Eph. 2:10—Are We God’s Poem? (Monday with Mounce 60)

Paul tells the Ephesians that “we are his workmanship (ποιημα), created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (ESV). ποιημα (related to the verb ποιεω) means “that which is made,” hence work, creation” (BDAG).

 

It is etymologically connected to poème (Middle French), poema (Latin), and ποιημα (Greek).

 

Because of this, you often hear the idea of the English “poem” creeping back through the centuries and used to define the nuance of ποιημα. And so we hear assertions such as:

• “Poiema emphasizes God as the master Designer, the universe as His creation” (Rom 1:20).
• “As the artist seeks to express himself in his work, so God expresses Himself in us.”
• “You are His work, you are His poem. A poem is a thing of grace. A thing of beauty, God wants your life to be a thing of grace and of beauty and as God works in your life it will become a thing of grace and of beauty; you are His poem.”
• “But the beauty of God’s workmanship is not displayed in posing. That beauty can only he displayed when we are put to work fulfilling His purpose in us.”

These kinds of statement make picturesque sermon illustrations, but unfortunately have no basis in truth.

But how can you know this? The starting point is always BDAG. Does it give any credence to this nuance? Do any of verses quoted support an inherent nuance of poetry?

 

Its only other use in the Greek Testament is Romans 1:20. “For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made (ποιημα).” It refers to that which has been made. Since it is used only twice in the Greek Testament, we have to be a little cautious in defining it; it is nice to have at least five or so usages before we start talking about a word’s range of meaning.

 

If you look at the secular references in BDAG, you will see that their suggestion that it refers to “works of divine creation” may have some credence since they give about ten references under this heading. When you are limited in the number of occurrences for a word, you have to go to secular literature; just be sure you stay within 100 years or so of the biblical time period. Words can change their meaning quickly.

 

The other place to look is other translations. Do they see the nuance of “poetry” in this word? Most translations use “workmanship.“ We also find “handiwork” (TNIV) and “what he has made us” (NRSV). The NLT has “masterpiece,” but in light of the evidence, this seems to be making the same etymological error as our citations above.

 

It is one thing to quote a Greek word in a sermon, a practice I do not condone since it rarely adds to the meaning of the text and so often seems to be an arrogant (or ignorant) elevation of the preacher over the laity (my opinion).

 

But this is much worse. This is defining God’s very words using a derived meaning from a language totally foreign to the original; why do some people think that they can use the English nuance of a word that has been created 2,000 years after the biblical times and read its meaning back into the Bible.

 

This may be a little harsh, but this type of misuse is tiring and we all should know better by now.

 

So let me say it very clearly. The nuance that a word takes in a foreign language (English) 2,000 years after the fact has absolutely zero impact on the word’s biblical meaning (Greek). Let’s let this fallacy pass and get on with our task of using Greek to help us understand the very words of God.

 

God did not speak English.

 

William D. [Bill] Mounce posts every Monday about the Greek language, exegesis, and related topics at Koinonia. He is the author of numerous books, including the bestselling Basics of Biblical Greek (third edition coming in 2009!), and general editor for Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of the Old and New Testament Words. He served as the New Testament chair of the English Standard Version Bible translation. Learn more and visit Bill's blog (co-authored with scholar and his father Bob Mounce) at www.billmounce.com.

Comments

[Jonathan Grotefendt]

Amen. You see the same fallacious reasoning from teachings on Romans 1:16: “I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God.” Yes, the ENGLISH word dynamite came from the Greek word dunamis (power), but dunamis has nothing to do with dynamite. It sounds nice to say that “God blasts down our sinful walls with his dunamis, his dynamite.” It always starts innocent; however, it can quickly lead to improper usage of the text. Let’s keep our teaching and preaching focused on the text and away from fluff.
You’re right—God did not speak Enlgish, nor does he teach fluff.

[Wayne Leman]

Good post, Bill. I think that our Bible college and seminary courses lend themselves to this superficial approach to the Biblical languages. We need to teach seminarians some basic facts about how languages work and change, including that we must avoid the etymological fallacy.

[Jimmy Doyle]

While I whole-heartedly agree with your comments on many levels, ποιημα seems to be an challenging choice for this article.

I agree that it can be overplayed, but it seems works of art or poems also fit under the umbrella of this term. In Liddell & Scott, which admittedly is referencing mostly older texts but does include writings within 100 years of the NT (see link below), ποιημα and related terms are directly connected with poetry. The BDAG also references the use of ποιημα as poem (and the reference is Taitan in the 2nd century).

When a word can have a wide (though sometimes specific) range of meanings, the issue for me is one of context. It may be that ποιημα _can_ refer to poetry as a (skillfully?) created work, but is there any evidence that Paul is thinking of poetry or art here?

Liddell and Scott entry:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=poi%2Fhma&la=greek&prior=marturo-&d=Perseus:text:1999.05.0181:document=1114&i=1

ποιημα in classical literature via and limited to Perseus documents:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/searchresults?target=greek&all_words=poi%2Fhma&phrase=&any_words=&exclude_words=&documents=

Expanded:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/searchresults?target=greek&all_words=poi%2Fhma&all_words_expand=on&phrase=&any_words=&exclude_words=&documents=

[Phil Faris]

Excellent discussion topic; but debatable points. (Hmmm, that's what makes it good for stimulating discussion...)

Your main point that sermons can sometimes prop themselves up on fluffy word studies is more valid than we care to admit. Time pressure leaves these "illustrations" based on English words in the script when they should only be placeholders in draft copies. Used properly they would force us to come back and finish the research and, possibly, lead us to a more spiritual insight.

Your point about quoting Greek in sermons, however, was probably too general; some (or most) cases are exactly as you paint them. But selective cases may fall into different categories. After all, this is a homilectical issue--and effective communication is the primary criterion.

But my main quibble is with your apparent reliance on lexical support alone for this or that "interpretation". Great writers are often the ones who use a word or phrase in a uniquely new way that "does something" to the audience or readers. What is "lacking" in modern preachers is an adequate fluency in Greek or Hebrew to catch the flow of a complete passage; to see when a writer echoes a phrase later in a passage, but puts a twist on it; to notice subtle clues to the attitude or even humor of the author.

To be honest, I only grasp at what I call "pseudo fluency"; memorizing or reading an entire book straight through in Greek or Hebrew repeatedly over weeks until it makes sense without translating it in one's head. But even such a process might help delve the intended meaning of words in context, at least as an adjunct to (not a replacement for) the lexical work.

Finally, you don't mention the reverse process; letting the original meanings shed light on the modern English words. One reason the Greek word came to mean "poetry" was probably that the distinction between off the cuff language and poetry comes from the deliberative, arduous work involved in the process. Even when poetic forms are used in prose, they are signs that the readers ought to linger and "work" on the thought more than normal. And if we ponder this "reverse word study", maybe it will inform our "reading" of the Psalms.

Thanks,
Phil