Lacking the Ability to Understand Jesus

All my life, I have heard preachers talk about how every word in the Bible is important and, often, they seek to prove this by giving an entire sermon on one word. (Yawn! Did I yawn? Sorry!) Since I have been studying Jesus’s Greek, I have realized that the chances they understood the words that Jesus actually said were slim. If every word was important, why would anyone use the New Living Translation, where the actual words are consistently ignored for the pleasures of paraphrasing. (“If I were Jesus, I would have said it this way! It may mean something different, but I understand it better!”)

Jesus, of course, commented on this very problem. In John 8:43, he says, “For what reason, this chatter, this one of mine, don't you understand? Because you don't have the power to hear this message, this one of mine.”

If that seems convoluted, you are right, but our mistake is thinking that it is unnecessarily convoluted. As I will show, it is intentionally convoluted. I present the words in the order that Jesus spoke them, not because I couldn’t simplify them, but so we can appreciate the journey Jesus took his listeners through as they listened to him.

This gets translated as:

• KJV: Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.

• NIV: Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say.

• NLT: Why can’t you understand what I am saying? It’s because you can’t even hear me!

Those are all much better, aren’t they? So much simpler! So much more straightforward! These translators are awesome! What was Jesus thinking, not expressing himself in words like these? Mmm, maybe he had a reason…maybe we might want to think about what it might be.

Going Through the Differences

All of these versions simplify the initial “For what reason” into “why.” This isn’t a crime, but Jesus could have easily said “why” by simply not using the initial proposition that gives the phrase this specific meaning. Why did he use it? Because Jesus didn’t want to open a can of worms. Explaining a “why” is much more complicated than explaining a “what.” He wants to offer a simple “what,” one simple reason, not getting into all their other problems.

Is Jesus’s next issue his “speech,” “language,” or “what he says?” He said none of these. He chooses a specific word that means “chatter.” This is the only time he uses this word in any of the Gospels. Was this an accident? Did he make a mistake? The word is intentionally self-deprecating. He has been using its verb form throughout this discussion with his challengers. He further deprecates his “chatter” by adding, “this one of mine,” an intentionally convoluted phrase he seldom uses. Why? To set up a punchline. How is that translated? As “my” or “I.” Why not? The punchline is going to be ignored by all translators anyway.

So what is the reason that Jesus gives for people not understanding him? Is it because they “cannot hear” or “can’t” hear?” Yes and no. They aren’t deaf. The NIV comes closer here with its statement, “are unable to hear,” but this still misses the key point. Almost every “can” we read in Jesus’s words is a mistranslation. Greek doesn’t have “helping verbs” like we do in English, like the word, “can.” The active verb in this sentence, the real focus of the action, is a verb meaning “having power.” Its is the verbal form of the word that means “power,” the Greek word from which we get “dynamic,” “dynamo,” and “dynamite.” To have an “ability” says the same idea, but in a much weaker form. Jesus is saying that they are not powerful enough. Because of their lack of power, they cannot hear, but that is a result, not the cause.

As the first part of the verse explains, the issue is less their hearing than the “what" of it. Of course, the NLT doesn’t offer a what. In that version, the problem is that they are just deaf. The KJV and NIV are better, describing the “what” as “my word” and “what I say.” But this again misses the point by a mile. The Greek word he used is logos, a profound, complicated word that the Bible usually glosses over by translating it as “word.” I explain it in detail in this article. Minimally, he means his “message,” but the broader reference is to his “logic,” a word we get from the root, logos. So, his challengers don’t have the power to understand the logic of his message. This is an important idea to me.

So, since he has made his point, Jesus must end there, right? Maybe the translator’s Jesus does, but not the real one. He described his logos as “this one of mine.” This equates his light-hearted word, “chatter,” with his serious “message.” This is his point. His critics hear the chatter but miss his message. Both are “these ones of his,” his way of communicating includes both humor and deeper meaning.

To me, today’s translators sacrifice both to make his words simpler and more conforming to their message rather than his.

Conclusions

So, do all of Jesus’s words matter? I trust that they do and that, someday, people will come to realize this. Today, however? I think our preachers, translators, and the religious community have their own message that can drown out the message of Jesus.