|
12/20/19
Hello, everyone! I'm going to take a little blogcation here. I want to let you know the reason. For a little over two weeks in January, I will be visiting some Christian friends in Uganda. During that time I will not only be busy visiting with a lot of people and helping some folks build a goat enclosure (because, obviously, I am an especially fit person and have shown expertise at digging holes and fastening fences together), but I will also be preaching several times and teaching, in compressed form, a seminary level course on the foundations of Lutheran theology, as well as working in as much of a second course on Bible study practices as I can. When I return from Uganda, I will plunge back into campus ministry as well as teaching at the American Lutheran Theological Seminary, starting about a week after the beginning of the term in each institution. One of my seminary courses is a course I have not taught before. Rather than writing blog posts, which do actually take a good deal of preparation on my part, I need to focus on preparation for the trip to Uganda and the various things I will plunge into upon my return. Please pray for our trip to Uganda. My hope is that it will be a good time of growth for all involved, and that we will be able to care for needs of the saints in ways that nobody else has been able to do so as yet. Is blogcation even a word? Yes, I used it several times. It apparently is a word now, even if it was not before. 12/19/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. Our Gospel reading from John 1:19-28 introduces us to John, the forerunner of the Messiah. We meet John proclaiming the kingdom of God and baptizing repentant people. When asked why he was doing this, he denied being the Christ or the prophet to come, but says he can show the people to the Christ. It’s so very easy for us to mix up our priorities. I regularly find myself talking with pastors and other church leaders who are frustrated because they haven’t been able to convert people to Christ. They have found that they are unable to put marriages and families back together again. They have failed in their prayers, in their counsel, in their administration. My question in these situations, though I usually ask it more gently than this, is, “Who do you think you are, anyway?” If we think we are the savior, we will be disappointed, and so will the people we try to care for. Worse still, the people we try to care for may try to trust us as the savior, be deceived into looking for salvation to come from us, and fall from the grace of God into eternal condemnation. Who do we think we are, anyway? Who are you, John? I’m a guy pointing people to Jesus, the Messiah. You should see what he is doing. He’s able to bring you forgiveness. He’s able to deliver life to you. He’s worthy to take away the sins of the whole world. Really, don’t trust me. Trust him. He’s the one you want to meet. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. 12/18/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. Our Epistle for this week, from Philippians 4:4-7, came up also in a special Thanksgiving service which I recently led. It applies just as well to the preparations we make for the Christmas season. Here Paul tells the Philippians not to be anxious about anything. That seems really difficult, especially when we think not only of festive occasions, but also of the many trials that can come upon us at any time. In my country, we are approaching the shortest day of the year. We move into the coldest time of year, the time when a lot of industry that depends on work outside closes down due to weather, the time when seasonal employment in the retail sector is getting ready to be cut off, the time when some types of manufacturing shut down for a while to retool for the next year’s model of whatever they are making. There’s some uncertainty there. We are also moving into the season when influenza and other related illnesses predictably claim the lives of 12,000 to 60,000 Americans each year. That’s a whole lot of uncertainty, produced from what most of us would consider a fairly routine type of infection. Don’t be anxious? This is EXACTLY the right time to be anxious! What’s the rest of verse 6? We commit everything to God through Jesus in prayer. We give him thanks. We are telling a heavenly Father who cares about the troubles we may face, about the fears we have, about our uncertainty, about the troubles of those around us, big and small. And we can do it with thanksgiving. After all, the Lord is able and willing to care for the needs of His people. There’s no reason to think He would abandon us. He likes us to bring our problems before Him. He cares for his children. As we commit our concerns to the Lord, I want to observe something in verse seven. It is often misquoted, as a benediction or a wish for someone. “May the peace of God…” But this isn’t what the apostle Paul said. He made a statement, a factual statement. “The peace of God will guard your hearts and minds.” This is the natural result of turning our concerns over to the Lord. He will guard our hearts with His peace. There’s no room left for that anxiety. Yes, there’s a lot of uncertainty in our lives. But who is in charge of the world? Not I, not my fears, not my hopes, nor even my thoughts and prayers. God almighty is in charge of the world. As we commit our cares to Him, He will guard our hearts and minds. No fear. Uncertainty, yes, but fear? Not at all. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces
12/18/19 Audet, Jean-Paul. “Literary and Doctrinal Affinities of the ‘Manual of Discipline’” pp. 129-147 in Draper, Jonathan (editor). The Didache in Modern Research. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996. Audet compares the second section of the Manual of Discipline (1QS 3:13-4:26) with the Two Ways narrative and the Shepherd of Hermas so as to weigh the Christian and, possibly more striking, Jewish tone (Audet 1996, 129). He considers the ongoing dialog between Jewish and Christian authors to be a substantive factor in the type of moral and ethical teachings of the primitive Church. He particularly notes that Christians tended to transcribe or adapt Jewish works to their purposes (Audet 1996, 130). A key to this analysis may be the Duae Viae narrative. Audet considers the material, as found in the Epistle of Barnabas 18-20, to have the same stylistic and verbal elements as the rest of the Epistle. He concludes it is composed by the same author (Audet 1996, 131). The version in the Didache, while similar in content, draws from different soures and apparently engages in some revision. However, Audet immediately discounts the idea that the material as found in the Jewish Manual of Discipline could ever be adapted from a Christian source (Audet 1996, 132). The matter of dependence is not resolved, but it is Audet’s opinion that the concepts and even the arrangement was known to Barnabas from another source. This view is in contrast to the prominent statements of J.A. Robinson, who asserted Barnabas as the originator of the Two Ways (Audet 1996, 133). Audet further considers the work of Funk in the late 19th century (Here Audet does not provide a first name, but refers to an 1887 edition of the Didache published by Henrici Laupp.).Funk assigned the Didachist as the author of the Duae Viae (Audet 1996, 134). Audet considers Funk’s assignation inadequate. He rather sees the Duae Viae may well have existed in different forms and different languages, being adapted by a number of authors, including the Didachist and Barnabas (Audet 1996, 135). Audet follows a fairly conventional process of presenting texts next to one another, with the similar statements more or less parallel (Audet 1996, 136ff). The text from 1QS is significantly longer than the passage of Doctrina Apostolorum. Audet observes that the literary frameworks and developments of the two texts are very similar (Audet 1996, 141). This leads him in turn to look for a unifying principle in the historic faith of Israel. This pattern of light and dark, good and evil was found frequently in Jewish literature, and even in some Greek literature of the period (Audet 1996, 143). Despite the existence of the themes in Jewish literature, Audet does not find the themes occurring together with one another in proximity anywhere else. Rather, he sees striking parallels between the Duae Viae and the Manual of Discipline (Audet 1996, 144). The similarities in structure, especially the proximity of “light and darkness, life and death” which Audet finds nowhere else, point him to a common source (Audet 1996, 144). To show fairness in his analysis, Audet does list numerous difficulties in his comparison. There are various ideas which are not consistent in their treatment (Audet 1996, 145). It is a matter of interest that the two texts did not become progressively more uniform over time. Yet some divergence in structure and concepts is a commonly-found feature within Christian literature. The roots of two pieces of literature may be the same but we still find distinct literary works (Audet 1996, 146). Audet’s only conclusion, aside from similarity of the documents, is that both have a similarly early date, and that the Manual of Discipline probably dates to the early first century (Audet 1996, 147). 12/17/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom; all those who practice it have a good understanding” (Psalm 111:10, ESV). I’ve listened to numerous interviews and read a good number of books and articles recently which have led me to a conclusion about our Psalm for this week. Those who actually consider culture and history in context, looking at it with an open mind, then who give the Scripture genuine consideration, these people will find wisdom and understanding in the Scripture. They will ultimately see that God has worked in history through his covenant people, providing for the needs of huge swaths of society. Those who remember his words of peace and gracious treatment of our neighbors will in turn care for their neighbors. Those who view God as the source of all food and other renewable resources will find themselves caring for production and distribution of those resources. Those who see God as the God of all knowledge, understanding, and beauty are going to share that knowledge, understanding, and beauty with the world all around them. Those who know that God is the God of justice and order will themselves practice justice and order through cultural norms and through governmental organizations. Those who recognize that God’s redemptive covenants are for all who believe will invite everyone to believe and receive God’s redeeming care. There’s a tremendous weight of good for all the world as we discover the fear of the Lord and the accompanying wisdom. The more we explore the riches of God, the better we are at loving and serving our neighbors. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. Tuesdays are for the Old Testament
