13. (There’s another word for love in the New Testament, φίλος (philos)/φιλέω (phileo), but it is not used as often as agape. The tricky thing with philos/phileo is that it can sometimes mean friend, or even kiss.)

Defining words is not easy and defining an often used word like love is no different. In some places, like John 3:35, the definition seems pretty much self-evident. There the apostle writes, “The Father loves (agapao) the Son and has given all things into his hand.” One of the things I love about John is how he likes to use different words to mean the same thing. Later, in chapter 5, he writes almost exactly the same thing, but this time uses the Greek word phileo for love instead of agapao: “For the Father loves (phileo) the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing.” (If you’d like to look into this feature of John’s writing further, check out John 21:15-17.)

Moving out from the New Testament, but using the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint, LXX), we could look at a verse like 2 Samuel 13:1, which reads: “Now Absalom, David’s son, had a beautiful sister, whose name was Tamar. And after a time, Amnon, David’s son, loved (egapesen) her.” If you know this story, you might be a little concerned with the usage of the word love here, because what happens next is nothing short of horrific. Amnon takes Tamar and humiliates her because, as the text says, the love he had for her overcame him. And, less we think that there is something odd going on here with the English translation, the Greek translators of the Old Testament chose to use the word (egapesen), which is a form of the word (agapao). The same word used by the Apostle John for the love the Father has for the Son. Depending on the context—even in Greek—one word can mean something positive and true, and in another sense something twisted and dark.

We’ve arrived at the familiar conclusion that, even with an original language study, it’s context that drives the definition of love, because context is king.

LOVE IS OTHERS-FOCUSED

So, here we are once more at the question driving this article: What is love? We can continue to give thanks to God for the Apostle Paul, because he lays out some very helpful characteristics of love for us in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 as he writes:

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude.

It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.

Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

A couple things to note here right off the bat. First, this is almost certainly not an exhaustive list of characteristics for love. Second, this list can be divided up into two main categories: what love is/does, and what love is not/does not do.

Love is/does: patient, kind, rejoices with the truth, bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things.

Love is not/does not: envy, boast, arrogant, rude, insist on its own way, irritable or resentful, rejoice at wrongdoing.

When we further stare at these characteristics of love, it becomes clear that one group focuses on others and the second focuses on the self. Those without love have little to no care for anyone other than themselves. They make much of themselves, and they’re rude when they do it. Instead of backing up and allowing someone else to lead, they insist that their way is best. God forbid they don’t get their own way, because they’re irritable and resentful. This, then, manifests itself into the tragedy of rejoicing when evil befalls others. Someone without love has become a person who has turned in on themselves, and to turn love around so that it is focused back on ourselves, is little more than the age-old idolatry of Genesis 3. I should make something clear here before going forward. Saying this is not the same thing as saying we ought not to care for ourselves or think we’re worthwhile as human beings. It’s exactly the opposite. Far from a call to think we’re worthless, it’s a call for us to love the God who loves us more than anyone else in the universe has or ever could. And, thus, gladly receive the love he has for us. This is the essence of true self-worth.

On the flip side, someone with love is patient and kind. They believe that another person’s time is just as important, or even more important than theirs. Those with love are kind to other people. They rejoice with the truth they find in the world. They bear, believe, hope, and endure in all circumstances. Someone with love lives their life in such a way as to see others (God and their neighbors) as the worthy recipients of their love. They are others-focused, because love is others-focused.

the embodiment of love

After the Israelites were freed from their 400-years of unjust captivity and forced labor in Egypt they found themselves on the edge of the Promised Land. An entire generation had died, but here they were, about to step into what God had been calling them to for 40-years. But…there was a problem; a big problem. They had become a forgetful bunch, who didn’t always trust the one who rescued them. So Moses exhorts them to remember their calling into a life intimately connected to God; to remember what it’s like to be the people of God in a world who doesn’t know him. And he does this by reminding them of who they are, and whose they are.

It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the Lord set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but it is because the Lord loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the Lord has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. (Dt. 7:7-8, ESV)

Lest any of the ancient Israelites of Moses’s day think that they were God’s people because they were great in number, he reminds them that they were actually the fewest of all peoples. In other words, they were not God’s people because of who they intrinsically were—a large collection of wanderers—they were God’s people because, as Moses says, “the Lord set his love on you and chose you.” There goes all their boasting in anyone but God. There goes all their reliance upon anyone but God. And there goes all their reception of self-worth from anyone that would say anything different than what God has already said. The Lord set his love on the ancient Israelites because he “loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers.” The ancient Israelites were loved by God because that’s who God was, and that’s who he continues to be today.

Fast-forwarding a few thousand-years, we find a similar thing being said about God and Christ from the Apostle Paul.

