Hebrew Grammar Lesson
Russ--Yes, it is rather disappointing, because Missler's explanation is so appealing. But that's so often the problem with biblical scholarship: we want it to read that way, so we ensure that it does (consciously or subconsciously; through ignorance or deception). That's the case with the long-held urban myth about a NASA scientist discovering the missing 24 hours in the "sun standing still" story in Joshua. That's the topic, by the way, in this week's Bible Blast: "The Sun Stands Still."
Just goes to show, we have to be very diligent in our scholarship and research if we're to teach the Bible with honesty and integrity, letting the chips fall where they may..
I should note that I've asked Andrew (our LBS web site guru and audio engineer) to edit my audio teaching on John 19: 19, editing out the Missler stuff, so I don't perpetuate the error any farther than I already have.
Russ,
This one took some research! I'm going to post the answer as this week's blog. It will appear in a day or so. Here's what I wrote:
In John 19: 19 we read, “Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read: ‘Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.’ Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Hebrew (NIV, “Aramaic”), Latin and Greek.” In The Creator beyond Time and Space (Costa Mesa, CA: Word for Today, 1995), Chuck Missler argues that the Hebrew phrase forms an acrostic, the first letter of each of four Hebrew words spelling YHWH, the tetragrammaton for the name of God. Recognizing this, claims Missler, prompts the chief priests to protest to Pilate, “Do not write ‘The King of the Jews,’ but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews” (John 19: 21). I had read Missler’s argument years ago, and trusting it, incorporated it into my teaching.
I was wrong.
After listening to my lecture on John 19: 19, Russ Wills, one of our learned LBS students, asked for clarification on a point of Hebrew grammar in the phrase “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” In researching an answer, I found that Missler is wrong, and that I had perpetuated his error. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa!
Here’s the scoop. The Gospel according to John is written in Greek, as are all of the New Testament books. The Greek phrase, “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” in John 19: 19 is: ’Ihsoûs ó Nazoraîos ó Basileùs tôn ’Ioudaìov. A Latin translation would read: “Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum,” (from which we get the acrostic so often seen in Christian art: INRI). Missler claims that the Hebrew would have read: “Yeshua HaNazarei v Melech HaYehudim (the “v” is “w,” in English), making the tetragrammaton, YHWH.
But here’s the thing: Grammatically, the Greek construction used on the sign of the cross is an appositive; there is no conjunctive “and” in the Greek (kaí or dè), nor is there in a correct English translation. In order to make Missler’s acrostic YHWH work, the Greek needs a conjunctive and, or waw in Hebrew (“Jesus of Nazareth, and the King of the Jews”). It does not have one. Thus correctly translating the Greek into Hebrew forms the acrostic YHHH, not YHWH.
I don’t know of any instances in Old Testament Hebrew in which an appositive construction has a conjunctive (waw) when referring to the same person (e.g, Judges 11: 25: “Are you better than Balak son of Zippor, king of Moab?”). Adding a conjunctive would obviously create confusion: “Are you better than Balak son of Zippor and the king of Moab?” In the same way, “Jesus of Nazareth and the King of the Jews” invites the impression that two people are nailed to the cross: Jesus of Nazareth and the King of the Jews!