Calling all Greek scholars!
I recently read this: http://www.tektonics.org/af/christianmyths.html
“God is my buddy, Jesus is my friend. The modern hymn calls Jesus a “friend” and some may appeal to a verse in John where Jesus calls his disciples “friends”. But the understanding of the word is decontextualized. People of the time of the Bible did not “get to know” each other as modern persons in the West do. A “friend” meant a person who looked out for your practical interests — not someone you had beer and watched football with.
But really, even a more common view can be misleading. Many evangelists speak of a “personal relationship with Jesus”. The phrase is used to mean something not too far from the “God is my buddy” idea, in essence meaning we can talk to Jesus any time, and so on. If I had to correct this, I would say that what is required of us is a patronal relationship with Jesus. The NT explains our relationship with God in terms of a client-patron relationship, one in which God, patron, is remote; and Jesus, as a broker, mediates between ourselves and God. Then we do have the indwelling Holy Spirit as a broker as well; but though the Spirit supplies us with mediation and perhaps power, there is nothing to show that the Spirit is some sort of intimate conversation partner. And finally, since people of the ancient world seldom “got to know each other” personally (as is taken for granted in modern, Western society) there is no way that NT writers could have had an idea like a “personal relationship with Jesus” in mind in the first place — not as we perceive it.”
It doesn’t say where the guy gets this idea from… so I’m not sure, but what concerns me is his attack against using the words “personal relationship with Jesus.” If Jesus doesn’t mean “friend” in John 15:15 in the same way that we think of when we read the word “friend” then obviously the translators are missing something. I tend to doubt the guy because if it didn’t mean “friend” in the same way that we think of the word “friend” then why didn’t the translators translate the word as “associate” or something like that. I think that would fall within the semantic range of the greek word filov . Of course the lexicon lists “friend” as the first meaning for the word filov .
To all the greek scholars out there… do you agree with this guy? Is the word “friend” decontextualized and if we recontextualize it for our modern day setting,is the meaning more along the lines of patron or associate?
Powered by FireStats
6 Comments, Comment or Ping
sc_q_jayce
Yes, patron and associate is correct. Read David DeSilva.
Jun 22nd, 2007
sc_q_jayce
Also, “Bible translators are not social science experts.” That’s what JP Holding said.
Jun 22nd, 2007
sc_q_jayce
By the way, if you want to know where he gets the idea from, read the rest of his articles, which are well referenced. This article is just a short rehash of some things he had been seeing.
Jun 22nd, 2007
KingdomSheepDog
I think when we read the Bible, one of the incorrect concepts is that we must read it the way people use it at the time. Although that technique is correct most of the time, it is not always helpful. Before we consult sociology, or linguistics, we must consult Jesus’ definition of the word in contest. Jesus sometimes explained what he meant or how he defined it. If he did that, he overode what was the convention for the word at the time. The same is true here. If you read the pericope carefully, Jesus’ use of the word “friend” means at least four things, as he explained it in context: a loving, selfless, loyal relationship (”Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13)), a totally intimate, transparent relationship (”I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you.” (15:15)), a relationship with integrity (”You are my friends if you do what I command.” (15:14)), a noncondescending, nonpatronizing relationship (”I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business.” (15:15)).
In these statements, Jesus defines what he means by being friend with him. We don’t need no Greek scholars, we only need to read the text carefully and with common sense. The linguists are off-track here if they are trying to impute a “patron/client” meaning in Jesus’ friendship. By saying “I no longer call you servants…,” Jesus is particularly encouraging the disciples to drop that patron/client notion and get closer to him.
Does that mean Jesus is going to have beers with us, watching the Padres game? I don’t know, but at least I know this much: Jesus was willing to dine and drink with the tax-collectors. Jesus’ whole life is a demostration what he meant by friendship with him. It wasn’t a patron/client relationship, as far as I can tell. Should we take advantage of this and take light of his deity, and not give him due respect? No, we shouldn’t. We need to balance both sides.
Jun 22nd, 2007
KingdomSheepDog
Correction: When I said, “we don’t need no Greek scholars,” I only meant in this particular controversy. We do need Greek scholars for other things.
Jun 22nd, 2007
im4GMG
I agree with KingdomSheepDog, whom I presume to be something of a Greek scholar himself. While Greek and linguistic scholarship is necessary, it is secondary to the text itself, which is where we ought to go first to find definitions of terms. The background scholarship is there to help us add contrast and color to the situation, aiding us in bridging the cultural and temporal gap. While it is necessary to be on guard against anachronistic back-reading, it is also necessary to be cautious about assuming that first century cultural use determines NT use, especially when Jesus is involved. The Gospels present a Jesus who was very counter-cultural, and remains at least counter-intuitive.
I suggest you have a look at Longnecker’s book, The Lost Letters of Pergamum , if you get the chance. It’s not a “scholastic” book in the traditional sense, but it does a good job of engaging the layman with some recent findings on first century culture and how early Christianity would have fit/not fit with it.
Jun 25th, 2007
Reply to “Calling all Greek scholars!”