Old timers switch off, I know this is old ground for you - except for you Enkidu, I need you in here.

New timers - this started in the “HELP NEEDED-URGENT” thread so you could have a look there for the background

[Egg timers- turn over now :-) ]

Ekidnu, you said

So when we come to worship, I think it is something more specific than simply “everything we do for God.” It is something we do within our relationship with God.

I might be convinced that the NT ‘worship’ could feasibly be a subset of ‘service’, but I need to think about it a bit more.

Can you say a bit more please?

I would start by a bit of a word study on terminology, so this may or may not start to answer your query, Gordon.

1. What is ‘worship’ (προσκυνεω):
Underlying this term is the notion of prostrating before a ruler or deity. It is thus an expression of submission motivated out of respect/fear and/or gratitude.

Robert Denham asked on another thread about David Peterson’s work, which prompted me to pull out my copy of Engaging With God. Peterson does engage in a generally useful study of the terminology (certainly more in depth than I am able to do here!). When it comes to the meaning of προσκυνεω, I think the title to the section which examines the term is perhaps a useful definition in itself: “Worship as homage or gratefull submission” (although I would add the notion of fear/reverence as well.” I think this is correct:
[quote author="David Peterson, Engaging With God, 63"]In the Old Testament, bowing down or bending over could simply be a respectful greeting, but more often than not it was an expression of inferior status and subservience to another person. Sometimes this obeisance was an indication of gratitude and sometimes it was associated with supplication or entreaty. Whatever the situation it was a recognition of the total dependence of one party on another for the provision of some need.

ISTM that this defines what we do when we ‘worship’. Being so restrictive, however, is not to say that this description defines all aspects of our relationship with God. Other aspects of our relationship, however, are better described with different terminology.

2. What is ‘service’ (λατρεια):
In the LXX the term is not common, but is usually tied to some form of cultic (in the technical sense) action, so the rehearsal of the passover is λατρεια, for example. As Peterson says:
[quote author="David Peterson, Engaging With God, 64"]… the Septuagint gave it special prominence, using it to refer exclusively to the service rendered to God or to heathen gods, and especially service by means of sacrifice or some other ritual.

As such, Paul’s use of this term in Rom 12:1 in association with being a ‘living sacrifice’ is eminently appropriate. This is our equivalent of the OT service which took place in the precincts of the temple. The word is also used in Rom 9:4 which the NASB nicely translates as ‘temple service’ (contrast the ESV and its predecessor the RSV which simply use ‘worship’ in this instance).

There are only 3 other uses of λατρεια in the NT. Heb 9:1, 6 refer to service in the temple, and John 16:2 uses the term in reference to a perceived ‘service’ to God, again probably in a technical sense.

In summary, all uses of λατρεια are technical and refer to service of a deity (often in the specific context of the temple or high place or whatever), and in the NT when not applied to OT cultic activity, it remains tied to the sacrificial language. So perhaps the translation ‘service’ itself is too vague for this term, and it should be translated along the lines of the NASB in Rom 9:4 with ‘temple service.’

As I said previously, the danger in collapsing distinct terminology, terminology which is not strictly synonymous, into a single English term obscures the meaning of the different texts. If ’service‘ and ’worship‘ are different in meaning but we translate them using the same term, we lose sight of the distinction and can feel free to import the meaning from one context into another.

This is, in fact, basically one of the arguments the ESV employs in favour of its approach (although it does not employ the methodology when it comes to this terminology!).

It is also at this point where I depart from Peterson, who writes:
[quote author="David Peterson, Engaging With God, 70"]’Bowing down’ to God in the Old Testament, however, is ideally an expression of one’s desire to ‘serve’ him. It is therefore necessary to recognize that, from a scriptural point of view, worship involves specific acts of adoration and submission as well as a lifestyle of obedient service. To make this point, it may be helpful to translate words indicating service to God as ‘worship’. There is always a danger, however, that readers of the English text will then understand such worship purely in cultic terms! The problem for translation and for theology is that the English word ‘worship’ is generally used too narrowly.

Let me make a couple of brief comments in response:
[list][*]While I would not suggest a complete disjunction between notions of ‘worship’ and ‘service’ in biblical terminology, I would not want to associate them quite so closely as Peterson. His identification of texts where השתחוה and עבד appear together seems to imply they function almost as a hendiadys, but he fails to note that they frequently appear as part of a list of different actions associated with relating to God, such as making oaths or doing what they do (e.g. Ex 23:24; Josh 23:7). This observation means that the case for such close identification of these two aspects of relating to God from various possibilities is weakened (IMHO).

