Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry
  • Home
  • Calendar
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Recording Archives
  • Resources
    • Bible Study - Matthew's Gospel
    • Bible Study - John's Gospel
    • Bible Study - Ephesians
    • Greek Tutorials
  • About
    • About Wittenberg CoMo
    • Support Us
    • Contact Us
  • Position Papers
  • Sandbox

Fearing the Lord

11/13/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Notes
11/13/25

Welch, Edward T. (2001). "Chapter 8: Fearing the Lord." (pp. 161-179). In Addictions: A Banquet in the Grave Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing (Personal Library)
    Welch observes that it is perfectly normal to respond to good news. The good news "that the Creator of the universe is the Lover of our souls" is the best news we can receive (Welch 2001, p. 161). We would expect a joyful response. Among our expected responses, the Bible describes "fear." Welch contends that the fear of the Lord is not a simple emotion we might experience. It "is more akin to awe, devotion, and worship" (Welch 2001, p. 162). This fear moves us to attempt to know and do God's will. Welch sees this as a powerful guard against addictions. Rather than striving to stop an illegitimate craving, we build a new and legitimate craving.
    To grasp this concept of the fear of the Lord, Welch urges a focus on God as a "loving and generous father" (Welch 2001, p. 164) rather than as a tyrant. Many of the actions commanded of the Israelites in Exodus may have been for the purpose of teaching them that they could trust God. His power was repeatedly shown to Israel as protective in nature (Welch 2001, p. 165). Welch notes that the power of God is overwhelming. It always urges the need for a mediator. Christians recognize Moses as a mediator in the Exodus and Jesus as the true and final mediator for us (Welch 2001, p. 167).
    Welch considers that a disease-based model of addictions leaves the addict with no room for a God who does anything but to urge us to be strong when tempted (Welch 2001, p. 167). The lack of a concept of a holy God who confronts our sin and restores us at his own cost renders Christianity nearly useless in addiction care. God's holiness is the key to our understanding.
    I would interject here that Welch writes from a strongly Reformed point of view. In Lutheran understanding the governing principle is the incarnation of Christ, rather than the holiness and sovereignty of God. An emphasis on Jesus as the suffering savior tempted as we are proves at least as beneficial in addiction care as does the emphasis Welch articulates. The unmerited forgiveness presented to us in Jesus moves us to repentance and a desire for restoration (Welch 2001, p. 168).
    Welch takes the forgiveness found in Christ to be more powerful than all guilt and shame. It is sufficient to move people to lasting life change. However, it may be rejected by those who need it (Welch 2001, p. 169). A refusal to be moved by or convinced of forgiveness is a critical fault. The person who holds to this refusal is ultimately denying Christ and asserting his own sovereignty instead. Welch lists and describes a number of ways this can be manifested (Welch 2001, pp. 169-172).
    The fear of the Lord is something we learn, rather than something we receive as a sudden infusion (Welch 2001, p. 173). Welch urges making deliberate efforts to remember what God says (Welch 2001, p. 173). Reading and meditating on Scripture as well as gathering with other Christians assist us in remembering. Praying the Lord's Prayer and considering each element is also beneficial (Welch 2001, p. 174).
    Through a careful definition of the fear of the Lord, Welch suggests it is possible to refine our goals. He describes it as follows, with some elaboration. 'The fear of the Lord is a son or daughter's response to the divine father's holiness" (Welch 2001, p. 174). "The fear of the Lord is our total response to God. It goes further than an intellectual understanding" (Welch 2001, p. 175). "The fear of the Lord expresses itself in responsive, reverential, and joyful action" (Welch 2001, p. 175). Finally, the fear of the Lord recognizes that God sees us in all we think and do. There are no secrets from God (Welch 2001, p. 176).
    Welch closes the chapter with questions for reflection as readers build their biblical and practical theology (Welch 2001, pp. 178-179).

​
0 Comments

Alexandria and Jerusalem

11/11/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
11/11/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter X. Church Fathers, and Theological Literature." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2562-2700). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 161-180).

"§167. Didymus of Alexandria." (pp. 2610-2611).
    Didymus of Alexandria, dubbed "Caecus" due to his blindness from the age of four, cultivated his knowledge in Scripture, philosophy, rhetoric, and mathematics alike (Schaff 2014, p. 2611). Nominated to teach by Athanasius, he worked in this role in Alexandria for close to 60 years, having many students who were themselves illustrious scholars. Though Didymus took strong stands against Arian beliefs, his acceptance of Origen's views about the pre-existent nature of human souls earned him condemnation after his death by several councils. Schaff lists a number of his extant works, mostly exegetical in nature.

"§168. Cyril of Jerusalem." (pp. 2612-2614).
    Cyril, who became presbyter in Jerusalem in 350, was involved in the Arian controversy for much of his life. "His metropolitan, Acacius of Caesarea, an Arian, who had elevated him to the episcopal chair, fell out with him over the Nicene faith and on a question of jurisdiction, and deposed him at a council in 357" (Schaff 2014, p. 2612). He was restored to office in 361, then Acacius converted to Nicene views in 363 (Schaff 2014, p. 2613). After being restored from an exile in 379, Cyril continued working with the church in Jerusalem until his death in 386. His catechetical lectures from about 347 are well known. They provide significant insight into the preparation converts of his time would have prior to baptism (Schaff 2014, p. 2614).

​
0 Comments

Christ as Central to Addiction Recovery

11/6/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Notes
11/6/25

Welch, Edward T. (2001). "Chapter 7: Knowing the Lord." (pp. 141-159). In Addictions: A Banquet in the Grave Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing (Personal Library)
    Welch opens this chapter with a powerful thesis statement. "If the root problem of addictions is false worship, the answer is knowing the Lord, the Lone who deserves our worship" (Welch 2001, p. 141). The means of change consists of a redirection of our affections to a right course. Welch contends that the Scripture is not essentially instructions but that the message of Jesus somehow bears its own power (Welch 2001, p. 142).
    A problem Welch finds in our current culture is that "Jesus has been domesticated" (Welch 2001, p. 143). He seems to be used in our climate as a therapeutic idea or a consultant. Welch urges finding a biblical practical theology which can deal with God as the sovereign lord of all. His love is not merely comfort, but creative of love in us for him and for others (Welch 2001, p. 145).
    Welch elaborates on the love of Jesus by describing it as holy in nature (Welch 2001, p. 146). A holy thing is set apart in some way. It is not ordinary in its use. Welch describes God's holy love for his people in terms of the book of Hosea. Here, God calls the prophet to love and be faithful to an unfaithful wife (Welch 2001, p. 147). This is emblematic of the relationship between God and Israel. In his holiness and dedication to us, Jesus shows himself the superior prophet, redeemer, and ruler (Welch 2001, p. 149). 
    Welch considers a central problem of our age to be that we have forgotten the holiness of God in Christ (Welch 2001, p. 150). This results in our willingness to voice opinions of God's unfairness or injustice. While God in Christ has become like us, he remains the holy one, set apart from us. His holy love doesn't always give us what we imagine we want. Yet it is always right (Welch 2001, p. 151). Welch particularly finds this love and exalted nature of Christ at the center of Paul's letter to the Ephesians (Welch 2001, p. 153). He is the source of all we need. This is a particularly important idea in dealing with addictions, since the addictive behavior portrays itself as what we need.
    Welch closes this chapter with a fairly extensive illustration of ways to help oneself and others dealing with addictions (Welch 2001, p. 155-159).

​
0 Comments

Gregory and Gregory

11/4/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
11/4/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter X. Church Fathers, and Theological Literature." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2562-2700). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 161-180).

"§165. Gregory of Nyssa." (pp. 2592-2597).
    Gregory of Nyssa, brother of Basil the Great, considered earthly wealth and lineage to be unimportant (Schaff 2014, p. 2593). He became an ascetic in Pontus after a brief time as a rhetorician. Although he was married, he endorsed a life of celibacy as a means of freedom from worldly distractions (Schaff 2014, p. 2594). He viewed the spiritual dedication to God as a true sort of virginity, developing a life of freedom.
    In 372, Basil urged Gregory to move to Cappadocia and engage in active interactions to combat Arian beliefs (Schaff 2014, p. 2594). This resulted in a two year exile beginning in 376. After his return from exile he endured the death of all his brothers and sisters, who served as examples to him of the godly life (Schaff 2014, p. 2595). Schaff provides a substantial prayer written by Gregory after the death of his sister, indicating the depth of his repentance and dedication to God.
    Gregory of Nyssa was present at the council of Constantinople. There arose a tradition, which Schaff considers erroneous, that he composed the addition to the Nicene Creed adopted at Constantinople (Schaff 2014, p. 2595). Because of his prominence as a theologian he was sent to tour numerous Christian communities to evaluate and strengthen their faith (Schaff 2014, p. 2596). He died around 395. Schaff lists many of his known works. They show a strong influence of Origen, and stress human freedom (Schaff 2014, p. 2597). 

"§166. Gregory Nazianzen." (pp. 2597-2610).
    Gregory Nazianzen is also referred to as Gregory the Theologian. He is a contemporary in both time and place with Basil the Great and Gregory of Nyssa (Schaff 2014, p. 2598). Gregory defended Nicene orthodoxy while embracing the arts, poetry, and contemplation.
    Gregory was born about 330, making him a year younger than the emperor Julian (Schaff 2014, p. 2599). His Christian mother was a strong formative influence on him. In Schaff's analysis, she was a woman of broad interests and abilities, able to concentrate her attention in a singular manner (Schaff 2014, p. 2600).
    Trained in the Scripture and in science, Gregory then moved into a study of rhetoric (Schaff 2014, p. 2600). As a teacher in the church he followed and endorsed the custom of his time, living a celibate life (Schaff 2014, p. 2601). He received training in Cappadocian Caesarea, then in Caesarea in Palestine, followed by studies in Alexandria and Athens. It was in Athens that Gregory became a close friend of Basil. His relationship with his fellow student, Julian (the apostate) was quite the opposite, resulting in ongoing antagonism (Schaff 2014, p. 2602).
    After studies in Athens, Gregory returned to his parents' home with his brother, a physician (Schaff 2014, p. 2602). After receiving baptism he entered a strict form of asceticism. Schaff illustrates Gregory's progressive move into the life of contemplation in this period. In 361, against his will, Gregory was ordained as a presbyter (Schaff 2014, p. 2603). He began service as a presbyter in Nazianzum in 362. Basil subsequently ordained Gregory as a bishop, with responsibility to care for the small town of Sasima. There is some doubt as to whether Gregory actually took up that office, as he is known to have been assisting his father in 372 (Schaff 2014, p. 2604).
    After the death of Gregory's father in 374, he entered a life of solitude in 375 (Schaff 2014, p. 2605). The death of Basil in 379 pushed Gregory into a period of depression. At this time, he was called to the orthodox church in Constantinople, which city had succumbed to Arian thought (Schaff 2014, p. 2606). Through his labors, Nicene orthodoxy came to prominence in Constantinople. Gregory's trinitarian discourses from this time period were well known and received. Schaff considers the edict of Theodosius in 380, deposing Arians, to have been inspired by the work of Gregory, whom he placed over the cathedral church of Constantinople (Schaff 2014, p. 2607). Gregory was placed as bishop of Constantinople in 381. He subsequently resigned due to the political intrigue caused by his elevation (Schaff 2014, p. 2608). Gregory remained active in writing and engaged in human care ministries through the remainder of his life (Schaff 2014, p. 2609). He died in 390 or 391.

