Blog Posts - Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry

Psalm 93 - Lectionary for Last Sunday of the Church Year, Series B

11/19/2018

11/19/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

The Lord reigns, and he is pictured in Psalm 93 on his throne and wearing the signs of authority. We sometimes shy away from the idea of God’s majesty and glory. After all, it’s intimidating, even threatening, as we realize that God is on his throne ruling over the world, powerful enough to accomplish all his will. We sure hope God’s will is in our favor.

It doesn’t take much imagination to start seeing God and his kingdom as we do our earthly institutions of power, as something with a generally good purpose that will roll over and crush the individual, particularly us.

How will we deal with this? We need to ask ourselves how God’s nature is described in Scripture. Is he or is he not the Lord who lovingly calls all creation into being, declares it good, and appoints humans to the lofty position of caring for all the rest of the creation which he loves? If that’s the kind of God we find in Psalm 93, we should have no fear. He is clothed with majesty and strength, he has an eternal throne, and he uses his holy word to govern all creation and keep his people safe from all eternal harm. There is no fear of such a king, unless we try to hinder his good and gracious plan. The Lord is good.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Vows of Celibacy

11/19/2018

Mondays are for Church History
11/19/18

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Amazon Kindle Edition, 2014.
Volume 2, Ante-Nicene Christianity A.D. 100-325, “Chapter 9. Ascetic Tendencies.” Sections 104-108, Loc. 17159-17485.

§ 107. Voluntary Celibacy.

Schaff finds an “exaggeration” of celibacy drawn from Matthew 19:12; 22:30; 1 Corinthians 7:7ff, and Revelation 14:4 (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17291). He considers it exaggerated because it is a view going beyond the bounds of the specific biblical passages. Other biblical texts make it clear that marriage is a good thing, especially for clergy (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17296).

Schaff observes that Roman paganism tended to exalt virginity, especially with the cult of the Vestals (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17302). Christians may have adopted a high view of celibacy from paganism combined with a desire for angelic purity.

The exaltation of celibacy was not an entirely bad thing. Schaff observes that the women in Christianity who didn’t marry were often considered with great dignity and received respect due to their frequent dedication to caring for the poor or the sick (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17313). The actual depreciation of marriage was at its peak later, in the late third century and after (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17318). There was always a recognition of the honor of purity and separation from cultural excesses. However, many, most notably Clement of Alexandria, considered marriage and celibacy alike as honorable ways of life (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17329).

Schaff goes on to list numerous instances of less balanced views of marriage. In some cases, the practice of celibacy also led to indolence (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17356) or even impure thoughts and actions. Schaff notes that as demands for clerical celibacy increased, instances of clergy violation of their vows also tended to increase (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17367).

Friday is Didache day.

11/16/2018

11/16/18

Milavec, Aaron. The Didache: Faith, Hope, & Life of the Earliest Christian Communities, 50-70 C.E. New York: The Newman Press, 2003.

“How the Greek Manuscript was Discovered, Transcribed, and Translated” pp. 3-11.

The text of the Didache was discovered by Archbishop Philotheos Bryennios in 1873, located “in the library of the Greek Convent of the Holy Sepulchre in Istanbul” (Milavec 2003, 3). Although the library had been catalogued in 1845 and 1856, this text was missed. It was in a volume of other early writings and filled only a few pages (Milavec 2003, 4). Bryennios published one of the other texts from the manuscript but overlooked the Didache. Others saw it mentioned in his table or contents but missed the significance. It was finally published in 1883 (Milavec 2003, 5). Milavec used a transcription of the text with its taxigraphic signs expanded, a s published by J. Rendel Harris in 1887. He does make note of a number of small corrections based on photos of the manuscript (Milavec 2003, 6-7). Milavec does note that punctuation may well have been absent in the original. Most of his editorial corrections pertain to punctuation. As to corrections in the text, Milavec prefers not to include emendations based on the Latin or Coptic records or in the Apostolic Constitutions. The text may have challenges, but the complete Greek text is considered authoritative (Milavec 2003, 8). The text and translation as presented by Milavec is arranged in word groups which Milavec thinks will make the logic more clear (Milavec 2003, 9).

Milavec’s side-by-side Greek and English version of the text comprises pages 12-45. A review of the text and translation gives me the impression that Milavec’s work is rather non-literary. The purposeful genderless interpreation, in my opinion, obscures the natural flow of the language.

Mark 13:1-13 - Lectionary for Pentecost 26B

11/15/2018

11/15/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Our Gospel this week moves us toward the end of the Church year. Jesus speaks of the trials that will be signs of the coming end. The signs he brings up are impressive. However, I fear we often neglect the chronology Jesus gives.

Notice in verses 6-8 Jesus is clear that the signs are only a beginning. They are early labor pains. Yes, the baby will be born, but the first few contractions rarely signal an immediate delivery.

We can expect to hear of false christs, wars, uprisings, earthquakes, and famines. They are all certainly signs that the world as we know it is coming apart. But we can also look honestly at history and know of a very long pattern of all these trials.

What should the disciples guard against? Arrest, torture, and trial await them. They will also be engaged in preaching the Gospel. They will have answers from the Holy Spirit when on trial. Again, all these things are recorded for us in the Book of Acts. They have already happened.

When does the end of the world come? All the signs mentioned by Jesus suggest it will be soon. But we don’t know the timing. Our attitude, then, should be one of readiness and expectation. But we may be waiting a while. The baby’s coming, but there’s no rushing or delaying the process.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Perseverance in Hard Times

11/15/2018

Thursdays are for the New Testament
11/15/18

Osborne, Grant R. Revelation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002. Location: Ellis BS 2825.53.O73 2002
II. Churches Addressed (1:9-3:22) pp. 77-217.
B. Letters to the Seven Churches (2:1-3:22) pp. 104-217.
“2. Letter to Smyrna (2:8-11)” pp. 127-137.

Osborne notes that Smyrna is still in existence, as the city of Izmir (Osborne 2002, 127). Like Ephesus, it was a well known harbor city. In Smyrna, Christianity and Judaism had severe conflicts. Osborne suggests the Jews would denounce Christians so as to protect themselves from the Roman authorities (Osborne 2002, 127).

In the address to the church, Jesus, portrayed as “the first and the last,” is seen as the sovereign God (Osborne 2002, 128). Jesus is also presented in verse 8 as the one who came back to life from the dead.

2:9 presents the church at Smyrna as not having weaknesses to address. Osborne notes that this is the case only for Ephesus and Smyrna, the two smallest and least influential churches which receive letters (Osborne 2002, 129). He concludes that faithfulness is more important than numbers. The situation which Christ considers important here is what the church suffers, not any strengths which they have. For Smyrna, Osborne observes the persecution they receive, which drives them into poverty and draws slander against them, is recognized by Jesus as a matter of his special care (Osborne 2002, 129). Osborne also notes the juxtaposition of “poor” and “rich.” “It is interesting that every time ‘poor’ occurs in Revelation it is contrasted in some way with ‘rich.’ It is clear that both poverty and wealth (in the churches of Sardis and Laodicea) were major problems for these churches” (Osborne 2002, 130). In the case of Smyrna, poverty had apparently made the Christians more aware of their riches in Christ. Among the persecutors Osborne mentions particularly the Jewish community, called in this letter the “synagogue of Satan” (Osborne 2002, 131). This is the Jewish community which later lodged charges against Polycarp for not worshiping the emperor, then gathered wood on the Sabbath in order to burn him.

