Right now I'm reading a very thought-provoking book titled HEBREW THOUGHT COMPARED WITH GREEK by Thorleif Boman
The so-called "old" Testament was predominantly Hebrew thought, philosophy, ethos and sensibility. The New Testament was Greek.
This book gives a lucid and penetrating insight into the mindset of a thinking person's sense of Time and Space and culture and religion through the expression of thought in those languages.
Here is a PDF of the book: [PDF]
Here is an academic review:
Hebrew Thought Compared With Greek
By Thorlief Boman
224 pp. Philadelphia, Westminster Press, 1960. $4.50.
From time to time a book appears which is seminal in its importance. This may be the case even when much that it has to say is not original, and its subject matter has already been debated both internationally and over decades. Boman's book, I believe, is of this caliber. He is a wise author, for two reasons. Firstly, his book appeared in its original German version six years ago, so he has been able to take advantage of suggestions and criticisms made before the edition we now possess was put into English translation. So now we have his mature thoughts. Secondly, the world of Biblical scholarship is at present realizing that the study of semantics is quite as important as the study of philology; thus Boman has struck while the iron is hot. But apart from those advantages, Boman's very competent handling of his material, revealing an acute understanding of both our Greek and our Hebraic heritage, is put to such excellent use that his resultant thesis ought to be required reading for systematic theologians equally with Biblical students. Jules Moreau has greatly contributed to the clarity of the exposition, since what is sometimes quite difficult subject matter is always clear, and never carries a translation smell.
Boman perhaps shakes us in his introduction by declaring that Platonism and the Hebrew view of life are related essentially and support joint values. The decisive and self-evident fact is not the antithesis but the unity of thought they share. On the other hand, until he compares both fields with the negation of thought in Buddhism, one is more aware of Boman's diligence in delineating the differences between the two rather than their similarities.
Fortunately, Boman spends most of his time on a fresh and incisive discussion of Hebraic modes of thought, because of course many interpreters throughout the centuries have analyzed the Greek modes. And even though Boman frankly goes back to authorities of fifty or a hundred years ago, such as Orelli, R. Blake, G. R. Driver, I. Bursztyn, what he has to say is always fresh and incisive and fully up-to-date in its presentation.
His wise insistence on a study of the meanings of words offers the student with a general interest in the Old Testament a host of fascinating examples of the vitality of Hebrew thinking. Outstanding are his discussions of the concept of "being" and of the vitality of the "word." All his conclusions are of importance theologically. In his discussion on the concept of "being," he shows (1) that logical "being" is expressed in Hebrew by the mere juxtaposition of two nouns, so that the equation
|
| 255 - Hebrew Thought Compared With Greek |
AB means A is B; (2) that the verb hayah rather means "become" than "be," both with and without supplementary prepositions; (3) that thus hayah may have to be translated by "come…. come forth," or other equally vital verb. "The being of things is not the same as panpsychism, but rather 'being' is pre-eminently personal being." A person therefore is not "is," but "becomes," just because he lives. The importance of this fact when applied to the living God is evident, since God's Being is "being to effect," as we see at historical moments like that of the Exodus, and these in turn must bear a content with a promise for the future.
This "dynamism" is something unknown to the Greek mind, as Boman shows in a discussion of the Eleatic, Heraclitean, and Platonic schools, though the Hebrews shared the concept of the dynamic power of the Word with the whole ancient Near East. Yet even here the Hebrews were unique. The Babylonians supposed the Word to be an etherial substance; the Egyptians regarded it as a fluid issuing from the mouth of the god, so that they had no doctrine of creation, but merely of emanation. Unfortunately Boman does not at this point enter the realm of study introduced to us by Rendel Harris in The Origin of the Prologue to the Fourth Gospel (1917) where he examines the parallel concept of sophia. But Boman gives us an excellent excursus on the Song of Songs, basing his exegesis upon the discussion of another topic, that of "Impression and Appearance," a chapter so rich that no summary could do it justice. Finally, there are valuable discussions of the concepts of Time and Space in the two civilizations, and of Symbolism and instrumentalism, as he names his topics. The last chapter contains an excursus on a theme that needs attention, what Boman calls the "missing dimension" in God's relationship to the world, namely, "transparence." This is a concept which Paul holds in the balance with transcendence and immanence in Eph. 4:6.
A book not to borrow, but to buy, mark, and inwardly digest.
George A. F. Knight
McCormick Theological Seminary