​
0 Comments

Careful Assessment

10/30/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Notes
10/30/25

Welch, Edward T. (2001). "Chapter 6: Respecting, Listening, and Inviting." (pp. 117-140). In Addictions: A Banquet in the Grave Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing (Personal Library)
    Welch, having described the initial steps in dealing with addiction, sums up the status of affairs as having reached the point that it is difficult to engage in addictive behaviors due to friends and family providing accountability and the addict having barriers creating separation from the negative behaviors (Welch 2001, p. 117). There is still work to be done. Welch considers the AA model for life change to be the default method used in our culture. However, Welch thinks we can do better for Christians through use of a distinctively Christian model of care (Welch 2001, p. 118). Welch advocates a model in which the gospel is of primary importance (1 Cor. 15:3) and which deals with addictions in terms of repentance, forgiveness, and Christian life change (Welch 2001, p. 119). The life in a Christian community which repeatedly draws attention to Jesus is of greater value than a life in a community of addicts which attempts to draw attention both to and away from addiction, often at the same time.
    To care for those struggling with addictions, Welch contends that the church must do the very difficult task of welcoming those struggling with all sorts of sin, meanwhile providing a place for repentance and life change (Welch 2001, p. 120). This may require a church congregation to cross some challenging cultural barriers. As a helpful thought experiment, Welch suggests considering our "ruling desires. What tends to compete with Jesus for your affections?" (Welch 2001, p. 121). This makes sense since addictions are essentially desires which are ruling us in ways which Christ should.
    Welch emphasizes the importance of getting to know a person's story. This is an important theme in Scripture, essential in building friendships (Welch 2001, p. 123). Because the situation of an addict is likely to be chaotic, it does matter to ask about urgent needs before digging into the addiction. Welch uses the example of a wife planning to leave an alcoholic that day. It is necessary to deal with immediate crises so as to free up attention for longer term help. Relational dynamics may actually become worse while an addict is trying to change behaviors (Welch 2001, p. 124). 
    The use of some sort of behavioral contract may be helpful. Areas of the contract must be capable of monitoring, be specific in nature, and provide specific consequences for violation (Welch 2001, p. 125).
    Exploring the life story of an addict in detail is essential. Welch continues with his sample addict, showing that the development of the addictive behavior and its relationship to other elements of life is essential in understanding why it was able to gain control (Welch 2001, p. 126). This exploration may also identify parallel situations to be explored in Scripture. Finding life issues in the Bible pulls us into the relationship we need with God in Christ. Welch reminds us to consider biblically what forces influence our lives (Welch 2001, p. 127) as well as the things which come from within us and are revealed as influencing our lives (Welch 2001, p. 129). In one way or another, and probably in many ways, addictions become linked to other issues in our lives. The story is normally quite complicated.
    Welch discusses at length the question of the addict's conversion. There is a time at which it is valuable to consider growth in Christian character as it relates to our allegiances (Welch 2001, p. 132). My estimation is that Welch here leans closer to a baptistic view of decision theology than I would prefer.
    In addition to one's standing as a Christian, Welch speaks of the value of gaining the addict's commitment to work on the addiction, including root issues which may be related (Welch 2001, p. 134). The commitment to change is not easy. Welch reminds the reader that the addict's life did have a strategy to move through life. Leaving those strategies is a difficult commitment. Bringing Scripture to bear is very helpful, as most addicts are accustomed to acting from secular points of view (Welch 2001, p. 135). 
    People who are trying to break addictions generally need to erect barriers to prevent themselves from re-entry into addictive behavior (Welch 2001, p. 136). Awareness of situations that lead to such behaviors is helpful. Welch reminds the reader that the goal is to lead the addict to freedom rather than to be merely satisfied with abstinence. Making a clear break is important in the process (Welch 2001, p. 137).
    Finally Welch urges the reader to give the addict hope (Welch 2001, p. 138). Christ desires to help his people resist temptations to evil.
    The chapter concludes with a number of questions for thought and discussion.

​
0 Comments

Athanasius and Basil

10/28/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
10/28/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter X. Church Fathers, and Theological Literature." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2562-2700). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 161-180).

"§163. Athanasius the Great." (pp. 2574-2583).
    After an extensive bibliography which includes information about works of Athanasius discovered and published in the 19th century, Schaff asserts that Athanasius should be seen as great in theological and churchly matters similarly to Constantine in political and secular issues (Schaff 2014, p. 2575). Athanasius proved his convictions through many years of standing in the face of opposition. Despite hostility on all sides he was willing to stand for the truth (Schaff 2014, p. 2576). He had been brought into training in 313 by the bishop Alexander of Alexandria, whom he served for many years, accompanying him to the Nicene Council. He became the successor to Alexander in 328 despite his youth.
    Immediately upon his elevation as bishop, Athanasius became intimately involved with the Arian controversy (Schaff 2014, p. 2577). He was exiled five times due to his stance in favor of Nicene orthodoxy. After his fifth exile ended in 369, Athanasius was able to live and write in peace until his death in 373 (Schaff 2014, p. 2678).
    Schaff describes Athanasius as having tremendous acumen and insight, attributed by supporters to divine assistance and by detractors to the devil (Schaff 2014, p. 2578). All accounts suggest he endured good and bad circumstances equally well. Because of his view that Arian belief was completely contrary to Christianity, Athanasius was inflexible in his opposition to the Arians (Schaff 2014, p. 2579). He spoke and wrote against them in forceful terms but never endorsed violence or persecution against the Arians.
    Athanasius' writings, in Schaff's estimation, showed theological depth and rhetorical excellence, as well as the marks of a superior intellect (Schaff 2014, p. 2581). Schaff provides a categorized list with brief descriptions of his written works (Schaff 2014, pp. 2581-2583).

"§164. Basil the Great." (pp. 2583-2592).
    Schaff (with many others) recognizes Basil the Great and "the two Gregories" from Cappadocia as distinguished in a high degree (Schaff 2014, p. 2583). Basil, born to a wealthy and pious family in Caesarea about 329, was raised in piety. Two brothers and a sister are considered saints in the East, one of them being Gregory, bishop of Nyssa, one of the two Gregories. His friendship with Gregory of Nazianzen, began between 351 and 355, in schooling at Athens (Schaff 2014, p. 2584). He and Gregory, unlike their classmate Julian (the Apostate), held fast to their Christian convictions. Schaff observes that Basil and the two Gregories showed broad knowledge and appreciation for the natural world (Schaff 2014, p. 2585). This set them apart from many philosophers, who took little interest in the created order.
    Schaff suggests that the Cappadocian Fathers may have favored the beauty of nature over that of art due to pagan abuses of artwork (Schaff 2014, p. 2567). The beauty of God's creation transcends all our imitations of beauty.
    After his studies in Athens, Basil taught and practiced rhetoric in Caesarea, but in 360 he traveled to Syria and Egypt in order to explore monasticism (Schaff 2014, p. 2588). This became the pattern for his life. The separation from temporal cares and events struck Basil as a blessed life. In 364 Basil was appointed as presbyter, then bishop of Caesarea in 370 (Schaff 2014, p. 2590). A difficult life of asceticism, along with the stresses of hostility in community contributed to Basil's death in 379 (Schaff 2014, p. 2591). Schaff briefly describes a number of Basil's written works.

​
0 Comments

Opening the Door to Help with Addictions

10/23/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Notes
10/23/25

Welch, Edward T. (2001). "Chapter 5: Speaking the Truth in Love." (pp. 87-115). In Addictions: A Banquet in the Grave Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing (Personal Library)
    Welch describes addictions as different from most other problems chiefly because the addict will rarely reach out for help. They almost always prefer covering up their problem (Welch 2001, p. 88). Because of this tendency, identifying an addiction is a difficult task. Observation of changes in work, relationship, spiritual life (Welch 2001, p. 90), physical and emotional health, use of legal drugs (Welch 2001, p. 910, or the presence of drug paraphernalia (Welch 2001, p. 92) serve as clues that addiction may be part of a person's picture.
    A confrontation of addictive behaviors is a difficult thing. Welch advises to "so so as one addict to another, pointing the way to freedom" (Welch 2001, p. 93). He reminds the reader that addictive desires are common to all (Welch 2001, p. 94). All are sinners. We all need help and restoration.
    Counter to waiting for an addict to reach the worst point possible (hitting bottom), Welch recommends earlier intervention, based on Proverbs 24:11, which counsels more immediate care (Welch 2001, p. 95). He then urges use of a pattern found in Matthew 18:15-17, where confrontation by an individual, then a group of increasing size, is used to attempt to resolve conflict (Welch 2001, p. 96). This approach, done out of love for the person struggling, is appropriate for people of any age or situation. It is essential, in Welch's view, that this be done out of loving concern, with a determination to protect the relationship regardless of the likely hostile reaction of the other person (Welch 2001, p. 97). The relationship will necessarily endure a lot of stress through the confrontation. Caution is imperative. Welch describes a number of potential scenarios and responses which may arise.
    Welch returns to his theme of Matthew 18 by moving from individual confrontation to the intervention involving others (Welch 2001, p. 105). The other people should be close friends who are committed to the addict and who have some knowledge of the behavior. The intervention should be carefully and prayerfully planned (Welch 2001, p. 106). Welch lists a number of preparation strategies, then provides a list of some possible options for follow up (Welch 2001, p. 107). He goes on to discuss some of the implications of different follow-up programs.
    There is a very real chance that an intervention will fail. Welch encourages his reader not to give up. Further interventions are altogether possible (Welch 2001, p. 110). Protection of those being harmed is frequently called for, as is forceful intervention to save anyone who is immediately endangered (Welch 2001, p. 111).
    The battle with addiction is not finished when there has been successful intervention (Welch 2001, p. 113). Welch considers the Christian life to be a daily challenge.
    Welch concludes the chapter with questions for ongoing through and study.

​
0 Comments

Church Historians of the Third to Fifth Centuries

10/21/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
10/21/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter X. Church Fathers, and Theological Literature." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2562-2700). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 161-180).

"§161. Eusebius of Caesarea." (pp. 2562-2569).
    After a substantial bibliography pertaining especially to Eusebius, Schaff observes that this period, which he considers the third in the Church, saw many good and influential teachers (Schaff 2014, p. 2563). He sees the roots of classical rhetoric and the strength of Christianity coming together in these authors. Eusebius emerges as "the 'father of church history,' the Christian Herodotus" (Schaff 2014, p. 2563).
    Born after the middle of the third century in Palestine, Eusebius was influenced in his education by the work of Origen (Schaff 2014, p. 2563). After some education, he settled in Caesarea, where he was involved in a theological school (Schaff 2014, p. 2564). In 335 or 336, Eusebius, presiding over a council in Tyre, opposed Athanasius. At this time he was accused of cowardice in the face of persecution, having emerged unscathed. Eusebius served as bishop of Caesarea from about 315 until his death in 340.
    Eusebius was a party to the Arian controversy, though unwillingly (Schaff 2014, p. 2565). He attempted to hold to a middle ground. Schaff considers Eusebius to have been more allied with Arius than with Athanasius in the dispute. Yet Eusebius was silent about this controversy in his writings. Rather, his focus was on Constantine's political victories at the same period. Schaff describes Eusebius as "not a man of controversy, but of moderation and peace" (Schaff 2014, p. 2566), choosing not to take a solid stance on either side of the Arian dispute.
    Schaff considers Eusebius' character to be flawed by indecision as well. He proved a loyal court theologian, adapting to the views desired by Constantine (Schaff 2014, p. 2566).
    The wide reading and collecting of information carried on by Eusebius sets him apart (Schaff 2014, p. 2567). While his theological statements may be lacking in depth, he demonstrated a considerable breadth of knowledge, making his historical writings an outstanding source to this day. Despite this, Schaff considers his collection of information to be more compelling than his analysis of that information. Schaff describes Eusebius' various works in brief.

"§162. The Church Historians after Eusebius." (pp. 2569-2574).
    After a substantial bibliography, Schaff notes that Eusebius was followed by church historians who carried his work on through the end of the sixth century (Schaff 2014, p. 2570). Like Eusebius their analysis may have been lacking in rigor but their collation of source documents was significant. They did nothing to correct or expand Eusebius' work through the third century. All focus on the East, except when the West was in direct contact with the East.
    Schaff describes Socrates of Constantinople, born in 380 (Schaff 2014, p. 2570). He provided extracts from source documents covering 306-439). Hermeas Sozomen, from Palestine but working in Constantinople, provided a history covering 323-423, without apparent influence of Socrates (Schaff 2014, p. 2571). Theodoret of Cyrus, who became embroiled in the Christological controversies noted in the previous chapter, composed a history of 325-429 in five books (Schaff 2014, p. 2572). He recorded substantial information about hermits and monks, as well as a description of heresies, among many other works. Evagrius of Antioch, living about 536 until after 594, wrote an ecclesiastical history covering 431-594, describing political events, bishops, public buildings including churches, and earthquakes and other calamities. Thomas Lector of Constantinople, as well as writing a history from 431-518 also compiled abstracts of other authors. Schaff moves next to mention Nicephorus Callistus, of the 15th century (Schaff 2014, p. 2573). He picked up histories in the 6th century and brought them up to his time, though with more detail from the 10th century onward. In the West, Schaff notes only Rufinus of Aquileia, 330-410 (Schaff 2014, p. 2573). He translated and annotated Eusebius and moved his accounts forward to 392. Cassiodorus, in the sixth century, abstracted some of the Eastern historians (Schaff 2014, p. 2574). Jerome's biographies of important men also receive mention in brief.

