# Which Original Language should I study?



## Sonoftheday (Feb 15, 2008)

I am no longer teaching Sunday School nor bible study since I left my old church. This leaves me with the time to begin to study one of the original languages. I have a couple of questions that perhaps those of you who have a knowledge of Greek/Hebrew could help me with.

1. I am not a seminary student so I will be teaching myself with the help of audio tracks and books. Is greek or hebrew easier to learn, also which one has better resources available for learning?

2. Which have you found more profitable in your daily studies? It seems to me that the greek is more often debated than the hebrew texts so I have thought of studying greek due to that, but I Love the Old testament and am much more ignorant of it than the new.

Thanks for your time and input.


----------



## ReformationArt (Feb 15, 2008)

Different people take to the languages differently. Some find Greek to be easier, and others Hebrew. So that will depend on you. 

There are excellent resources available for both Greek and Hebrew. However, neither is easy to learn, both require a good bit of discipline. 

Basically if you are more interested in Old Testament studies at this time, start w/ Hebrews. If you are wanting to do more studying in the New Testament, then Greek would be your best bet.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon (Feb 15, 2008)

Although there is that saying, "It's all Greek to me." This is saying generally used to indicate that something is hard to understand. But it is my opinion that Greek is by far the easier of the two.

A good text is Essentials of New Testament Greek by Ray Summers (Broadman Press, 1950).


----------



## jawyman (Feb 15, 2008)

Greek and then more Greek.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Feb 15, 2008)

Presbyterian Deacon said:


> Although there is that saying, "It's all Greek to me." This is saying generally used to indicate that something is hard to understand. But it is my opinion that Greek is by far the easier of the two.



In French, they say, "C'est de l'hébreu pour moi!"

Most languages have their variations on this theme.

Translations of It's all Greek/Chinese/Hebrew/Arabic to me in many languages


----------



## Poimen (Feb 15, 2008)

Try English. Yours is terrible! 

 

Seriously I agree with Jeff. If you are going to learn one, choose Greek. That way you will also have access to the OT through the LXX.


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 15, 2008)

Greek. I was good with languages and was utterly humbled by Hebrew. Greek, on the other hand, was quite easy.


----------



## Herald (Feb 15, 2008)

jawyman said:


> Greek and then more Greek.



and then some more Greek on top.


----------



## greenbaggins (Feb 15, 2008)

Sorry guys, but I am going to have to disagree, at least somewhat. They have different difficulties. With Hebrew, the grammar is very simple, and the vocabulary is a real pain (since all the verbs are three letters long, not including vowels, and they start to run together a lot). There are far fewer forms to memorize with Hebrew than with Greek. I didn't find that it took very long to get used to reading backwards, or to get used to letters and vowels that had no relationship to English letters. The tough part about Hebrew is the vocab. So, if you have a good memory for memorizing baseball statistics, say, then you should learn Hebrew. 

Greek, on the other hand, is the reverse. The vocabulary is much easier. A lot of it is cognate with Latin and with English (at least etymologically). The grammar is exceedingly difficult. One verb can have well over a hundred different endings, especially when you count the participles. Greek grammar is much more difficult to learn. However, if you have an analytical mind, and have a good grasp of English grammar, then Greek is a good first choice. I actually wouldn't say that either is more difficult. Hebrew has this aura about it that is undeserved. They are both difficult, but their difficulties are very different.


----------



## DMcFadden (Feb 15, 2008)

Greek. Still using it 37 yrs later. Grammar is more difficult, but worth it!


----------



## larryjf (Feb 15, 2008)

I'm not so sure that which is "easier to learn" should come into the equation at all.

If you want to learn the original languages, learn both. The entire Bible is important, and when you desire one language above the other it implies that not all of the Scripture has the same import.

I would suggest learning Greek from...
New Testament Greek
Class

I would suggest learning Hebrew from...
Learn the Hebrew Alphabet


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 15, 2008)

> If you want to learn the original languages, learn both. The entire Bible is important, and when you desire one language above the other it implies that not all of the Scripture has the same import.



The idea that men can study Greek, but not Hebrew is surely a sign that the NT is being set above the OT, yet Paul says "All Scripture is breathed out by God". Not to mention the fact that nearly 80% of the Bible is written in Hiebrew.


----------



## Sonoftheday (Feb 15, 2008)

> I'm not so sure that which is "easier to learn" should come into the equation at all.


 
The reason easier comes into play is because I wish to start learning one now, and will learn the other later. I would like to attend seminary someday but for now that is not an option. So leaving the harder to learn for later means I may have more help learning it. 