Revelation 2:10 moves us to an encouraging prophecy about affliction to come. The people of Smyrna are not to fear. They are going to suffer and will not be able to avoid it. Osborne notes the use of μέλλειν as indicating that the suffering is certain (Osborne 2002, 132). The devil is going to have some imprisoned. Osborne notes that the Romans did not use prison as a penalty, but normally as a holding place prior to execution, trial, or torture (Osborne 2002, 133). In verse 10 the imprisonment serves a purpose of tempting the Christians to depart from the faith. The period of testing mentioned, ten days, is unclear in its purpose, but is a short time. The outcome urged and expected in the letter is that they will be faithful and receive a crown of life, a divine gift. Osborne notes that Smyrna was known for games and festivals in which a winner would receive some sort of crown (Osborne 2002, 135). A crown of life is clearly a divine prize, not a human gift. Verse 11 brings the letter to a close with the observation that the Christians in Smyrna are overcomers and will participate in God’s eternal life (Osborne 2002, 136).

Hebrews 10:11-25 - Lectionary for Pentecost 26B

11/14/2018

11/14/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Our Epistle this week, from Hebrews 10:11-25, takes us in a direction that makes many uncomfortable. Because Jesus has given himself as the truly adequate sacrifice for sin, there’s no need to make any more offerings for sin (v. 18). For this reason, we are bold to approch the Lord, not on our own recognizance, but through Jesus. Why would this make us uncomfortable? There are two basic ways it can be a problem. Having a certain forgiveness we may neglect to live a holy life. With freedom to approach the Lord, we may neglect the need for Jesus as a mediator.

What of the constant demands of Scripture that Christ’s people must live a holy life? Doesn’t that negate the statements that our sin is completely taken care of? not at all. Why would we live a life of good works? Simply because they are good works. God has created some things so that they work toward the good of the world, of society, of our neighbor. We live those out because they are good, they are pleasing to God, and they are of great assistance to our neighbor. While we confess of ourselves that we have failed to do good in ways that would be pleaseing to God, at the same time we realize that those works are the fruit of salvation, not the cause of salvation. We are saved by grace through faith in Jesus. We don’t earn or maintain that salvation by any of our works. We simply live a life of good works because they are pleasing to God.

What of the neglect of Jesus as mediator? People in pop Christianity seem obsessed with seeing the Lord face to face, receiving directly from God, having no mediator, just going into the bare presence of God. This is not a biblical good. When we approach God without a mediator, we are confronting a consuming fire. If we were to see God in His glory without a mediator like Jesus, we would be consumed, or at least so terrified and grief-stricken at our own unrighteousness we could live no more. Why do we want to approach God without a mediator? Why are we not content to find God where He has promised to be in His mercy, through the Word which creates faith in us, through the Sacraments which are enactments of His Word.

Jesus is the mediator. He is the one who has made an approach to God for us, through His blood. He is the one who makes us able to see God in his mercy and grace. Thanks be to the Lord. We are made partakers of His glory so we can live a life which is compatible with his promises and his way of blessing the world.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

What Is Human, Anyway?

11/14/2018

Sommerville, C. John. The Decline of the Secular University. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Chapter 2, “Trouble Defining the Human” pp. 23-38.

Sommerville calls out an important indicator of institutional decline with the thesis statement for this chapter. “If there is one thing that should raise the question of the secular university’s irrelevance, it might especially be in the failure to justify or even make sense of the concept of the human” (Sommerville 2006, 23). Normal observation of human work, accomplishments, and concerns indicates that we are set apart in many ways from the rest of the natural world. Sommerville observes that the limitations scientists place on experimentation shows that they consider humans to deserve a moral dignity (Sommerville 2006, 24). However, secularism erodes any reason behind a special, positive treatment of humans. Therefore, scientists who are naturalists are unable to explain why it might be appropriate to treat one or another species, habitat, or other issue in a different way from others, a behavior which Sommerville observes is engaged in by humans (Sommerville 2006, 25). Although humans are part of nature, it seems clear that we are set aside from the rest of nature. The essential question about us is “about the meanings we can give to the human, what an ideal of humanity might be, or what we could aim at” (Sommerville 2006, 27). The ideals may be classified in philosophical or religious terms, but cannot be reduced to secularity. Sommerville considers the descriptions which are purely secular to fall short (Sommerville 2006, 28). Yet if the answer involves religion, the secularism rejects it out of hand. Sommerville goes on to illustrate this phenomenon in terms of the animal rights debate. The matter of animal rights is predicated on a concept of human moral obligation. That moral obligation does not exist in the other animals (Sommerville 2006, 30).

Because these difficult questions are best answered in terms of a religious formulation, Sommerville suggests it would be helpful to “reopen our universities to a wider philosophical and cultural heritage (Sommerville 2006, 31). The attempts at naturalistic explanation have always failed. An assumption of purpose and probably creation is necessary to our understanding of what it means to be human. This has been removed from the discussion in academia (Sommerville 2006, 32).

Sommerville observes that the topics which are immediately dismissed in academia are those which require religious answers of some sort. He suggests this is “a sign of timidity rather than of assurance” (Sommerville 2006, 33). The questions for which some kind of faith is required for an answer are removed from discussion. Yet those questions underlie nearly everything we do in our lives. Sommerville gives numerous examples of problems involving the actual nature of morality, conscience, truth, and other concepts. None can be discussed with any clarity apart from a religious explanation of some sort.

One of the most telling factors in Sommerville’s discussion is the matter of discussion itself. The material elements may be made up of things which can be analyzed through breaking them into component parts and data points. But moral concepts finally defy such analysis. They are understood through the process of narrative, which in turn cannot be quantified and analyzed so easily (Sommerville 2006, 36-37). Now, with that realization, history and social sciences are using narrative approaches, as has hard science for many generations (Sommerville 2006, 37). Discovery is a process which must be described. This is a moral, philosophical, and religious process at its heart.

Daniel 12:1-3 - Lectionary for Pentecost 26B

11/13/2018

11/13/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Daniel 12:1-3 describes a time of great distress for God’s people. During this time of trouble, those “who are found written in the book will escape (v. 1, CSB). The prophet here is telling about those whose names have been placed in God’s book of life. We find in the New Testament that this refers to those who trust in Jesus. They escape the trials which would be their undoing. Verse two speaks of a resurrection of the dead. Those sleeping in the dust are the people whose mortal life has ended. God will raise them up.

Daniel describes the ressurection in a way that can be instructive to us. Notice that some are raised “to eternal life” but the rest are raised “to disgrace.” There will be a sorting. Almost every Christian admits to this. But let’s notice crefully the language used. We may be tempted to think of the resurrection to an eternal life of blessing or of torment. But the Bible makes it clear. Only the resurrection to blessing is actually considered life. Everyone has eternity. That’s not a problem. But only some have life. In the same way, throughout the New Testament, actual life is predicated on trusting Christ. To live is Christ.

