What If…(before: space or time)

…Declaring the Words of God

Though not what I think of as a series – in that each entry, though based on the question, covers a different topic – the “What If’s” certainly have an underlying theme – at least so far.

That theme has proven to be fairly easy to identify; I am reviewing words and terms that are seen as modified or phonetic transliterations of the original languages of the Bible, as opposed to their translations.

By definition, a transliteration is the representation of a word with the letters of another language’s “alphabet”. The intent is to present a word from the source language (let’s say Greek) as it would be spelled in the target language (English, for example), though it may also include modifications that are necessary for a phonetic representation or even those that have the original language’s word represented in the targeted language’s form.

In contrast, simply put, to translate a word from one language to another requires the identification of the meaning of a word in the source language that is then replaced by a word in the target language that provides a sufficiently accurate rendering of the source word’s meaning. This, for any given word can be more art than science – languages are nuanced and the meanings of words evolve.

For more modern languages, such as English, a significant percentage of words were sourced from ancient languages. In other words, many English words are modified transliterations. For example, the English word “traitor” was sourced from the Latin “tradere” which means “to hand over, deliver, betray”.

I share this particular example in an effort to recognize that for the majority of readers, the words I have identified in these posts could (and maybe even should) be perceived no differently. In fact, for years I was among that majority. Until it became clear that sufficient inconsistencies in the true meanings of the words and phrases that I highlight in these “What If’s” warrant a deeper review.

Might the modified, phonetic transliteration “aspostle” simply be the representation of the evolution of the English language? It might. But that the source word’s clear definition is not represented in our modern understanding, let alone dictionaries, suggests otherwise. Or, at the very least suggests that modern translators need to reconsider how they express the original meanings.

By the way: It is for this reason that I have decided not to attempt to pinpoint the rationale or motivation for these transliterations and modifications. Most if not all of the transliterations that I have so far discovered would have been derived no later than from the latter parts of our first millennium (as we currently measure time) or towards the end of the fifth millennium Anno Hominis or An. Hom. (the year of Man’s creation). Therefore, rationales or motives can only be assumed – and so a task which I have no desire to pursue. Suffice to say: it happened and it continues to be supported.

What stands out to me is that, no matter the source cause, the implications of the particular words for which the transliterations are common are centered on what we would consider Ecclesiology – or the doctrines of the “church” – and what the early Christians referred to as “the Way” – the outworking of their faith in their day to day activities. And though I am reticent to provide the complete list up front (and thereby foregoing the severe care that I believe needs to be taken when revealing them, in order to avoid appearing like I doubt the inspiration of God’s Word) the transliterations we have covered so far already demonstrate this trend.

Add to that the odd (or maybe “inconsistent” is a better term) approach used to include the modified Greek transliterations, back into the Old Testament.

What I mean is there are Greek transliterations found, in whole or in part, in the Old Testament, but the determination of their presence suggests significant inconsistencies. We have seen, with the posts under this theme so far: 1) an example of a Greek transliteration that was exclusively inserted in the New Testament but that was selectively inserted for the Hebrew word with the same meaning as the Greek (i.e. a translation); 2) an example of a Greek transliteration (and its derivatives) that was almost exclusively seen in the New Testament (meaning on rare occasions we do see it translated) not being transliterated even in the English translation of the Septuagint; and today, 3) an example will be given of a transliteration of a Greek word (and its derivatives) that is wholly inserted into the English translation of the Septuagint for the original Hebrew word with a similar, though not precisely the same, meaning.

(The first example noted in the paragraph above is “aggelos” which would be a precise letter for letter transliteration, whereas “angelos” is the phonetic representation and “angel” is the modified form. None of these efforts drew from the actual meaning of the term; which is of course “messenger” a word with its own, pre-English Bible etymology. The second example was what we saw with the transliteration for the Greek term “baptizō”, which means “to dip (as in “immerse” or “plunge”), sink or wash”, the transliteration of which is not seen in the Old Testament even when the original Greek word (or a form of it) is used in the Septuagint. Today’s post – which we will get to in a moment – will provide the third “model”.)

Since I am making sure of the foundation I have laid for these posts, I also believe it will be helpful if I explain the exercise that helped solidify the sense of importance of these transliteration events.

