by Kevin Cauley

One of the earliest introductions to the Greek language for most Bible students comes through a study of the word "love." As most Greek students are quick to point out, there are different words in the Bible for different flavors of the word "love." We all understand that "I love ice cream" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing as "I love my wife" or even, "I love God." In each of those sentences, the word "love" is being used with a different connotation. The Greek language didn't just have one word for "love;" it had several words. In this article, I want to call attention to each of those words, briefly define them, and place them in their Bible context.

Perhaps most familiar to us is the Greek word "agape." "Agape" is the noun form of the word, the verb form being, "agapao." The verb form is found 117 times in the New Testament and the noun form, 109 times, according to The New Englishman's Greek Concordance and Lexicon. It is the most used word for "love" in the New Testament and may be used in regard to God's love for man (John 3:16, Romans 5:8), man's love for God (Matthew 22:37, 1 John 2:5), and man's love for his fellow man (Matthew 22:39, Romans 13:10). In the New Testament, it is used primarily regarding these relationships, though, the word is sparsely used to describe strong personal desires for some things (Luke 11:42, John 3:19, 12:43). I believe that it is fair to conclude that this word indicates the kind of love we have for someone or something upon which we are willing to base our principles for determining right and wrong; it includes the intention to act upon those principles regardless of what the consequences may be. This kind of love is the deep and abiding respect that we have for another. It is the kind of love that commands our intentions and directs our daily decisions.

The second most used word in the New Testament for "love" is the word "phileo." The verb form is found 24 times in the New Testament. The adjective "philos" is as close as we get to a "noun" form in the New Testament. It is used 28 times in the New Testament substantively as a noun simply meaning, "friend" (Matthew 11:19, John 11:11, John 15:13). The verb form is used to describe man's love for other men (Matthew 10:37, Titus 3:15), God's love for the Son (John 5:20), God's love for the disciples (John 16:27), and Jesus' love for those who need rebuking (Revelation 3:19). Interestingly, the word is used in Matthew 26:48 and Mark 14:44 for "the kiss" that Judas gave to Jesus. The word also may be used to describe man's love for other things (Matthew 6:5, Revelation 22:15). I believe that we can conclude that this word describes intimate and personal affection toward others or things that we may have. The word seems to reflect strong personal preference for something, similar to our word "like" in English. The word is never used to describe God's love for mankind, although it is used to describe God's love for Christ and the apostles (John 5:20, John 16:27). This is the kind of love upon which we base our personal preferences which may or may not be consequential to our decisions.

A related word to "phileo" which deserves some attention is "Philadelphia." This word is used six times in the New Testament with the meaning "brotherly love." It exclusively refers to the kind of love that one Christian should have for another. It is a compound word composed of the base from "phileo" (love) and the word for "brother," "adelphos." Hence it's meaning, "brotherly love." It is found in Romans 12:10, 1 Thessalonians 4:9, Hebrews 13:1, 1 Peter 1:22 and 1 Peter 1:7 (twice).

Finally, there are two additional words that may be translated "love" from the Greek. These words, however, are not found in the New Testament. These are the words "stergo" and "eros." The word "stergo," while not found in the New Testament, is found in other literature during the time of the New Testament. The word indicates natural affection that one might have toward another, such as a husband toward a wife. The negative of the noun form of this word is "astorgos" and is found in the New Testament in Romans 1:31 and 2 Timothy 3:3. One could correctly infer from these passages that God expects us to have "stergo" (natural affection) for our families.

The word "eros" on the other hand, is a word that simply refers to passionate, carnal, type love. It is not used in the New Testament at all, nor any other form of it, as far as I know. It is, however, used in the Septuagint in Proverbs 7:18 and 30:16. (The translation in the Hebrew is different in 30:16, so you will need to look at a translation of the Septuagint in that passage to get the meaning.) Both passages indicate carnal/fleshly appetites.

