As stated, I have always had a problem with the misuse of Hebrews 11.1, a misuse given legs by misunderstandings implicit in the English translations themselves. This series of posts is an attempt to get at the truth.
The task before me progresses in three stages. First, I listed the three major groups of English translations as they present the text of Hebrews 11.1. In this post, I turn to the Greek text and provide both a translation and an accompanying paragraph or two of simple historical and contextual exegesis which will serve as a platform for comparison with the aforementioned English translations. This comparison will then be used to construct a conclusion based in dialogue with Paul's description of the faith of Abraham in Romans chapter 4.
The Greek text of Hebrews 11.1 is as follows:
Ἔστιν δὲ πίστις ἐλπιζομένων ὑπόστασις, πραγμάτων ἔλεγχος οὐ βλεπομένων.(NA26)
which I translate:
Now faith is that state of being which results from being made absolutely certain that the things hoped for will be obtained, and this apart from being given the whole truth about them. [1]
What we have here is not a complete statement, but one coming on the heels of some previous discussion (and for this reason alone, its continued citation as "the definition of faith" is irritating.) Now, the author of Hebrews writes to encourage his readers - either Jews themselves or well-informed Gentile God-Fearers - to persevere despite persecution. In order to follow the rhetorical flow in which verse 11.1 sits, one has to go back to Chapter 2.1, 18: "We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away," and "Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted." Note, too, the warning in verse 3, "how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation?" These three elements: not drifting away from sound teaching; taking comfort in Christ's co-suffering; and warning against apostacy, come together in a dense, multi-layered doxology.
more to come...
[1] I am well aware that my translation sounds too philosophical and complex, as if I'm padding it to support my own preconceived opinion. Not so. Rather, the Greek itself is quite complex, referring both to a singular reality (our experience) and to the plurality of God's promises. We are certain. They are hoped for. We are convinced. They are being accomplished, and yet are unseen. The three participles - hoped for, being certain of and unseen - are passive. We aren't hoping, we are being given to hope. We aren't certain, but are being given certainty. We aren't not seeing, but are being kept from seeing, or not being allowed to see. Further, these are in the present tense, meaning that the action they describe is ongoing, describing the ongoing living of our everyday life. Combined with the modal verb "to be", which also suggests the ongoing and habitual, I felt it best to posit faith as a state of being, or, going one further, a state of human being-ness.
[2 (or some other number)] "Men are also admonished that here the term "faith" does not signify merely the knowledge of the history, such as is in the ungodly and in the devil, but signifies a faith which believes, not merely the history, but also the effect of the history—namely, this article: the forgiveness of sins, to wit, that we have grace, righteousness, and forgiveness of sins through Christ....the term 'faith' is accepted in the Scriptures not for knowledge such as is in the ungodly but for confidence which consoles and encourages the terrified mind." Augsburg Confession XX.23, 26
__________
Cf. the previous post in this series: The danger of substantial faith - pt 1
Hebrews 11:1; faith; biblical theology; exegesis.
I am waiting for the next installment with baited breath. I understand your contention, but am still thinking that your case has yet to be made. Are you maintaining that there is no translation that has done the original justice? Or, do you think that one has it right and you are waiting to spring the final answer upon us, the unsuspecting audience?
ReplyDeleteSubstantial faith. If the English translations have misunderstandings in them, then God has allowed misunderstanding to be perpetuated in His Word in a way that hides the true meaning? Or is it that the original intent is discernable within the English, but the weight of presupposed meaning has colored the interpretation?
ReplyDeleteLuther, by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, was able to find grace in a church that was overwhelmed with an erroneous apprehension of God's true meaning for the believer. Is it relying upon man too much to say that small variations in translation are that important in the light of God's sovereign control of what man can and can't comprehend....what the Spirit wills him to understand? Is the Holy Spirit's ministry such that it can't be properly discharged unless we perform our transcriptions without mistake? The enemy is always seeking to mask the truth and the Lord is always uncovering it. Precise wording of spiritual truths are not what makes salvation possible. Man sows, but God gives the increase. As sowers are we that in control of the process, or is the Lord aware of our failings and constantly making sure that they do not hinder His plan? (Although I am very much one in favor of precision where possible.)
