tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28281018295045182032024-03-09T20:57:44.282-06:00Wry Thoughts About ReligionUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger299125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-7983028572981373902024-03-06T05:42:00.008-06:002024-03-06T05:43:27.351-06:00"A Power came-out from Him": Healing and Exorcisms in Luke<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Last Sunday morning as the minister was reading the text I was following along in the Greek and was immediately struck by a statement in Luke 6:19, which only appears in Luke.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The whole crowd sought to touch him because power came-out from him and healed all.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">What struck me was that Jesus was not portrayed as the source of the healing of the crowd, rather “a power (<i>dunamis</i>) that came-out from (<i>para</i>) him” brought-about the healing. Jesus was the source for the power but the power itself was the source of the healing. The same phrase appears in Luke 8:46, “a power had come-out from (<i>apo</i>) him,” and that is also the case in Mark’s parallel passage (Mark 5:30), “A power (<i>dunamis</i>) had come-out (<i>ek</i>) from him.” In this latter passage the woman had touched his garment, which triggered the emanation of power from him. Jesus did not know who had touched him and was only aware that power had suddenly emanated from him.<sup>1</sup> It seems that the power operated independently of the will of Jesus (Mark 5:30-32).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> It appears that Luke conceived the power in Jesus as the power of God: “And there was a power of the Lord [present] for him to heal” (5:17). Again, it was not his power but the power of the Lord. This sentence is lacking in the parallel passages Mark 2:2 and Matt 9:1. In Luke’s source, Mark (1:25) reads “With authority he commands the unclean spirits,” whereas Luke (4:36) reads “With authority and power he commands the unclean spirits.” One might almost say: Jesus’ authority and God’s power. When Jesus sent out his disciples on a mission, Matthew (10:1) and Mark (6:7) read that Jesus gave them authority over unclean spirits. Luke (9:1), on the other hand, reads: Jesus “gave them authority <i>and power</i> over the unclean spirts.” In his second volume (the book of Acts) of his two-volume work (Luke-Acts) Luke makes a point of emphasizing the role of the power of God active in the community of Jesus followers (1:8; 10:38; compare Luke 24:49).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> In other healing or exorcism stories in Luke, it is not a power emanating independently of Jesus without his intentionally directing it that heals. Jesus heals by a laying on of his hands (4:40; 13:12-13), by a touch (5:13) by words or a word (5:24-25; 6:10; 7:14-15; 8:54; 9:42). In some cases, there is no description as to how he healed (14:4; 17:14). Once, the healing is at a distance but no description of how the healing occurred is given (7:9-10).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Luke appears to conceive of this power of the Lord present in Jesus but not totally controlled by Jesus. It acts in a similar way to demons, and unclean or evil spirits, when they are exorcised. Luke describes the emergence of the power of the Lord from Jesus with the same expression that he uses in describing the exorcism of a demon or spirit: “it came/went-out from him” (4:35-36, 41; 8:33; 11:14; 11:24). Luke 9:42 does not contain the phrase: “it came/went-out from him,” but such is suggested by 9:40.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">These descriptions of the activities of Jesus are simply another reminder<sup>2</sup> to the reader that in Luke’s Gospel we are not reading a historical account of Jesus’ career as it actually happened but rather we read what Luke thought had happened from the disparate bits of oral tradition s/he gathered from oral reports, or that s/he had read in the written reports of others (Luke 1:1-4).<sup>3</sup> And that brings me to the rubric “Word of God” used to describe the Bible. At its worst, the expression is a learned religious confession elevating the Bible to an iconic status in the religious community. At its best, it is a metaphor converting the human wisdom of its authors and texts into a divine guide for faith and practice. Nevertheless, calling the Bible the “Word of God” dismisses the human role in the production of the Bible.<sup>4<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See W. L. Lane, <i>The Gospel of Mark</i> (NICNT; Eerdmans, 1974), 192-93.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See Charles Hedrick Blog, Wry Thoughts about Religion: “The Challenge of the Proverb”: <a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2024/02/the-challenge-of-proverb.html" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2024/02/the-challenge-of-proverb.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">And “Euphemisms in the Bible”: <a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2024/02/euphemisms-in-bible.html" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2024/02/euphemisms-in-bible.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Modern scholars have identified three of those written sources as the Gospel of Mark, the hypothetical source Q, and Luke’s special source, dubbed “L” (written or oral is unknown”). See Vincent Taylor about sources in Luke, “Luke, Gospel of” in G. A. Buttrick, et al., <i>The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible</i> (4 vols.; Abingdon, 1962), vol. 3. 184-85.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See Charles Hedrick Blog, Wry Thoughts about Religion: “The Bible’s Story: A Brief Summary”; for the part of human beings in making the Bible a book, see: <a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2023/10/the-bibles-story-brief-summary.html" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2023/10/the-bibles-story-brief-summary.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">And “Inspired Writings”: <a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2023/11/inspired-writings.html" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2023/11/inspired-writings.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-21600075032711265872024-02-19T07:58:00.000-06:002024-02-19T07:58:59.726-06:00Euphemisms in the Bible?<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Sometimes the biblical writers do not speak plainly and are less than “honest or frank in what they write.”<sup>1</sup> Instead they will use a euphemism for certain body parts, acts, or ideas. A euphemism is: “The use of a word or phrase that is less expressive or direct, but considered less distasteful, less offensive than another.”<sup>2</sup> The biblical writers, in some cases, tend to avoid the use of disagreeable, or what were considered offensive or “impolite” words or expressions.<sup>3</sup> I have been aware of such being the case for the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament since my seminary days, when it was pointed out that the expression “to cover one’s feet” (KJV, 1 Sam 24:3, Judg 3:24) was an euphemism for “relieving one’s self” (as it is translated in the RSV). Candidly, the expression means to urinate or defecate.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">It turns out, however, that there are many expressions found to be euphemisms in the both Hebrew Bible/Old Testament and New Testament that are used to avoid speaking plainly. “<span style="background: white; color: #3b3d3f;">Most of the euphemisms found in the HB/OT relate to three areas of common human experience: (1) death; (2) sexual activity and the organs associated with it; and (3) certain bodily functions,”</span><sup>4</sup> whereas most “euphemisms in the NT have to do with sexual organs, sexual relations, or death.”<sup>5</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The King James Version (KJV) generally translates the biblical euphemisms literally (what the text says). The New Revised Standard Version (RSV) generally translates biblical euphemisms by expressing the offensive idea concealed in the euphemism, but nevertheless translates them into an English euphemism. Here are examples of euphemisms in the NT for each of the categories: “see a man’s shame” (KJV) is an euphemism for “male genitalia” (NRSV, Rev 16:15), which itself is an English euphemism for penis and testicles; “the fruit of his loins” (KJV) is an euphemism for “put a descendent upon his throne” (NRSV, Acts 2:30), which itself is an English euphemism for seminal ejaculation and impregnation; “I do not know a man” is an euphemism for “I am a virgin” (NRSV, Luke 1:34), which itself is an English euphemism for not having had sexual intercourse; “give a wife due benevolence” (KJV) is an euphemism for “give a wife her conjugal rights” (NRSV, 1 Cor 7:3), which itself is an English euphemism for satisfy a wife sexually; “put off my tabernacle”(KJV) is an euphemism for “death” (NRSV, 2 Pet 1:14); “let your servant depart in peace” (KJV) is an euphemism for “dismiss your servant” (NRSV, Luke 2:29), which is an English euphemism for die (see Luke 2:26).