What of a heavenly reward? We read in verse three that there may well be differences in the heavenly realms. But if we think about those differences, we still need no fear. The reward is life in the loving presence of God. What kind of reward do we want? It makes no difference. All the blessings of God go far beyond our imagination or our hopes. We simply receive them and rejoice.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

The Latest Wittenberg Door Newsletter Is Here!

11/13/2018

Unchanging Promises

11/13/2018

Tuesdays are for the Old Testament
11/13/18

Motyer, J. Alec. The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction & Commentary. Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993. “Isaiah 38-55: The Book of the Servant” “E. The Greater Deliverance (49:1-55:13)” Loc. 10947-13096

Motyer finds in Isaiah 49-55 a contrast between the changing relationship shown in redemption from Babylon and the unchanging nature of God’s promises to Israel (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10947). In 49:1-6 the Servant calls the world to hear and be released from bondage into truth (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10968). Motyer goes on to analyze the structural progression of thought in great detail. The passage points to a divine and human agent who acts near and far to rescue all God’s people.

Isaiah 49:7-13 speaks of the success of the Servant’s work. Motyer identifies numerous very brief songs in these verses dealing with the way the Servant interacts with the world in general and Israel in particular (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11109). The Servant is despised and abused by the nations (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11132). Despite this he will rescue the nations, bringing in a day of salvation.

Not all is well in the presence of the Servant. 49:14-50:11 speaks of unresponsive hearers (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11200). Again, Motyer observes numerou very brief units in the text. Though Zion feels forsaken, the Lord has never forgotten His people (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11234). God’s people will be gathered. More will return than went into captivity (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11272). God will bring people from the nations into his people. Those who refuse God’s restoration seal ther own fate. Motyer describes them as “self-destructive” (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11304). Regardless, God is able to rescue any who do not refuse him (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11339). In 50:111 the Servant is clearly the one who suffers himself (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11365). Especially verses 6 and following point to the Servant as an individual, not a personification of the nation (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11398). The rescue from bondage and darkness is related to trusting in the name of the Servant (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11443).

Isaiah 511-52:12 speak to the future prospects of salvation and to its reality (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11460). Motyer identifies eight distinct oracles in this passage. They call the people to hear from the Lord and promise salvation. The oracles, like the rest of Isaiah, show very careful organization and progression of thought (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11502). The first messages are of salvation for Israel, for all the nations, then a call to faith and perseverance. The salvation of Isral in the past was a rescue from Egypt (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11637). The same God is still able to rescue his people. Therefore, 51:17-52:12 have a number of commands that God’s people should respect (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11773). The rescue has been accomplished. It remains to be received. Reception of God’s deliverance is done by awaiting God’s return and acknowledging him as the one who rescues Israel (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11946). This rescue is a greater Exodus than that from Egypt (Motyer 1993, Loc. 11980). In the new Exodus the enemies will not pursue God’s people. They depart from bondage without fear or turmoil (Motyer 1993, Loc. 12038). Again, the text shows very careful balance, which can be disscted into very small portions. The Servant s both exalted and humiliated (Motyer 1993, Loc. 12079). This reaches to many nations. In the Servant, salvation is as universal as it can be. By and large, the Servant is not accepted (Motyer 1993, Loc. 12172). The news given is not recognized. Therefore, the Servant suffers, and he suffers alone (Motyer 1993, Loc. 12235). His suffering is the punishment deserved by his people. It is not his own (Motyer 1993, Loc. 12271). Even when taken away to death the Servant is not understood (Motyer 1993, Loc. 12390). However, the Servant is triumphant, as we read in 53:10 and following. Having made himself an offering for sin, the Servant becomes the one who executes God’s will (Motyer 1993, Loc. 12563). Because all has been made ready, God calls to his people. 54:1-55:13 give promises of the success of the Servant’s work (Motyer 1993, Loc. 12657). By his work the world can come for pardon (55:1-13). By God’s word a feast is prepared. The curse of sin is done away with (Motyer 1993, Loc. 12895). Even with no resources, people can come and buy what they need. God has provided all that may be desired.

Psalm 16 - Lectionary for Pentecost 26B

11/12/2018

11/12/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Psalm 16 is one of the Psalms which reminds us that the Old Testament is all about Jesus. We can start reading at the beginning and think it’s about David or maybe even partly about us. But when we get to verse ten and we find that the apostle Peter quotes it while speaking of Jesus in Acts chapter two, we have to think through our interpretation again. It’s about Jesus, the one who is not abandoned in death and who doesn’t see decay. It’s about the one who lived a life of dependence on the Father, who died, and who rose from the dead. He’s the one who leads his people along the path of life. He’s the one seated at the right hand of the Father, making prayers for his people. He’s the one who always finds his pleasure and fulfillment in the Father.

This is all excellent news, because the Christian hopes and trusts only in God. We look to Jesus as the one who will be able to raise the dead in the last day. He’s the one who brings us to the Father. He’s the one who truly delights in all God’s word and will, and who gives that delight to his people. He’s the one who has rejected all the religions of this world to give us his life, ransoming all who believe from sin, death, and destruction.

At the same time, much of the time, we can rightly say the Lord has been good to us. As in verse six, I can say that my boundary lines are pleasant and that I have a beautiful inheritance. Yes, in Christ I have promises for the future. But also, as with so very many others, I can say there are opportunities for good in my life. Even in hard times, I can always imagine someone in worse circumstances. We can consider the many bad things that haven’t happened to us in any given day. We can know that the Lord who made heaven and earth cares for his people and that he is the one who can protect us from all final harm. And we can, by faith, confess the truth of Jesus’ words in John 11:25-26. “The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die” (NIV). This is great news indeed.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Poor, but Why?

11/12/2018

Mondays are for Church History
11/12/18

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Amazon Kindle Edition, 2014.
Volume 2, Ante-Nicene Christianity A.D. 100-325, “Chapter 9. Ascetic Tendencies.” Sections 104-108, Loc. 17159-17485.

§ 106. Vountary Poverty.

Among ascetic practices Schaff considers the voluntary poverty engaged in by many Christians. He recognizes the vows of poverty as having their source in Jesus’ command to the rich young ruler, who was told to sell his possessions and give them away (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17280). Further, Christ and the apostles also seemed to live in poverty. Counter to the common idea of Christian poverty, Clement of Alexandria encouraged careful use of material goods to care for the world (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17285). However, it is noted that many Christians have historically avoided the overt pursuit of fortune and its trappings.

Friday is Didache day.

11/9/2018

11/9/18

Milavec, Aaron. The Didache: Faith, Hope, & Life of the Earliest Christian Communities, 50-70 C.E. New York: The Newman Press, 2003.

In his preface, Milavec addresses the i dea of an origination hypothesis. In short, this is the idea a commentator has about how a document came to be. Milavec discusses five considerations. First, is the Didache “a unified production”(Milavec 2003, xvii)? We would expect more of an overall logical process and flow to a unified work than to an assembly of other material. Second, can a unifying key be found? Milavec does think he has found a key which accounts for the bulk of the text (Milavec 2003, xviii). Third, “[an} orination hypothesis cannot be directly falsified” (Milavec 2003, xxi). Rejectionof one generally leads to acceptance of another. Fourth, the person who develops a superior organization theory has a scholarly responsibility to share it with the academic community (Milavec 2003, xxi). Finally, within the scholarly community, when there are divisions, responsible scholars encourage discussion of all views in order to find a new consensus (Milavec 2003, xxii).