It totally agree on the statement made about the New Testament being treated as if it is given more value. The Old testament not only makes up 80% of the holy scriptures but it is also the Only scripture that was available for The Apostles, and the first christians. The abondonment of the OT was one of the factors that contributed to my leaving my old church.

And as far as my English being terrible that was just hitting below the belt Daniel. And it hurt.


----------



## JOwen (Feb 15, 2008)

Greek. Then read the LXX.
:0)


----------



## fredtgreco (Feb 15, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> > If you want to learn the original languages, learn both. The entire Bible is important, and when you desire one language above the other it implies that not all of the Scripture has the same import.
> 
> 
> The idea that men can study Greek, but not Hebrew is surely a sign that the NT is being set above the OT, yet Paul says "All Scripture is breathed out by God". Not to mention the fact that nearly 80% of the Bible is written in Hiebrew.



No, it is because Greek is much easier (_pace _Lane).

What part of Hebrew makes it easier?

The no vowels?
The backwards writing?
The complete lack of any cognates with English?
The multiple stems?
The vast difference in language development from section to section of the Hebrew Bible (written by God's servants over centuries, from Moses to the author of Chronicles)


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 15, 2008)

fredtgreco said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > > If you want to learn the original languages, learn both. The entire Bible is important, and when you desire one language above the other it implies that not all of the Scripture has the same import.
> ...



Numerous  s to the above


----------



## Archlute (Feb 15, 2008)

I didn't see anybody mention Aramaic. You'll miss out on half of the Book of Daniel without it!


----------



## DMcFadden (Feb 15, 2008)

Sorry, guys,

I wasn't trying to be "unspiritual" or to imply a Marcionite hermeneutic. My point was that Greek is more accessible and has more online and published tools to make self-learning do-able. I answered his question in the most practical way: if you were to start with one or the other, which one would you start with now. Answer: Greek. 

[Besides Hebrew nearly killed me when taking it 31 years ago, I'm still smarting from the memories. And, a few years later in my first pastorate, a Reformed fellow with a Cal Tech degree and a Fuller degree came into my office, pointed his bony finger in my face and demanded to know: "Is the waw a true conversive or is it merely a consecutive." Three decades have not erased the terror.]


----------



## jawyman (Feb 15, 2008)

Did I mention Greek?? Learn Greek and then after you have learned it, learn it again. I enjoy languages, but Greek is not numbered among them. If you want to open up the Scriptures and especially the Gospels to your flock or future flock, then Greek is the best language to learn. That is my  worth again.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 16, 2008)

fredtgreco said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > > If you want to learn the original languages, learn both. The entire Bible is important, and when you desire one language above the other it implies that not all of the Scripture has the same import.
> ...



The fact that Greek might be easier does not mean that Hebrew should be neglected if your a candidate for the ministry (which is what I was referring to - sorry I didn't make this clear). Though you may have a point for laymen who want to study languages.


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 16, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> fredtgreco said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Ritchie said:
> ...



Nobody is saying that Hebrew should be neglected, but for a layman the following must be taken into consideration:

1) He doesn't have the luxuries of time like a seminarian has. Given he is busy, he only has time for one language to study at the moment.
2) Greek, given its close relationship to Latin, its Western alphabet, the fact that it reads from left-to-right, and its fairly easy vocabulary, is a lot better for beginners.

Greek is incredibly easy at first, then comes the nightmare of syntax (maybe not, when you are doing sermon prep you really don't care too much about such and such ablative, but on the other hand at this point you can easily read the text in greek). Hebrew is nightmarishly difficult for begginners (e.g., there are about 100 vocabulary words that look identical and sound identical, but have different meanings) but it does get easier, per se.


----------



## Stephen (Feb 16, 2008)

greenbaggins said:


> Sorry guys, but I am going to have to disagree, at least somewhat. They have different difficulties. With Hebrew, the grammar is very simple, and the vocabulary is a real pain (since all the verbs are three letters long, not including vowels, and they start to run together a lot). There are far fewer forms to memorize with Hebrew than with Greek. I didn't find that it took very long to get used to reading backwards, or to get used to letters and vowels that had no relationship to English letters. The tough part about Hebrew is the vocab. So, if you have a good memory for memorizing baseball statistics, say, then you should learn Hebrew.
> 
> Greek, on the other hand, is the reverse. The vocabulary is much easier. A lot of it is cognate with Latin and with English (at least etymologically). The grammar is exceedingly difficult. One verb can have well over a hundred different endings, especially when you count the participles. Greek grammar is much more difficult to learn. However, if you have an analytical mind, and have a good grasp of English grammar, then Greek is a good first choice. I actually wouldn't say that either is more difficult. Hebrew has this aura about it that is undeserved. They are both difficult, but their difficulties are very different.



