3. CONTEXTUAL
Contextual information in the new Testament
The Importance of Context
Context has everything to do with translating because language has everything to do with context. Just as YHWH knows the whole context of every life, so each word in the Writings from YHWH also has a world of context behind it -- context which a reader/hearer may or may not know. Often, when readers have been separated from original contexts simply by living in a vastly different time and place, some contexts are not apparent and there is no guarantee that they will ever be discovered.
If you think of a word in your native language, you might be amazed at how much you could say about it. You could talk about how old it is, about where it came from, what its parts mean, whether any idioms use it, what group of people use it most, how often it is used, the changes in its meaning over time, its varieties of pronunciation, etc. There are whole regions of history, geography and society that are part of a word's context, its world of meaning. Even a native speaker may be aware of only a few of these but it may still be enough to use the word fluently.
The less translators know about a word's contexts, the chances of mistranslating it increase in those contexts. When dealing with dead languages and very different cultures, the problems multiply. As much as possible, translators should note the possible meanings in each context along with every syntactic and semantic variation, and also bring to bear on it any of the word's known contextual information. To the extent that the process is not followed adequately, or that the means or time is limited, or that translation tools or methods are flawed, inaccuracies may creep in unnoticed.
Examples of Contextual (Pragmatic) Redundancy Increasing Translation Information
Below are a few examples of contextual information that the accuracy of the TENT Lexicon and TENT translation seem to solve. Many more solutions can be found in the "Valuable" section.
1. The Abiathar Problem
In Mark 2:26, there is a problem with the phrase usually translated something like, "in the days/time of Abiathar." Daniel B. Wallace describes the issues around this phrase here: https://bible.org/article/mark-226-and-problem-abiathar. Simply stated, contextual information tells us that Abiathar was not the high priest in this snippet of history referred to by Yeshua; instead, Abiathar was the son of that high priest. However, the words of Yeshua in Mk 2:26 seem to say otherwise, and no one yet seems to have pinpointed the problem. Is Yeshua wrong?
Translating prepositions between a case based language and a word-order based language can be tricky. In the case based language of biblical Greek the meaning of a preposition depends on the case of the noun of the prepositional phrase. Trying to find its equivalent in a word-order based language such as English using the TENT Lexicon is not difficult. Therefore, having used the N2LR method to create the TENT Lexicon, I suggest that the Abiathar problem has a solution.
The TENT Lexicon for biblical Greek shows that the preposition ἐπὶ / epi (NT1909) governed by the genitive case, as in this example, might mean, among other things, "in-front-of/before" in a location sense or "prior-to/before" in a time sense, just as "before" also does in English: "He found himself standing before the candy store" (of location) or "she left her seat before the curtain dropped (of time)." Even for those who are familiar with this kind of ambiguity, the correct meaning can be momentarily confusing until your brain recognizes the context near and in the sentence.
For the genitive of ἐπὶ/"before" in the two different contexts of time and location, I have chosen to differentiate them by using two different English translations: "prior-to" for the time sense, and "in front of/in the sight of" for the location sense. In one of the examples given above, the English would change to, "he found himself in front of the candy store." This allows the translator to avoid confusion in English, which sometimes happens when using only "before" for both time and location contexts. In 1Cor. 6:6 - "...and that in front of unbelievers," I have translated ἐπὶ using the location sense. We can see ἐπὶ used also in the time sense in other places in the NT --in Mat 1:11; Luke 3:2 and 4:27, and in Acts 11:28.
Now let's get back to the specific problem concerning Abiathar. Mark 2:26 is usually translated in English as something like, "David came into the House of God ἐπὶ/before Abiathar the high-priest." English translators' brains must have immediately seen this "before" as an adverb of location, even inserting a definite article before "high priest" although there is none in the Greek! [note: see my BIG problem with reading the Greek definite article carelessly!] However, what if the preposition ἐπὶ / epi (NT1909) is one of time rather than of location?
Seeing this instance of ἐπὶ (NT1909 -genitive case) as a preposition of time instead of location solves the problem of Abiathar. In English word order this problematic phrase becomes, "...how he came into the House of the Mighty-One prior to High Priest Abiathar,..." or "...before Abiathar [is] High Priest." The high priest in this biblical scene was Abiathar's father, who was less well known than his son. History tells us that fact, which is important, but more importantly, a statement by Yeshua is vindicated...as it always will be.
2. NT1690 - Horse-snort
A consistent weakness in traditional English NT translations is that they reflect little knowledge about the charismatic giftings of the Holy Spirit in the lives of God's children. Traditional translators have at times gone to some trouble, including not accurately translating the oldest attested grammar, seemingly in order to sidestep their unfamiliarity with the charismatic giftings of the Pure Spirit of YHWH.
That problem in the case of NT1690 is compounded by the not uncommon idea that horses snort because they are angry. Angry horses scream. More often they snort a warning when alerted to anything unknown and possibly dangerous. It's a survival mechanism for horses. I believe this is the true sense from which this verb, literally “by-horse-snort” and meaning "to alert," developed. A snorting horse has been alerted to something. His snort is a 'yellow alert' to others.