Milavec is clear that different scholars will reach different conclusions about the same text. As an example, he considers the interpreations made about water for baptism. The provision of “warm” water could refer to a text from a cold climate. However, it could refer to numerous other conditions. The interpreter’s preconceptions will flavor the analysis (Milavec 2003, xxiii). Milavec’s stated goal is to view the text fairly, as a whole unit, and identify the kind of community from which it came (Milavec 2003, xxv).

Milavec’s early experience w ith the Didache was varied yet fragmentary. “In each of these instances . . . the Didache was cut up and laid open in order to answer pressing questions other than those for which it was originally designed” (Milavec 2003, xxvi). The scholarship at the time was not based on treating a whole document.

In cooperation with Rabbi Jacob Neusner in 1989, Milavec began identifying the Didache’s own logic, structure, and voice (Milavec 2003, xxvii). Gradually, over the course of several years, Milavec’s views of different aspects were refined and corrected (Milavec 2003, xxviii). One of the critical elements in Milavec’s exploration, inspired by Neusner, is that, “[T]here were many Christianities during the first century just as there were many Judaisms”(Milavec 2003, xxix). To back up this claim,Milavec adduces Hebrews, which he sees as completely independent of the Gospels or Epistles (Milavec 2003, xxx). For further reserach, he recommends James D.G. Dunn Unity and Diversity in the New Testament (1977) (Milavec 2003, xxx). Milavec intends to demonstrate that the text emerged from a distinct kind of Christianity which was Jewish, primarily consisted of women, and which sought a distinctive lifestyle in community (Milavec 2003, xxx).

Milavec also details a relationship with Willy Rordorf, whose work with the Didache in the 1970s was considered a uthoritative (Milavec 2003, xxxi). Rordorf a nd Milavec collaborated on some seminars. Milavec says, “Rordorf’s most significant contribution to me was his notion that the framers of the Didache did not use any known written Gospel” (Milavec 2003, xxxi). Milavec goes on to discuss the theories, used since the 1880s, that the Didache was dependent on different parts of the New Testament. Rordorf’s ideas o f independence allow for a significantly earlier date than was previously assumed. Milavec argues “that the theology and structure of Matthew’s community are incompatible with those of the Didache” (Milavec 2003, xxxii).

Milavec emphasizes the oral nature of the Didache (Milavec 2003, xxxii). He notes especially the various instructions to attend to spoken words (4:1; 1:3; 7:1; 11:1; 16:2; 4:2). Milavec further finds oral structure patterns which are repeated within the text, leading a speaker through in a logical manner. He suggests that, to truly understand this work, one must listen to it and speak it, rather than reading it (Milavec 2003, xxxiii).

Mark 12:38-44 - Lectionary for Pentecost 25B

11/8/2018

11/8/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Our Gospel for this week is from Mark 12:38-44. It would be very easy to skip directly to verse 41. After all, the last four verses are relatively easy to deal with. God honors the trust shown by giving even when we have limited means.

Does this idea tie directly to the earlier three verses? Maybe someone will put in a comment pointing me to a connection. There is a bridge with the idea of widows, but verse 40 speaks against taking from widows and verse 43 commends the idea of widows giving. I am inclined to say the paragraph break is a relatively large break and that Mark is telling us about something different.

So, in verses 38-40 Jesus warns against the scribes. They have clothing that signifies rank. They expect to be treated with honor. They take even the few resources held by elderly women. They speak just to be heard. My question is whether this is best applied to people today who are overtly religious. In some instances, it does apply. I think particularly of those who preach (and live) a “prosperity gospel.” Some have made themselves wealthy and expect to be treated as nobility because they view themselves as God’s messengers.

In contrast, I think the passage is sometimes wrongly applied. I’ who normally wear a clerical collar at work, have been accused of being like the scribes. And I do wear a long robe when conducting a church service. Sometimes people treat me with honor and dference. Sometimes not. Really, I just want the coffee I bought to be hot and fresh, and you could repay my courtesy with yours.

What I aim to say is that identifying these scribes is not as easy as it seems. One could make an argument that if Jesus were speaking to our community today he would speak of academic or political elites as he did of the scribes. You choose the discipline or the party. The figures may be those we should avoid. Some would want to be honored because of their alignment, and then would use that honor to silence or harm others.

If the shoe fits, beware of the person. If it fits you or me, lt’s take it off and use our positions, our honor, our “privilege,” for the good of our world.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

A Biblical Call to Love

11/8/2018

Thursdays are for the New Testament
11/8/18

Osborne, Grant R. Revelation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002. Location: Ellis BS 2825.53.O73 2002

II. Churches Addressed (1:9-3:22) pp. 77-217.
B. Letters to the Seven Churches (2:1-3:22) pp. 104-217.

Osborne reiterates that the letters of Revelation chapters 2-3 re still considered part of the divine vision introduced in chapter 1 (Osborne 2002, 104). Each letter has the same basic outline. There is some debate about whether the letters are truly specific to individual churches. They certainly contain specific details but they also present more general types of problems which can be found in many times and places. Some commentators also suggest the churches represented problems found at different periods in history (Osborne 2002, 105).

“1. Letter to Ephesus (2:1-7).” pp. 108-126.

The first of the letters to churches found in Revelation 2-3 is to the church at Ephesus. Osborne notes that Ephesus was “one of the four most powerful cities in the Roman Empire (Osborne 2002, 108). The city is very well knwon for its temple to Artemis (Osborne 2002, 109). Temples were used as treasuries as well as places which would inspire worship. In addition to the temple to Artemis, there were temples to numerous other gods as well as Julius Caesar.

Ephesus is known to have had a significant Jewish population, as well as a church congregation established by the year 52 (Osborne 2002, 109).

The letter is commanded to be written to the angel of the church (Osborne 2002, 110). Osborne notes this would indicate a message addressed to the entire church. The address to an angel also reminds the reader “that divine forces are at work and watching” (Osborne 2002, 111). The church is reminded that Christ holds the seven stars. He, not the church, is the ruling power. At the same time, Christ is seen as the one walking amid the churches. His care is very present (Osborne 2002, 112).

In that Christ “knows” the works of the church, Osborne says he understands it perfectly and completely (Osborne 2002, 112). The particular way he knows it is in the labor and endurance. Specifically, the Christians have worked against false teaching (Osborne 2002, 113). The conflict with false teachers showed that the false teachers could not withstand inspection.

Osborne notes that the word “apostle,” as used here, could be used in two ways. Frequently it referred to the Twelve, Paul, and at times a few others who were appointed by the church as leaders (Osborne 2002, 114). Alternatively, they could be those wandering people with a commission from the church but not necessaarily enduring and broad authority. Because the apostles tested by the Ephesians failed, Osborne assumes they were the latter, not the former.

Though the Ephesians did have strength and had defended the truth, all was not well. Revelation 2:4 speaks to weakness. God has something against the Ephesians (Osborne 2002, 115). They have left their original love. Osborne finds authors who recognize this a a love for one another, some who see it as love for God, and others who do not think we can make such a distinction (Osborne 2002, 116).