As my retirement was still undecided (meaning after I was laid-off, I was still considering going back into the job market) and with me being used to working 10 hour days on projects of importance to my team, I decided to get back to what I loved when I had had the time – studying God’s Word. I started (as many of us do) in Genesis. And though I wasn’t intending to go through the entire Bible, I wasn’t trying to study anything in depth either.

I was still in the first chapter when I became enthralled, once again, with the poetry and the epic language.

I have an app that allows me to read the NASB1995 with the Strong’s Concordance numbers inserted for each word – making it really easy to have the English version in one column and the Hebrew (in this case) in another! The insight that that encouraged was surprising. I had laid out the “hard copy” versions of study helps many-a-time over the years – but the ability to, so quickly, access the original words and their meanings almost made up for not taking Greek and Hebrew in college.

The renewed sense of wonder inspired me to, in essence, create my own interlinear version of select books. In all, over that 12 month period, in between interviews and presentations for senior level management positions, I completed 22 books this way – and was especially moved to address the difficult ones. So Genesis, Exodus, Ezekiel, Daniel, Esther (among others) in the Old Testament; and Revelation, John (all four of his), Ephesians, and Romans (among others) in the New. (I can’t help but think of the original “Karate Kid” and the “wax on, wax off” training as I look back with hindsight.)

It was during this process that I began to recognize the “theme”. The longer I worked on truly understanding the meanings, the greater my faith in His inspiration and shepherding of His Word grew. I also began to experience a greater depth of relationship with Him and appreciation for the “one another’s” in my life, that was missed when “words without meanings” (or so I began to think of them) were presented.

And with that came a sense of, well, curiosity, which quickly became intrigue which led to almost a feeling of sorrow. What I grew to understand is: There are key words that have still not been rightly translated! Which at first (say, 500 years ago) may be explainable, but now, in our more recent translations and editions? with some of the deeper research and insight into the original languages?

This led me to begin translating some of these words as I read – and for me it produced a growing sense of awe. And though I wondered, I was not allowed to judge – my time and effort would be better spent in understanding His intended meanings, than in questioning others’ motives.

Allow me to restate: I am not interested in the original reasons or rationales of the transliterations; I am more convinced than ever that the original manuscripts were written by those inspired by the Holy Spirit and that He has shepherded the process of selection, discovery and translation; we, as the kingdom of priests He has desired and as joint-heirs with our Lord, are encouraged to search out those things that God Himself has chosen to conceal! The Victory of God is certain; it is His Plan to include all who will choose to be a part of the Victory. And each of our inclusion, though individualized, is intended to be experienced in unison with Him first and foremost, but with one another as well – therefore, division is not helpful.

And so…

For today’s “What if…”, since the translations of our Bible predominately follow the same protocol, regarding this Greek modified transliteration, I want to begin by providing clean and clear examples of what this particular gift and role was intended to look like before digging into the etymologies and their implications.

To do that, it is best for us to begin with the clearest explanation of how God views this function. Author’s note: When we look at Deuteronomy 13 and 18, it is helpful to remember that this is Moses speaking directly to those who are about to enter into the land of promise – that is in fact true of the majority of this book – so when we see a first person pronoun, without a single quotation mark (‘), it belongs to Moses not the Lord.

“If a prophet or a dreamer of dreams arises among you and gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder comes true, concerning which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us go after other gods (whom you have not known) and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams; for the LORD your God is testing you to find out if you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall follow the LORD your God and fear Him; and you shall keep His commandments, listen to His voice, serve Him, and cling to Him. But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has counseled rebellion against the LORD your God who brought you from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, to seduce you from the way in which the LORD your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from among you. Deut.13:1-5

“‘But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.’ “You may say in your heart, ‘How will we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ “When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.” Deut. 18:20-22

What we see here is a person who is acting as a spokesman for someone else or, in the case of the dreamer of dreams, just that. The role does not of itself confer characteristics of goodness, rightness, holiness, or even personal insight – only of the function of speaking on behalf of someone else. (These verses are significant enough that I believe it will be worth coming back to them once we clear up the etymologies, in order to draw out the understanding God intended.)

