Romans Study Overview, Part 3 - Keeping a Pattern of Sound Words

I Still Have a Concern…

The final major question we must ask is this: which version translates these three manuscripts?

It should come as no surprise that, if we are able to consider the Concordant Greek Text, then the English translation deriving from this text will be the most satisfactory for readable study. In this article, we will briefly survey the Concordant Version’s methodology (how it goes about translating,) and briefly introduce the laws of language that we must stick to in order to understand God’s usage of words over the 1,500 year timespan of the Bible’s creation.

This… Sounds Like A Lot. Where Do We Start?

It all starts with the simple truth. The simple truth is that this is simple Greek. This is a deep and detailed language, yes – but it is not a confusing language. It can only become confusing if the same word is given multiple different English words, or a host of 7 or 8 different definitions! Sometimes the opposite is even true, and there can be anywhere between 20 and 40 different Greek words translated the same way! Examples include the word “depart,” “soul,” and “eternal!” I don’t know about you, but those words sound pretty freakin’ important concepts that we should have clear and simple definitions for!

Now, I say simple Greek, but we will be extremely careful in considering the CLV. Although an understanding of the English language is beneficial in our study, it is not a perfect language – not by a long shot. It is a beautiful language – I agree. But the English language (like most English Bibles) is a mixture of multiple different languages. It may have various laws, but many words in English look and sound exactly the same. If I say, for example, that “I hit the bat with my bat,” you kind of have no choice but to logically interpret what I said. You would have to infer that I did not pick up a winged creature in a cave and whack a baseball bat with it, but the other way around.

In contrast to this, koine Greek has no such issue. It is one of the most carefully perfect, law-abiding languages in all of history. It, like the Hebrew, is designed for Scriptural study (almost as if God set everything up in order to deliver us a perfect piece of writing that can only get messy when you throw it through Google translate 4 or 5 times, but what do I know?) In koine Greek, we don’t have to worry about “bat” and “bat,” or “read” and “read.” We can simply appreciate the original text, and rarely need to question whether this word “means one thing or the other.” If God intended for two different words in two completely different parts of his text to have the same meaning (see Gehenna and unseen,) then He would have used the same word (Ps. 12:6.)

The Law of Relation

We will now cover some of the laws of the Greek language, beginning with the “law of relation.” When something is revealed to us, it is only revealed in relation to another object. We are not “absolute” creatures, omnipotently able to consider all. We are stuck considering things relatively. For example, we know the difference between a “door” and a “window” by their relative relation to each other. We comprehend the difference between a phone screen and a computer screen by way of contrasting the two in size and ability. As such, when we are considering the CLV, we want an English rendering that will consider the usage of a word (that is, the surrounding context by which a word is used,) the etymology of a word (that is, the family of words from which it springs,) and the overarching contrast between the Greek and English language itself (which we will be uncovering as we study.)

When we consider the Greek more carefully like this, we come to realize that one of the first laws of the Greek language is this: “No one word is the exact equivalent of another word.” When we are considering English, this rule, of course, is nonexistent. “Parallel” and “side by side” are equivalent in meaning. “Pain” and “hurt” are equivalent in meaning. So on and so forth.

In Greek, no such ‘equivalents’ exist. Each word, in Greek, is definite in meaning, and have no good reason to be translated in various different ways. In Greek, for example, the word “Lord” and “Christ,” while in many cases refer to the same individual (Rom. 1:5, 1 Cor. 8:6, etc.,) the two words themselves are undeniably different in meaning (“Lord” meaning “master,” and “Christ” meaning “anointed.”) The words, however, are not interchangeable.

This is true for other words as well, which by necessity must be translated uniformly in order to fully grasp their meaning and import on God’s end. The words “soul,” “spirit,” and “life” are not interchangeable. So why, if a Scriptural writer writes “soul,” psuche, does the King James randomly translate psuche as “life” in some cases, as “mind” 3 times, and “heart” 1 time (not even getting into the Old Testament, which translates it a wealth of different ways??) Why, if a Scriptural writer writes “spirit,” pneuma, does the King James randomly add notations to limit the word to their personal worldview (translating it “holy ghost” eighty-nine times, when the words “holy” and “ghost” are represented by their own Greek words??)