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Euphemisms in the Bible are not exactly lies or untruths but they are clearly a softening of the truth in order to disguise what is considered distasteful, impolite, or offensive. They are not straight-forward, candid, or frank statements, which makes them something less than the “unvarnished” or complete truth. Their use by the writers of the Bible makes the Bible seem a more human product and little less a collection of texts divinely inspired. It hardly seems possible that the Almighty could be involved in a shading of the truth, as John (16:13; 17:17) and the psalmist (119:160) seemed to think—although the authors of First Kings (22:22-23) and Second Chronicles (18:21-22) appear to think differently. Go figure!<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Webster’s New World College Dictionary</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">, 4<sup>th</sup> ed., s. v., “candid.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Ibid., s. v., “euphemism.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">, s. v., dysphemism: using “a disagreeable, offensive, or disparaging word or expression.” <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Here is a list of expressions considered to be euphemisms by a jointly authored essay: <a href="https://www.degruyter.com/database/EBR/entry/key_20138155-819d-446f-959d-d4e432296e9b/html?lang=en" target="_blank">https://www.degruyter.com/database/EBR/entry/key_20138155-819d-446f-959d-d4e432296e9b/html?lang=en</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Ibid.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-72403177036906905322024-02-04T06:07:00.000-06:002024-02-04T06:07:14.940-06:00The Challenge of the Proverb<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Proverbs are traditional pithy sayings that briefly and memorably express some general truth about life in the world. Proverbs are distillations of community wisdom whose ideas have been hammered out of common human experience. One might think of it as a bit of homely wisdom that originates around some nameless person’s kitchen table and becomes part of community lore by oral transmission. It is a universal form emerging through the ages in various cultural contexts and languages. The Book of Proverbs in Hebrew Bible is an anthology of many such sayings.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Here are a few American proverbs that I have learned somewhere along the way: “A stitch in time saves nine”; “The early bird gets the worm”; “Actions speak louder than words”; “Birds of a feather flock together”; “Better late than never.” One I quote to myself all the time is “Haste makes waste.” I am certain that the reader recognizes most, if not all, of these, and can easily add more to my short list.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The New Testament also has a few proverbs, but they are not necessarily traditional oral sayings that emerge out of the life of a people. In some cases, identifiable writers compose proverbs, such as George Bernard Shaw, Robert Frost, J. R. R. Tolkien, C. S. Lewis, Herman Melville, and others.<sup>1</sup> Here are a few of the proverbs in the New Testament: Luke 4:23, Acts 17:28, Acts 26:14, 1 Cor 15:33, Titus 1:12. To these I would add Mark 2:21-22, Gal 6:7 (compare Prov 22:8). One must argue, however, for the position that these proverbs are traditional rather than having a known origin in a given author. Some of them come from ancient Greek poets. Other proverbs in the New Testament come from Hebrew Bible: Prov 11:31=I Pet 4:18; Prov 3:11-12=Heb 12:5-6; Prov 22:8 (Septuagint)=2 Cor 9:7; Prov 25:21=Rom 12:20.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Here are two traditional proverbs preserved in Luke 12:54-55. Luke has narrated them in a prose form: “He said to the crowds, ‘When you see a cloud rising in the west, you immediately say, ‘It’s going to rain’: and so it happens. And when you see the south wind blowing, you say, ‘There will be scorching heat’: and so it happens.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Notice that both proverbs are not attributed to Jesus, but in the text of Luke’s gospel they are attributed to Luke’s character, Jesus, who in turn attributes the sayings to the crowds. In their present form they are neither pithy nor memorable, however. In a proverbial form they would have been orally repeated, I suppose, as something like: “Clouds in the west, rain comes on apace.” “South winds gust, heat scorches us.” So far as I know, however, these proverbs are not preserved in the literature in memorable forms. They are only preserved in these prose forms.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Matt 16:2-3 is similar to Luke 12:54-55:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">[Jesus] answered them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.”<sup>2<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Again, in the context Matthew’s Jesus takes it to be a traditional proverb by attributing it to the Pharisees and Sadducees as a group (Matt 16:1).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">These verses are, however, a suspected interpolation into the text of Matthew.<sup>3</sup> At least three modern translations of the Bible treat the saying as an interpolation and accordingly follow the lead of those ancient manuscripts that do not have the saying in the Gospel of Matthew (<i>The Complete Bible. An American Translation</i>; the translation of James Moffatt; and The Revised English Bible).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">If there are traditional proverbs in the Bible (and there appear to be), it poses a problem for those who place such a high value on the biblical text by referring to it as “the Word of God.” Such an idea completely overlooks the human inspiration for proverbs and raises the question: Why should the traditional words of a given people, hammered out of their common sense and human experience, be regarded as divine words? The people that I know who use the expression, “the Bible is the Word of God,” do not regard that expression as metaphorical, rather they seem to regard it as literal.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proverb" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proverb</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Compare the modern proverb thought to be derived from Matt 16:2-3: “Red sky in the morning, sailors take warning. Red sky at night, sailors delight.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See Funk, Hoover, and the Jesus Seminar, <i>The Five Gospels</i> (Macmillan, 1993), 205, 344. For the reason see Bruce Metzgar, <i>A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament</i> (2<sup>nd</sup> ed; United Bible Society, 2000), 33.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-47620995868482819742024-01-18T05:57:00.000-06:002024-01-18T05:57:05.818-06:00Once upon a time, a Man Became God<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">How in the world did that happen, do you suppose? Well, as with all good stories, there are several different accounts in the New Testament. The best known appears in two different versions (Matt 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-2:20).<sup>1</sup> These narratives are blended and celebrated annually every December in Christian church and family settings. The narrative leads the reader to think that the God-Man (or man-God) was born naturally like all human children, as a flesh and blood child through the vaginal canal of his birth mother. The conception of the child by the birth-mother, however, is most unusual. Matthew says that the child’s mother conceived by a holy spirit (Matt 1:20) in fulfilment of Scripture. The child was to be called Emmanuel (Isaiah 7:14), which Matthew interprets as “God with us” (Matt 1:23). Luke also describes the child’s conception through a holy spirit that “comes upon” the mother and a “power of the Most-High overshadowing her,” suggesting that conception occurs in fashion similar to human conceiving, by a spiritual sperm.<sup>2</sup> This child, Luke opines, shall be holy and called a son of God (Luke 1:35).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> In John’s Gospel, there is a third version of the story in the prologue to John’s Gospel (1:1-18) for how a divine figure came to be man. The fragmentary narrative (John 1:1-2, 14) lacks in clarity. A figure, described as <i>logos</i>,<sup>3</sup> who was from the primordial beginning alongside God and “what God was, the <i>logos</i> was.”