Author Archives: Kate

The Seed Sown

10 Monday Apr 2023

Posted by in Studies

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Image by Petra from Pixabay

Hello and welcome-or welcome back-to Renaissance Woman where, this week, I am taking a look at the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares found in Matthew 13:24-30:

“Another parable He put forth to them, saying: ‘The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went on his way.  But when the grain had spouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared.  So the servants of the owner came and said to him, “Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field?  How then does it have tares?”  He said to them, “An enemy has done this.”  The servants said to him, “Do you want us then to go and gather them up?”  But he said, “No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them.  Let both grow together until the harvest and at the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.” ‘ “

There are two major interpretations of this parable but, before I get to them, a brief lesson on tares.  The consensus is that this passage of scripture is referring to the darnel or Lolium temulentum.  It is a weed that grows among grain, especially wheat.  The grains resemble those of wheat and, since they are difficult to separate by sifting, are often sown with wheat and grow with it in the same field.  Since the darnel is poisonous, no one deliberately sows tares in a field but tares are difficult to distinguish from wheat as the two look similar until they come to full fruition.  Then it becomes easy to separate wheat from tares, to discard what isn’t fit for consumption, and to preserve the desired harvest. 

The sower in this parable made no such mistake.  The parable states he sowed “good seed”.  The poisonous seed was sown by an enemy but presence of the tares wasn’t discovered until the grain had sprouted and produced a crop.  I read that tares will often share the same root system as wheat and they are impossible to remove from a field without damaging the wheat.  It is best to let them both continue to grow together until the time of harvest so none of the wheat is lost. 

What does this parable mean?  There is an explanation given later on in the same chapter of Matthew.  In verse 36, Jesus’s disciples come to him and ask him to explain the parable of the tares of the field and he answers, “He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man.  The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one.  The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels.  Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age.”

Now onto the two interpretations of this parable.  The first says this parable speaks of believers and unbelievers within the church, sitting side by side in the seats with each other, indistinguishable from each other until Jesus returns and His angels separate the tares from the wheat.  The second interpretation disagrees with the first and says no, the field is clearly the world as stated by Jesus Himself in Matthew 13:38, therefore; this parable is speaking of the righteous and unrighteous living together in the world until the end of the age when Jesus returns and His angels separate the tares from the wheat.

There is a third interpretation of this parable which was new to me when I first read it so I feel safe in assuming none of you have heard it either.  It is found in J. Preston Eby’s Candlestick to the Throne study series # 173 entitled The Firstfruits, The Harvest, and the Vintage.  In this study, Mr. Eby quotes a woman named Dora Van Assen who wrote not only on the tares and the wheat but the wheat and the chaff.  I couldn’t remember exactly what was said so I got the teaching out and refreshed my memory.

One of the first lines that caught my eye was, “The wheat and the tares did not convert one another!  Wheat was wheat, the tares were tares, both growing up together just like the wheat and the chaff, until the time of harvest.”  This caught my attention because, in an article on Tares, which I found on the Jewish Virtual Library site and is also linked below, I had read the same thing.  Despite the similarities in the grains and immature stalks, wheat does not ever become a tare and a tare does not ever become wheat.  I read on.

“…I saw this was not a parable on soul-saving, nor was it an exhortation to scare the heathen or sinning Christians in the church into a conversion, but it was a parable dealing with the inner thought life of the believer himself.  In the context around the parable we find that Jesus was uttering, ‘things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world’ (Mat. 13:35).  In other words, by this parable, He was explaining in parabolic form something which had taken place from the beginning! I believe He was referring to what had happened in the Garden of Eden when sin entered into the plan of God.  There we find God fellowshipping with Adam in the cool of the day.  Certainly God was not standing there in bodily form any more than He comes in bodily form when we commune with Him and hear His voice.  By the Spirit God was planting His good thoughts and spiritual understanding in the mind of Adam.  But, while Adam was not aware of it, the adversary also came into the garden and whispered and planted evil thoughts and carnal understanding, causing a duality within, which led him to fall into a carnal mind.  This dual mind of both good and evil was a split personality within man, each capable of bringing forth a harvest of a certain kind of man (Romans 8:6).  The battlefield is in the mind!”

