I came across a statement in a book that my small group is using at my church. I won’t mention the book, so as not to detract from its overall message (as I think it is helpful overall, which is why we’re using it). However, this statement is similar to other statements I have read or heard far too often, either in written form or from the pulpit, and it involves referring to or appealing to “the Greek.”

On the one hand, I think that the author makes a good and helpful statement regarding confession, especially in our interpersonal relationships. Many relationships fail, including our relationship with God, because we refuse to admit our deviations from truth. This is a helpful way to look at confession and health.

On the other hand, there is a plainly incorrect sentence here, on at least two counts. First, the Greek word for sin in James 5:16 (which is what footnote 6 refers to) is ἁμαρτία, not παράπτωμα. Now, just to be fair, I looked up any potential textual variant in the three most used Greek New Testament editions, UBS5, NA28, and THGNT. Perhaps this is a textual variant worth noting. However, both UBS5 and THGNT do not refer to any textual variant for τὰς ἁμαρτίας, which means that it is not a textual variant that is significant according to the editors of these editions. But NA28 does note a minor variant of τα παραπτωματα. Aha! Maybe that’s what the author was referring to. But NA28 lists the following manuscripts that have τα παραπτωματα: 307. 442. 1448 Byz sy^p, and Origen. Without getting into too much detail regarding textual criticism, the earliest of these manuscripts is 10th century, which is hardly considered an “older Greek text.” The oldest Greek texts would be anywhere from 2nd to 5th centuries. The external evidence for this variant is clearly so weak that UBS5 and THGNT didn’t even bother noting it. However, given the background of the author as a law enforcement officer for about three decades, and without any noted theological training in his bio, I highly doubt that he was referring to this textual variant issue. So I’m not sure where he got his information from.

Second, his definition of παράπτωμα is questionable as well, “a deviation from what is true.” It’s in quotation marks, but the source is not cited. I checked a few Greek lexicons, even though the word in James 5:16 is a different word. The only lexicon that had a similar definition is Thayer’s, which is dated 1885–1889, but not even in those words. Louw and Nida’s lexicon defines it as: “what a person has done in transgressing the will and law of God by some false step or failure – ‘transgression, sin.’” BDAG has: “in imagery of one making a false step so as to lose footing: a violation of moral standards, offense, wrongdoing, sin.” These are probably the two most widely consulted Greek lexicons today.

The author’s point preaches well and he makes his argument strongly… if it were accurate. But it’s a wrong use of Greek to make the point, and this is precisely what James Barr preached against in his Semantics of Biblical Language. He wrote: “In recent years I have come to believe that one of the greatest dangers to such sound and adequate interpretation comes from the prevailing use of procedures which, while claiming to rest upon a knowledge of the Israelite and the Greek ways of thinking, constantly mishandle and distort the linguistic evidence of the Hebrew and Greek language as they are used in the Bible” (OUP, 1961, p. vii). Later, he wrote: “Quite often I think that theological arguments which I have examined would have been better and more convincing without the linguistic evidence which has been used in their support” (p. 6). I don’t understand why preachers and authors continue to cite the Greek when they clearly don’t have a sufficient handle on it. Actually, I have my suspicions, but I’ll keep those comments to myself for now!

I have taught my students that it is dishonest to use Greek if one does not know Greek, to say (authoritatively) that the Greek behind this text means such-and-such, without having the requisite learning. It would be akin to me giving out medical advice when I have not studied medicine (sorry, but WebMD doesn’t count!). But I do offer an alternative to those who must cite the Greek text: one can simply cite the author or speaker who makes a note about the Greek text by saying something like “such-and-such commentator states that the Greek word for sin is hamartia, which he/she defines as XYZ.” And if one were to be really transparent, he/she can add: “I don’t know Greek so I can’t verify that, but I really like such-and-such author.” Or something to that effect.

Pastors, teachers, anyone teaching the Bible: if you don’t know Greek (or Hebrew), just know that it is dishonest to make statements that make one appear to know Greek (or Hebrew). It’s dishonest, irresponsible, and misleading, and you may make a mistake that some annoying Greek professor will see and post about online someday. 

— David I. Yoon