…but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Ro. 5:8, ESV)

Can you imagine doing this for someone who was dead set against you? How about someone who had made it their life’s mission to discredit everything about you? How about someone who tried to destroy all you made? I can’t. But this was the exact situation God was in. He had reached out to a world he made with his hands—to a people he crafted individually—and he was met with a resounding, NO! So, what did he do? He decided it was best to step down into the world, live among his creation, teach them what it meant to be truly human, and then allow them to put him to death in the most horrific way possible at the time. While we were still going after anything but God, Jesus—the second person of the triune God—-gave up his life for us. Why did he do this? To show his love.

Understanding love is not merely to ascend to an appropriate definitional standard. Love is much more real and solid than that; it’s much more complex than that. In the end, love is a person. And that person, who is the embodiment of God, is by definition the embodiment of love.

a story about jesus

So, what would you say to friend who asked you to define love? Are you going to Google “What is love?” and then read off the first few definitions, putting together a definition of your own? At least you’d be doing some research. Maybe you do a word-study throughout the Bible? That’s not bad, either. You’ll get a lot of useful material. You might, though, just flip open your Bible to 1 Corinthians 13 and read aloud.

You could do any of those or none of them. One other thing you could do, though (which I think Paul would gladly approve of), is to read through the gospels until you know them like the back of your hand and then tell your friend a story about Jesus. The Jesus who preached to his followers about what it meant to be a part of the kingdom of God. The Jesus who didn’t turn away children, but warned those who did and would. The Jesus who confronted some of the religious leaders of his day who sought to control people instead of showing them God. The Jesus who healed people who trusted him. The Jesus who wept over Jerusalem before heading in to be crucified. The Jesus who resurrected, ascended, and sent the Spirit of God to minister to us as we live our lives.

To define love, just tell a story about Jesus.

Two Tips for Reading the Book of Revelation

In all of my reading of articles and books and listening to different lectures on Revelation there stands out at least two—let’s call them tips—toward a better reading and understanding of that most ominous book of the Bible.

These two guides again, and again, have helped me, not to understand everything in Revelation—far from it—but to do what I can to allow the book to be what it is. The reason Revelation is often misunderstood and then, ultimately, caricatured is because we don’t allow Revelation to be what is is. Instead, we make it into the book we’d like it to be, which—as is always the case—does little else than pull us further away from what Revelation has to say for itself.

So, in an effort to let Revelation be Revelation, allow me to offer to you two tips for the next time you turn the page to this most exciting book of the Bible.

Tip #1: It is called Revelation, not The Destruction of All Things at the End of the World.

The first three words of Revelation—in Greek—are Apokalupsis Iesou Christou. In English, “The revelation of Jesus Christ.”

It’s that first word—apokalupsis—where we get our first bit of help in understanding the story Revelation is telling. The Greek word, apokalupsis, is rightly translated as revelation, but it could be translated as apocalypse—provided apocalypse still meant what it used to mean. The reason most, if not all, major English Bible translations have revelation over apocalypse is because apocalypse has come to mean something different in English than apokalupsis meant in ancient Koine Greek. Contrary to the meaning of apocalypse today, apokalupsis does not mean the destruction of all things at the end of the world. Instead, it means to make something known that was not yet made fully known (i.e., a revelation).

So, before anyone turns the page to the first words of Revelation, we must get rid the assumed idea that this book is going to tell us about how the world is going to end. This is difficult because, if we come to the book with this specific understanding of the main theme, a lot of the events in Revelation end up fitting into that theme quite nicely (plagues, riders on horses, one with a sword, blood, a beast, a dragon, etc.). It’s the same self-fulfilling prophecy we see with those going to the dentist or getting their blood drawn. Fortunately, a trip to the dentist rarely—if ever—turns out as bad as we sometimes think it will.

I suggest we allow the first three words of this amazing book to shine a light forward through its pages. Let’s read Revelation as if it is actually telling the story of how Jesus is going to reveal and be revealed to the world because, of course, that’s what Apokalupsis Iesou Christou means.

Tip #2: Before Revelation can have any meaning and application for us, today, it must have a meaning and application to those to whom it was immediately written, back then.

How many times have you heard someone—perhaps even yourself—use Revelation as a key to interpret “end-times events” in our present day?

I submit it’s nearly the constant drumbeat of popular-level interpretations of this book. This is a problem, though—a huge problem—because if Revelation didn’t really start to make sense and find meaning until our day, what in the world were people doing with it for nearly 2,000-years before us?