I found this interpretation absolutely fascinating and, the more I looked at the other parables, it isn’t as farfetched as it might at first seem.  There’s another Parable of Sowing at the beginning of Matthew Chapter 13 where the seed fell by the wayside and were devoured by birds, some fell on stony places and had no root so withered away, some fell among thorns and were choked, and some fell on good ground.  I don’t know of any interpretation that doesn’t acknowledge the “ground” mentioned here is a picture of the human heart.  I can thus consider the idea that the “field” mentioned in the Parable of the Wheat and Tares is the human mind (and heart-the Hebrew people did not separate the two “as a man thinks in his heart” [Proverbs 23:7]).

But, doesn’t Matthew 13:38 clearly say the field is the world and both the good and bad seeds are children?  Yes, it does but I just read something interesting about this passage.  The Abingdon Bible Commentary states, “All scholars reject the genuineness of the explanation in vv. 36-43 on the ground of its stilted style, and because the interpretations of successive details are mechanical; moreover, the presence of popular and conventional apocalyptic expressions, and the title Son of man, used of the earthly life of Jesus in v. 37 and then of his Messianic glory in v. 41 stamp it as secondary in character” (Abingdon, p. 977).

The moment I read “all scholars” I was skeptical.  There wasn’t one scholar publishing around 1929 who attested to the validity of this passage?  ALL scholars reject their genuineness?  Even so, I couldn’t help rereading the Parable of the Wheat and the Tares thinking, “what if the explanation isn’t correct?”  As I did so, I realized Dora Van Assen’s interpretation made sense.  Still, I cannot accept any interpretation that relies on other parts of scripture being declared invalid.  Does Dora Van Assen’s interpretation of this parable rely in discarding Matthew 13 verses 36-43?  It does not!  Which I will demonstrate in next week’s post.

Until next week, I pray for each of us-including myself-that the Holy Spirit continues to open the eyes of our hearts and grant us the gift of discernment as we face each new day.

Amen.

Unless noted otherwise, all Scriptures are quoted from The Holy Bible, New King James Version, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee, 1982

References

Tares (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)

What Does Tares Mean? Bible Definition and References (biblestudytools.com)

Tares – WebBible Encyclopedia – ChristianAnswers.Net

KINGDOM BIBLE STUDIES: THE FIRSTFRUITS, THE HARVEST, AND THE VINTAGE by J. Preston Eby (godfire.net)

Eiselen, Frederick Carl, The Abingdon Bible Commentary, Abingdon Press, Nashville •New York, 1929

Strong, James, LL.D., S.T.D., The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville Tennessee, 1990

If No One is Watching

04 Tuesday Apr 2023

Posted by in Walking in the Way

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Hello and welcome-or welcome back-to Renaissance Woman!

I am running a bit late this week but I did get a post completed!  I had thought I would take a deeper look at the word “wicked” in scripture but then saw some fascinating things in the NT about faith I wanted to look at as well.  And then, there have been so many avenues of study opened up to me through my study of Isaiah 45:7, I wasn’t sure which one to pursue first.  I’ve known my next study was going to be on the full armor of God as described in Paul’s letter to the Ephesians (See Ephesians 6: 10-18) and, as I started to put together notes this this week’s post, I realized everything I was looking at would be explored as I looked at the various pieces of armor.  Perhaps I should just wait to post until deeper into my Armor of God study…but then, I read something interesting in Ephesians Chapter 6.  The word as found in The New King James Version of the Bible is “eyeservice” found in verse 6. 

“Eyeservice” caught my attention because of my study of the word “evil”.  I had looked at the Hebrew and Greek words for “evil” during my study of Isaiah 45:7 and the Hebrew word translated “evil” is ra.  Ra is spelled Resh (ר) Ayin (ע).  Resh is a picture of a bent head or one bent under a heavy burden and the Ayin is the picture of the eyes.  So, those who do evil are those who allow their actions to be guided by what they have determined is right in their own eyes.