​
0 Comments

Addiction as Idolatry

10/16/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Notes
10/16/25

Welch, Edward T. (2001). "Chapter 4: The Descent into Addiction." (pp. 65-83). In Addictions: A Banquet in the Grave Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing (Personal Library)
    In this chapter, Welch considers how the biblical model of idolatry can illustrate the descent into addiction (Welch 2001, p. 65). He observes that it is quite likely that people move toward addiction in their attitudes before significant interaction with a substance or situation. This he considers to be due to our propensity toward sin, since we are in a fallen world (Welch 2001, p. 66). Such a descent into bondage is familiar to us all. Because of our understanding of the tendency, he contends we should be eager to help others who are endangered.
    The beginning of addiction, in Welch's analysis, may normally be found in our indifference to what God's word says, or our lack of preparedness to deal with the attractive nature of sin (Welch 2001, p. 67). Curiosity, experimentation among friends, or social desires can quickly lead people into substance abuse or other types of bondage (Welch 2001, p. 68). Welch relates this to a biblical category of idolatry, due to similarity with Israel's behavior. The people had numerous cultural warnings against seeking security in the idols of neighboring cultures. However, gradually, they compromised as concerned the idol worship around them (Welch 2001, p. 69). Given time, Israel's life was very similar to that of the surrounding nations. Welch urges his readers to guard themselves and their families from capitulation by being open and honest, as well as engaging in behaviors such as regular church attendance and family prayers which may provide stability and accountability in all areas of life (Welch 2001, pp. 69-70). Those who are aware of a descent into addiction are much more likely to ascend out of it. The role of our interests and desires is more important than the role of outside substances.
    Welch suggests that as a time of experimentation with the addictive idol continues, the substance or experience takes on the role of a friend (Welch 2001, p. 71). The old friend group may be deserted in preference for a new group centered around the addiction, which gets to call the shots. Welch does concede that this process may be difficult to perceive. It is somewhat like finding the difference between dusk and darkness. Welch specifically describes a progression from one substance to another. As long as the friendship exists, one can make friends with other addictions (Welch 2001, p. 73).
    As with intimate romantic relationships, a friendship with an addiction can grow into what Welch would call infatuation (Welch 2001, p. 73). In this context, Welch suggests we can find many idols other than the addiction which are fed by the addictive behavior. He notes feelings of belonging and being loved as examples. Having access to the substance or experience increases use, which can eclipse other factors, including employment, finances, and family (Welch 2001, p. 74). Promises of behavior change may be made, but they are easily broken, often along with blame-shifting excuses (Welch 2001, p. 76). Welch considers the tension caused with family and friends to lead most naturally to enabling behavior. The problem is allowed to continue so as to avoid conflict. Rather than enabling, Welch suggests that family members should make it known that they are seeking help to deal with conflicts (Welch 2001, p. 77).
    At this point, Welch is clear that the life of the addict and others has become chaotic. Nobody is free from tension (Welch 2001, p. 78). Blame shifting is the rule. The addiction is seen as the escape hatch from problems caused by everyone else. The idol is now firmly in charge of the addict's life (Welch 2001, p. 79).
    Welch sees the final stage in the addiction/idolatry as worship. The idol controls the entirety of the addict's thought and emotional life (Welch 2001, p. 80). The addict may deny dependence, but it eventually becomes clear to others (Welch 2001, p. 81).
    Welch closes this chapter with a number of incisive lies of questioning we may consider when confronting addictions in ourselves and others (Welch 2001, pp. 82-83).

​
0 Comments

Laying Pelagianism to Rest

10/14/2025

0 Comments

 

Church History
10/14/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter IX. Theological Controversies, and Development of the Ecumenical Orthodoxy." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2327-2561). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 117-160).

"§159. Semi-Pelagianism." (pp. 2550-2557).
    Schaff identifies semi-Pelagian thought as attempting to mediate between Pelagius and Augustine (Schaff 2014, p. 2551). This system takes a synergistic and somewhat legalistic approach to conversion and sanctification, normally requiring man to make the first step. Semi-Pelagian thought never coalesced into its own sect during our period.
    After Pelagianism was condemned as heresy, those who objected to an Augustinian view of predestination wrote about their understanding of security in Christ (Schaff 2014, p. 2652). Followers of Augustine responded with writings of their own. The writings of Prosper and of Haliarius particularly rejected the growing semi-Pelagian views (Schaff 2014, p. 2653). The semi-Pelagians held that while man was sick with sin he was not dead, and that he was able to cry out for divine assistance, with which he needed to cooperate (Schaff 2014, p. 2654). Among the semi-Pelagians Schaff considers John Cassian to be pre-eminent. Prosper of Aquitane emerged as the chief Augustinian to write against Cassian (Schaff 2014, p. 2585). Schaff describes a number of their writings in brief.

"§160. Victory of Semi-Augustinianism. Council of Orange, A.D. 529." (pp. 2557-2561).
    In the previous segment, Schaff made brief mention of synods in 472 and 475 in which an Augustinian predestination was condemned (Schaff 2014, p. 2557). These were provincial synods which resulted in a schism. Augustinian doctrine was by and large upheld. By the middle of the sixth century, semi-Pelagianism was not widely accepted (Schaff 2014, p. 2558). The Synod of Orange, in 529, approved an Augustinian outlook, articulating doctrines in some detail. Schaff provides numerous extracts (Schaff 2014, pp. 2558-2560). The Acts of the council were endorsed by numerous dignitaries and were forwarded to Rome, where pope Boniface II confirmed them in 530 (Schaff 2014, p. 2560). The controversy between Augustinian and Pelagian thought has resurfaced now and then, though not with as great an overall impact on doctrinal articulation as clear in the Middle Ages.

​
0 Comments

How Do We View Addictions?

10/9/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Notes
10/9/25

Welch, Edward T. (2001). "Chapter 3: New Ways of Seeing." (pp. 45-63). In Addictions: A Banquet in the Grave Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing (Personal Library)
    Welch considers addiction research to have been too limited in scope. While most disciplines are analyzed through a variety of perspectives, addictions tend to be evaluated according to only one (Welch 2001, p. 45). While the metaphor of disease is useful, it limits the range of plausible perspectives. In Welch's opinion, those limitations are generally understood in terms of neglecting the universal sense of bondage the Bible describes as a fall into sin, as well as the possibility that at least some of that bondage is brought upon us willingly (Welch 2001, p. 46). The fact that addictions cannot be cured apart from some sort of change in choices sets them apart from other diseases. Welch questions whether there are biblical metaphors for addiction other than that of disease.
    One metaphor which can be used for addiction is that of idolatry. "From this perspective the true nature of all addictions is that we have chosen to go outside the boundaries of the kingdom of God . . . saying that we desire something in creation more than we desire the Creator" (Welch 2001, p. 47). Though this language is unfamiliar to current Western culture, it is a very common motif in the world of the Bible. The concept of idolatry extends to anything we are attached to by our thoughts and desires. At root, it describes what we worship rather than God (Welch 2001, p. 49). It is not limited to our behaviors, but has roots in our desires. In the beginning of our idolatry we desire to use something for our own purposes. However, the idols quickly begin controlling us (Welch 2001, p. 50).
    Of significance to Welch's consideration of idolatry is that "some idols hook our bodily passions and desires" (Welch 2001, p. 51). These forces are harder to resist. Welch speaks of this issue briefly in the terms which would be discussed in traditional Christian theology as disordered affections. We allow desires to rule rather than having Christ rule.
    A second alternative biblical perspective on addictions is that of adultery (Welch 2001, p. 56). Here, again, there is a desire which is out of order. Eventually one is controlled by the situation. The descriptions in Proverbs 7 and in Judges 13-16 easily generalize from sexual desire to other desires which can be out of balance (Welch 2001, p. 57). 
    A third alternate picture of addiction Welch explores is that of foolishness. Here, the fool decides to engage in actions which are pleasurable in the beginning but which become painful (Welch 2001, p. 59). At the root of the concept is sinful attitudes resulting in destructive behaviors. The fool is ultimately considered primarily in terms of sinful disordered affections.
    Two final biblical metaphors Welch discusses in brief are those of being attacked by a wild beast (Welch 2001, p. 60) and disease (Welch 2001, p. 61). In both of these metaphors the person is attacked in some way by the negative force. These attacks are painful and lead to tragedy.
    Welch closes the chapter, as he does each, with some summary statements and questions for further consideration.

​
0 Comments

Grace and Election in Augustine

10/7/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
10/7/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter IX. Theological Controversies, and Development of the Ecumenical Orthodoxy." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2327-2561). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 117-160).

"§157. Augustine's Doctrine of Redeeming Grace." (pp. 2538-2544).
    Schaff takes Augustine's argument for the redemptive grace of God to come first from an argument "upwards from below" (Schaff 2014, p. 2538). Here, because mankind is so unable to merit God's favor, redemption must be a gift from above. Secondly, arguing "downwards from above" he sees that as God is intimately involved in the natural world, he would also be involved in the spiritual world. God's presence pervades all creation, though never in a pantheistic sense (Schaff 2014, p. 2539). God's grace is taken to transform man, though granting forgiveness and life (Schaff 2014, p. 2540). Schaff does observe that in Augustine's usage justification includes some level of moral progress which most Protestants would take to be sanctification.
    Augustine, counter to Pelagius, considered the grace of God indispensable for creating and maintaining Christian virtue (Schaff 2014, p. 2540). By its nature, grace is unmerited (Schaff 2014, p. 2541). This turns the understanding of the Chrsitian life into the opposite of Pelagius' belief. We receive grace not because of our belief but so that we may believe. Grace is the cause. Belief is the effect. It is God's grace that changes us, rather than being our belief that changes God (Schaff 2014, p. 2542). The grace of God, by its very nature, draws people to God. This does not mean that humans cannot resist God. However, the grace of regeneration is something which is received by default.
    Augustine understood that grace "removes all the consequences of the fall' (Schaff 2014, p. 2543), but gradually. The change occurs over time. All the conversion, sanctification, and preservation of the Christian is a work of grace. Finally, Augustine saw that grace develops in man a self-determination to do good (Schaff 2014, p. 2544). This is the true freedom of the Christian.


"§158. The Doctrine of Predestination." (pp. 2544-2549).
    Augustine found that God's grace led him to understand an eternal and gracious purpose in calling people to himself. He therefore viewed predestination as "a necessary attribute of the divine will" (Schaff 2014, p. 2545). Schaff admits the problematic nature of predicating any actions, decisions, or willings of the eternal and omniscient God in terms of "before" or "after." Yet from a human vantage point we assign times to elements of a plan. There is therefore in every Christian some conception of God's grace as an eternal element which influences us in temporal matters. What set Augustine apart was his attempt to describe it in a systematic way (Schaff 2014, p. 2546). Schaff notes that while Calvin saw predestination as the starting point for his explanation of God's grace, Augustine saw it as the consummation. Augustine "recognizes simply a decree of election to salvation" rather than any form of double predestination (Schaff 2014, p. 2547).
    Pelagians, predictably, considered Augustine's view of predestination to be fatalistic (Schaff 2014, p. 2547). They took exception to his view of the fallen nature which resulted in condemnation. The election to salvation seemed arbitrary, as some are saved but not all. Yet Augustine insisted God could not be the author of sin. He knows all our sin from eternity, but only permits it, rather than causing it (Schaff 2014, p. 2548). Schaff recognizes in Augustine the concept that not all are elect.They will eventually show their lack of election through failing to persevere. Yet it is always due to the fault of the sinful human, never the sinless God. All people are to be called to repentance and faith, as we never know who the elect are.

​
0 Comments

Is It Sin or Sickness? Both?

10/2/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Notes
10/2/25

Welch, Edward T. (2001). "Chapter 2: Sin, Sickness, or Both?" (pp. 17-43). In Addictions: A Banquet in the Grave Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing (Personal Library)
    Welch sees a biblical concept of sin as central to understanding addictions (Welch 2001, p. 17). He admits this is an unpopular view, but primarily due to a failure to understand sin biblically. Welch understands sin to be an inescapable reality in life (Welch 2001, p. 19). Humans eventually enter into sin, and we need to recognize that. Though it is uncomfortable, we admit that all people make "moral judgments about our own or other's behavior" (Welch 2001, p. 19). Decisions, and actions based on decisions, have consequences. However, the Bible does not allow us to set ourselves up as the lawgiver, judge, jury, and executioner. It is essential that we all examine ourselves and our sin before others and, ultimately, against God (Welch 2001, p. 20).
    Welch holds that our sin is the greatest problem we have (Welch 2001, p. 20). He further clarifies that sin is normally hidden and quiet. All is rooted in a failure to love God perfectly (Welch 2001, p. 21). Since the gospel proclaims that Jesus gives forgiveness of sin, a failure to confess sin also rejects the gospel.
    While sin is easily seen as something problematic from a moral point of view, addictions are often interpreted as being medical in nature (Welch 2001, p. 21). Yet Welch finds that the Bible discusses addictions in different terms than diseases. The classic example is drunkenness (Welch 2001, p. 22). It is portrayed consistently in moral terms, as people allow themselves to be overcome by alcohol. This is a problem of misplaced desires, not of medical illness. A difficulty which Welch acknowledges in this interpretation is that while sin is understood as directed against God, drunkenness may seem only to hurt oneself (Welch 2001, p. 23). Yet the question of lordship or mastery remains. Welch asks, "Who is your master, God or your desires?" (Welch 2001, p. 23). Addictive thoughts and behaviors ultimately rule us. They also have a negative influence on all our relationships.
    In general, Welch considers that the element of volition governs our understanding of sin versus sickness. "If we do something wrong and we do it purposefully, self-consciously, and in control, then it is sin. If we do something that might be considered wrong, but we do it without apparent intent or even in spite of our intent, then it is a disease" (Welch 2001, p. 25). This concept leads to a view that something begun in a willing manner but which then becomes out of control may be considered a disease. It ultimately is without intent or in spite of intent. However, Welch observes that the person engaged in addictive behavior generally, at least at some point, thinks there are payoffs, so chooses to continue down that path (Welch 2001, p. 26). This is not the pattern we find in diseases. While biological factors may predispose people to certain patterns, studies consistently fail to demonstrate an inescapable pattern of determined behavior (Welch 2001, p. 27).
    The issue of cravings is an important element in an analysis of addictions. Cravings to engage in addictive behavior fall into three essential categories. Some come while the person is "clean and sober" (Welch 2001, p. 28). Those seem to suggest a biological root, at least a disposition. Welch suggests that these cravings can be triggered by a wide variety of situations, many of which are relational in nature, either based on a relationship with a person, a setting, or a substance (Welch 2001, p. 29).
    A second category of craving is that which we experience after beginning an addictive behavior. The heavy drinker is likely to continue to drink after a first drink (Welch 2001, p. 30). However, this is a tendency, not a foregone conclusion. Welch rejects a deterministic view that the addicted person is completely helpless.
    A third area of carving is that experienced by someone physically dependent on a substance (Welch 2001, p. 31). Withdrawal from a physical addiction is difficult, in large part because it creates medical instability. Spiritual care during the symptoms of withdrawal is unlikely to be fruitful.
    Welch strongly advocates understanding addiction as rooted in a self-serving internal attitude, played out in behaviors which tend to take control over our will (Welch 2001, p. 32). He defines this in terms of sin which leads to slavery. The slave cannot escape without dealing both with the sinful attitudes and the behavioral consequences of those attitudes (Welch 2001, pp. 33-34). Dealing only with the actions fails to break the bondage. Likewise, dealing only with the attitude fails to stop the destructive behavior apart from conscious effort.
    Welch asks a critical question. "Does sin turn into a disease?" (Welch 2001, p. 370. While this approach makes sense on the surface, the Scripture urges a view in which sin is the fundamental problem and by which sin leads to more sin, with consequences also multiplying. The longer a pattern continues, the more complicated its troubles become.
    Welch admits freely that the view of sin governing addictions seems like a step backwards, one which could be used to condemn others (Welch 2001, p. 39). However, Welch advocates a philosophy that all people sin and that sin is meant to be dealt with through repentance and life change. This does not lead to condemnation.
    From the standpoint of applied theology, Welch suggests we cultivate an acceptance of God's work to confront our sin, calling us to receive forgiveness and restoration (Welch 2001, p. 40). The change of attitude toward an addiction is fundamental in our change of behavior. The change, above all, is a process (Welch 2001, p. 41). Welch allows that it may take significant time and effort to move away from slavery to addictions. However, he encourages perseverance.