In the same way we ought not make Revelation tell the story we want it to tell, we ought not read it as though it was written primarily to us, now. When John penned these words, while exiled on Patmos, he was surely writing them for the people of his day—for the church of his day. It would be amazing to me to think of John finishing the final words of Revelation—“The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God’s people. Amen.”—and thinking to himself, “Wow. I don’t understand anything of what I’ve written, but I hope someone, a long time from now, will be able to figure it out!”

No. When John finished Revelation he knew that what he had been shown (an apokalupsis) was something important for his believing brothers and sisters of his day. This is, of course, what is mentioned at at the very beginning of the book: “…which God gave him to show to his servants the things that must soon take place” (Rev. 1:1b).

Now, we can debate what the word soon means in the mind of God (and John), and how it ought to be interpreted in the context of the book as a whole, but what we can’t say is that the book had no immediate relevance to the readers—and the early Christian church—of the first-century. Revelation was a book for its time—then—and, by the grace of God, remains a book for our time—now—just as it will remain a book for those after us.

In order to remain on the right track for understanding what is contained in Revelation, we must do our best to remember that whatever meaning we think we’ve found within its pages, must be compatible with what the readers of John’s day found, too.

Translate That!

It just needs a little elbow grease.

If you are a native English speaker, you know exactly what that means. You are not wondering if it is even possible to grease up an elbow. The phrase sounds normal to you, and you know that basically what was said was: Some hard work is needed.

What if, however, you were trying to explain to your non-native English speaking friend what was said? How would you go about translating it?

You could, as an option, choose to translate it strictly, in a word-for-word format. You could take each word and find its closes counterpart in whatever language you were translating into. And, hopefully, once you have done that—provided there were not many big grammatical hurdles—you’d have a pretty faithful translation of what It just needs a little elbow grease means in another language.

Or, as another option, you could choose to translate the sentence loosely, in a thought-for-thought format. You could take the “idea” of the sentence and bring that same idea into the other language without worrying too much about matching up the particular words. And then, hopefully, you have a sentence in the other language that, although it does not match all the words from English, still gets across the same idea.

The question that is always asked, however, is: What option is best—word-for-word or thought-for-thought?

This is the trouble with translation, and it happens time and time again in the Bible.

Bible translators have given all of their adult years to doing the best they can at faithfully translating the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek text of the Scriptures into whatever language they are working on. And, still, there are places where their choices (for any number of reasons) do not seem make the most sense. That is not a slam against the work of the translators; it is just a reality because of the tremendous difficulty of the job.

I have come to find that if I can just have a peek into the work that the translators are doing, I am much more willing to appreciate and respect their results (i.e., the many English translations of the Bible available to us). So, I would like to offer a peek to you with the hope that you would grow in your appreciation and respect of their results, too.

Look, with me, at a short phrase in the New Testament. In Luke 9:44, he writes this in Greek: Θέσθε ὑμεῖς εἰς τὰ ὦτα ὑμῶν τοὺς λόγους τούτους.

What in the world does that mean?

The interesting thing with this Greek phrase is that there is an idiom in there (like the English one we looked at earlier); one that English speakers do not use. The Greek phrase, strictly speaking, is you all put these words into your ears. Now, we can probably figure out what is meant by that phrase. The question for us is: How should Θέσθε ὑμεῖς εἰς τὰ ὦτα ὑμῶν τοὺς λόγους τούτους it be translated?

One option is to go for a stricter translation, translating it into basically what was just written (you all put these words into your ears). The benefit of this translation is that we have kept that original Greek phrase in-tact as much as possible. The Greek phrase talked about an action of the people (you all put), an object of that action (these words), and a goal of that action (into your ears). It would seem that little to nothing is lost in translating it that way. But is that the message Luke intended to get across? Did he really mean to have people put something in their ears? Of course not. And here is where the second option becomes available—and, perhaps, even beneficial.

Taking the same exact original Greek phrase, you could just as easily translate into something like take these words to heart, all of you. As English speakers, we know what is meant by that phrase. There is no ambiguity with it. But there is no mention of taking in the Greek. Neither is there any mention of heart in the Greek. What we have now is an English translation from Greek where two words that are not originally found are present in the translation. This could be a great cause of concern for some. In some eyes, that was not a translation choice; it was a translation manipulation…and it was probably malevolent.

What can we do?

The short answer is: examine and trust. The longer answer is: take advantage of the wealth of English translations available to us.

And, by “take advantage” I mean, read and compare them to one another. Come to the translations on their own terms, not getting upset with them because they are not what you wanted them to be.

The NIV does not read like the KJV and that is not the fault of the NIV because it was never the intention of the NIV to sound like the KJV. Let them be what they are. Examine them for yourself and then after you have done your work and you are satisfied with your understanding, trust the work of the translators.

I say “trust” because trust does not always mean agree. It means you recognize and accept the way in which a particular group of translators have translated the Bible. Then you have the freedom to either agree or disagree (i.e., read and approve of what they have translated or set it aside).