The Greek word translated as “eyeservice” is ophthalmodouleia (G3787)and is a bit of a tongue twister.  It’s a combination word of opthalmos meaning “the eye” and douleia meaning “slavery” or “bondage”.  This Greek word appears twice in scripture: here in Ephesians 6:6 and then again in Colossians 3:22 where Paul writes, “Servants, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not only when their eyes are on you, as pleasers of men, but in simplicity of purpose (with all your heart) because of your reverence for the Lord and as a sincere expression of your devotion to Him” (Amplified). 

At first glance, the word ophthalmodouleia doesn’t have any relation to “evil”.  The two passages where this word appears does seem to be speaking about a bondage to another’s opinion rather than doing what is right on one’s own eyes.  Since the two passages are similar, I am focusing on Ephesians 6:6 and  Jonathan Mitchell’s New Testament renders the passage as, “not in accord with eye-service (or; in line with slavery to the eyes [of folks watching]; or = doing it only when being watched) as folks desiring to please men, but rather as slaves of Christ, constantly doing (performing; producing) the will and intent of God-from out of [the] soul (=with the whole inner being; mind, will, emotion, life-force; or: = spontaneously)”. 

The Amplified is a smoother read: “Not in the way of eyeservice-as if they were watching you-and only to please men; but as servants (slaves) of Christ, doing the will of God heartily and with your whole soul.”  Paul’s admonition is to not behave one way when another person is watching you and another when they are not.  In other words, Paul is telling us not to be hypocrites.  And yet, I do see a deeper meaning in this passage.

In June of 2020, I was in prayer asking not only that the eyes of my understanding be enlightened but that I would see the Holy Spirit guiding me into all truth.  The answer I received was “the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil”.  I did a word study on Genesis 2:9 but, once I’d completed it, I wasn’t sure where to go next.  I didn’t need to worry: the Holy Spirit was about to guide me.  I began hearing my Bible Teacher’s mention the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil and then they weren’t just mentioning it but teaching on it.  I also would just happen to come across books and other writings teaching on the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil as well as the Tree of Life.  Since June of 2020, I have come to see that there are two ways to live.  We can live our lives out from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil which means we have ourselves at the center of our lives and determine for ourselves what is good and evil.  We can live our lives out from the Tree of Life which is the very life of the risen and ascended Jesus Christ made real to us through the Indwelling Spirit. 

I do not see Ephesians 6:6 (or the passage in Colossians) as Paul only telling his listeners not to be hypocrites.  I see this passage as Paul urging his listeners, and us today, to live our lives out from the very life of Jesus Christ no matter what position we find ourselves in and no matter what work might be placed in our hands to do.

I hear the word “secular” a great deal.  I get what people are saying but may I suggest there is no such thing as “secular” where a Believer is concerned?  Our very bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit.  We are One Body with Jesus Christ, partakers of His divine nature and co-creators with Him (2 Peter 1:4, 1 Corinthians 3:9).  This is our very identity.  This is not something we pick up and adorn ourselves with on a Sunday morning but then lay aside when we go to work or to school or whatever occupies our time on a day to day basis.  Everything we do we do unto the Lord and with Him because He is in us. 

That is what I saw in Ephesians 6:6.  I suppose “eyeservice” does have some relation to “evil” because a person who is living for the approval of others and is acting accordingly has determined it is good to do so.  In that sense, that person is doing what is right in his or her own eyes.  Let us not live that way.  Let us live-and live spontaneously-with our whole inner being: mind, will, emotion, out of the Christ.  Let us each one live joyfully knowing that it is no longer we who live, it is Christ who lives in us. 

Hallelujah!  Amen.