The problem of the Ephesians does have a solution, presented in Revelation 2:5-6. They are to remember their former stance. Osborne considers that remembering implies necessary action and change (Osborne 2002, 116). The remembering here is followed by two aorist imperatives, repent and do. Osborne finds these as the ways remembrance is to be implemented (Osborne 2002, 117). If the Ephesians do not repent and implement life change, they are threatened with judgment (Osborne 2002, 118). However, Osborne asks just what it means when the Lord will remove even the Ephesians’ lampstand. They could lose the credibility of their testimony as in 1:12, or the warning could be against a loss of their very identity as a church. Osborne considers the latter to be more likely (Osborne 2002, 118). The language of the passage calls the Ephesians to intensify their efforts to combat the things rejected by God. God’s righteousness does not admit competition (Osborne 2002, 120).

The letter to the Ephesians mentions the Nicolaitans. However, it does not make it entirely clear what they are and what they believe. Yet the sins of the Nicolaitans are always mentioned as idolatry and immorality. Osborne considers that this was probably related with the growth of the imperial cult and possibly of an antinomian faction which would spin off from Paul’s teaching about being free from the Law (Osborne 2002, 121).

The letter closes with a prophetic call to listen (Osborne 2002, 121). The message is from the Holy Spirit and deserves the attention of the recipient. Osborne observes that the message of the Spirit is intended for all people (Osborne 2002, 122). The hearer is challenged to overcome, a military metaphor. The true victory is to come from God, but Osborne notes the person who hears and perseveres will participate in God’s eventual victory (Osborne 2002, 122). The essence of overcoming as used in Revelation 2:7 is believing on Christ. This, Osborne notes, is the way Revelation shows one is to receive God’s promises. Here, the promise is to eat of the tree of life (Osborne 2002, 123). There is credible reason to see the “tree of life” in Revelation as a referece to Christ’s cross. This further emphasizes the view of Christ as the slain Lamb of God who restores paradise, where life is found (Osborne 2002, 124).

Hebrews 9:24-28 - Lectionary for Pentecost 25B

11/7/2018

11/7/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

The heart of our Episthe this week, from Hebrews 9:24-28, is that Jesus is the one special high priest who makes an offering good forever. All else points to Jesus as the reality. This takes us who have always lived around materialism some effort to deal with.

We are used to having a sharp distinction between what we think is real and what is abstract. Please read that last sentence again. Now let’s unpack it a little bit. We will easily admit the reality of some abstract things. Just because they are immaterial doesn’t make them unreal. A memory, the concept of intelligence, love, courage, and loyalty are all things we quickly admit are not only real, but good.

What about that concept of good? We may be more troubled by it. Is it real? Is it imaginary? How do we define it? Likewise we have trouble with admitting a firm identification of evil, sin, cowardice, and the like. This becomes a problem when we try to identify what good Jesus is. We want to substitute easy alternatives for some of those more abstract things Jesus takes care of. Sin, shame, guilt, and fear are presented as problems, real problems, in the Bible. Jesus’ death as our substitute is presented as the solution. He took our sin upon himself and made it die when he died.

It would be so easy to create substitutes which we think of as real. But this is not the way God did it. The visible temple points to the invisible gathering of Christians in every age. The preached Word of God points to the invisible confidence we have. The visible elements of Christian worship point to the now invisible Jesus, who depart frm earth afte his resurrection. The pastor’s words are powerful only as they are used to do the work of Jesus’ words.

Jesus is the real one, and He has accomplished all that is needed to rescue from sin and death. This is ultimate reality.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

How are American Universities Marginalized?

11/7/2018

Sommerville, C. John. The Decline of the Secular University. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Chapter 1, “The Marginalization of Our Universities” pp. 3-22.

Sommerville begins his book with a very interesting question. He asks in what way Universities are marginalized. He goes on to consider that in many aspects they are not leading forces. For instance, while the academy leans politically to the left, society is moving to the right. The interests of the academy are increasingly separate from those of the culture as a whole. It appears that universities are becoming isolated from the world, rather than leading the world (Sommerville 2006, 3). While in Europe the academy has a secular worldview which is reflected in the society, in the United States the secular academy is often countered by a religious culture which wins elections. Sommerville suggests that the university is “increasingly marginal to American society” as “a result of its secularism” (Sommerville 2006, 4). The questions our society has may be too religious for the secular academy. Sommerville goes on to list numerous sample questions which the academy appears poorly equipped to answer (Sommerville 2006, 4-5). Sommerville further observes that he is thinking of not only the elite colleges, which many see as out of touch. Most students attend average colleges, which he thinks are also detached from the world of normalcy (Sommerville 2006, 6).

Sommerville associates the decline of the unviersity with what he calls a “postsecular” worldview, “in which cultural fashion has replaced intellectual argument” (Sommerville 2006, 6). This cultural fashion is able to change quickly and cannot be argued for or against using the methods of rationalism. He compares the climate to that of the early twentieth century and finds significant differences. A hundred years ago the emphasis was placed on an information and technical base needed to participate in the current world. Now, however, the degree is intended to enable people to participate in society. However, in the early 20th century there was an assumption that civic character was based on an understanding of certain cultural values. Sommerville thinks this element of philosophy is now absent. The reason he gives is that the secular university of the 1900s sought to replace religious thought with liberal arts and humanities. The professors would replace religious experts. However, the liberal arts education has become less robust and the faculty have not been able to guide students using the methods imagined (Sommerville 2006, 8).

Sommerville considers the arcane topics of academic seminars, noting that the average person, whose tax dollars fund higher education, would find incomprehensible and useless. He also notes the increasing specialization of departments and academic units. The growth of subspecialties means that a broad education is less and less available (Sommerville 2006, 9). Further, with the explosion of information there has been a decreasing emphasis on wisdom and context. Because academics can’t or won’t pursue wise decisions, the public increasingly ignores them. Worst of all, Sommerville says, is that the increasing secularization hs removed some of the important moral and philosophical reference points needed to have a reasoned discussion (Sommerville 2006, 10). Despite Sommerville’s recognition that secularization has pushed religion to the side in culture, politics, and academics, his book will focus on the negative effect of secularization on academia, not on religion (Sommerville 2006, 11).

Sommerville makes it clear that the term “secularization” merely indicates “the separation of religion from various aspects of life and of thought” (Sommerville 2006, 11). For this reason, secularization can be carried on by a highly religious person who keeps those religious views out of sight in certain contexts. Counter to this, “secularism” seeks “to complete and enforce secularization” (Sommerville 2006, 11). This would attempt to force religion out of life entirely.

As the academy tended to move toward secularism, particiularly in the sciences, it found itself unable to answer questions of values, interests, or of the importance of cultures (Sommerville 2006, 13). It may be important to step back out of secularism, though still allowing for secularization on some levels. The secularism may hve deprived us of language and thought patterns needed to express and analyze worldviews (Sommerville 2006, 14). At the same time, Sommerville thinks secularism is becoming more muddled and difficult to defend. This may well be because it is also an ideology (Sommerville 2006, 15).