11.1 in light of the rest of that chapter becomes, unless one is spiritually myopic, clear by virtue of the testimony represented by the lives of the saints mentioned and the exercising of faith in their lives. It is a multifaceted meaning that is painted by acts of faith, faith as a motivator, faith as trust, faith as relationship, faith as reward, and faith as that thing which pleases God.
Jesus Himself gave a substantive meaning to faith in describing it as a quanity that, even if it were small as a grain of mustard seed, could move the mountains that were obstacles in a believer's life. In instructing us in the use of faith, He gives us an idea of what varying "amounts" or degrees of faith can do.
I'm sorry to say that your dependence upon God's providence for the maintaining of "purity of idea" despite changes in grammar over time and history is not, nor has ever been, supported by any element in the church. From Origen's Hexapla in the 2nd Century to the amazing liberation of the Greek Text in Nestle Aland's 27th edition, everyone has located meaning not in the subjective intuition of the reader (even the Spirit-filled reader) but in the text itself, whether directly in its grammar or from its location in time within a historical community. Like it or not, for one reason or another, God has allowed error, intentional or unintentional, in the transmission of Scripture.
ReplyDeleteLuther's insight testifies to the same. With the publication of Desiderius Erasmus' Greek New Testament, humanists all over Europe began reading the Bible in a more original tongue than Jerome's Latin Vulgate. One of these was the Augustinian Monk, Martin Luther, who was assigned to teach Galatians and the Psalms in the early 1500's. Luther, along with a good deal of educated Europe, began to see the Latin translation for what it was. Indeed, the Greek suggested a far more simple, direct faith than practiced by the hyper-liturgical Latin church. Luther chose the Greeks. The Reformation born upon his shoulders was largely a re-examination of the Biblical text, and, after that, a re-formulation of European church and society. A purification of the Greek text began in earnest, and continues up to the present day (though most scholars agree that the Greek text we enjoy today is now so accurate that any future changes could only be of the smallest nature, with no change in doctrine.)
Returning to your post, I suggest you review the Spirit's role in illumination. The Spirit does not tell you the answer, whispering in the ear his truth - to do so would be to not even need the Bible. Rather, the Spirit opens the mind to understand and the heart to apply what is read to oneself. The Spirit makes Bible reading a living conversation. Truth is always mediated; discovering it is always moving along a spiral of clarity in a process called hermeneutics. (Actually, the process itself is referred to as "a hermeneutic." The discipline which investigates and evaluates such processes is called hermeneutics.)
Finally, your closing discussion of faith as a quantity is exactly what I'm going to argue against! Faith is not a thing unto itself, a self-existing, indepenent force or substance which can be acquired, exercised, grown, stored, or whatever. At least that is where I'm going.
Sorry to be blunt, but I know you would rather frankly discuss a matter than bridle disagreement for the sake of protecting some personal opinion.
Reading my above post, I'm sorry if it comes off too-wordy. I certainly didn't mean it to be so. Also, I totally neglected to mention a resource that would clarify the conservative view in regards to the locus of meaning when it comes to the Bible. The statement I'm thinking of is called the Chicago Statement on Biblical Innerancy. Why not give it a look?
ReplyDeleteNo, quite right. I understand your points and see your meaning within them. I don't, however, think you have accurately read my post. I did not say I think that God maintains "purity of idea". Rather I am saying that despite the obvious twisting and mistaken translating of His truth, He is always at work to reveal the true meaning to the believer.....this is where the power of God is greater than the deception of the enemy and the "wisdom" of mankind. Over the ages there have been varying degrees of revealed truth...no doubt. Luther, despite the obstacles of that time was given a revelation of God's grace and that was from God. Man WAS NOT the clarifier of truth in that situation...nor has he ever been. People may have been seeing the distinctions between texts, but who gave that understanding? God shifted the paradigm as is is wont when He decides to. If you more closely read my comments, you will see the difference.