Unless noted otherwise, all Scriptures are quoted from The Holy Bible, New King James Version, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee, 1982

References

The Comprehensive Study Bible, The Zondervan Corporation, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1984

Mitchell, Jonathan Paul, MA, The New Testament, Harper Brown Publishing, 2009, 2013, 2015, 2019

Strong, James, LL.D., S.T.D., The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville Tennessee, 1990

Walker, G. Allen, Koine Greek Textbook, Volume IV-V, 2014-2017

Confession

27 Monday Mar 2023

Posted by in Poetry, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , 

Confession

How it feels
Like freefall
There is nothing I can do
I am plummeting toward the ground
With nothing to grab onto
Yet I feel You all about me
The only One I can cling to
I remind myself I chose to jump
And fall deeper into You

How it feels
Like limbo
I'm in a vague and formless place
I see shadow forms around me
But cannot discern a trace
Of the path I thought would be so clear
When I chose to run this race
But I know You are always with me
I can rest in Your embrace

How it feels
Upheaval
Please heed my appeal
My world is wildly rocking
Return me to an even keel
Remind me I am close beside You
Love me, hold me, and reveal
It is only with my eyes on You
I can perceive what is real

How it feels
Committed
I to You and You to me
I am aware of Your presence
Despite all my uncertainty
I resolve to trust in You
For You are my assurity
You will guide me ever onward
And give me eyes to see

The Meaning of the Word

20 Monday Mar 2023

Posted by in Walking in the Way

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

Image by Smim Bipi from Pixabay

Hello and welcome to Renaissance Woman where, this week, I am exploring another side path I encountered but steadfastly ignored during my study of Isaiah 45:7.

This side path presented itself during my study of the Hebrew word translated as “evil” in the King James Version but “calamity” in the New King James Version.  That Hebrew word is ra spelled Resh (ר) Ayin (ע) and does not necessarily mean “evil” in the way we think of “evil”.  In the word ra, we see the Resh which is a picture of bowing or a bent head, and the Ayin which is a picture of the eyes.  The head is bent to the eyes so those things that are “evil” in a Biblical sense are those things we do because they seem right in our own eyes.  In their study on Psalm 2:11, Chaim Bentorah and Laura Bertone have this to say about ra: “In Hebrew, there are about ten different words with a Semitic root of ra (ר), which is the basic word for “evil”.  However, ra (ר) does not necessarily have to signify something bad.  The Semitic concept of this word is an outside influence that causes us to react in a certain way in which we have little or no control over our actions.”1

As time passes, I am persuaded of the necessity of knowing what the original language behind our English words truly meant.  One such word is “evil”.  The Septuagint translated the Hebrew ra in Isaiah 45:7 as kakos but then translated “evil” (ra) in “The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil” as poneros.  These words do not mean the same thing in the Greek although at first glance the difference does appear slight.  George Ricker Berry says “These words may be used with very little distinction of meaning but often the difference is marked.  (G2556) kakos frequently means evil rather negatively, referring to the absence of the qualities which constitute a person or thing what it should be or what it claims to be.  It is also used meaning evil in a moral sense.  It is a general antithesis to agathos.  Poneros is a word at once stronger and more active, it means mischief-making, delighting in injury, doing evil to others, dangerous, destructive.  Kakos describes the quality according to its nature, poneros, according to its effects.”2 (Agathos [G18]: good, benefit, well)

I cannot repeat everything I learned about “evil” during my Isaiah 45:7 study but I will repeat how aware I am that everything I learned in this study only scratched the surface.  There is so much more to be gleaned from scripture regarding the meaning of “evil”.  This is true for so many other words as well.  One such I came across while studying ra and I was astonished as I began to look into its meaning.  That word is rasha (רשע) often translated by the English word “wicked”.

I was looking up ra in Benjamin Blech’s The Secrets of Hebrew Words and found this entry: “רע (ra) means evil.  What does the wicked person do in order to gain acceptance?  He makes central to his very being the appearance of ש (shin), the letter appearing on every mezuzah as the acronym for שדי   (ShaDaY), the name of God.  The reprobate will claim that holiness is central to his being. All of his actions are hypocritically assigned to “holy causes”…the only way to unmask the רשע (RaShA) is to remove his ש (shin), the letter of piety that he uses to disguise his wickedness.”3

I have no doubt that we all have a person or two who readily springs to mind as someone who is rasha or wicked.  Before we start pointing fingers and leveling accusations, I want to share one other entry from Benjamin Blech.  His very next entry on rasha asks the question “how does one explain why someone is wicked” and then quotes the second half of Numbers 15:39: “And that you go not about after your heart and your own eyes, after which you use to go astray”.4 Benjamin Blech then writes:

