Logos Bible Study

Luke 14:34–35

The NET BibleOther versions

English

Arabic

Czech

French

German

Greek

Hungarian

Italian

Korean

Latin

Portuguese

Russian

Simplified Chinese

Spanish

Traditional Chinese

14:34“Salt106 is good, but if salt loses its flavor,107 how can its flavor be restored? 14:35It is of no value108 for the soil or for the manure pile; it is to be thrown out.109 The one who has ears to hear had better listen!”110

Read in Logos

Footnotes

  1. 106 Grk “Now salt …”; here οὖν has not been translated. Salt was used as seasoning or fertilizer ( ἅλας a), or as a preservative. If salt ceased to be useful, it was thrown away. With this illustration Jesus warned about a disciple who ceased to follow him.
  2. 107 The difficulty of this saying is understanding how salt could lose its flavor since its chemical properties cannot change. It is thus often assumed that Jesus was referring to chemically impure salt, perhaps a natural salt which, when exposed to the elements, had all the genuine salt leached out, leaving only the sediment or impurities behind. Others have suggested the background of the saying is the use of salt blocks by Arab bakers to line the floor of their ovens: Under the intense heat these blocks would eventually crystallize and undergo a change in chemical composition, finally being thrown out as unserviceable. A saying in the Talmud ( Bekhorot 8b) attributed to R. Joshua ben Chananja ( a.d. 90), when asked the question “When salt loses its flavor, how can it be made salty again?” is said to have replied, “By salting it with the afterbirth of a mule.” He was then asked, “Then does the mule (being sterile) bear young?” to which he replied: “Can salt lose its flavor?” The point appears to be, both are impossible. The saying, while admittedly late, suggests that culturally the loss of flavor by salt was regarded as an impossibility. Genuine salt can never lose its flavor. In this case the saying by Jesus here may be similar to Matt 19:24, where it is likewise impossible for the camel to go through the eye of a sewing needle.
  3. 108 Or “It is not useful” (L&N 65.32).
  4. 109 Grk “they throw it out.” The third person plural with unspecified subject is a circumlocution for the passive here.
  5. 110 The translation “had better listen!” captures the force of the third person imperative more effectively than the traditional “let him hear,” which sounds more like a permissive than an imperative to the modern English reader. This was Jesus’ common expression to listen and heed carefully (cf. Matt 11:15; 13:9, 43; Mark 4:9, 23; Luke 8:8).

In other versions

ESVEnglish Standard Version

“Salt is good, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is of no use either for the soil or for the manure pile. It is thrown away. He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”

NIVNew International Version (2011)

“Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; it is thrown out.

“Whoever has ears to hear, let them hear.”

CSBChristian Standard Bible

“Now, salt is good, but if salt should lose its taste, how will it be made salty? It isn’t fit for the soil or for the manure pile; they throw it out. Let anyone who has ears to hear listen.”

NLTNew Living Translation

“Salt is good for seasoning. But if it loses its flavor, how do you make it salty again? Flavorless salt is good neither for the soil nor for the manure pile. It is thrown away. Anyone with ears to hear should listen and understand!”

LEBThe Lexham English Bible

“Now salt is good, but if salt becomes tasteless, with what will it be made salty? It is usable neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; they throw it out. The one who has ears to hear, let him hear!”

KJV 1900King James Version

Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned? It is neither fit for the land, nor yet for the dunghill; but men cast it out. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.