|
The following lessons are from Paul and The DispersionThe Teacher’s Edition Copyright©2009 Richard J. Willoughby, Sr.
LESSON 1
The English Translation of The Bible Students know that the Bible they read is actually a
translation of ancient manuscripts, some of which were written over 2000
years ago. The Old Testament was written primarily in the Hebrew, Aramaic,
and Chaldee languages. The New Testament was written in Greek. The first
widely published English translation of those ancient languages was the King
James Version. It was known as the Authorized Version and made available to
the public in 1611 AD. After that time, more ancient Hebrew and Greek
documents were uncovered and became available for translation. Based on newly
discovered manuscripts, the 1611 King James Version was subsequently amended
and changes were made to it. The
beginning of the 1611 King James Version of the Old Testament reads as
follows: THE HOLY BIBLE,
Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the
Originall tongues: & with the former
Translations (my emphasis) diligently compared and reuised: by his
Maiesties speciall Comandement. Appointed to be read in Churches. Imprinted
at London by Robert Barker, Printer to the Kings most Excellent Maiestie. ANNO DOM. 1611. The beginning of the 1611 King James Version of the New Testament reads as follows: THE NEWE Testament
of our Lord and Sauiour IESVS CHRIST. Newly Translated out of the Originall
Greeke: and with the former
Translations (my emphasis) diligently compared and reuised, by his
Maiesties speciall Commandement. IMPRINTED at London by Robert Barker,
Printer to the Kings most Excellent Maiestie. ANNO DOM. 1611. Cum Priuilegio.
Scholars who compared and revised the “former Translations” depended on many
sources, including the Wycliffe New Testament (c. 1382 AD) and the Tyndale
Bible (c. 1526 AD). Each contained both the Old and New Testaments as translated
into English from Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. The 1582-1610 Douay-Rheims Bible was also a source, but it depended extensively on the
Latin translations of the
Hebrew and Greek texts of St. Jerome. In addition to earlier
English translations, the Hebrew
Masoretic text and the Greek Septuagint were consulted. The scholars who
prepared the 1611 King James Version did not have the Hebrew and Greek
resources that are available to today’s translators. Since 1611, many English
versions have been made available to the public. These editions are based on
recently discovered Hebrew or Greek manuscripts. To repeat, the recently
uncovered texts were not available either to the scholars of the original
King James Version or to their predecessors, such as the Wycliffe, Tyndale,
and Douay-Rheims Bibles. Depending on the translators’ experience, knowledge
and skill, later editions are now widely available to the public and differ
from each other in many ways. Some versions are paraphrased editions, loosely
following the original manuscripts and making changes that dilute the meaning
of the original Hebrew and Greek texts. The New King James Version
(NKJV) and New International Version
(NIV) are examples of paraphrasing. These later versions are vapid and misleading
translations and must be read with considerable skepticism and constant
reference to the original manuscripts. For example, the words “with the
Gentiles worshippers” were added to Acts 17:17 in the NKJV. There are versions that more closely follow the
Hebrew and Greek texts. The King James Version and Jay P. Green,
Sr.’s, Interlinear Bible are more nearly exact word-for-word,
literal translations that preserve the original meaning of the original
texts. Both may be referenced to Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. Nevertheless, there is also an opportunity for students to
challenge the accuracy of the “former
Translations” and, therefore, to question the accuracy 1611 King James
Version itself. One example is the “historical” hypothesis that Paul was an
apostle to non-Jews, i.e., Gentiles. The focus of this proposition is the
translation of the Greek common
noun, ethnos, as the English proper noun, “Gentile”. Circumstantial as it may be, use of the
proper noun “Gentile”, meaning non-Jew, rather than the common nouns,
“people” or “nation”, is a relatively recent event, appearing as late as 1300
AD. See E. Raymond Capt’s comments in
Lesson 2.
LESSON 2 E.
Raymond Capt and the Definition of ethnos The Biblical archaeologist, E. Raymond Capt,
recognized this problem also and wrote in his book, Abrahamic Covenant,
“The word (ethnos)
could have been translated ‘people’ or even better ‘nations’”. That is,
“people” and “nations” are not exact as to their identity, being neither Jew
nor non-Jew, neither Israel nor some other unnamed nation. They are common
nouns, not proper nouns. By the time of Jesus, Peter, and Paul, members of
the 12 tribes of the patriarch Jacob-Israel had disbursed “to the nations”
(James 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1; 2 Peter 3:1; Acts 11:19;
Genesis 11:8). Paul’s apostleship “to the nations” did not
mean that he was to go exclusively to non-Jews/Gentiles more than he was to
go to the lost sheep of the House of Israel: “They came to Thessalonica,
where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul, as was his custom, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned
with them from Scriptures.” (Acts 17:1-2, 28:20;
Matthew 15:24) Capt’s complete statement follows: *Gentile - To better understand
what Timothy said it must be pointed out that the word “Gentile”, which is
not found in any scripture, is a translated word from the Greek word “ethnos”
which means “heathen”, “people” (non-Jewish) also “nations”. The word could
have been translated “people” or even better “nations” for Christ did not go
to the heathen but rather He did preach to the people of non-Jewish origin or
nations of Israel (my
emphasis) as will be shown later. (Capt, E. Raymond, Abrahamic
Covenant, Artisan Publishers, Muskogee, Oklahoma 74402, ISBN
0-934666-26-1, from a footnote on page 12. Capt’s comment is on 1 Timothy
3:16, “God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of
angels, preached unto Gentiles*, believed on in the world, received up into glory.”) LESSON 3 The
Definition of ethnos If the word “Gentile”, as it occurred in the
1611 King James Version, originally meant “nations” and was neither a proper noun nor a synonym for non-Jew, when did it
assume a technical meaning of “non-Jew”?
