by Kevin Cauley

If you grew up watching Saturday morning cartoons in the 1970's, then you are familiar with the above title. Schoolhouse Rock was a popular Saturday morning "filler" between cartoon times that educated children on various school subjects: history, law, mathematics, grammar, and other subjects. One of my favorites was "Conjunction Junction." This particular educational experience discussed the ins and outs of the English conjunctions: "and," "or," and "but." These three conjunctions play a critical role in our language and they are all important, but many do not understand the importance of the word "and."

In the Greek language, the two most common words that may be translated "and" are "KAI" and "DE." Of the two words, "KAI" is the stronger conjunction. It signifies a strong logical connection, whereas "DE" is a weaker conjunction signifying more or less association and being adversative in nature. For example, in that long run of genealogy in Matthew 1:1-16 most of the "ands" in that passage are from the Greek word "DE." In that same passage, "KAI" is used, but only when speaking of additional siblings begotten to the same father. For an example, look at Matthew 1:2. "And (DE) Abraham begat Isaac; and (DE) Isaac begat Jacob; and (DE) Jacob begat Judah and (KAI) his brethren." The weak conjunction that is more or less grammatical association is represented by "DE," but the strong logical conjunction is represented by "KAI."

The logical force of the word "KAI" is to be understood as addition or supplement. A.T. Robertson says regarding the meaning of "KAI," "The idea would then be 'together with,' 'in addition to.'" (Grammar, p.1180). Thus one understands when seeing the word "KAI" that the two things conjoined are grammatically copulated. Grammatically, if they are joined together by "KAI," they are an inseparable pair. "KAI" is only listed in Robertson's grammar as a "copulative" conjunction, whereas "DE" is listed as both "copulative" and "adversative." (Grammar, p.lxi) "KAI's" business is to conjoin.

Now, the conjunction "KAI" may join nouns, verbs, phrases, clauses and sentences and when it does, we must pay attention to all parts of the conjunction. One such example may be found in Mark 16:16a. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." In English we have a simple sentence with a relative clause that describes who is saved, namely, those who believe and are baptized. In Greek however, the situation is different. The subject of the sentence is the conjunction of two aorist participles, PISTEUSAS and BAPTISQEIS. Translated into English we have: "the-one-who-believes-and-is-baptized." To this subject is amended the predicate, "shall be saved." Because these two participles are joined together with the Greek conjunction "KAI" we know that the action of the verb applies equally to the one subject, namely, "the-believing-and-baptized-one." What is that action? Such a subject "shall be saved." The subject is not just the one who believes but is not baptized. The subject is not just the one who is baptized without believing. The subject is the one who has both believed and been baptized. That subject is the only subject to which the predicate "shall be saved" applies. This must be true because of the strong connection in the Greek conjunction "KAI."

What's the function of the Greek conjunction "KAI"? It is to join strongly together different grammatical elements. When "KAI" is used, we understand those elements to be grammatically conjoined to one another in the sentence.

by Kevin Cauley

There may be someone out there reading this column who has asked at this point, "Why study Greek?" It is a good question. Greek is a difficult language, as is Hebrew and Aramaic. So why study them? Why make things so hard on ourselves?

First, I have heard others ask, "Do I have to know Greek to be saved?" The answer is, "No, you don't have to know Greek to be saved -- but somebody does!" That's right! Somebody has to know Greek; somebody has to know Hebrew and Aramaic too! Why? Because those are the languages in which the Bible was originally written. The New Testament was written in Koine Greek. The Old Testament was written mostly in Hebrew, but a section of the book of Daniel was written in Aramaic. So in order for us, who speak English, (or some other modern day language) to understand the Bible, someone, somewhere has to translate it from Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic, into English. Without them doing that, then we couldn't know the message, unless, of course, we studied those languages and learned them ourselves.

Second, someone needs to keep the translators honest. There are about as many translation philosophies out there as there are translators. Some choose to translate strictly; others choose to translate loosely; some want to paraphrase instead of translate. If no one among us studies Greek, then who will be able to tell whether the translators have done an honorable job in translating? Should we just take their word for it? No! 1 John 4:1 applies to translators as much as it applies to teachers. Perhaps the verse applies more so, because translators are actually claiming to transmit to us the very words of God Himself. Does someone need to know Greek in order to test the translators? Yes.

