mountainman

And to what extent were they the Greeks?

Toto

No results were found for heathen in the version(s):New International Version

The NT does not use that word.

andrewcriddle

The KJV or AV uses heathen to translate EThNIKOS and EThNOS where modern versions would mostly translate as Gentile(s).
Matthew 6:7, 18:17 Acts 4:25 2 Corinthians 11:26 and several places in Galatians.

The meaning seems to be those who do not worship the true God.

Andrew Criddle

Sheshbazzar

Acts 4:25 is a quotation from Psalms 2:1, and the Hebrew word translated as "heathen" is "goyim" or simply "nations" in many versions.
It is really not proper to conclude a blanket meaning of "those who do not worship the true God", Because many among these goy'eem are of the "GER'eem"
that is to say the gentile, "strangers", the "GER' toshav'eem" ("strangers of the gate) and the "GER'tzad'dook'eem" ("strangers [being] righteous ones") which did/do worship the God of Israel, called the ONE true God.

mountainman

OK, so who were the "gentiles" of the NT?
And to what extent were they Greek?

Are they to be considered as "unbelievers"?
Or are they a geographically defined nation?
Are they simply the christian "other"?



For example, citation (1):

Titus (via Paul) was apparently born at Gortys on Crete
and is decribed as a "gentile" (or "heathen").


For example, citation (2) -- I think from Ben's TF page:

compared to ....

I understand that Eusebius who writes in Greek, and Rufinus who writes in Latin, are both being translated to English, and this could obscure the treatment.




And as a separate but related issue, how are the "gentiles" and the "pagans" related? As far as I know the term "pagani" is a fourth century term for a "non-christian". Are we to perceive the term "gentile" as the same sort of thing as the term "pagan"?

Sheshbazzar

Depends on the context, "gentiles" is simply any nationalities other than Jewish/Israeli.
"Greek' is sometimes used indifferently to describe -Greek speaking peoples-, who were not always of any actual Greek nationality.
the "Hellenes" those who admired and adopted -the Greek language and customs-, "Hellenism".
Context again, usually makes it clear whether the "gentiles" being referenced are "believers" or not. (see Acts 10:45, 11:1, 18, 13:42-48)

Nope.
Hardly, as most "Christians" were from amongst the Hellenes, if not actually Greek.
In fact if this were not true, "CHRIST-ianity" would not have became known by that (Greek) name.
The Jewish/Israeli NT believers continued calling the Nazarene by the Scriptural Hebrew term "ha'mashiach" -"The Messiah", as they do to this day.


The common derogative English understanding of the word "heathen" is inappropriate here, Titus was simply a "gentile", a non-Jew.

Behind either translation would have been Josephus' original, and consistent with his nationality and language, the Hebrew idiom, the "goyim"-"nations", would have rendered as the "ethnos"-"gentiles" in his Greek mss. This would hold true irrespective of whether the persons being referenced were believers or not.

You have almost answered that one for yourself. "Pagan" is an anachronism when discussing the actual texts of any earlier documents.
Whereas a "gentile" is any non-Jew, (even a foreign believer), a "pagan", as the term is applied by Christianity, indicates a non-christian, NON-believer.

Toto

etymology of heathen pagan

IamJoseph

What's more strange than christians using the term Heathens? Muslims calling Jews infidels! :constern02:

Citsonga

Which is exemplified with passages like Ephesians 2:11 & 3:6.

mountainman

Dear Shesh,

Yes. Context is definitive in most cases. In order to look at the overall context of the use of the term "gentiles" in the bible, here is a listing (sorry about the lack of format). I do make any assumption that the authors of the NT were Jewish, anymore than I would make the assumption that LONGFELLOW was a native american indian because he wrote about the life of Hiawatha:


The use of the term gentile in the NT seems to be reserved for what the authors would refer to as other than jews and/or christians in the Roman Empire. If we make the assumption that christianity in the first 3 centuries was a small underground inconspicuous green-like sect, secretive, hidden, etc, then it seems to me that the author(s) of the NT canon refers to all people outside of this sect as "gentiles".

Nationalistically, It represents fundamentally, the establishment of a "christian other", as perceived by the author(s) who, writing in the greek language for prospective greek converts, was not using the term in any "Jewish sense", and in fact classes the Hebrews in many instances as separate and distinct from both the "gentiles" and the "christians" IMO the term resolves ultimately to the entire non-Jewish Graeco-Roman civilisation. The monotheism was defined just as much by its exclusion of "gentiles" (and Jews/Hebrews) as it was defined by its self-asserted "revealed christian literature".

This "christian other" appears to be part of the self-definition, "legendary history" and folk-lore that the new testament authors embedded in their narratives in to serve as a means to differentiate "the christians" and "the jews" and "the gentiles". Perhaps, and I say this rather loosely, it was originally intended as a "religious otherness", but history shows that when the christian religion was embraced at the monotheistic Roman State religion, it was used as a "political otherness". It was at this time that the "nation of the gentiles" became "the nation of the pagans", and struggled unsuccessfully against the emergent "nation of christians".


Best wishes,


Pete