“The eyes ought not to be our rulers.  Samson followed his eyes to lust after Philistine women.  His punishment, measure for measure, was that he became blind.  Look in retrospect at the רשע (RaShA) and see that backwards we are told the story behind his aberrant behavior: ע (ayin) the eye, became his   שר (SaR), ruler.  A   ישראל (YiSRaEL) is one who remembers ראש לי (LiY RoSh): I possess a head, a mind, and an intellect that must control the desires stemming from sight.  ראש (RoSh) also has the consonants  שר (SaR), ruler.  But central to rule as expressed by the word is the letter א (alef), the One of the universe Who dictates the difference between right and wrong, between what my eyes see and desire, and what my head determines is suitable or off limits.”5

These two entries riveted me because I realized that whenever I read the word “wicked” in the Bible, I was picturing something different in my head than what was meant by the original language.  And, while I can think of one or two people who would fit the Biblical definition of “wicked” I cannot resort to finger pointing.  The roots of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil have penetrated deep into the soil of my heart.  I have both eaten its fruit and produced its fruit in my life.  Even after I knew Jesus and had determined to follow Him I still nibbled the fruit from time to time.  My early following of Him consisted in trying to do right, believe the right things, keep the right rules, and present myself to Him as a good Believer with an absolutely stuffed resume He could be proud of.  I did not know then that even the good I tried to do was evil because I was either doing what seemed right in my own eyes or, at times, doing what another person told me was right.  That person of course knew more than I did so following his/her dictates meant I was safe, right?

No.  The wicked person is one who covers his evil deeds with holiness and piety.  It may be that contained within the word rasha is the idea that this covering of one’s deeds with holiness and piety is deliberate. This is a word I need to spend some more time with. Whether it is or not, wickedness can be hard to recognize because, while “evil deeds” are those things done because they seem right in a person’s eyes, they oftentimes do appear to be good. Knowing for certain I have turned from wickedness to righteousness can be quite a dilemma but one which has a both remarkably simple and intensely difficult solution.

“Let the peace of God rule in your hearts…Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom…and whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him.”  I am quoting bits of Colossians 3 verses 15-17 here and the Greek word for “name”, as in “the name of the Lord Jesus” is onoma (G3686).  It means “name” but also “authority, character”.  The Strong’s also has “surname” as a definition.  The word “in” is en (G1722) and it means “fixed position…a relation of rest”.

That’s it.  Rest in Jesus Christ.  Eat of the fruit of the Tree of Life which is Jesus Christ.  Let His life live in and through us.  It is at once utterly simple and the most difficult thing in to do.  There’s a scripture in the Book of Revelation which has often been quoted as something reserved for after this body dies.  The passage is: “Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, ‘Write: “Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.” ‘‘Yes, says the Spirit, ‘that they may now rest from their labors, and their works follow them’” (Revelation 14:13).  I don’t think this scripture is describing a rest that happens after physical death.  I think it’s describing what it means to live the Christian life here on earth while still in this body. Jonathan Mitchell’s translation of the New Testament seems to say as much. Listen to the tenses: “Write: “From the present moment (from this time; from now; henceforth) the dead ones [are] blessed (happy) folks-those continuously dying within the Lord!” “Yes, indeed” the Spirit continues saying, “to the end that they may rest themselves from out of their wearisome labor (travail; toilsome exhaustion), for their works (actions; deeds) are continually following together with them.”6

“I die daily,” Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:31.  We have died in Jesus Christ, were buried with Him, rose with Him, and are now seated with Him in heavenly places.  Even so, there is a law in our members that seeks to draw us away from His life in us and then to lead us onto a path where we declare we are the gods of our lives and can determine for ourselves what is good and evil.  This path is almost impossible to stay off of except we have the Holy Spirit living within us.  He teaches us who Jesus Christ is and teaches us who we are in Him.  By His opening of my eyes I see Jesus Christ, the Tree of Life.  By His working within me, I can recognize the fruit of the tree that led to death.  By His wisdom and the revelation He gives, I know I am dead to sin and alive to God in Jesus Christ.  By His power, I do refuse to let sin reign in my mortal body and can present myself to God as being alive from the dead (Romans 6:10-13). 