ReplyDeleteI said, " IS IT RELYING UPON MAN TOO MUCH to say that small variations in translation are that important IN THE LIGHT OF GOD'S SOVEREIGN CONTROL OF WHAT MAN CAN AND CAN'T COMPREHEND....what the Spirit wills him to understand? Is the Holy Spirit's ministry such that it can't be properly discharged unless we perform our transcriptions without mistake?"
The errors are assumed, as are the efforts of the enemy to obsfucate and mislead in the transmission of the Gospel to mankind. It is certain that some ages saw more success on the side of the enemy than others. My comments are aimed at pointing out the ongoing work of God to undo this. The Holy Spirit is in the role of revealing to the heart of the believer the difference between truth and falsehood. How that plays out from one period to another depends upon His will.
"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you."
"But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come."
In these Jesus speaks to the defining role that the Spirit would have in the believer's life. Again, if you read more carefully, I have not said that I think that it is the Spirit's mission to speak the word to our very ears. It is very clearly, as Jesus pointed out, the Spirit's mission to lead us into all truth. That is in the face of untruth and error. The indwelling Spirit does give the believer the truth as given to Him from the Father. That truth, however, is in relation to the Bible. That recognition of truth is passed on to us and any work done through hermeneutics is the Spirit fulfilling John 14:26 and 16:13. For whatever reason you have pegged me as a literalist of the most narrow or simple-minded sort. My questions weren't as antagonistic to your argument as you think, rather they are filling in a hole I thought you might have been missing. (Not that you intended that.)
As to the issue of faith...I said, "Jesus Himself gave a substantive meaning to faith in describing it as a quanity that, even if it were small as a grain of mustard seed, could move the mountains that were obstacles in a believer's life. In instructing us in the use of faith, He gives us an idea of what varying "amounts" or degrees of faith can do."
I am not saying here that faith IS substance or a thing which can be actually measured. My point is that Jesus Himself used a quantitative description to help believer's understand an intangible, so we could learn that effective faith is reliant upon usage regardless of the "amount" one has. This has more to do with a way of relating truth than the material or immaterial nature of faith. As I said in an earlier post, I am still waiting for your case to be made about faith. These most recent postings of mine were unable to react to that case as of yet.
As I always have, I believe that the Word is the source of God's revelation to man. I also believe that man tries too often to use his "human" wisdom to decipher it and blocks the Spirit from doing what Jesus said He would come to do. Basically everything I said was to Give God, the Spirit, His due as the prime force behind all understanding we have of God's divine word. Your point seemed to be saying that the mistranslations were accounting for people's lack of true understanding of those particular scriptures. I felt that the power and role of the Spirit in rectifying such problems were being understated in your posts. My remarks were geared towards this percieved lack as you seem to rely very heavily on the wisdom and scholarship of man to maintain the truth and clarity of God's Word. (It being understood that He uses both wisdom and scholarship to do this very thing...but not a small portion of both are at times in error and motivated by the enemy.)
I realize your efforts and degrees are in the fields that concern themselves directly with these matters, but I have seen and listened to people that do not have such backgrounds and were anointed with an understanding beyond the power of man to achieve. These are those who have been given, much like the original apostles, the task of preaching or teaching God's Word and were chosen, not by man's will, but by God's Spirit. Regardless of their obvious lack of erudition, they were chosen as Jesus said, "You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight."
My point, again that the Spirit is the ultimate determiner of who understands His truth and who does not. Councils and translations aside, we are either lead by the Spirit or we are are not.