Scholars of 1611 King James Version introduced the word “Gentile” into the
common English (Biblical lexicon) language on a relatively wide (public)
scale. It is true, whether or not the word “Gentile” had its inception with
the Douay-Rheims Bible (c. 1582 AD) or with the earlier Latin translation (gentibus
< gens) of the Greek word ethnos which was translated by St. Jerome (c. 382-405
AD). It is also true, whether or not the word ethnos meant “non-Jew” to him. At some point in time,
“Gentile” (upper case “G”) became a synonym for a specific person (a proper
noun) who was a non-Jew. It was
a change from the original Greek text where ethnos had a meaning of an unspecified place or person. As more evidence is presented
later, this meaning will become clear.
(See laos and ethnos
from ‘am
and gowy,
respectively, in Lesson 8.) Since the Greek word ethnos,
traditionally translated as “Gentile”, is not explicit as to its name or its
location, it must follow that the theological beliefs of the inhabitants of
such an unnamed nation cannot be known either. They may be Jew, or they may
be non-Jew. Ethnos
has a meaning of an unspecified, common noun, with a meaning of “nation” or
“person”. The etymology of the English word “nation” is
that it has a precursor in the Old French word nacion, which, in turn, was taken from the Latin word nātiō. The original meaning of the French word nacion, and the Latin word nātiō, meant a place
of birth but does not carry that same sense today, as the English word
“nation” does. Now, the meaning of “nation” is that of an unspecified place, geographical location,
territory, or country. Nations today are not necessarily racially or
theologically monolithic (having one race or belief). The “nations” of Paul’s
time were not unified in their
race or beliefs either. Both Jews of the Dispersion and non-Jews lived
together in foreign nations (James 1:1; Acts 2:5-11; 17:1-2). Nations foreign to Israel were not
“theologically uniform”, as solely non-Jew/Gentile countries. Acts 9:15 is a case in point. The recent history
of the translation of the Greek word ethnos
is that it is mistranslated as “Gentile”,
as a specific person,
meaning non-Jew. (See Lesson 2, E. Raymond Capt’s comments on the definition
of ethnos
and Lesson 4, the corrected translation of Acts 9:15.) LESSON 4
THE
GREEK GRAMMAR OF ACTS 9:15 ειπε δε
προς αυτον ό
Κυριος 1
Πορευου
ότι σκευος
εκλογης μοι
εστιν ούτος του
βαστασαι το
ονομα μου ενωπιον
εθνων και βασιλεων
υίων τε Ισραηλ The Word for Word, Literal
English Translation of Acts 9:15 ενωπιον εθνων
και βασιλεων υίων τε
Ισραηλ enōpion ethnōn kai basileōn huiōn te Israēl
before nations and kings sons and of Israel. The
Greek words βασιλεων (kings)
and υίων (sons) are grammatically connected to one another
by the conjunction te.
According to Goetchius, “Τε (and) is
peculiar from the point of view of English. It does not stand between the two
(not three or more) syntactic units it serves to join but after the second
one.”2 Both “kings and sons” are grammatically
connected to each other by the conjunction te and to the proper noun Israel (Jacob) by their
suffixes ων, which means the genitive
of possession. “Kings and sons” are
not connected grammatically to the word nations (εθνων, people), either by the previous conjunction και (and) or their suffixes ων. The
“kings” are not Gentile kings. It
is true that the word ethnōn (εθνων, nations, people) also has the suffix, ων. However, in that instance, ων signifies the “genitive of place”, not
the “genitive of possession”. It is “the place to which, or within which, an
action belongs.”3 The “genitive of place”
reveals where Paul’s actions were to take place
– before nations or people. ενωπιον εθνων και βασιλεων
υίων τε
Ισραηλ before
nations and kings and sons of Israel (Jacob)3a “genitive of place” “genitive
of possession” of Jacob
1Jay P. Green’s Interlinear Bible; 2Goetchius, p. 244;
3Hadley and Allen, p. 243, pp
18-19; 3aGenesis 32:28, 35:9-10 According to James Hadley and Frederick
DeForest Allen, in their text, A Greek Grammar, New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1884, page 243, the genitive of place “is used to denote the place to which, or within which,
an action belongs.” Here, the
“nations” are the unspecified places where Paul was to carry Jesus’ name. It
is also true that ethnōn is the object of the preposition “before” (ενωπιον). However, the “genitive of possession” is present as the Genitive case ending, not as the Accusative Case ending, which would be represented by the
suffix η, ē. (See the Paradigm of the word ethnos in Lesson 5; ē is pronounced “ay”) If ethnōn were in the Accusative Case, it would only
mean that “ethnos” was the object of the preposition, “before”, ενωπιον, and not signal it as a place of action. The genitive of place signifies that an
action is to occur at an unspecified place, not before a specific
people. To
repeat for emphasis, the two units that are connected grammatically are
“kings and sons”. More emphatically
still, the word “nations” is not connected to “kings and sons”.
The “kings” are not Gentile kings.
Even if Paul met with “Gentile kings”, the grammar of Acts 9:15 does not
address that association or involvement. The “kings” are the kings, leaders,
or chiefs who were descendants of Jacob-Israel. The Greek words βασιλεων and υίων both have
the suffix, ων, which represents the “genitive of possession”.