2 Corinthians 4:10 says, “always carrying about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh.”  This is one of those living in the New Covenant paradoxes: living in union with Jesus is wondrous beyond words and each one of us would declare there is no other life worth living, and yet it also intensely painful.  There are times the finger is pointed at me accusing me of wickedness. It cuts the deepest when that finger belongs to someone close.  I have no defense to offer.  I know His Life is in me and I am joined to Him through His Spirit.  Because His peace is alive in me and ruling in my heart I can say, “my conscience is clear but that doesn’t prove I’m right.  It is the Lord Himself who will examine me and decide” (1 Corinthians 4:4, NLT).

Amen.  So be it.  Come, Lord Jesus.    

Unless noted otherwise, all Scriptures are quoted from The Holy Bible, New King James Version, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee, 1982  

  1. Bentorah, Chaim with Laura Bertone, Hebrew Word Study: Exploring the Mind of God, Whitaker House, New Kensington, Pennsylvania, 2019, Page 246
  2. Walker, G. Allen, New Koine Greek Textbook Series Supplements, Berry’s Synonyms, Page 66
  3. Blech, Benjamin, The Secrets of Hebrew Words, Jason Aronson Inc., Northvale, New Jersey, 1991, Page 76
  4. Ibid., Page 77
  5. Ibid., Page 77
  6. Mitchell, Jonathan Paul, MA, The New Testament, Harper Brown Publishing, 2009, 2013, 2015, 2019, Page 629

References

Danker, Frederick William, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Third Edition (BDAG), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1957-2000

Strong, James, LL.D., S.T.D., The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville Tennessee, 1990

I Have Questions

13 Monday Mar 2023

Posted by in Walking in the Way

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Hello and welcome-or welcome back-to another week and another post on Renaissance Woman.  This week I am going to venture down one of those side paths I did not go down during my Isaiah 45:7 study.  This path presented itself during my study of the Hebrew word bara which is most often translated by the English word “create”.

While studying bara, I had had a video shared with me where the meaning of bara was given as “to fill”.  I had found another video which expanded on that first one by pointing out that the Hebrew word bar meant “son” and thus bara not only meant “to fill” but also “to increase”.  I can’t say any of this is wrong.  The root of the English word “create” used to translate bara is kre and means “to grow”.  Filling, increase, growth…all of these ideas are contained within the word bara.  However, while none of this is wrong, perhaps it is incomplete.

Bar is the Aramaic word for “son”.  The Hebrew word for “son” is ben.  Bar in the Hebrew means “beloved, pure, empty, choice, clean, clear.”  The root barar means “to clarify, brighten, examine, select, make bright, choice, chosen, cleanse (be clean), clearly, polished, pure, purify”.  Bar is also used to mean “field” or “grain, in the sense of winnowing”.  All of these definitions are from the Strong’s concordance where I also find an entry for bar defining it as “borrowed from the Chaldean as a title, the heir, son, grandson”.  The Strong’s then says bar corresponds to ben: son.

The Young’s concordance concurs.  Both concordances show several different Hebrew words used throughout the Old Testament all translated as “son”.  Ben is used most often and there are pages of scriptures associated with that word.  Bar is also translated “son” in a few different passages.  But then, bar is also translated as “pure” and “clean” in other passages (See Psalm 19:8, 24:4, 73:1, Proverbs 14:4). 

All of this might just be a matter of interest in studying the Hebrew language if it weren’t for Psalm 2:12.  The King James Version has it as: “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little.  Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.”  The Hebrew word translated “Son” in this passage is bar.  What interests me is that the English word “son” also appears in verse 7 of this Psalm: “…Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.”  In verse 7, the Hebrew word is ben.  I wondered to myself, why are the different Hebrew words translated with the same English word?  The Strong’s Concordance answers this question by telling me in this passage bar is “Son” in the sense of a title.  I checked and didn’t find anything in any of my reference books or any other Bible translation that suggested bar in this passage could or should be translated as anything but “Son”.