Some people seem too eager to suggest that in Mark 1:43, NT1690 - "by-horse snort" means Yeshua was angry with someone He had just healed. Perhaps these people are not familiar with the ways of horses. The middle meaning of NT1690 is "to be alert," while the figurative meaning is "to-caution." Yeshua was alerted by His Spirit to the intent of the healed man to speak of his healing, so that He could warn the man not to do this.
3. NT444A - Son of Man
Yeshua's self-proclaimed title, "Son of Man", puzzled his hearers. Either He was only stating the obvious, that he was a human being, or He also meant something else. "The Son of Man" is a simplified rendering of the literal translation, "the son/offspring of the man", which has a regular and a deistic article, and could be understood as "the son of the man [of/from/for-YHWH]"(Mt9:6) or, as a possible Hebraism, "the son of Adam/Humanity.”
All of his Jewish hearers would wonder why he was calling himself a human being. Why would he state the obvious and do it so frequently? Was he just being humble or was he also using the title in the other sense? We have his actual words only in Greek translation, but we know his use of this title meant something his original hearers could not comprehend, as in Jn12:34, which adds support to this other possible translation as well.
The Greek word for "son" was also used to indicate a potential family heir, as offspring or by adoption, as Gal 4:7 indicates, "So you(sing.) are no longer a servant, but an offspring/(potential-)heir; and if an offspring/(potential-)heir, then an heir/inheritor of YHWH through [YHWH's-]Anointed One." This sounds like a good thing! So, in reference to Yeshua's self-proclaimed title, we might think that "Heir of Humanity" sounds good, right?
But consider this! By proclaiming himself "The Heir of Humanity", Yeshua inherited not only the Adamic race; he also inherited the estate's debt, meaning the debt owed to God from all the wrongdoing of the human race. To show Himself the true and sole Heir, Yeshua had to pay that debt. He paid for it with his own uniquely perfect and priceless human blood, so that we could become co-heirs in Him. It turns out that his application to Himself of that title, “Son of Man / Heir of Humanity” was actually perfect -- in both aspects.
4. NT1122 - Scribes
Some might also wonder why Yeshua picked on “simple scribes” for criticism, and not just the Pharisees. Ancient history provides more context. Scribes in ancient Israel were far more than copyists or takers of dictation. Yeshua's criticism had to do with their knowledge of the Law and their high standing in society.
Scribal studies could begin at age 14 with ordination at the age of 40. Scribes could be judges, teachers and administrators. Their religion-based studies brought them, as Mosaic Law scholars, the authority to institute rules for every human activity. The Scribes as Scripture interpreters created an official interpretation of the Law of Moses which eventually became as honored as the Law itself. They were part of the Jewish governing council, the Sanhedrin, and highly respected by the people. It is because of their high standing that Yeshua held them to account along with the Pharisees.
[Note: The last paragraph above I found in a book a long time ago. I wrote down the quote (accurately?), but not the reference. If anyone knows where it is from, please tell me ([email protected]) so I can give proper attribution which will take the place of this note.]
5. NT2859 - Was Yeshua Gay?
In many tribal cultures it was customary for a chief or headman, when in his place of authority and formally receiving visitors, to use as a mediator his trusted first son and heir, who would be trained by serving as the "public side" (NT2859) of his father. His duty was to protect the father's dignity and privacy, hear the purpose for any visit and to relay private messages. In Jn 1:18 a Greek idiom using NT2859 seems to describe this mediator son literally as "being/existing for the father's front(-side)/public-side," and probably meant to serve in this public capacity. Other figurative meanings for NT2859 are the "lap" (where babies sit) found three times in Luke and "inlet" (as a lap of the sea) found in Acts 27:39, and of course the literal meaning of "front-side" found in John 13:23. Now let's see why this is important.
John 13:23 describes a common scene in the Roman world. Guests at a feast reclined on their sides on individual lounges or mats, the heads of which were adjacent to low tables. Guests rested on the left forearm and kept the right arm free for taking food. The tables were arranged in a semicircular or U-shape, with the host in the center of the central section, and the place of honor at his right hand (his front side when reclining). The next place of honor would be the one facing his back. The host could easily turn or lean back slightly and speak to the honored guest facing his back, while the person at the host's right hand would be in a position to speak confidentially to the host by turning or leaning back to face the host's front.
This was John's position at Yeshua's last Passover as described in John 13:23, where John is wrongly translated as "...leaning on Jesus' bosom"(NKJV). The Greek idiom here simply describes the furniture (and social) arrangement and is literally translated "reclining [at table] at Yeshua's front-side.” Some Christians with a personal agenda have taken liberties with this verse, and from this same verse even use "one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved" to insinuate that Jesus had a relationship with John which was contrary to Mosaic Law.
The word "loved" in this verse is from "agape", which means "to sacrificially love.” It does not mean an erotic or even a friend love; it is more akin to parental love. The sacrificial love of God described in His Word is inclusive. Biblically one loves sacrificially in the sense of acting with "tough love", like a parent justly punishing a child’s rebellious disobedience. God’s law of sacrificial love, not based on feelings, flows to any and all and cherishes others as oneself. The way of sacrificial love is a tight squeeze and few seem to want to sacrifice the self life enough to do it. John was so awed by it that he, and he alone, humbly referred to himself as "the disciple Yeshua sacrificially loved."
