Mountains and Hills: The Use of Hosea 10:8 in Luke 23:30

When one is reading the New Testament, it’s always extremely important to take special notice when a writer or speaker is quoting the Old Testament. Most of the time, he or she (Luke 1:50, 53) is pointing to the overall passage and its contents and context. Often, the writer or speaker is using that passage as an example to explain what is currently happening in a given situation. Such quotations, references, and allusions are a means of interpretation. It is in this way that Jesus quotes Hosea 10:8.

In the 23^rd chapter of the Gospel according to Luke, Jesus has been sentenced to death by crucifixion by Roman prefect Pontius Pilate (vv. 20-24). Roman soldiers are leading Jesus to the place where he is to be crucified (vv. 26-33). As Jesus is being led, a group of women are lamenting his punishment. Jesus responds to them,

“Daughters of Jerusalem, stop weeping for Me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts that never nursed.’ Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us,’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’ For if they do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?” (NASB, vv. 28-31).

This last sentence is important.

“For if they do these things when the tree is green, what will happen when it is dry?” (v. 31)

The proverb that Jesus is making is that green kindling is far more difficult to burn than dry wood. Burning dry, dead wood is quick and easy. He is looking at these women lamenting his situation and saying, if the Romans do this to me though they believe I am innocent, what do you think they will do to you who they will believe are guilty. There are several references in Luke’s book that the Roman authorities thought Jesus was innocent (Luke 23:4, 14-15, 22, 47). In these references, I don’t believe the primary purpose is to make the historic case that his crucifixion was a self-evident travesty of justice. Rather, I think Luke is making the case that if the Romans will heap this amount of brutality on one who they know is innocent of rebellion, what sort of evils will they inflict upon Israel if it is guilty of rebellion?

While the most important role Jesus held in his earthly ministry was that of Messiah (the Christ, the King of Israel), he was also a self-proclaimed prophet (Luke 4:24; 7:16, 39; 9:19; 13:33; 24:19) calling God’s people back in repentance (Luke 13:1-5). Jesus rightly saw that the current path Israel was on was leading them to a confrontation with Rome – a confrontation they would lose and would lead to their ultimate destruction. The people of Israel were embracing the eye-for-an-eye retributive violence of the Maccabees in hopes that God would once again intervene with such methods and defeat gentile enemies. Jesus completely rejected such methods, teaching a way of submission (Luke 9:48), forgiveness (Luke 17:3-4; 23:34), love of enemies (Luke 6:27-28, 35), and turn-the-other-cheek justice (Luke 6:29). This was a methodology that he himself fully embraced all the way to the cross (Luke 22:51). Jesus urged the people to abandon their way and embrace his, warning that destruction was coming (Luke 11:50; 12:5, 35-48, 54-59; 13:6-8, 24-30, 34-35; 14:8-11; 17:26-37; 19:12-27, 46; 20:9-18; 21:10-36). It is in this vein that Jesus could point back to the Old Testament Scriptures that predicted the judgments on God’s people by the pagan Assyrians and Babylonians and warn, “It’s about to happen again.” Here Jesus is quoting from Hosea 10:8:

“Then they will say to the mountains, ‘Cover us!’ And to the hills, ‘Fall on us!’”

The context of this verse in Hosea is an Old Testament prediction of the punishment by God for Israel’s sins – a punishment that came to fruition for both Kingdoms (in 720 BCE for Israel and in 587 BCE for Judah). Note the following verses of this passage:

Their heart is faithless; Now they must bear their guilt. (10:2)

…

Surely now they will say, “We have no king,

For we do not revere the Lord.

As for the king, what can he do for us?” (10:3; cf. John 19:15)

…

At dawn the king of Israel will be completely cut off. (10:15)

In context, Luke is saying that many in Israel have rejected their rightful King (Luke 9:51-56; 10:13-15; 22:71; 23:2, 5, 18-23, 35, 39) and that judgement is coming upon them as it did in the times of Hosea.

The crucifixion of Jesus is multi-faceted, accomplishing many tasks at once, including the defeat of evil, the forgiveness of sins, an example of true discipleship (Luke 9:23; 14:27), and an enacted parable. In this latter aspect, Jesus was - as Christ, the full embodiment of Israel - enacting the destruction of Israel by Rome, going before his people, taking on the full weight of its evil for his followers and showing, this is what will happen to those who don’t repent or turn from their incorrect ways. To those who do repent, Jesus told them to run away from the approaching doom (Luke 21:20-24). He said that when they see Jerusalem surrounded by enemies to flee to the mountains (Luke 21:21). John picks up this same idea in his prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in the Apocalypse. The people hide themselves in the caves and mountains (Revelation 6:15). In 6:16, John even references the same Hosea 10:8 to this effect, showing commonality with Jesus’ understanding of the coming destruction in 70 CE.