This function is clearly described when the Hebrew word shown as “prophet” is first used. Abraham had gone into Gerar, his fear of its king motivated him tell Abimelech (a title that meant “father is king”) that Sarah, his ninety year old wife, was his sister. Abimelech brought her into his harem but before he could approach her the Lord warned him in a dream that He would destroy the nation if he did so. (Remember that this was right after the Lord had told them that she was about to conceive a son – see Gen.18:13-14.)

It is in this context that God said to Abimelech”

“Now restore the man’s wife, for he is a prophet (spokesman), and he will pray for you and you will live. But if you do not restore, know that you shall surely die, you and all who are yours. Abraham prayed to God , and God healed Abimelech and his wife and his maids, so that they bore. For the LORD had closed fast all the wombs of the household of Abimelech because of Sarah, Abraham’s wife. Gen.20:7, 17-18

One last foundational passage – the second use of the term in the Hebrew – here being applied to Aaron.

Then the LORD said to Moses, “See, I make you God to Pharoah, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet (spokesman). You shall speak all that I command you, and your brother Aaron shall speak to Pharoah that he let the sons of Israel go out of this land.” Ex.7:1-2

The original Hebrew Old Testament contains, as a noun, the transliterated word “nābí” which is derived from an unused Hebrew word (meaning one not found in the Old Testament) and which is found over 310 times. It means “a spokesman or speaker” and infers one who speaks on behalf of another. The verb form (“nābā’”) is found an additional 110 times and should be understood as “to speak for or on behalf of another”. In the Septuagint, the “72 scholars” decided that the best Greek word to replace “nābí” was one that was understood to mean “to declare a thing before (in either a spatial or temporal sense)”.

The Septuagint aside: the difference between what the Hebrew word “nābí” was understood to mean in the Old Testament and the meaning of the word in the source language of the New Testament may be accepted as the normal evolution of language. However, that every occurrence of the idea of a “spokesperson” was replaced by a “manufactured” word (a modified, phonetic transliteration) is to me, a bit disturbing.

So what is this Greek word and what did it mean to those who wrote it in the first century after Jesus birth?

The word, as a noun, represents a person or role; it is a compound word that, transliterated, looks like “prophētēs” (or psi, rho, omicron, phi, eta, tau, eta, sigma) and it can be found some 144 times. It is sourced from the prefix “pro” meaning “before (in either time or space)” and the root verb “phēmi” which means “to declare, say”. So in it’s purest translation this would be read as “someone who declares a thing before others (space) or before it occurs (time)”. The secular (meaning extra-Biblical) use of the word suggests one who interprets the will of a god to humans and so leans toward the idea of an interpreter.

To complete the etymology, so that we can get to the understanding that I believe the Lord reveals when we insert the original meaning, let me provide the Greek transliterated derivations of “prophētēs”, their frequencies of use and their most common modified transliterations:

• “prophētis” is the feminine form used 2 times – seen as “prophetess”

• “prophētikos” is an adjective form used 2 times – seen as “prophetic”

• “prophēteuō” is a verb form used some 28 times – seen primarily as “to prophesy”

• “prophēteia” is a noun which is directly derived from “prophēteuō” and is used about 19 times – seen primarily as “prophecy”

• “pseudoprophētēs” is a noun that speaks of one who is a lying or false declarer of a thing before used 11 times – seen as “false prophet(s)”

And so, in all, we have some 205 times that a concept or idea that is intended to speak of “the person who declares (or the act of declaring) a message that is either delivered before an audience (in the spatial sense) or before it has come to pass (in the temporal sense)” has been replaced with a term that did not, at the time, have a direct meaning in English (this is proven by the fact that the Latin Vulgate used a similar transliteration).

The etymology suggests that the development of this term as an English word occurs sometime after it was first inserted into the language – a seemingly unnatural evolution and so, in essence, it was manufactured. This term is then pushed back into the Old Testament of the Christian scriptures (over 400 times) – absent its original meaning in the Greek. Where it is, at the least, not representative of the best efforts of the science of translation.

---

I trust I have effectively laid a foundation for our review of the intent of the original writings as it relates to this very important and broad concept.