Sommerville observes that the 19th century saw a move in academia from a fairly ingrained assumption of religious value to more of an interest in religion as an academic point of view (Sommerville 2006, 15-16). At the same time, science took the position of greatest authority. During the 20th century, the idea of a religious morality was gradually turned into a study of ethics, then eventually it lost its religious tone altogether (Sommerville 2006, 17). The academic world became more distant from questions of religion, even during times of religious revival. It became more entrenched in secularism.

The idea of intellectual discourse also endured change, especially in the 20th century. Sommerville observes that a “marketplace of ideas” means something very different today than it did around 1900 (Sommerville 2006, 19). In 1900 the work of scholarship was routinely published in a few journals. It used proofs and logical argumentation. It was possible to interact with scholarly work from various disciplines. With the explosion of publishing it became more difficult to sort through the many arguments. As a result, Sommerville finds a greater emphasis on tolerance and diversity as opposed to proofs based on logical use of data (Sommerville 2006, 19). Sommerville does not show clearly how this outcome would occur. He does speak of a democratization of ideas and opinions (Sommerville 2006, 19) which may be the source of the shift. If all opinions are of equal value, regardless of the evidence, the majority gets to decide what truth is. If they agree that truth is different for different people, then suddenly everyone is right, regardless of data and logical analysis.

He does make a connection between postmodernism and the move from fact to fashion. This could easily lead to an academic culture in which any opinion is authoritative (Sommerville 2006, 20). In the end, students are left to themselves when it is time to work with the most difficult questions of values and morality. The modern view of scholarship does not have the tools to do so. Sommerville says this is due to the constraints of secularism (Sommerville 2006, 21).

1 Kings 17:8-16 - Lectionary for Pentecost 25B

11/6/2018

11/6/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

In 1 Kings 17 we read about the prophet Elijah, who, at God’s command, confronted Ahab, an unbelieving king, and prayed for a drought. Most of us can hardly imagine a situation worse than a drought. At first it seems dry. As time goes on, the dry weather stresses crops and livestock. Eventually there is little choice but slaughter of the livestock. They would not have adequate food to eat. Crop after crop fails. There is nothing left but reserve food, the kind of food which can be kept from year to year. Grain supplies dwindle. Creeks and ponds dry up, then lakes and rivers. All along the people face the reality that they need to reserve seed to plant, that it will take months after planting to bring a crop to harvest, and that one rainfall doesn’t mean the drought is broken. It is a fearsome condition.

This drought, we realize, was aimed at Ahab the king. Possibly the intention of God was to bring the king to his senses. Confronting the cruel earthly king with the power of the heavenly king would be a wake-up call. Possibly this was a means of God calling His people to repent. They knew they were Israel, the people who answer to the particular God who does not share with others in his claims to loyalty. If they repent, He can bring rain.

We really don’t know the “what if.” What we do know is that God appointed Elijah to go to a widow, suffering from the drought, and bring relief. She could supply Elijah with a little bread, the last she had. As she showed her faith in God, He would make her small supply of flour and oil last. God provided for this woman who trusted in Him.

We have no promise that God will provide for everyone in the same way. That isn’t the point of this passage. However, we do have a promise in the Bible that God will provide, indeed has provided, for people of every nation. By trust in God through Jesus, anyone, anywhere, in any kind of social and economic climate, can be a partaker of Jesus, the bread of life. The supernatural supply of the bread of heaven will not perish, will not run out, and will not fail God’s people. We can come near and know that even when we eat our last meal and starve, we have been nourished for eternal life.

Lord, take the eyes of your people off of our concern for bread which perishes. Let us look to You, the bringer of eternal life. And as we are concerned with You, may we see provision for our daily, earthly needs as well.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

God Greater Than World Leaders

11/6/2018

Tuesdays are for the Old Testament
11/6/18

Motyer, J. Alec. The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction & Commentary. Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993. “Isaiah 38-55: The Book of the Servant” “D. The Great Deliverance (44:24-48:22)” Loc. 10096-10946.

Motyer treats Isaiah 44:24-48:22 as one unit, with a parallel in 49:1-53:12. In this unit cyrus will be the agent doing God’s will (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10096). He begins with a thematic outline showing that the progression of ideas is in the same order in the two passages. The people of God, who have been captive in Babylon, will be released both from the nation and from its idols, though they will not wish to leave the idols behind (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10121).

The passages opens by declaring that God is the only redeemer of Israel (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10151). He is the creator of all. He is ever-present. He has only one purpose, that of redeeming his people (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10188). Motyer notes the bias which would assign a late date of composition since 44:28 names Cyrus, not even born at the time of Isaiah. Predictive prohecy, though relatively uncommon in the Bible, is certainly assumed to exist (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10200). Isaiah 45:1-8 discusses the relationship between God’s purposes and those of Cyrus (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10210). Cyrus is presented as an instrument of God. Motyer wishes that Cyrus had believed the true God (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10272). Even though Cyrus does not seem to know God, God knows him (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10282). God is shown as the one who knows all things and can govern them all. Motyer recognizes this as a comfort (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10306).

Isaiah 45:9-13 addresses objections to God’s sovereign activities (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10354). Just as a shard of pottery does not question the potter, God’s people do not criticize God’s use of a Gentile to deliver them. God’s actions are not open to debate (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10391). He does have a coherent plan, described in 45:14-25. Those who follow idols will be brought to Israel’s God (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10416). This applies regardless of national origin. The salvation of God, then, brings glory to God in Israel (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10451). The Gentiles come to Israel to find God. The idols, who need to be carried around, cannot save anyone (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10487). God, however, is the one we can look to for rescue (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10519).

Isaiah 46 develps the author’s chronology. Though the people of Babylon are threatening and though Israel is rebellious, God is determined to crush his enemies and care for his people (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10535). In verses 1-2 the gods people have made become a burden t o them. Motyer briefly describes the known Babylonian gods (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10550). While the false gods are a burden to those who carry them, the God of Israel actually carries burdens in verses 3-4 (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10572). Verses 5-7 compare God to the idols. Motyer sees that there is no real comparison (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10583). He is the one who has actually made things, as seen in verses 8-11 (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10588). The coming restoration of Israel will be under Cyrus the king. Motyer notes, “There will be a return without freedom or sovereignty” (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10611). Yet verses 12-13 show God as the one who does save his rebellious people.

Chapters 47-48 deal with Cyrus’ triumph. Motyer finds a strong chiasm in the chapters (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10626). He details it as he continues, using it to unify thematerial. Babylon, having been overly proud, is destined to fall. God will take retribution as he protects his people Israel (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10652). In 47:1-4 Babylon is to be humbled forcefully. It will fall for Israel’s good (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10662). In speaking of hte atrocities of war, Motyer notes this is surprising. The Old Testament has no place for ignoring morality in a time of war. Atrocity remains atrocity. It is unexpected to see people treating their enemies in the way Babylon does (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10684). In verses 8-11 Babylon realizes that there are moral consequences for their actions (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10689). The are going to receive exactly what they had given to other nations. Verses 12-15 show that all the punishment is related to Babylon’s religion. They used various types of sorcery. Babylon was observant of a religion but was not looking to the real God (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10723). Once Babylon has fallen, Cyrus liberates his prisoners. They are clearly stubborn and treacherous (ch. 48). However, God arranges for them to return home (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10745).