I looked up this passage in every Bible translation I have access to and didn’t find much variation.  The Young’s Literal has “Chosen One” in place of “son” and the New English Bible has “king” but the majority of the other translations all have “Son”.  Only two translations had footnotes associated with this passage that suggested there might be more to the standard interpretation.  One is The Complete Jewish Study Bible which states, “Regarding this verse, the Targum says, ‘Those who reject his instruction will incur his anger and perish but blessed are those who trust in his Word’.”  The second footnote appears in The Passion Translation which states, “Or ‘be ruled by the Son”.  The Hebrew word for ‘kiss’ is nashaq and can also mean ‘to be ruled by’ or ‘be in subjection to’ (the Son).  Yet another possible translation of this difficult verse is ‘be armed with purity’.”

I found other glimmers of possibility.  The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon did have “kiss purely, of sincere homage” under the entry for bar but none of this was enough for me to question how this verse has been translated.  And I did want to question it because the verse bothers me. 

“Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way when his wrath is kindled but a little.”  Every resource I have access to are in agreement this is a messianic Psalm and thus I have to ask myself whether this passage is an accurate reflection of the Jesus I read about in the gospels.  That Jesus came to save the lost, received and ate with sinners, and wept over Jerusalem.  He washed filthy feet and died on a cross.  Am I to expect that if I don’t kiss or show proper homage to that Jesus, He’s going to get angry with me and I’ll be left to perish?  That seems to be what this passage is saying and ending the Psalm with “Blessed are all they that put their trust in Him” doesn’t really soften that blow.  Still, I couldn’t find anything that suggested there was any other possible interpretation for this passage and, since I agree with those who are saying we can’t make the Bible say whatever we want, I put all my discomfort with this passage firmly with the Holy Spirit and waited for what He would say.

I waited a while.  I did shift my focus from studying Isaiah 45:7 but my questions about this passage percolated in the back of my mind.  Then came the day when I happened to pick a Hebrew word study book off my shelves and found the last two studies in it were devoted to Psalm 2.  The book is Hebrew Word Study: Exploring the Mind of God by Chaim Bentorah with Laura Bertone and I ask you to imagine my surprise when I read someone else asking the same question I had asked.  Mr. Bentorah writes, “In Hebrew, the word for “sin” is ben (בן).  Only in Aramaic is the word bar (בר )used as son.  This passage was written in Hebrew, so why suddenly insert an Aramaic word?” (Bentorah, 248).  My question exactly, Mr. Bentorah!

He goes on to say that there is a basis for using the word “Son” and capitalizing it to imply a reference to Jesus.  Mr. Bentorah says that, because Jewish tradition teaches this psalm in a messianic context, Christians do have a legitimate basis for assuming the word bar is “Son” with a capital S and implying we are to kiss the Son of God-Jesus.  But then, he goes on to say, “I’m okay with this interpretation, except the idea that Jesus will become angry with us and we will perish if we don’t kiss Him is a little unnerving to me.  Out salvation has nothing to do with “kissing” Jesus. Additionally, Jesus threatening us to submit to Him doesn’t fit His character” (Bentorah, 249).

Mr. Bentorah points out that rendering nashaq as “kiss” is a later, postexilic use of the word and that nashaq, which is derived from an old Akkadian word, signifies a voluntary joining together or a desire to be joined together.  He also points out that if the New Testament attributes Psalm 2 to David (which does seem to be the case in Acts 2:24-26), then rendering the word nashaq as “kiss” postdated David’s time and we ought then revert to the original meaning of the word which is a voluntary joining together.  If we also use the Hebrew meaning for bar which is “purity” rather than translating it by the Aramaic “son”, then command in this passage becomes to embrace or desire purity in our relationship with God.  Mr. Bentorah goes through the other words in this passage questioning why ‘aneph is translated “anger” and “wrath” instead of “passion”.