<sup>4</sup> Hence, the <i>logos</i> shared God’s essence, while being distinguishable from God (cf. Phil 2:6). In John 1:14 this spiritual figure “was made flesh” (cf. John 1:3).<sup>5 </sup>I take this to mean an incarnating or “enfleshing” of the <i>logos</i> in the sense of Phil 2:7: “taking the form of a slave, being made in the likeness of men, and being found in form as man…” How ever the author of the introductory poem to John may have conceived the event, it seems clear that conception and birth in the Matthaean and Lukan sense is not the process being described.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> A fourth version of the story appears in Rom 1:3-4 where God’s son is “born (<i>genomenou</i>) from the sperm (<i>spermatos</i>) of David according to the flesh,” and “appointed (<i>oristhentos</i>) son of God with power according to a spirit of holiness by resurrection from the dead.” Jesus was a human being, a descendent of David, born of fleshly sperm, and was appointed, or declared, son of God by the spirit at his resurrection. His historical life was therefore not lived as the son of God. He was only advanced to that status at the end of his life at his resurrection.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> The early period of the Jesus movements was one of speculation about the identity and nature of Jesus. The historical matrix providing the spark that led toward the regarding of Jesus as son of God was plausibly the influx of gentiles into the gatherings of the Jesus followers.<sup>6</sup> The cessation of early speculation about the nature of Jesus, which effectively weeded out other views and resulted in the dominance of the stories of Matthew/Luke, was occasioned by the early confessions of the church in the fourth century and at the Council of Chalcedon in the fifth,<sup>7</sup> where Jesus was acclaimed as “very God and very man.” That declaration by the council is an uneasy solution, since it is challenged by other views reflected in the early Jesus gatherings and preserved in biblical texts. So, What is your thinking was Jesus a God-man or a man-God?<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">They are not contradictory narratives but just completely different, but they both agree in the birthing process.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See Charles W. Hedrick, “Early Christian Confessions and the Language of Faith,” <i>The Fourth R</i> 52.1 (January-February 2019): 15-20; idem, “How Do Divine Beings Procreate,” <i>The Fourth R</i> 36.6 (November-December 2023): 18-19.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Logos</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"> is a central term in classical Greek culture. Its range of meaning in English is generally covered by two different ideas: speech and reason. See the entry <i>logos</i> in Simon Hornblower and Anthony Spawforth, eds., <i>The Oxford Classical Dictionary</i> (3<sup>rd</sup> ed. Oxford: University Press, 1999), 882. And the discussion by Ernst Haenchen, <i>John 1. A Commentary on the Gospel of John Chapters 1-6 </i>(Robert W. Funk, trans. and ed.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 135-40.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Here is the translation of John 1:1-2 in the <i>Revised English Bible</i>: “In the beginning the Word already was. The Word was in God’s presence, and what God was the Word was.” It is at once as much an interpretation as a translation.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See Bauer-Danker, <i>Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature</i> (3<sup>rd</sup> ed. revised; Chicago: University, 2000), 196-99, taking <i>ginomai</i> in the sense of Bauer-Danker’s second entry rather than the fifth.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, “Early Christian Confessions,” 13-20.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">7</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, “Early Christian Confessions,” 17, 20.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-10434322371277119622024-01-04T05:59:00.001-06:002024-01-06T09:02:42.249-06:00Rhythm, Rhyme, and Religion<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">A
Christmas Miracle?</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Christmas
Day,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">In
the roadway,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">I
found a Lincoln cent<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">That
failed to glint,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">because
it was chocolate brown,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Not
copper red, but color of the ground.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype", serif; font-size: 12pt;">“See,” said I, “It’s a penny.”</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">My daughter agreed with me.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">But on coming home<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The penny had metamorphosed;<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Not a cent, as we supposed.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">It was a dime, <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Colored by dirt and grime.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Can it really be,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Like a rock into a tree,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">That with a little time,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">A red cent became a brown dime?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Why not,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">I thought.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">It happened once before,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">In days of yore.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">A man became God.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">How odd!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype", serif; font-size: 12pt;">For the last several years on my daily walking route of 2.5 miles, I have been writing a hasty rhyme each time I found a coin in order to commemorate the finding. I recently self-published a modest volume of these rhymes for the family.* They are not serious poetry, but aim at being whimsical. The above rhyme, however, neither made the book nor aims at whimsicality. It falls somewhere between simple rhyme and poem that takes aim at saying something serious about religion in rhythm and rhyme.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"> Writing whimsical rhymes is something to do and it keeps my mind active, through what has been a difficult year.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype", serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype", serif; font-size: 12pt;">*For other coin rhymes, see Charles W. Hedrick, </span><i style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype", serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://charleshedrick.com/hedrickpoembook.pdf" target="_blank">Lost Legal Tender in the Streets: Ditties, Rhymes, Whimsical Verse</a></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype", serif; font-size: 12pt;"> (Storyworth; 2023).</span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-59563383463053884262023-12-20T05:46:00.000-06:002023-12-20T05:46:30.485-06:00Reinterpreting the Christmas Mythology<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The mythological<sup>1</sup> message of the first Christmas has endured for over two thousand years, surviving translation from ancient into modern culture, the attacks of hostile rationalists, the naiveté of biblical literalists, its crass commercialism in the marketplace, the self-serving interests of over-zealous pietists, and its amalgamation with other competitive holiday traditions (Santa Claus, Christmas trees, etc.).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> The story of the birth of Jesus has continued to capture the imagination of the most creative and able talent of Western culture. Under its influence artists have produced many of the masterpieces of our Judeo-Christian heritage (for example, Handel’s Messiah). We are still influenced by the Christmas myth in the twenty-first century. Motivated by the ancient story, we moderns have been led to acts of altruism, self-sacrifice, and charity that surprise even us. It is difficult to react with a bah, humbug attitude when we are bombarded with so much Christmas “magic” in the marketplace at this time of year. There is a grandeur, a nobility, associated with Christmas that stirs the slumbering cords of the highest human ideals. For that reason, the Christmas story has become “authentic” in our culture in a way that historical criticism cannot confirm, or even investigate.