In English, the words could be translated as “Jacob’s kings and sons” or
“Israel’s kings and sons”. Israēl is not the nation of Israel
but the patriarch Jacob. (Genesis 32:28, 35:9-10) “In the Bible, the word (βασιλεων, basileōn, king) does not
necessarily imply great power or great extent of country. Many persons are
called kings whom we should rather call chiefs
or leaders.” (Smith’s Bible
Dictionary, page 335) See,
for example, Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue at Corinth and (also) the
chiefs of the Jews at Rome. (Acts 18:8 and 28:17)
LESSON
5
PARADIGM
OF THE GREEK WORD το
εθνος, the nation Singular Plural Nominative: το εθνος (the
nation)
τα
εθνη (the nations) Genitive: του
εθνους (of
the nation) των
εθνων (of the nations) Dative: τω εθνει (the
nation)
τοις
εθνεσιν (the
nations) Accusative: το εθνος (to,
for the nation) τα εθνη (to,
for the nations) A portion of this paradigm is used by permission
and is from E. vanN. Goetchius’ textbook, The Language of the New Testament, pages 129-130. Note that this paradigm includes the definite
articles only to show their form. They are not present in the Greek text of
Acts 9:15. The paradigm illustrates the grammar of the “genitive of possession” (for kings and sons) and the “genitive of place” (for nations, εθνων), by means
of the suffix ων, ōn. The “genitive of place” and the “genitive of
possession” are found in Acts 9:15 in the word “nations” and the phrase “Jacob’s
kings and sons”, respectively, εθνων ≡ ethnōn.
In the above paradigm, the article, το, is not
used in a restrictive sense but as a means of determining case, number, and
gender. (“Gender” is a grammatical classification and does not represent male
or female.) DEFINITION: The Greek word εθνος, (nation, people), and its various grammatical forms such, as εθνη (to nations), εθνων (of nations), etc., is generic and intended to represent a body of people or peoples, including Jewish groups, which may or may not be associated with a particular geographic territory, depending on context. Such nations are understood to be sufficiently conscious of their unity to possess a government uniquely their own, or to be subject to another government, such as, peoples, provinces, principalities, areas, regions, countries, districts, empires, kingdoms, states, terrains, territories, city states, tribes, human groups, or ethnicity as a common characteristic, but which are based on territorial or cultural differences, not specifically theological differences. The inhabitants are not defined by or limited to their theological beliefs. (ethnos<ethō, Strong’s Number 1486)
LESSON
6
ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF ACTS 9:15 WITH DEFINITE ARTICLES The Greek word ethnos is traditionally translated as the English word
“Gentile”. (Although, this is now slowly being corrected; see Jay P. Green,
Sr.’s Interlinear
Bible, GIB.) The English word “Gentile” is a
specific person and means
non-Jew. Also, the definite article “the” has been traditionally added before
the words “Gentile” and “sons”. The article, “the”, is a word which is not in the original Greek
manuscripts. The Wycliffe Bible is one of the few exceptions where the
article “the” was not added before a translation of ethnos, (hethene
men), but was added before
“sons”. However, the word “hethene” adds specificity to ethnos, just as an article would. (See the purpose of
the Greek definite article in Lesson
7 and Goetchius4) Literal Translation of the Greek Words ενωπιον εθνων και βασιλεων
υίων τε
Ισραηλ before
nations and kings and sons of Israel “genitive of place” “genitive of possession” of Jacob English Translations
of the Greek Words bifore hethene
men, and kingis, and tofore thea sones of Israel.
(Wycliffe Bible; the words, “hethene men,” have no definite article before
thea gentyls
and kynges and thea
chyldren of Israel. (Tyndale Bible) before thea Gentiles, and kings, and thea children of
Israel. (Douay-Rheims) before thea Gentiles,
and Kings, and thea children of Israel. (1611 KJV) before thea
Gentiles, and kings, and thea children
of Israel. (1885 KJV) before
nations
and kings
and sons of Israel. (Green, GIB) The
word thea, in bold italics, indicates that it has been
added by translators. Note that the word “gentyls” in the Tyndale Bible is not
capitalized There are no definite
articles in the Greek manuscripts. Εθνων and υίων are anarthrous4
(have no article). Absence of the definite article in Greek signifies
that εθνων and υίων are common
nouns, not proper or specific nouns. Εθνων has been translated as “heathen men”, “the gentyles”, “the Gentiles”, and “nations” and υίων as
“the sones”, “the chyldren”, and “the
children”.
Again,
“leaders” (kings) and “sons” (children) are connected grammatically to the
noun “Israel” (Jacob), not to the
noun “nations” (ethnōn, “people”). Felix, (Herod II) Agrippa, Porcius
Festsus, et al, are not examples
of the “kings” (leaders) to whom Paul was to go. They were not descendants of
Jacob-Israel. (See Acts 23:24 ff and 28:17 for
leaders.) Green, correctly translates εθνων and βασιλεων
υίων τε
(“nations” and “kings and sons”) without definite articles (“nations” and
“kings and sons” are also common nouns. They are not proper nouns.