12/17/19 Augustine. Exposition on the Book of Psalms. Schaff, Philip (editor). New York: Christian Literature Publishing Col, 1886. Nicene and Post-Nicene Church Fathers: Series 1: Volume VIII. Re-published 2014, Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle electronic edition, ISBN-13: 978-1-78379-372-3. “Psalm 50” Augustine makes it clear, based on Psalm 50:1, that God speaks to his world and that God’s word is sure in every way (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324945). Augustine refers to the phrase, “God of gods,” and interprets it to indicate that he is the true God who can do all things, yet emphasizing the triune nature of the one God. In reference to the Psalms which make references to other gods and even to humans being like gods, Augustine suggests, though in rather indistinct terms, the idea which we would know as communication of attributes, where God imparts some measure of his divine nature, such as his righteousness, to his people (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324955). Augustine continues, as the Psalm says God has called the earth, to note how God speaks to all the nations in the world. Particularly here, he mentions the African peoples (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324982), possibly because of his African heritage or possibly suggesting he is speaking to Africans. Yet Augustine is clear that in God speaking “from the rising of the sun to its going down” he is removing ethnic boundaries. All in Christ are one and there is no particular group with special favor. Verse two, in a contrast which Augustine mentions, says that the revelation of God starts in Zion, at Jerusalem, and spreads to all nations (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324991). Augustine sees this as a reference particularly to Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection at Jerusalem. The Gospel spread from Jerusalem to all nations (Augustine Psalms, loc. 320996). Augustine considers that Jesus’ coming to Jerusalem and living as a man essentially was his means of hiding his divine glory so as to die for his people. Otherwise, unhidden, he would not have been rejected and killed, thus fulfilling the prophecies (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325006). In verse three we read that this communicative God, once hidden, makes himself known. He is manifest and will not remain silent. Augustine notes that for now God in Christ seems silent and uncomplaining, allowing people to continue in their evil (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325027). Rather than revealing himself in his wrath, he calls a people to repentance. At some time, he will call his people to repentance and come in judgment, but it is not yet. In the day of judgment, though, Augustine is clear that the unbeliever will not only suffer separation from God, but also some clear punishment. He considers that this should motivate all to turn to God in trust (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325036). Augustine follows with an allegorical mathematical argument that God raises up many generations of people together. From this apparent digression, he moves into verse four, where God will call heaven from above, to join with the Lord as judge (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325114) In verse five, God’s voice calls to gather the righteous, whom Augustine takes to be angels, though the angels also gather righteous people in turn (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325129). Verse six continues the motif, with heaven declaring God’s righteousness. After this call, in verse seven, Augustine finds us returning to the original theme. God speaks to his people, they are to hear him (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325152). God’s message to his people appears at last in Psalm 50, verse eight. God is not reproving his people because they sacrifice. According to verse nine, the people regularly bring sacrifices to God (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325167). Despite the fact that the offerings are being made, God says he does not accept them. He already owns everything (v. 10). He also has superior knowledge of all the winged creatures, those acceptable for sacrifice and those not acceptable (v. 11). Augustine recognizes that this shows God’s knowledge and possessions go far beond what humans have (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325191). He even notes that God’s knowledge of creatures existed before the creatures themselves, so God could make them by His command (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325198). Verses 12 and following expand on the idea of the necessity of offerings. Augustine notes that it says very plainly that God doesn’t actually need anything. On the contrary, he describes God as the giver of all, not the receiver (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325214). Ultimately, Augustine observes, all we are able to give God is praise. In verse 14 the language of sacrifice is used to describe praise to God. Augustine describes this further as very good news. It levels the field for rich and poor. It requires o possessions at all, but a character, which God has given to all (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325229). In the day of trouble (v. 15) we can call upon God. Again, this does not take any earthly resources. We are rescued not by what we have, but by what God has. Augustine goes on to describe trials that are common to all, and the fact that the Lord is the help of all who endure trials (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325245). He even observes that our compassion creates trials for us, as we find needs we cannot meet. This also urges us to call out to God on behalf of those who suffer. Augustine observes that God calls his people to worship him rightly, offering a genuine sacrifice of praise. It is important to have a pure attitude before God (v. 16). We are to take up the commands of God rightly, though Augustine does leave room for God’s servants to be fallen in nature (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325275). Verse 17 draws a distinction between the one who is fallen and the one who hates instruction. The person who, in verses 17 and following, hates instruction and makes alliances with thieves and adulterers, is not offering praise to God (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325291). That man, according to verse 19, is not offering praise to God (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325291). That man, according to verse 19, embraces deceit. He pursues evil rather than the good of the LORD. This pursuit is not only harmful to the neighbors, but also to the man himself. Yet Augustine sees the greater problem, as stated in verse 20, as the damage caused to the brother. That could be seen even as pulling believers away from the Church and their redemption (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325314). All the while, observing evil, God had not spoken out to bring judgment, according to verse 21. Augustine is clear that God issued warnings, but had not poured out all his displeasure on his people (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325337). God’s warnings are clear. Those who ignore him should fear. In verse 23, the alternative to fear is genuine praise to God. Those who take up God’s Word with an attitude of praise and honor to God will see God’s salvation. Augustine uses several allusions to the New Testament as illustration of this idea (Augustine Psalms, loc. 325352). Particularly, that salvation of God, says Augustine, is through Christ, the Lord who saves sinners. 