In Isaiah 48:1-11 it is clear that Israel has forfeited any claim to divine favor. Yet God, even by his very name and identity, is the one who keeps his covenant (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10786). He is going to care for his people. Motyer does note that the time of fulfillment is not specified. Yet it is ceratin (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10807). God will do this, in verse 11, for his own sake. God’s rescue of his people is proof of his reliability (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10855). With this said, God, in verses 12-22, reminds the reader that he will keep his word in the future as well (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10866). As we approach the end of Isaiah 48, Israel has been rescued from captivity. God has kept his promises. Yet the people do not have peace due to their sin (Motyer 1993, Loc. 10915).

Psalm 146 - Lectionary for Pentecost 25B

11/5/2018

11/5/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Where are we going to place our hope? It will be somewhere, no doubt about that. Our Psalm for this week gives us very significant guidance. Verses 3-4 tell us not to trust even noble people. They can’t save you. They die and their plans come to an end.

This thought could well bring us to despair. We are, after all, taught the virtue of self-reliance. We can work hard, show industry and integrity, and make a difference in the world for ourselves and for others. Or we are taught to dream of a better world for future generations, then to make it into reality. We try to write music for the ages rather than for next week. We want to do things that matter. Yet the Psalmist says the plans of even nobility pass away. How much more will ours? We want to save the world, but we need saving ourselves. What will we do?

Verses 5 and following tell us to trust in the Lord. He’s the one who is faithful. He’s the one who endures forever. He gives justice, provides food, releases prisoners, cares for the oppressed, heals the sick. So we look to the Lord for our help. Our ability passes away.

Does that still leave us in despair? After all, what’s the use of us? What’s the use of any of this earthly life? When we consider the ways God helps us, I thnk we can grasp our purpose. God gives justice. How? He often uses earthly law enforcement and legal systems to hand out justice. The lawyer, officer, or judge who looks to God is equipped to administer justie rightly. God feeds the hungry. How does He do that? Through farmers, shippers, markets, food preparation, everything involved in getting from the idea of food to putting it on the table. He uses your employer and your employer’s customers as well, so you can pay for what you need. I don’t think we need to go on down the list. When God cares fr our world, he uses us as His instruments. We will pass away from this earthly work. But our Lord will keep on until heaven and earth pass away. He is faithful and just. We look to Him as the one who supplies all we need by His grace.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Heretical and Catholic Asceticism

11/5/2018

Mondays are for Church History
11/5/18

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Amazon Kindle Edition, 2014.
Volume 2, Ante-Nicene Christianity A.D. 100-325, “Chapter 9. Ascetic Tendencies.” Sections 104-108, Loc. 17159-17485.

§ 105. Heretical and Catholic Asceticism.

Schaff observes that not all asceticism in antiquity was alike. Some, based on pagan philosophy, he considers heretical, but that based on Christian ideals is sound (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17225). The heretical kind develops in Gnosticism and Manichaenism. He finds these ideas based on “a confusion of sin with matter, and a perverted idea of God and the creation (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17230). A genuinely Christian asceticism, on the othre hand, grows from Scripture, though Schaff finds it to strain some passages of Scripture. The purpose of a Christian asceticism is to control the body, rather than to mortify it (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17236). However, Schaff considers it to devolve into the same misuse of asceticism as found among the Gnostics. Eventually, there is a desire to escape from the body (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17241). Asceticism moves ultimately to a division of sins from one another based on how harmful they are. This in turn creates special classes of holy people (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17247). Doing works of piety becomes a work which can earn special merit. The list of works which earn merit then grows (Schaff 2014, Loc. 17263).

Friday is Didache day.

11/2/2018

11/2/18

Milavec, Aaron. The Didache: Faith, Hope, & Life of the Earliest Christian Communities, 50-70 C.E. New York: The Newman Press, 2003.

The life of prayer is very important in the Didache. Milavec will discuss thevarious prayers in his commentary.

Milavec’s work extends to a discussion of the prayers in the Didache. He views the eschatological expectations of the community as leading to a vivid spontaneity. “My commentary will disclose how it can be shown that none of the prayers given in the Didache was ever read or recited word for word from memory. Prayer leaders were expected to be entirely familiar with the prayer symopsis that guided the opening phrases, the thematic flow, and the concluding refrain(s)” (Milavec 2003, xiv). He draws distinctions between the traditional Birkat Ha-Mazon in the eucharistic prayer and the format presented in the Didache.

The relationship to prophets is also significant in the Didache. Milavec asserts “that the Didache communities never created or sent out wandering prophets. Rather, they attracted and absorbed them (Milavec 2003, xiv).Milavec’s view is that the absorption of prophets was a means of healing in the traumatized life of the prophets (Milavec 2003, xv).

The history of source criticism to which the Didache has been subjected suggests a rather clumsy construction, a collage of components. Milavec sees this process as problematic. It obscures any reason for inclusion of particular materials. The purpose becomes one of celebrating the past, reforming practices to reflect a past practice, or enforcing an authoritarian position (Milavec 2003, xv). The process of source criticism removes unity and coherence. As an example, Milavec describes, in brief, the work of five different scholars, all of whom reject the work of all the others (Milavec 2003, xvi). Counter to the efforts of source criticism, Milavec “willconcentrate on hearing the text as a whole” (Milavec 2003, xvii). Milavec’s thesis is built on an organizational key which he h as identified. “The key is this: the Didache was the comprehensive, step-by-step program used for the formation o f a gentile converting to Christianity. By adhering to the order of the Didache, mentors training novices were assured of following the progressive, ordered, and comprehensive path t hat master trainers in the community had effectively culled from their own successful practices in apprenticing novices” (Milavec 2003, xvii).

Mark 12:28-37 - Lectionary for Pentecost 24B

11/1/2018

11/1/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

If you are at all like I am, it’s very hard to look at a social media newsfeed without being bombarded by countless value statements, many of which play some sort of religion card. And these religious claims are almost uniformly based on the idea in the second important command. Love your neighbor.

The big debate, of course, is not whether or not we should love our neighbor. That’s part and parcel of Christianity. But what does that love for neighbor look like? Here’s where the conflict begins. It’s a conflict which causes many who are not Christians to question a Christian commitment to love of the neighbor. And it can even cause deep divisions within Christianity, as it may bring different groups of Christians into conflict. For instance, how do we love our would-be neighbor who wishes to immigrate? How about the neighbor who faces job insecurity and fears the addition of more available workers? What about our neighbor who is losing a fight with substance abuse? What about the neighbor dealing with sexual identity issues? What does love for the neighbor look like in those cases?

Many Christians find themselves either with no answer to these questions, or with difficulty finding a rhyme or reason to organize their responses. However, I would suggest it is more straightforward than we might first assume. In the two verses immediately preceding, we are reminded that there is one true God, the Lord of Israel. We are to love that Lord with all our beings.

How does this make for a straightforward response to the problem of loving our neighbor? First and foremost, by our love for the true God of the Bible we take on His values, His definition of justice, His concern for repentance and restoration. The greatest way we can love our neighbor is through helping him to love the Lord, to take on His values. This in turn helps those whose lives are broken by the condition of the world to find ways to compe, to ask help in pursuing godly character, and to work for the restoration of this world to a right relationship with God. That is what pulls our world together.