[*]It is surprising that he is able to conclude that English uses a word too narrowly when the Hebrew and Greek used terms equally narrow and did not themselves have a single term which encompassed all the meanings Peterson would like ‘worship’ to encompass. According to his own observation, English ‘worship’ is a good semantic match for προσκυνεω and השתחוה, but does not inherently encompass λατρεια. Surely the logical conclusion is that English translators should seek other English words for other terms which are currently (mis)translated as ‘worship’.[/list:u]
So, Peterson at least acknowledges that the common English understanding of ‘worship’ works best only as a translation of the terms השתחוה/προσκυνεω, which is essentially my point. On further reflection, I don’t think this can be reduced to a subset of ‘service’, at least when that service is reflective of the semantic range of λατρεια.

I think these are all aspects of how we relate to God. My beef is with the practice of conflating distinct meanings into one overarching term so that the distinctions are lost. I do not think this enhances our understanding of the text, but instead obscures or confuses it.

I’m not a greek scholar (although I’m *GULP* starting to learn as of tomorrow morning) but I was led to believe there were four different greek words (each with a distinct definition) which we translate as worship?

[quote author="Dani Treweek"]I’m not a greek scholar (although I’m *GULP* starting to learn as of tomorrow morning) but I was led to believe there were four different greek words (each with a distinct definition) which we translate as worship?

It probably depends on what translation you’re using (certainly wouldn’t happen in mine!). There are four terms which are sometimes translated ‘worship’, they are (in order of frequency):[list][*]προσκυνεω ‘worship’;

[*]λατρεια ‘(religious) service’;

[*]σεβομαι ‘feel awe, fear, shame (before God); to worship, to be religious, devout’, not used in LXX. I would argue that it is usually quite distinct from προσκυνεω, as can be seen from its use in Acts 13:43, 50 and elsewhere where it refers to a ‘god-fearer’, a gentile convert to Judaism; and

[*]θρησκεια ‘religious worship, cult, ritual; religious formalism’. Only occurs in Acts 26:5; Col. 2:18; James 1:26-27, mostly as ‘religious’.[/list:u]
The last two appear to be translated as ‘worship’ less frequently than the others, so I left them out. Other translations may also use ‘worship’ for other terms, but I’m not able to check them out at present.

BTW, what are you using to learn Greek?

BTW, what are you using to learn Greek?

I’m doing some preparation study from Wenham until the end of the year (the teacher prefers Wenham) and then will switch to the other ones (whose name I can’t remember) when I go to college.

Thanks Dani. I was taught from Wenham, and the fact that it’s still in use must say something (I must sound like I’m about 80 when I say this stuff!). I’m always interested to find out what’s being used, I’m probably about due to buy a new Greek grammar…

Worship

This might be helpful for understanding what Paul had in mind with his reference to offering ourselves as “living sacrifices” in order to worship or serve God. (Romans 12:1-2)

One way of looking at Romans is that it teaches the new covenant version of the old covenant sacrificial system. There are parallels with the book of Leviticus in which the first 9 chapters present 5 main sacrifices to us. They are given in a few orders, but the order given in chapter 9 was the system of sacrifices in practice. This is:

1) the sin offering;
2) the guilt offering;
3) the burnt offering;
4) the grain offering;
5) the peace or fellowship offering.

Without going into details, the first 2 are related to forgiveness for sin and reconciliation with God. In response to this, the other 3 offerings are then made by the forgiven sinner.

The 3rd, burnt offering, was completely burnt, symbolising the person’s wholehearted devotion to the God who had forgiven them.

The 4th offering was made to represent the forgiven sinner offering up something of their daily lives to God. It’s ingredients were the things that were also the ingredients of a daily meal; or the things that the Jewish person’s daily labour had produced. It symbolised offering up the best of their labours to God and thanking Him for providing their daily needs.

Then the 5th offering is a shared meal, with the priests joining in. (It’s a picture, I believe, of holy communion, the Lord’s Supper.) It’s about fellowship and the shared life of the redeemed community, in right relationship with their Redeemer.

Through Romans 1 to 5, Paul presents Christ as saviour, as the one true sacrifice for sin, as the fulfillment of the first 2 Levitical sacrifices. (He doesn’t say it explicitly, but when you read those chapters with Leviticus in mind, the parallels are striking.)