In my last post, do not mistake my language as implying that I truly think you consider me an idiot. Rather, I am making the point of your assumptions more plain by being colorful.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comprehensive response. You put my mind at ease, in that I did think for a minute there that you were espousing some kind of "purity of idea" doctrine. My misreading. By means of your post, you have put us on to something much better - namely the search for a clear understanding of the doctrine of divine illumination, a branch of pneumatology, that is the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. I have been "coming to" this doctrine for a few months, and am not quite sure about my opinions on it. May as well hash them out together. I'm going to start a new blog entry on this, perhaps today, but let us take as a foil this article by Wayne Jackson of the Christian Courier. Again, I'm still reading carefully your reply, and will respond partly here and partly with a new blog enry specifically directed toward the doctrine of illumination by the Holy Spirit.
ReplyDeleteCan I summarize your opinions stated in the post above as follows?:
ReplyDeleteThe Spirit is the revealer of truth, and this is applied narrowly to the believer and generally to all people in history. Narrowly, the Spirit impresses the truth about Scritpure upon believers. The Spirit both witnesses in the heart of believers that Scripture is the truth, and reveals to them the true meaning of Scripture (not by speaking directly into their ears but by leading them to a true understanding.) The Spirit is the prime force behind all understanding we have of God's divine word. You leave open the question as to whether or not, and how well, one who is not regenerate can understand the Scripture. More generally (perhaps as part of God's general grace) the Spirit reveals and conceals truth in various degrees to human beings in the course of history according to the divine perogative. The Spirit does this according as is necessary to accomplish the end to which human history has been created. The enemy can also obfuscate and mislead, so a part of the Spirit's ongoing work is to undo this damage.
That would sufficiently summarize the obvious high points. My thoughts are merely my gleanings from the Word as the interrelate to one another in a contextual sense. This is the first time I have put them into a semi-coherent form. (It shows)
ReplyDeleteI would add, however, that I think that, based on observation, that the Spirit has the ability to peform this work in much the same way that He can heal believers. As Jesus ran into all too often in healing and teaching while He was here, our willingness to accept His promises (of the revealing of truth) either creates the avenue by which illuminaton can take place or the enemy may steal it away and replace it with deceptive doctrines. This opportunity believers' have to be mislead seems to be somehow a part of the greater fabric of free will that is problematic to me. Our determination to receive a certain amount of truth is what leads people to chose one denomination over another many times it seems. That this is built into the process is hard to grasp. Why is there not a standard measure of truth that believers' receive when they come to Christ? (I say this as it relates to this present age when there are so many varying degrees of truth that are represented within the Protestant faith.)
The past has obviously been more a history of the evolving battle between God and the enemy to reveal or hide the truth. Today, however, it would seem that we have atleast reached a plateau where the most accurate truth could be spread abroad in a fairly consistent manner. The enemy is still very successful in blocking that more accurate transmission. The only answer I can fathom returns to the fact that for whatever reason God allows these differing levels of truth because(perhaps), as Paul writes, by faith different believers' can consume different things and God understands and provides for this.
I have printed and am reading the article you suggested. When I have finished it I will respond with my thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI have read the article in question and wonder whether or not it will provide a feasible jumping off point for this discussion. Mr. Jackson is so obviously in a camp that presupposes that God does not work in certain ways that it colors his entire piece extending beyond this present topic. To refute his analysis could be to start at a point further back than his thoughts on the illumination theory.
ReplyDeleteIf the Spirit only works in certain ways according to the periods that He is in,(and pertaining only to certain people...remembering Peter's words, "For the promise is to you and your children, and as many as the Lord our God will call.") we are at a crossroads of talking about this topic in two different languages.
I realize you have something in mind when you put forward Mr. Jackson's piece. Perhaps I should allow you to take the lead as I am in the position of calling into question his thoughts on the Spirit's work in this present age as a whole. This is not to say that I am unable to consider his premise, but to say that certain schools of doctrinal thought have so abdicated their responsibility (as it pertains to the Spirit) that they are almost as out of touch as those that have found cause to accept homosexuality in the Church. This is not speaking of degrees of error, rather the degree to which they have ignored scriptural admonitions. I think that homosexuality as a viable Christian lifestyle is truly an abomination, but to limit the power of the Spirit through unbelief shows an equal disregard for God's intended purpose for the Church and His indwelling Spirit.
Take the lead and I will follow.