Monday, September 20, 2021

Using New Testament Greek (David A. Black)-Part XII

This post deals with five steps for exegesis outlined by David Black. In the final post for this series, I will concern myself with five more steps. But to make this exercise more facile, I will pick one scripture to use as a model text for how exegesis might be done, and that scripture is Philippians 4:13. At the end of this post, sources for further reading on New Testament exegesis will be listed; for now, we're only focusing on the basics of exegesis (drawing meaning from the scriptural text). D.A. Black lists these five steps but I've added some of my own wording for them:

1. Survey the historical context (historical setting)
2. Observe the larger literary context (the macrostructure or entire book)
3. Resolve any significant textual issues
4. Determine the meaning of any crucial words (do a word study on important terms in the text)
5. Analyze the syntax. Ask which syntactical features directly contribute to the exegesis of your chosen text.


1) For Philippians 4:13, the historical context would involve identifying the writer of the verse (the Apostle Paul), the recipients of the letter/epistle (Christians in Philippi), the approximate time of writing, the relationship that Paul had with the Philippians and his purpose for writing. You might also find out what ancient Philippi was like; how did the city come into existence and what were its socioeconomic conditions like?

2) Black spurs exegetes to analyze texts above the sentence level: one should exegete at the paragraph level, but prior to doing this work, determine the GNT book's genre. In this case, Philippians is an epistle, so one finds expository and hortatory portions in Paul's correspondence to this ecclesia. Knowing a document's genre is crucial for the exegete, but this is only a start. Exegeting a passage like Philippians 4:13 equally requires that one read the entire book of Philippians to get an overview of the macrostructure; along the way, look for transitional words that indicate the start of new sections in the letter--words like therefore, finally, so, thus, hence, consequently, moreover, furthermore, for, and because of this. See Philippians 4:1, 8, 15 for examples.

3) Textual variants are often important when exegeting texts; at other times, they don't matter a great deal. The standard work to consult textual issues is Bruce Metzger's Textual Commentary although it's not the only place one can seek out information for variants. I would urge cation when it comes to textual criticism. Establishing the probable reading of a text is difficult and requires special training: do not simply look up what someone else says about a text and let matters rest there. You might find yourself in a figurative minefield.

As for Philippians 4:13, our model text for this entry, the NET Bible offers this commentary:

tc Although some excellent witnesses lack explicit reference to the one strengthening Paul (so א* A B D* I 33 1739 lat co Cl), the majority of witnesses (א2 D2 [F G] Ψ 075 1175 1241 1505 1881 2464 M al sy Hier) add Χριστῷ (Christō) here (thus, “through Christ who strengthens me”). But this kind of reading is patently secondary, and is a predictable variant. Further, the shorter reading is much harder, for it leaves the agent unspecified.

 4) What are the crucial words in Philippians 4:13? A few terms in the verse might deserve a word study: one question is the scope or application of πάντα. Whichever sources you use to do a word study, try to find out what the word means in a particular context. In the case of Philippians, we might ask how Paul employs terms in other writings. Additionally, what does the immediate literary context suggest about the meaning of key words in the text? Black warns that some fallacies to avoid are etymologizing and illegitimate totality transfer, an expression made famous by James Barr. Another good practice would be to consult the major Greek-English lexica (BDAG and Louw-Nida), check a good concordance, and use NIDNTTE.

5) Syntax refers to word order or to the grammatical and semantic relationships that words bear to one another. Black advises the exegete to analyze the syntax that impinges upon your exegesis. Questions that could be asked: Does the Greek article appear in the verse or paragraph I'm reading? What is the tense/aspect and form of the verbs I encounter? What about the nominal or pronominal cases? What is the word, phrase, and clause order of the text? I will list suggestions for works about syntax below, and the next post will discuss five more steps for GNT exegesis.

Works for Further Reading

Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans, 2003. Print.

Reed, Jeffrey T. A Discourse Analysis of Philippians: Method and Rhetoric in the Debate Over Literary Integrity. Sheffield, Eng: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997. Print.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschsaft, 2016. Print.

Silva, Moisés (editor). New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2014. Five Volumes. Print.

Brooks, James A, and Carlton L. Winbery. Syntax of New Testament Greek. Washington, D.C: University Press of America, 1988. Print.

18 comments:

FR said...

