|

REVISED EDITION
POSTED
14 AUGUST, 2005
Can We Trust the Greek Scriptures?
by
J.K. McKee
editor@tnnonline.net
It is indeed phenomenal that many
Believers are coming to the revelation of the
Hebraic Roots of our faith, are adopting a Torah
obedient lifestyle, and are seeing themselves as
a part of Israel. But as with any move of God,
there are concerns that exist—concerns that
sometimes wrench at the heart and soul of what
we should be doing, as opposed to what we should
not be doing. We should be preaching the gospel
message and discipling others as they grow and
mature in their faith, fulfilling Yeshua’s Great
Commission and aiming to see the restoration of
all Israel.
Of course, with this restoration comes many things, such as the
realization that our Heavenly Father does not have two groups of
elect as is commonly supposed, Israel and “the Church,” but
rather one, the Commonwealth of Israel. As all Believers are a
part of Israel, Israel is called to diligently follow the Torah,
and thus be a light to the entire world (Exodus 19:5-6;
Deuteronomy 4:5-8).
Many Believers who are seeing the eternal validity of the Torah
believe that it is important to learn the Hebrew language, the
language of the Tanach or Old Testament. This is to be commended
and encouraged, as these Scriptures make up the first two-thirds
of our Bible that many Christians, sadly, ignore or feel are
important only for Bible history. However, there is another
portion of the Bible, the Apostolic Scriptures or Messianic
Writings, commonly known as the New Testament, which is not
written in Hebrew, and should not be cast by the wayside.
Some people say that the New Testament Scriptures were
originally written in Hebrew and that the Greek texts we have
today cannot be trusted. This is an opinion that is widely
circulated throughout the Messianic movement, but one that has
many problems. The foremost of these problems is where
these “Hebrew New Testament” manuscripts are, if they once
existed. Of all of the arguments given in favor of a “Hebrew New
Testament,” the most substantial one that must be addressed
is the ideological one. The following individual, quoting
Yeshua’s words of Matthew 5:17-19, essentially says that the God
of Israel is incapable of inspiring His words in a language
other than Hebrew:
“The amazing
thing is that a ‘jot’ is the smallest Hebrew letter called a
Yodh (‘iota’ in Greek, letter I or Y in English) and the
‘tittle’ is the smallest Hebrew particle called a Seraph (‘keriaia’
in Greek, horn or apex in English). Why is this important?
Yeshua is saying that the HEBREW character called the Yodh and
the HEBREW particle called the Seraph WILL NOT PASS AWAY FROM
THE TORAH!!! The Messiah has clearly stated here that the final
‘authority’ regarding the Torah and the Prophets was to be the
Hebrew writings – not translations. The Greek language does not
have a character called a Yodh nor a particle called a Seraph!
Yeshua is not condemning ‘translations’, but He is teaching us
‘today’ that it is the HEBREW, which constitutes the final court
of appeal regarding what is right, and what is wrong. Where does
that leave the Greek translation called the Septuagint? Where
does that leave the Greek translations of the Messianic
Writings? It leaves them ‘out’ as the final word of authority
regarding the truths of Scripture!” (emphasis mine).[1]
The last time that I checked, the Creator God of the Universe is
all-powerful and is the originator of all languages. I
was unaware that He was monolingual and that He is only powerful
enough to communicate to human beings in Hebrew. The individual
quoted above, and indeed many others in the Messianic community,
believe that the God of Israel will only communicate in Hebrew
to mankind. An attack can be made on anything that is “Greek,”
especially the Apostolic Scriptures or the New Testament. At the
very least, this simplistic teaching discredits the Messianic
movement in the minds of many evangelical Christians
investigating their Hebraic Roots. In many cases because the
inspiration of the Greek New Testament is readily spoken
against, it has led some to deny the faith and convert to
Judaism.
The question of whether or not the Greek Scriptures can be
trusted is one of ideology. Is our God
powerful enough to inspire His words in a language other than
Hebrew or not?