​
0 Comments

Pelagians' Charges, Augustinian Responses

9/30/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
9/30/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter IX. Theological Controversies, and Development of the Ecumenical Orthodoxy." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2327-2561). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 117-160).

"§155. Arguments for the doctrine of Original Sin and Hereditary Guilt." (pp. 2530-2533).
    Schaff moves on to consider the means used by Augustine to reach his conclusions about original sin (Schaff 2014, p. 2530). Many of his arguments were based on the Vulgate version of Romans 5:12, which affirms that in Adam's sin all have sinned, though Schaff takes the "in which" to refer to the nature of the world, rather than the nature of Adam personally to have led all into sin. However, Schaff agrees that Augustine rightly found a causal tie between sin and death. Augustine's exegesis does include other passages which make the picture clearer.
    Augustine further made arguments from the ancient practice of infant baptism "for remission of sins" (Schaff 2014, p. 2531). This practice signified an acceptance of the universality of sin in all humans. In contrast, while the Pelagians continued to baptize infants, they made it simply a ritual which confirmed the goodness of a good nature. The Pelagian reaction to Augustine's point of view was utter rejection.
    Schaff observes that Augustine, as well as other authors, while affirming the necessity of baptism, still would soften his view as to the nature of torment to which those unbaptized who died in early childhood would endure (Schaff 2014, p. 2532).
    A third branch of Augustine's argument was based on human experience (Schaff 2014, p. 2532). It is easily observed, and even among non-Christian observers, that humans are not as good by nature as we might wish (Schaff 2014, p. 2533).

"§156. Answers to Pelagian Objections." (pp. 2533-2538).
    Augustine did not write in a vacuum. He was engaged with Pelatians, interacting with them regarding their differences. Schaff cites Julian of Eclanum as a primary voice of Pelagianism (Schaff 2014, p. 2533). Julian's argument against Augustine was based on five points conceded by Augustine. Man is created by the good God. Marriage is good. If baptism remits sins, children of the baptized are good. If God is good, he holds nobody responsible for another person's sins. If humans can be perfectly righteous they cannot be inherently sinful.
    The first point, in Julian's opinion, forced Augustine to fall into a Manichaean dualism (Schaff 2014, p. 2534). However, Augustine held that humans are appropriately good in their nature, but the fall has introduced evil vice which clings to the nature.
    The argument about baptized people bearing sinless children is based on evil having no actual substance. Augustine maintained that baptism removed guilt, but that sin (concupiscentia) remained. This reality remains through generations (Schaff 2014, p. 2534). Despite the existence of lust within marriage, marriage is not to be condemned. It does not remove sin from a next generation (Schaff 2014, p. 2535).
    Pelagians would affirm it as unrighteous for God to condemn one man for another man's sin (Schaff 2014, p. 2535). Augustine, however, views humanity as one whole. Therefore, he sees all humans as participants in Adam's sin (Schaff 2014, p. 2536). In Augustine's view you cannot separate one generation from the whole context.

​
0 Comments

Practical, or Applied Theology

9/25/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Notes
9/25/25

Welch, Edward T. (2001). "Chapter 1: Practical Theology." (pp. 3-15). In Addictions: A Banquet in the Grave Phillipsburg, N.J.: P&R Publishing (Personal Library)
    Welch opens this chapter with an anecdote of a friend whose interaction reminded him that a correct biblical view of problems is at the root of healing (Welch 2001, p. 3). In particular, a view that desires are outside our control, that we are identified by our sins, and that we can expect to be made godly and "fixed" instantly will lead to discouragement and despair (Welch 2001, p. 4).
    Welch's conclusion, based on this encounter, is that it is necessary to apply theology to our actual circumstances (Welch 2001, p. 5). This is difficult for many people, especially in our secularized, therapeutic culture. Yet Welch contends that correct application of biblical viewpoints to current situations is mandatory (Welch 2001, p. 6).
    In many instances, Welch would say we willfully neglect application of theology to our lives (Welch 2001, p. 7). For example, if Jesus is lord of all, we are called to sacrifice all our other desires if he so commands. The other desires may be difficult to keep at bay. Welch concedes that we have often spent years nurturing those desires and trying to deny the theological claims on our life (Welch 2001, p. 8). He sees a practical difference between confessing the truth and actually believing it.
    Welch urges involvement with other people as we deal with addictive tendencies (Welch 2001, p. 9). The people around us are often willing to confront us in areas about which we may be blind or attempting to hide. These areas which require confrontation may not be the addictive behavior per se, but often are underlying beliefs and attitudes. In Welch's opinion, the life rooted in Jesus is the goal of every Christian (Welch 2001, p. 10). In this life, our addictions often prove to be a side-effect of past sinful beliefs and attitudes. The underlying issues are the root.
    Welch attempts the mammoth task of describing addictions and what they feel like. In his view, addictions make people feel trapped, powerless, and victimized (Welch 2001, p. 12). In almost all cases, addictions are related to substances or activities which provide a quick physical sensation (Welch 2001, p. 13). At the root of all, Welch finds a fundamental desire for something which can be used in a manner that is outside of the balanced life and behavior the Bible would endorse.
    Welch closes this and each chapter with questions for thought, study, prayer, and application. I recommend the reader of the book write out answers to the questions provided (Welch 2001, pp. 14-15).

​
0 Comments

Augustine's Understanding of the Fall

9/23/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
9/23/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter IX. Theological Controversies, and Development of the Ecumenical Orthodoxy." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2327-2561). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 117-160).

"§153. The Augustinian System: The Fall and its consequences." (pp. 2521-2526).
    Schaff, describing the Augustinian view of the human nature, considers it to be predicated on the "unity of the human race," an understanding of the nature of the first Adam and Christ as the second Adam, and a concept of all humans partaking of Adam's sin (Schaff 2014, p. 2522). Augustine takes all humans as personally sinning in Adam. The penalty of sin imposed on Adam is also imposed on all subsequent humans.
    In Augustine's view, there was one imperfection in the created order, the ability of humans to enter into sin (Schaff 2014, p. 2522). Falling prey to Satan's temptation, Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit. The rejection of obedience to God's command proved to be the sin which ruined all humanity (Schaff 2014, p. 2523).
    As Augustine saw the serious nature of the first human sin, he understood the penalty of sin to be commensurate (Schaff 2014, p. 2523). Schaff categorizes Augustine's list of consequences of sin in seven parts. He first identifies a loss of free choice. This consequence of sin is that the fallen human will necessarily sin (Schaff 2014, p. 2524). Second, human knowledge is hindered. Learning has become difficult. Third, free will is bound so that the sinner does what he does not desire. Paradise is closed to mankind, creating severe difficulties in life. Fifth, the desires of fleshly pleasure are elevated. This concupiscence interferes with all our endeavors (Schaff 2014, p. 2525). The higher and lower desires are at war against each other. A sixth result of the fall is the introduction of physical death in the world (Schaff 2014, p. 2526). Finally, the topic to be considered in the next section is "original sin and hereditary guilt in [Adam's] whole posterity" (Schaff 2014, p. 2526).

"§154. The Augustinian System: Original Sin, and the Origin of the Human Soul." (pp. 2526-2530).
    Schaff continues his evaluation of Augustine's anthropology by noting that Augustine considers all the descendants of Adam, apart from Christ, to be bent toward evil, thus to engage in actual sins themselves (Schaff 2014, p. 2527). Because of this corruption by original sin, all human thoughts and actions are, in some way, sinful. Augustine does, however, allow for there to be "different degrees both of sinfulness and guilt" (Schaff 2014, p. 2537).
    Because Augustine considered sin to be the universal condition of humans, he evaluated the various explanations of its transmission (Schaff 2014, p. 2528). A Traducian theory describes the soul originating along with the body. Thus, a sinful soul comes to be in conjunction with a fallen body. Under a second theory, each soul is created by God, not through procreation. This creationism sees God implementing the soul in the body at some point. Hence, the soul becomes corrupt by being connected with a body. The third theory, Platonic in origin, is that of pre-existence. Here, the soul was created in another world and sinned, thus being bound to a body as punishment. The first point of view was held by Augustine, the second by Pelagius, and the third by Origen. Schaff clarifies, that the historic Traducian view admits that the soul may have existed "in the thought and purpose of God" but not in any other way (Schaff 2014, p. 2629). All three views have some kernels of truth, and all have drawbacks.

​
0 Comments

Matthew's Gospel as the Gospel of the Kingdom

9/18/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Scholarly Notes
9/18/25

Kingsbury, Jack Dean. (1975).  "Recapitulation." in Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom. (pp. 161-167). Philadelphia: Fortress Press. (Personal Library)
    Kingsbury concludes this brief book with a summary of his various theses. He takes Matthew's Gospel to be divided into three portions, with signal statements at 1:1, 4:17, and 16:21. The main themes for each segment then may be seen as the person; the proclamation; and the suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus (Kingsbury 1975, p. 161). He sees a consistent movement throughout of salvation history as the narrative shifts the reader's focus from the time of Israel to the time of Jesus. Kingsbury considers that Matthew "is primarily a christological document and has as its central purpose to inform the members of Matthew's community, against their present situation, of Jesus Messiah and of his relationship to the Father and of what it means to be his disciple" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 162).
    Matthew's primary understanding of Jesus, as evidenced by his use of titles, is that he is the Son of God, specifically the one who reveals God's saving presence in human terms (Kingsbury 1975, p. 162). His work is to establish the kingdom of heaven, which, in his death and resurrection, he has done as both a present and a future reality (Kingsbury 1975, p. 164). 
    As partakers of God's kingdom, those who believe Jesus are seen by Matthew as having an ethical change (Kingsbury 1975, p. 164). There is an expected understanding of some spiritual concepts. These set the disciples' behavior apart from the behavior of those who are partakers of Satan's kingdom, which is characterized as "lawless" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 165). The lawful teaching and preaching of the kingdom of God should set all Israel apart. However, Matthew shows much of Israel as rejecting Jesus as the Messiah. For this reason, God transfers the work of his kingdom to the church as a new people of God. Though the church remains a community in which strife may arise, it is unified as a body of partakers of the Gospel (Kingsbury 1975, p. 166).

​
0 Comments

Pelagius and Augustine on Human Nature

9/16/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
9/16/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter IX. Theological Controversies, and Development of the Ecumenical Orthodoxy." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2327-2561). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 117-160).