12/16/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. Most people in our world seem to have one of two responses to Christianity, both described in Deuteronomy 18:15-19. Some of them, fearful of what might happen if they are confronted by God, are like those of verse 16. “Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord!” The presence of the creator of all is a terrible thing. He is described as a consuming fire, possessing glory which will kill those who gaze upon it. Many who are afraid of God’s confrontation are intimidated by all His commands as well. They flee from a life regulated in ways which go against their own inclinations. They find God’s identification of sin repugnant. In this headlong flight from the true and living God, they prefer “dead” gods, those made in the human image, including physical idols and idols of their own imagination. Others like the idea of God visiting the world, but they misunderstand the glory and majesty of God. They say they want an unmediated encounter with God. They pursue spiritual experiences, emotional highs, and seek to be ushered into the spiritual presence of God. Some turn to mediums and spiritists, ending up in the presence of evil spirits. Some turn to experiential forms of Christianity and try to be whipped into an emotional frenzy. They don’t consider the fact that an unmediated encounter wtih God is exactly what brings death and destruction throughout the Scripture, because only that which is holy and pure can stand before God. My hope and prayer is that all these people, in both categories, will be frustrated and their desires will be unfulfilled. Both groups are going down a path that leads to eternal destruction. What is the alternative? As God raised up Moses, a prophet who would speak for him in the presence of the people. in these last days, just as He promised, God the Son, Jesus, has come. True God, yes, but clothed in humanity, he mediates the presence of God for all who look to him. Being without sin himself, he alone is able to stand in the presence of the holy Lord. Being truly human, he alone is able to represent all humanity before God’s throne. He is the one we are to hear and believe. Verse 19 leaves us with a sobering thought. We can stand before God in the mediating presence of Jesus, or we can stand before God without Jesus’ protective care. God requires this perfect obedience, perfect holiness, perfect submission, from someone. Are we prepared to stand before God in our own selves? Not at all. We need a mediator, and in Jesus we have exactly the mediator we need. Lord, give us grace to hear and believe him. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. Mondays are for Church History
12/16/10 Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Amazon Kindle Edition, 2014. Volume 2, Ante-Nicene Christianity A.D. 100-325, “Chapter 13. Ecclesiastical Literature of the Ante-Nicene Age, and Biographical Sketches of the Church Fathers.” sec. 159-204. § 162. Clement of Rome. Schaff provides a brief bibliography regarding Clement of Rome, noting that the so-called second epistle “is a homily of a later date” (Schaff 2014, 20485). Clement, possibly the one mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3, follows the examples of Peter and Paul, whom he knew (Schaff 2014, 20503). He shows signs of being from a distinguished family and also having intimate knowledge of the Septuagint. He was at the head of the Roman Christians. “According to Eusebius he was bishop from the twelfth year of Domitian to the third of Trajan (A.D. 92 to 101)” (Schaff 2014, 20509). Schaff observes that many legends have emerged around Clement, but little is actually known about him. Clement is known for an epistle to the Corinthians, which was frequently cited by the Fathers but was lost for atime, then reproduced in 1633 (Schaff 2014, 20526). Since then, several additional versions have been discovered. Schaff considers it “the oldest and best among the sub-apostolic writings both in form and contents” (Schaff 2014, 20538). The letter is full of quotations both from the Septuagint and the Apocrypha, and also shows familiarity with numerous New Testament letters (Schaff 2014, 20544). Schaff further notes that many central Christian doctrines are spoken of, at least briefly, in 1 Clement. Schaff observes that 1 Clement bears strong resemblances to Paul and to the book of Hebrews, though there are similarities to Peter as well. “There is no trace in it of an antagonism between Paulinism and Petrinism” (Schaff 2014, 20560). The idea of justification by grace through faith is certainly present, which Schaff finds unusual among the apostolic fathers. Additionally, Clement is very zealous for unity in the Christian faith, even saying that old legends point to a proper unity in creation (Schaff 2014, 20578). This unity, according to Schaff, extends in 1 Clement to the reconciliation of Judaic and Gentile Christian factions, which suggests to Schaff that the letter was written from a time when much of the earlier discomfort had been resolved. Schaff further notes that in Clement the pastoral office is an extension of the Levitical priesthood and has not yet led to a magisterial view of bishops. Clement has a concept of the eschaton as an imminent event, drawing in a variety of signs and teachings as reason to expect Christ’s coming at any time (Schaff 2014, 20591). Schaff dates the letter “after the death of Peter and Paul, for it celebrates their martyrdom; and probably after the death of John (about 98); for one would suppose, that if he had been living, Clement would have alluded to him, in deference to superior authority, and that the Corinthian Christians would have applied to an apostle for counsel, rather than to adisciple of the apostles in distant Rome” (Schaff 2014, 20597). He refers to persecutions by Nero and Domitian, and sees the church in Corinth as “ancient.” Culley, Robert. “Oral Tradition and Biblical Studies.” Oral Tradition 1:1 (1986), 30-65.
Culley focuses his review of the study of oral tradition and biblical studies by breaking it into three stages: first, up to the early 20th century, second, to about 1960, and third, up to the time of his writing (Culley 1986, 30). He observes that the term “biblical studies” is somewhat ambiguous because scholarship is often divided into Old Testament and New Testament studies. He also observes that the study of oral tradition as it overlaps with biblical studies is, by and large, a 20th century study (Culley 1986, 31). The study is complicated by the fact that we have very little definitive information about specifically how the biblical texts came to be written in their current form. Culley first considers scholarship “up to the time of [Hermann] Gunkel (d. 1932)” (Culley 1986, 32). Specific debate about oral traditions as well as written source materials which could be used in the composition of biblical texts arose in the late 18th century, specifically in the work of Johann Gottfried Herder and Johann Christoph Nachtigal. About 100 years later, the work of Julius Wellhausen and Hermann Gunkel draws the attention of Culley (Culley 1986, 32). Wellhausen, best known for his postulation of the J, E, D, and P sources for the Pentateuch, assumed oral (and unreliable) sources for the stories gathered into the biblical texts (Culley 1986, 33). Gunkel took the texts to have a strong relationship to “folk literature” and to fit genres formed in an oral tradition. Culley finds Gunkel to have a relatively high opinion about accuracy of oral transmission, yet observes that he considered shorter narrative to be, by definition, older. He considered written transmission to be the only appropriate means of transmitting history (Culley 1986, 34). Culley next considers developments in scholarship up to the early sixties (Culley 1986, 35). He notes that relatively little scholarship emerged from Germany during the period, however, the work of Martin Noth recognized oral legends at the heart of aetiological stories. Noth frequently treated oral and written traditions as bearing equal weight (Culley 1986, 36). In Scandinavia, studies focused not only on oral tradition but also on the role of rites and sacral kings in Israel. Oral tradition was normally considered relatively accurate. Nyberg, in particular, saw the oral tradition as authoritative and the use of written texts primarily as props for memory (Culley 1986, 37). Other Scandinavian scholars considered that the methods of Nyberg and Gunkel needed to interact with one another. Particularly Culley mentions Sigmund Mowinckel, who considered writing to be essential to unchanging traditions and G. Widengren, who considered that Arabic poetry was not as much an oral creation as did Nyberg (Culley 1986, 38). This led Widengren to propose a robust written tradition in the Hebrew literature. The scholarly literature in North America at the time was not as extensive as that of Germany and Scandinavia (Culley 1986, 39). Culley does discuss William Foxewell Allbright and his view that oral and written traditions could coexist, with oral transmission continuing in cases of written literature which is disseminated orally (Culley 1986, 40). Culley sees 1963 as the time of a major ground-shift in studies of oral tradition and the Old Testament (Culley 1986, 41). Much of this was related to an interest in Serbo-Croatian oral poetry as well as more archaic English classics. Culley’s working thesis at that point was that there were particular, often repetitive, patterns, which could be cataloged and identified in texts which depended heavily on orality. Culley further considers attempts, beginning in the 1960s, to catalog the characteristics of Hebrew poetry. Most scholars agreed that Hebrew poetry is related in some ways to pairs of synonyms in different lines and to repeated phrases in different lines (Culley 1986, 42). The discussion is made more challenging because Hebrew does not make very clear distinctions between poetry and prose. Culley’s own work with biblical Psalms in 1963 and onward found stock phrases in traditional poetry from numerous cultures (Culley 1986, 43). The research continued into the 1970s as some scholars attempted to treat repetition of ideas, rather than