And, at the risk of repeating myself: I hope that have reaffirmed the conclusion that when endeavoring to understand a doctrine found in the writings that have been given to us in order that we can know how best to walk in His Way, it is important for us to come to know what God meant when He inspired the writers of scripture to write His words. Doing that (understanding the meaning) takes more time than it takes to just read words; especially when they are words that we may not truly grasp and so ignore; unless of course they are explained – but I believe it to be time well spent.

This, the understanding and communication of His meaning, is the core reason I am motivated to do these “What If’s”; to draw attention to what I (and others with whom I interact) had originally accepted as obvious, when in reality, it isn’t obvious at all. I mean, just because someone (like me) believes they “know” what “baptism” is and what it effects for us as believers, doesn’t mean that they (or I) truly do.

Let me quickly add: That there is more than one way to translate the verified, original scrips into any particular language is indisputable – because language is nuanced. That any of those translations can and have been refined can also not be denied (in other words, there are multiple “editions” of the New American Standard Bible, for example). And that the various translations are joined by even more devotional or expositional works, those that focus more (and maybe exclusively) on application than they do on an attempt to translate the originals, is also a given.

All that said: I absolutely believe that the Holy Spirit – despite the variety – will lead us into all Truth, if we submit to His leading as we read and meditate on the written word. (He does, after all, work in and through flawed and feeble men and women.)

And as I have noted before, there are those who were willing to risk their lives in order to get the Word of God into the hands of the people of God. The model Jesus describes – in fact the model that God the Father describes – is that of a kingdom of priests. We are all encouraged to know the Truth and to diligently apply ourselves to understanding it – it is for that reason that Jesus expressed such enthusiasm for the coming of the Holy Spirit. As we will see, God is willing to work with plan B when we force Him to, but He always has, and I believe, always will prefer His original design.

---

As I mentioned, I want to go back to the early passages we read that help to define what God meant when He referred to the “nābí”, the spokesman. We first found God’s declaration, in a dream, to the king of Gerar, of the fact that Abraham was His spokesman and that in that capacity he would pray for the restoration of Abimelech and his household but only if he first restored Sarah to Abraham, untouched. He (Abimelech) does and they are healed by Abraham’s prayers. (We risk overlooking that fact that this occurs during the window of time from the promise of Isaac until “when the time revives” or when it is the “time of life”, when the promise is realized – it certainly adds to the significance and should be included in our broader understanding of God’s dealings.)

Next, we were told that “Moses is to be God to Pharoah and Aaron is to be Moses’ spokesman”. This structure, instituted by the LORD God, had deep implications to the idolatry that existed in Egypt – and again, those implications may be overlooked. So, if you will allow me…I have placed as an addendum at the very end of this post something that I believe will help to frame-in the standards and expectations of God for mankind both at this place in history – the Exodus for the people of Israel as well as for us today.

That God would use spokesmen is confirmed when He describes His relationship with Moses to Aaron and Miriam, in Numbers 12:

If there is a spokesman among you, I, the LORD, shall make Myself known to him in a vision. I shall speak with him in a dream. Not so, with My servant Moses, He is faithful in all My household; with him I speak mouth to mouth, even openly, and not in dark sayings, and he beholds the form of the LORD. Why then were you not afraid to speak against My servant, against Moses?” Num.12:6-8

That Moses had a unique relationship, one that was a foretelling of the Messiah (for those in Jesus’ day were still waiting for the other “nābí” and even asked John the Immerser if he was the one – see John 1:21) is described both here and in Deuteronomy 18:

“The LORD your God will raise up for you a spokesman like me from among you, from your brothers, you shall listen to him. This is according to all that you asked of the LORD your God in Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying, ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, let me not see this great fire anymore, or I will die.’ The LORD said to me, ‘They have spoken well. I will raise up a spokesman from among their brothers like you, and I will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him. It shall come about that whoever will not listen to My words which He shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him.’” Deut.18:15-19

And I have to ask: What if the people, in Horeb, had not been afraid and had accepted God’s invitation to be an entire kingdom of priests – with God as their King?