"§151. The Pelagian System Continued: Doctrine, of Human Ability and Divine Grace." (pp. 2511-2516).
    Continuing to discuss the historical Pelagian movement, Schaff notes that Pelagians consider the state of humans to be the same before and after the fall (Schaff 2014, p. 2511). They see the difference in human nature to be nonexistent among different faiths except for an assistance by grace in the Christian. The basic good of the human nature will often be asserted based on the rather universal tendency of humans to do good deeds. Augustine would counter that such good deeds outside of the Christian faith on some level are self-serving. For this reason, they are not rightly seen as good works (Schaff 2014, p. 2512).
    Pelagians would counter the Augustinian view by defining good in terms of power to do something, will to do it, and the nature of the act (Schaff 2014, p. 2512). In Schaff's view, this separates the nature of man from his will or his actions. God, further, becomes a spectator who has no power or control over his creation (Schaff 2014, p. 2513).
    Rather than denying God's grace, since God doesn't really seem to be in charge of his universe, Pelagius affirms a sort of natural grace as well as a supernatural grace which enlightens and assists humans (Schaff 2014, p. 2513). Again, Schaff points out that the Pelagian understands free will to mean we can choose to imitate Christ. This makes Christ into an example (Schaff 2014, p. 2514). While grace is helpful to us, it is not necessary, since we have an example and a free will. In the end, Schaff finds that Pelagian thought has no logical need for the existence of God or for redemption in Christ (Schaff 2014, p. 2516).

"§152. The Augustinian System: The Primitive State of Man, and Free Will." (pp. 2516-2521).
    Before the rise of Pelagianism, Augustine had articulated his view of human nature, sin, and grace (Schaff 2014, p. 2516). Schaff does observe that, after his Confessions (400), Augustine did refine and clarify some of his views (Schaff 2014, p. 2517). However, in essence, they were unchanged to the end of his life.
    In his original state, Augustine describes mankind as innocent (Schaff 2014, p. 2517). This original state could be described as "the undeveloped germ" of perfection (Schaff 2014, p. 2518). Because there was no offense or disobedience, there was a sort of grace present, but not of a redemptive nature (Schaff 2014, p. 2518). The perfect state of innocence is not seen as exactly heavenly, as a child is not a mature human. Human powers, seen as gifts from God, could be developed for good or not. A foundational element in Augustine's thought was the "distinction between the possibility of not sinning and the impossibility of sinning" (Schaff 2014, p. 2519). Man's freedom before the fall still allowed for falling into sin. Augustine saw man as originally free in terms of action. Whether sinful or not, we have freedom to do this or that (Schaff 2014, p. 2519). A slightly different type of freedom is a freedom of choice. Here, counter to the Manichees, Augustine affirms that prior to the fall man could choose to sin or not to sin. This is specifically a freedom of the will. After the fall, this free will was limited. In Augustine's view it now applies to choice "between individual actions within the sphere of sinfulness and of justitia civilis" (Schaff 2014, p. 2520). A third freedom exists to the Christian, that of "the free self-decision or self-determination of the will toward the good and holy" (Schaff 2014, p. 2521). This is only available to Christians, made free by the Son of God. It is true freedom.

​
0 Comments

The Kingdom of Heaven in Matthew's Gospel

9/11/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Scholarly Notes
9/11/25

Kingsbury, Jack Dean. (1975).  Chapter 4: Matthew's View of the Son of God and the Kingdom of Heaven." in Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom. (pp. 128-160). Philadelphia: Fortress Press. (Personal Library)
    Acknowledging the central role of Jesus as Son of God in Matthew's Gospel, Kingsbury here explores the relationship between the Son of God and the kingdom of heaven, the central concept he finds in the first Gospel (Kingsbury 1975, p. 128). The entire message of the good news, in Matthew, may be related to the preaching of the kingdom. Kingsbury finds it significant that in Matthew there is no distinction made between the gospel message before and after the resurrection (Kingsbury 1975, p. 130). Further, the gospel itself is not defined. While the overall content of the written account is a possible definition, at times within the document an event exalting Jesus is indicated as "gospel' (Kingsbury 1975, p. 130).
    Because of the potential for confusion based on terms, Kingsbury evaluates the terms "gospel" and "kingdom" in thru. He ties the word "gospel" to Isaiah 52:7 and asserts Matthew's use of Mark and Q, taking the word to bear christological significance, always being modified with the idea of "the kingdom" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 133). As to Matthew's use of "kingdom," Kingsbury notes that Matthew modifies the word with "of heaven" or "of God," using the two terms synonymously (Kingsbury 1975, p. 1234). In the time of Matthew, Jewish thought has largely concluded that the work of prophets and teachers centered around the kingdom of God, looking to some form of an eschatological kingdom (Kingsbury 1975, p. 136). The messianic hope found in Jesus therefore seems a reasonable theme of teaching and preaching.
    God's kingdom, as described in Matthew, has significant complexity. In its salvation-historical dimension, it shows a strongly temporal orientation (Kingsbury 1975, p. 138). Just the same, Kingsbury does not rule out the instances of the kingdom being viewed spatially, drawing near. This is especially associated with the physical proximity of Jesus. However, the temporal context of an eschaton remains prominent. "The present is to be viewed in the light of the future and everything seen as moving toward the consummation of the age" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 138). The age to come is drawing near, and is a time of blessing. Matthew regularly uses "blessed" to describe the kingdom to come (Kingsbury 1975, p. 141). The blessed age to come features the destruction of Satan's rule (Matthew 12:28). The kingdom may be given and taken away by God (21:43) (Kingsbury 1975, p. 142). And in 11:12, "violent ones" have attempted to plunder God's kingdom. Kingsbury's suggestion is that we take the violent ones to be the devil and those who falsely claim an allegiance to God. The work of the kingdom, on the other hand, is to bring people to confess the Son of God and live as his disciples (Kingsbury 1975, p. 143).
    In addition to the concept of salvation history, Kingsbury notes an important element of the kingdom of God is its cosmic dimension. He considers the idea of a growing spiritual force to be foreign to Matthew's mind (Kingsbury 1975, p. 146). It has always been present, as God has always been present. However, the acknowledgement of God's kingdom does grow among people in cultural groups (Kingsbury 1975, p. 147). In the end, all will see it as it is. In the meantime, in some ways, it seems hidden or insignificant.
    Thirdly, Kingsbury notes the ethical facet of God's kingdom (Kingsbury 1975, p. 148). This is normally seen in personal convictions and actions. The decision is presented to readers, whether to enter into the way of life or the way of death (Kingsbury 1975, p. 149).
    An important element in Matthew's portrayal of the kingdom of heaven is its adversarial counterpart, the kingdom of Satan (Kingsbury 1975, p. 149). The devil is depicted as the enemy whose power is only exceeded by God. He is the ruler over demons, or unclean spirits, and uses them in his encouragement to humans that they should engage in lawless behavior. In Matthew's Gospel Jesus serves as the primary target for Satan (Kingsbury 1975, p. 150). When Matthew describes the post-resurrection Church, he shows it under attack by Satan though Satan is depicted as a defeated enemy (Kingsbury 1975, p. 151). In his broader role in the world in general, his work is to raise up followers to deceive others. At the end of the world, he, his angels, and his followers will be relegated to punishment (Kingsbury 1975, p. 152).
    With the level of dualism shown in other areas within Matthew's Gospel, Kingsbury evaluates whether there is a different relation of Israel or of the Gentiles to the kingdom of heaven (Kingsbury 1975, p. 152). Israel is definitively described in Matthew's Gospel as rejecting Jesus as the Messiah. Kingsbury documents this concept with numerous biblical passages (Kingsbury 1975, p. 153). By the time of the composition of the Gospel, Kingsbury sees no change in this rejection. This he bases on the third person descriptions in the Gospel, for instance, "their synagogues" and "their leaders," as of a different and hostile culture (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 153-154). This indicates the hostility as an ongoing feature of the relationship between Israel and the Church. With Israel's rejection of the Messiah, the proclamation of the Gospel has been directed to other nations (Kingsbury 1975, p. 156). While the nations also are, at least at times, hostile toward Christ and His people, the Gospel goes to all nations. They are all, in a sense, equal before God.
    Kingsbury concludes that the Church serves as the dwelling place of God with His people. However, Matthew does not consider the Church to be the Kingdom of Heaven (Kingsbury 1975, p. 157). While the Church lives under the rule of God, the people who follow Jesus have been instructed in the things of the Kingdom and live under its sway. It can expect trials and troubles from inside and outside (Kingsbury 1975, p. 158). There are false prophets. People sin against each other. Some lose their faith. In short, this is a community that is tainted by sin, though it has been redeemed. The final coming of the kingdom is still in the future.

​
0 Comments

Pelagianism Bites the Dust (Sort Of)

9/9/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
9/9/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter IX. Theological Controversies, and Development of the Ecumenical Orthodoxy." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2327-2561). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 117-160).

"§149. Position of the Roman Church. Condemnation of Pelagianism." (pp. 2500-2504).
    After two councils in North Africa in 416, the condemnation of Pelagius was forwarded to Pope Innocent, both in the official conciliar documents and a 'more confidential letter" (Schaff 2014, p. 2501). While Innocent agreed with the condemnation, he died in 417. His successor, Zosimus, received an explanatory letter from Pelagius, then heard a presentation by Coelestius, defending less controversial doctrines. Zosimus then censured the North African bishops for their rejection of Pelagius. Schaff concludes that this event marked the first of a number of instances of popes accepting some form of Pelagianism (Schaff 2014, p. 2502). Though remaining respectful, the Africans held a council in Carthage in 418, defining their opposition to Pelagius in eight or nine canons, which Schaff summarizes briefly.
    Zosimus, persuaded by the canons produced in Carthage, accepted them and condemned Pelagius and Coelestius (Schaff 2014, p. 2503). Numerous Italian bishops rejected the new position of Zosimus, resulting in ongoing tensions within the Church regarding Pelagianism. The Pelagians, in exile, continued to press their point, and, in 429 were received by the patriarch Nestorius in Constantinople (Schaff 2014, p. 2504). Schaff notes that Nestorius, along with Theodore of Mopsuestia, engaged in writing opposing Augustine's view of anthropology. With the death of this generation, Schaff sees Pelagianism as "externally vanquished" around 430 (Schaff 2014, p. 2504). There remained adherents, but there was no success as a sect.

"§150. The Pelagian System: Primitive State and Freedom of Man: the Fall." (pp. 2505-2510).
    Schaff concedes that Pelagian views of anthropology do make sense in a certain way. If human nature is understood empirically, it is reasonable to assume that humans are free in terms of moral will (Schaff 2014, p. 2505). The Pelagian view of ancient man takes Adam to be created in a sinless state and to be morally competent (Schaff 2014, p. 2506). His free will allowed him to serve God, and could be seen as the foundation of all ability to serve God. With this as the foundational premise, Pelagius took it as necessary that human freedom must include the ability to choose good or evil. Otherwise, it is not true freedom.
    The human will, in the end, is seen to become accustomed to making choices for good or for evil. In Pelagian thought, this moves people down the path of godliness or sinfulness (Schaff 2014, p. 2507). Freedom of choice must be used properly, so as to make a man holy. If practiced regularly, eventually a man could no longer sin.
    Pelagius viewed physical death as a necessity, which would occur even in the absence of sin (Schaff 2014, p. 2508). The connection between sin and death he took to indicate that since all people choose sin, at least occasionally, the result is that all people die. While Adam's sin led to his death, it merely serves as a bad example, rather than creating an inherited sinful state. The sin in the world is a learned pattern, as we see examples of sin in others. This results in growing habits of sin (Schaff 2014, p. 2509).
    In Pelagius' view, as with Adam, so also with Christ. The merit of Christ serves only as an example for the free will of the person who would desire to be good (Schaff 2014, p. 2510). Sin and righteousness are both choices we make.

0 Comments

Jesus Has Many Titles. Which One Is Greatest?