Romans 6 begins to elaborate on what Christ’s sacrifice means. A key verse is Romans 6:13, which says:

“Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life: offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness.”

I see this as parallel to the 3rd Levitical offering.

Then, as he begins the end of his great epistle, Paul says that, in view of these mercies we are to offer up the New Covenant equivalent of the last 2 sacrifices. These last few chapters of Romans are about how we use our gifts, about sincere love, about living in the wider community, etc. They teach us to give the fruit of our labours and to join with others in fellowship. Not just bits and pieces in an occasional sacrifice, but everything all the time - we are living sacrifices. 

There’s overlap here with what we do when we meet together, which is a clear time of our gifts being used - especially those who are teachers of the word of God, or have musical gifts, etc. I think that worship includes singing praises, singing encouragement to each other, praying together, reading the word together, listening to the word together, sharing in the sacraments together. But it is not confined to that - far from it.

Paul has taken something that in the Old Testament was confined to the regular times when the covenant community met and transformed it into a whole of life concept.

Worship is, in fact, everything that we are and do that acknowledges God as God; as supreme; as holy; as almighty; as saviour; etc. It’s to do with His “worth-ship”. For He is worthy “to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and praise” (Rev 5:12).

[quote author="as an aside"]It ties in with my interest in the topic of Faith in the Workplace, because as I understand it the words “work” and “worship” in Hebrew come from the same root word, avodah. Thus, there is a link between our work and our worship. They aren’t identical, but I firmly believe that we worship God when we do our jobs well, treating Him as our boss (Colossians 3:23 - 4:1). It’s not too much to extend this to when we do anything in the spirit of Colossians 3:17, we are worshipping our great God. The link between the grain offering and the idea of being a “living sacrifice” is consistent with this, too.

I hope these observations might be helpful to people exploring this important topic.

Warren,

I love Leviticus, and have made my previous parish suffer under my sermons through it, yet I’ve never seen the connection between it and Romans as you described it.

My first thought is wow, I haven’t seen that before.
My second thought is, it may be there, but it’s a bit squeezy in getting the shape exactly.
My third thought was it reminds me of how some people see Jesus in Matthew’s Gospel corresponding with the life of Moses. (some connections, but it doesn’t quite fit).
My fourth thought is that it reminds me of how some people see the book of Psalms as being the life of Jesus (again some connections but it draws a long bow to make it fit).

It certainly doesn’t mean that there are no connections there, but I can’t see how it fits without a massive shoe-horn and a bit of toe-chopping.

Rob

Thanks Enkidu,

I appreciate what you did. I now have to consider where this leaves me with speaking about worship/service etc.

Rob

Warren, your suggestion regarding the link between Leviticus and Romans is interesting, but I’m afraid I’m not (yet?) convinced. Aside from not being particularly sure that your analysis of Romans is not somewhat tailored to find the links you’ve suggested, I have some problems with your comments on the OT.
[quote author="Warren Bird"]The 3rd, burnt offering, was completely burnt, symbolising the person’s wholehearted devotion to the God who had forgiven them.

I’m not sure where you get this definition or interpretation for the significance of a burnt offering from. Passages like Ex 29:18, 25 seem to imply some form of propitiatory significance associated with burnt offerings (since they are said to soothe). This is confirmed by Lev 1:4, which involves a ritual depicting the transfer of guilt from the offerer to the offering prior to its burning, with the specifically stated intention that it be accepted “to make atonement on his behalf.”

So the explicitly stated function of the burnt offering is no different to that you ascribe to the sin and guilt offerings.
[quote author="Warren Bird"]Then the 5th offering is a shared meal, with the priests joining in. (It’s a picture, I believe, of holy communion, the Lord’s Supper.) It’s about fellowship and the shared life of the redeemed community, in right relationship with their Redeemer.

Any explicit link to the Lord’s Supper seems extremely unlikely, given that the LS is unambiguously identified with the Passover meal in both its inception and subsequent explication in the NT. While it may be possible to assert some broad thematic parallel, I suspect similar parallels could be drawn regarding all manner of OT practices.

I agree, however, that the peace offering, which was typically last (AFAIK), probably did represent the fact that the relationship between God and his people had been put right through the performance of the previous sacrifices.