We tend to confuse the word "love" with emotionalism today, but that's not really the way the word is used a majority of the time in the New Testament. When we think of "love" in the New Testament, we should think of a deep, abiding, personal commitment to principles, as opposed to the fickle emotion that we so commonly consider in our society. In this regard, the Greek language really helps us to parse out the various flavors of words and enlightens us to consider definitions which we may not consider simply studying English.

by Kevin Cauley

Perhaps one of the most popular Bible tools that is readily available is Strong's Concordance. As a concordance, Strong's is one of the best (if not the best) available to the Bible student today. Many a gospel preacher wrote his first sermon using nothing but the Bible and a Strong's concordance. As many are familiar, Strong's also numbers each word indexed so that the reader may look up the original Greek or Hebrew word that is used in the passage under consideration. This can be useful in comparing two different Bible passages to aid the reader in understanding whether the same word was used in both passages. However, a student should be careful not to extend Strong's beyond its intended purpose; it is a concordance, not a comprehensive lexicon of ancient words. What can Strong's Greek and Hebrew aids do to help the non-Greek/Hebrew reading student? What are the limitations of Strong's Concordance? Let's look at these questions this week in our basic Greek study.

As I mentioned, Strong's language helps can aid the reader to understand which word is used in what passage. For example, if I were comparing two passages that had the English word "love" in them, I could note what the Greek word for love is in those passages. However, in order for that to be helpful to me, I need to know what those different Greek words indicate. Without knowing the definition of a word, I may be able to eliminate a scripture that doesn't go along with my sermon topic, but that doesn't help me put what I do have into the right context. "Mr. Strong" recognized this and so he put a "dictionary" into the back of the concordance. The dictionary is designed to aid by giving a rudimentary definition of a word so that one may know the difference between two different Greek words with the same English translation. So it is very helpful in this regard.

On the other hand, the Greek and Hebrew dictionaries in Strong's Concordance ought not to be looked at as "the" definition of a word for all occurrences of that word in scripture. Just as most English words have more than one definition, so also Greek and Hebrew words have more than one definition. Strong's often gives the words as they have been translated in the KJV. Strong's dictionary doesn't really look at the fundamental definitions of a word and the nuances involved in the uses of those words and how they might be translated into English in the year 2004. This job should be left to more advanced lexical tools, such as Thayer's or BADG.

Another limitation of Strong's is that it doesn't necessarily indicate how the word is used in the context. It merely gives the word as most often translated. For example, Strong's translates the Greek word OINOS as "wine." That is the correct translation; but in the times of the New Testament the word "wine" could indicate either an alcoholic or a non-alcoholic beverage. One cannot determine simply by looking at Strong's dictionary what the Greek word OINOS means in its context. One must examine the context and understand how a word is being used.

Finally, while Strong's can tell us when two different words are being used, it cannot tell us how synonymous those two words are in meaning. There are many synonyms in the New Testament. Sometimes those words are used to reiterate the same concepts and sometimes not. Strong's cannot help a person understand when that is happening and when it is not, though, Strong's may be able to provide some hints through its etymological references. But one must remember that similar etymology doesn't necessarily mean that two words are synonymous, either.

Overall, Strong's Concordance is an excellent tool for the Bible student. I highly recommend that every person have a copy in their personal library. However, when it comes to Greek and Hebrew aids, one ought to purposefully limit Strong's to what it does best in that department. Strong's aids the reader in understanding where similar original language words are used and where different original language words are used in reference to a single English word. One should limit one's use of Strong's dictionary to that purpose. Greater depth of understanding of original language words ought to be sought from a Greek or Hebrew Lexicon.

by Kevin Cauley

Perhaps one of the most controversial words in the discussion of music in the church today is the Greek word "psallo." In the 1923 Boswell-Hardeman debate on instrumental music, Boswell, who represented the Christian church, set forth the argument that instrumental music was permissible in Christian worship today because it was included in the Greek word "psallo." Brother Hardeman argued that the word did not inherently include the instrument, but required the context to specify the instrument and that the instrument specified in Colossians 3:16 and Ephesians 5:19 was the "heart." While we cannot cover the gamut of ancient literature in this short study, I would like to briefly look at the word "psallo" and its meaning.

The "Greek-English Lexicon" by Liddell and Scott is considered by most Greek students to be the authority for English word translation. Regarding the word "PSALLW," the first (I) definition they write, which indicates the basic and most primary use of the word, is: "pluck, pull, twitch ... pluck the hair ... esp. of the bow-string ... twang them ... send a shaft twanging from the bow ... a carpenter's red line, which is twitched and then suddenly let go, so as to leave a mark." The second (II) definition that Liddell and Scott give is as follows: "mostly of the strings of musical instruments, play a stringed instrument with the fingers, and not with the plectron ...." They also write, "2. later, sing to a harp" and they cite Psalms 7:18 and 9:12 in the Septuagint without qualification. But interestingly enough, they also point to Ephesians 5:19 and 1 Corinthians 14:15 but not without qualification. They qualify the word with the object of the "psalloing," namely, "THi KARDIAi" (the heart) and "TWi PNEUMATI" (the spirit). They recognize that the word in the New Testament is used with fundamentally different objects than in the Septuagint. It is not merely the "psalloing" of the strings of a mechanical instrument, but the "psalloing" of the heart (Ephesians 5:19) and of the spirit (1 Corinthians 14:15). The instrument upon which we "psallo" is specified. It is the "heart" or the "spirit" upon which we play that is to accompany our singing to God.

