Martin Luther on the benift of learning Biblical languages
Let us be sure of this: we will not long preserve the gospel without the languages.
The languages are the sheath in which this sword of the Spirit [Eph. 6:17] is contained; they
are the casket in which this jewel is enshrined; they are the vessel in which this wine is
held; they are the larder in which this food is stored. . . . If through our neglect we let the
languages go (which God forbid!), we shall . . . lose the gospel.
Martin Luther, “To the Councilmen of All Cities in Germany That They Establish and Maintain Christian Schools,” in The Christian in Society II (ed. Walther I. Brandt; trans. Albert T. W. Steinhaeuser and rev. Walther I. Brandt; Luther’s Works 45; Philadelphia: Muhlenberg, 1962 [orig. 1525]), 360. _
Comments
-
I don't think the gospel, often preached to illiterates, needs precision in language. And I don't think precision in language provides a true understanding of scripture in itself. But it helps to have those who devote their lives to the task that we can trust. So we can devote our lives to following Jesus' and the disciple's examples which were normally shy of technical expertise.
-
I do not know about your ministry or the audience you are trying to reach, but for those who continue to cross my path knowledge of the Tanakh, classical Hebrew, and literature has proven to be of great value in "starting from Moses and all the prophets".
-
What is our calling in the NT? It certainly is not trifling over words. “Remind people of these things and solemnly charge them before the Lord not to wrangle over words. This is of no benefit; it just brings ruin on those who listen.” (2 Timothy 2:14)
-
@Dave_L said:
What is our calling in the NT? It certainly is not trifling over words. “Remind people of these things and solemnly charge them before the Lord not to wrangle over words. This is of no benefit; it just brings ruin on those who listen.” (2 Timothy 2:14)Wow, that is a classic example of a verse taken way out of context. We are to study the Scriptures. We are to wrestle with the original languages because words mean things. If you get it wrong you may not know the actual word of God. That's a big deal Dave.
-
@Dave_L said:
What is our calling in the NT? It certainly is not trifling over words. “Remind people of >these things and solemnly charge them before the Lord not to wrangle over words. >This is of no benefit; it just brings ruin on those who listen.” (2 Timothy 2:14)Dave, the act of communicating in modern English on these forums with you is not trifling over words any more than speaking my family's language or the language of the country I currently live in is. If you came to my country attempting to communicate the gospel in English it would at best be meaningless, but it might also push people away who aren't interested in English. One, of the reasons I use Hebrew, is because people I know speak Hebrew and to force them to use an English translation or a Japanese translation would ludicrous. Other, people I meet speak only Japanese and usually if they know English only know the very basics. So, I believe that God has probably called me to use other languages, but even if He didn't it would still be common sense for me to use other languages.
-
Tell me if words have power in the media, in a marriage, from a pulpit?
My view is that words and language have great power. Some of that comes from experience counseling, but much more from the Word of God.
God spoke the world into being by the power of His words Heb 11:3
For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned” Mat 12:36–37The words we speak are actually the overflow of our hearts Mat 12:34–35
All over Proverbs such as...
Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and those who love it will eat its fruits.If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless. Jam 1:26
So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. Rom 10:17
(Free note: Faith isn't forced upon a handful of the "chosen")Dozens more.
Redefining words, missing context leads to very poor theology and blatant error.
Yes, words matter. Getting then right matters.
-
Thanks GaoLu,
Just like the way KJV says it:
Matthew 12:37 -- "For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned."
Matthew 12:36
"But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment."@Dave_L said:
I don't think the gospel, often preached to illiterates, needs precision in language. And I don't think precision in language provides a true understanding of scripture in itself. But it helps to have those who devote their lives to the task that we can trust. So we can devote our lives to following Jesus' and the disciple's examples which were normally shy of technical expertise.Bro. Dave,
Words are important to understand the Message, for the speaker and the listener. CM -
“Remind people of these things and solemnly charge them before the Lord not to wrangle over words. This is of no benefit; it just brings ruin on those who listen.” (2 Timothy 2:14)
I would venture to say the disciples who people perceived as ignorant and unlearned knew far more than any of us. And Paul counted all of his acquired learning as dung. Why? Because unless God grants understanding, we cannot possibly know his Word.
Look at the profound language skills of the greatest heretics. I use them as proof of what I say.
-
@Dave_L said:
“Remind people of these things and solemnly charge them before the Lord not to wrangle over words. This is of no benefit; it just brings ruin on those who listen.” (2 Timothy 2:14)I would venture to say the disciples who people perceived as ignorant and unlearned knew far more than any of us. And Paul counted all of his acquired learning as dung. Why? Because unless God grants understanding, we cannot possibly know his Word.