Who do you think Paul is referring to by the use of "Him" in this passage (Philippians 4:13)?
He applies endynamoō (strengthens) in reference to the Lord Jesus in 1 Timothy 1:12; 2 Timothy 2:1 and 2 Timothy 4:17. In Ephesians 6:10 I think the "Lord" refers to the Lord Jesus.

Edgar Foster said...

It very well could be Christ as the one who strengthens Paul in Philippians 4:13, but then again, the referent may not be explicit. It could be God. See Philippians 2:13; 3:20-21; 4:6-9, 19-20. Compare 2 Corinthians 4:7; Ephesians 3:14-16.

For Eph. 6:10, you also have to consider 6:11.

FR said...

Thanks for the information for Phil. 4:13.

In terms of Ephesians 6:10 I think the fact that "kyrios" is used in reference to Jesus in vv. 7, 8 and 9 is very clear. Furthermore, "in the Lord" is also used in reference to Jesus in Ephesians 6:1 and Ephesians 6:21.

Edgar Foster said...

FR, you may be right: there is no major disagreement here. Witnesses have explained (in the 1984 Reference Bible) that it's sometimes difficult to identify which "Lord" is being discussed in the GNT, but we still don't believe that makes Jesus YHWH. Unlike God the Father, Jesus Christ was made Lord and Savior after God raised him from the dead (Acts 2:32-36; 5:31).

FR said...

Since the Jehovah's Witnesses believe Jesus isn't God then this means they have a difficult time, as well as a contradictory one, in differentiating between their creator and creature in mnay passages. This constitutes an attack on monotheism and creates an environment where idolatry, which is so bittlery oppposed throughout the Bible, is able to flourish.

When the Bible teaches Jeaus is "Lord" this demonstrates He is God in that as being Lord He is the proper recipient of prayer - and only God is to be prayed to.

Edgar Foster said...

I disagree that Jehovah's Witnesses can distinguish or have a difficult time differentiating the creator from the creature. For me, I think Trinitarians have many problems trying to explain the doctrine coherently and scripturally. For instance, Ephesians 4:6 and 1 Peter 1:20-21 seem hard to understand from a Trinitarian perspective. So does Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32 and Revelation 3:12.

But we grant that Jesus is Lord: the question is, how did he come to have this designation? Who made him Lord? And when? Moreover, what about Psalm 110:1, which distinguishes between YHWH (LORD) and "my Lord"?

Funny that we're never commanded to offer prayer to Jesus in the GNT. Yes, he's called "Lord," but that doesn't mean he's equal to his Father, nor does it necessarily mean he's Almighty God.

FR said...

Romans 10:11
For the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame." (ESV)

Beginning from the most recent and then going to the past the Jehovah's Witnesses are very confused as to whom the singular "him" is in refernce to.

The singular "him" refers to Jesus Christ.
Romans Study Notes—Chapter 10: Paul here shows that a person who exercises faith in Jesus Christ will not experience the shame and disappointment of those whose faith is shown to be in vain. (Romans 10:11, c. 2019)

The singular "him" refers to Jehovah.
The Watchtower: We are confident that as long as we fully trust in Jehovah and put his Kingdom first, we will not be disappointed. —Rom. 10:11. ("You Know Neither the Day Nor the Hour", September 15, 2012, page 27)

The singular "him" refers to Jesus.
The Watchtower: With reference to Jesus, Paul quoted Isaiah’s words: “None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.” (Rom. 10:11; Isa. 28:16) (There Is Good News That All Need, June 15, 2011, page 11)

The singular "him" refers to God.
The Watchtower: The apostle Paul wrote: “None that rests his faith on [God] will be disappointed.” (Romans 10:11) (Will We Ever Enjoy Real Security?, November 1, 2004, page 32)

The singular "him" refers to Jesus.
Survival Into a New Earth: But Jesus' own words reflect a spirit that is reassuring. He warmly invites us: “Come to me, all you who are toiling and loaded down, and I will refresh you. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am mild-tempered and lowly in heart, and you will find refreshment for your souls. For my yoke is kindly and my load is light.” (Matthew 11:28-30) What an appealing prospect! Those who heed that warm invitation, putting their full confidence in him, will not be disappointed. (Romans 10:11) (Who Leads the Way to Deliverance?, January 1, 1984, page 70)

The singular "him" refers to Jehovah God.
The Watchtower: When experiencing great difficulties, God’s servants today can take comfort in the words of this psalm. It may look as though all of them will perish off the earth. But Jehovah God will never permit the enemy to exterminate his people. Relief is certain to come. “None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.” —Rom. 10:11 (Survival Depends upon God, January 15, 1980, page 22)