I have never been against the Hebrew language or the Tanach (Old
Testament). I have formally studied Hebrew and appreciate the
deep richness of the ancient tongue. I enjoy Hebrew music,
liturgy, and the ability to converse with others in Hebrew. I
encourage people to learn Hebrew to enhance their Biblical
studies. However, the claims against the Greek New Testament are
overrated and unwarranted, often from those who are misinformed
and have never studied the Greek language. They criticize
something they have no business criticizing.
I have examined the Greek texts of the Scriptures and they have
only confirmed my beliefs as a conservative Messianic Believer.
In them I have found confirmation that the Torah is still to be
followed today, that God does not have two groups of elect, that
our Father is restoring the whole House of Israel, and most
importantly that Yeshua is indeed God made manifest in the flesh
and that He is the Messiah. I do not believe that a Hebrew text
of the Apostolic Scriptures is needed to prove such claims. Many
people I have encountered fail to examine the Greek text itself,
as opposed to biased English translations, before discrediting
it. This is a blatant violation of the Torah, which requires
multiple witnesses before something can be established as fact.
Even more importantly, almost all advocates of a “Hebrew New
Testament” have consistently failed to give a
book-by-book historical analysis of why they believe the
Gospels, General Epistles, and Pauline Epistles were originally
written in Hebrew. They have simply said things along the lines
of “It was written in Hebrew,” but have failed to substantiate
their claim with any evidence.
I have received e-mails and letters from many people telling me
over the years why I should deny the inspiration of the Greek
New Testament. They essentially go along the lines of “Hebrew is
the holy language,” “why would Yeshua speak Greek?”, and even
“why would Paul write to Hebrews in Greek?” On the surface, some
of the arguments can seem rather convincing to the layperson,
but many of them come from people who have studied neither
language and they are merely repeating the claims of others. And
what of the motives of the people involved?
To begin, many have varying opinions in regard to what the
“Hebraic Roots” of the faith are. What one defines as “Hebraic
Roots” can determine how we handle the Apostolic Scriptures. For
some, “Hebraic Roots” encompasses the origins of our faith as
they relate to the Hebrew Bible, the Tanach or Old Testament,
and we as Believers having a foundation in it to understand the
Messianic Scriptures or New Testament. This includes things such
as learning about the Biblical festivals and how they relate to
the sacrifice of Yeshua and His Second Coming, why we need to
understand the Sabbath, and why God gave the Torah to Israel. It
also simply includes knowing about the history of Ancient
Israel, which many people, including Messianics, are
often sadly ignorant of. This is what I consider my definition
of “Hebraic Roots” to be. You must have knowledge about the
first two-thirds of Scripture, for without a foundation you
cannot have a house, and properly understand what the writers of
the Apostolic Scriptures are communicating to their audiences.
There are, however, others whose definitions of “Hebraic Roots”
are somewhat different than my own. Many seek to take the
written Greek texts of Scripture and stridently argue that every
saying of Yeshua, the Apostles, and others are colloquial
Hebraic expressions, and that the Greek can only be a
translation, and likely an errant one at that. Thus, it is said
that the Greek texts of Scripture are only “second hand.” Many
go as far as to say that they “cannot be trusted” and that the
Greek must be “retranslated” back to Hebrew. But some of these
so-called “Hebraisms” are not supported by Biblical scholarship,
in comparison with Rabbinical Jewish writings, and especially in
comparison with other Scriptures. Claiming that something is an
“Hebraic expression” to others who are uninformed can be a way
of manipulating people. Unfortunately, I fear that some of the
same will deny Yeshua as Messiah. For once you deny the veracity
of the message, what is keeping you from denying the Messenger?
There is merit in knowing that there are
colloquial Hebraic expressions in the Greek texts of Scripture,
which no conservative Christian scholar should deny. One example
comes from Matthew 16:19 when Yeshua tells the assembly “I will
give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you
bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you
loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” This
expression strictly deals with halachah or Torah
application as the Messiah was giving Peter the authority to
“bind” (restrict) or “loosen” (permit) various requirements of
the Torah to the congregation of Believers. But even if the
expression were translated from Hebrew to English instead of
Greek to English, it would be meaningless without historical
knowledge of the setting.