                Therefore, I submit that Jesus, Luke, and John used Hosea 10:8 as an explanation and warning to their contemporaries about the coming destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans during the Roman-Jewish War. In particular, Jesus uses it in the context of saying, “You’ve rejected your rightful King and his way of being the people of God. Your current way is leading to conflict with Rome and ultimate destruction. If the Romans do this to me (one they believe is innocent), the brutality they will do to those recognized as guilty of rebellion will be even more severe. Repent.”

Women Pastors According to Paul: Translating Presbyteros, Presbyterai, Presbyteroi in 1 Timothy 5:1, 2, 17, and 19

In the bible, the terms “elder”, “pastor”, and “bishop” are used interchangeably, referring to the same function of use in the church (Acts 20:17, 28-30; Titus 1:5-9; 1 Pet 5:1-3). The qualifications and work are identical. The purpose of an elder/pastor/bishop is to teach and mentor younger believers in the faith (1 Tim 3:2; 4:13; 5:17; 2 Tim 3:13-17; 4:2; Titus 1:7, 9; 1 Pet 5:1-2) so that the latter can become fully functioning members of the Kingdom of God. In this way, every mature believer teaching sound doctrine can be an elder/pastor/bishop to a younger (less mature) believer. In this way, every Sunday School teacher (teaching children and all the way to adults) is a an elder/pastor/bishop. All that separates a professional pastor from a mature lay leader is that they are good enough to be supported for doing so (Acts 20:17, 28-30; Titus 1:5-9; 1 Pet 5:1-3).

So, we come to the pastoral letter of 1 Timothy where in chapter five Paul is discussing the treatment of elders within the Church, including qualifications, their relation to less mature believers, and matters of discipline. In verse 1, he says that elders should not be rebuked in a harsh manner (epiplēssō) but explains the actual process of rebuking (elegchō) an elder in verses 19 and 20. Presbyteros is the word generally translated as “elder”. Originally, the elders were leaders of Israel during the New Testament period (Matthew 16:21; 26:47). When Christianity emerged, the Church had its own elders (Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:2, 4, 6, 22; 16:4; 21:18) in the same way that the local church was modeled after the synagogue. You can see this same traditional idea in Presbyterian denominations that get their name from this word, indicating their churches are led by elders.

Paul tells Timothy to treat a presbyteros (masculine singular) well (v. 1). He then tells Timothy to treat a presbyterai (feminine singular) well (v. 2). In verse 17, Paul tells Timothy to honor the presbyteroi (masculine plural) who lead well. It’s common in the New Testament for writers to use the masculine Greek words that describe people but which do not necessarily exclude women. For example, ὄχλος (“crowds”) is masculine but would have include women (Luke 11:32). When John wrote his first letter to the church, his use of the masculine plural agapētoi (“beloved”) would have included the women in the church. The same is true of adelphoi (“brethren”) which is masculine but in New Testament refers to both men and women (see Paul’s use in 1 Corinthians for examples). Context and commonsense will indicate whether such plurals exclude women or include them. In 1 Timothy 5, the inclusion of the feminine presbyterai gives us strong indication that Paul is being inclusive when he uses presbyteroi. Nevertheless, Paul is continuing his discussion of the treatment of elders in this passage. He concludes in verse 19 by giving the proper method of rebuking and elder (presbyteros).

As an egalitarian, I believe that women can be pastors/elders/bishops because that is what the Bible explicitly states in the Greek. However, most Christians only read the bible in translation. Therefore, I was curious how a variety of English translations interpreted this passage. Here are the results.

In the following translations, presbyteros is translated in 1 Timothy 5:1 as “old(er) man”: NOA (fn), NASB, NKJV, CEB, NLT (fn), NCV, NWT, NWT, TEV, TAB, CEV, LNT, NIV, ESV, CSB, RSV, LEB, and GNT.

In the following translations, presbyterai is translated in 1 Timothy 5:2 as “old(er) woman”: NOA, NEB, NASB, NKJV, CEB, NLT, NCV, NWT, TEV, TAB, CEV, LNT, KNT, NIV, ESV, CSB, RSV, LEB, and GNT.

The KNT translates presbyteros as “senior man”.

However, we do have a small number of translations that differ, translating the terms as “elder” (NEB; KJV; ASV) and “elder women” (KJV; ASV).

For presbyteroi in 1 Timothy 5:17, the following English versions translate it as “elders”: NOA, NEB, NASB, KJV, NKJV, CEB, NLT, NCV, TEV, TAB, KNT, NIV, ESV, CSB, RSV, LEB, and GNT.

However, the NWT translates it as “older men”, the LNT as “pastors”, and the CEV as “church leaders” (fn).