Such shoddy translating is unacceptable, and confuses the reader. We should not be confused by other men when attempting to read the unadulterated word of God. Such a problem will (mostly) be eradicated by the Concordant Literal Version. If the word is soul, the translators stick to soul. They do not change the meaning of easily identifiable words out of personal comprehensions (which God directly stands against, Eph. 2:2-3,) for many of us are at different levels of understanding. The only safe method is by reading uniformly, as Paul steadfastly demands (2 Tim. 1:13,) that we do not become confused.

*As such, I feel this PSA is most important here, as it will save you (and me) a wealth of time and misunderstanding. If you don’t care about finding exactly what God said, and would prefer your personal Bible version for sentimental or sectarian reasons, then stop reading now, for I will be demonstrating just how foolish many of our translations are, and your objections will only frustrate you, and slow down those who seek to study the Greek words as they are written. Good day.*           

The Law of Location

For those of you who stuck around, welcome to the study! The next law we will consider in Greek is the “law of location.” This law does not so much apply literally to the Greek language, but in the art of translating. The law is simply that “Every word in the original should have its own English equivalent.” Any translator(s) refusing to follow this notion are immediately compromised, so we must acknowledge the Concordant Version for keeping this principle front and center. Thankfully, this ideal is also noted by most translators of English versions. Many can tell the differences between “yes” and “no,” or “empty” and “full.” However, as I’ve covered before, though these translators proclaim this law, many disregard this rule by translating according to their pre-supposed theology. As such, we must push the CLV in the most difficult passages, to ensure that it maintains these rules, even if the English feels awkward to us.

Now, when I say that “every word in the original must have its own English equivalent,” this is not to claim that “Greek” and “English” must have the exact same number of words used in the text. The simple reality is that English has more words than Greek for a reason. What the Greek language can convey with 1 word, the English language may need 3, or even 4. This is why we must also pay attention to the tense of a Greek word in the Concordant Greek Text first.

Examples? Sure! One of the biggest criticisms against the Concordant Version (apart from correcting direct mistranslations, which we will consider throughout the study,) are the verb forms. John 13:34, for example, in the KJV, translates Jesus’ words thus–

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

In contrast, the CLV reads–

A new precept am I giving to you, that you be loving one another; according as I love you, that you also be loving one another.

The Concordant Version catches a lot of flack, because the sentence is perceived as “unnecessarily changed.” The objector would say some variation of, “Why make such an arbitrary change, when the KJV reads just fine? The parallelism of the passage is conveyed accurately! Love the way Jesus loves!”

Yet, upon close inspection of the Greek first, we find the King James translators to be in grave error. Jesus’ love is not in the past tense, as is conveyed in the KJV. He still loves. Moreover, the first use is explicitly in the present and active tense, while the second use, not being past, is actually indefinite, highlighting that Christ’s love is true, no matter the time period.

Thus, the passage must be understood in its proper context, not as a parallel, but in juxtaposition. No one should rationally say that our love is equivalent, or greater than Christ’s all-encompassing love. The passage in the CLV, while “clunky” or “weird” at the outset, is actually extraordinarily accurate in its tense and form, to convey to the English reader just what God said. Moreover, both the pdf and physical copies of the CLV have a keyword concordance in the back, which highlights the elements and different uses of words (as well as figures of speech and internal structures of each book of the New Testament!) You can find the pdf here, and nab a physical copy for a pittance here (and, if you would like the keyword concordance only, click click here.)

In short, yes, this is how exact we are going to be getting, as often as we can. The correct phrasing of the words in this passage and others will be verified. All of this may frustrate many pastors, yes. However, “anger” does not supercede “grammar.” These folk can be mad about the exactitude, but consider: if the evidence is so clearly set forth in the very verse we’re studying, then… is that anger rational? Moreover, if the exact verbiage of God is a problem for the pastors, shouldn’t that be their problem, not the honest truth seeker?