Third, by keeping an open ear to the original languages, many misunderstandings can be clarified. Take for example Acts 9:7 and Acts 22:9. In Acts 9:7 it says that the men who were with Saul heard a voice. In Acts 22:9 it says that they did NOT hear a voice. Is this a contradiction in the Bible? It is not. Rather, it is the Greek language expressing itself in two different ways. Sometimes the Greek word "AKOUW" means to hear an indiscernible sound (as in Acts 22:9), but the word can also mean to comprehend (as in Acts 9:7). These men heard the sound, but they did not comprehend the message. Knowing a little more about the language helps to clarify such passages.

Finally, the study of other languages can be rewarding in its own merits. The Greek language is a very picturesque language. One of the most picturesque passages in the Greek New Testament that simply does not come across in English is the latter half of Romans 6. The imagery of two armies fighting the eternal battle of good vs. evil really comes to life in Greek. The choice before each is to choose in which army to serve. One army owns a beneficent liberator as Captain; the other army owns an evil despot. One army wields weapons of justice; whereas the other army wields weapons of wickedness. One Captain rewards his soldiers with eternal life; the other merely pays the wages of death. Whose weapons will you wield in the battle between good and evil? The English languages simply doesn't do this passage justice; but in Greek, the picture is as clear as a DaVinci original.

Why study Greek? Indeed, with so many good reasons, why not?

by Kevin Cauley

One of the things that I've noticed about Forthright is the magazine's motto: "Straight to the cross." In the English language, we have a homonym which is often confused with the word "straight," namely, the word "strait." The word "straight" means "extending continuously in the same direction without curves" (American Heritage Dictionary). The word "strait," on the other hand, means "Narrow; not broad" (Websters). This homonym got me curious about the Greek word for "strait."

Jesus said in Matthew 7:13,14 "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." He was speaking of the narrow and difficult gate as opposed to the broad and easy way. The Greek word for "strait" is STENOS, and this word is only used in the Greek New Testament in Matthew 7 and in the parallel passage in Luke 13:24. The word, however, is found in the Septuagint (a.k.a. LXX, an ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament made around 200 B.C.). It is illustrative of the meaning of the word to note a few passages from that translation.

In the LXX we find STENOS in Numbers 22:26, "And the angel of Jehovah went further, and stood in a narrow place, where was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left." You may recognize the passage as being part of the story of Balaam and his insubordinate (?) donkey. This is a good illustration of the literal meaning of STENOS, a narrow place. Another literal usage is found in 1 Samuel 23:29 which reads, "And David went up from thence, and dwelt in strong holds at Engedi." The word for "strongholds" in the Septuagint is our Greek word STENOS. An English translation of the Septuagint in this passage is: "And David got up from that place, and dwelt in the narrow places of Engedi." If you have ever seen the land around the oasis of Engedi, then you know exactly what this passage is discussing. The land is full of cracks and crannies and numerous narrow places to hide.

STENOS, however, also has a figurative meaning which is reflected in the English word "strait" as well. The American Heritage Dictionary defines it: "A position of difficulty, perplexity, distress, or need." We see this meaning illustrated in 1 Samuel 13:6 when the Philistines threatened some of the people of Israel: "When the men of Israel saw that they were in a strait, (for the people were distressed,)then the people did hide themselves in caves, and in thickets, and in rocks, and in high places, and in pits." Here, the word indicates a difficult circumstance. You might say they looked for "straits" (the literal meaning) due to a "strait" (the figurative meaning). 2 Samuel 24:14 is also illustrative. The prophet Gad had told David that he had been given a choice of three punishments for his sin of numbering Israel and that David had to make the decision which. "And David said unto Gad, I am in a great strait: let us fall now into the hand of the LORD; for his mercies are great: and let me not fall into the hand of man." David was in a "difficult circumstance" no doubt.

The Greek word STENOS can be understood both literally, (i.e. in relationship to physical surroundings) and figuratively, (in relationship to difficult circumstances). When considering the "strait" gate vs. the broad way, perhaps Jesus had a more figurative thought in mind, something akin to what Paul said in Acts 14:22, "... we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God." In that regard, not only would the word "straight" serve well in the motto "straight to the cross," but "strait" too.

by Kevin Cauley

A few weeks ago on a Bible Study Forum (www.preachersfiles.com) we received a question about hell. Basically the question was how can the lake of fire described in the book of Revelation be hell if hell is going to be cast into the lake of fire? It's true that in Revelation 20:14 (KJV) we read "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." The person who was asking the question was suggesting that there really isn't such a place as hell because this verse says that "hell" was going to be destroyed. What would someone say to that?