This all points to the fact that "psallo" does not inherently involve the use of the mechanical instrument of music. The instrument had to be specified by the context in which the word was used. Certainly, the word may be used to refer to the mechanical instrument of music, and often was used that way in many contexts. However, when it came to the worship of the early church, the "psalloing" that they did was upon the heart and the spirit. The context particularly excluded the use of the mechanical instrument by focusing upon the heart and spirit as the instrument. It is for this reason that early Christian writers held to the necessity of singing, not as accompanied by a mechanical instrument, but in making one's own body the instrument upon which to sing praises to God. Clement of Alexandria writes:

The Spirit, distinguishing from such revelry the divine service, sings, "Praise Him with the sound of trumpet;" for with sound of trumpet He shall raise the dead. "Praise Him on the psaltery;" for the tongue is the psaltery of the Lord. "And praise Him on the lyre." By the lyre is meant the mouth struck by the Spirit, as it were by a plectrum. "Praise with the timbrel and the dance," refers to the Church meditating on the resurrection of the dead in the resounding skin. "Praise Him on the chords and organ." Our body He calls an organ, and its nerves are the strings, by which it has received harmonious tension, and when struck by the Spirit, it gives forth human voices. "Praise Him on the clashing cymbals." He calls the tongue the cymbal of the mouth, which resounds with the pulsation of the lips." (Emph. Added)

Chrysostom stated:

"David formerly sang songs, also today we sing hymns. He had a lyre with lifeless strings, the church has a lyre with living strings. Our tongues are the strings of the lyre with a different tone indeed but much more in accordance with piety. Here there is no need for the cithara, or for stretched strings, or for the plectrum, or for art, or for any instrument; but, if you like, you may yourself become a cithara, mortifying the members of the flesh and making a full harmony of mind and body. For when the flesh no longer lusts against the Spirit, but has submitted to its orders and has been led at length into the best and most admirable path, then will you create a spiritual melody." (Emph. Added)

Dozens more quotations could be set forth to show that this was the consensus for musical worship in the early church, namely, that it was the individual Christian who became the instrument upon which to praise God. The Greek word "psallo" does indeed include the idea of "playing," but that which is played must be specified by the context in which the word is found. In Ephesians 5:19 and 1 Corinthians 14:15, the object is specified, namely, the heart and the spirit. This is why the word is universally translated in these passages "sing" instead of "play."

by Kevin Cauley

In the English language we have two articles, one definite ("the") and one indefinite ("a"). We use these articles to distinguish between definite and indefinite nouns/substantives. For example: "If you are thirsty, you may go to a water fountain, but if you want bottled water you need to go to the cooler." Any water fountain will get you water, but only the cooler will get you bottled water. The indefinite article tells us that of the noun specified, any will do. The definite article tells us that of the noun specified a particular one is under consideration.

The Greek language has a definite article, but it does not have an indefinite article. This tells us a few things. First, if the definite article is not present, then the indefinite article should not be assumed unless the context indicates such because two other possibilities exist, namely, 1) that there may be no article on the noun or 2) there may be an implied definite article. Second, when the definite article is present, it is present for a reason. One of these reasons provides a very fascinating proof for the deity of Christ.

In the Greek language, there is a certain idiom where two nouns (or substantives) joined together by the conjunction KAI and preceded by the definite article, refer to the same thing. In this construction, the nouns/substantives act, more or less, adjectivally to describe what is under consideration. For example, in Hebrews 3:1, we read, "Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus" (KJV). It should be obvious that these two nouns ("apostle" and "high priest") adjectivally refer to one person, namely, Christ Jesus. It can be said, therefore, that Jesus is both the Apostle of our profession and the High Priest of our profession.

Understanding that point, we note several New Testament Greek passages that utilize this construction. First and foremost, 2 Peter 1:1: "Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours, by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ" (NASB). In the Greek language the underlined expression is: TOU QEOU hHMON KAI SWTHROS IHSOU XRISTOU, literally "the God of us and Savior, Jesus Christ." Notice the underlined definite article (TOU) and conjunction (KAI). This passage clearly demonstrates that Jesus is both "God" and "Savior."