But as for spokesmen in general, whether by words or dreams or visions, there were two standards given in the passages above (Deut.18:20-22 and 13:1-5): 1) their declarations (their speaking forth) must align with His commandments; and 2) if/when they speak in the name of the Lord that something will happen, it happens. If either of these standards are violated (even if a sign or wonder they foretell comes to pass, as we saw in Deut. 13) then the one claiming to be a spokesman is guilty and must be punished. The false spokesman was to be treated like a soothsayer, or witch, or spell caster.

But lest we misunderstand, Moses himself proclaims a desire that all the people would behave as the spokesmen of God:

But two men had remained in the camp; the name of one was Eldad and the name of the other Medad. And the Spirit rested upon them (now they were among those who had been registered, but had not gone out to the tent), and they spoke for the LORD in the camp. So a young man ran and told Moses and said, “Eldad and Medad are speaking for the LORD in the camp.” Then Joshua the son of Nun, the attendant of Moses from his youth, said, “Moses, my lord, restrain them.” But Moses said to him, “Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the LORD's people were His spokesmen, that the LORD would put His Spirit upon them!” Num.11:26-29

---

Not everyone who was called to speak for God was thrilled or honored by that distinction.

Jonah received a “hāyāh” moment – the Word of the Lord came into being to him and he was commissioned to go to Ninevah and to cry against the city because their wickedness had risen to the face of God. We are not told exactly where Jonah lived or where he was when the Word came; what we know is that he fled in his attempt to avoid delivering the message (being God’s spokesman) to the Ninevites.

His escape route took him to Joppa (basically where Tel Aviv is today) and…well the rest of his fishing expedition is well known. (By the way – for those who argue that what swallowed Jonah – assuming it to be a whale – was not a fish but a mammal, it should be remembered that God’s categories of creation were extremely broad. For the living creatures which “swarmed” in the water, which He later refers to as “dagah” (which is the feminine form of the root word that means “to multiple, increase”) and is translated as “fish” in both Gen.1 and Jonah 1, this included all creatures, big and small – and even the great sea dragon – that lived in the waters.)

When Jonah is expelled, after his prayer of repentance, the “hāyāh” moment is renewed with the added note that God Himself would give Jonah the words he was to speak. Jonah is back on dry land. Since we are not sure where he had been heading (the location of Tarshish being unknown) we have no idea if where he landed was closer or further away from Ninevah – so we do not know how long his journey would take. At best he was around 400 miles away.

I will leave off here – since my purpose (noting Jonah’s self-imposed sufferings) has been accomplished. It is worth calling out that though the words “nābí” and “nābā’” are not found in Jonah – that he was commissioned to be a spokesman for God is undeniable!

We will finish our look back at the insertion of the Greek modified transliteration into the Old Testament by reviewing Jeremiah’s calling and ministry as a spokesman for God. The noun form of the Hebrew word is used some 85 times in the book of Jeremiah; the verb, over 35 times. It is used to describe both those who were spokesmen for the LORD and those who were speaking for someone other than the LORD – emphasizing the truth that to be a spokesman was not a reflection of character, but simply a reference to function. It was then and is still today, the responsibility of each hearer to discern for whom the spokesman speaks.

Obviously I will over-stay my welcome if I do more than just provide a light dusting of the avalanche of insight available from Jeremiah. Starting with his initial call seems appropriate.

Now the word of the LORD came to me saying, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a spokesman to the nations.”

Then I said, “Alas, LORD God! Behold I do not know how to speak, because I am a youth.”

But the LORD said to me, “Do not say, ‘I am a youth,’ because everywhere I send you, you shall go, and all that I command you, you shall speak. Do not be afraid of them, for I am with you to deliver you,” declares the LORD.

Then the LORD stretched out His hand and touched my mouth, and the LORD said to me, “Behold, I have put My words in your mouth. See, I have appointed you this day over the nations and over the kingdoms, to pluck up and to break down, to destroy and to overthrow, to build and to plant.” Jer.1:4-10

Two quick points: Jeremiah, like Jonah, experiences what I call an “hāyāh” moment – in fact he experiences about 130 such moments throughout his recorded ministry. (As a reminder “hāyāh” is the transliteration of the term that means “to come to pass, occur, become, be” and is found within the construct of the Everlasting name of God.)