To the Greek text’s credit, an arguably more important verse as
it relates to us appears in the previous verse where Yeshua
supposedly tells Peter “upon this rock I will build My church.”
This verse has been interpreted by Roman Catholics as meaning
that through the Apostle Peter, Yeshua started an unending line
of Papal succession. Protestants who are dispensationalists
believe it means that He was starting a new assembly of elect.
But is this what Matthew 16:18 says? No. The Greek verb
translated “build” in the passage, oikodomeō (oikodomew),
could just as well be translated “rebuild” or “strengthen”—and
the Greek text alone validates our position as Messianic
Believers that God has only one group of elect, as Yeshua was in
the process of restoring the ekklēsia on Himself.
So what do we do about this? I believe that when Yeshua was on
the Earth He spoke in Hebrew, or in Aramaic, and much of this
verbal dialogue has been written down for us in Greek,
word-for-word. But does this in any way “invalidate” the Greek
text? Absolutely not. In fact, if anything it should show us
that we need to have a working knowledge in both
Hebrew and Greek. We have to deal with the Biblical text as it
exists in its final form first, before we can engage in
any other kind of speculation.
Those of us who have studied these languages need to be able to
build a “bridge” between the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures. One
way that theologians do this is through the Septuagint (LXX), or
the ancient Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, which was
produced around three centuries before Yeshua. It is quoted
extensively throughout the Greek New Testament, and was
considered authoritative Scripture in the Greek-speaking Jewish
synagogues of the Diaspora.
In the case of Matthew 16:18, our position of God having only
one assembly of elect is vindicated from Jeremiah 33:7: “I will
restore the fortunes of Judah and the fortunes of Israel and
will rebuild them as they were at first.” In this verse, the
Rabbis who translated the Septuagint rendered the Hebrew verb
banah (hnB)
as oikodomeō, the same verb used in Matthew 16:18 for
“build.” Not only can this validate our claim that Yeshua did
not establish a second ekklēsia of elect commonly called
“the Church,” but it establishes the fact that He came to
restore the Two Houses of Israel.
Note the slight difference in the translation of Jeremiah 33:7
from Sir L.C.L. Brenton’s 1851 English translation of the
Septuagint: “And I will turn the captivity of Juda, and the
captivity of Israel, and will build them, even as
before.” Note that oikodomeō is translated here as
“build.”
If using the Septuagint as a bridge between the Hebrew and Greek
Scriptures demonstrates the fact that the Greek New Testament
does in fact support our beliefs, but that we need to use the
Septuagint to understand the underlying Hebrew meanings behind
Greek words, then the importance of having an ability to
understand the Greek language is just as important as
understanding the Hebrew language. But sadly, as I observed in
my past Greek classes, the importance of knowing Greek can be
overstated just as understanding Hebrew can be overstated. Many
Christians fail to learn Hebrew, and many Messianics fail to
learn Greek. But we are called to set a
higher standard and to be more thorough.
One of the first claims people will make against the veracity of
the Greek Scriptures is saying that Hebrew is the “pure
language,” and therefore claim that the God of Israel would
never inspire Scripture in Greek. This is primarily based on
Zephaniah 3:9: “For then I will give to the peoples purified
lips [Heb. safah beruah,
hrWrb
hpf],
that all of them may call on the name of the
Lord, to serve Him
shoulder to shoulder.”
It seems as if
this verse is speaking in future tense. The “purified
lips” or “pure language” have yet to be given to anyone to
worship the Lord. To say that these “purified lips” are the
Hebrew language—or any human language—is reading messages
into the text. The idea that the “pure language” is Hebrew is
not stated anywhere in the Biblical text itself, and it has been
forced into the text by those trying to make a point.[2]
The Apostle Paul “was caught up into Paradise and heard
inexpressible words, which a man is not permitted to speak” (2
Corinthians 12:4). If what he heard were the “purified lips,” or
perhaps “the Heavenly language,” then it is self-evident that
this is a language that no one has heard before and it is
neither Hebrew nor Greek, for Paul demonstrated a knowledge in
being able to speak in both languages (Acts 21:37).