I have to agree with Lane. I enjoyed Hebrew but really struggled with it. I took Hebrew from Dr. Robert Reymond and really had to learn it. I did not enjoy Greek as well but it was easier in some ways. The problem with Biblical Languages is that it takes alot of time and discipline. For most people languages are not easy to learn. I would not recommend you take it unless you have a calling to ministry. It is not something the average person would be able to do and honestly would not benefit from it. I do not want to discourage you from doing it, but it is something that you need to devote alot of time and energy to doing.


----------



## greenbaggins (Feb 16, 2008)

Archlute said:


> I didn't see anybody mention Aramaic. You'll miss out on half of the Book of Daniel without it!



Aramaic is basically Hebrew with an attitude, as one of my professors put it. Aramaic is not hard once you have Hebrew.


----------



## Archlute (Feb 16, 2008)

greenbaggins said:


> Archlute said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't see anybody mention Aramaic. You'll miss out on half of the Book of Daniel without it!
> ...



(I _was_ merely kidding when I mentioned it)

The script is the same, and a portion of the vocab is borrowed, but the paradigms (including the "Binyanim", and not just the verb endings) are radically different. I was disappointed that there were not more students willing to take the course, as it was only a semester in length, and it is a language of Scripture. Besides, when we went through it, we actually exegeted the book of Daniel, which was a real treat, the final Aramaic chapter, chapter seven, was just profound and eye-openingly majestic in the original. It's hard to describe its effect w/o having one read it in, well...Aramaic!


----------



## Davidius (Feb 16, 2008)

Classical (Attic) Greek, then Koine Greek.


----------



## fredtgreco (Feb 16, 2008)

Davidius said:


> Classical (Attic) Greek, then Koine Greek.



Once you have done the former, you have essentially done the latter.


----------



## greenbaggins (Feb 16, 2008)

fredtgreco said:


> Davidius said:
> 
> 
> > Classical (Attic) Greek, then Koine Greek.
> ...



Absolutely. And, not to denigrate the NT, but the NT is not the only thing worth reading in Greek. Just think of reading Homer, Plato, Aristotle, Herodotus, Hesiod, Thucydides, Aristophanes, Aeschylus, and Sophocles in the original language! For this purpose, the absolute best learning book for classical Greek is Anne Groton's book _From Alpha to Omega_.


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 16, 2008)

greenbaggins said:


> fredtgreco said:
> 
> 
> > Davidius said:
> ...



Counting both college and seminary, I have had well over 35 hours in Koine Greek and continue to read my Greek NT. How hard would it be to learn Attic greek?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 16, 2008)

greenbaggins said:


> fredtgreco said:
> 
> 
> > Davidius said:
> ...



I wish there was an "I disagree" smile here  (well, excluding the LXX of course).


----------



## fredtgreco (Feb 16, 2008)

Not as easy as going from Attic to Koine, but Koine is a pretty big help. There are more forms in Attic that are not used in Koine (more subjunctive and optative, for example) but the basics are all the same.

It is certainly worth the effort.


----------



## fredtgreco (Feb 16, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> > fredtgreco said:
> ...



Interesting, since of course Calvin and the Reformers (and the Church Fathers and Puritans) would disagree _with you_.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 16, 2008)

fredtgreco said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > greenbaggins said:
> ...



I can't say I'm too worried about that. I don't think reading Plato et al did them much good (Col. 2:8).

I wonder if those who advocate reading stuff by the likes of Plato and Aristotle would tell us to read things by modern homosexuals?


----------



## fredtgreco (Feb 16, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> fredtgreco said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Ritchie said:
> ...



Yes. It helps us to understand the sinful mind, and to find opportunities for the gospel. Obviously the Apostle Paul disagreed with you as well - using Greek poets for apologetical purposes.


----------



## greenbaggins (Feb 16, 2008)

Ivanhoe said:


> greenbaggins said:
> 
> 
> > fredtgreco said:
> ...



Well, it's the same language. The best analogy I can think of is that it is like going from normal everyday conversation to reading Shakespeare. If you know your English well, it's not too bad of a leap. Koine is everyday conversation style. Classical is highly stylized, with much longer sentences, as a general rule, many more verb forms, and many more subordinate clauses, and many more particles (that are always important!).


----------



## greenbaggins (Feb 16, 2008)

fredtgreco said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > fredtgreco said:
> ...