repetition of phrases, as the structural unifying factor in Hebrew poetry (Culley 1986, 44). Oral formulas as a feature of composition was a popular field of study, especially among students of Frank Cross ad Harvard in the late 1960s. These students tended to find patterns which suggested an origin of Hebrew poetry in oral tradition. One of the difficulties in the field, stated purposefully or not by Culley, is identification of formulae which would imply an oral origin. Culley’s statement of this may be telling of the discipline as a whole. “In selecting formulaic phrases, Urbock was less restrictive than I was, not demanding as great a measure of semantic identity” (Culley 1986, 45). An assessment of parallelism in ideas would predictably be highly subjective, and could be interpreted quite freely. This is affirmed by the fact that several scholars, through the 1970s and up to 1980, developed alternative theories about oral and written origins of precisely the same works, based on data gathered and analyzed in earlier years (Culley 1986, 46). Culley next considers biblical Hebrew prose, beginning with the work of David Gunn, who, in the 1970s, produced articles analyzing prose. “In his approach to the biblical text he makes a distinction between what he calls traditional material, conventional for the author and his audience, and oral traditional material, where the mode of composition of the conventional material can be specified as oral” (Culley 1986, 47). Culley identifies the non-oral material as more elaborate motifs, and the oral material as short patterns. While this is an interesting analysis, it still does not provide definitive measures to identify oral and written sources. Culley goes on to describe his work with a blend of stable tradition and narrative variety (Culley 1986, 48). Other studies likewise apply tools to the biblical narratives, frequently using the methods applied to folklore, but without significant success in distinguishing among oral and written source material (Culley 1986, 49). This difficulty may have moved authors such as John Van Seters to seek written roots for virtually all texts (Culley 1986, 49-50). Culley recognizes that interdisciplinary studies may be valuable, though they bear their own challenges. However, he does survey the work of two anthropologists, Robert R. Wilson and Burke O. Long (Culley 1986, 51). Both are cautious in their approach and note features such as repetition and variation in genealogical lists as signs of orality (Culley 1986, 52). The overall consensus, as observed by Culley, is that oral tradition is of questionable usefulness in reconstructing history. We simply know little about how it has been transmitted. The New Testament has not been considered in terms of oral tradition as much as the Old Testament. However, Culley notes that Bultmann’s work with form criticism acknowledges both oral and written roots. “However . . . he makes the claim that one cannot distinguish in the end between oral and written traditions since the written material displays no specifically literary character” (Culley 1986, 53). Others, such as Birger Gerhardsson, in 1961, suggested that much of the New Testament was passed on orally, just as were many of the traditions of Judaism (Culley 1986, 53). Culley acknowledges that Gerhardsson’s work has been sharply critiqued, but still has redeeming characteristics. As we would expect, studies of orality and the New Testament have focused on the move from some sort of spoken tradition to a written manuscript. There is considerable difficulty in distinghishing the nature of oral and written sources which we don’t posssess (Culley 1986, 54). In the late 1970s, work which may prove fruitful began as the nature of orality and textuality in the New Testament was studied. Of note to me, Culley mentions the work of Werner H. Kelber, with an article on oral tradition in 1979, followed by The Oral and the Written Gospel (1983), dealing with the interaction between oral and written texts (Culley 1986, 55). In his concluding remarks, Culley restates the difficulties inherent in assessing oral roots of a written text, but does note there are numerous scholars who are beginning to sort out characteristics of orality and textuality. The interactions of oral and written sources can be a valuable means of understanding the nature and implications of many pieces of literature. 12/12/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. The words and deeds of Christ are controversial, as they have been since the time of John the Baptizer’s imprisonment. John’s question to Jesus in Matthew 11:2-11 is whether Jesus is really the Messiah. Jesus’ answer is that John has to make up his own mind. What are the works of Jesus? How do they compare with what John knows of the Messiah. He is healing, even raising the dead, and he is preaching good news to the poor. Are these the works of the Messiah? These are the works of the Messiah. But Jesus is not the Messiah that some cultures want. After all, by some accounts he should have crushed the Roman government, that bunch of oppressive and hateful people. Maybe he should have given free money and food to all who wanted it. At least it would have been nice if he had healed all sicknesses forever and made it so nobody would ever sin against me again forever. If Jesus was going to usher in a new order of the ages, at least he could have done it the way my imagination would prefer. This is just the problem we have with all the biblical prophets and other leaders, all the way up to Christ, who showed himself to be God the Son, savior of the world, conqueror of sin, death, and the grave. They don’t do things the way we wanted them to. John was still beheaded in prison. Jesus heals people and they get sick again. They even die! The poor are still among us. For all the preaching about peace, we live in a world of war. What’s going on with all this? Jesus points out to his listeners that they also didn’t recognize John the Baptizer for what he was. They thought he was some sort of oddball, and really he was, but he was a prophet who would point people to God. In the final analysis, when we try to understand God’s work in terms of our momentary temporal existence in a sin-cursed world, we don’t normally manage the task. This is why we need God’s perspective, as He has delivered it to us in the Scripture. We are then prepared to look through God’s eyes and see that Jesus is rescuing people from sin, death, and an eternity of penalty by grace through faith, delivering them into eternal life. We can see those around us as God sees them, as people who are laboring underneath the weight of the curse of sin and who cannot rescue themselves. We can bring the Gospel - good news of forgiveness, life, and salvation - to the least and the greatest of those surrounding us. We begin to see that Jesus is accomplishing the will of God the Father and that we are along for the ride. We, like John, may still be imprisoned. We may sometimes lose sight of what God has done in Christ. At those times we are reminded, as was John, that Jesus is doing the work of the Messiah. He is reconciling the world to himself. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. Thursdays are for the New Testament
12/12/19 Jerome, Commentary on Galatians, [J.P. Migne, Editor]. Patrologiae Tomus XXVI. Paris: D’Ambroise, Pres La Barriere D’Enfer, ou Petit-Montrouge, 1845. pp. 307-438. In Galatians 3:21ff, the apostle Paul asks if God’s Law is opposed to his promises. He says that is not the case, but that the Law cannot bring life through justice. That can only come through faith in the promise of God in Christ. Jerome’s observation, made very briefly, is that the promise gives life but that the Law shows a stark contrast, as it is not able to create life. Jerome makes it clear that the hope in God’s promise looks to the future coming of Christ, “who will deliver an end to promises” (Jerome, Galatians, 367). Further, he makes it clear that we should not think the Scripture creates sin, but that it shows sin, just as a judge assesses crime and decrees a penalty. Verses 24-26 describe the Law as a “paedogogus,” directing us to Christ (Jerome, Galatians, 368). Jerome is clear that the paedogogus is not the teacher or the father, but another person who enforces control of the child and helps him grow to maturity. In exactly the same way, the Mosaic law prepares people to trust Christ. The Christian is related to God by faith. Jerome sees the law as the “mother of faith” (Jerome, Galatians, 368). Verses 27-28 describe the similarity of all the baptized, who have “put on” Christ. Jerome here notes the command of Romans 13:14 to put on Christ and relates it directly to being baptized, the way we are dressed in Jesus (Jerome, Galatians, 369). Jerome considers it a mark of heresy and hypocrisy when people question whether those baptized have been dressed in Christ. He is clear that being baptized into Christ, not circumcision or uncircumcision, makes one equal in Jesus, not Jew or Greek, slave or free, male or female (Jerome, Galatians, 369). Galatians 3:29 concludes the ideas of the chapter - those who are Christ’s are the children of Abraham, heirs of the promise. Jerome again emphasizes that Jesus is both the seed and the promise, the one in whom we believe. He delivers the promise to all Christians. Get them while they're hot (off the presses)! The latest, the greatest, the December 2019 Newsletter is here! Read about Mere Christians, about Uganda, and about how you can participate in the work of Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry here and around the world!