Briefly Summarizing…

More complex examples of these laws will arise. We will be discriminating specific words by their relation and location to each other. “Sin” and “offense,” for example, are not the same thing. If they were, then “sin” would have been used where “offense” is written. The same is true for “offense” and “transgression.” These are all different Greek words that, while related (in this case, all represent sin in some way,) carry a different weight in the passage that they are used. And, that they are located in close tandem with each other (Rom. 5:20 uses both “sin” and “offense,” verifying conclusively that these are two separate words with two separate definitions which should be kept distinct, lest we ourselves miss vital truth.)

The Law of Reciprocation

The last major law that I want to consider is what I call “The law of reciprocation.” The law is simple: “Every thought symbol, the moment that it is placed in connection with others, both influences the meaning of its neighbors – and is, itself, modified by them.”

In other words, you’re never going to read the phrase “bright darkness” in Scripture (nor should you read that anywhere except a David Lynch film.) Words, with their meaning, are given weight by their surrounding context. You can very easily find out what a word means to the Author apart from a dictionary. You do this by considering each and every time it is used in the book you are studying.

We can see the value of this law for translators, but why does it matter to readers? Well, simply put, it means that the use of an English word in whatever English translation we may find may not be its meaning in the current dictionary. This, unfortunately, is not only true of Scripture, but of many other forms of media (and this misunderstanding is the driving force of cancel culture today.) For example, the definition of “gender” today in the dictionary is not the definition of “gender” fifty years ago. The same is true of the term “gay.” The same is true of the term “righteous.” The same is true of the word “racism.” Mankind shifts its meanings of words with the current fashion of the world, and changes when that fashion becomes “outdated.”

Now, none of that is an indictment on any particular group or theology. I am stating the above as simple facts – man changes definitions of words when it is convenient for them to do so. The good news about the Bible, however, is that it has already been written. Assuming that all 66 books of the Bible are inspired by God, and said Bible claims that God does not change (Mal. 3:6,) then we should rightly infer that His use of a word will not change, even over the course of the 1,500 years by which the Bible is written. We know that “sin” does not change its meaning anywhere in Scripture. Neither does “human,” or “finger,” or “breath.” To presume that a word’s meaning could potentially mean its opposite, or radically shift, in the completed word of God is, simply, artificial.

Now, this does not mean that a word’s meaning is not contextualized. “Righteousness,” for example, is defined by its context. Job is said to be a righteous man, in Job 1:1. Does this mean that He held the righteousness of God, documented in Romans 3:21? Hell no! The genitive phrase “of God” in this case contextualizes “righteousness,” that we may understand the juxtaposed use of the word. When we consider all three laws we’ve covered, we can safely conclude that Job is considered righteous in relation to humanity, whereas God’s righteousness has no equal. That being said, it does not mean that the word “righteousness” has lost or changed its direct meaning – only its scope and force.

See how these normal grammatical laws, when applied to the Bible instead of ignored, keep us from deifying creation, and keep us worshipping the Creator instead?

With this, we have a set foundation by which to study the Greek text. We are unable to deviate from this foundation, for it is a concrete method that denies our personal feelings about the text, and shows us that God has spoken, and our disagreements or misunderstandings of the word do not give us a right to alter it. We do not speak for God.

As such, these laws are not here to “obscure” things, but to shine a light on obscure dogma in the Christian church. How does the original text compare to modern-day Christian theology? Are these two even remotely compatible?

How Does the Concordant Version Translate, Then?

The Concordant Version of the Bible takes everything we have considered, in Greek, into consideration – and more.

See, when I began studying the text, I presumed that the laws above would satisfy. Yet the head of the Concordant Publishing Concern, named A.E. Knoch, writes,

“At first it was thought sufficient to assign each word standard English equivalent. Much as this helped, it fell far short of our ideal. So the whole vocabulary of the Greek scriptures was analyzed into its Elements, and to each of these was assigned a ‘STANDARD.’

