I'm learning two languages at Bible College: Greek and Hebrew. If I'm successful I'll be able to fumble my way through most of the Bible in the original languages (there are a few sections in Aramaic). Knowing the original languages isn't the most important thing in reading the Bible, it's humility. And our belief that God communicates himself in time through human words means that the meaning of the words is more important than the words themselves, thus we're able to translate our Scriptures into many other languages. As English speakers we are very well served by a number of excellent translations which range from kids translations (The Message) through to easy reading translations (NIV) through to the harder reading but more informative (ESV).
At college this year I've heard a couple of different attitudes from older year students towards learning languages. All students studying degrees learn Greek, whereas Hebrew is an optional subject which slowly consumes its victims.
The basic assumption is you can't learn everything, which sounds sound. So you need to decide which compromise you're going to make. If you keep up both languages then you won't be able to finish all your readings, especially doctrine reading. And so you are really answering what you want to leave college with: two biblical languages or deeper reflection on theology? Now it's never so black and white, and you will no doubt get some of both, but what are you going to major in?
My gut tells me I'd rather leave with the languages. I'm a bible teacher. Studying God's word is my bread and butter, and I want to be able to do that to the best of my ability. Some of that involves the doctrinal framework from which I approach this understanding. Yet in the next breath, that same framework inevitably arises from the study of the word istelf. Knowing the languages won't make me any more godly, but it will help me to teach the Bible from the perspective of understanding the intention of the author more clearly.
At college this year I've heard a couple of different attitudes from older year students towards learning languages. All students studying degrees learn Greek, whereas Hebrew is an optional subject which slowly consumes its victims.
The basic assumption is you can't learn everything, which sounds sound. So you need to decide which compromise you're going to make. If you keep up both languages then you won't be able to finish all your readings, especially doctrine reading. And so you are really answering what you want to leave college with: two biblical languages or deeper reflection on theology? Now it's never so black and white, and you will no doubt get some of both, but what are you going to major in?
My gut tells me I'd rather leave with the languages. I'm a bible teacher. Studying God's word is my bread and butter, and I want to be able to do that to the best of my ability. Some of that involves the doctrinal framework from which I approach this understanding. Yet in the next breath, that same framework inevitably arises from the study of the word istelf. Knowing the languages won't make me any more godly, but it will help me to teach the Bible from the perspective of understanding the intention of the author more clearly.
At the moment I'm choosing to be naive and assume I can do everything.
I think the most helpful thing is: What are you least likely to do after you leave college?
ReplyDeleteI betcha all those third and fourth years who dumped Hebrew in favour of theology will go on to read heaps of theology after they leave. Most people will.
But how many will learn Hebrew by themselves, while out in full time ministry.
I say do the Brew.
Absolutely. The whole idea of what you are more likely to do on your own after college also comes into the discussion fairly regularly and the conclusion is much the same as your own. You won't learn Hebrew on your own.
ReplyDeleteThe other thing I've found is quite a defeatist attitude to actually using Hebrew once you leave college. Even with Greek to some degree - that it's just a waste of time because you'll just forget it. Of course with those thinking that way, you have to ask what comes first, the desire or the practice?
But I cannot offer too much comment on that attitude because it would seem a tad arrogant to do so before I've been out in the real world myself. However my experience of blokes out of college is seeing them make a deliberate effort to maintain their languages, and the proof is in the pudding. Or perhaps the proof is in the preaching.
I'm hoping to keep the Brew. That's my goal and that's what I'm working towards.
Plenty of preachers I admire don't exegete from Greek and Hebrew (or even look at it). At least I don't think they do. Many of them have told me they don't. So I'll take their word for it - I'd be interested to see how different the "pudding" is for each approach.
ReplyDeleteI think understanding the way the original languages work is vital. I think grasping concepts like semantic range, and limitations of language, and the inexact nature of translation (at times) is pretty vital - but I don't think you need to be spending significant time translating your way through the passage you're preaching each week in order to come up with your own version of the text - I reckon Augustine was onto something when he said that dramatic changes of accepted translations caused unnecessary undermining of the confidence in the English text for those who don't have the languages.
From what I've seen of the ministry workload I think time in ministry can be better spent than slugging through the nuances of two foreign languages.