The singular "him" refers to Jesus Christ.
The Watchtower: Romans 10:9 definitely refers to Jesus Christ as Lord, and the quotation from Isaiah 28:16 found in Romans 10:11, “None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed,” also applies to Jesus. (Questions From Readers, February 1, 1977, page 95)

The singular "him" refers to Jehovah God, the God of truth.
The Watchtower: Jehovah God, the God of truth, has given us his solemn “word,” and “none that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.” (Rom. 10:11) (A Solid Basis for Confidence, July 15, 1976, page 443)

The singular "him" refers to Jesus.
The Watchtower: Time would fail us to bear witness to Jesus and tell all that he means to us as members of the fallen human family. Never will we be disappointed in him. “For the Scripture says: ‘None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.’”(Rom. 10:11; Isa. 28:16) (Why We Need the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, April 15, 1976, page 245)

The singular "him" refers to Jehovah.
The Watchtower: Be a worshiper of Jehovah. In unity with other worshipers of Jehovah, acknowledge with thanks your own faith in Jehovah and you will never be disappointed. “For the Scripture says: ‘None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.’ For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for there is the same Lord over all, who is rich to all those calling upon him. For ‘everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.’” —Rom. 10:11-13. (Assemblies After the Death of Christ, July 1, 1971, page 402-403)

Edgar Foster said...

FR,

I might check some of your references to see if they hold up, but I seriously doubt that our understanding of Romans 10:11 has changed that much. Maybe some reader can check them all, but I don't have time right now.

FR said...

In April 15, 1976 it doesn't just read "Jesus" but it does read "Jesus Christ." If anyone can show how my citations are in error I'd like to see where.

Here's another example:
2 Timothy 2:13
If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself. (NASB)

God
The Watchtower: God "cannot deny himself." (2 Timothy 2:13) (The Great Issue - What Is It?, March 1, 1991, page 5)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1991160

Christ Jesus
Awake!: Christ Jesus is loyal to his own sense of worth, unswayed by the failings of others. "If we are unfaithful, he remains faithful, for he cannot deny himself." - 2 Tim. 2:13. (Seven Deadly Sins and the Antidote for Them, September 22, 1979, page 3)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101979681

God
The Watchtower: But regardless of what man would do, God would remain faithful, for he cannot deny himself.—2 Tim. 2:13. (Never Failing Our God in This Time of the End, December 1, 1963, page 734)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1963887

Jesus
The Watchtower: Copy Jesus, who holds true to what he is, unchanged by the weaknesses of those around him: "If we are unfaithful, he remains faithful, for he cannot deny himself." - 2 Tim. 2:13, NW (Stop Evil, Start Good, July 15, 1956, page 420)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1956520

Jehovah God
The Watchtower: Only Jehovah God is to be worshiped and feared. "It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service." And he brooks no rivals, for he "is a God exacting exclusive devotion." For him to tolerate rivals would be for him to deny his supremacy, which he cannot do - Matt. 4:10; Deut. 6:14; 2 Tim. 2:13, NW. (Ancestor Worship - Its Folly, June 15, 1954, page 362)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1954442

Edgar Foster said...

One issue I noticed in your quotes is when the WT applies a verse to Jesus versus actually believing that the verse has him or Jehovah in mind. The two things are different. It may be confusing to an outsider, but the WT has explained this interpretive practice before. Applying a verse to Jehovah or Jesus does not mean that the original writer had the same intention: we sometimes apply principles that may not coincide with the contextual understanding of the passage.

Secondly, some passages can be confusing: even interpreters of Christendom have not been exactly sure who Paul is talking about at times. See 1 Corinthians 15:58 for an example. Nevertheless, I think it's safe to say that the true referent/subject of Romans 10:11 is Jesus Christ.

I think the quote from the Sept 15, 2012 WT is meant to be an application of principle, not a contextual understanding. This is the kind of thing I mentioned earlier.

I didn't see the 1/15/1997 WT, page 12 in your list for Romans 10:11, which applies the verse to Jesus Christ.

For 2 Tim. 2:13, the contextual referent in all probability is Jesus Christ.