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Why do the biblical narratives describing Jesus’ birth still speak to modern human beings? It is not because of their philosophical sophistication, or technical excellence. It is because of the hope they hold forth. There are two different ancient Christmas narratives in the New Testament. One is found in Matthew (1:18-2:23) and the other in Luke (1:5-2:52). Mark does not know a birth narrative, and John has an “enfleshing” story (John 1:1-14), not a birth narrative. Many, even devout church people, have confided that they have difficulty accepting the believability of the miraculous elements in the narratives: virgin birth, angels, star leading the wise men from the east, etc. For many, these have become serious obstacles to faith (except for the “traditional believer”). Such miraculous elements, however, are common in the literature of antiquity, where they are used to validate the careers of great men. Compare for instance birth stories about Asclepius, Hercules, or Alexander the Great.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The real “miracle” of Christmas, however, lies elsewhere, in how it inspires us to treat one another. The Christmas narratives still remain relevant in our day, in spite of their mythic character, even in our Western rational culture. Each narrative expresses deep longings of the human spirit. Their promise rises above the insignificant language boundaries separating denominations, and even religions. They address two basic existential issues that concern human beings, regardless of heritage or creed. All of us want to believe what they proclaim is capable of realization in human life. They speak to our fear of human finitude and the apparent nihilism that ultimately surrounds our very existence (Luke 2:10-12). And they address the very deep human desire for peace in the world at all levels of human existence (Luke 1:76-79).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Matthew proclaims that the humanity of a particular Jewish child born in a remote village of the Roman Empire, in a naïve and prescientific age, brings a forgiving God near to all human beings (Matt 1:21-23). The existential message of this mythical event is: your finitude need not be feared. Luke holds this mythical event forth as the hope of peace “among people of [God’s] good favor”<sup>2</sup> (Luke 2:14). The possibility of being liberated from the terror of our finitude and finding peace in a turbulent world is “good news” indeed. Such hope can bring quiet comfort to every human heart, and is worthy of celebration by all of us.<sup>3<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Myths usually involves the exploits of Gods and heroes.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The translation “people of good will” is less likely.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">This essay began life in the late twentieth century as a Religion and Ethics Editorial in the Springfield, MO newspaper, <i>The Springfield Newsleader</i>. It was later published in Charles W. Hedrick, <i>House of Faith or Enchanted Forest? American Popular Belief in an Age of Reason</i> (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2009), 72-73. It appears here again after heavy editing.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-75311812920554765922023-12-06T06:03:00.000-06:002023-12-06T06:03:41.733-06:00Sidelined at the Far End<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Many at the far end of things<sup>1</sup> likely feel much like Moses must have felt looking over into Canaan and knowing that he would not be part of the conquest of the “promised land” (Gen 32:48-52). God had effectively sidelined him from the next great adventure of his people. In our case, time has caught-up with us in the form of aging’s numerous aches and pains, or serious illnesses and, in any case, retirement many years ago from our former positions of active engagement in the world has made us no longer players but turned us into observers of the world and the momentous events of recent days (wars in the Mideast and Ukraine and Mr. Trump’s positive numbers in the recent polls), and local crises, too many to chronicle in a two-page blog.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> To the credit of the cable news networks they have enlisted as “consultants” a few of our number who are recently retired political, governmental, military, and academic figures whose opinions they consider still current in order to cast light on the events of the day. These once influential figures from the recent past are once again players in our national drama. Too many current occupants of influential positions in government and academia are reluctant to speak candidly about events that eventually affect all of us.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Most of those who observe the passing of days from the far end are sidelined and feel powerless to influence the course of few things in their individual lives, much less matters of the state and international affairs. What is left to us is volunteering our services locally, if physically able, contributing financially what we can to causes we believe in, and responsibly voting our conscience. Many are like the proverbial figure in John 21:18, dependent on the help of care-givers. Once we ran gazelle-like through life, shared wisdom as we knew it, loved and were loved in return, wept through the years at too many funerals, and saw our homes depleted as children assumed their own places and activities in life. Some of us observe and ponder our reduced worlds from the far end, while others suffering from Alzheimer’s and dementia are no longer capable of such introspective reflection, and still others because of physical anomalies and other handicaps look on from beds and wheelchairs. If you run into one of the far-end tribe, recognize that once they were movers and community shakers; and many in spite of their advanced age and infirmities still have much to contribute, which they will willingly and candidly share. At the far end duplicity is not valued.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> The Judeo-Christian tradition has left us a few cogent appreciative comments about our aged brothers and sisters.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Job 12:12: Wisdom is with the aged and understanding in length of days.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Psalm 92:14: [The righteous] still bring forth fruit in old age, they are ever full of sap and green.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Sirach 8:9: Do not disregard the discourse of the aged, for they themselves learned from their fathers; because from them you will gain understanding.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Sirach 25:4: What an attractive thing is judgment in grey-haired men, and for the aged to possess good counsel.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Sirach 25:6: Rich experience is the crown of the aged, and their boast is the fear of the Lord.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Lev 19:32: You shall rise up before the hoary head, and honor the face of an old man.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Of course, the biblical tradition does not give blanket approval to the aged just because they are old. Yet these comments show the tendency of the tradition to appreciate the experience of those at the far end.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Alas, there are also other observations as well:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Job 32:9: It is not the old that are wise, nor the aged that understand what is right.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Eccl 4:13: Better is a poor and wise youth, than an old and foolish king, who will no longer take advice.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">On balance, it seems that the biblical tradition is realistic. Not all those at the far end have gained wisdom through their experience, but some have, and deserve to be recognized for what they still have to offer.