Holy: Understanding It Better Through Territory and Map

You may have heard the saying, "The map is not the same thing as the territory".   You also may have heard someone else say: "This sure would be a lot easier, if only we had a map".   Life can be a lot easier, if we maintain the distinction between territory and map on the one hand and if we have a map to use on the other.  We don't want to live like the pre-reformer Martin Luther did for a long time, having to always learn things the hard way, due to his misunderstanding of the Bible as his map.  That is the way he describes his learning until his breakthrough in understanding the map of the Bible and that after having traveled down so many real life dead ends.  We also don't want to live a life of dead orthodoxy that came about after Luther's death, where the map came to mean more than the territory.  The same goes for understanding that key biblical word that is translated as holy.   It is supposed to be a word map that helps us understanding real life territory.   The question is whether the current popular definition of holy as a part of the map does that or not.   Does "set apart" fit the map and the territory?

 

The picture above is a world map and one of the most incredible things in history is all the changes that have been made to maps and how useful maps are in our smaller much-travelled world,   We have even changed some of the terminology.  If you went to Google Maps you would see different optional boxes in the upper right corner.  For our purposes the two names closest to territory and map would be earth and map.  You could explore the earth using a satellite or you could examine it using a map!

Using the analogy of earth and map (or territory and map) the meaning of holy can be explored in two ways: 1) by using the territory and 2) by  using a map.  You could make the terminology even more comtemporary by using the words from Google Maps: Earth and Map.  Through satellite, you can view the territory or terrain of the earth.  Through its maps, you can use the line drawings of map experts.  The best way to do the exploration of its meaning is to test the possible definitions for holy through both means and not just one or the other.  You could call it a hybrid method.  I am speaking here of testing: 1) the meaning of set apart, 2) the meaning of whole and 3) the meaning of pure.  These are the top 3 meanings scholars, teachers, pastors and lay people suggest for the central idea of qadosh (Hebrew transliteration) or hagios (Greek transliteration), both of which are transalated as holy (or sanctified or hallowed) in an English Bible. 

The first test for our knowledge is the test of the territory.  How do each of these meanings fit with real life territory?   First, we have a consensus that whatever meaning this word carries, it should be a high priority thing in reality.  "Holy, holy, holy" is not said repreatedly for no particular reason.  Rather it is said like that to point to the pinnacle of God's character.  Not many scholars should disagree with that indication in the map of the Bible. 

So then, does "set apart/separate", "whole", or "pure" rise to the highest place in the reality of God's character?   One thing is certain, they all are ideas that fit reality.  What is an unique test is whether these ideas are more significant than others in the face of reality. 

Before we answer the question, let's expand each idea a little bit.  First, some believe that the main thing missing in addressing reality is that there is not enough separation between Christians and sin or Christians and the world.  They believe that is the missing reality.  Second, others believe that what is missing is moral wholeness as opposed to moral reductionism.  They believe that what would change reality is to recognize the importance of seeing the whole of God's character rather tthan reducing it to one trait like for the example of reducing God's character to just love.  Third and finally, some believe that the reality that is missing is that Christians are not pure like they need to be.  They are too intermixed with the sins of the world.  They believe that the introduction of a new level of purity would change the church. 

My loose ends -

exploring the territory with wholeness
knower learner

exploring the map with wholeness
tearher studier

tremendously effective in territory
through streets versus dead ends


tremendously effective in map
through streets versus dead ends
remaining issues only with the map


exploring the territory with set apart (separate)
exploring the map with set apart (separate)

somewhat effective in territory (plausible)
somewhat effective in territory (plausible)

exploring the territory with purity
exploring the map with purity
dead ends versus through streets

somewhat less effective in territory
somewhat less effective in map


Closing illustration since paper maps are becoming more and more obsolete though mapping itself (someone has explored this area before) has not. 

Global positioning devices (mapping)
Tom Tom (territory match due to sufficient updates) vs. Dumb Dumb (not a territory match due to lack of updates)

{This will be completed fairly quickly with some time available hopefully next week - but you can already see some of my direction in these loose pieces}.

Sincerely,

Jon

Holy: Understanding It Better Through Getting Started Right

The idea of seeing my task on this blog as defining the word in the Bible that is translated as "holy" is misleading.  It is more than that. That is really just 1/5th of a comprehensive set of tasks to make sure the holy is being understood correctly.  What I would like to introduce in this blog entry is the set of tasks that help insure a more reliable understanding of qadosh in the Hebrew and hagios in the Greek. 

In Guidelines for Barefoot Language Learning: An Approach Through Involvement and Independence, Dr. Donald N. Larson identifies 5 steps in learning to process input, when learning another language beyond our first.

He identifies these 5 steps as part of the larger task of "getting started right".  That is why this entry is particularly important.  To define a word is only one part of getting started right.  It is covering one, but one that is important because it is a component of what it means to be getting started right when learning a foreign language (or even more of your own)!

These are his five steps for processing language input or things (with some changes by yours truly):
  

First Step:  Classifying  (Amount of thing/input)

            Classify words as to their primary major class

 Second Step:  Defining  (Relationship of thing/input)

            Defining words for relationships or
            combinations of the major classes.  

Third Step:   Differentiating  (Action of thing/input)

            Differentiate words so that they can be
            distinguished with ease.

 Fourth Step:  Mapping  (Thing of thing/input)

            Map the range of all the classes that a word
            has based on its associations. 

 Fifth Step:  Establishing Sets  (Whole of thing/input)

            Establish a set by discovering the semantic
            features common to a set of words.

I have not found these steps that Dr. Don N. Larson outlines anywhere else in my reading of linguistics texts.  I know that one of his colleagues describes him as someone who was very good at making the complex simple.  I think this set of steps may outline in a more clear way what Dr. Eugene A. Nida was doing along with Louw in developing a lexicon for New Testament Greek build around what are called semantic domains.  I believe that Larson's "Establishing Sets" is the equivalent of Nida's semantic domains. 

Please note that defining a word is step 2 out of this set of 5 steps toward processing input from another language.  That means that simply defining holy by itself is incomplete.  It is really important that we understand that we naturally do all these steps, when we learned our first language whether conscious or not.  The other thing is that in developing these steps further, I have found that each step helps in understanding the other steps. 

Let me also show you these steps in a more simplified picture format:

It is also true that some of what I have said previously in some of my entries will have to be amended, because I was guilty of mixing these steps together rather than "differentiating" them as in step 3 above.  This is easily done because most of what I have read in both exegesis and linguistics has a tendency to develop some valid points, but the organization is more eclectic than well-organized.  Larson, I agree, had a great ability to organize things well. 

So as I develop my points about the meaning of qadosh, etc. in Hebrew and hagios, etc. in Greek, I hope you will see me following Larson's strategy more closely in the future.  The coming steps are to actually practice what Larson preaches.  For that, I may have to reach out to others to make his theory more practical.  I am thinking that Dr. Betty Sue Brewster at Fuller Theological Seminary might be particularly helpful in that regard due to her connections with Dr. Larson and his influence in the book that she co-authored with her husband, Language Acquisition Made Practical (otherwise known as LAMP).   I recommend their text very highly for knowing how to learn a new language.  And in the end, that is what I am doing in learning and studying Hebrew and Greek. 


Sincerely,

Jon