12/11/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. I’ve had discussions, if you can call them that, more frequently of late than usual, with people who level charges against what they think Christianity is. Perhaps that is indicative of our culture in general, perhaps not. Yet regardless, our Epistle reading from 1 Corinthians 4:1-5 speaks to the attitude underneath these discussions. The apostle tells us that we are “servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God” (v. 1, ESV). The Christian is not a servant of the culture, nor of history, nor of his own or anyone else’s opinion. He is a servant of Christ. As well as we can determine the will of the Savior, based on Scripture, which is our definitive revelation, we serve Jesus’ priorities. We follow His commands. Does Jesus say to love and serve our neighbors? Yes, He does. So what do we do? We love and serve our neighbors, both those who seem worthy to us and those who seem unworthy. Does Jesus say exactly how we serve our neighbors? No, He doesn’t. Does Jesus specifically define who our neighbors are? He illustrates it as being the person we are in contact with and who is in need. That leaves the doors wide open for us to wrestle with situations where those we are in contact with have differing and competing needs. As servants of Christ, we do what we are able to, as well as we understand the situation, and we trust that He will make it clear to us when we need to change course. What does a steward of the mysteries of God do? He cares for those things that we don’t understand. To throw a little theological terminology around, we frankly can’t understand how substitutionary atonement works. We also can’t understand how water along with the promises of God would forgive sins. We really can’t explain Jesus being truly, physically, substantially, and essentially present in consecrated bread and wine. These are mysteries. We can describe them, but we really can’t explain them. A steward doesn’t have to explain something. He simply takes care of it and makes sure it is present and available for use when the master wants to use it. Back to those alleged discussions. They are alleged discussions because the assailant in the encounter doesn’t actually wish to discuss anything. He or she wants to make accusations which are rarely based on actual facts. The discussions are rather like giving testimony about why I didn’t stop beating my wife (I couldn’t stop because I never started). The encounters are uniformly about “Christianity” but pertain to issues which are not central to Christian faith or practice. They presuppose that Christianity is a social invention intended to bring the force of oppression on certain groups of people in order to exploit them. They have nothing to do with Christ crucified for sinners and raised from the dead to deliver justification to all who believe on him. In response to a spiritual mugging, what do we do? We hold firmly to the faith delivered to us in Scripture, bringing honor to Christ, the author and finisher of our salvation, the one who will come as the righteous judge of all. Those who actually want to receive the riches of God in Christ are free to do so. We trust that those whose hearts are opened by the Holy Spirit will become partakers of his riches alongside us. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces
12/11/19 Tuckett, Christopher M. “Synoptic Tradition in the Didache” pp. 92-128 in Draper, Jonathan (editor). The Didache in Modern Research. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996. Tuckett observes that while much 20th century analysis assumes the Didache’s dependence on a Jesus tradition, for instance, a Q document, he and others would argue that the Didache actually depends on a finished version of Matthew’s Gospel (Tuckett 1996, 93). Because of the common view of a history of redaction, the dependence should be considered independently for the different segments. Tuckett notes that the use of other texts is mostly by allusion, not by direct quotation (Draper (ed.), 1996, 94). He considers that Köster does the best job of arranging texts to analyze possible dependence (Tuckett 1996, 95). Didache 16 has numerous links to materials in the Synoptic Gospels. Tuckett notes that the links to Matthew24 may or may not include elements which scholars also tie to Mark (Tuckett 1996, 96). One of the difficulties in the analysis is that “the Didache and the synoptists could be reflecting standard eschatological motifs and using OT language” (Tuckett 1996, 96). The verbal links are not exclusively related to Matthew, but the parallel idea could be. Unfortunately, the overall pattern of connections throughout needs to be considered. It is possible that both texts drew from the same source material. Some scholars have made that conclusion (Tuckett 1996, 97). Tuckett walks through a number of the passages which show similarities. Of special note is Didache 16:3-5, where there is wording very similar to Matthew, especially 24:10-12, but not found in the other Synoptics (Tuckett 1996, 101). Tuckett acknowledges that the significance of the parallels is unclear. It may indicate a knowledge of Matthew on the part of the Didachist or common use of motifs (Tuckett 1996, 102-103). Tuckett notes passages outside of Didache 16 as strongly parallel to Matthew as well. Didache 11:7 in its statement about unforgiveable sin agrees with Matthe w12:31. Further, the identification of a true prophet in Didache 13:1 is strongly similar to Matthew 10:10 (Tuckett 1996, 105). The love command and the golden rule statements from Didache 1:2 were fairly common ideas in Judaism. However, the formulation was not widely found except in Matthew 22:38f (Tuckett 1996, 106). Tuckett’s conclusion is that “these parallels can be best explained if theDidache presupposes the finished gospel of Matthew” (Tuckett 1996, 110). Tuckett moves on to consider parallels of Didache 1:3-2:1 (Tuckett 1996, 110ff). The Two Ways narrative contains almost no specifically Christian content. However, Tuckett finds 1:3-2:1 as an interruption which emphasizes Christian doctrine (Tuckett 1996, 111). There is debate about the source of this doctrinal passage, as it does not clearly appear in the Gospels. Tuckett considers it a Q passage which was not preserved in a canonical Gospel (Tuckett 1996, 113). Tuckett arranges the various parts of Didache 1:3-2:1 into columns with similar ideas from Matthew and Luke in parallel. The ways in which the ideas are presented differ significantly. Tuckett considers that a Q document probably contained the ideas and language which may hve been adapted oonsiderably to suit the purposes of different authors (Tuckett 1996, 114). The ideas of these passages are somewhat problematic in terms of analysis. For instance. in Didache 1:3b, the text asks what good it is to love those who love you, then exhorts loving those who hate you. The theme is very common throughout the New Testament, but the wording may differ. Demonstration of dependence, as Tuckett would like to do, is nearly impossible (Tuckett 1996, 118-119). However, after perusing all the passages, Tuckett’s conclusion is that the Didache is written by an author or authors familiar with both Matthew and Luke in their final forms. I did not find his case to be conclusive. 12/10/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. Would you like to be in good company? I mean really, really good company! In Psalm 85, appointed for this third week of Advent, we read in verses 10-11, “Steadfast love and faithfulness meet; righteousness and peace kiss each other. Faithfulness springs up from the ground, and righteousness looks down from the sky” (ESV). Where are God’s people? They are right in the middle of this meeting. They are getting kissed from both sides at once, like my granddaughters do. Sometimes we have built a “hug sandwich” where the beloved one is the cheese and the parents or grandparents are the bread. The Christian, redeemed by God’s loving sacrifice on behalf of sinners, has suddenly been placed in the middle of this loving melee! We’re stuck between faithfulness and righteousness. We’re right in the middle of righteousness and peace. We’re being run over by love and faithfulness from opposite sides. There’s no escaping God’s mercy. Does it always seem like we are in this position? Not at all, nor did it for the Psalmist. In verses 4-7 we cry out for restoration, for God to lay down his indignation, for his anger to go away, for his salvation to be shown. We often find ourselves in a place of fear and doubt. But God . . . Our Lord has come, born of a virgin, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, at the right time, in the right place, not clinging to his divine kingly authority but suffering as one of us, to bring us to God. He knows that we aren’t able to live that sinless life. He knows that we won’t keep God’s law perfectly. He knows that we are ultimately powerless to redeem ourselves. But God . . . puts in the middle of that cosmic pile-up, treats us with his favor, and redeems us out of all sin and death for eternal life. Thanks be to God. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. Tuesdays are for the Old Testament