LESSON
7
Review:
The Purpose of the Greek Article In Greek, there are no indefinite
articles (a, an) as there are in English. However, Greek does use the definite article to specify a
particular person, place, or thing, as distinguished from other persons,
places or things. Definite articles are used in a restrictive sense in both English and Greek languages. “The restrictive article marks a particular
object (or objects) as distinguished from others of the same class: thus ό
ανθρωπος , ho anthrōpos, the man (as distinguished
from other men). The article is
omitted in many common
(unspecified, i.e., not proper)
designations of place made by such words as πολις/city,
αγρος/country,
and γη/land. Names of persons, places, and
things being individual in their nature, are usually without the article
(e.g., Israel). Plural proper names
of nations
or families
generally have the article: οί Κορινθιοι, the Corinthians; but sometimes omit
it: … Μηδους,
Medes.” (Greek
Grammar, Hadley and Allen, their pages 216 and 217) The word, ethnos, is a common
noun. It is not specific and not used in a restrictive sense as proper noun would be. The text of
Acts 9:15 illustrates this. It is leaders (kings) and (te)
descendants (sons) of Jacob that are united.
Nations and kings are not united. (See Lesson 4) Paul was to carry the name
of Jesus to leaders and descendants of
Jacob who had dispersed to “foreign nations” or “people”. They were not
specifically designated “Gentiles”. This is supported by Paul’s customary
attendance at synagogues of the Jews of the Dispersion, not Gentile
assemblies. (See Paul’s attendance at synagogues of the nations in Lesson 8
below) “For the hope of Israel, I am bound with this
chain” is also evidence of his focus on the Jews of the Dispersion. (Acts 28:20) Paul rarely went to Gentile meetings unless he
was requested to do so. For example, at Athens, “they took hold of him (Paul)8 and brought him
to the Areopagus”. (Acts 17:22)
LESSON 8
Home
Paul’s
Synagogue Appearances 1. Damascus, Acts 9:20 2. Salamis, Acts 13:5 3. Antioch of Pisidia, Acts 13:14 4. Iconium, Acts 14:1 5. Thessalonica, Acts 17:1 6. Berea, Acts 17:10 7. Athens, Acts 17:17 8. Corinth, Acts 18:4 9. Ephesus, Acts 18:19 10. Ephesus, Acts 19:8 (11. Rome, Acts 28:17)
LESSON
9
Review:
Proper Nouns and Common Nouns In contemporary translations of the Greek New Testament,
the English word “Gentile” (upper case “G”)
is a proper noun and is the name
of a specific person who is defined as a non-Jew. “Gentile” is defined as a non-Jew, notwithstanding the etymology
of the word. In English, a proper noun is signified by an initial upper-case
letter and represents specific person, place, or thing.5 Specific nouns are called
proper nouns: John
Adams; Scotland; Statue of Liberty,
Jesus. In the Bible, some English pronouns are also given upper case
letters to designate a specific person. When the name of Jesus
is the antecedent, the following third person, singular masculine pronoun is
given an upper case “H”: Then He took the cup. (Luke 22:17) The English word “nation” is a common noun and does not reference a
specific place. It is not a proper name that specifies a
particular country, location, or group of people. “Go and make disciples of
all nations/people.” (ethnē; Matthew 28:19) “Gentile” and “nation” are not the same. To
repeat, an English word that begins with an upper case letter signifies a
specific person, place, or thing5 and is a proper
noun. Turning that around, the word “Gentile”
must mean a specific person. Some scholars believe it means a non-Jew. If
true, “Gentile” (upper case “G”) cannot be a synonym for an unspecified territory, nation,
province, country, or people. A “Gentile” is a specific person. 5Nouns may also refer to a
quality: “I came not to call the righteous…” (Mark 2:17) If a “Gentile” is a non-Jew, it cannot,
therefore, mean “nation”. It cannot carry opposing meanings, in the same context, as an oxymoron would. A
“nation” (an εθνος)
is an unspecified place. When and
why did the Greek word ethnos,
in its various grammatical forms, cease to have a meaning of “nation” or
“people”, as an unspecified place
or person, and take on the
specific, technical definition of “Gentile”, meaning non-Jew, a specific person? (Two of the first were the
Douay-Rheims and KJV translations.) Septuagint scholars6 translated the
Hebrew words, gowy and ‘am, into Greek. Each
meant “people”
or “nation” without specifying precisely either the geographical location or
the beliefs of the inhabitants. Septuagint
scholars selected
narrower meanings when they translated the Hebrew words into Greek. The word gowy was translated as the
Greek word ethnos (a foreign nation or
people not “of Israel”). The word ‘am was translated as the
Greek word laos (people “of Israel”). The etymology of the
Greek word ethnos
has its roots in the Greek word ethos,
which had a meaning of custom,
manner, life manner, or theological persuasion. However, the meaning of ethnos
does not carry the same meaning as ethos. Ethnos does not mean “Gentile”, non-Jew. It has a meaning of “people”
or “nation” as an unspecified group
or place, regardless of the custom, manner, life manner, or theological beliefs of its citizens. It
is a common noun and is not
specific as to the “people” by name or the “place” by geographical location.