Thus, for example, two elements, ‘FROM’ and ‘COVERing,’ in combination, became ‘FROM-COVERing,’ with secondary standard, ‘unveiling.’ Whenever possible, these elementary standards, which are printed in small capitals, appear in the [Greek manuscript’s] sublinear, beneath the Greek word, commencing under its initial letter. They will be found delight fully suggestive and profitable.”

Knoch essentially does what we did with “BEFORE-FATHER,” or “forefather.” Using his terminology, “BEFORE-FATHER” would be the standard, and the ‘secondary standard’ would be “forefather.” Yet Knoch segregates many Greek words into families using these elements, and, in following all of the Greek laws, we get information such as the one in the large photograph to the side.

This should be our standard. If a translator is not conclusively breaking down an English version on the Greek language, but is instead contingent on “personal judgments” and “interpretations” (as the KJV writers admit to, in the preface to their version,) then the version in consideration is not actually the word of God, is it? It would, by definition, be the word of man.

On this subject, A.E. Knoch, the compiler of the Concordant Literal New Testament, writes in his Intro to the Concordant Greek Text (p. 7) –

“The English reader, who knows nothing of Greek, has somewhat the same advantage as the learned scholar. Anyone can readily refer to the Lexical Concordance to find the meaning and occurrences of any word, and those of the entire family of which it is member, and satisfy himself as to the correctness and accuracy of any passage.

Uniformity or consistency is the key note. This is attained by the use of standard English expression for every Greek element of the original, and secondary standards which correspond to the words, and form the basis of the version. All is uniform when possible, and consistent, when uniformity is impracticable.”

This is the key to studying Scripture. The apostle Paul requests to his readers (the nations… us) that we should strive to keep a pattern of sound words when studying the text (2 Tim. 1:13.) I plan on doing this very thing throughout my study. If we do this, we should have no reason to deny, question, or recontextualize any detail, correct? Whether you believe it or not, again – it’s still a book. In a story, you would not deny the detail, correct? Let’s say you began to read “Harry Potter,”  but don’t like the fact that Harry goes to Hogwarts. Would you irrationally deny the existence of the claim that “Harry goes to Hogwarts” is in the book? Right, you wouldn’t – so why should you read this book any differently?

This is what the translators of the Concordant Literal Version have done. They do not seek to deny something God has said – they simply take Him at His word, and translate accordingly using harmonious translation of the original Greek text. With such careful measures taken to translate properly, we now have a proper English version to be reading from. Of course, the Greek is still our source of information, but the English translation here will keep me from wasting time explaining every little word (nor will I make attempts to justify why they translated ‘every single word.’ We will consider many, but there is a magazine published by these same folk where they break down pretty much every major point of translational conflict that you would consider. You can access every article on their site for free.)

It must be clarified that, using this method of harmonious translation, you can begin to see why we are not considering Greek scholars (and there will be times where I will disagree with Mr. Knoch.) The Greek language operates differently today than it did back then. By translating concordantly, we are going to ignore the new rules and laws implemented by modern day Greek scholars, in favor of how the original text read.

And What if I Choose not To Follow Any of these Laws?

When you break a law, there is a penalty. You have “transgressed.” This is true in any category. You break a U.S. law, there’s a penalty. You break a law in driver’s ed, there’s a penalty. Businesses have laws. You break them, and you’re booted from said business. When you break a rule in a game, you’re disqualified, because you cheated. Why, then, would grammar be any different? When you break a grammatical law, you have infringed upon the original thought, and it takes a toll on your understanding of the text. When you add five or six different meanings to a word (as opposed to studying the word itself, and how each use of said word relates to the text,) horrible twisting of a beautiful text transpires.