It's possible that our understanding of the passage had to be adjusted, but I think some of the articles you're quoting are simply applying 2 Tim. 2:13 to Jehovah God without necessarily saying that he's the referent of the passage. Then again, the older writers/members at headquarters might have believed that 2 Tim. 2:13 applied to Jehovah but it actually is talking about Jesus.



FR said...

Your first paragraph doesn't make any sense.

It wouldn't really matter if a Trinitarian confuses the two because they are not confusing the Creator and the creature. Those who deny the Lord Jesus is God do such a thing when not being able to differentiate between the Father and the Son.
a. The Watchtower: The apostle Paul wrote: “None that rests his faith on [God] will be disappointed.” (Romans 10:11) (Will We Ever Enjoy Real Security?, November 1, 2004, page 32)
b. The Watchtower: With reference to Jesus, Paul quoted Isaiah’s words: “None that rests his faith on him will be disappointed.” (Rom. 10:11; Isa. 28:16) (There Is Good News That All Need, June 15, 2011, page 11)

I never referred to January 15, 1997 (page 12). Perhaps you meant something else (?)

I am surprised you affirm in all probablity that 2 Timothy 2:13 refers to Jesus Christ when the most recent assertion by the Jehovah's Witnesses teaches it is in reference to God.
The Watchtower: God "cannot deny himself." (2 Timothy 2:13) (The Great Issue - What Is It?, March 1, 1991, page 5)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1991160

FR said...

John 7:18
Whoever speaks of his own originality is seeking his own glory; but whoever seeks the glory of the one who sent him, this one is true and there is no unrighteousness in him. (New World Translation)

1. In 1963 the Jehovah's Witnesses affirmed the one who is true and has no unrighteousness in him refers to the Lord Jesus.
The Watchtower: Christ Jesus was the very essence of maturity, possessing all the characteristics of a mature Son of God. Not only did he always speak truth, but he demonstrated loyalty and truth in his actions and deeds. (Rev. 3:7; Acts 4:27) The ever-present quality of righteousness was exhibited by him, as recorded at Hebrews 1:9, where it states: “You loved righteousness, and you hated lawlessness. That is why God, your God, anointed you with the oil of exultation.”
He certainly possessed the qualities of truth, as stated further: “He was full of undeserved kindness and truth.” (John 1:14) He was unselfish in every respect because he never sought his own glory but sought the glory of the one who sent him, and he was unequivocally loyal and there was not an unrighteous thought in him. (John 7:18). (Maturity, a Christian Requirement, July 1, 1963, page 398)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1963484

2. In 1977 the Jehovah's Witnesses affirmed the one who is true and has no unrighteousness in him refers to the Father, Jehovah God.
Awake!: JESUS CHRIST said of his Father, Jehovah God: "This one is true, and there is no unrighteousness in him." (John 7:18) (Did God Create the Devil?, May 8, 1977, page 27)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101977331

3. In 1999 the Jehovah's Witnesses once again affirmed that no unrighteousness in him refers to the Lord Jesus.
The Watchtower: Jesus said: “What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me. He that speaks of his own originality is seeking his own glory; but he that seeks the glory of him that sent him, this one is true, and there is no unrighteousness in him.”—John 7:16, 18
Unlike the writer of Psalm 119, there was "no unrighteousness" in Jesus. (How Much Do You Love God's Word?, November 1, 1999, page 13)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1999803

Edgar Foster said...

Allow me to clarify what I earlier wrote. I'm not going to cite the reference now, but it's on this blog. The WTS has explained in past issues of the WT that they sometimes apply Bible verses in ways that differ from the original context of the verse. That is to say, the WT publications sometimes apply principles from a verse that may not be directly consonant with the original context of the passage. For example, 2 Timothy 4:2 means something different in context from the way it has sometimes been applied in WT publications. Outsiders may have a difficult time spotting such uses of Bible verses in our literature.

JWs have no problem differentiating between the Father and the Son: Trinitarians may think we do, but they would be mistaken. From our standpoint, Trinitarians worship more than one God or some appear to be quasi-modalists. Either way, Trinitarianism teaches there is more than one person who constitutes the only true God. That sounds ludicrous to me. And Trinitarians teach that the Son of God has a God; I cannot accept that teaching either. Eternal subordination of God the Son to God the Father is another absurdity.

Show me where Jesus is ever called "Creator/creator" in the Bible. I'll wait for your answer :-)

My point about the 1997 WT was that you curiously omitted it, yet that is another issue of the WT where they applied Romans 10:11 to Jesus. Should it not be added to your list?