“Josephus in Jewish War uses ethnos for Israel and laos for
‘people’, ‘population’, ‘crowd’. In
the Antiquities,
however, he often uses laos for Israel, largely because he makes considerable use
of the LXX in his work.” 6a The point is this. Use of the word ethnos is not sacrosanct and is not to be narrowly
translated as the English proper noun,
“Gentile”. 6 The Septuagint (LXX, 70)
was a Greek translation of Hebrew Scriptures by 72 Jewish scholars
between 300-200 BC. It was a Greek source of the Hebrew Bible for early Greek-speaking
Jews of the Dispersion and, later, Christians. 6aBromiley, Theological Dictionary of The New Testament,
page 500; see Bibliography. The Septuagint
scholars were responsible for the original translations of the Hebrew Bible
into Greek. Later English
translations of the two Greek words ethnos and laos,
which occurred in the Septuagint, followed suit and translated those English
words as “Gentile” and “people” (or nation of Israel) respectively. They are
linked through the Septuagint to the peculiar Hebrew double translation of gowy (foreign people) and ‘am (people of Israel). That
is, the 70+ scholars who translated the Hebrew Bible into
Greek were inclined to use the Greek word ethnos for the Hebrew word gowy and laos to represent ‘am. By itself, that is not deterrence. As stated before, the common meaning of
each, ethnos and gowy,
is the same: an unspecified geographical area or “nation” or “people”. That
which is deterrence is the use of the English proper noun “Gentile” to translate the unspecified (common) Greek
noun ethnos (or even the Hebrew words gowy or ‘am)
as “non-Jew”, rather than “nation”. There is the intrusion of the false
hypothesis that if one is a person of a foreign nation, one must be a
non-Jew, a Gentile, even though Jews (of the Dispersion) lived in nations
foreign to Israel and were the reason for Paul’s chains. (e. g., Acts 18:24,
21:39; 28:20) In the Bible, the English proper noun “Gentile” is used without regard to the etymology of the
word. The English word “gentile” (lower case “g”) stems from the Old French
(OF) word gens
(lower case “g”) and the Late Latin word gentilis < gens,
(also lower case “g”). Gens means “a clan, stock, people, tribe, nation, or
a place”, without specificity or
regard for the inhabitants’ theological beliefs. When did the common noun “gentile” (lower case
“g”) become the proper noun
“Gentile” (upper case “G”),
meaning “non-Jew” and enter the English language, thereby supplanting the
original common noun meaning of “a clan, stock, people, tribe, nation (as
unspecified persons, places, or things)? Based on the Septuagint’s narrow definition, it
began with the original Hebrew to Greek translation, thence (from that
source) to English translations but not necessarily to St. Jerome’s Latin
translation. (gentibus; see St. Jerome’s translation in Lesson 10) The Old French word gens (plural) is derived from the Latin word gentilis. Each has a meaning of nation, a place, regardless of the racial composition or theological
persuasion of that nation’s population, whether they “be” Jew or non-Jew.
There is no direct (cognate) link between the Greek word ethnos
and the French word gens or from the Latin word gentilis that can have a meaning of
non-Jew. Ethnos is not cognate to the English word gentile in that sense. There is a
vast difference between the word nation, as a geographical place
of birth, and the modern usage of the English word Gentile (upper case “G”) as a person having a particular theological persuasion. gentile [lower case “g”, 1350-1400 AD; ME < OF gens < LL
gentilis < gens, a people, clan, stock, tribe, nation; plural, gentes, foreigners; all unspecific] nation [1250-1300
AD; ME < OF nacion, nation
< L nātiō, a place of birth, people; all unspecific] The Latin word gens is a specific (not specific), as is the English
derivative “gentile” (lower case “g”). Both are common nouns and carry no
technical, proper noun connotation, such as Achaia/Greeks; Israel/Israelites;
Italia/Italians/Romans; or “non-Jew/Gentile”, etc. The use of the English
word “Gentile” (upper case “G”) does
carry a technical, specific meaning and is a proper noun that has become a synonym for “non-Jew” in English
translations of the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. (The exceptions are Green’s
translations). The proper noun
“Gentile” has affected English translations of the Greek New Testament to
such an extent that the original meanings of ethnos, laos, gowy, ‘am, and gens have
been lost. A foreign “nation”, in Biblical
translations, has come to mean non-Jew/Gentile (upper case “G”), rather than
signify an unspecified place or a people. The evidence is this: Septuagint scholars
ignored the original meaning of the Hebrew word, gowy, גוי, and the Greek word ethnos, εθνος. Each has a meaning of “nation”, “people”, or
“groups” (of persons, places, or things), without regard to their theological
beliefs. Nevertheless, the Septuagint scholar’s inclination is “always to
use laos when the reference
is to Israel and to use ethnos
even for ‘am when the reference is to another people,
although this is not a consistent principle.” (See Bromiley, page 499) Ethnos would not necessarily mean non-Jew, simply
because there were Jews of the Dispersion in those foreign, Greek-speaking
nations – those who cried abba! pater!
(Father! abba in Hebrew; Father! patēr in Greek. Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6) The
Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible translated for Jews of
The Dispersion, c. 200 B.C. LESSON 10
St. Jerome’s Latin Translation of Acts 9:15 The scholars of the
1611 King James Version also relied on St. Jerome’s Latin translation of the
Greek text of Acts 9:15.7a His translation provided a source for the
English word “Gentile”. The English word “Gentile” is based on the Latin word
gens
through St. Jerome’s translation of εθνων as gentibus < gens. The Douay-Rheims (D–R) English translation follows St. Jerome’s
Latin translation.) ειπεν δε
προς αυτον ό Κυριος
πορευου ότι
σκευος εκλογης
μοι εστιν
ούτος του
βαστασαι το
ονομα μου ενωπιον εθνων
και
βασιλεων
υίων τε Ισραηλ dixit
autem ad eum Dominus7 vade quoniam vas electionis est mihi iste ut portet nomen meum coram gentibus et regibus et filiis Israhel. And
the Lord said to him: Go thy way: for this man is to me a vessel of election, to carry my
name before the Gentiles
and kings and the children of Israel.