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The “far end of things” is my expression for what I consider advanced old age. Gerontologists disagree as to when advanced old age begins. For some it is 85+, in my thinking it is 90+. Currently this percentage of the population is estimated by the Census Bureau at 4.7 percent of the U.S. population aged 65 and older. <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_age#:~:text=One%20study%20distinguishes%20the%20young,old%2Dold%20(85%2B)" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_age#:~:text=One%20study%20distinguishes%20the%20young,old%2Dold%20(85%2B)</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-68414218043060176392023-11-22T05:56:00.000-06:002023-11-22T05:56:47.767-06:00Separate Yourselves from Unclean things<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;">The title of this essay is drawn from 2 Cor 6:17, where Paul encourages the Corinthian gathering to separate themselves from the “unclean things” of the world (2 Cor 6:14-18). The statement is from a quote from the Greek translation of Isaiah (52:11). One also runs across a similar idea of separation from the world in the Gospel of John attributed to Jesus. In John 17, Jesus prays to the Father:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;">They<sup>1</sup> do not belong to the world, just as I do not belong to the world (John 17:14, 16, NRSV).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;">Earlier (John 8:23) in a debate with “the Judahites,” contrasting himself with them, Jesus asserts: “you are of this world; I am not of this world.”<sup>2</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;">Paul’s statement effectively calls his followers out of the world and sets them apart from “the world.” The idea that Jesus and his followers do not belong to the world, i.e., that they are separate from the world leads them into a kind of world denial, found in ancient Cynicism<sup>3</sup> Such an attitude has encouraged many sorts of separations from the “world” through history, from religious hermits<sup>4</sup> to asceticism.<sup>5</sup> It has also encouraged other forms of religious withdrawal from the world that some choose as a vocation in the modern world, such as coenobitic monasticism.<sup>6</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;"> The truth of the matter, however, is that Paul, Jesus, and their disciples do belong to the world. They were “made” for the world, as all human beings are: they breathed oxygen, and their bodies required sustenance for energy and life. Their hearts circulated blood and their bodies were comprised of the same star-stuff of which our species is made (dust thou art and to dust you shall return, Gen 3:19). They voided like the other animals of the planet. They had the ability to sense objects tactically and visually. They used their brains and experienced emotions, as we all do. They even participated in the “world” to a point: attended social functions (like weddings, dinner parties, feasts, synagogues, the Judean Temple, etc.), enjoyed libations, engaged religious leaders in debate, aided the suffering, etc. Thus, to say that they were not “of the world” did not mean there was no involvement in society; it rather suggests an attitude they held about themselves and everyone else, although there is no denying the mystical implications of the statement attributed to Jesus about himself.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;"> The author of John uses the term “world” in different ways. For example, world can refer to the physical creation (John 1:10; 17:24; 21:25; compare 3:31). World can refer to other people who are a part of the world order (3:16), while in John 17:14, 16 world appears to comprise an oppositional spiritual realm that has a ruler (14:30; 12:31), referred to as “the evil one” (17:15). This evil empire is alien to Jesus who came “from above” (6:38; 8:23) in order to pass judgment on the ruler and his empire (9:39; 12:31) and to cast out its ruler, the prince of this world (12:31; 14:30; 16:11). In the world Jesus’ disciples are exposed to evil (17:15), but Jesus prays that they may be made holy (17:16-19).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;"> This kind of mythical complex seems quite different from the potentially ethical lapses that many contemporary Christians associate with negative aspects of living in the world: gambling, bar hopping, “houses of ill repute,” etc. For example, in my teen age years I was reared in the church, where I was encouraged to be “in the world,” but not to be “of the world.” What this meant practically was that I should avoid certain kinds of activities that were deemed religiously unacceptable for Christian folk, like smoking, drinking alcoholic beverages, dancing, and watching movies, etc. There are sound health reasons for avoiding some of these activities and no good reason for avoiding others. The neighborhood of the average teenager is much more dangerous today.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;"> The bottom line of this essay is that if one is to be a positive influence in the world, one must be part of the world. Religious people in my view should not separate themselves for religious reasons from aspects of the world to which they object. I know a man, for example, who practiced what he called a “bar ministry.” Although he himself was not a drinker of alcoholic beverages, he was there in the bar to provide a positive influence within a setting generally frowned upon by the church. According to Mark, Jesus also attended dinner parties, and was accused of being a heavy drinker.<sup>7</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 12pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;">If one thinks of oneself as a follower of Jesus, one must ask oneself should there be parts of the world that are left devoid of the comforting ministry of presence in the form of followers of Jesus. Military chaplains of all faiths, for example, join the army to render spiritual comfort to soldiers in garrison, and to wounded and dying soldiers on the battlefield. To do that they must be part of the soldiers’ world.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 106%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-top: 12pt;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">That is to say: those the Father gave Jesus “from the world,” i.e., his disciples (John 17:6, 12).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">John is highly suspect as a historical source; see Hedrick, <i>Unmasking Biblical Faiths</i>, 151-63. Thus, this statement attributed to Jesus may simply be a case of the author of John’s Gospel overriding history with his own brand of religious faith.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynicism_(philosophy)" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynicism_(philosophy)</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermit" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermit</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asceticism</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://www.britannica.com/summary/monasticism" target="_blank">https://www.britannica.com/summary/monasticism</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">7</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">One finds the accusation that Jesus was a glutton and a drunkard in the early hypothetical source Q, Luke 7:33-34 = Matt11:18-19. And there is also to consider the infamous incident in John, where the host at a wedding ran out of wine and Jesus turned water into wine for the guests, whom the chief steward accused of being drunk (John 2:1-11).<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-83661440954577450952023-11-06T06:09:00.000-06:002023-11-06T06:09:38.299-06:00Inspired Writings<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">From where do thoughts come to us? Logically, one would think they arise out of the life experiences, reading, and the pondering of the thinker. A letter that a distraught friend finds inspiring, a creative solution to a complex problem, and sage advice at the right time (Proverbs 25:11-13), all constitute the essence of an inspired thought arising within a person. A successful writer will write what s/he knows. If s/he wants to write convincingly about something in an unfamiliar area, s/he must live the subject area until it becomes like a second skin, and then, just perhaps, s/he will have a pregnant thought that can be nurtured and expressed convincingly.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> In my experience, sudden “inspiration” enters my brain, as an unprompted, errant thought that surprises me. It does not enter firing all synapses in my brain, fully formed, like an authoritative dictating voice. It is fragile and malleable, and I must massage it into a “solid” abstract idea, that will, with pondering, perhaps, become a concept forming the basis for writing.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Inspiration begins as a passing brief <i>thought</i> that must be fleshed-out into a formal <i>idea</i>, which I must work at developing into a <i>concept</i>.