My understanding of 2 Tim. 2:13 is based on the literary context--I don't think my comments are untoward or at odds with WT teaching. To understand 2 Tim. 2:13 as I do is not without precedent in the WT literature as you mentioned. See https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101978003?q=2+timothy+2%3A13&p=par#h=34

FR said...

You ask me to show you where Jesus is ever called Crreator in the Bible and yet you ought to know there is more than one way to epxress a truth claim.

Revelation 11:15
The seventh angel blew his trumpet. And there were loud voices in heaven, saying: "The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever." (NWT)

To whom does "he will rule as king forever and ever" refer to?
Jesus
Frequently Asked Questions About Jehovah's Witnesses: We also believe that Jesus is now ruling as King of God’s heavenly Kingdom, which will soon bring peace to the entire earth. (Revelation 11:15) (Do Jehovah's Witnesses Believe in Jesus?, page 6)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/502012469

Jehovah God
Romans Study Notes—Chapter 5: Therefore, it may be properly rendered “to rule as king; to become king.” (Lu 19:14, 27) It is used of Jesus Christ (Lu 1:33; 1Co 15:25) and of Jehovah God (Re 11:15, 17; 19:6), who rule as kings in heaven. (See 'Romans 5:14')
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1001070722

Christ
The Watchtower: the Scriptures speak of Christ's rule of having "no end." (Isa. 9:7; Luke 1:33; Rev. 11:15). (Jesus' Royal Act of Humility, January 1, 1977, page 10)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1977003

Creator
The Watchtower: And in the final book of the Bible the apostle John quoted voices out of heaven that said about the Lord Jehovah: "He will rule as king forever and ever." The writer John here uses the plural form of the Greek phrase, which literally means "to the ages of the ages." (Rev. 11:15; 1 Tim. 1:17) With regard to the future, then, John knew unquestionably that our Creator will reign "into the ages of the ages." (Kingdom Interlinear Translation) (Serve with Eternity in View, June 15, 1974, page 376)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1974446

Jesus
The Watchtower: That kingdom is already functioning in the heavens with Christ as its king. (Rev. 11:15) (Breaking the Yoke of the Oppressor, October 1, 1970, page 590)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1970722

In Revelation 11:15 "he will rule as king forever and ever" is the "Creator" (6-15-1974) - in reference to Jesus.

Your claim that "JWs have no problem differentiating between the Father and the Son" is entirely wrong based on John 7:18; Romans 10:11; 2 Timothy 2:13 and Revelation 11:15. Furthermore, they specifically asserted that Christ is not being referred to in 1 John 3:2 when it reads "when He appears" (NASB), but instead it refers to "Jehovah God."
The Watchtower: At times the conscientious translator may feel justified in adding a word or two to make the meaning clear. However, there is always the danger, when this is done, of misleading the reader. Thus in an attempt to aid the reader the translator of Today's English Version replaced "he" with Christ at 1 John 3:2. However, in this he erred, for Jehovah God and not Jesus Christ is here referred to, even as is clear from the preceding verse 1Jo 3:1. (Choosing a Modern Bible Translation, June 1, 1969, page 331)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1969402

So after warning us about "misleading the reader" the Jehovah's Witnesses later do affirm that it is in reference to Jesus.
The Watchtower: In his first letter, John warns against "antichrist," and tells Christians to remain in union with Christ while awaiting His "presence" and His manifestation. (1 John 2:18, 28; 3:2) (Happy Are Those Found Watching!, December 1, 1984, page 12)
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1984882

Their confusion abounds.

Edgar Foster said...

You say a lot of things that I could and have addressed on this blog, including Revelation 11:15, which the context helps us to understand but you never directly answer my question. Therefore, I will. No scripture calls Jesus the creator. The bible teaches that God the Father created all things through Christ. Christ is the intermediate agent.

FR said...

I already addressed your Creator argument. There is more than one way to express a truth claim. For you to simply repeat the argument does not make it true.

Edgar Foster said...

FR, you said there's more than one way to make a truth claim. That's certainly true: I agree with that point. But does the Bible teach that Jesus is Creator? I don't think so, and it's still curious to me that he's never designated Creator. I will submit a blog post expanding on this point. It will not just be directed to you, but to my readers. Thanks.

FR said...

The fact that the Bible teaches the Lord Jesus is the proper recipient of prayer demonstrates He is the Creator.