The second claim that many people use in trying to persuade
others to deny the inspiration of the Greek New Testament is,
“Why would Yeshua speak Greek?” After all, His ministry was
primarily to Jews. This reason has its merit, as no scholar
should deny that the Messiah spoke and knew Hebrew and primarily
ministered to Jews. As it is attested in Paul’s experience on
the Damascus road, Yeshua spoke to him in Hebrew (Acts 21:40).
But is the claim that the Messiah did not know Greek valid? I
would ask another question. When Yeshua was before Pontius
Pilate, did Pilate speak Hebrew to Him? That is extremely
doubtful. Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea, and while he
knew Latin, he likely used Greek in his daily affairs as Greek
was the primary language of the eastern Roman Empire. Hebrew and
Aramaic were the local languages of the province of Judea, but
they were not the languages used in commerce or in dealing with
the imperial Roman authorities. This is attested by the fact
that the transcription above Yeshua’s cross said “Jesus of
Nazareth King of the Jews” in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin (Luke
23:38; John 19:20). If everyone in the region were speaking
Hebrew, then why would this message have to be in three
languages?
But if we say that Yeshua probably knew Greek and spoke it
occasionally, is this an attempt to deny the Hebraic origins of
our faith? Absolutely not. It is to say that Yeshua was a
person who lived and operated in First Century Judea, a province
in the eastern Roman Empire, of which there were several
languages used: Hebrew, Aramaic (a close Semitic relative of
Hebrew), Greek, and Latin. This is fully consistent with what
modern archaeology and scholarship have confirmed for us. It is
just the historical reality of the way things were. And, it is
notable that many Jews that lived outside Israel in the Diaspora
spoke Greek. To deny this is to deny legitimate history.
Even more so, two of Yeshua’s own Disciples, Andrew (Andreas)
and Phillip (Philippos), have names of Greek origin. The
Gospels of Mark (Markos) and Luke (Loukas) have
names not of Hebrew origin, either.
The third claim against the Greek Scriptures comes in the form
of: “Why would Paul write in Greek to Hebrews?” To confront
this, all one needs to do is look at where his epistles were
sent: Rome, Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, Phillipi, Colossae,
Thessalonica, and elsewhere—to Jewish communities whose members
spoke Greek as their primary language and used the Septuagint as
their primary Bible. Jewish synagogues in the Diaspora were
planted there to present the nations with the message of the One
True God, the God of Israel. The Septuagint was available as a
Greek translation of the Tanach, and was helpful in presenting
many Greek speakers with a knowledge of the Lord, preparing them
to later hear of Israel’s Messiah. The congregations in the
Diaspora that Paul and the other New Testament authors would
write to did not speak either Hebrew or Aramaic as their primary
language.
Knowing the fact that the gospel was now being preached to the
heathen who were joining themselves with Jewish Believers, many
of whom were possibly made up or included members of the
scattered Northern Kingdom of Israel/Ephraim, should reemphasize
the need for Paul to have written in Greek. Why? Think about it
for a moment. Hosea 1:10 tells us that the Northern Kingdom
Israelites were to become lo ammi (yM[-al)
or “not a people,” and in so becoming they were to lose all
traces of their Hebraic identity—including speaking the Hebrew
language. So to say that Paul, the author of much of the
Apostolic Scriptures, would have written to people who were once
“not a people” in a language they did not understand does not
make any sense. How else would the good news of eternal life in
Yeshua be spread to those scattered in the nations?