[quote author="Warren Bird"][quote author="as an aside"]It ties in with my interest in the topic of Faith in the Workplace, because as I understand it the words “work” and “worship” in Hebrew come from the same root word, avodah. Thus, there is a link between our work and our worship.

No. See my earlier comments on this thread. In Hebrew, worship is hishtachawah. The word abodah is a feminine noun which means ‘service’. Words related to the root עבד are ‘service’ terms, not ‘worship’ terms (a distinction I have vociferously defended). As I’ve said above, to fail to distinguish the two is to obscure the meaning of the text.

It is also worth noting that there are a number of terms in Hebrew which are commonly rendered ‘work’.

I am not downplaying the importance of working out the implications of faith in the workplace, and I don’t know what conclusions you may draw from this association, but I think that there is a danger of reading conclusions into the way the Bible addresses these issues based on misunderstanding the terminology.

The final difficulty I have with this theory is that if Paul really did want to draw this parallel, why did he not describe our bodies as a “peace offerings” or the like, rather than merely using the generic “sacrifice” in Rom 12:1?

Hi Enkidu

I want to keep thinking about the point you are making - keeping the distinction between worship and service. (I hope that’s right? I used ‘keeping the distinction’ rather than ‘separating’ or ‘dividing.’)

Even though sebomai is not used very much, do you see any significance in the relateness of sebomai and eusebia (godliness)? Does this strengthen your position, or does it bring worship & service closer together? Or does it do neither!?

Little c

Hi Enkidu

As I started this thread by asking the question, I thought I should at least give some indication I was reading it. Thanks for what you’ve said so far, which has been an extremely useful move towards conceptual clarification.

I think I am reasonably happy with your insisting that worship and service are not the same either in English, or in their Gk equivalents, or in their Hebrew equivalents. Little Chris’s question is interesting, would like to hear your opinion too.

(About the only perfect synonyms I’ve come across recently are “perichoresis” and “circumincession”, and I’m saving those up to toss in at the appropriate moment in the Trinity thread, hoping to confuse at least a couple of people while I gather my thoughts)

So far I’ve seen no indication in what you’ve said that there would be a temporal or spatial limitation on ‘worship’, and at some point that becomes important in a discussion of how we throw ‘round terms today, including the rather unfortunate term ‘corporate worship’, which is certainly found nowhere in the Bible and appears to be an attempt to salvage something we think important that I don’t at all believe the NT writers were particularly concerned about.

Enough for the moment…

including the rather unfortunate term ‘corporate worship’

[uninformed rant mode]

I am SO over this insistence in Sydney that whatever it is we do in church we don’t worship!

So much so that I always use the word now to describe it. And I use “service” too.

The side effect of this has meant that we have “meetings” with no Godward dimension at all… we might as well be at a lecture or a club meeting.

Just saying “it isn’t mentioned in the NT” isn’t theo-logic… scant reference is made to nature of hell or to evangelism or the Trinity (in the explicit form we understand him/them anyway) either.

SO over ‘worship’ as a dispute over words

I am with Michael Jensen!

We have been making the same point about the “real” meaning of worship for as long as I have been an Anglican (since 1972). Not that conceptual clarity isn’t important.

However, I am interested in knowing whether anything has improved in (a) our Christian lives or (b) those-gatherings-formerly- known -as-worship as a result?

I can’t speak for (a) but I don’t find that we are doing much that really impresses in (b).

Ditto Michael and Rob (if I may be permitted to lend my weight to the views of a theological lecturer and a bishop!).

I too have in the past adopted the “church-is-not-worship” attitude, but am increasingly coming to see it as pedantic and am getting a bit tired of it. 

I had to smile to myself last Sunday.  The first time “meeting leader”, who is American and no doubt unacquainted with our Sydney-avoidance-of-all-things-worshipful-on-Sunday-mornings, opened the service (I’m going to insist on calling it a “service” too!) with the words “Welcome to the house of the Lord”!  At that point I thought I could hear someone at the back of the hall jingling a small heresy bell!  But I loved it - it was a good jolt out of our usual “this is nothing more than a meeting” attitude.

And by the way, he went on to explain why he was saying we were in the house of the Lord and I thought his explanation was great.  He emphasised that it had nothing to do with having a steeple, or stained glass windows or even plush carpet (all of which are absent in the school hall in which we meet) but because we were the people of God gathered together.

Theological lecturers, priests ... and now a bishop!  We are truly blessed here on AMS.

God bless,
Ian.