9/4/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Scholarly Notes
9/4/25

Kingsbury, Jack Dean. (1975).  Chapter 3: The Christology of Matthew: Other Titles." in Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom. (pp. 84-127). Philadelphia: Fortress Press. (Personal Library)
    In this chapter Kingsbury attempts to demonstrate that "Son of God" is the central title of Jesus in Matthew's Gospel and to do so by comparing it with other titles used for Christ (Kingsbury 1975, p. 84). He addresses twelve different titles, essentially in order from least to most important from a christological point of view.
    The name "Jesus," essentially meaning "Savior," appears 150 times (Kingsbury 1975, p. 84). Matthew's use of the name strikes Kingsbury as pointing not to Jesus' majesty but to a definition of his mission. Of course, it does double duty as it is also his personal name (Kingsbury 1975, p. 85). The name is predominantly used simply as an identifier, rather than as a title.
    Matthew uses "son of Abraham" once to describe Jesus. The significance of this as a designation of the heir of God's promises to Abraham would be hard to miss (Kingsbury 1975, p. 85). He is thus designated as the true Israelite as well as the one through whom the Gentiles are blessed. Kingsbury notes that, as Jesus is also designated as the Son of God, and as he directs his disciples to carry the gospel to the Gentiles, he is taking on divine authority to fulfill the promise made to Abraham (Kingsbury 1975, p. 86). This indicates to Kingsbury that the "Son of God" title is more important than that of "Son of Abraham."
    Four times Jesus is referred to as "the Coming One" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 86). This title bears Messianic overtones, also suggesting that the "Coming One" performs divine actions. Due to the Messianic context, then, Kingsbury considers the title to point to the greater title, "Son of God." The title "Coming One" urges an understanding of the authority and divinity of the one expected.
    Jesus is three times described as the "Shepherd." It is fair to add to these references the one use of a verb for herding and the eleven references to his sheep (Kingsbury 1975, p. 87). The Old Testament frequently identifies God as the shepherd of Israel, and the Messiah is the coming one who will actually engage in the work of the shepherd (Kingsbury 1975, p. 87). The Messianic symbolism thus appears strong. While Matthew frequently refers to Israel as a flock, he does not push the term of shepherd upon Jesus frequently. Rather, the term used frequently for Jesus the shepherd is "Son of God." When Jesus uses the term of himself it is in the context of his impending death, which Kingsbury notes is particularly as the "Son of God" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 88). Thus Kingsbury concludes that the term "shepherd" is of less centrality than "Son of God."
    Kingsbury observes that the title 'prophet," while applied to Jesus in Matthew's Gospel, is applied broadly to others including the Old Testament prophets and John the Baptist (Kingsbury 1975, p. 88). Jesus' positive mentions of the prophets suggests that, as portrayed in Matthew, the term does not bear nearly the same importance as "Son of God." Kingsbury notes that even unbelieving crowds recognized Jesus as a prophet (Kingsbury 1975, p. 89). Kingsbury makes extensive comments regarding the comparisons made between Jesus and Moses (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 89-92). In all, while the similarities certainly exist, when Jesus does signs reminiscent of Moses, he is routinely referred to, or refers to himself, not as a prophet but as the "Son of God." 
    Jesus is addressed on occasions as "Rabbi" or "teacher," terms which Kingsbury takes to be used synonymously and to often be applied to any respected scribe or teacher (Kingsbury 1975, p. 92). It strikes Kingsbury as significant that Jesus' disciples do not use this term for him. Once again, we see that when Jesus is engaged in his teaching work, the important title for him is not "teacher" but "Son of God" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 93). 
    Kingsbury next addresses the term he translates as "servant" (παῖς), used once in Matthew, freely adapted from Isaiah 42 (Kingsbury 1975, p. 93). While I question the wisdom of woodenly using the term as "servant" I free grant that here it is the most appropriate understanding of the passage in Isaiah. Kingsbury observes that while the use of Isaiah in Matthew 12:18-21 speaks to actions and characteristics of Jesus, all are described elsewhere in Matthew in more detail and while identifying Jesus as "Son of God" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 94). He thus concludes that, as before, the primary christological title is "Son of God."
    In the passage about the origin of Jesus, the term "Emmanuel" is used of him (Kingsbury 1975, p. 95). Though the significance of Jesus as "God with us" is enormous, the word is not even used as his actual proper name. The role of the person Jesus is certainly that of "God with us." However, it is played out under the different christological title, "Son of God" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 96).
    The remaining titles Kingsbury discusses he considers major christological terms (Kingsbury 1975, p. 96). He first deals with "Messiah" ("Christ"), which can also be interpreted as "King." Kingsbury observes that the Messiah is Jesus, who brings history to a head, making either salvation or damnation available (Kingsbury 1975, p. 97). The title can be qualified to indicate the "King of the Jews" or the 'Son of God." In Matthew 16:16 and 26:63, Jesus ties the term directly to the "King of the Jews" and the 'Son of God" (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 97-98). Kingsbury is inclined to see the title used at times to distance Jesus from the association of the suffering servant idea (Kingsbury 1975, p. 98). 
    Related to the concept of Jesus as a king is that of him as the "Son of David" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 99). While the term is important, Kingsbury does not take it to have as great a significance as "Son of God." In terms of conceptual categories, "Son of David" belongs with "Son of Abraham" and likely serves to direct attention to Jesus as the king who provides blessing to the nations (Kingsbury 1975, p. 100). These titles are used with a narrow scope, involving some healings and Jesus' entry into Jerusalem. Kingsbury takes the people healed by Jesus as an indication that Jesus' role is as a humble king (Kingsbury 1975, p. 101). This further advances his theory that the "Son of David" title is less important than "Son of God."
    The title "Κύριος" ("Lord") is frequently held forth as the primary title for Jesus (Kingsbury 1975, p. 103). The work of G. Bornkamm has played a leading role in these conclusions. Kingsbury reviews Bornkamm's work in some detail. He identifies three levels of usage of the term in Matthew. First, it is frequently used in a "conventional fashion" as a title of respect, such as "sir" in English (Kingsbury 1975, p. 105). In many instances, it is also used as a denotation of "God." The third use, and the one most closely related to Kingsbury's argument, is the use with christological significance (Kingsbury 1975, p. 106). For this analysis, Kingsbury looks at the use of "Lord" in the parables. Within the parables, the word is used, normally in the vocative case, in an interpersonal manner (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 106-107). In effect, we see Jesus as "Lord" but the term does not normally bear the weight used for "Son of God." Kingsbury considers the relationship of "Lord" to other titles, finding that proximity and use in apposition tie it most closely to "Son of David" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 110). Ties to other christological terms are not as strong.
    The references to Jesus as "Son of Man" are the final ones used for examination in this chapter. Kingsbury observes that "Son of Man" is related, in Matthew, to Jesus' "public ministry; to his suffering, death, and resurrection; and to his parousia" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 113). He considers Matthew to have actively increased the use of "Son of Man" references "available to him from the tradition" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 114). He further considers the references to be associated with reference to 'Son of God" and, further, to have a "public" character in which anyone would feel free to refer to Jesus as the "Son of Man" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 115). Despite the public nature of the title, it is used, especially by Jesus, as bearing authority. Kingsbury briefly entertains the theory that, especially in what he considers redactional passages, uses of "Son of Man" are simply to be understood as a personal pronoun (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 118 ff). In his estimation, they are stronger and more laden with christological significance than if they were intended as personal pronouns. He concludes that "Son of Man" is a public title equivalent to "Son of God," which is a private title (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 121-122).
    Kingsbury briefly concludes that in Matthew Jesus is presented, above all, as the Son of God. All other titles are subservient to that one (Kingsbury 1975, p. 126).

​
0 Comments

Outworkings of Pelagianism

9/2/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
9/2/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter IX. Theological Controversies, and Development of the Ecumenical Orthodoxy." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2327-2561). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 117-160).

"§147. External History of the Pelagian Controversy, A.D. 411-431." (pp. 2495-2497).
    Schaff observes that Pelagius, a monk from Britain, was well read, intelligent, and showed a good character of which Augustine was respectful (Schaff 2014, p. 2495). However, his morality was framed in legalism which rejected Augustine's view that it was by God's power that we could obey God's commands. We were to keep God's commands by our own effort. Having settled in Rome, Pelagius and his colleague Coelestius left from Rome in 411, going to Africa and missing seeing Agustine at Hippo. After a brief correspondence, Pelagius continued to Jerusalem while Coelestius sought a post as bishop in Carthage (Schaff 2014, p. 2497). Coelestius, facing opposition of his views at Carthage, was excluded from communion, went to Ephesus, and became a presbyter there.

"§148. The Pelagian Controversy in Palestine." (pp. 2497-2500).
    In Palestine, where Pelagius had gone, a controversy broke out in 414 (Schaff 2014, p. 2497). Pelagius' views were gaining traction, and becoming publicly known. The opposition was led by Jerome and Orosius. Jerome penned several books refuting the doctrinal claims of Pelagius (Schaff 2014, p. 2498). Schaff considers the views expressed by Jerome themselves to be semi-Pelagian in nature (Schaff 2014, p. 2499). At the same time, Orosius, a Spaniard, was sent to Jerome by Augustine bearing letters which spoke of the controversy. In a council in 415, Pelagius was viewed favorably. Because of Pelagius' facility in argument, he gained further favor, despite Jerome's misgivings (Schaff 2014, p. 2500).

​
0 Comments

"Son of God" as Jesus' Official Title in Matthew

8/28/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Scholarly Notes
8/28/25

Kingsbury, Jack Dean. (1975).  Chapter 2: The Christology of Matthew: The Title Son of God." in Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom. (pp. 40-83). Philadelphia: Fortress Press. (Personal Library)
    Because Kingsbury maintains that Matthew's Gospel is primarily christological in nature, he proceeds to approach the various topics found in Matthew in christological terms, with each shedding light on some aspect of the nature of Christ. In this chapter, he argues "that 'Son of God' is the central christological title of Matthew" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 41). This differs from much of the contemporary scholarship cited by Kingsbury, which has considerable diversity in terms of the central title used to describe Jesus' identity.
    Kingsbury considers the title "Son of God" as introduced in 1:1-4:16 to be represented also by parallel terms such as "the Son" or "my/his Son" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 42). In the birth narratives, while Jesus is identified as the Son of David, he is also identified as the Son of God, having been conceived by special means of the Father through Mary (Kingsbury 1975, p. 43).
    In the narrative of the Magi, Kingsbury notes the frequent use of regal language around Jesus (Kingsbury 1975, p. 45). The newborn is considered by Herod and the Magi as some sort of divine figure. In the narrative Jesus is regularly referenced as "the child" in such a way as to reject any conclusions that he is the son of Joseph. Kingsbury further notes the eschatological language used about Jesus. The divine promise made to Abraham is presented as coming to all humans through Jesus. This is something only God's representative could do (Kingsbury 1975, p. 46).
    In the account of Jesus' baptism, temptation, and relocation (3:13-4:16) Kingsbury notes a central theme of Jesus as the perfectly obedient one (Kingsbury 1975, p. 48). The sign of the Holy Spirit in 4:17 demonstrates that Jesus is divinely empowered for his work. He is openly endorsed by the Father and the Spirit (Kingsbury 1975, p. 49). The baptism thus declares Jesus to be the one and only Son of God. As with the baptism, so the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness (4:1-11) portrays Jesus as the perfectly obedient Son of God (Kingsbury 1975, p. 51). 
    In 4:17-10:42, the title "Son of God" or its equivalent does not appear. For this reason, Kingsbury seeks out a convincing argument that the title "Son of God" remains central to the concept held in Matthew (Kingsbury 1975, p. 53). This reason, Kingsbury considers, is that the title is not a "public" title. It is not used by outsiders to refer to Jesus except in mocking him. Even the disciples refer to Jesus as κύριε rather than υἱὲ θεοῦ (Kingsbury 1975, p. 54). Within Matthew 4:17-10:42, Jesus is engaged in dealing with the outsiders who would not be privy to the term "Son of God." Kingsbury further notes that, in other passages in Matthew, both κύριος and Messiah are used as synonyms for "Son of God." Within this section, those terms are still used to address Jesus. A further piece of evidence Kingsbury notes is that within this passage, Jesus describes his disciples who believe in him as sons of God, the heavenly Father. This strongly suggests Jesus is applying to them the status of sonship before God which he had applied to himself (Kingsbury 1975, p. 55). Additionally, Jesus continues to show divine authority in his teaching. His frequent choice of a mountain as a setting points to the many times God has revealed himself on a mountain (Kingsbury 1975, p. 57). 
    A note on the organization of the chapter is in order. Though Kingsbury began by breaking Matthew 4:17-28:20 into smaller parts, he departed from that organizational plan, here adducing passages throughout the second portion of Matthew (Kingsbury 1975, p. 56ff).
    While Kingsbury observes the importance of the title "Son of God" in Matthew, he also considers the displayed authority of Jesus as his central characteristic (Kingsbury 1975, p. 58). It is as the one who possesses authority that Jesus teaches and preaches. Kingsbury discusses in some detail the signs of authority in Jesus' teaching (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 60-61) and in his works of healing (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 61-63). Kingsbury concludes that the ongoing moves of Matthew to portray Jesus as the authoritative Son of God in 4:17-10:42, though without using the descriptor specifically, assert him as the Son of God (Kingsbury 1975, p. 63).
    In Matthew 11-12, though Israel has not recognized Jesus as the Son of God, Jesus is still portrayed as God who has come to dwell with His people (Kingsbury 1975, p. 63). He thanks the Father for revealing him to the "infants" even though he has not been understood in general (Kingsbury 1975, p. 64). Yet it is the Father's will to reveal the Son. Due to Israel's continued rejection of Jesus, he turns to teaching in parables. Yet his disciples continue to see his acts showing divine sovereignty, such as his walking on water in 14:22-33 (Kingsbury 1975, p. 66). Matthew continues to portray the confusion about Jesus' proper identity as we continue reading. 
    Kingsbury sees the next high point in the discussion with Peter in chapter 16. Counter to other people, Peter, as spokesperson for the Twelve, has come to know that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God (Kingsbury 1975, p. 67). The text continues with a move to the Transfiguration, where Matthew presents Jesus as the one who can overcome the fear of the disciples who have been confronted with God's glory (Kingsbury 1975, p. 68). Jesus is presented as the one in whom God's presence resides and as the one to be listened to. As parabolic actions and teaching continue, Jesus presents himself as the Son, the one who is with Israel (Kingsbury 1975, p. 71).
    Kingsbury moves on to the passion narrative. As Jesus prays in the garden it is significant that he specifically addresses God as "my Father" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 73). The motif of Jesus as the Son of God is continued in the trial of Jesus, where he agrees with the High Priest's question about being the Son of God, then immediately equates that term with the Son of Man (26:62-64). It is the assertion that Jesus is the Son of God which serves as his condemnation to receive the death penalty (Kingsbury 1975, p. 74). The remainder of Matthew's account of the suffering of Jesus is infused with language affirming Jesus' identity as the Son of God. The events of the cross leave no doubt that Matthew portrays Jesus as the perfect Son of God (Kingsbury 1975, p. 76). The culmination of the Gospel, in Matthew 28:16-20, completes the theme, which Kingsbury has argued exists throughout Matthew, of Jesus as the Son of God. Here, rather than being the suffering Son, he is the risen and glorified one (Kingsbury 1975, p. 77).