One must understand that the King James translators didn't draw a distinction between two Greek words. These words we know today as "Hades" and "Gehenna." The word Gehenna has a historical reference to a valley on the southwest side of Jerusalem where human sacrifices once occurred. After the Babylonian captivity, the place was deemed unclean and turned, more or less, into a "city dump." Fires burned there day and night, consuming the waste and the place became metaphoric for the eternal destruction of the wicked.

Rabbinical tradition used this history and the word "Gehenna" to refer to an afterlife of punishment and torment. The Babylonian Talmud refers to the fires of Gehenna as being different from fire created by men. "The fire which we use was created at the close of Sabbath, while the fire of Gehenna was created at twilight on the eve of Sabbath" (Chapter IV, pg. 93, www.sacred-texts.com). The Talmud also records that wicked men would suffer punishment in Gehenna. "If one is meritorious and righteous, he receives his own portion and also the portion of his neighbor in the Garden of Eden. If he has incurred guilt, he receives his own portion and also the portion of his neighbor in Gehenna." (Chapter II, pg. 33, www.sacred-texts.com). This is important to understand, because it is in this sense that Jesus speaks about hell (Gehenna) in the New Testament, namely, as place for the wicked (Matthew 5:22, 10:28, 23:33, Luke 12:5).

On the other hand, the word "Hades" is not necessarily used to describe the place of the wicked, but merely the realm of the dead. This is the place that describes where the rich man and Lazarus went after death (Luke 16:23). This word is also used to describe where Jesus went after death in Acts 2:27, 31. We know that Jesus went to paradise (Luke 22:42) and that the rich man was in "torments" (Luke 16:23) yet both of them were in "Hades." How could this be? It is simply the case that Hades refers to a general place where the spirits of the dead go, not heaven, and not hell either.

So what was it that was cast into the lake of fire in Revelation 20:14? The word in the Greek New Testament is "Hades" not "Gehenna." Hence, it is perfectly reasonable to understand that "Hades" being the place of those who are dead, is no longer necessary after the judgment as the souls of all men have been resurrected to die no more (John 5:29). So, the place of the dead, "Hades" will be destroyed in that day, along with death itself. However, the place of eternal punishment for the wicked, "Gehenna" is the lake of fire as we see from Revelation 21:8.

by Kevin Cauley

I have to admit that the one thing that intimidated me more than anything about going to one of our brotherhood schools of preaching was having to take Greek. I was fortunate to have a very patient and understanding teacher and believe it or not, Greek wasn't nearly as difficult as I thought it would be. That may sound rather "after the fact" but it was nonetheless true. Almost immediately after I started learning Greek, we learned about the Greek verb. The Greek verb is complicated and truly dizzying when looking into all of its various facets. There was one aspect of it that we kept coming back to time and time again, namely, present tense, active voice, and indicative mood -— present, active, indicative.

This was the first aspect of the Greek verb that we learned as it is perhaps the most simple for the new student to understand. Everyone knows what present tense is. It is action that is occurring in the present. An active voice verb contains actions that happen to something other than the subject, and indicative mood simply means that it is a statement of fact. "I see spot run." There's a present, active, indicative verb in that sentence, "see." As we advanced into the more difficult aspects of the Greek verb in our studies, every once in a while the book would throw us a present, active, indicative verb just to make sure we were paying attention. Usually it would throw us off and we would say, "Is that ...?" To which the teacher would reply, "Yup, plain old vanilla."

Understanding the present, active, indicative verb in the New Testament plays an important role in studying the Bible. The action of the present, active, indicative verb represents ongoing action. This can be represented by an ongoing horizontal line (---------). The King James Version translators, in an effort to try to convey this particular aspect to the Greek verb, placed a special ending on the verb, -eth. Many times we wonder why such funny sounding words are still in that version today. If we understand what the translators were trying to do, then we can learn more about God's word. The words that have that –eth ending on them usually correspond to a present, active, indicative Greek verb. This means that the action in that verb is ongoing, or continual.

One really significant example of this is found in the book of 1 John. In the KJV, 1 John 3:6 reads, "Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him." Notice the words "abideth," and "sinneth." When we understand that the –eth ending represents continual action, then we understand that the meaning behind this verse is in regard to those who keep on abiding in Jesus, that is, those that do that, do not keep on sinning. However, the one who keeps on sinning, doesn't know who Jesus is. One might read these verses and conclude that if one is in Jesus that one cannot sin at all. Such would not be the case. They may sin occasionally (1 John 2:1), but they do not sin continually. We know that because of the significance of the present, active, indicative verb in the Greek language.

So, the next time you see that –eth ending on a verb in the King James Version, remember "plain old vanilla" and the continual action of the present tense Greek verb.