To underestimate this is to consign the gospel only to the
Jewish people, who retained their Hebraic identity. Although we
know that Paul’s practice was to first enter into the local
synagogue and witness to his Jewish brethren who knew Hebrew
(although possibly not as their first language), those of the
nations who did not have faith in the God of Israel did not know
this language. Even the synagogues he would have gone to in the
Diaspora would have spoken Greek as their primary language, as
the Septuagint translation was used in these synagogues as the
primary Scripture.
Believing, or not believing, in the inspiration of the Greek
Scriptures may become a litmus test to see if one truly believes
in the end-time restoration of all Israel, or is only dabbling
in the idea that there were Israelites scattered into the
nations who lost all traces of their Hebraic heritage.
The arguments against the Greek text of the Apostolic
Scriptures, however, never end. Some claim that original Hebrew
texts will one day be discovered. Others say that through some
evil conspiracy the Roman Catholic Church destroyed them, and we
are “unfortunately” stuck with the Greek. Some deny the
authority of these writings because they are in Greek. But will
this all stand under intense scrutiny? No, it will not. No
historical and credible book-by-book case for a written original
Hebrew New Testament has ever been made by anyone, because
the evidence in favor of the Greek New Testament stands. As far
as those who deny the canonicity of the New Testament, the
majority of these people later prove that they are unworthy of
the Messiah, and deny Him.
We do know that contemporary translations of the Greek New
Testament exist in Aramaic, but they post-date our oldest Greek
texts by approximately 200 years. There also exist ancient
translations of the whole of Scripture in Latin, Coptic, and
Arabic—which attests to the fact that the good news of salvation
was spread out! We can certainly use these versions as
supplementary tools, but we believe the evidence concerning the
New Testament is in favor of an originally written Greek text,
but of course this written Greek text has a strong underlying
Hebraic understanding.
What of the so-called original Hebrew Gospel of Matthew that has
made its way among some Messianic circles? Is it the authentic
Matthew as some believe? Can it be trusted? Although some, but
not all, Biblical scholars do believe that Matthew was
originally written in Hebrew, we must question the current
text’s origin because it was used by unbelieving Jews to
counter Messianic evangelism. Does its appearance signal
that for over 1,900 years Believers have been using incorrect
manuscripts and have been “mislead”? I do not believe so, and I
will continue to use the Greek text of Matthew, as I believe
that the current Hebrew Matthew bears signs of it being a
translation from a written Greek text. This is most evident by
the fact that in the Hebrew Matthew in verse 16:18 Peter calls
Yeshua Kristo (wjsyrq),
or “Christ,” the Greek word for “Anointed One.” Certainly, this
evidence should make us at least question the claim that Matthew
was originally written in Hebrew.
The issue for many people is that they are waiting for original
Hebrew New Testament manuscripts to be discovered. In fact, some
already believe that they have been discovered. But if they
were, then this would be given much more publicity and the
scholastic community would be examining this. What does the
American Bible Society or United Bible Societies have to say
about this? The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls was a major
discovery, so why should this not be? I fear that such
individuals will be waiting a very long time for the discovery
of texts that never existed.
And what does the attack on the Greek Scriptures do to those who
have gone before us in the faith? What of those men and women of
God who were martyred at the hands of the Roman Empire because
they possessed a copy of a Greek text that spoke of the Jewish
Messiah Iēsous Christos? What of those who were hunted
down by the Roman Catholic Church because they dared to possess
copies of these same texts to translate into their native
tongues in which the Word was suppressed? Such attacks against
the Greek Apostolic Scriptures by Messianics today imply that
their actions were in vain and they would have been better off
not concerning themselves with the New Testament.
What of the actions of those who readily deny the inspiration of
the Greek texts of Scripture? Many of them are not unlike those
who compose the “Jesus Seminar,” who want to say that the Bible
is a collection of oral stories and exaggerated myths, and tell
us that the virgin birth and the resurrection are fabricated and
inaccurate, and that no texts of Scripture—Greek or
Hebrew—can be trusted.
