The Meaning of the Nonexistent "Of"
This seems like a silly topic. It is worse than that. It is a foolish expedition into the jungle of Greek grammar in the search of meaning. Of course, since we are searching for the meaning of Jesus’s words, it may be worth the effort. This was meant to be the second article about “the kingdom of heaven.” It didn’t work out that way. I tripped over the little word in the middle of that phrase, the word “of.” This little word is difficult because, in Greek, a word like our “of” doesn’t exist, at least not in this phrase.
This is true not only in “the kingdom of heaven” but other phrases that are important such as “the light of the world,” “the Son of Man,” “the Son of God,” “the love of God,” “the salt of the earth,” and many, many more. There is no “of” in any of these phrases. Our eyes focus on the big words “kingdom,” “heaven” “son,” “man,” and “love,” but we need the little word “of” to define the relationship between them. In these cases, the English “of” is conjured up by translators. This article explains how the trick is done and other possible meanings for these phrases.
This is where the grammar details get a bit thick but bear with me that the value of all this becomes clear in the end. At least, I pray it does.
Not all “Ofs” Are Equal
The “ofs” in the key phrases above all come from the same cause, which is the main topic of this article, but first, we must clear away some of this jungle’s overgrowth. Since the word “of” has so many uses in English, there are several Greek prepositions that are misleadingly translated as “of.” These include those meaning “out of“ (ek), “under” (hypo), “about” (peri) and so on, but the most problem is best illustrated with the preposition, apo (ἀπὸ). This preposition primarily means “from.” When it is translated to “of” in English, we confuse a lot of its meaning. For example in Luke 5:36:
KJV: No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old;
Listeners Heard: No one puts a patch torn from a new cloak onto an old cloak.
When we translated apo as “of,” we get phrases like “a piece of new garment.” This looks like the same “of” in “the kingdom of heaven.” Translated as “a piece from a new garment” to make what Jesus said much clearer. The price was taken from the new garment. The Greek source used by the KJV translators was missing the word, “torn,” which means the need for “from” much clearer. New translations correct the problem because of this.
The point is that none of these prepositions translated as “of” should be translated as what looks like a possessive. We can rephrase the “of” in “the kingdom of heaven” as simple possession, “heaven’s kingdom” and it would still be accurate. We can not rephrase “a piece of new garment” as “a new garment’s piece” without distorting what Jesus said.
If the “of” in the key phrases that we are discussing doesn't come from a Greek preposition, where does it come from?
The Conjuring of “Of”
The “of” in all these key phrases, including “the kingdom of heaven” is a Greek noun and pronoun form called the “genitive case.” We can think of the Greek genitive case as something like the English possessive, but there are key differences. In English, the possessive is represented either by an apostrophe “s” and in “heaven’s” or the “of” as in “of heaven.” The apostrophe “s” is always a possessive form but in both English “of” and Greek genitive case have a lot of additional meanings. Both share a similar range of uses describing:
a producer: "the Gospel of—or by—Matthew,"
the focus of an object: "love of/for the Gospel,”
an attribute: “The Gospel of/with the most Jesus verses),”
ownership: "The Gospel Book of/owned by Bob,"
a part of a whole: "Verse 5:3 of/in Matthew,"
materials used: the "Gospel of/on the page" versus the "Gospel of/in the heart."
Some of these can be accurately translated as a simple possessive but the meaning can be confusing. We can say “Matthew’s Gospel,” but do we mean the one produced by Matthew or the one owned by someone named Matthew. The “part of a whole” meaning is captured by the possessive, “Matthew’s Verse 5:3” but the meaning of materials doesn’t work as “the page’s Matthew.” There are a host of other complications in translating the Greek genitives that I could bore you with, but that would just be showing off how tedious I can be.
The fact is that the translator must come up with a preposition of some kind in English to represent the meaning of this genitive case. However, it doesn’t always have to be “of.” The genitive can be translated as “of” but it can often be more clearly translated as "belonging to," "part of," “with,” “by,” “owned by,” “in,” "which is," "than" (in comparisons), or "for," "concerning" or "about" with transitive verbs. In reference to time, it could instead be translated as "during," "at," or "within." The problem is that these are subjective judgments made by the translator. Often it is better to use the more generic “of” so it can be interpreted by the reader unless the evidence points strongly to a specific meaning. This is usually the case in the “than” of comparison and the “at” of time.
When we translate “the kingdom of heaven,” more accurately translated as “the realm of the skies,” (see this article if this paragraph is confusing) we discover that it cancapture many different ideas at once. The possessive doesn’t seem to work with the actual Greek words “the skies.” This realm isn’t owned by the skies. It is owned by the Divine. So is this realm a part of the skies? That depends on how we interpret “the skies.” Is it the realm of “the physical universe” or the realm of “the highest things?” Or are the highest things the material out of which the realm is made? Or do the highest things define an attribute of the realm?
When we see the “of” in translation, we have no idea if it comes from one of the Greek prepositions with more specific meanings or from the genitive case that has a range of meanings. When “of” is conjured from the genitive, we cannot assume a meaning like our possessive. Certainly, the “love of God” doesn’t translate as the possessive, “God’s love.” The two ideas are the opposite of each other. Does “the son of the man” means “the man’s son” or does it mean “the son which is the man” or “the son in the man” or something else? I have no idea.
The problem is that there are dozens if not hundreds of times Jesus uses the genitive to describe a key idea. We cannot tell in translation where this occurs.
Conclusions
I only use “of” to translate the genitive in my “Listeners Heard” translations. I ue other more specific English prepositions to translate the other Greek prepositions so that they cannot be confused with the genitive case. This helps a little. I will also use more specific prepositions to translate the genitive only when the context demands it.
These are not answers. They are ideas we can think about if we think that Jesus’s words are worth thinking about.