Look at the profound language skills of the greatest heretics. I use them as proof of what I say.
That's not proof of anything. That just shows that they knew the language but didn't have the Spirit. You need both. If you can't even know what is written because you cannot read it, how can the Spirit give you an understanding of what is there? That's nonsense.
-
I'm not discounting literacy. But I think it is possible many if not more presently in heaven arrived there being illiterate than literate.
-
@Dave_L said:
Look at the profound language skills of the greatest heretics. I use them as proof of what I say.I am still not sure if the above is true, but if it is then that would be all the more reason why more (not all) faithful men/women of faith should know Biblical languages in order to deal with and even persuaded the heretics.
-
Not necessarily. If becoming language scholars is our calling, certainly. But scripture nowhere calls the average Christian to become a language scholar. Paul stresses the simplicity of the gospel, not the complexity.
-
No> @Dave_L said:
Not necessarily. If becoming language scholars is our calling, certainly. But scripture nowhere calls the average Christian to become a language scholar.
Dave have you noticed that I never once said that 'all' Christians should learn languages, I said that it would be beneficial if 'more' did so, but I never said 'all'. As, for the average Christian I am not sure what that means, for the so-called average Christians I have met and those you have met encountered may indeed not be the same type of individuals.
@Dave_L said:
Paul stresses the simplicity of the gospel, not the complexity.When, did anyone on here stress that the gospel was complex?
-
@Mitchell said:
No> @Dave_L said:Not necessarily. If becoming language scholars is our calling, certainly. But scripture nowhere calls the average Christian to become a language scholar.
Dave have you noticed that I never once said that 'all' Christians should learn languages, I said that it would be beneficial if 'more' did so, but I never said 'all'. As, for the average Christian I am not sure what that means, for the so-called average Christians I have met and those you have met encountered may indeed not be the same type of individuals.
@Dave_L said:
Paul stresses the simplicity of the gospel, not the complexity.When, did anyone on here stress that the gospel was complex?
Nobody said anything about making the gospel complex. But that is what we do when we place too much emphasis on the words and miss the meaning. As Paul says, the letter kills but the Spirit gives life.
-
@Dave_L said:
But that is what we do when we place too much emphasis on the words and miss the meaning.How is the concept of language acquisition equal to placing too much emphasis on words rather than meaning? Does this mean that I should focus on meaning and avoid using modern American English to communicate with you? It seems clear to me that using different languages to communicate is a good thing and necessary tool to get meaning across.
From the NT it is clear that Pual himself used more than one language when he found himself in different cultural contexts.
-
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
But that is what we do when we place too much emphasis on the words and miss the meaning.How is the concept of language acquisition equal to placing too much emphasis on words rather than meaning? Does this mean that I should focus on meaning and avoid using modern American English to communicate with you? It seems clear to me that using different languages to communicate is a good thing and necessary tool to get meaning across.
From the NT it is clear that Pual himself used more than one language when he found himself in different cultural contexts.
But Paul did not suggest everyone become fluent in the original languages.
-
@Dave_L Sounds like Original Languages are not your thing. Probably they are not imperative for everyone. I would trust that those with less interest would also not be overconfident in there unique, one-man-band interpretations that differ from scholars.
-
There is safety in a multitude of counselors. If you are not familiar with Baptist and Reformed theology you might see me as a one man band. But the truth is I stick pretty close to Reformed Theology and their creeds.
-
@Dave_L said:
But Paul did not suggest everyone become fluent in the original languages.A mute point as neither did I nor for that matter anyone else on this thread.
-
Isn't that the Topic of the thread? Luther and his "benefit of learning biblical languages"?
-
@Dave_L said:
Isn't that the Topic of the thread? Luther and his "benefit of learning biblical languages"?The topic of the thread is the benefit of learning biblical languages, but not that 'all' or 'everyone' should do so.
Which is why the following statement you made is a mute point and a strawman:
@Dave_L said:
But Paul did not suggest everyone become fluent in the original languages. -
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
Isn't that the Topic of the thread? Luther and his "benefit of learning biblical languages"?The topic of the thread is the benefit of learning biblical languages, but not that 'all' or 'everyone' should do so.
Which is why the following statement you made is a mute point and a strawman:
@Dave_L said:
But Paul did not suggest everyone become fluent in the original languages.It is not a false argument. If the NT is silent on a subject, we should not go beyond that.
-
@Dave_L said:
It is not a false argument. If the NT is silent on a subject, we should not go beyond that.Once, again you have changed the argument. Now, rather than being about Paul it is about the entire NT. No problem ...
the NT is silent on the use of Cars, therefore, Christians should not use Cars?