Once you deny the veracity of the Greek Scriptures using the
kind of reasoning presented by a few, what is really stopping
you from denying the reliability of the Tanach or the Hebrew
Scriptures? The oldest complete copy of the Hebrew Bible that
currently exists comes from the Ninth Century C.E., whereas, the
older copies of the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate date from
the Fourth Century C.E. But is this to say that I do not believe
in the inspiration of the Hebrew Scriptures? Certainly not. But
it does mean that we have a responsibility to examine these
older texts to confirm that what the Hebrew is saying is truly
accurate, especially in regard to the Hebrew vowel markings
which were a Ninth Century addition to the text.
Why do I believe that the Greek New Testament is the inspired
Word of God? Obviously, I believe that the power of the God of
Israel transcends all languages, cultures, and creeds. If the
Lord wanted the message of His Son in Greek, then He is fully
capable of doing so. My God is all powerful and I refuse to put
Him in a box. But it is not just this. Having studied the Greek
language, I know that it will confirm for us what we Messianics
believe. I know that the Greek text is our friend, and that it
upholds the validity of the Torah and the message of Israel’s
restoration. I know that we must use the Greek Scriptures if we
are to be taken seriously by evangelical Christianity and the
academic world, rather than being discredited because we believe
they are only a mere “translation.”
I do not deny the clear Hebraic connection that the Messianic
Scriptures have. If you do not have knowledge of the Hebrew
Scriptures to understand the Greek Scriptures, you will run into
serious misinterpretations. But likewise, if you do not have an
understanding of the Apostolic Scriptures, your interpretation
of the Tanach or Old Testament will be skewed. Yeshua properly
interpreted the Torah for us (Matthew 5:16-18), and all things
must be interpreted through what He says as He is the Word of
God made manifest in the flesh.
Above all, we must be very thankful for what we have. We must
understand that the Apostolic Scriptures being written in Greek
is not something to be looked down upon, although we certainly
need to understand the proper Hebraic historical background
behind them. That can be accomplished through study of ancient
contemporary literature, First Century history, and use of the
Greek Septuagint as a “bridge” with the Hebrew Tanach. The Greek
texts must be embraced as the inspired Word of God, for they
contain the keys to our salvation, and they record the perfect
life of our Redeemer. They are the oldest recorded testimony of
the existence of Yeshua of Nazareth.
The Apostle Paul writes, “I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it
is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to
the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16). As it was
said of Yeshua, “Where does this man intend to go that we will
not find Him? He is not intending to go to the Dispersion among
the Greeks, and teach the Greeks, is He?” (John 7:35). If we
believe that among those Greeks were the scattered seed of
Israel, then we must conclude that the New Testament was written
in Greek, because the message went out to those who were “not
a people, but now…the
people of God” (2 Peter 2:10).
Truly, I have been blessed by having the ability to understand
and study both Hebrew and Greek. But let us not be so caught up
in embracing our Hebraic heritage that we cannot see the big
picture, which is the redemption of all of mankind and those
of all languages. The good news of salvation cannot be
consigned to a single language, be it Hebrew or Greek
or even English.
My God is powerful enough to communicate in whatever language He
wants to. Is yours?
J.K. McKee (B.A., University of Oklahoma; M.A., Asbury
Theological Seminary) is the editor of TNN Online (www.tnnonline.net)
and is a Messianic apologist. He is author of several books,
including: The New Testament Validates Torah, Torah In the
Balance, Volume I, and When Will the Messiah Return?.
He has also written many articles on the Two Houses of Israel
and Biblical theology, and is presently focusing on Messianic
commentaries on various books of the Bible.
NOTES
[1]
Charlotte Fludd (2003). Cited in Devarim/Words, 02
August, 2003. Sheepfold Gleanings. Retrieved 28
March, 2004, from <http://www.mim.net>.
[2]
Indeed, the safah beruah or “pure
speech” (RSV) need not even be a “language,” per se, but
rather be a manner or style of speech that brings honor and
glory to the Lord, and that can edify His people (cf.
Ephesians 4:29).
|