12/10/19 Augustine. Exposition on the Book of Psalms. Schaff, Philip (editor). New York: Christian Literature Publishing Col, 1886. Nicene and Post-Nicene Church Fathers: Series 1: Volume VIII. Re-published 2014, Catholic Way Publishing. Kindle electronic edition, ISBN-13: 978-1-78379-372-3. “Psalm 49, Part 2” Augustine’s comments on Psalm 49 pick up in a second part at verse 14. Here the Psalm speaks of death as the shepherd of some people. Augustine notes that their ”way is a stumbling-block to themselves” and that they “mind only things present, while they think not of things future . . . who think not of any life, but of that which must be called death” (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324808). Augustine then makes a slight digression by discussing the nature of death in very interesting terms. “[D]eath is either the separation of the soul from the body or a separation of the soul from God, and that indeed which men fear is the separation of the soul from the body: but the real death, which men do not fear, is the separation of the soul from God” (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324816). Death becomes the shepherd of these people because they reject Christ, who is life. For all who believe Christ, the shepherd is life and immortality. Augustine goes so far as to say that in the present time, “In heaven we are by faith” (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324823). Augustine continues to ask why the unrighteous seem to flourish. He notes that the Psalm describes it as being night. Even a small light at night seems bright, or, as Augustine, shifting metaphors, says, a blade of grass in winter seems very green, but it will perish (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324831). In the end, those who trust in Christ, the light of the world, will rise to everlasting life, while those who do not trust Christ, though they appear temporarily alive, will perish. The hope, restated in verse 15, is that “God shall redeem my soul” (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324846). Augustine observes this is not an idle or temporary hope, but that it is a hope based on Christ’s descent to hell and ascension to heaven. It is a hope beyond doubt or fear (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324854). There is a potential fear of the Christian, from verse 16, when confronted with the fact that some have become rich. Possibly the Christian himself worries that he is too rich so must be guilty in the terms used in the Psalm (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324862). Augustine counsels that there is no need for fear. As we seek good things in life, as we seek them for good motives, we have no fear. Those who would oppose us will finally have no eternal profit. We also, if we gain riches, will be no better or worse in eternith (v. 17). Augustine compares this idea to Jesus’ parable of Lazarus and the rich man. In the afterlife the rich man had no gain from his wealth (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324884). Verse 18 speaks of the earthly blessings which the unbeliever might have. Augustine points out that the blessings of this world are illusory. What the rich have now do not go with them. Again, the rich man in Jesus’ parable was unsatisfied in Sheol. He had not hungered and thirsted for righteousness, so he was not satisfied (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324907). Augustine’s overall conclusion is that righteousness is what God has said it is, and that we are obligated to recognize and pursue it, knowing our eternal reward. To think otherwise, in verse 20, is to be like a beast, lacking sense (Augustine Psalms, loc. 324933). 12/9/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. As we move into the second half of the Advent season, our readings turn to a hopeful kind of peace, still driven by the promise of the coming of the Lord. In Isaiah 40:1-11, we are told of the comfort to be spoken to God’s people. Their trouble is coming to an end. There’s no need to fear, because God is on his way. Some years ago I saw a series of billboards trying to encourage people to turn to God in faith. Actually, that isn’t quite right. They were trying to scare people to turn to God in faith. They asked questions such as, “How will you answer when God asks you what you did for the least of His people?” One of them, with virtually no graphic, just a stark black background, said, “Don’t make me come down there.” - God - How different this is from the picture we are given in Isaiah. What will happen when God comes down here? His arm rules, he sends his reward, he gathers his lambs, he carries them, he leads those with young. Oh, I want God to come down here. I need to be guided. I look forward to a reward. I am identified in Scripture as a sheep that needs his leadership, and he is the good and gentle leader. We don’t try to scare people into God’s kingdom. No, when we confront our world with the truth, it is frightening enough. These people are scared. They need to confront their fear and be confronted with the fact that they really ought to be scared to death in sin and shame, but that Jesus insisted on dying in their place. Is God still coming to end the world? Yes. He says that the grass withers, the flowers die, but his word, which gives life, will endure. May we decrease and God increase. Come, Lord Jesus. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. Mondays are for Church History
12/9/10 Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Amazon Kindle Edition, 2014. Volume 2, Ante-Nicene Christianity A.D. 100-325, “Chapter 13. Ecclesiastical Literature of the Ante-Nicene Age, and Biographical Sketches of the Church Fathers.” sec. 159-204. § 161. The Apostolic Fathers. After an extensive bibliography, Schaff identifies the apostolic fathers as “the first church teachers after the apostles, who haed enjoyed in past personal intercourse with them, and thus form the connecting link between them and the apologists of the second century (Schaff 2014, 20448). He acknowledges that we know little of these authors or, for that matter, of the apostles. The life in Christ was considered as much more important, so the authors of Christian works were considered to be relatively unimportant. Their works are not lengthy, Schaff observes, comprisonly only about wice as much writing as the New Testament (Schaff 2014, 20455). Most are simply exhortations to faith in Christ. “Yet they show the genus of the apologetic, polemic, dogmatic, and ethic theology, as well as the outlines of the organization and the cultus of the ancient Catholic church” (Schaff 2014, 20463). Schaff considers the writing of the apostolic Fathers to be of lower quality than that of the New Testament, from which he adduces apostolic inspiration by contrast (Schaff 2014, 20471). He also notes the tendncy of the apostolic fathers to quote sayings, rather than writings, of the apostles. The Fathers, though often read in churches, were never considered to bear the same authority as the texts which were later recognized as authoritative Scripture. Fridays are for the Didache