<sup>1</sup> The ephemeral thought that quickly passes through the mind constitutes the essence of inspiration. Ideas and concepts, on the other hand, must be hammered-out of experience by the hard work of the one who had the errant thought. People that are inspired may produce a written text that others may come to value as inspiring because it speaks to them. In our culture we generally call a written text inspired if it inspires us. The exception to this general practice is the Bible. In our culture it is generally regarded as inspired, when most of it is anything but inspiring. It does, however, contain inspiring passages that have even made their way into secular culture.<sup>2<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Calling a written text inspired or inspiring is a judgment that others bestow on the significance of the writing. It is a personal judgment. Nothing at the level of paper and ink inevitably makes the written text inspired; the author’s written ideas and concepts may inspire others, but it is the writer that is inspired and not the written text. The written text is a record of the inspiration that previously came to the writer, which others may or may not find inspired or inspiring. One can never know if the author of a written text was actually inspired to write.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (OT) and the seven deuterocanonical writings that one finds in the Catholic OT,<sup>3</sup> it is always the writer who is described as being inspired by God (Job 32:8, Wis 15:11; LJr 6:4; 1 Mac 4:35; 1 Esdr 9:55). Only once (so far as I can tell) are written texts in the Bible (both Protestant and Catholic) described as inspired. Second Timothy 3:15-16 claims that the “Holy Writings” (<i>iera grammata</i>) are inspired (<i>theopneustos</i>, or literally, “God-breathed”). The term “Holy Writings” is “the name for the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament in Greek.”<sup>4</sup> Second Timothy, along with First Timothy and Titus, is one of three texts in the New Testament (NT) attributed to the anonymous writer, dubbed the “pastor,” because the content of the three texts is concerned with church matters. That the pastor claims to be Paul, and is not, makes the pastor a pseudonymous author. The earliest evidence for the three “pastoral” writings is a papyrus fragment of Titus, which has been dated from 100 to early 3<sup>rd</sup> century common era.<sup>5</sup> In general, however, the pastoral texts are thought of as 2<sup>nd</sup> century.<sup>6</sup> In the early second century the NT did not even exist. Hence, the writings that later came to be included in the NT had not yet achieved the status of canonical literature in the sense of the Greek translation of the OT. Hence, the author of 2<sup>nd</sup> Tim 3:15-16 was referring to the OT Scriptures. The NT had clearly achieved the status of canonical texts (Athanasius calls them “Divine Scripture”) by the 4<sup>th</sup> century however, to judge by the Easter letter (39) of Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria in 367,<sup>7</sup> although he stops short of calling the NT writings “God-breathed,” as the pastor did.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Why would someone think the 27 NT written texts are “inspired”? What is it at the level of the written text that might lead someone to the idea that they are inspired as their authors may have been? Is it because one <i>believes</i> the original writers to have been “God-breathed”? Such a belief says nothing specific about the written texts themselves, and believers in other religions counter with their <i>beliefs</i> in their own special religious literature, which they find inspiring or inspired, such as for example, the Koran (Islam), the Rig Veda (Hinduism), the Avesta (Zoroastrianism), Tao Te Ching (Taoism), Guru Granth Sahib (Sikhism). But believing a thing to be so does not make it so.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Is it because one regards the <i>ideas</i> of the written texts as inspired or inspiring? That, of course, is something everyone must decide for themselves, because if any inspiration happened, it happened to the original author of the text. The written text itself is produced by the flawed abilities of the human author. Whether the original author’s written ideas are to be accorded the quality of inspired or inspiring is a personal decision for every reader. What does your dentist think?<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">These three words are generally conceived as synonyms in English.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, “Is the Bible Inspired?” Wry Guy Blog, Thursday, December 5, 2019: <a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/search?q=is+the+bible+inspired" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/search?q=is+the+bible+inspired</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The seven deuterocanonical books, not a part of the Hebrew Bible or the Protestant OT, were originally in the Christian Bible (the Septuagint) before being removed by the Protestant reformers. They were later declared canonical for the Catholic OT at the fourth session of the Council of Trent 1545-1563: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Trent<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Martin Dibelius, <i>Die Pastoralbriefe</i> (HNT 13; 2<sup>nd</sup> ed.; Tϋbingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1931), 74.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://christianpublishinghouse.co/2020/07/26/papyrus-32-p32-p-rylands-5-a-very-early-greek-fragment-copy-of-the-epistle-of-paul-to-titus/" target="_blank">https://christianpublishinghouse.co/2020/07/26/papyrus-32-p32-p-rylands-5-a-very-early-greek-fragment-copy-of-the-epistle-of-paul-to-titus/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">W. G. Kϋmmel, <i>Introduction to the New Testament</i> (H. C. Kee, Trans.; rev. ed.; London: SCM, 1975), 384-87.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">7</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://www.scrollpublishing.com/store/Athanasius.html" target="_blank">https://www.scrollpublishing.com/store/Athanasius.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-8927725574055365252023-10-19T06:03:00.000-05:002023-10-19T06:03:29.282-05:00The Bible's Story: A Brief Summary<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">My title is a double entendre that you might catch if you think about it for a bit. First there is the story <i>of </i>the Bible. That is to say, the story the Bible tells from Genesis through Revelation. The other possibility is the story <i>about</i> the Bible. That is to say, how the Bible came into being.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;"> The Bible’s story begins with the first inscription of each of its writings, the Old Testament (OT) first, and finally the inscription of each New Testament (NT) text. At the time of inscription each writing of the Old and NT existed alone in the ancient world as a part of the literary stream of Western civilization. They were not part of a selective group of writings. Only later did people, who valued their messages, gather them into groups with other writings. They were initially understood individually apart from other writings. The OT contains the writings of the ancient Israelites. It is “old” to Christians but today it is the holy Scripture of modern Judaism.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;"> I must now leave the story of Israel’s ancient collection of sacred scripture for another day, and will turn to the Bible’s “postscript”: The NT. It is a small collection of twenty-seven initially isolated writings, which date from the fifties of the first century AD into the early second century—or from the Pauline letters to the inscription of second Peter, the latest NT writing. The NT is the Christian part of the Bible. The Jewish Scriptures being treated in the NT as a resource book of prophecies and religious ideas by the Christ followers of the fourth century and later.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">Paul’s undisputed letters (1 Thessalonians, Romans, 1, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, and Philemon) are the earliest writings of the collection and date from the 50s and 60s of the first century, some 15-30 years from the crucifixion of Jesus. They are “undisputed” because virtually everyone thinks a particular man by the name of Paul composed them. The other writings bearing his name or the supra script title “according to Paul” in some translations (2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, and Hebrews) are not regarded in critical scholarship as being composed by Paul (critical scholarship makes decisions on the basis of historical evidence rather than church tradition). Hence, their authorship is “disputed,” which means: critical scholars regard them as anonymous or pseudonymous writings. These texts were not written by Paul but by an unnamed and unknown disciple of Paul.