Our dilemma is clear. For many who have been disillusioned by Christendom, this lack of systematic translation (which effectively dissolves all false dogma) is why there is so much religious turmoil and degradation. For the passer-by who cannot grasp why this text is so valuable, consider this: if Satan is real (Satan Satan, a real being with thoughts and motivations, not the silly two-horned dude on glass panes or in our memes,) then it means that there is a creature out there that is hiding the true text for what it is (2 Cor. 4:2-6,) and confusing many of our own loved ones into this perpetual state of inconsistency and conditional love (2 Cor. 11:12-15.) And how? Through simple misunderstandings. Eve herself, when being deluded by the serpent, is not inherently evil or corrupt; before eating of the tree, she naturally has no knowledge of good and evil. And yet, she misspeaks, adding to God’s initial charge (she says, you shall not touch it, whereas God only said, you shall not eat of it,) and she simplified His penalty (she says, you shall surely die, whereas God only said, do die you shall be dying. Words matter.) This simple miscommunication gives the serpent the leeway to trick Eve into transgressing.

It’s as simple as that.

Thus, if we are to study this carefully, we must understand that one of the worst, and most powerful, forces in creation right now wants to ensure that this information is completely ignored, and that you never see it. And to do this, he’s designed our institutions and manipulated our wills in such a way that has disguised the text, uniformly translated, in a vast ocean of sects, teachings, orthodoxy, debates, and coupled that with financial burdens, family matters, social obligations of any kind, and, for many, crippling addictions to certain foods, drinks, plants, and objects. We are in a teenage wasteland, as Pete Townsend puts it.

Let us, then, refrain from these distractions. Clear your mind. Play dumb! Act as if you’ve never read the Bible before (because, in all honesty, if you’ve never observed the Greek text and its particulars, you really haven’t read the Bible before.) We don’t want to get bogged down in the weeds of wondering if we can actually trust what we’re reading (which, if we’re being honest, is exactly what belief is all about: trust.) We need some kind of solution.

So, if you don’t feel like learning Greek, then at least consider a translation that does follow these simple grammatical laws. We must, for times’ sake, study an English translation that follows this objective method of studying Greek words in Scripture only. Observe it with me, and watch your understanding become legitimate. Instead of theorizing, consider fact.

*   *   *

I said earlier that I believe many members of today’s organized religions have faith. That is a fact. Faith in what, I suppose, will only be revealed on Judgment Day, but in the meantime I would like to shine a light on any inconsistencies that these modern doctrines contain, and how they impact the world today.

There is nothing tangible that I am getting out of this. These are going to be my composite notes on these critical, highly-debated documents – free to all. I am not receiving money from this, and in fact I could be working for a solid paycheck or taking college classes in the time I spend writing this, but I don’t. I’ve reached a point where this stuff is too important to me to ignore. My heart yearns for more members of the Body of Christ to reach their understanding and realization in Him.

On that note: many of the words we are about to read have been heavily debated for almost 2,000 years, now. I don’t expect this to change with my writings, but I do hope to add a sensible voice of reason and belief to the exchange, and profess the measure of faith that God has granted to me while I’m still stuck on this floating rock. You and I have a secret on this blog: with this simple mechanism of harmonious translation – that is, giving each Greek word its exact English equivalent 100% of the way, using elements of Greek terms to help us understand the facts of a matter – we have immediately solved a major issue that most scholars refuse to acknowledge because of their pre-supposed positions on what they believe their English versions must say. They are, in essence, compromised, because they refuse to acknowledge God’s use of a term, and seek multiple interpretations to confirm their view as opposed to resting in what the text simply says, whilst remaining under the laws of language.

This is most upsetting when you realize that, when you do properly translate the text, and then study the text’s construct, as opposed to man’s religious constructs, you find the most beautiful story ever written. As you stick around and dwell on what we will read, you will find one of the most profound depictions of a true, unconditional love that, whether you “become a believer” or not, could still fundamentally change your life, and break down the world for you in a way that – trust me – you never would have thought possible.

I know that this is a big thesis statement, but I think I’m comfortable with such a large project. I don’t know how long it will take, and I plan on taking an entertaining journalistic approach to everything, but it must be made clear that this project has nothing but Christ in mind and is driven by faith the Lord has given me in His Grace. That being said, I hope you enjoy, and we all come to a better understanding of Paul’s original Greek Scripture.

- GerudoKing