Confusing Clarification

I am well aware that many of my attempts at clarity tend toward obfuscation. Sometimes, it’s even intentional. Therefore, I suppose this blog really isn’t designed for a massive readership, and I’m fortunate and blessed when anyone reads this stuff.

In my defense, such as it is, or is required (which I don’t think it is), I deal with Scriptures that often are confusing without being obviously confusing. So, my obfuscation actually clarifies the problem before I lamely attempt to clarify. It’s like so many that believe they must, and actually attempt to, “get people lost before they can be saved.” I always thought that was an insane approach to sharing the good news of Jesus, but I’m learning to appreciate it.

I realized that I’ve been confusing to clarify just this morning, although I wouldn’t have disagreed had someone brought it to my attention. I was working on a Greek passage in Hebrews that was difficult for me, but it wasn’t the vocabulary that was difficult. The different grammatical parts were unexpected, and difficult for me to conceptualize in English. So, there weren’t any difficult words to explain, only difficult grammatical constructions.

When we read a translation of Scripture, we’re getting the grammatical sort of confusion clarified for us. It’s only when we read a passage in multiple translations that we get some sense of the difficulty, and then, only when the translators disagree on how to translate the grammatical elements. So, it’s not always easy for us to spot confusing passages when the vocabulary used is familiar.

So, enough with my self-defense of obfuscating Scripture (or making clear the obfuscation already there). Here’s an example:

and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives.

Hebrews 2:15 NASB

That seems simple enough, and most translations sound very similar. But here’s how I translated it:

and liberate these, as many as were caught by fear of death through slavery of every living thing.

my own translation

That’s a big difference, especially “every living thing” instead of “all their lives”. And, to be clear, I’m wrong. The problem I faced was that the grammatical construction in Greek was unfamiliar to me. The construction is composed of a preposition (through), a pronoun (all), the definite article (the), and an infinitive (to live), all in that order. For translators for hundreds of years, that means “all their life”. For me, I’m missing stuff like “them” or “their” in the construction. In fact, I think I completely missed the noun this phrase modifies. All the life of whom? Well, all translations seem to agree that the phrase modifies “those…subject to slavery” (see any other translation, even King James). I opted to modify “slavery”. Yeah, no.

So, I suppose my point is not simply that I’m wrong a lot, or that Greek isn’t easy (It’s Greek to me! You were thinking it). My point is that sometimes what seems merely odd is actually more peculiar than you imagine. And then, sometimes what seems clear actually isn’t. I consider part of my calling and gifting to perceive the ironies of our life with our Creator. I’m still working out how to communicate what I discover to others. Whether others care or not depends partly on my ability to communicate, and partly on who’s reading.

So, I’ll spend some time improving my understanding of Greek grammar. And I hope to be back with another entry, clarifying the obscure. Please forgive me if I obscure the clear on the path to clarifying. Irony is like that, sometimes, ironically.

Advertisement

Prepositional Combat

One of the difficulties in translating Hebrew into English are the wide range of usage of Hebrew prepositions. Understanding what a particular preposition means is very dependent upon the context. Just in the first few verses of Israel’s combat with Amalek, we excellent examples.

Then Amalek came and fought against Israel at Rephidim. So Moses said to Joshua, “Choose men for us and go out, fight against Amalek. Tomorrow I will station myself on the top of the hill with the staff of God in my hand.”

Exodus 17:8-9 NASB

The Hebrew prepositions are as follows:

1. …Amalek came and fought with Israel…
2. Moses said toward Joshua
3. “Select for us men…”
4. “Go, fight in Amalek…”
5. “I will stand on the top of the hill…”

The problems aren’t obvious until you read most translations, and see only about half of these prepositions. For instance, the NASB uses “against” for “with” in number 1, and almost all have “against” instead of “in” for number 4. This more explains the difficulty in translating Hebrew prepositions than it does what actually happened.

But why one preposition in one place, and another where you would expect what was used earlier? For instance, why didn’t Moses say “fight with Amalek” instead of “in Amalek”? The preposition, with, was used to introduce Amalek showing up to fight Israel in verse 8, why not use it again in verse 9?

My concern is perhaps unfounded, because there may not be much, if any, significance in using with versus in when speaking of engaging in combat. On the other hand, in Greek for instance, there is much difference. The preposition para in Greek, means “beside” or “alongside”, and this roughly corresponds to the Hebrew preposition “with”. But there are a couple of Greek words for “in”, one of which means, “inside”, as opposed to “among”. In Hebrew, there’s not much differentiation, in is in. So, perhaps Amalek was more tentative (“alongside” for combat), where Israel rushed in among them for combat (or Moses instructed Joshua to fight that way).

It’s hard to make definitive assertions one way or the other. The elasticity of Hebrew prepositions truly makes it difficult to know for sure. But knowing the various choices that were made may help at least expand the visualization of the event. What did it look like? What did the people see? What was it like to be there, standing among those Joshua tested in choosing for battle? What did the people feel when Amalek showed up? Was it over the sudden presence of water at Rephadim?

We don’t know for sure, but perhaps exploring the event through the additional lenses provided by these prepositions may help us bring a dusty ancient event into more vibrant focus.

That’s my view through the knothole this morning, what’s it look like from yours?