Some people, who have slaved for years learning Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic, may find themselves saying, “You can’t really understand the Bible unless you’ve studied it in the original languages.” The nose starts to point down, and the person uttering these words begins staring out over his or her reading glasses with an all-knowing look that says, “Don’t challenge me on this. I went to seminary!” 

This creeping arrogance was most likely not a part of the seminarian’s view of things at the beginning of his or her studies. No, there was anticipation, delight, and more than a little dread at the prospect of learning years of dead languages. And when the going gets tough, many students ask, “Why bother?” But in the end, they usually realize how extremely valuable the Bible in the original languages is. And it is a documented fact that schools that go soft on the biblical languages sooner or later go soft on orthodoxy. Part of the reason is that the professors can no longer be held in check. Students can’t call them on the carpet for their exegesis, since the students have never learned how to exegete (an activity that, technically speaking, can only be done in the original language of the document).

I am committed to the highest standards of theological education. I believe that seminarians need to pour themselves into their studies for the glory of Jesus Christ. They need to know the text—the Greek, the Hebrew, and the Aramaic text—because this is the Bible in its original languages. This is where meanings, contexts, author’s flow of argument are perceived most clearly. This is where, as Erasmus once remarked, one could see the face of Jesus more clearly than if Jesus had been standing on the shore of the Sea of Galilee right in front of you.

It should be obvious to all Bible-believing Christians that those who are training for ministry ought to know the languages. This is a sine qua non. They must know them because they are teachers of the church, leaders of the flock. They are not called ‘shepherds’ for no reason. In no way do I want seminaries to cut back on their biblical language requirements. The more they do, the more they give away the farm. Indeed, one criterion I have when evaluating how serious a seminary is, is to determine how many Greek and Hebrew courses they offer in the required curriculum. Anything less than two years in both sends up a warning flag.

But what about the attitude that these seminary graduates come out with? Few faculty tell them the dangers of what their hard-earned knowledge can bring: pride. And that is the quickest way to take the bloom off a church and make all the saints in the pew who haven’t had the privilege or inclination to study biblical Greek and Hebrew feel like second-class Christians.

The fact is that evangelical seminaries focus on the biblical languages because the Reformers focused on biblical languages. Their battle cry was “ad fontes!”—back to the sources! But that was their battle cry because the priests of the day had forgotten their Latin; they were just going through the motions of what a worship service was supposed to be. The Reformers felt that these dead languages had direct value for the person in the pew. The Reformation was the primary impetus in getting the Bible translated into the language of the people. From Wycliffe to Tyndale and Luther, these early Reformers knew that the scriptures did not need to be a mystery to laypeople. And to that end, they worked hard—and even sacrificed their lives—to get the Bible into their hands. Later Reformers who worked on the Geneva Bible (published in 1560) had to leave England for Switzerland to do their work because they feared for their lives since Bloody Mary was on the throne. Yet they produced an elegant translation, meant for the people. In fact the Geneva Bible was still the most popular Bible in England fifty years after the King James Bible appeared.

So, we have this tension: on the one hand, Reformers thought that pastors and teachers must know the biblical languages in order to teach as effectively as possible. But they disagreed with the Catholic Church in that the reason to get back to the sources was to make it understandable to the person in the pew.

There are some who have had the gall to say, on this very blogsite, that all English Bibles are merely ‘historical relics.’ That is arrogance at a galloping pace! And it also flies in the face of yet another Reformation principle: the perspicuity of scripture. This simply means that the basic message of the Bible—the message of salvation and how we are to please God—is sufficiently clear that everyone can grasp it. Once a person parades his knowledge as though it is a secret knowledge that is untouchable by the masses, he is unwittingly playing the tune of the ancient Gnostics. Knowledge is salvation, and the kind of knowledge that saves is secret. That has no resemblance to biblical Christianity.

So, where does this put us? Were the Reformers hopelessly confused about what they believed? Not at all. They recognized that all believers were priests, that we all had equal access to God. But this also meant that the layperson is responsible to find solid-character teachers who have devoted themselves to knowing the scriptures well. And those teachers have a sacred duty to explain the text in a way that the layperson can grasp. Further, they have a sacred duty to show laypeople how to study the Bible for themselves. After all, if the Bible truly is perspicacious, then laypeople should be able to figure out its meaning from a translation.

