Matthew 5:22

An Exegetical Examination of Γέεννα, ᾍδης, and the Particle Δὲ in Matthew 5:22 and Related New Testament Passages

This exegesis addresses a fundamental inquiry regarding the translation of key eschatological terms, specifically Γέεννα (Gehenna) and ᾍδης (Hades), in the New Testament, with particular focus on Matthew 5:22. The challenge lies in determining whether these terms should be transliterated as proper nouns or translated interpretively as “hell,” given their distinct etymological, historical, and conceptual backgrounds. Furthermore, the role of the particle δὲ (de) in Matthew 5:22 is examined to ascertain its precise grammatical and rhetorical function within Jesus’ teaching on the Law.

Greek Text (Nestle 1904) – Matthew 5:22

Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ὀργιζόμενος τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ εἰκῇ ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει· ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ Ῥακά, ἔνοχος ἔσται τῷ συνεδρίῳ· ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ Μωρέ, ἔνοχος ἔσται εἰς τὴν γέενναν τοῦ πυρός.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The Nestle 1904 text includes the adverb εἰκῇ (“without cause” or “unjustly”) after ὀργιζόμενος. The SBLGNT (2010), following modern critical texts, omits εἰκῇ.
• Minor orthographical variations, such as the use of an apostrophe (δʼ ἂν in Nestle 1904 vs. δ᾽ ἂν in SBLGNT 2010).

Textual Criticism and Lexical Notes

Textual Criticism (NA28): The most significant textual variant in Matthew 5:22 concerns the presence or absence of εἰκῇ. While found in many manuscripts, this adverb is absent from several important early witnesses (e.g., Papyrus 64, Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Bezae Cantabrigiensis). The omission in the NA28, as well as the SBLGNT, reflects the judgment that εἰκῇ is likely a later scribal addition, perhaps intended to soften the absolute nature of Jesus’ statement or to reconcile it with the allowance for righteous anger (cf. Eph 4:26). Its omission implies that any anger toward a brother renders one liable to judgment.

Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG):

• Γέεννα (Gehenna): This term (G1067) derives from the Hebrew Ge Hinnom (גֵּי בֶן־הִנֹּם), the Valley of Hinnom, located south of Jerusalem. In the Old Testament, it was notorious as a place of child sacrifice (2 Kgs 23:10; Jer 7:31). By the time of the New Testament, it had become a refuse dump where fires burned continuously, serving as a powerful metaphor for destruction, divine judgment, and ultimate punishment. BDAG defines Γέεννα as “valley of Hinnom,” then “hell,” denoting a “place of final punishment.” Kittel (TDNT) provides extensive historical background, tracing its evolution from a literal geographical location to a symbolic representation of eternal divine retribution in intertestamental Judaism and the New Testament. Crucially, its usage in the New Testament is consistently eschatological, referring to the place of ultimate torment for the wicked, distinct from the temporary abode of the dead.
• ᾍδης (Hades): This term (G86) originates from Greek mythology, denoting the “unseen world” or the “abode of the dead,” ruled by the god Hades. In the Septuagint, ᾍδης frequently translates the Hebrew Sheol (שְׁאוֹל), which generally refers to the grave or the realm of all the deceased, without specific distinction between righteous and unrighteous in its earliest conceptualizations. BDAG defines ᾍδης as “underworld,” “realm of the dead,” or “place of the dead.” It serves as the temporary holding place for the dead prior to the final resurrection and judgment (Rev 20:13-14). While some early Jewish and early Christian traditions developed compartments within ᾍδης (e.g., Abraham’s bosom for the righteous, Tartarus for the wicked, as implied in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Lk 16:19-31, and 2 Pet 2:4), it is distinct from Γέεννα in its temporal nature and often in the severity of its punishment, though the two concepts are sometimes conflated in later theological discourse.
• Δὲ (De): As a postpositive conjunction, δὲ (G1161) serves various functions, including connecting, contrasting, and emphasizing. Thayer’s Lexicon categorizes its uses, noting that it can strongly emphasize, softly discriminate, or simply transition. In Matthew 5:22, following Jesus’ introductory phrase “You have heard that it was said…” (Mt 5:21), the phrase “Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν” (“But I say to you” or “Indeed, I say to you”) introduces a statement that is not merely contradictory but often ascensive. It highlights Jesus’ authoritative interpretation or intensification of the Law, building upon and deepening its ethical demands (cf. Mt 5:17, where Jesus states he came not to abolish but to fulfill the Law). Thus, δὲ here indicates a significant transition to a more profound teaching, often carrying an adversative nuance against a superficial understanding of the Law, rather than a direct refutation of the Law itself.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The translation of Γέεννα and ᾍδης into English presents a complex challenge, reflecting tensions between literal accuracy, conceptual clarity, and avoidance of anachronism. The particle δὲ in Matthew 5:22 also requires careful consideration for its rhetorical impact.