Mr. Bentorah closes his study with: “By saying that ‘aneph ( אנף) does not refer to anger or wrath but rather to God’s passionate love for us, I know I am trying to put a positive spin on something that is traditionally read in a negative context.  That may be the case” (Bentorah, 252). 

As I said before, every Bible translation is consistent in the interpretation of this scripture.  I am not saying Mr. Bentorah is correct and everyone else is wrong and Mr. Bentorah isn’t saying that either.  What he is saying is that there is valid reason to take a deeper look at this passage, the ancient language it was written in, and to question the interpretation.  It’s okay to ask questions.

There was a recent post on a Biblical Archeology forum I follow that said the Bible had to be taken “as is”.  It is difficult to glean just what exactly someone means by a one sentence post so I can only speak to what I thought when I read it.  I hear Believers declare the Bible is the inerrant word of God.  This is said as if it’s the arguments to end all arguments.  The Bible means exactly what it says and the idea of questioning what’s written there is unthinkable.  Besides, the very act of questioning means you don’t have any faith and without faith it is impossible to please God (Hebrews 11:6). I don’t agree.  I’ve found my questions about scripture passages are an invitation from the Living God to enter deeper into relationship with Him.

I love my Bible.  Reading it used to be a chore, a box I would tick to prove I’d done my Christian duty for the day.  Reading it was a chore because I’d finish with this sense of unease that my life was not quite measuring up to the standard set down combined with the certainty it never would.  It’s a great irony that, the closer I have drawn to Jesus and the Father through the Spirit, the more questions I have and the more I delight to read the Bible.  One of the greatest privileges of my life is being able to possess as many copies of it as I like.  And yet, I also never lose sight of the fact that what I possess is a translation.  The translators have done the best they could whether they sought to produce a literal translation or express what they thought the ancient languages were saying.  I agree the Bible is the inerrant word of God because the One who inspired it is inerrant and any interpretation of it is inerrant if the Holy Spirit is the One doing the interpreting.   

There is no relationship on earth that is formed without asking questions and I have not found my relationship to the God who loves me to be any different.  The Bible is a crucial way of getting to know Him.  When I have a difficult passage I present it to Him.  “This passage says this,” I say.  “Is this truly who You are?  Show me.  Help me to know You.”  I have found our God is delighted to answer my questions and draw me closer to Himself.  Does He answer everything at once in the way I expect?  No.  Sometimes His answers have been years in the receiving and I have found He had to teach me other things before I could understand His answer.  Doesn’t stop me asking.   

My precious fellow believers, Jesus Himself says, “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life, and these are they which testify of Me.  But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life” (John 5:39:40).  The Life we live in Christ Jesus is one of relationship.  His perfect love casts out all fear and I think that includes the fear of asking questions.

The Bible contains the promise of a day when we will know as we are known.  So ask.  Ask whatever you would.  He is safe.  He loves you.  He will answer you.

Amen. 

inerrant meaning – Google Search

Two Competing Philosophies of Bible Translation | Patterns of Evidence

References

Holy Bible, New King James Version, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee, 1982

The Comparative Study Bible, Zondervan Bible Publishers, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1984

The Complete Jewish Study Bible, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts, 2016

The New English Bible with the Apocrypha, Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, 1970

The Passion Translation, Broadstreet Publishing, Passion & Fire Ministries, 2018

Bentorah, Chaim, with Laura Bertone, Hebrew Word Study: Exploring the Mind of God, Whitaker House, New Kensington, Pennsylvania, 2019

Brown, F., S. Driver, and C. Briggs, The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, Eighteenth Printing, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody Massachusetts, 2018  

Guralnik, David B., Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language, Second College Edition, William Collins + World Publishing Co., Inc., Cleveland • New York, 1970, 1976

Peterson, Eugene H., The Message, NavPress, Tyndale House Publishers, 1993, 2002, 2018

Strong, James, LL.D., S.T.D., The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville Tennessee, 1990

Wilson, William, Wilson’s Old Testament Word Studies, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts

Young, Robert, Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts

Young, Robert, Modern Young’s Literal Translation: New Testament with Psalms & Proverbs, Greater Truth Publishers, Lafayette, Indiana, 2005