THE SCRIPTURAL MEANING
OF REPENTANCE This is a review of those words which Bible translators may employ as
alternatives for Repentance and of the Hebrew and Greek words involved. Basic to this study is the recognition of the Divine inspiration of the very
words of the original in the canon of both Testaments, these being respectively
in Hebrew and Greek.
However their comprehension; needs the
medium
of one's native
tongue, which in our case is English.
Here a single word for word equivalent is
rarely possible; so it is most likely to require two or more words to embrace the
full sense when translating between two languages. But having thus allocated an
appropriate word to one in the original tongue it may not be used to stand for
another; and failure to observe this nullifies the purpose of the Holy Spirit in
designedly employing a certain word in the original text.
Reference to any concordance or lexicon will indicate that Repentance, and
its cognate words, represent the Hebrew word
NACHAM
and a Greek word
metanoia.
But our first consideration must be the meaning of the English word Repentance;
and most dictionary definitions may be summarised thus :-
(1) To feel remorse about a past action;
(2) To experience a change of mind.
The second definition, though of less frequent use nowadays, is probably the
older of the two; for it accords well with that same sense for
metanoia which
Parkhurst's Lexicon states was so used by the Greek historian, Xenophon; and that
was many years before the LXX, (the Hebrew/Greek Septuagint translation), was
begun. Though not inspired, the LXX is an important guide to how words were
understood in those days; so it is noteworthy that it represented
NACHAM as
metanoia about sixteen times.
Though now of common occurrence it is questionable whether the first given
definition was in use when the LXX was made, or even when the NT was written. It
seems to have evolved with the development of ecclesiastical tradition and the
prevalence of Latin texts. Certainly a concern has been expressed about the
suitability of this definition to convey the sense of
metanoia.
Among some of those who take the place of being Bible students there is
extant the belief that an appropriate equivalent for
metanoia
is found in the
word "Submit". Now the idea of submission is certainly a biblical one; since it
is inherent in the phrase "bow the knee", whether before Joseph in
Gen.41:43., or
before the Lord Jesus Christ in
Phil.2:10.. Yet the prefix 'sub' looks suspect
as standing for the Greek prefix
meta, which means "after", since the suffix
expected would be
hupo. So the question we now need to ask is: What does the
word Submit really mean ? Probably a fair definition of this verb would be:
(A) To place something before a person to get his opinion;
(B) To place one's self under another so owning his superiority.
The former of these is no doubt of modern usage and the latter is now used
less frequently though possibly closer to the basic meaning.
By consulting the "Greek and English Lexicon" of M. Wright it is noted that
for "Submit" the Greek equivalents suggested are
hupopiptO
and
hupeikO. The first
is not in the NT and can be disregarded, but the second word does occur just
once, in
Heb.13:17, where the AV quite properly has "submit". Some translators
have the word "obey" here; but reference to
peitharcheO in its four occurrences
shows that here again the AV is right in translating all of them as "obey". But
the AV is wrong to read "submit" in
lCor.16:16.
,Col.3:18.,Jas.4:7.,lPet.2:13. and
lPet.5:5, where the Greek word is
hupotassO, rightly reading throughout in the
RV as "subjection". These are not insignificant issues nor quibbles: we are
dealing with the inspired text of holy writ.
So why does the word "submit" properly occur in Scripture only once ?
Is it
not because it means a single act in time; whereas the believer on the Lord Jesus
Christ is called upon to dedicate himself to Him in irrevocable allegiance not
limited by time ?
But the word
hupeikO. lays claim to "submit" as its proper
counterpart, which thus is debarred from representing any other Greek word.
Turning now to the OT it will be found that the Hebrew word
NACHAM appears
in the AV as "repent" over forty times, yet there are as many as sixty places
where it appears as "comfort", and both are valid translations. So how can this
one word embody such a diversity of meaning ?
It is because it carries a broad
basic meaning which calls for the context to narrow it down to a precise sense.
The following is submitted as the general definition of the verb
NACHAM ;
To become re-adjusted in one's feelings.
According to its particular context
NACHAM can more closely come within one
of these three specific definitions : (a) to seek by means of the emotions a changed attitude in another;
(b) to have one's feelings changed as to a purpose left unchanged;
(c) to discard a mental/emotional attitude and adopt a new one, thus
to have a change of heart.
The definition (a) is represented in Greek by the word
parakaleO, which the
LXX uses some forty-five times. The authority for this identity is established,
by the principle of Divine Interchange, from
Jer.31:15. where
NACHAM is equatable
with
parakaleO. in
Matt.2:18.. The English equivalent is "comfort", as here and
elsewhere; but its meaning also requires the word
"beseech", as
Matt.8:5. etc.
The definition (b) is represented in Greek by the word
metamelomai which the
LXX uses four times for
NACHAM. By the Divine Interchange rule the word
NACHAM
in
Psa.110:4. is identified as
metamelomai in
Heb.7:21.. In
2Cor.7:8. this word
in the RV is twice translated "regret", which is its proper equivalent and should
also be this reading in the other four NT occurrences.
The definition (c) is represented in Greek by
metanoeO, which the LXX uses
some sixteen times for
NACHAM. There is no NT example of its being quoted from
the OT, but the NT writers were well acquainted with the LXX and would have used
the word in just the same sense. It is properly equated in English with "repent"
in its original meaning as a change of heart - being not so much a mental process
as an emotional one.
It is thus submitted that the Greek word
metanoia, with its cognates, is not
properly translated by the second definition of "submit", but that
it
is properly
translated by the second definition of "repent", i.e. a change of heart.
It is problematic that Scripture states that God cannot repent, yet there
are several instances where He is said to do so. On this point Keil and Delitzsch
in their Commentary on the Old Testament, with reference to Numbers
23:19, say,
"With regard to His own
counsels, God repents of nothing; but this does not
prevent the repentance of God, understood as an anthropopathic expression,
denoting the pain experienced by the love of God, on account of the destruction
of His creatures". M.S.Lloyd.
Glasgow .October 1992
Distribution to others interested by photo-copying is sanctioned and sought