(Douay–Reims) The use of
the lower
case “g” in the
Latin word “gentibus” is used by St. Jerome to
translate the Greek word εθνων (ethnōn). The lower case “g” indicates a common noun,
not a proper noun. “Dominus” and
“Israel” are capitalized in both the Greek and Latin because they are proper nouns,
as they are in English. However, the common noun “gentibus”, with its lower case “g”, is capitalized when it is
translated as the English word “Gentiles”, making it
a proper noun, meaning non-Jew. (See the Latin suffix “us” in regibus.)
7a See
“The Translators To The Reader”, at the beginning of the 1611 Edition of the
King James Version of The Holy Bible and the comments on S. Jerome’s translations. The first
letter in the word “Gentiles” is capitalized in
English translations of the Greek word ethnōn. The word ethnōn
is not capitalized in the original Greek texts (or in Jerome’s Latin
translation of εθνων as gentibus.). Also, the
word “the” has been
added before “Gentiles” in the English translation. There is no definite
article, tōn, before ethnōn in the original text of the Greek
manuscripts. It is anarthrous (has no definite article). That
is, the lower case “e” signals a common
(not specific) noun. However, there
is a definite article in the Greek
text before “the Lord”, (ho Kurios), indicating
that it is a proper (specific) noun, meaning a specific person,
i.e., “The Lord”. St. Jerome
properly capitalized Dominus in his Latin translation. “Lord”
is capitalized in English translations. “Israel” needs no definite
article. It is a specific nation, a particular place, as signified by its initial upper case latter, I.
In Acts
9:15, the definite article, tōn (the), is absent before the neuter noun ethnōn (nations). That is, ethnōn is a common
noun, neuter in gender (grammatical classification). Based on the absence of
that definite article, “tōn” and the absence of a capital first letter, ethnōn is not a proper noun. If ethnōn was a
specific (proper) noun, it would have a meaning of a particular or specific
“somebody”, “some place”, or “something” and/or would be preceded by the
definite article tōn. It is
neither preceded by the definite article tōn,
nor is the first letter capitalized. That is, ethnōn is a common
noun having no specific
designation, such as Gentile. St. Jerome translated the Greek word ethnōn as the Latin word gentibus, which does not have a technical or particular
meaning of anything specific, let alone have a meaning of non-Jew/Gentile. (See
page 13 for St. Jerome’s Latin translation) That is, ethnōn should be
translated as “before nations”
and/or “before people” with no
specific designation, such as non-Jew/Gentile.
LESSON 11
Home
Review:
The Purpose of the Greek Article In Greek, there is no indefinite article as
there is in English. However, Greek does use a definite article to specify a particular person, place, or thing,
as distinguished from other persons, places or things. Definite articles are
used in a restrictive sense. “The restrictive article marks a particular
object (or objects) as distinguished from others of the same class: thus ό
ανθρωπος , ho anthrōpos, the man (as
distinguished from other men). The
article is omitted in many common
(unspecified, i.e., not proper)
designations of place made by such words as πολις/city,
αγρος/land, and γη/land.
Names of persons, places, and things being individual in their nature, are
usually without the article (e.g., Israel). Plural proper names of nations or families generally have
the article: οί Κορινθιοι, the Corinthians; but sometimes omit
it: … Μηδους,
Medes.” (Greek
Grammar, Hadley and Allen, their pages 9 and 10.) The word, ethnos, is a common
noun. It is not specific and not used in a restrictive sense as proper noun would be. The text of
Acts 9:15 illustrates this. It is leaders (kings) and (te)
descendants (sons) of Jacob that are
united. Nations and kings are not united. (See page 5 ff) Paul was to carry
the name of Jesus to leaders (kings) and sons of Jacob who had dispersed to
“foreign nations” or “people”. They were not specifically designated
“Gentiles”. This is supported by Paul’s customary attendance at synagogues of
the Jews of the Dispersion (See page 23 for Paul’s
attendance at synagogues). “For the hope of
Israel, I am bound with this chain” is also evidence of his focus on the Jews
of the Dispersion. (Acts 28:20) Paul rarely went
to Gentile assemblies unless he was requested to do so. For example, at Athens,
“they took hold of him (Paul) and
brought him to the Areopagus”. 8 (Acts 17:22)
LESSON 12
Home
WHO
WERE THE JEWS OF THE DISPERSION (DIASPORA)? Dates
Are Approximate – They are Common Knowledge Remember, I beseech thee, the word that thou commanded your servant Moses, saying, If ye transgress, I will scatter* you abroad among the nations: But if ye turn unto me, and keep my commandments, and do them; though there were of you cast out unto the uttermost part of the heaven, yet will I gather them from there, and will bring them unto the place that I have chosen to set My Name there. (Nehemiah 1:8,9; Israel 1948 AD; Leviticus 26:33, 1–46) The 12 tribes of Israel, each named for one of
the 12 sons of the man Jacob, occupied the Palestine region as a unified
kingdom from 1020 BC to 920 BC. It was later partitioned into northern and southern
regions. The 12 tribes were also known collectively as “the nation of
Israel”. It was a name that reflected the patriarch of all 12 tribes,
Jacob-Israel. Jacob’s name had been changed to Israel before the birth of his
son, Benjamin. (Genesis 32:28; 35:10; Appendix
IIA). Between 1020 and 920 BC, the twelve tribes of
Israel were united and ruled by a monarchy of three kings: Saul, David and
Solomon. That united kingdom only survived a short time after the death of
Solomon in 930 BC. In 920 BC, Israel became divided into two nations: Israel,
the northern kingdom, consisted of 10 tribes; Judah, the southern kingdom,
consisted of the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin (Judah was Jesus’ House;
Benjamin was Paul’s House; see their Genealogy in Appendix IIA). The priestly
tribe of Levi was not a landed gentry but was associated with both Judah and
Benjamin as well as the other 10 tribes. (See Note below for the Hebrew and Greek words for
“scatter” and “people.”) Israel, the northern kingdom, survived from 920
BC to 720 BC under a series of kings, when it was taken captive by Assyria.