So personally I've chosen to understand the mechanics of the languages, and what is significant for exegesis, while not sweating the small stuff. The technological tools that help with parsing and all that jazz when you're in the real world mean that you don't really have to do the same work that people thirty years ago did. I reckon the biggest failing of language study at college now, and indeed of college in general, is that the language stuff doesn't reflect the real world.
The guys working on translating the Greek and Hebrew in our Bibles are always going to be better at it than us, unless we want to become translators, so why not trust them to be serving the body well in their endeavours and spend time thinking about where a passage fits in Biblical and systematic theology?
I'd love to say: do both. I think the College course is designed so that you do your language work in 1st and 2nd year and then move on your doctrine in 3rd and 4th.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Mikey here. There are heaps of pastors who do first language exegesis out there. They struggle to read theology. It looks easier, but it is much hard to see the direct payoff day by day in ministry.
BTW: I've notice Izaac that say that you are at 'Bible College'. Moore quite deliberately calls itself a 'Theological College'. Is it a significant difference do you think?
@Michael - perhaps we move in different circles? Who knows?
ReplyDeleteBible College/Theological College distinction. I think there's a hebrew word to describe that discussion:
'meh'
Indeclinable ;-)
I concur there are plenty of faithful preachers historically who don't look at the original languages. Also how standing over translators is an incredibly proud thing to do and can quickly erode a persons trust in their English Bible.
ReplyDeleteLooking at the original languages is no guarantee to being helpful or interesting or even faithful as a teacher of God's word. However, I'm of the firm belief that handled correctly it can greatly assist our understanding of what God intended from a particular part of scripture as well as enabling us to have an opinion on the choices made by the translator. Ignoring the benefits that can come from such knowledge seems foolish. Though I know you're not suggesting ignoring it altogether. It is only on the basis of what is there in the text that we can move to Biblical and systematic theology. The original languages are in one sense more than just another tool, but fundamental to the other activities. So sure, others can make those first steps for you, but you don't get all the benefit of the thinking.
At Moore they have been gradually increasing the amount that computer tools features in the teaching of these languages. But it seems to me that programs are simply tools to aid our understanding, and a firm grasp of the language itself will mean that the benefit of the software can truly be maximised.
There is also a question of how far we can get with our languages. If we can get to the level of relatively fluent reading then that would not necessarily be draining to maintain, but of enormous benefit. While like all things it is laborious to begin with, I would hope over time it gets better.
So two examples of how I've heard of godly men maintaining their languages post college;
1. I know of one pastor who spends 9-12 each morning in his study preparing different teaching material including sermons, and afternoons and evenings are time spent with people. He spends each Monday of this study time working up his own translation of an upcoming sermon passage, and using this to format a basic outline to the sermon. This is a guy who certainly doesn't undervalue people work, but rather probably does more than most, and yet he works into his sermon preparation the benefit of his years at college on the languages.
2. Another senior minister I know does his quiet time each day in the original. It is a combination of thorough language learning, familiarity with the passages in general, and a desire to faithfully teach God's word.
So what I anticipate is, putting time in at college can lead to a working knowledge of the languages that could be maintained.
In answer to a question at Bible study this week, when I thought we were heading a bit off track I mentioned looking at the conjunction in verse three. Someone made the joke, "Izaac you've finished exams now". Now I knew the word 'conjunction' long before college because I've sat under teaching that taught me to question the logic and how a passage fits together. I'm similarly shocked every time I look at the Greek and see the number of conjunctions that have been left out for readability. I understand the translators have to make these decisions, but I also know it's good to know why. Though I had no Greek text with me, I am increasingly aware of the right way to approach a passage to resolve difficulties from the slugging away this year.
Also, I think if I started making decisions purely on pragmatic principles then I wouldn't bother looking at the Greek at all as well as a heap of other things I do. I am very wary of seeking the immediate pay off. Few things in life in general nor the Christian life are to be judged on the basis of immediate practical results. I include in this a lifetime of dedication to understanding God's word in the original languages.
That said, it may all come crashing down once I hit the real world. Though surely it's best to aim high?
@ Michael
ReplyDeleteIs it a significant difference to be 'theological' college?
Only to 'theologians'.