NT is silent on the use of the internet as well.But, The NT does give us examples of people using different languages it however neither condemns the use nor commands the use. So, it seems that the use of other language is permissible.
Of, course the topic of the thread is the benefit of learning biblical languages, but not that 'all' or 'everyone' should do so. Nor, that Paul or the NT claimed all should do so.
that is why the following statement you made is still a strawman:
@Dave_L said:
But Paul did not suggest **everyone **become fluent in the original languages. -
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
It is not a false argument. If the NT is silent on a subject, we should not go beyond that.Once, again you have changed the argument. Now, rather than being about Paul it is about the entire NT. No problem ...
the NT is silent on the use of Cars, therefore, Christians should not use Cars?
NT is silent on the use of the internet as well.But, The NT does give us examples of people using different languages it however neither condemns the use nor commands the use. So, it seems that the use of other language is permissible.
Of, course the topic of the thread is the benefit of learning biblical languages, but not that 'all' or 'everyone' should do so. Nor, that Paul or the NT claimed all should do so.
that is why the following statement you made is still a strawman:
@Dave_L said:
But Paul did not suggest **everyone **become fluent in the original languages.The topic is: "Martin Luther on the benift (sic) of learning Biblical languages". So how can Paul or any other NT authority remaining silent on the matter not be on topic?
-
@Dave_L said:
The topic is: "Martin Luther on the benefit of learning Biblical languages".Sure, that is the topic
@Dave_L said:
So how can Paul or any other NT authority remaining silent on the matter not be on topic?Why are you using English when the NT is silent on the matter? Shouldn't we only use the languages that are mentioned specifically in the NT or give direct permission in the NT?
Why are you discussing on an internet forum when the NT is silent on the matter?
Why do you use the term Trinity to describe God when the NT is silent on the matter?
**I could go on, but I think you can see why I don't buy your argument about the NT's silence nor do I see how it has anything to do with the real topic. **
However, as mentioned before the NT does mention the use of languages. It does not use the use the term "Biblical Language" Because there was neither an NT nor a Biblical Greek, back then what we call koine or Biblical Greek was simply one the many contemporary languages. It does use the term Hebrew. In the books of Acts, Jesus is recorded to have spoken in Hebrew to Paul (Acts 26:14), Paul is recorded to have been able to use Hebrew to speak for communication (Acts 21:40; 22:2).
-
Jesus' command to preach the gospel to the whole world involves learning the vulgar language of each. It says nothing about learning Greek, or Hebrew.
-
Now, you have switched the topic to the great commission (Matthew 28:16-20).
Rather than dealing with the questions I continue to ask of you and the issues I pointed out to you.@Dave_L said:
Jesus' command to preach the gospel to the whole world involves learning the vulgar language of each. It says nothing about learning Greek, or Hebrew.Would that then mean that:
Christians who learn Greek and Hebrew in order to translate the Bible into the language of the local people are in sin according to the Dave L line of theological reasoning?
Christians who know and use Hebrew to communicate the gospel and teach Bible classes are in defiance of the Dave L line of theological reasoning?
Christian colleges, Universities, and Seminaries that offer classes in Biblical language are wrong to do so according to your line of thought?
-
@Mitchell said:
Now, you have switched the topic to the great commission (Matthew 28:16-20).
Rather than dealing with the questions I continue to ask of you and the issues I pointed out to you.@Dave_L said:
Jesus' command to preach the gospel to the whole world involves learning the vulgar language of each. It says nothing about learning Greek, or Hebrew.Would that then mean that:
Christians who learn Greek and Hebrew in order to translate the Bible into the language of the local people are in sin according to the Dave L line of theological reasoning?
Christians who know and use Hebrew to communicate the gospel and teach Bible classes are in defiance of the Dave L line of theological reasoning?
Christian colleges, Universities, and Seminaries that offer classes in Biblical language are wrong to do so according to your line of thought?
Luther on the benefit of learning ancient greek, Aramaic or Hebrew has nothing to do with learning to speak the vulgar tongue of those to whom we are to preach.
-
@Dave_L said:
Luther on the benefit of learning ancient greek, Aramaic or Hebrew has nothing to do with learning to speak the vulgar tongue of those to whom we are to preach.By the way, Luther in the quote (found in the OP) said nothing about preaching.
Luther, however, did speak of 'preserving' the Gospel. -
@Mitchell said:
@Dave_L said:
Luther on the benefit of learning ancient greek, Aramaic or Hebrew has nothing to do with learning to speak the vulgar tongue of those to whom we are to preach.By the way, Luther in the quote (found in the OP) said nothing about preaching.
Luther, however, did speak of 'preserving' the Gospel.This is fine, but I am pointing out we need to apply ourselves to speaking at street level to our audiences.