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">The General or Catholic Epistles (James, 1, 2 Peter, 1-3 John, Jude) was the latest group of writings to be gathered together and used in the early ecclesiastical communities, although 1 Peter and 1 John were popular in the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> centuries. We first hear of a group of seven “Catholic Epistles” from Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea (4<sup>th</sup> century).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">Although the book of Acts initially was part of a unitary work of two volumes with the Gospel of Luke, they were early separated and each had its own subsequent literary history. In the 2<sup>nd</sup> century Acts gained in popularity in early orthodoxy helping to document the concept of apostolic tradition. The book of Revelation (the Apocalypse) was well accepted in the Western church and widely cited as scripture in the 2<sup>nd</sup> century, but Eastern Christians tended to reject Revelation. The full recognition of Revelation did not come about until the late 4<sup>th</sup> century.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">There are two ways that authorship is determined: following church tradition or by offering a historical rationale for or against authorship. Except for Paul’s undisputed letters, the authors of the rest of the NT texts are anonymous or pseudonymous, meaning their authors are unknown. In antiquity texts were titled by their first lines, not unlike some modern poetry. Their supra script titles were added by the later church.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">Who gave the New Testament its present arrangement of grouping texts by literary type (gospels, acts, epistles, and apocalypse) is likewise unknown, but it would have been persons concerned with the religious life of the early Christ followers, who found the texts helpful for the religious life of the community. For that reason, other texts, not in your Bible were used in worship in many churches, such as the Gospel of Thomas, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, 1 Clement, Barnabas, and others.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">Bishop Athanasius of Alexandria, Egypt in his Easter Letter #39 in 367 gives the earliest complete listing of the NT texts used in Christian worship and education today.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;"> If we stand in the middle fourth century and look backwards in time to see the state of these NT writings, we are immediately faced with the following situation. There are over 5000 manuscripts of the Greek NT and no two of them agree alike in all particulars. Further, virtually all early manuscripts date from the third century and later are fragmentary, virtually scraps of texts. Not until the fourth century do we find whole manuscripts that survived, collected into a single volume, although not all of our NT is included in the collections, and certain other texts not in our NT are included.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;"> The latter half of the 18<sup>th</sup> century saw the beginnings of a scientific approach to studying the differences between the surviving Greek manuscripts. Ancient scribes who copied the manuscripts would make mistakes in copying and add their own thoughts in the margins. Later scribes would copy the marginalia into the body of the writing. None of the manuscripts that survived is an original author’s copy. To accommodate all this diversity in the texts, Scholars that are referred to as text critics developed the science of textual criticism. The goal of the text critic is to determine the wording of the original author’s copy by comparing the Greek manuscripts and the ancient versions in other ancient languages. It is an ongoing process requiring the seasoned judgement of the text critic, and as each new ancient manuscript is discovered it must be analyzed and compared to the present readings for an improvement of the text. A critical version of the Greek New Testament in koine Greek (the Greek vernacular of the ancient language) is published with an apparatus of approximately half a page listing all the significant variations to the text-half at the top half of the page. Translators are currently working from the 28<sup>th</sup> edition of this publication giving the current judgment of text critics as to what the original author’s copy of the NT texts read.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;"> Non-Greek readers of the New Testament will only encounter these different readings by comparing different translations of the NT, because each translator decides for himself or herself the Greek wording to be translated into English.*<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;"> In the first and second centuries there is evidence of some 34 early Christian Gospels. From this wealth of possibility, the church by the 3<sup>rd</sup> century selected a fourfold gospel collection. Given here in their order of dating: Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John were valued as deposits of an oral tradition that remained viable into the second century and competed with the written gospels. No Christian artifacts from the first century exist.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">Matthew and Luke are thought, with good reason, to have used a common sayings source (called: <i>Q[uelle]</i>) that no longer exists except in the agreements of Matthew and Luke against Mark. Their common use of the sayings source accounts for the verbatim or near verbatim passages shared in Matthew and Luke. And the Gospel of John is thought to have used a lost source called “The Signs Source,” which also no longer exists.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">This information is something to consider when you describe the New Testament to others. My take on this information is this: If one describes the “Bible” as “the Word of God,” honesty requires that one also recognize and include the role of human beings in its production as well in the description. My recommendation that does this is: <i>The Bible may be inspired by God but it is clearly designed and produced by human minds and hands</i>.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">*For examples of Bible translations differing in the Greek text that each translation uses see Hedrick, “Variations in the Bible,” Wry Guy Blog, May 23, 2023: <a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/search?q=variations+in+the+Bible" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/search?q=variations+in+the+Bible</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Sources Consulted:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Athanasius, Easter Letter, #39: <a href="https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2806039.htm" target="_blank">https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2806039.htm</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Eusebius, <i>The Ecclesiastical History </i>(trans. Kirsopp Lake; 2 vols. LCL: Harvard).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Harry Y. Gamble, “Canon/New Testament,” in <i>The Anchor Bible Dictionary</i> (Doubleday, 1992), Vol. 1. 852-861.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Charles W. Hedrick, “The Four/34 Gospels” <i>Bible Review</i> 17.3 (June 2002),20-31, 46.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Hedrick, <i>When History and Faith Collide: Studying Jesus </i>(1999; reprint Wipf &Stock 2013).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Bruce M. Metzger, <i>The Text of the New Testament. Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration</i> (3<sup>rd</sup> ed.; Oxford, 1992).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 14pt;">Graydon F. Snyder, <i>ANTE PACEM. Archaeological Evidence of Church Life Before Constantine</i> (Mercer, 1985).<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-89098762347333918512023-10-05T06:05:00.000-05:002023-10-05T06:05:02.920-05:00Pondering Jesus as “Fully God and Fully Human”<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">This statement is not from the New Testament, and as best I can tell, it is not a quotation from an early creed or council of the Christian church. It appears to be a modern adaptation of what was stated at the Council of Chalcedon in 451: that Jesus was "truly God and truly man."<sup>1</sup> This statement stands somewhat in tension with the early Nicene Creed (325), where it appears that Jesus was "true God of true God…of one substance with the Father." He had no beginning since "he was begotten by the Father before all the ages" and "for us men came down from the heavens, and was made flesh of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and <i>became man</i>."