​
0 Comments

Monophysite Sects and Pelagians

8/26/2025

0 Comments

 
Church History
8/26/25

Schaff, Philip. (2014). "Chapter IX. Theological Controversies, and Development of the Ecumenical Orthodoxy." In  History of the Christian Church. (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Volume 3, Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity A.D. 311-600, from Constantine the Great to Gregory the Great. (pp. 2327-2561). (Original work published 1889).  Amazon Kindle Edition. (Personal Library). (sections 117-160).

"§145. The Monophysite Sects: Jacobites, Copts, Abyssinians, Aremenians, Maronites." (pp. 2476-2489).
    After a substantial bibliography, Schaff notes the persistence of Monophysite doctrine, as the sects had remained until his time (Schaff 2014, p. 2477). This stands in contrast to other erroneous sects, which have tended to die out. Schaff briefly entertains the advantages and disadvantages of the presence of Nestorian and Monophysite sects. Both have often served as an entry way to orthodoxy for Jews and Muslims. He briefly describes the many similarities they have to more orthodox Christianity.
    Schaff identifies "four branches of the monophysites: the Syrian Jacobites; the Copts, including the Abyssinians; the Armenians; and the less ancient Maronites" (Schaff 2014, p. 2479). The Jacobites trace their lineage to a sixth century patriarch of Antioch. They have a succession tracing back to the sixth century (Schaff 2014, p. 2480). The Copts, ethnically tied to ancient Egypt, though with influences from Greece and Arabia, built a patriarchy in Alexandria, dating back to the sixth century, though the patriarch normally lives in Cairo. The patriarch is always a monk and must be elected against his will (Schaff 2014, p. 2481). Coptic and Catholic Christians were at enmity with one another, with the Copts siding with the Saracens in the sixth century. They were later persecuted by the Saracents. The Coptic Christians have remained a small and impoverished underclass. The subgroup of Copts in Abyssinia tend toward syncretism and often hold to Jewish feasts (Schaff 2014, p. 2482). The Armenian Monophysite sect traces its origin to Mount Ararat and the fourth century (Schaff 2014, p. 2483). They are credited with developing the written version of the Armenian language. The Armenians split with the Greek church in 552, having been excluded from the council of Chalcedon (Schaff 2014, p. 2484). The empire, in the time of Schaff, was in the hands of Turkey and of Russia. Schaff compares their reception and treatment in the East to that of Jews in the West (Schaff 2014, p. 2485). Schaff notes that (in the 19th century) Protestant missionary work has been fairly successful in Armenian communities. The fourth branch of the Monophysites Schaff discusses are the Maronites, primarily located in Syria (Schaff 2014, p. 2486). This group, since the late 12th century, has tended to move toward Western Christianity and the Roman church.
    Schaff moves on to discuss controversy regarding anthropology, beginning with the Pelagian controversy (Schaff 2014, p. 2487). He provides a copious annotated bibliography of original source and later commentary (Schaff 2014, pp. 2487-2489).

"§146. Character of the Pelagian Controversy." (pp. 2489-2495).
    Schaff observes the distinction between the practical and concrete theology of the West over against a more speculative and developmental theology of the East (Schaff 2014, p. 2489). A study of biblical anthropology was not undertaken until the time of Augustine (Schaff 2014, p. 2490). Rather, Schaff sees the Greek fathers stressing human freedom in cooperation with divine grace, while the Latin fathers stressed human hereditary guilt versus God's grae. Pelagianism placed the responsibility on the human will, which must seek salvation. Augustine emphasized the divine will in conversion. After the death of Augustine, a semi-Pelagianism arose, which was more similar to the orthodoxy in the East (Schaff 2014, p. 2491). Both Augustinian and Pelagian influences continue in Christianity to the present time. Schaff treats each theologian charitably. In the end he recognizes, "The soul of the Pelagian system is human freedom; the soul of the Augustinian is divine grace" (Schaff 2014, p. 2492). He goes on to contrast the two systems in numerous foundational aspects.

​
0 Comments

Matthew's Gospel - Structural Concepts

8/21/2025

0 Comments

 
Thursday Scholarly Notes
8/21/25

Kingsbury, Jack Dean. (1975).  Chapter 1: The Structure of Matthew's Gospel and His Concept of Salvation-History." in Matthew: Structure, Christology, Kingdom. (pp. 1-39). Philadelphia: Fortress Press. (Personal Library)
    Kingsbury asserts a lack of consensus about both the structure of Matthew's Gospel and about the history of salvation (Kingsbury 1975, p. 1). For this reason, he proposes his view of each.
    From a structural standpoint, Kingsbury finds that some commentators have essentially assumed and described a topical structure in which there is no purposeful overall goal in the progression of topics (Kingsbury 1975, p. 2). A second type of topical structural outline leans toward Matthew structuring his writing in five parts, with some sort of connection to the Pentateuch (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 2ff). This perspective has gained much influence, though different interpreters approach the purpose of the parts in various ways. Because of the lack of overall agreement on the purposes of the portions of Matthew, while the divisions are reasonably easy to identify, the interpretive framework as a whole remains unstable.
    Kingsbury notes that from a structural standpoint it may be fruitful to consider the formula "from that time Jesus began" found at 4:17 and at 16:21 (Kingsbury 1975, p. 7). The two passages serve as pivotal instances in the narrative, in Kingsbury's view (Kingsbury 1975, p. 9). He therefore attempts to demonstrate that this is the appropriate transitional cue which Matthew uses to arrange his narrative. The passage 1:1-4:16 he takes to be a first section, introduced as the background information about Jesus' lineage, birth, and preparation to begin his tasks which consume the remaining two parts of the book (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 10-11). He makes extensive comments on chapter three, which could easily be seen as an independent sense unit. Kingsbury considers it to be closely tied to the earlier and later materials from a standpoint of language usage (Kingsbury 1975, p. 15). Kingsbury's overall conclusion is that 1:1-4:16 introduce the person of Jesus.
    Kingsbury takes Matthew 4:17-16:20 as focused on Jesus' public proclamation of himself as Messiah (Kingsbury 1975, p. 17). It is in this portion of the text tha Jesus performs miracles which accompany his teaching, attracting crowds. He commissions twelve disciples whose ministry resembles his. It is in this portion of the text that his popularity grows and shrinks (Kingsbury 1975, p. 18).
    The third and final portion of Matthew's Gospel may then be seen as 16:21-28:20, which describes Jesus' suffering, his death, and his resurrection (Kingsbury 1975, p. 21). In this section Jesus and the public come into greater tension as he is being rejected. He still heals people, but his teaching is primarily focused on his disciples (Kingsbury 1975, p. 22).
    Kingsbury, considering his structural thesis as proven fact, moves on to discuss Matthew in terms of salvation-history (Kingsbury 1975, p. 25) He notes there has been increasing interest in the conceptual framework in recent years. Much of the scholarship he considers has evaluated the conceptual structure in terms of salvation history. Kingsbury notes authors who take as central the concept of Christians serving as the true and new people of God, others as a shift from the call of Israel to a call of the Gentiles. The temporal shift and a shift in the way salvation is understood work together (Kingsbury 1975, p. 26). Patterns of analysis have typically divided salvation history itno three parts. Yet Kingsbury does not think that a three period view is a foregone conclusion (Kingsbury 1975, p. 27). 
    There is no contest to the fact that Matthew uses temporal terms more frequently than Mark (Kingsbury 1975, p. 27). While some of his usages are relatively vague, many are used in the context of vivid descriptions of a time to come. Matthew tends to give eschatological significance to his temporal markers (Kingsbury 1975, pp. 28-29).
    Of more importance to Kingsbury is his understanding tha Matthew considers history to be divided into only two periods, rather than the conventionally assumed three (Kingsbury 1975, p. 31). The "time of Jesus" takes over from the "time of Israel." Matthew would seem to consider himself as living in the "time of Jesus," which includes all the age of the Church (Kingsbury 1975, p. 32). Kingsbury finds that within Matthew the distinction is made between Jesus and his disciples, but there is not such a temporal distinction that would show a difference between a time of Jesus and a time of the church. This leads Kingsbury to conclude that "the christology of Matthew, not his ecclesiology, more than anything else has molded his concept of the history of salvation" (Kingsbury 1975, p. 36).
    In sum, Kingsbury understands Matthew to be topical, rather than chronological, in nature. The topical development he takes to be governed by matthew's Christology (Kingsbury 1975, p. 36). What chronology does exist in Matthew is a division of history into prophecy and its fulfillment in Christ (Kingsbury 1975, p. 37).
    Kingsbury ends the chapter with some comments on a study of Matthew by H. Frankemölle, released shortly before publication of this book. The study appears to take a covenant theology point of view, with a strong element of continuity rather than changes in era (Kingsbury 1975, p. 37). While Kingsbury does agree with Frankemölle on one level, he rejects the view of covenant theology which is used. The level of continuity which matthew shows between Old and New Testament is not as great, in Kingsbury's opinion, as Frankemölle would allege (Kingsbury 1975, p. 38). 

​
0 Comments
<<Previous

    ​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 Inkwells

    When 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

    RSS Feed

    Want to keep up with what's happening at Wittenberg Door? Subscribe to our mailing list!