• Translating Γέεννα:
  • As “Gehenna” (Transliteration): Many modern translations (e.g., ESV, NASB, NET) retain “Gehenna” as a transliteration. Grammatically, it functions as a proper noun, referring to a specific geographical location that acquired symbolic eschatological meaning. Rhetorically, retaining “Gehenna” preserves the specific Jewish-Hebraic background and the term’s unique trajectory from a literal valley to a metaphor for ultimate judgment. This approach avoids importing later theological concepts associated with the English word “hell,” which often conflates Gehenna, Hades, and Tartarus. The challenge lies in ensuring that the contemporary reader understands its symbolic weight without a direct geographical referent.
  • As “Hell”: Older translations (e.g., KJV) and some modern ones (e.g., NIV) translate Γέεννα as “hell.” This choice aims to convey the ultimate meaning of eternal punishment to a modern audience. However, it can be problematic because “hell” in English often carries broader connotations, including aspects of Hades/Sheol (the temporary abode of the dead) and pagan underworld concepts, blurring the distinct eschatological categories present in the Greek New Testament. This interpretive translation prioritizes impact over precision.
• Translating ᾍδης:
  • As “Hades” (Transliteration): Most contemporary translations (e.g., ESV, NASB, SBLGNT) retain “Hades.” Grammatically, it is a proper noun referring to the underworld. Rhetorically, maintaining “Hades” allows for a clear distinction from Γέεννα. It represents the temporary realm of the dead, contrasting with Gehenna’s depiction of final, eternal punishment. The conceptualization of Hades in the New Testament is deeply influenced by the Old Testament’s Sheol, signifying the grave or the collective state of the departed.
  • As “Hell,” “Depths,” “Grave”: Some translations (e.g., NIV, KJV for certain instances) render ᾍδης as “hell,” “depths,” or “grave.” While “grave” might capture the literal aspect of Sheol, translating ᾍδης as “hell” risks creating the same confusion as with Γέεννα, conflating the temporary intermediate state with the final place of punishment. The variability of translation for ᾍδης in some versions reflects an attempt to capture its multifaceted meaning (the place, the power of death), but can lead to inconsistency and misunderstanding of the distinct realms.
• Translating Δὲ in Matthew 5:22:
  • As “But”: Many English versions (e.g., NIV, NKJV, NAS, RSV) translate δὲ as “but” (“But I say to you”). This renders it primarily adversative, implying a contrast with the preceding traditional teaching (“You have heard that it was said…”). While there is a contrasting element, a purely adversative reading might inadvertently suggest Jesus is abolishing the Law, which contradicts his statement in Matthew 5:17.
  • As Connective/Ascensive: An alternative interpretation of δὲ here suggests a connective or ascensive function, possibly translated as “and,” “moreover,” or “indeed.” This emphasizes Jesus’ authoritative extension and intensification of the Law’s demands, moving from external action to internal disposition, rather than a mere contradiction. This reading aligns with Jesus’ intention to fulfill the Law by revealing its deeper spiritual implications. Given Thayer’s classification of δὲ with “strong emphasis” in such contexts, an ascensive reading provides a rhetorically powerful and theologically coherent translation.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The exegetical analysis highlights the critical need for precision in translating eschatological terms and conjunctions. Distinguishing between Γέεννα (the place of ultimate, eternal punishment) and ᾍδης (the temporary realm of the dead) is crucial for accurate theological understanding. Similarly, grasping the nuanced function of δὲ in Matthew 5:22 illuminates Jesus’ authoritative teaching.

Here are three suggested translations for Matthew 5:22, each with a brief explanation of its interpretive emphasis:

1. “But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; and whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘Moreh,’ will be liable to the Gehenna of fire.”
   This translation prioritizes a literal rendering of the Greek terms, maintaining the distinct proper nouns Γέεννα and the conventional “But” for δὲ. It retains the specific cultural and geographical references, emphasizing the historical context.
2. “Indeed, I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; and whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca,’ will be liable to the Sanhedrin; and whoever says, ‘Fool,’ will be liable to the fiery Gehenna (the ultimate place of divine punishment).”
   This translation employs “Indeed” for δὲ to convey Jesus’ authoritative and ascensive teaching, and translates the Aramaic/Hebrew insults (‘Raca’ and ‘Moreh’ as ‘Fool’) for clarity. It also provides a parenthetical explanation for Γέεννα, offering a contextual interpretation while retaining the transliteration to highlight its unique significance.
3. “Furthermore, I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; and whoever says to his brother, ‘Worthless!’ will be liable to the Sanhedrin; and whoever says, ‘Apostate!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.”
   This translation attempts a more dynamic equivalence, translating δὲ as “Furthermore” to show continuity and intensification, and offering more interpretive renderings of the insults. It translates Γέεννα as “hell,” aiming to convey the concept of ultimate punishment directly, though with the inherent risk of conflation that accompanies this English term. This option prioritizes contemporary comprehension over strict transliteration, while still acknowledging the distinct gravity of the final judgment.