On doing both doctrine and languages:
Of course. And I will. But it still seems a matter of emphasis. It's interesting Nathan argues from a pragmatic angle to not bother too much with most the languages stuff. I would argue from a pragmatic angle that as you say, that's the obvious way bible teachers will spend their time being in the text so my pragmatics say do it. But yeah, it is better to be both, and.
And on doctrine being emphasised later in the course:
Someone was away when they were meant to be explain to us how the whole college program is designed, so I wouldn't have the foggiest. I jsut show up and do what I'm told.
@Izaac - I find it very hard to believe many people actually manage to pull of that 9-12 studying the Bible thing in full time ministry.
ReplyDeleteMaybe some can. Maybe after they've left little children behind. Maybe.
But it seems idealistic to me. Maybe a nice thought-experiment. But...
I can't help but think that someone who actually did that would generally either:
- have a miserable wife
- enormously ridiculous work hours
- a stagnant/shrinking church
- or a hard working staff/volunteer team
or a mix of the above.
@ Mikey
ReplyDeleteStrangely the opposite to all of the above. You couldn't maintain it working for AFES, which he now does. But at the time where scripture teaching, visiting hospitals, bible studies out of work hours meant he maintained it for a number of years.
He was in a suburban church looking after families and preaching every week so he had to have a pattern. Most blokes in ministry I know that pattern of preparing the sermon each week means staying up until ridiculous hours Saturday night. He happened to have a point in his preparation he knew he needed to get to each morning. The first step was his translation.
It sounds idealistic and I certainly wouldn't hope to emulate it or expect it as the norm, but for him it worked. As soon as you introduce students into the equation who can meet up all hours of the day (or night) that creates a different pattern of ministry. I also think he did sermon prep at the office, which changes the home dynamic again.
That first paragraph should add 'where bible studies out of work hours were at a fixed time each week'...
ReplyDeleteI'm interested that it's a legit story. Was it literally every day? Monday to Friday? I am honestly intrigued.
ReplyDeleteFWIW, I doubt suburban church vs student ministry explains this guy fully.
It is an important distinction, the ole Bible/Theological College thing.
ReplyDeleteYou are (I mean, as in 'any student') at College to study the knowledge of God (for which the Bible is the unsurpassable means), not to study the Bible. They look similar, but not quite the same. And may result in different emphases.
@ Mikey
ReplyDeleteWell we will have a chance to discuss it with the person himself at NTE. (At the very least to check my memory of this conversation is serving me well)
But I'm also shocked at your level of shock. From my perspective I can't see why it is that strange a concept? For those whose congregations are primarily workers there are various limitations on when you meet with people. If you meet people before work, at lunch and after work, and are not in a huge staff team then there seems to me no impediment to scheduling your morning free to do sermon prep. And other daytime meetings in the afternoon. They say most people schedule 15 hours towards a sermon, it makes sense to do that over the whole week.
I see your point about it being dependent upon the personality traits of the man in question, but to me it seems like a much better way than many other ministers I've seen who don't put in place logical steps in their sermon prep, end up having a late Friday and Saturday night, and then preach three times Sunday and are too pooped after three big days to start early the next week on the next talk and the pattern repeats.
I'm interested as to why it sounds so foreign to you? Is it because a ministers week is never that neat? That you think it more likely they are would have consistently scheduled meetings/unscheduled responsibilities that fall in the morning? Life's never that neat?
a bunch of things
ReplyDelete- 15 hours on a sermon seems a lot.
- the rest of ministry duties are a lot
- there are always always always interruptions in the morning, from my experience
- I can see a day-in-the-study making sense, but almost two days dribble across the entire working week - can't see how you get everything else done.
shocked at your shock at my shock :-)
@ Michael
ReplyDeleteI imagine one of the different emphases you are suggesting might be on studying languages over doctrine?
I know what you're saying and I'm with you on the distinction. It's important and all that. We don't want to be accused of biblioatry if that's the right word.
I remember Carson saying once if someone asked him on a plane what he did for a living he could grunt back "Teach" and that would be the end of it. Or if he really cared for that person he could better respond, "I introduce people to God." Now that's more likely to start a conversation. But more than that, he is making the distinction between the means and the end (even if he's making that point in a rhetorically significant way).
But as for advertising that I go to Bible College, it is primarily so that it fits on the one line on my blog profile (as a visual thing)
Plus, if you insist on making the distinction, to the average joe you just sound like a toff.