    Categories

    All
    1 Chronicles
    1 Corinthians
    1 John
    1 Kings
    1 Peter
    1 Samuel
    1 Thessalonians
    1 Timothy
    2019-02-feb
    2 Chronicles
    2 Corinthians
    2-john
    2 Kings
    2 Peter
    2 Samuel
    2 Thessalonians
    2 Timothy
    3-john
    Abortion
    Academic-success
    Acts
    Advent 1
    Advent-1-a
    Advent-1b
    Advent-1c
    Advent 2
    Advent-2-a
    Advent-2b
    Advent-2c
    Advent 3
    Advent-3-a
    Advent-3b
    Advent-3c
    Advent 4
    Advent-4-a
    Advent-4b
    Advent-4c
    Akagi 2016
    Aland 1961
    Alesso-2009
    Alexander 1999
    Allegory
    Allitt-2010
    All Saints' Day
    Alon 1996
    Amos
    Anaphora
    Anointing
    Antioch
    Anunciation
    Apollinaris Of Hierapolis
    Apologetics
    Apostles' Creed
    Apostolical Constitutions
    Apostolic Fathers
    Applied Theology
    Aristides Of Athens
    Aristotle
    Aryeh 2021
    Ascension Day
    Ash Wednesday
    Athenagoras Of Athens
    Audet 1996
    Augustine
    Bakker-1993
    Balabanski-1997
    Bammel-1996
    Baptism
    Baptism-of-christ
    Baptism-of-the-lord-b
    Bardy-1938
    Baron-2019
    Baron-maponya-2020
    Bauckham-1984
    Bauckham-2006
    Bauckham-2007
    Beale-1984
    Belief
    Belonging
    Benamos-1999
    Betz-1996
    Biesenthal-1893
    Bigg-1904
    Bigg-1905
    Blogcation
    Blomberg-1984
    Boehme2010
    Botha-1967
    Botha-1993
    Botha-2013
    Braaten-2007
    Bradshaw 2002
    Bruce-1988
    Bruce-1988
    Bryennios
    Butler-1960
    Caneday-2017
    Canonicity
    Capon-1998
    Capon1998
    Carr-2010
    Carson-1991
    Carson-moo-2005
    Catechesis
    Catholicism
    Cerfaux-1959
    Chilton-1984
    Chrismation
    Christmas-1b
    Christmas-1c
    Christmas-dawn
    Christmas-day
    Christmas Eve
    Christmas Midnight
    Chronicles
    Church History
    Church Order
    Circumcision And Naming Of Christ
    Cody 1995
    Colossians
    Conditions
    Confession Of Peter
    Confessions
    Connolly 1932
    Connolly 1933
    Connolly 1934
    Constantine
    Constanza-2013
    Cooper & Lioy 2018
    Costa 2021
    Court 1981
    Creeds
    Culley 1986
    Cyprian
    Daly 1978
    Daniel
    Danielou 1956
    Davids 1984
    Davis 1995
    DeHalleux 1996
    Dehandschutter 1995
    Denominations
    Deuteronomy
    Didache
    Diversity
    Divine Fellowship
    Dix 1933
    Dix-2005
    Dix2005
    Doane 1994
    Draper
    Draper 1984
    Draper 1989
    Draper 1995
    Draper-1996
    Draper-1997
    Draper-2000
    Draper 2005
    Draper-2006
    Draper 2008
    Dube 2016
    Due 2003
    Early Christian Functionaries
    Easter-2
    Easter-2a
    Easter2b
    Easter-2c
    Easter-3
    Easter-3a
    Easter-3b
    Easter-3c
    Easter-4
    Easter-4a
    Easter-4b
    Easter-4c
    Easter-5
    Easter-5a
    Easter-5b
    Easter-6
    Easter-6a
    Easter-6b
    Easter-6c
    Easter-7
    Easter-7a
    Easter-7b
    Easter-7c
    Easter-b
    Easter-day
    Easter-monday
    Easter-sunday-a
    Easter-sunday-c
    Easter-sunrise
    Easter-tuesday
    Easter-wednesday
    Ecclesiastes
    Eleutheria2014
    Elman-1999
    Ephesians
    Epiphany
    Epiphany-1c
    Epiphany-2-a
    Epiphany-2c
    Epiphany-3-a
    Epiphany-3b
    Epiphany-3c
    Epiphany-4-a
    Epiphany-4b
    Epiphany-4c
    Epiphany-5-a
    Epiphany-5b
    Epiphany-5c
    Epiphany-6-a
    Epiphany-6c
    Epiphany-7-a
    Epiphany-c
    Epistle Of Barnabas
    Epistles
    Eschatology
    Esther
    Ethics
    Eucharist
    Evangelism
    Eve-of-the-circumcision-of-christ
    Exodus
    Exodus-20
    Experiential Reading
    Eybers 1975
    Ezekiel
    Ezra
    Fagerberg-1988
    Fagerberg1988
    Fall Of Jerusalem
    Farrell-1987
    Flew-2007
    Flusser-1996
    Forde-2007
    Fraade-1999
    France-2007
    Galatians
    Garrow 2004
    Gender
    Genesis
    Gero 1977
    Gibbins 1935
    Gibbs 2006
    Gibbs 2010
    Gibbs 2018
    Glover-1958
    Goga & Popa 2019
    Gonzalez-2010
    Good-friday
    Gospels
    Greek
    Grosvener-schaff-1885
    Grosvenor-1884
    Guardian-of-jesus
    Habakkuk
    Haggai
    Hagner 1984
    Harnack-1884
    Harrington 2008
    Harris 1887
    Harris 1984
    Hartin 2008
    Hasitschka 2008
    Hearon 2004
    Hearon 2010
    Hebrews
    Heilmann 2018
    Henderson-1992
    Henderson1992
    Henderson 1995
    Hezser 2010
    History
    Hoffman-1986
    Holy Cross Day
    Holy-innocents
    Holy-saturday
    Horsley 2010
    Hosea
    Hutchens2013
    Hymes-1994
    Ignatius Of Antioch
    Incarnation
    Infertility
    Isaiah
    Jaffee-1999
    James
    James Of Jerusalem
    James The Elder
    Jefford 1989
    Jefford 1995
    Jefford 2005
    Jefford 2019
    Jeffreys-1986
    Jeremiah
    Jerome
    Jesus
    Jewish Christianity
    Job
    Joel
    John
    Jonah
    Jones & Mirecki 1995
    Joseph
    Joshua
    Judaism
    Jude
    Judges
    Julian The Apostate
    Jungmann-1959
    Justinian
    Justin Martyr
    Kelber-1987
    Kelber-1995
    Kelber 2002
    Kelber 2010
    Kelber & Sanders 2010
    Kelly 1978
    Kevil
    Kings
    Kingsbury 1975
    Kleinig-2013
    Kloppenborg 1979
    Kloppenborg 1995
    Kloppenborg 2005
    Kloppenborg 2008
    Koch2010
    Kok 2015
    Kolb-2000
    Kolb2000
    Kolb-arand-2008
    Kolbarand2008
    Konradt 2008
    Koukl 2019
    Kurekchomycz2009
    Lake 1905
    Lamentations
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year-a
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year-b
    Last-sunday-of-the-church-year-c
    Last Supper
    LaVerdiere 1996
    Law
    Layton 1968
    Lectionary
    Lent-1
    Lent-1-a
    Lent-1b
    Lent-1c
    Lent-2
    Lent-2-a
    Lent-2b
    Lent-2c
    Lent-3
    Lent-3-a
    Lent-3b
    Lent-3c
    Lent-4
    Lent-4-a
    Lent-4b
    Lent-4c
    Lent-5
    Lent-5-a
    Lent-5b
    Lent-5c
    Lessing-2014
    Lessing2014
    Lessing & Steinmann 2014
    Leviticus
    LGBTQ
    Lincoln-1885
    Lindemann 1997
    Literacy
    Literary Character
    Liturgy
    Livesey 2012
    Long-2009
    Lord-1986
    Lord-1987
    Lord's Prayer
    Love
    Luke
    Luther
    Lutheran Confessions
    Lutheran Distinctives
    Maas-2014
    Maccoull-1999
    Maier-1984
    Malachi
    Manuscripts
    Marcion
    Mark
    Marty-2016
    Martyrdom-of-john-the-baptist
    Martyrs
    Mary-magdalene
    Mary-mother-of-our-lord
    Mason-1998
    Massaux-1993-1950
    Matthew
    Matthias
    Mazza-1995
    Mazza-1996
    Mazza-1999
    Mbamalu-2014
    Mcdonald-1980
    Mcdonnell-montague-1991
    Mckean-2003
    Mcknight-2014
    Micah
    Middleton-1935
    Milavec-1995
    Milavec-2003
    Milavec-2005
    Milavec2012
    Miller-2019
    Missional
    Mitch-2010
    Mitchell-1995
    Molina-evers-1998
    Monasticism
    Monday-in-holy-week
    Montenyohl-1993
    Morris-1992
    Motyer-1993
    Mueller-2006
    Muilenburg-1929
    Music
    Nahum
    Nehemiah
    Neufeld-1999
    Newsletter
    New Testament
    New-testament
    Niditch-1995
    Niditch-2003
    Niebuhr-1956
    Niederwimmer-1982
    Niederwimmer-1995
    Niederwimmer-1996
    Niederwimmer 1998
    Numbers
    Oaths
    Obadiah
    Old Testament
    Old-testament
    Olsen-1986
    Ong-1987
    Ong-1988
    Ong-1995
    Oralit
    Orality
    Ordination
    Orphan-hosting
    Osborne-2002
    Osborne-2013
    Overman-2008
    Ozment-1980
    Ozment1980
    Painter-2008
    Palm-sunday
    Palm-sunday-a
    Palm-sunday-c
    Pardee-1995
    Pardee-2012
    Parks-1986
    Passionb
    Pastoral-office
    Pastors
    Patterson-1995
    Paul
    Pearce-1993
    Pentateuch
    Pentecost-10a
    Pentecost-10b
    Pentecost-10c
    Pentecost-11a
    Pentecost-11b
    Pentecost-11c
    Pentecost-12a
    Pentecost-12b
    Pentecost-12c
    Pentecost-13a
    Pentecost-13b
    Pentecost-13c
    Pentecost13c
    Pentecost-14a
    Pentecost-14b
    Pentecost14c
    Pentecost-15
    Pentecost-15a
    Pentecost-15b
    Pentecost15c
    Pentecost-16
    Pentecost-16a
    Pentecost-16b
    Pentecost-16c
    Pentecost-17a
    Pentecost-17b
    Pentecost-17c
    Pentecost-18a
    Pentecost-18b
    Pentecost-18-c
    Pentecost-19a
    Pentecost-19b
    Pentecost-19-c
    Pentecost-1a
    Pentecost-20a
    Pentecost-20b
    Pentecost-20-c
    Pentecost-21a
    Pentecost-21b
    Pentecost-21-c
    Pentecost-22a
    Pentecost-22b
    Pentecost-22-c
    Pentecost-23a
    Pentecost-23b
    Pentecost-23-c
    Pentecost-24a
    Pentecost-24b
    Pentecost-24-c
    Pentecost-25b
    Pentecost-25-c
    Pentecost-26b
    Pentecost-26-c
    Pentecost-2a
    Pentecost-2b
    Pentecost-2c
    Pentecost-3a
    Pentecost-3b
    Pentecost-3c
    Pentecost-4a
    Pentecost-4b
    Pentecost-4c
    Pentecost-5a
    Pentecost-5b
    Pentecost-5c
    Pentecost-6a
    Pentecost-6b
    Pentecost-6c
    Pentecost-7a
    Pentecost-7b
    Pentecost-7c
    Pentecost-8a
    Pentecost-8b
    Pentecost-8c
    Pentecost-9a
    Pentecost-9b
    Pentecost-9c
    Pentecost-b
    Pentecost-c
    Pentecost-eve
    Pentecost-monday
    Pentecost-sunday
    Pentecost-tuesday
    Petersen-1994
    Peterson-2010
    Peterson2010
    Philemon
    Philippians
    Philosophy
    Picirilli-1988
    Pick-1908
    Pieper-1924
    Pieper1924
    Pieper-1968
    Piper-1947
    Pluralism
    Pope Leo I
    Post-70
    Powell-2000
    Prayer
    Preaching
    Presentation-of-our-lord
    Proctor-2019
    Proper19c
    Proper20c
    Proper-21c
    Proper-22c
    Proper-23c
    Proper-24c
    Proper-25c
    Proper-26c
    Proper-27c
    Proper-28c
    Prophecy
    Prophets
    Proverbs
    Psalm
    Psalms
    Purity
    Quinquagesima
    Quintilian
    Rabbinic-character
    Real-presence
    Receptivity
    Reed-1995
    Reformation
    Reformation-day
    Reinhartz-2018
    Reproof
    Repschinski-2008
    Resurrection
    Revelation
    Rhetoric
    Rhoads-2010
    Richardson-gooch-1984
    Riggs-1995
    Ritual-meal
    Romans
    Romeny-2005
    Rordorf-1996
    Rosenberg-1986
    Rosenberg-1987
    Rosenfeldlevene2012
    Rouwhorst-2005
    Rueger-2016
    Russo-1994
    Ruth
    Sacrament
    Sacrifice
    Saenger-1999
    Sailhamer-1992
    Sailhamer1992
    Sale-1996
    Samuel
    Scaer-2004
    Scaer2004
    Schaff-1886
    Schaff-1888
    Schaff-1889
    Schaff 2014
    Schaff2014
    Schollgen
    Schroter-2008
    Schwarz-2005
    Scriptural-usage
    Seeliger-1996
    Senn-1997
    Septuagesima
    Sermon
    Sexagesima
    Sim-2008
    Simon-and-jude
    Smith-2009
    Smith-2018
    Sommerville-2006
    Song-of-songs
    Songofsongs
    St-andrew
    Stark 1997
    St-barnabas
    St-bartholomew
    Stewart-Sykes 2008
    St-john
    St-john-the-baptist
    St-luke
    St-mark
    St-matthew
    St-matthias
    St-michael-and-all-angels
    St-paul
    St-peter-and-paul
    St Philip And St James
    Strawbridge 2017
    St. Stephen
    St. Thomas
    St. Titus
    Sunday Of The Passion
    Svartvik 2008
    Syreeni 2005
    Syria
    Tatian
    Taylor 1888
    TDNT
    Teaching
    Telfer 1939
    Tertullian
    Textual Comparison
    Textual Integrity
    Theological Development
    Theophilos 2018
    Theophilus Of Antioch
    Thielman 2010
    Thursday-in-holy-week
    Timothy
    Titus
    Tomson-2005
    Tomson-2008
    Tradition
    Transfiguration
    Transfiguration-a
    Transfigurationb
    Transfiguration-c
    Trinity-1
    Trinity-10
    Trinity-11
    Trinity-12
    Trinity-13
    Trinity-14
    Trinity-15
    Trinity-16
    Trinity-17
    Trinity 18
    Trinity 19
    Trinity 2
    Trinity 20
    Trinity 21
    Trinity 22
    Trinity 23
    Trinity 3
    Trinity-4
    Trinity-5
    Trinity-6
    Trinity-7
    Trinity-8
    Trinity-9
    Trinity-a
    Trinity-b
    Trinity-c
    Trinity-sunday
    Tsang-2009
    Tuckett
    Tuesday-in-holy-week
    Tuilier-1995
    Tuilier-2005
    Twelftree-1984
    Two-ways
    Ty-19
    Vahrenhurst-2008
    Van-der-merwe-2017
    Van-der-merwe-2019
    Van-der-watt-2008
    Van-de-sandt-2002
    Van-de-sandt-2007
    Van-de-sandt-2008
    Vandesandt2010
    Vandesandt2011
    Van-de-sandt-flusser-2002
    Van-deventer-2021
    Varner-2005
    Vatican-ii
    Veith-1993
    Veith1993
    Veith-sutton-2017
    Verheyden-2005
    Verheyden-2008
    Vikisfreibergs-1997
    Visitation
    Voobus-1968
    Voobus-1969
    Vows
    Warfield-1886
    Wasson-toelken-1998
    Wednesday-in-holy-week
    Wegman 1985
    Welch 2001
    Wenham-1984
    Wenham-1992
    Weren-2005
    Weren-2008
    Weston-2009
    Wilhite-2019
    Wilson-2011
    Wilson2011
    Wilson20113470b5cf10
    Winger-2014
    Wischmeyer-2008
    Wolmarans-2005
    Wright-1984
    Young-2011
    Ysebaert2002
    Zangenberg-2008
    Zechariah
    Zephaniah
    Zetterholm-2008

Proudly powered by Weebly