12/6/19 Hoffman, Elizabeth A. “Exploring the Literate Blindspot: Alexander Pope’s Homer in Light of Milman Parry.” Oral Tradition 1:2 (1986), 381-397. Hoffman observes that Alexander Pope, in his 1715 Iliad, recognized two categories of communication in the Iliad. She finds the preface says “one involves active, participatory communication fo ‘Hearers,’ the other passive, impersonal composition for readers” (Hoffman 1986, 381). This distinction, says Hoffman, was not well explored prior to the second half of the twentieth century. She sees this as a blind spot which has remained problematic. Pope and his contemporaries assumed that “an original text of Homer’s work” existed (Hoffman 1986, 382). Hoffman finds that even in Pope’s comments on “a 3rd century BC relief, ‘The Apotheosis of Homer,’ by Archelaus of Prienne” (Hoffman 1986, 382), the only detail that escapes notice is a scroll in Homer’s hand, presumably ignored because it was a given that creative expression would be written. Though Pope and others knew of a pre-literate memory, Hoffman takes them to consider the lack of writing as a severe hindrance to creative and memorable work (Hoffman 1986, 384). Her view is that even through most of the 18th century public and private audible reading was the default, so orality came to be associated strongly with writing. Non-oral reading has possibly tended to separate print and orality in the twentieth century (Hoffman 1986, 385). In some ways, Hoffman sees Pope and the other poets of his time as recovering a sense of set oral forms which could bear meaning adequately (Hoffman 1986, 386). Pope observed the differences between Homer and Virgil, agreeing that some of the difference is between oral and literary foundations, even though, according to Hoffman, Pope thought genuine oral dependence belonged to a time period before Homer (Hoffman 1986, 386). However, Pope still thought Homer could turn people into hearers and Virgil could turn them into readers (Hoffman 1986, 387). Hoffman notes that Homer may be more akin to an oral composition, as described by Albert Lord in 1960 as something that was created in performance (Hoffman 1986, 389). Yet neither A. Parry or Alfred Lord managed to identify markers of the difference between oral and written composition (Hoffman 1986, 390). Hoffman notes that Pope considered Homer as the superlative poet, also ascribing him credit as an historian and interdisciplinary specialist who could preserve the culture (Hoffman 1986, 390). She finds it worthy of note that Pope took “a change in the ‘Mode of Learning’” as a major contributor to the lack of invention in poetry after Homer (Hoffman 1986, 391). Plato himself speaks to a decay in learning as a result of the increased prevalence of writing in the time after Homer and before Virgil. As readers, rather than listeners, Hoffman considers that our normal reaction is geared to written creations, rather than oral creations (Hoffman 1986, 392). For this reason it is very difficult to translate a piece of oral poetry into a meaningful written form, though Pope certainly did well. She notes that Pope himself found this a frustrating task (Hoffman 1986, 393). He further considered that much of his frustration was caused by artless use of print media. Hoffman notes Pope’s publication of the Dunciad, a parody of Homer, written for fools. Here intelligence is enslaved by dependence on print (Hoffman 1986, 395). By Hoffman’s accounting, Pope’s work with Homer is the last great work in English which can nearly capture Homer’s tone, and it does so because Pope understood orality (Hoffman 1986, 395). Hoffman suggests a concerted scholarly effort to recapture the power of orality in the pre-literate cultures so as to rightly understand the genres of the past. 12/5/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. Our Gospel reading in Luke 21:25-36 is regularly used as a warning, and it should be. The coming of Christ to judge the world will be, by all accounts, very frightening. It will bring distress, international tumult, the heavens will be shaken, and all manner of other terrifying things are predicted to happen. The Bible speaks in graphic terms about rather a lot of ways people will be able to die at that time. Christians, however, need to ask whether this is a scene which should inspire terror. In fact, it is not. Where is the terror in all this for the Christian? Jesus is coming and he is going to take his people to be with him. All who believe on Jesus will be considered as righteous as He is in the final judgment. If we are parted from our bodily life in the process, at that time we will be part of the resurrection, nearly immediately. There’s no fear in that either. If we are not parted from our bodily life, we are told that we will be caught up to be with him. There’s still no place for fear, though there is a very large place for amazement and wonder. The Christian, in hope of the resurrection, is not a fearful person. Now I admit that I have fears, like anybody else. I had a frank discussion about some fears with a couple of relatives at a family gathering recently. No, I’m not going to tell you what my irrational fears are, nor what theirs are. We all agreed that they were irrational and that we have created coping mechanisms to deal with them. For the person who is not believing in Jesus, fears surrounding the end of life should be very real. But for the Christian the fears are actually not reasonable. We are not to needlessly endanger our lives in the sure and certain hope of the resurrection, but we have no fear about meeting God. Our response, rather than fear, is to be watchful. There are going to be signs that Jesus is getting ready to come. Some of those signs seem to be with us rather a lot, but they have been with us for millennia as well. The comfort in that is that Jesus has been getting ready to come, and he will do so, at the right time, on his own terms, and he will then gather all his people to himself. As we watch we gain confidence. Yes, Jesus is coming soon. Glory to God. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. Thursdays are for the New Testament
12/5/19 Jerome, Commentary on Galatians, [J.P. Migne, Editor]. Patrologiae Tomus XXVI. Paris: D’Ambroise, Pres La Barriere D’Enfer, ou Petit-Montrouge, 1845. pp. 307-438. Jerome observbes that Paul had many credentials which would allow him to exercise authority over the thinking of the Galatians, but that in Galatians 3:15 he speaks ‘as a human” - in simple terms (Jerome, Galatians, 364). Jerome notes this was also Paul’s attitude as expressed in his letters to the Corinthians. The heart of Paul’s statement here is that God will bless the singular seed of Abraham. Jerome sees this as different from God’s Word, which is scattered to many. Here the promise is regarding one seed of Abraham, whom Jerome recognizes as Jesus (Jerome, Galatians, 365). Jerome continues with a brief history of God delivering His promise to just one of multiple offspring, but concludes that in the end the singular chosen offspring was a blessing to all nations. This blessing is by grace, not by the law, which was passed to all. In verses 19-20, Paul points out that the Law was put into force because of transgressions, while the promise was purely a matter of promise from the one God. Jerome points out numerous events in the history of Israel where transgression could be seen (Jerome, Galatians, 366). He further observes that Christ was present with the Father as the “Word God” from the beginning and that his presence in word has been shown many times. Jerome points out that Scripture is very clear that Christ speaks as the almighty God and that he is the one who spoke all God’s Law into force (Jerome, Galatians, 367). 12/4/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. This week’s Epistle, from Romans 15:4-13, calls the Romans to receive each other as Christ has received them. In our postmodern West, this sort of call receives praise, especially from theologically progressive people as well as from those who take joy in deriding Christianity. “After all,” they say, “those killjoy Christians think you can reject some people even though Christ welcomes everyone.” This line of reasoning quickly becomes a warrant to reject all calls to repentance and forgiveness, the heart and center of the Christian message. On the contrary, these voices would like us to say that everything is all right and that as long as you are a welcoming person (welcoming according to their definition, which changes frequently), there’s no place for a change in lifestyle, ethics, or beliefs. Everything goes. The apostle Paul doesn’t fall for that kind of logic, not for a moment. He goes on to describe how Christ has welcomed people. And how is that? By showing God’s truth. By calling people to receive God’s mercy, which specifically implies a condition requiring mercy. By ruling over Jew and Gentile alike, conforming them all into God’s image. Jesus’ welcome is for everyone, yes. But Jesus’ welcome is a transforming kind of welcome. He calls all people, not just some, to repent of their reliance on themselves and their own righteousness, to trust in his mercy, and to believe he is able to deliver them from sin and every evil. God’s welcome redeems people so as to forgive them and change their lives. Our welcome is to be just the same. What, then, is our prayer during this season of Advent? That we may be God’s instruments to bring the redeeming love of Christ into every situation, calling our world to prepare themselves for the coming of the Lord. Even so, come quickly, Lord. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces
12/4/19 Draper, Jonathan. “The Jesus Tradition in the Didache” pp. 72-91 in Draper, Jonathan (editor). The Didache in Modern Research. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996. Draper, considering the general tone of the Didache, observes that “the picture of the Church which it presents could only be described as primitive, reaching back to the very earliest stages of the Church’s order and practice in a way which largely agrees with the picture presented by the New Testament” (Draper 1996, 72). It was apparently widely used and was recommended reading for new converts until the 4th century. Draper notes that chapters 1-6 and the Epistle of Barnabas have considerable parallels. However, scholars are not in agreement about any direction of literary dependence (Draper 1996, 73). The Manual of Discipline from the Dead Sea Scrolls (1QS 3:13-4:26), in comparison to Doctrina Apostolorum, Barnabas, and the Didache suggests strongly that the Two Ways teaching was a pre-existing conceptual block of Jewish material (Draper 1996, 74). Draper, citing Audet but asserting that Audet’s conclusions are not entirely correct, identifies multiple layers of redaction in the text. He concludes that “[T[he Didache is a composite work, which has evolved over a considerable period, from its beginning as a Jewish catechetical work, which was taken up and developed by the Church into a manual of Church life and order” (Draper 1996, 74-75). Draper recognizes that some redaction may have continued up to the time of the 11th century manuscript which we have. Since there are no complete earlier manuscripts, our ability to compare an earlier time period is severely limited (Draper 1996, 75). Draper continues to evaluate the “evidence concerning the Jesus tradition” (Draper 1996, 76). For this he looks primarily at 1:3b-2:1; 8, and 15:3-4. The use of the term “gospel” is not necessarily to be taken as a reference to a written cospel, which complicates matters. Draper finds that the Jesus tradition has largely not influenced the Two Ways, except at Didache 1:2b. Here, he finds the first . . . second . . . to be related to the Christian tradition from Matthew 22:37-39 (Draper 1996, 77). Again, dependence is not clearly demonstrable. Didache 7 and 9-14, with their liturgical instruction, do not strongly reflect a Jesus tradition, though the Trinitarian formula in 7:1 is a clear reference to Jesus. Draper considers this a later redaction (Draper 1996, 78). He finds the eucharistic prayers in 9:10 similar to John 6:14, but more similar to the Jewish Berakoth (Draper 1996, 78). Draper further suggests that Didache 11:1-2 may ot have been dependent on Matthew 5:17-20, but that the dependence may have gone the other way. He thinks marks of dependence on a written gospel are “very faint” (Draper 1996, 79). Didache 1:3-2:1, though somewhat similar to Matthew 5-7 and Luke 6, does not actually identify the ideas as teaching of Jesus (Draper 1996, 79). Draper considers this passage more similar to Justin Martyr’s Apology 1:16. Again, he is left uncertain as to the source, if any, of the material. Draper proceeds to lay out parallel passages from Didache 1, Matthew 5, Luke 6, and Justin, 1:15-16 (Draper 1996, 79-81). Draper considers the text of theDidache to be the most clumsy, therefore less likely to have been strongly influenced by other texts (Draper 1996, 82). The variations in wording of numerous passages suggest to Draper that the Didache was composed independently of the actual written Gospel accounts. Draper thinks it more likely that the Didache received influenes from “Q material, either in a written or an oral form” (Draper 1996, 85). In Didache 8 Draper finds a strong influence, or at least a relationship to Matthew 6:1-6 and 9-13 (Draper 1996, 85). He also views it as a later insertion which interferes with a more natural flow of events. Draper briefly considers the difference in the wording of theLord’s Prayer as presented in the Didache and in Matthew (Draper 1996, 86). The apocalyptic material in Didache 16 is similar in content to Matthew 24, but Draper considers it independent in composition (Draper 1996, 86). He finds the conceptual material in Exodus 12, but the actual compositions to be unrelated (Draper 1996, 87). This he demonstrates with parallel presentations of the texts, which are indeed not very similar. Draper concludes, tentatively, that the Didache is relatively independent of the Synoptics. Dependence on a Jesus tradition is probably limited to materials found in Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount and Luke’s Sermon on the Plain, as well as Matthew 24. There is usually more similarity between the Didache and Matthew than with Luke (Draper 1996, 90). The Didache source seems more to be a Q document or some other oral or written collection of Jesus sayings. It is possible that this collection was known as τὸ εὐαγγέλιον (Draper 1996, 91). 12/3/19
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the historic one-year lectionary. What do you give someone who already has everything? Something to put it in. In our reading from Psalm 50 God presents himself as the one who does already have everything. His people have been making offerings before him, consistent with God’s command. In verse eight He doesn’t rebuke them for their offerings. But he doesn’t accept the offerings, either. At issue is the fact that the people seem to think they are giving God something He needs. We hear this idea all the time. It’s just as wrong now as it was back then. Maybe if we give to God’s work more generously from our finances, He will open the floodgates of heaven and bless us with more money! If we gather enough people to pray, maybe God will actually listen! If we humble ourselves as well as Christ humbled himself, then we will be exalted like Christ was exalted! All these ideas suggest that God needs something, that he is not complete in himself. The fact is, if God is not complete in himself, if he needs anything else to be complete, he is not the true God of all. He would be some sort of cheap imitation, like all the other gods of the world, who don’t possess their own cattle, know all the birds, and own all the beasts of the fields. What is the real issue in this Psalm? God is calling his people to trust him, and reminding them that their offerings are to come from their love and trust in him. Our relationship with God is not based on what we can bring or give, but on who God is and what He has brought into the world - - - everything there is. For this reason we bring him offerings, we give him praise, we honor him in all. He shows himself to be the Lord of all. It’s because God is worthy, not because we have a gift worthy of him. We can’t even give God something to put it all in. We simply call on God in the day of trouble, then find that he knew about it and has taken care of it. He is the mighty and loving Lord of all. If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us. |
Help Fuel This Ministry by Clicking Here!All the work of Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry, including this blog, is supported by the generosity of people like you. Please consider joining our team of prayer and financial supporters. Read more here!
Please Note: The opinions presented in blog posts are not necessarily those of Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry. Frequently we report on contrary views, often without comment. Please chime in on the discussion.
About Throwing InkwellsWhen Martin Luther was dealing with struggles in his life he once saw what appeared to be an angelic being. Not trusting that he was going to be informed by someone other than the God revealed in Scripture, he took the appearance to be untrustworthy and hurled his inkwell at it. The chipped place in the plaster wall is still visible at the Wartburg Castle, though apparently the ink stain on the wall has been refreshed periodically by the caretaker. Blog Feeds
Want to keep up with what's happening at Wittenberg Door? Subscribe to our mailing list!
Categories
All
|
|
|
RSS Feed