And his call is extremely well defined, which speaks to the principle that we have all likely experienced, even if it has been unrecognized: God gives the depth of support that He foreknows will be needed to sustain each of us. He knows the trials and victories we will face; I believe this demonstrates to Jeremiah, and to us all, that He provides in advance what will be needed! Selah!!

I will insert one more passage from Jeremiah’s book – and though it is lengthy, the implications are worth the space. The LORD is speaking to Jeremiah and giving him his next assignment as His spokesman. My sole comment is that we are, each and every one, accountable to discern for whom the spokesmen we are listening to speak.

“It shall come about when they say,

‘Why has the LORD our God done all these things to us?’

then you shall say to them,

‘As you have forsaken Me and served foreign gods in your land, so you will serve strangers in a land that is not yours.’

“Declare this in the house of Jacob and proclaim it in Judah, saying,

‘Now hear this, O foolish and senseless people, who have eyes but do not see; who have ears but do not hear. Do you not fear Me?’ declares the LORD. ‘Do you not tremble in My presence? For I have placed the sand as a boundary for the sea, an eternal decree, so it cannot cross over it. Though the waves toss, yet they cannot prevail; though they roar, yet they cannot cross over it. But this people has a stubborn and rebellious heart; they have turned aside and departed. They do not say in their heart, “Let us now fear the LORD our God, Who gives rain in its season, both the autumn rain and the spring rain, Who keeps for us the appointed weeks of the harvest.” ‘Your iniquities have turned these away, and your sins have withheld good from you. For wicked men are found among My people, they watch like fowlers lying in wait; they set a trap, they catch men. Like a cage full of birds, so their houses are full of deceit; therefore they have become great and rich. They are fat, they are sleek, they also excel in deeds of wickedness; they do not plead the cause, the cause of the orphan, that they may prosper; and they do not defend the rights of the poor. Shall I not punish these people?’ declares the LORD, ‘On a nation such as this shall I not avenge Myself?’

“An appalling and horrible thing has happened in the land: The spokesmen speak falsely, and the priests rule on their own authority; and My people love it so! But what will you do at the end of it?” Jer.5:19-31

---

There are four key passages from the New Testament that I believe will help us in our attempts to reframe our understanding and center ourselves on the meaning that was originally intended.

Before we work through those, however, I want to address the idea of the negative or false declaring before the people. We know from the few references we touched on from the Old Testament, that a spokesman can represent a person other than the LORD and that there can be a nuanced scenario where a person claims to represent the LORD but in fact does not, in that what he speaks does not happen (Deut.13:1-5). The word we saw from Jeremiah chapter 5 describes a “nābí” that speaks falsely (the word is “sheqer” and it means “deception, disappointment, falsehood”).

In the New Testament, as was noted among the derivative words, the same idea is found 11 times. We are even warned by Jesus five times of the arising of “pseudoprophētēs”. The culmination of this aspect of “declaring before” is found in the Revelation. Though introduced to us in chapter 13:11-18 as the doer of “great signs” in the form of the beast from the earth, we learn that it is he who declares before the people, during the last three and a half years of this age, the will of the false god – the serpent of old in 16:13:

And I saw out of the mouth of the dragon and out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the “pseudoprophētēs” (the one who declares before the people the will of the false god), three unclean spirits like frogs; for they are spirits of demons, performing signs, which go out to the kings of the whole inhabited earth, to gather them together for the war of the great day of God, the Almighty. Rev.16:13-14

In chapter 19:20, after the battle is won by our King of kings, the beast and the one who declared the will of the false god, are thrown alive into the lake of fire, where, we are told in 20:10 they are joined by the devil after the seventh day – the day of restoration is completed.

That this lying one can be allowed to preform signs is often an idea that Christians are repulsed by – though we are told by Jesus Himself that it will be the case (Mark 13:22; Matt.24:24) and are warned by Paul (2Thess.2:8-12) who also warns us that this is allowed by the Father because there are those who refuse to love truth and so are sent an operative power of wandering so that they will believe what is false. And we, here, should not be shocked by this since we read already in Deuteronomy 13 that the lying spokesman would be allowed to perform “signs and wonders” that come true in order to determine if our love for Him is with all of our heart and soul.