And, not everthing they said was wrong, either. But you cannot understand philosophy at all, for instance, without knowing what Plato and Aristotle said. I believe it was Whitehead who said that all philosophy is a series of footnotes to Plato and Aristotle. Given that philosophy is a handmaid to theology, I think that fairly sums up their importance. Besides the Colossians passage is not directed against all philosophy, but only against sophistic philosophy.


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 16, 2008)

fredtgreco said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > fredtgreco said:
> ...



There is a difference with a quote or two for apologetic purposes and indoctrination in their writings. Moreover, Paul only quoted them when they agreed with his worldview, the effects of Greek philosophy on the Christian faith have been truly baneful.


----------



## greenbaggins (Feb 16, 2008)

fredtgreco said:


> Not as easy as going from Attic to Koine, but Koine is a pretty big help. There are more forms in Attic that are not used in Koine (more subjunctive and optative, for example) but the basics are all the same.
> 
> It is certainly worth the effort.



Sorry, Fred. Didn't see this comment before I commented!


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (Feb 16, 2008)

greenbaggins said:


> fredtgreco said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Ritchie said:
> ...



Well, I might concede that those who have been throughly grounded in a Christian worldview may read it in order to critique it, but you would need to be extremely careful.


----------



## Me Died Blue (Feb 17, 2008)

Daniel Ritchie said:


> fredtgreco said:
> 
> 
> > Daniel Ritchie said:
> ...



Would you say that reading Plato, et al for his doctorate in philosophy did Bahnsen much good?


----------



## RamistThomist (Feb 17, 2008)

Me Died Blue said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> > fredtgreco said:
> ...



More Wittgenstein that Plato. See Bahnsen's lectures on Plato for the final scoop. As to Plato's importance, yes and no. I really think _The Republic_ is overrated. Worse, the dualism Plato made is antithetical to biblical creationism.

_Soma sema_, anybody?

But on the other hand, you can't really understand Augustine, Aquinas, and Anselm without Plato.


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 18, 2008)

I am currently learning Hebrew and it is great fun!


----------



## MW (Feb 18, 2008)

AV1611 said:


> I am currently learning Hebrew and it is great fun!



That's how I found it also.


----------



## AV1611 (Feb 18, 2008)

armourbearer said:


> That's how I found it also.



Granted I am at the beginning of my studies but even learning how to differentiate between the _dagesh lene_ and _dagesh forte_ and between the _silent sheva_ and _vocal sheva_ is enjoyable. 

For those who may be interested; if you read this before embarking on studying Hebrew or Greek you will be greatly helped


----------



## Augusta (Feb 18, 2008)

Should I wait to study Greek if I am still studying Latin? By the end of the school year I will have had 2yrs of Latin. I will continue to study Latin, but I want to study Greek next year or over the summer.


----------



## Davidius (Feb 18, 2008)

fredtgreco said:


> Davidius said:
> 
> 
> > Classical (Attic) Greek, then Koine Greek.
> ...



Exactly! I would rather go from Attic to Koine than vice versa. 



Augusta said:


> Should I wait to study Greek if I am still studying Latin? By the end of the school year I will have had 2yrs of Latin. I will continue to study Latin, but I want to study Greek next year or over the summer.



How much Latin have you made it through in 2 years?


----------



## Dieter Schneider (Feb 19, 2008)

greenbaggins said:


> Archlute said:
> 
> 
> > I didn't see anybody mention Aramaic. You'll miss out on half of the Book of Daniel without it!
> ...



Well - it's fun to translate Greek back into Aramaic, too, especially since our LORD spoke in Aramaic (see, e.g. Matthew Black). I studied Aramaic at university, incl. Targums. I found it enriching.


----------



## Augusta (Feb 20, 2008)

Davidius said:


> fredtgreco said:
> 
> 
> > Davidius said:
> ...



So far I have learned all the cases, 1st-3rd noun declensions, learned imperative mood recently, 3 of the 4 verb conjugations present, future, & perfect tense, lots of translation, just started reverse translation of English into Latin. I am not sure what the rest of the year will hold. I am taking it with my kids so I have no idea how fast or not fast we are going compared to a college Latin course.


----------



## Grymir (Feb 20, 2008)

hmm  Original Language? Well, we all know that Adam and Eve spoke Hebrew. Ha Ha. I couldn't resist.


----------



## Davidius (Feb 20, 2008)

Augusta said:


> Davidius said:
> 
> 
> > fredtgreco said:
> ...



Almost all of the grammar required to read most texts is covered during the first year of college instruction, but one obviously wouldn't do so much so quickly when studying at home with children. It sounds like you're doing really well. I don't imagine that there would be any reason not to go ahead and begin Greek studies.


----------