(1 Kings 1:1 ff) The southern kingdom of Judah and Benjamin survived
from 920 to 586 BC, when it was taken captive by the Babylonians. After the fall of the Assyrian Empire 610 BC,
the captive 10 tribes of the Northern Kingdom scattered in many directions.
The Biblical archaeologist E. Raymond Capt12 describes how
the 10 northern tribes dispersed over the Caucasus Mountains. That mountain
range is located in the modern nation of Armenia, as are the sources of the
Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. Those 10 northern tribes dispersed westward
across northern Europe to the British Isles and to North America. The members of the Southern Kingdom, Judah and
Benjamin, were carried into captivity by the Babylonians 586 BC. They began returning to the Palestine
region 538 BC and became subject to the Roman Empire 63 BC. The Romans ruled
Judea during the time of Jesus and Paul well into the 1st millennium AD. Some
members of the dispersed tribes of Judah and Benjamin remained in Babylonia.
During the first century AD, there were descendants of Judah and Benjamin13 who had not scattered great distances from
Judea. Some dispersed and settled in the nearby nations of Syria, Asia,
Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia and Italy. A total of 12 tribes (not 10) had
scattered from the Roman province of Judea according to James 1:1.14 (1 Peter 1:1; Acts 2:9-11)
See “Jutland”, the phonetic
relative of “Ioudah” (Jew), which was the land of the Angles (See
Anglo-Saxons) who invaded northern England. The word “English” also has its
phonetic etymology in the word “Angle”, as “Anglish”, L. Anglus, etc. 13Jesus; Paul; James;
Joseph, son of Heli; Joseph of Arimathea, et al. Jesus was of the House
(tribe) of Judah, Paul was of the House (tribe) of Benjamin. See Jesus and
Paul’s genealogy, Appendix IIA. 14The members of the House of Levi were spread
among the other 11 tribes in order to perform their priestly functions. The
tribe of Levi had no given geographical area. NOTE: The purpose of this very
brief account of the history of ancient Israel is done merely to point out
that Jews of the Dispersion were scattered to nearby nations and were the
ones Paul taught in their synagogues - not to Gentiles in their assemblies.
The nation of Israel’s division into the northern and southern nations of
Israel and Judah and their subjection to the Assyrians, Babylonians and
Romans should be kept in mind when understanding Paul’s mission to the
nations. It is also a reminder that translations of the Greek words Ioudaioi, Ioudaios, etc., are often mistranslated as a
person who was a descendant of Jacob-Israel when it may also be translated as
a region, nation, country, or a place under Roman authority, i.e., the region
in Palestine called Judea. The word ‘am is used for “people” or “nations”
in all of these references, not gowy, which is traditionally
translated by the Septuagint as laon the “people of Israel”. I will scatter (אפוצ, 6327); the nations (people, בעמים < עם, ‘am, 5971); + Ezekiel 28:25; Deuteronomy 4:27; Zechariah 10:9–10.) LESSON 13
Home
JEWS
OF THE DISPERSION RETURNED AT PENTECOST Some members of the scattered tribes were situated
close enough and were able to return to Jerusalem three times each year,15
as demanded by The Lord. The Jews of
the Dispersion of relatively nearby nations would be able to make the three
yearly pilgrimages to Jerusalem to celebrate the feasts of Passover16, Pentecost17, and Harvest18. One such pilgrimage is recounted in the Book
of Acts during the Feast of Pentecost. The Apostles also made their
pilgrimage from Galilee. Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God in the place which He shall choose; in the feast of unleavened bread (Passover), and in the feast of weeks (Pentecost), and in the feast of tabernacles (Harvest). (Deuteronomy 16:16) And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they (the Apostles) were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they (the Apostles) were sitting. And there appeared unto them (the Apostles) cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them (the Apostles). And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and (the Apostles) began to speak with other tongues (languages), as the Spirit gave them (the Apostles) utterance. (Acts 2:1-4) The Apostles were given the ability to speak
foreign tongues (languages) in addition to their own, for they (also) would
be sent out to the nations where other languages were spoken.
When the Apostles went up to Jerusalem from
Galilee for the Feast of Pentecost, pilgrims from other nations were also
present and heard the sound and the words of the Spirit though the mouths of
the Apostles. Those who traveled up to Jerusalem were Jews of the Dispersion
who returned for the three high Holy Days demanded by Deuteronomy 16:16.