Thus, on the one hand, laypeople ought not to say that devoting several years to studying the biblical languages is a waste of time. Such sentiment is usually borne of a lack of confidence, of feeling unworthy. On the other hand, teachers ought not to say that one cannot even begin to understand the Bible without first studying the biblical languages. That is the sin of arrogance. Both attitudes fly directly in the face of what the Reformers taught. Maybe these old sixteenth-century dead guys were on to something after all.

C Michael Patton
C Michael Patton

C. Michael Patton is the primary contributor to the Parchment and Pen/Credo Blog. He has been in ministry for nearly twenty years as a pastor, author, speaker, and blogger. Find him on Patreon Th.M. Dallas Theological Seminary (2001), president of Credo House Ministries and Credo Courses, author of Now that I'm a Christian (Crossway, 2014) Increase My Faith (Credo House, 2011), and The Theology Program (Reclaiming the Mind Ministries, 2001-2006), host of Theology Unplugged, and primary blogger here at Parchment and Pen. But, most importantly, husband to a beautiful wife and father to four awesome children. Michael is available for speaking engagements. Join his Patreon and support his ministry

    57 replies to "Is the Bible That Big of a Mystery?"

    • mbaker


      Isn’t it both? Non-Christians, for instance, can read scripture and get nothing out of it, but we have the advantage of both as God’s people. That’s His gift, through His grace, not just our human knowledge. I think that’s the difference.

    • Vladimir


      Perhaps a good passage that shows the necessary relationship between the Scriptures and the Spirit is Acts 18:24-28:

      24 Now a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, competent in the Scriptures. 25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord. And being fervent in spirit, [3] he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately. 27 And when he wished to cross to Achaia, the brothers encouraged him and wrote to the disciples to welcome him. When he arrived, he greatly helped those who through grace had believed, 28 for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, showing by the Scriptures that the Christ was Jesus.


    • David

      Dr. Wallace,

      You say well,

      “And those teachers have a sacred duty to explain the text in a way that the layperson can grasp. Further, they have a sacred duty to show laypeople how to study the Bible for themselves…”

      The clarification on both sides as you propose is certainly needed within Christiandom. On the one hand, Biblical Languages and exegesis is an extremely important tool that one must humbly (not arrogantly) use to illuminate those instructed. On the other hand, lay believers should show an appreciation for what studying the original languages in ancient context can contibute in respect to furthering their understanding of what the Biblical Authors recorded in the context they recorded it in under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It’s like watching an HD color TV rather than just a 1950’s black and white TV.

      I find in the Adult Sunday School class that I teach at my church that this is in fact the case. My students ask difficult questions and are very interested in how the Biblical Languages influence a passage in it’s ancient context. Mature Christians seem to be hungry for more and the way I’ve approached it is I consider my students smarter than me because they are if one listens to their questions. I would encourage everyone to treat their students as their own newborns and be thorough on explanation of why you are using what you’re using to make a case or point (whether theology, Greek/Hebrew words, or otherwise).

      The teacher who puts himself above his students and waives either Theological Knowledge, Seminary Training or Biblical Language as some sort of superiority complex should voluntarily remove himself from teaching because when one reaches that arrogance, one is no longer a teacher and needs to be taught again. It’s not about us, it’s about the One God that exists as three persons in dynamic relationship.

      BTW, your book, “Greek Grammar – Beyond the Basics” is text I thoroughly enjoy as a reference.


    • Daniel B. Wallace

      David, you speak words of wisdom. Thanks for sharing.

    • […] a post entitled “Is the Bible that big of a mystery,” Dan Wallace explores the tension between the necessity of learning biblical languages and […]

    • Jeff Ayers


      My question for you is:

      If all you have is a King James Bible (no greek MSS or other versions) would you have ALL that God requires of you to know how to be saved…. Know how to please God….Know how to be in right relationship with God (both soterioloigcally and sanctification)

      In other words if we are to live by EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDETH OUT OF THE MOUTH GOD…. is that possible with a King James Bible?

      If not why?
      If not what text, MSS or version would i need to have all that is necessary for the things above?



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.