Biblical Languages

There is a common misconception about the biblical text that is unfortunately used to legitimate certain theological readings. Specifically, "original languages" do not offer a magical key into the concrete (and only) meanings of biblical passages, phrases, or words. Across the globe, on any given Sunday, a congregant might hear the words "but the original Greek tells us that this is what Paul meant by..." The idea that biblical Greek (or Hebrew) offers unquestionable clarity to English (or other) renderings is, I would argue, irresponsible.

Biblical Greek, or Koine Greek, is not unambiquous. There are not only difficulties and decisions involved in translation, but difficulties in constructing literal meanings with words and sentences employed with poor or ambiguous syntax. There are local tendencies with language and writing which effect authors, and which might be undetectable to our research and readings of the Greek or Hebrew texts. These nuances of language make authoritative appeal to the "original" biblical language quite problematic.

Whatsmore, there is not one "original" Greek or Hebrew text. We do not have the original "Leviticus," "Mark" or "Romans." What we have are copies, which vary by source, that create new kinds of interpretive and editorial problems for translators, theologians and linguists. Mis-spellings, editorial revisions, editorial additions, and theologically charged political struggles all touch the texts within the Hebrew Bible and New Testament. Different religious communities considered their texts sacred, and renditions of certain texts varied by community. These compilations make a univocal reading of any particular text problematic. Which text should we choose in reconstructing "the text," and why?

Beyond this, there are differences related to the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (the Septuagint). For instance, the Hebrew word for virgin can also be translated young girl. The Septuagint, which was available to the author of Matthew, translated that Hebrew word in a certain portion of Isaiah with a Greek word specific for virgin (indicating that the Septuagint translator(s) interpreted the Hebrew word in a certain way). Although the Hebrew word MAY have meant virgin, it definately meant virgin in the Greek translation. This, then, was the basis for the "virgin birth." This prophetic text, ambiguous in Hebrew, becomes a central theological event in the Christian narrative.

All these issues, I think, cloud the "clarity" trumpeted by many contemporary ministers and theologians.

As a result, we can not be so crass as to appeal to "original texts" for the last word on a theological discussion, debate, or difficulty. We must realize that a chain of interpretive decisions have led us not only to our English translation of the biblical text, but to the Hewbrew and Greek texts which are our sources for translation. We must proceed with humility and caution amidst languages which do not always provide concrete answers, but more questions.