The answers are still difficult. In the end we have to balance more needs than we could possibly meet. We find that some people will lose their battles no matter what we do, just as some would win despite all odds. But over time, as we love and trust in God, we are able to make a difference in some poeple. Above all, we have opportunity to show God as the Lord of all. This doesn’t solve all the problems the way some would demand it. Our remain question to the detractors is whether they, too, will commit to loving and trusting the God of Israel with all their hearts, and loving their neighbors as themselves. Love of neighbor, to be real love, is predicated on love for the true God.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

A Vision and a Call

11/1/2018

Thursdays are for the New Testament
11/1/18

Osborne, Grant R. Revelation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002. Location: Ellis BS 2825.53.O73 2002

II. Churches Addressed (1:9-3:22) pp. 77-217.

Inaugural Vision (1:9-20). p. 78-103.

John is introduced in Revelation 1:9-20 as both prophet and seer (Osborne 2002, 78). Osbone notes a similarity to the call narratives of Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. He also observes that John’s commission is to write what he sees as part of the revelation. Here we see Christ both as the one who commissions and as the main topic of the book. Rather than identifying himself as an apostle, the author identifies as a “brother” and “partner.” Osborne does not take this as an indicator of a non-apostolic author, but as a mark of his commitment to community (Osborne 2002, 79).

The areas of community focused on are tribulation, kingdom, and endurance (1:9), which Osborne considers to show “conceptual unity” (Osborne 2002, 80). Osborne finds the placement of “kingdom” in the center between “tribulation” and “endurance” to signify where patient endurance would function. The term “kingdom” is used in various ways throughout Scripture, including in Revelation, as Osborne treats briefly.

John’s context for sharing in affliction is that of Patmos (Osborne 2002, 81). Osborne observes that Patmos was not a penal colony, but would serve as a place of banishment. The island was populated and considered civilized. It is likely that John’s banishment ended with an amnesty under Nerva in 96, at which time John apparently settled in Ephesus (Osborne 2002, 81).

In Revelation 1:10 John is said to be “in the Spirit.” While the term is used at times of an ecstatic experience, Osborne thinks that is not the case here, since John seems quite aware of himself throughout (Osborne 2002, 83). The reference made to “the Lord’s day” appears nowhere else in the New Testament. Osborne thinks it is simply a reference to Sunday as the day of resurrection.

The first event in the revelation is that John hears a loud voice, which is a typical sign of important information to come (Osborne 2002, 84). John is told to write, and is told whom to address. Osborne discusses the recipients in brief as being cities in important places for natural communication around Asia Minor (Osborne 2002, 85).

Osborne observes that the vision of the Christ beginning at Revelation 1:12 actually continues through the end of chapter three, including the writing of the letters to the churches (Osborne 2002, 85). In verse 12, John turns to see the voice. Osborne notes the use of a verb for “turning” twice as possibly symbolic of a literary or historical transition. He also thinks the turn to “see the voice” may be a reinforcement of the call narrative from the start of Revelation 1 (Osborne 2002, 86). The lampstands John sees have been variously interpreted. In any estimation, though, they strongly indicate the idea that the seven churches shine God’s light into the world (Osborne 2002, 87). However, the focus is not on the lampstands but on the Christ in the midst of them. His presence is central to Revelation. Osborne finds numerous parallels to the visions of Daniel chapter 7 and 10 (Osborne 2002, 87). The one “like the Son of Man” (Revelation 1:13) very likely points to Jesus’ role as Messiah. His identity as the God/Man will be restated several times in Revelation (Osborne 2002, 88).

In Revelation 1:13b-16 Osborne identifies a series of eight Old Testament images which introduce themes which carry throughout Revelation (Osborne 2002, 88). The images all describe God the Son in his glory. His robe and sash suggest priestly or kingly dignity (Osborne 2002, 89). His white head shows dignity and wisdom (Osborne 2002, 90). The blazing eyes show his penetrating insight. The bronze feet may well refer to strength, stability, and purity (Osborne 2002, 91). The voice is a sign of power. Likewise, the stars in his hand indicate his power and authority. The sword in his mouth indicates authority and judgment (Osborne 2002, 92). His radiant face sums up God’s presence as shown by Moses coming down from Sinai (Osborne 2002, 93).

Revelation 1:17-20 shows John’s reaction and a restatement of the divine commission given to John. The natural reaction to God’s presence is to fall down before Him (Osborne 2002, 93). It is a sign of worship and submission. At this, the Christ lays his right hand on John and encourages him (Osborne 2002, 94). Osborne notes the right hand held the stars and was also used as a sign of blessing and peace. Jesus as the “First and Last” (v. 17) is the one who created and sustains everything (Osborne 2002, 95). The image of his eternal life indicates that he possesses and can distribute life, as shown in the resurrection (v. 19). His possession of the keys of death indicates his sovereign power over it (Osborne 2002, 96).

Osborne notes that the statement of Revelation 1:19 has often been seen as the organizational statement of all of Revelation (Osborne 2002, 97). John is to write what he has seen, which is his initial vision, what is now, which is the content of his seven letters, and what is yet to come, the remainder of the text. The specifics may be open to debate, but the overall framework does make sense. All the book seems to have past, present, and future elements. Verse 20 strongly suggests that the text as a whole speaks specifically to the churches (Osborne 2002, 98).

Osborne concludes his comments on chapter one by observing that Revelation depicts a world fully under God’s control (Osborne 2002, 100). As Christians periodically endure persecution we can still realize that God is not absent. Holding firmly to Christian teaching may spur on persecution, but that is not the destruction of Christ’s kingdom. The exalted Christ is present as the true God who is both in control and appointed as the final judge (Osborne 2002, 101).

Hebrews 9:11-22 - Lectionary for Pentecost 24B

10/31/2018

10/31/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

God’s ways are not our ways. This is made crystal clear to us when we consider God’s commands regarding sin and redemption. While we might be quite satisfied asking that people do what they can in their desire for reform and holiness, God requires perfection. While we like to decide what sins are serious and what could be overlooked, God says that all human sin condemns. While we might devise intricate and visible means of atoning for our own sin, God has something quite different in mind.

God has clearly revealed that sin, all sin, is deadly. He requires a perfect sacrifice to atone for sin. In the simplest terms, we can die of our sins and the sin which is common to humans. Otherwise, we can recognize that someone else, someone perfect, has died in our place. Nothing we could do, nothing we would ever devise, will bring help for sin.

Our Epistle from Hebrews 9:11-22 shows that Jesus, the perfect high priest, is the one able to atone by his perfect death for all the sin humans have ever or ever will commit. He is the one without sin who could offer himself up once for all (v. 12). This work cleanses our conscience (v. 14). This negates the elaborate schemes we could devise, what the author calls “dead works” (v. 14). Jesus accomplished this redemption by dying in the place of his people. This death is the work of both a sacrifice and a priest. The forgiveness is accomplished through shedding blood (v. 22) done by Jesus.

What does this men for us? It means that all our plans for holy living, all our attempts at reform, all the pledges we make to bargain with God, all are meaningless. The Christian walk is one of faithful reception, accepting that Jsus is the redeemer he promised to be.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.