6. NT173 - Acanthus
In ancient times around the Mediterranean, acanthus was valued for its lush greenery and its gorgeous tall flower spikes, especially during drought, to which it is resistent. Although its mature leaves are edged with tiny spines, when the leaves are new in early spring the spines are soft and edible, making it a highly nutritious spring salad green. So, as also one of the most tenacious and indestructible of plants, acanthus became a symbol for immortality and was commonly displayed at funerals. The acanthus leaf motif was also a staple in ancient Greek decorative arts, and it is the acanthus leaf carved in stone that crowns every Corinthian column.
The Greeks loved to compete in everything from warfare to poetry. The winners at the Greek games were crowned with wreaths of wild olive. Military victors earned the laurel wreath. On that Passover preparation day, when Pilate's Roman soldiers twined a "victor's wreath" of acanthus, it was not with the stiff twigs with finger-length spines we see in religious art. The soldiers probably had at hand a pile of tender spring acanthus to eat, small soft "spines" included.
The point of the wreath was not to draw blood, but to cleverly mock Yeshua's "victory" as "King of the Jews." At the same time it also symbolized His impending funeral. However, unrecognized by the soldiers, God used the most distinctive quality of the acanthus, its well known indestructibility, to symbolize Yeshua's imminent and most notable victory through His rising up out of death -- His immortality.
7. NT932 - The Rulership
Yeshua presented his students with two cryptic statements concerning when His future plans would be realized. They were cryptic in the sense of His using the students' expectation of His imminently claiming the throne of David to mask the fact that He was referring to two different events separated by at least a couple of thousand years. In Matthew 10:23, Yeshua is giving His students instructions and sending them forth to proclaim to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, saying, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." Firstly the word "heaven" in the singular without the definite article is a common Hebraic euphemism for "YHWH."
Secondly, the biblical Greek meaning of NT932 is not "kingdom." It is not the territory over which a king rules, nor is it the time-span of a king's rule. Instead it is the condition of rulership; it is the highest governing position independent of terms such as "king", "czar", "boss" or whatever the ruler might be called. The biblical meaning includes much more than just a territory or period of time. It clarifies Yeshua's first "good news" announcment of "the good news of the kingdom," that is, of the rulership [of-YHWH]; that YHWH will rule His people by giving them His Spirit to dwell within them, which, of course, they only understood later.
It also shows us something which has involved a puzzle.
Matthew 10:23 and 16:28 - A puzzling pair
In Mt 10 when Yeshua sends out His students, He also warns them of coming persecutions, saying in vs. 23, "When they persecute you in this city, flee to another, for truly I say to you, you will not have gone through the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes." How could this prophetic word be true? Surely, the news of Yeshua was known throughout the land of Israel. It was the biggest news since the Roman invasion! So if the Son of Man has not yet come, maybe somehow there are more cities to go through?
As a matter of fact, I know there are more cities to go through, cities that did not exist two thousand years ago, cities in Israel. I am sitting in one as I type this, the city I live in did not exist fifty years ago, and Messianic Jews here have to spread the good news to many cities that did not exist fifty years ago, but now they do exist, cities in Israel, and before they finish going through them all, the Son of Man will come the second time. [His original hearers were also puzzled by this "Son of Man" title, saying, "Who is this Son of Man?" See section #3 above.]
Here is Yeshua's second cryptic statement. In Mt 16:28, most English versions have Yeshua telling his students that some of them will "not experience death until whenever they would see the Son of Man coming in his rulership." People have difficulty understanding this prophetic word considering the shortness of the normal human lifespan, while also seemingly referencing only "the Second Coming" of the Son of Man, which has not yet happened almost two thousand years later. Or has it?
I do not believe Yeshua was referring to His "Second Coming", as we use that term today, but as He said, to His first appearing in His Rulership, which was given to Him after his physical body died. After death He had risen again in His glorified physical body, ascended to His Father (John 20:17) and received His inheritance, the Rulership over all Creation. That's why In Mat 16:28 He calls Himself the Son of Man, which can be translated "The Heir of Humanity". He then reappeared to His students and followers for forty days. During those forty days He fulfilled His own prophecy, that he would appear in His Rulership before they all had died, telling them before ascending to Heaven, "All authority in Heaven and on earth was given to me." (Mat. 28:18).
Although at His "Second Coming" as we commonly use the term today, He will appear in "the glory of his Father with his angels..." (Mt 16:27) , we must keep on asking ourselves, “Is He my Ruler right now?” Remember what He said in Mt 6:33, "Seek first the rulership [from-YHWH] and His right-doing and all these things will be added to you."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
For an in-depth textual analysis of a controversially difficult passage which highlights the importance of contextual knowledge along with the meanings derived through the N2LR method-based TENT Lexicon, go to what 1 Cor 7:36-38 might have been saying all along...