---

And so, we go to the passages that I trust will help bring clarity and insight regarding this powerful gift of God for the body of Christ. It would be easy to just grab a verse or two in my attempts, however, I have learned that context is extremely important in the support of our efforts to understand. And though I will focus on specific terms, I have provided the bulk of the passages for our edification. For our review, I have inserted the original meaning of the term that is sourced from the primary word we see as “prophet” and that transliterates as “prophētēs”. Also, I will address the passages in the order that I believe Paul wrote these instructions.

The first comes from the letter he wrote to those in Rome:

Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.

For through the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith. For just as we have many members in one body and all the members do not have the same function, so we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. Since we have gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, each of us is to exercise them accordingly: if proclaiming the will of God before the people of God or foretelling His purposes, according to the proportion of his faith; if service, in his serving; or he who teaches, in his teaching; or he who exhorts, in his exhortation; he who gives, with liberality; he who gives aid, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness. Romans 12:1-8

In this explanation from Paul, he is encouraging (primarily) the Gentile believers in Rome (after describing in detail the benefits of being in fellowship with their Jewish brothers in Christ) the value of the transformation that is available to those who have accepted Jesus’ Ransom – letting them know that it (the transformation) is the very means by which we are all made fit for our eternal service with God.

Paul proceeds to give some examples of how we all, in humility, should interact as members of the body of Christ. Please note: He is wise enough to begin by reminding them (and us) that we should not take pride in whatever grace we may have received – that our goal is merely to exercise whatever grace we have been given for the benefit of all!

Next, there are two passages that we will look into from our first letter to those in Corinth – though a case could be made to copy most all of our chapters 12-14.

Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another the declaring of the word of God, either before the people or as a foretelling of His purposes, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of languages, and to another the interpretation of unknown languages. But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He wills. 1Cor.12:4-11

Once again, Paul is very clear in that it is the variety of gifts that is central – not the human tendency to assign a ranked value of the gifts. He also clarifies that the ways the LORD, in the Everlasting Covenant, chose to interact with His creation are specific and varied. The Spirit, as we are being shown, brings a variety of gifts or graces; the Lord (which speaks of Jesus’ role) brings a variety of ministries (the word is “diakonia” it means “service”); God (the Father) brings a variety of effects or outcomes – but all from the God who works all things in all of His body – namely us. The distributions rests with God; it rests on us to exercise what graces, services and outputs we have received!

Now you are Christ's body, and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the congregation of the people of God, first ones who have been sent with specific orders and the ability and authority to accomplish them, second ones who have been asked to declare the will of God before the people of God or to fore tell His purposes, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of languages. All are not ones who have been sent with specific orders and the ability and authority to accomplish them, are they? All are not ones who have been asked to declare the will of God before the people of God or to fore tell His purposes, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they? All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with languages, do they? All do not interpret, do they? Be jealous of these great gifts. And I show you a still more excellent way.

If I speak with the languages of men and of messengers, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of declaring the word of God before His people and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

Love never fails; but if foretelling, they will be done away with; if unknown languages, they will cease; if knowledge, it will be done away with. For we know in part and we declare God’s purposes in part; but when the perfect and complete comes, the partial will be abolished. 1Cor.12:27-13:2, 8-9

Key to our understanding is the difference between ordinal and cardinal numbering. These are ordinal and should therefore suggest to us a sequence. And though that could also be accepted as a hierarchal indicator, I believe the case was made by Paul already (and is reinforced elsewhere) that the gifts are not to be considered better or worse, greater or lesser; they can however be recognized as being given or even exercised sequentially.

But for them all – the more excellent way is that of the love of God that will bring us to completion so that those things that are now necessary, will no longer be.

One more observation – the phrase typically presented as “earnestly desire the greater gifts” is actually more at “be jealous of these great gifts” referring to them all as worthy of our admiration and protection. Some also look at what we see as 14:1 as an indication that the “declaring of a word before” is superior to “speaking in an unknown language”. The best way to read this, since it uses the same verb, is ‘to chase after love and be jealous of what is spiritual and of declaring the will of God before the people all the more.’ And to support this Paul tells us:

Now I wish that you all spoke in languages (referring to the language of prayer to God), but that you would declare before the people the will of God even more. 1Cor.14:5a

And finally:

But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ's gift. Therefore it says,

“WHEN HE ASCENDED ON HIGH, HE LED CAPTIVE A HOST OF CAPTIVES, AND HE GAVE GIFTS TO MEN.”