There are times to have major concerns over a Bible translation. But, taken as a whole, those times are few and far between. In the meantime, let us be thankful to God that he has not left us without a witness. He has blessed us with readable and, more importantly, understandable translations of the Bible.

The trouble with translation is that it is an almost impossible task. No translation will ever make everyone happy. But that does not mean good work has not been done. It most assuredly has, and we are cutting off our noses to spite our faces if we do not take advantage of that good work.

Go ahead and translate that!

Luke 9:44 Translation Examples:
New International Version (NIV): Listen carefully to what I am about to tell you.
New Living Translation (NLT): Listen to me and remember what I say.
English Standard Version (ESV): Let these words sink into your ears.
King James Version (KJV): Let these sayings sink down into your ears.
New American Standard Bible (NASB): As for you, let these words sink into your ears.
Christian Standard Bible (CSB): Let these words sink in.
Good News Translation (GNT): Don't forget what I am about to tell you!
New English Translation (NET): Take these words to heart.
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV): Let these words sink into your ears.

A Reason to Learn Biblical Greek (5): Because You Love God and His Word

A love for the word of God can manifest itself in many ways.

You might be someone who always makes time to read your Bible, every day. You might be someone who memorizes verses, chapters, or entire books of the Bible. You might even be someone who reads commentaries in order to get a better understanding of what’s your Bible is saying. Or, you might be someone who decides to learn Greek.

The interesting thing is that, of those practices listed above—daily Bible reading, Bible memorization, studying commentaries, and learning Greek—it’s learning Greek seems to be the one that most people think is either 1) not worth it, or 2) not realistic.

I’m not 100% sure why that’s the case, although I have a hunch.

Far from being a most valuable tool in the toolbox, learning biblical Greek has become the annoying tool many bring out to make others feel small. You know the phrases as well as I do…

Well, the Greek here says.
If you know the Greek then you know your translation has a mistake in this verse.
I’m closer to God than you, because I know Greek.

I don’t know if anyone has actually said the third statement in that list, but that’s how it often comes across. And that’s too bad.

It’s too bad because those with PhDs in Greek hate Jesus. Learning Greek does not guarantee anyone anything in relation to an actual connection with the triune God, because learning Greek does not raise a spiritually dead person to life.

All that being said, scores and scores of people throughout the ages have taken the time and expelled the energy to learn Koine Greek with the sole reason being that they love God and his word. And that actually makes sense. What do we do with the people or things we love? We devote time and energy to them. Sure, we count the costs. But, in the end, our love moves us forward. I don’t think it ought to be any different with God’s word and our learning Greek.

Does this mean everyone should learn Greek? Probably not. You can love God’s word and not want to have anything to do with Greek, but I dare you to learn Greek because you love God and his word and come away thinking that it wasn’t worth it.

If you’re interested in learning biblical Greek and you’d like some help along the way, please email me at kevindavis1986@gmail.com. I’d be happy to discuss with you some different teaching options that will help you get into the Greek of the New Testament!

A Reason to Learn Biblical Greek (4): Because it's hard!

Why do people climb Mount Everest? It’s not because it’s relaxing. So many people have died trying to climb that mountain—it couldn’t possibly be a relaxing experience. It’s not because it will get them fame and notoriety—go ahead, try to name five people who have finished that climb…I’ll wait.

They do it because it’s hard.

The difficulty of a task is more often than not why we do something. No one runs a marathon because it’s easy. No run gets a PhD because it’s easy. No one goes to the moon because it’s easy. We do those things, as President Kennedy once said, “…because they are hard.”

The same can be said for learning biblical Greek. Why in the world would anyone want to learn Greek? Because it’s hard.

There’s nothing particularly easy about learning the Greek of the New Testament. You have thousands of words to memorize. You have grammar to learn; grammar that’s often different from the grammar that’s natural to you. You have paradigms to memorize and put into practice. We’re talking over 30 grammar paradigms that don’t just need to be understood, but need to be memorized cold. You have to then deal with all those places in the Greek New Testament where the rules you learned get changed because, as with all languages, rules are made to be broken!

But, as it is with climbing a mountain, running a marathon, or even going to the moon, the task is worth it. And it’s worth it not because it will get you fame and notoriety—if that’s what you’re looking for in Greek, you might as well go climb a mountain.

No, it’s worth it because God has called us to work, and work hard as we work, and to learn biblical Greek is hard work.

So, why not go for it?

If you’re interested in learning biblical Greek and you’d like some help along the way, please email me at kevindavis1986@gmail.com. I’d be happy to discuss with you some different teaching options that will help you get into the Greek of the New Testament!