Significantly, in verse 19, presbyteros is translated as “elder” in the NOA, NEB, ASV, NASB, KJV, NKJV, CEB, NLT, NCV, TEV, TAB, KNT, NIV, ESV, CSB, RSV, LEB, and the GNT.

Importantly, in older English translations, Wycliffe (1395) used “eldere man” and “elde wymmen” in verses 1 and 2, but “prestis” and “preest” in 17 and 19. Tyndale (1525) and Coverdale (1535) were consistent with “elder”, “elder wemen”, “elders”. Also consistent with “elder”, “elder women”, and “elders” were The Bishop’s Bible (1568), The Geneva Bible (1587), and Wesley (1755). Mace (1729) is all over the place with “senior” (v. 1), “elder women” (v. 2), “presbyters” (v. 17), and “pastor” (v. 19).

So, we can gather eight things from this. First, the older KJV and ASV get it right.[1] Second, interestingly, the NASB (1963) changed from the ASV (1900) and the NKJV (1979) changed from KJV (1611). Third, both the NOA and the NLT note the possibility of v. 1 being translated as “elder” rather than “old man” in footnotes but do not give footnotes to suggest the feminine “elderess”. Fourth, the NWT is consistent in its translation, though I think it’s in error. Fifth, the NEB is blatant here, translating presbyteros “elder” in verse 1 and then translating presbyterai as “old woman” in verse 2. Sixth, the CEV is odd in translating presbyteroi as “church leaders” but providing a footnote that it refers to “elders” or “presbyters”. Seventh, every modern translation that rendered presbyteros as “old(er) man” in verse 1, translated it as “elder” in verse 19. Finally, the older English translations were far more consistent in their translations.

I had two purposes in this exercise. First, I wanted to show the confusion, inconsistency, and general muddlement that our English translations create in trying to interpret “elders”. In most of their methodologies, they obscure Paul’s and the early Christians’ understanding of what it meant to be an elder and elderess in the Church. Second, I wanted to show that, in order to prevent people from arriving at the conclusion that the bible permits women to be pastors, English versions have to translate presbyteros as “elder” in verse 19 but as “old man” in verse 1.

In the 16^th, 17^th, and 18^th centuries, patriarchy was the default thinking of both men and women. That men and only men should be in positions of leadership both in secular institutions and the Church went virtually unquestioned. Older English translators could be consistent in 1 Timothy 5 because no one would even think to recognize equality within the passage. And even when a few older translations aren’t consistent (Wycliffe and Mace), the inconsistency is aimed at keeping a distinction between laity and clergy. However, in the 20^th and 21^st centuries, we have feminists and egalitarians questioning the legitimacy of patriarchy. We have Christian egalitarians questioning older, assumed readings of the bible and of particular passages. Is it then much of a surprise that as the feminist movement was rising in the 1960s and 1970s, the NASB (1963) and the NKJV (1979) chose to break with their previous versions and add inconsistency to their newer translations?

This is not unlike the so-called Slave Bibles (Parts of the Holy Bible, selected for the use of the Negro Slaves, in the British West-India Islands) which were given to slaves during the rise of the abolitionist movement that had all references to freedom and escape from slavery excised, while passages encouraging obedience and submission were highlighted. It skips over the Israelites in slavery in Egypt being let out. All of the Psalms, which express hopes for God’s delivery from oppression removed. It removes Paul’s teaching from Galatians 3:28 that “There is neither slave nor free … for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”[2] The promoters of slavery feared that blacks would read certain parts of the Bible in light of the work of Christian abolitionists and believe God wanted them to be free. People don’t typically excise portions of the bible these days. Instead, it’s more common for people to make interpretive decisions on how a word should be translated.

                Now, I in no way believe that these translators are being intentionally dishonest and willfully manipulating the language to obscure the egalitarianism of this passage. Most of them truly believe that the bible forbids women elders and pastors and are simply doing what they think will be less confusing to readers. Other translators might understand the possibility of what Paul is saying but prefer to err on the side of cautionary tradition. Still others might be egalitarians who are overruled by complementarians on translating committees. A significant minority might be able to secure a footnote under the first presbyteros.

               

I conclude with Paul’s own conclusion in his discussion about the treatment of elders in verse 21:

“I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of His chosen angels, to maintain these principles without bias, doing nothing in a spirit of partiality.”

I solemnly suggest that by excluding women from the recognized position of elder/pastor, much of the Church and its biblical translators have both unintentionally and intentionally shown partiality and are in violation of scriptural teaching.

---

[1] I will add that El Nuevo Testamento is consistent with its translations of anciano, ancianas, and ancianos.

[2] I note in passing that the Slave Bibles excise 1 Timothy 5, as well.