*bibliolatry
ReplyDelete@ Mikey
ReplyDeleteI could go on with the "shocked at your shock" thing but it might get awkward.
Well I'm off the actual example now, and just reflecting personally.
- In terms of distraction, for me it often depends on how often I check my email. If my conviction is that urgent things will get to me by phone, then a lot of the 'distractions' that I find myself getting distracted by, really are welcome distractions.
- How is it best to spend your time? It's easy to be self indulgent with Bible preparation and to avoid people in general. But at the same time I am sympathetic to those who take time to ponder God's word in order to teach it well if that is what allows them to pray and reflect on their own relationship with God as well as well as their desire to pastor the flock by the word. If before God this is how they choose to spend their time I can understand why they do, and refrain from being too judgmental.
- Thus I suggest it: depends on the person. 15 hours seems at the upper echelon, but depends on the person and on the week. Sometimes I spend a lot of time staring at the Bible praying for understanding. Sometimes (Often) I'm studying a book in detail for the first time. As I revisit it in future my prep time decreases. (My mate also may have been preparing two sermons, perhaps he might schedule that much time knowing he won't actually get that much)
- The idea of taking a couple of hours a week to keep up your Greek by working this in to your initial sermon prep sounds like a good idea to me. Though again might sound indulgent to some.
- It also depends on where you are. Some congregations are more stable in their expectations and on the demands of the minister. Thus there is a relative amount of freedom as to where you put your time. Depending on as you say support staff or generous congregation members, will determine what time you are able to invest where. And also on the ability to have a regular timetable or not.
- To sound like a broken record, I feel attracted towards the regular prep time idea. Traditionally i've been a 'happy to find distraction' kind of guy. Also a 'rush at the last minute' kind of guy. And consequently a 'poorly prepared guy' and a 'stealing relax time with Sarah guy'. The last minute skin of the teeth model might feel more godly because I'm always so busy, but I'm not convinced it is the best way.
- I am kind of procrastinating NTE prep right now.
agree with all you write here.
ReplyDeletesee you soon.
@Izaac - So, its reverse snobbery then? :-) I'd love to do a survey of average Joes to see if they really cared!
ReplyDeleteI don't think they would. Thus the reverse snobbery.
ReplyDeleteWell, then, you are free to call it a theological college without average Joes being offended. And you need to embrace your inner toff!
ReplyDeletePerhaps I'm embracing my inner average Joe?
ReplyDeleteFWIW, I think the languages are less valuable for almost everyone. You have commentaries and Bible software. I'd question whether any pastor (as a generalist) is going to notice some significant linguistic feature that commentators (specialists) haven't found. (This implies, with Nathan, that philosophy of language and the mechanical limits of Greek and Hebrew are far more important to learn than the languages themselves.)
ReplyDeleteAnd understanding and teaching the Bible properly is only partly about the text. It's a lot about theology, a lot about describing the world properly, and mostly about how those two things intersect. I'd warrant the reason that people read theology and don't do Hebrew post-college is because of the inherent value in one over the other. You probably won't play as much table-tennis after college, either.
A small handful of people are built in such a way as to be able to excel in both languages and theology. If you're one of them, enjoy. If you're not, then take the time to stretch yourself theologically. It'll pay off far more for those you're teaching than the languages.
I'm really quite torn on this whole matter. I toss between the two extremes (often around the time of language exams). This year languages were definitely my strong point in terms of marks, which indicates perhaps an affinity, reflects the time invested or could highlight a deficiency in the biblical and doctrinal areas.
ReplyDeleteBut then again at NTE, there was another great reminder of the benefit of the hard work in languages. With Mt 28 when Jesus says "Go and make disciples" I am certain that traditionally I have built way too much on the "Go" and less on the "make disciples". Now partly this was just poor reading because what follows expands on what is meant, but it is helpful to see how the Greek should help avoid such errors. Yeah, I could just read a commentary and hope they point out my error but for me as I've become more familiar with the Bible (starting from scratch not that long ago) the way that the languages have forced me to slow down has been a huge revelation.
At this stage (post results) I'm still maintaining my ignorance is bliss/I can do everything attitude. I will re-evaluate come census time.