Another passage is 2 Thessalonians 1:12, "so that the name of our Lord Jesus will be glorified in you, and you in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ" (NASB). The translators do not handle this passage correctly. They put the definite article before "Lord" when it is not there in the Greek. The Greek is: TOU QEOU hHMWN KAI KURIOU IESOU XRISTOU, literally, "of the God of us and Lord, Jesus Christ." Again, we may conclude from the Greek that Jesus Christ is both "God" and "Lord" due to this construction.

One more passage is Titus 2:13: "looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus" (NASB). The Greek is: TOU MEGALOU QEOU KAI SWTEROS hHMWN XRISTOU IESOU, literally, "of the Great God and Savior of us, Christ Jesus." In this passage Jesus is identified as both the "Great God" and "Savior."

Robertson, in his Grammar, identifies Ephesians 5:5 as another such example that proves that Jesus was considered by the writers of the New Testament to be God. This Greek idiom is in accord with the ancient usage of Greek in classical times, as well, and is thoroughly documented. Obviously the idiom is not limited to merely passages that speak regarding Christ, but when it is used in such a way, it is a powerful affirmation that Jesus is indeed divine, being Christ, Lord, Savior and our Great God.

by Kevin Cauley

"An event to remember! A great time for all!" What do you make of the previous phrases? We are all used to seeing such phrases in bulletins, flyers, newspapers and other advertisements. But do the words indicate when the event will take place? Did the event already happen? Is it happening right now? Will it happen in the future? You don't know, do you? Why is that? It is because there were no verbs attached to the phrase. If one were to add "It was" to the beginning of each phrase, then we would understand that the event has passed. If one were to add "This is" to the beginning, we would see that we are currently participating in it. If one were to add, "It will be," then, well, you get the picture. The tense of verbs is important in our language because tense tells us when action happens -- past, present, or future.

One of the things that make the Greek language difficult is that the Greeks thought about the concept of "tense" differently from our concept today. We think of tense in a very temporal way. That is, we associate tense primarily with time. Past tense = past time. Future tense = future time. But the Greek language didn't quite express tense in that way. Oh, yes, the Greek speaker knew the past, present, and future, but the tense of Greek verbs didn't quite express things along that line. The focus of the Greek verb was more in reference to the action of the thing being done as opposed to the time of the thing being done.

In Greek, the past tense was represented in two different ways. One way was to talk about actions that were completed. For completed actions, the Greek used the aorist tense. "John baptized Jesus." There is a completed action. But there was also the imperfect tense, which, in Greek, is considered more a function of the present tense verb, because the action is continuing for a period of time. "Jesus was healing the sick." There is ongoing action, but in past time. Both verb tenses describe what English speakers would see as action occurring in past time, but the Greek mind focused upon the completion or ongoing nature of the action. The present tense Greek verb, in this regard, represents ongoing action, as opposed to completed action. The future tense verb represents potential action that has not yet begun. Greek also has the perfect tense which expresses action that began in the past and completed in the past but had lasting effects.

1 Corinthians 15:1 serves as a good illustration of these distinctions. Paul writes, "Now I make known unto you brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand, by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you, except ye believed in vain." Paul said, "I make known." This is a present tense verb that indicates that Paul is currently engaged in doing this action as he is writing. "I preached" is an aorist tense verb, meaning that Paul had completed the action of preaching (publicly, orally) to them in the past. "Ye received" is another aorist tense verb indicating that the Corinthians had completed the action of receiving the gospel prior, i.e. they accepted it. "Ye stand" is a perfect tense verb indicating that they began standing in it in the past, and they are continuing to stand in it. "Are saved" is a present tense verb meaning that as Paul writes to them, they are continuing to be saved by the gospel. "Hold fast" is another present tense verb meaning to continue to hold fast. "I preached" is an aorist tense verb meaning that Paul had completed that action prior. And finally, "ye believed" is an aorist tense verb meaning that they had completed the action of believing at some point in the past.

The Greek verb is different from the English verb in that it considers state of action above consideration of time. I hope that as you continue to read these columns that you will keep in mind these differences in tense in the Greek New Testament -- aorist, imperfect, present, future, and perfect. As we discuss various passages I hope you will remember the difference between completed action, ongoing action, and completed action with lasting effects. Reference to action is the primary way in which the Greek verb communicates tense.