Pentecost was the second of the three Holy Days. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them (the Apostles) speak in his own language (dialect). And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? (Acts 2:5-7; KJV) And how hear we every man in our own tongue (dialect), wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia (Abraham’s homeland; land of the Hebrew’s; modern day Iraq), and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. (Acts 2:8-11; KJV) The Biblical evidence is this: Not all dispersed
Jews, whether of the 10 tribes of Israel or of the 2 tribes of Judah and
Benjamin, scattered worldwide. Some remained near Judea; (e.g., the Apostles were relatively close by in Galilee)
others settled in more immediate nations (shown above) as well as Asia
(Ephesus), Macedonia and Achaia (Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, and Corinth; Acts 17:1,
10, 17,
and 18:4). Paul’s family was of
the House of Benjamin and had settled in Cilicia. (Acts 21:39, 22:3; Romans
11:1; Philippians 3:5; see
map on page 34) Timothy’s mother was a Jew who resided in the
Derbe/Lystra/Iconium region on the plain of Lycaonia in south central
Eurasia. (Asia Minor; modern day Turkey) Priscilla and Aquila were Jews who
came from Rome, Italy. (Acts 18:1-2) Apollos was a Jew who came from Egypt.
(Acts 18:24) The leaders of the
Jews who Paul called to himself at Rome were Jews of the Dispersion. Some
commentators insist that the Dispersion (Diaspora, those scattered) consisted
of only ten tribes, with Judah and Benjamin being excluded. James 1:1, 1
Peter 1:1, 2:11 and 2 Peter 3:1 refute such claims. Paul’s immediate family
specifically refutes it because he was from Tarsus of the nation of Cilicia.
Since Paul was a seed of the House (tribe) of Benjamin, at least some members
of the tribe of Benjamin had dispersed (scattered) to Cilicia. That is, all 12 tribes dispersed throughout the
world, some traveling over the Caucasus Mountains, spreading across northern
Europe. (See Capt, Lesson 2) The word “Jew” would be better defined as
descendants, sons, or members of the House of Jacob-Israel the man, with the
understanding that the 12 tribes that scattered would also become known as
Jews, whether or not they were descendents of Judah, the forth son of the man
Jacob-Israel. Those who were called “Jews” were descendants of Judah, the
fourth son of Jacob-Israel and/or were out of the place called Judea. LESSON 14
Home
PAUL
WAS A JEW OF THE DISPERSION Who
could possibly be better to evangelize Jews of the Dispersion than Paul, a
Jew of the Dispersion himself? Why would a Hebrew-speaking Jew of the Dispersion
be chosen to evangelize Greek-speaking Gentiles? Paul said, I am a man which am a Jew (Ioudaios) of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city … (Acts 21:39) I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city (Jerusalem) at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day. (Acts 22:3) (I,
Paul am) of the stock of Israel (a
descendant of Jacob), of the tribe
of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee …
(Philippians 3:5) Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites (descendants of Jacob, Israelitai)? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I. (2 Corinthians 11:22) Paul
focused his mission on the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob-Israel
who had scattered (dispersed, the Diaspora) to the Greek-speaking, Roman
provinces of Syria, Asia, Galatia, Macedonia, and Achaia in their synagogues.
1. He is a chosen vessel to Me, to bear My name before nations and kings and sons of Israel (Jacob). (Acts 9:15) Paul’s first act was to obey. He went
immediately to the Jews, not to the Gentiles, in their synagogues at Damascus of the
“nation” of Syria. 2. And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God. (At Damascus, Acts 9:20) Paul’s final act was to continue to obey. He
called the leaders of the Jews together at Rome. He did not call Gentiles. (Acts 28:17 ff) 3. And it came to pass, that after three days Paul called the chief of the Jews together (not Gentiles leaders) (Acts 28:17) I called for you, to see you, and to speak with you: because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain. (Acts 28:20) Paul,
by his own admission, said that his method of operation was to become as one
with those who he wished to persuade and offer salvation through the gospel
of Christ. For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ), that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you. (1 Corinthian 9:19-23; KJV) It
is important to be mindful of what Paul did not say. Paul never said, “And to the Gentiles, I became as a
Gentile, that I might gain Gentiles”. If Paul were an apostle to the
Gentiles, why would he not become as a Gentile in order to gain Gentiles?
The hypothesis that “them that are without
the law” were Gentiles is without foundation. There is no evidence that Paul
meant Gentiles any more than he meant Hellenized Jews of the Dispersion who
had adopted the customs and laws of the Greeks. The Biblical evidence speaks
of a contrary objective – carry Jesus name to the descendants of
Jacob-Israel, who, at the very least, had adopted the customs of the Greeks.
(Acts 9:15) If Paul was a Benjamin-ite (a descendant of
Benjamin) and not a Judah-ite (a descendant of Judah), yet
called himself a Jew (Ioudaios)
and a Hebrew (Hebraios), he must have meant that he was a descendant of
those who emanated from (came out of) a place,
the Roman province of Judea or, further back in time, Babylonia, i.e., and
was a Hebrew. Paul did not mean to say, in Acts 21:39 and 22:3, that he was a biological descendent of Judah,
the forth son of Jacob-Israel but was a descendant of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob-Israel, who were the “fathers” of all of the 12 tribes. (Some of whom
returned to Jerusalem at Pentecost; Acts 2:5-11) LESSON 15
Home
PAUL’S WORK AMONG JEWS OF THE DISPERSION It is a one-sided image of Paul to insist that
he was the apostle to Gentiles, as if there were no others. It cannot explain
the greater number of activities that Paul had among Jews than among
Gentiles. The Biblical evidence is that Paul went first to Jews and far, far
more often than to Gentiles. Traditional
Teaching: Relative
Magnitude of Paul’s Work Among Jews
Biblical
Evidence: Relative
Magnitude of Paul’s Actual Work Among Jews
LESSON 15
Home
P
|