And He gave some who are sent with specific orders and the authority and ability to carry them out, and some who are to declare the words of God to the people of God or to foretell His purposes, and some who declare the good news of Jesus, and some as shepherds and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ. As a result, we are no longer to be children, tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, by craftiness in deceitful scheming; but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, being fitted and held together by what every joint supplies, according to the proper working of each individual part, causes the growth of the body for the building up of itself in love. Eph.4:7-8,11-16

The pattern is the same in this passage as we have seen. There are means by which and through which our growth and edification are manifested – the services, graces and inner-workings of God. The next section of this letter (though not included, it is well worth reading) addresses the details of that exact process and the specific implications of our need to function as His body in order for us all to benefit. How we talk and walk and even how we think and pray makes a difference – not only to ourselves, but to all of those with whom we connect in the “as every joint (think inter-connection) supplies” body!

I know I have covered a ton of material – beginning with reasserting why I believe the “What If” theme is extremely valuable to us as His followers – to discover and understand what was meant when the inspired Words were given, scribed and preserved.

This particular subject also presented a unique (at least so far) implication in regards to how the modified Greek transliteration was inserted into our Old Testament, replacing a word that was similar but not precisely the same in meaning in the original Hebrew scriptures. (This seems to have been instituted in the Septuagint which first came out around 300 BC – so the more accurate description would be that the New Testament translators chose to retain that insertion without actually translating the Greek word from which it is derived.)

What if as regards this concept which covers some 600 entries and is a significant doctrine in both Old and New Testaments, we were given the opportunity for improved understanding by focusing on the original language and the meanings that would have been perceived by the early followers of Jesus? What if the mystique of titles and offices is replaced by the truth of the ministry of His body? What if we all took responsibility for assessing those who claim to speak the words from God, by comparing what they say to what He Himself has given us?

These are questions that warrant our attention – or so it seems to me.

What if…? If only!

Addendum:

I would like to take this opportunity to express something that I believe will help to frame-in the standards and expectations of God for mankind at this place in history – the Exodus (though I believe the principle equally applies today). As a reminder Moses was born 2433 years after Adam was created and 777 years after the flood. God’s call of Abram took place only 427 years after the flood – and so Abram likely spoke with Shem about life before and after the flood. The generational overlap, despite fulfilling the covenantal commission to refill the earth, meant that there was only between 2 to 4 generations between the end of the flood and the time that Joseph went down to Egypt (for example – Eber likely knew Noah and Isaac could have known Eber, since he didn’t die until Isaac was 42). Which explains why Joseph was referred to as a Hebrew (or descendant of Eber) when he arrived in Egypt. Moses was born about 65 years after Joseph’s death – and the fourth generation promise from God for their return to the land of promise was realized when Moses was 81 and the sons of Israel spied out the promised land.

So, what am I getting at?

We know that it took only about 130 years after the flood for God to divide the land and the languages – an event that was experienced by all of the named ancestors of Lamech, Noah’s father. So we know that it didn’t take long for mankind, despite the creation altering interventions of God, to go their own way. But that does not mean that there was no record of what was right and what was not right as determined by the Creator. And we have evidence of that by the description of Job (Job 2:3) and the statement to Abram regarding the Amorite (Gen. 15:16). Yes God chose a line of people to preserve His oracles and from whom the Messiah would come – but to think that He did not also work with the rest of His children is a misunderstanding that causes us a narrowness of vision.

That idea speaks of promise, but it also speaks of responsibility. For the children of Mizraim the son of Ham who settled in what we now refer to as Egypt, God’s power and might was every bit as available in their oral history as it was for the sons of Shem or Japheth. That they had developed a complex mythology was not their only option for explaining the creation in which they lived. They too could have been blameless and upright and fearing God and turning away from evil. And so, He sent Moses in to both free His covenant people, but to also judge the idolatry of Pharoah and of Egypt as a whole!