<sup>2</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The Nicene creed affirms that he was originally God and later "became a person." It does not claim that he was human (in Greek, man/person is <i>anthrōpos</i>; human is <i>anthrōpinos</i>). His entry into human flesh, as described by the creed, is vastly different from human procreation or generation. If the creeds accurately describe Jesus, the only conclusion one can reach is that Jesus was not like us; that is, he was not human, at least not as we are. How many other people do you know who originated in heaven and whose birth was claimed to have been occasioned by insemination from a Holy Spirit (Matt 1:18//Luke 1:35)?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> The predecessors of the later church that created the creeds, however, were not unified in describing the origin or nature of Jesus in the late first and early second centuries.<sup>3</sup> During this earlier period the religious marketplace brimmed with competing ideas about Jesus. One could understand Jesus simply as a human being "who was descended from David according to the flesh and appointed Son of God…" (Rom 1:3-4). In other words, he did not originate in heaven but was commonly human like us. God chose to elevate him to divinity like the Roman Senate did for the Roman Emperor:<sup>4</sup> declaring that the <i>genius </i>(an indwelling guiding force or spirit) of the emperor deserved to be worshipped.<sup>5<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Before the creeds in the earlier period, the synoptic gospels (Mark, Matthew, Luke) described his career basically as a Jewish thaumaturge (worker of miracles), faith healer, and Galilean wise man. That is something very different from being God from the beginning and later becoming flesh as the Gospel of John has it. While John is similar to the synoptics, its prologue (John 1:1-18) prompts the reader to see Jesus as having a divine origin before he became enfleshed.<sup>6</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">John presents the reader with the other end of the spectrum: the belief that Jesus, as the Word was, "from the beginning," with God and "was God" (John 1:1-2). He only later "came to be in flesh" (John 1:14). A slightly earlier description declared that although he was equal to God (Phil 2:6), he came into being in human likeness and was found in human form (Phil 2:7). He was exalted by God for his death on the cross (Phil 2:8-9). One strange idea, reflected in Paul's letters, suggests that some thought he had a special kind of flesh that was only similar to sinful flesh (Rom 8:3), such as we human beings have. His flesh would not see corruption (Acts 2:25-31/Ps 15:8-11 Septuagint, not the Hebrew).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The point I wish to make is that after the third century the view that emerged from the debates became the standard. No longer was there an opportunity to ponder Jesus with impunity. The issue was settled. If you did not share the view of the group that called themselves "orthodox," you were a "heretic" (which only means that you do not share the orthodox view).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">If the pondering of the earliest followers of Jesus (as recorded in the New Testament) is your standard for determining who Jesus was, there are several options available for you to consider. A number of ideas were in the air. Here is another that I recently stumbled across: Jesus was a human being, descended from David. He became the pioneer of a certain kind of faith in God, and established that Way of faith for others to follow by being perfected through his own sufferings (Heb 2:10, 12:2).<sup>7 </sup>So what do you say about Jesus, and how do you explain all the other views?<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/council-of-chalcedon" target="_blank">https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/council-of-chalcedon</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The italics are mine; the source is Bettenson and Maunder, <i>Documents of the Christian Church </i>(3<sup>rd</sup> ed.; Oxford, 1999), 28.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">For a survey of the diversity of views in the pre-creedal gatherings of Jesus followers, see C. W. Hedrick, "Is Belief in the Divinity of Jesus Essential to Being Christian," <i>Unmasking Biblical Faiths</i> (Cascade: 2019), 221-33 and "Early Confessions and the Language of Faith," <i>The Fourth R </i>32.1 (2019), 15-20.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, "Belief in the Divinity of Jesus," 223-24.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">E. Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity (3<sup>rd</sup> ed.; Eerdmans, 2003), 209.</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, "Belief in the Divinity of Jesus," 221-24.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">7</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, "Belief in the Divinity of Jesus," 221-33 and "Early Confessions and the Language of Faith," 15-20.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-42864956255713050042023-09-20T05:30:00.001-05:002023-09-20T05:33:39.313-05:00Visiting a Church in Old Corinth in 50 A.D.<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">If it were possible to step into a time machine and travel back to the first-century, you would immediately be disappointed. There were no Christian church buildings in the first century to visit. Such edifices, built to honor God and cater to the religious needs of progressive and affluent congregations, did not begin to emerge until the early third century.<sup>1</sup> One possible reason there were no buildings is because they believed the world was soon going to end—within their lifetime (1 Cor 7:26, 29-31). You would be further disappointed because there were no “Christians” in the first century, at least, not like we today think of someone being Christian.<sup>2</sup> The creedal statements that shape modern traditional versions of Christianity hearken back to the framers of the creeds of the 4<sup>th</sup> and 5<sup>th</sup> centuries.<sup>3</sup> Who were the predecessors of those who developed the foundational creeds of modern Christian faith? What were their gatherings like?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> They gathered<sup>4</sup> in homes (1 Cor 16:19; Rom 16:3-5; Philemon 2; Col 4:15), rather than buildings constructed to accommodate their particular worship style. Apparently, there was no distinctly Christian symbolism in statuary and painting. These expressions of faith, like all other physical remains, do not emerge until near the end of the third century.<sup>5</sup> Corinth in the first century was not a Greek city. The Greek city had been destroyed by the Romans in 146 B.C., and left to lie in ruins for a century. It was rebuilt as a Roman city in 44 B.C. under Julius Caesar. As one of the leading cities of the Roman Province of Achaia by 50 A.D., it had something of a cosmopolitan flavor.<sup>6</sup> Basically, Roman houses in which the Corinthian Christ group gathered were fronted by a spacious atrium leading onto a courtyard garden open to the sky, which was surrounded by rooms. Romans did not use glass for windows but there were small openings in the rooms that opened into the courtyard.<sup>7</sup> So, we cannot peek through the window from the street and peer in on their gatherings. Fortunately, they welcomed outsiders to their gatherings (1 Cor 14:23-24). <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> It appears, to judge from Paul’s letters, the gatherings of these early Christ groups were charismatic, meaning that those who shared in the gatherings believed themselves to be possessed of divine gifts (charismata). Persons in the gathering were enabled by the spirit of God to special ends. Some were endowed by the spirit to speak wisely and to utter knowledge, others to heal and to perform miracles or to prophesy, and others to distinguish between spirits (1 Cor 12:4-11). Some, they believed, were enabled to speak and sing to God in a kind of spiritual language (1 Cor 14:2, 15), these gestures were left for others to interpret (1 Cor 12:10; 14:27-28). Paul did not deny the presence of this gift (1 Cor 14:5, 18-19), but he was uncomfortable with how it was practiced (1 Cor 14:9, 15, 26) and particularly, with the excessive outward display of spiritual gifts (1 Cor 14:23). Paul thought all the spiritual gifts could be controlled (1 Cor 14:32) and should be (1 Cor 14:26-31, 37). On the other hand, Paul also had some odd ideas about spirit (1 Cor 5:3-5; 2 Cor 12:1-4; 13:5; Gal 4:6; 2:20).<sup>8<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> The Christ group association at Corinth was not governed democratically by <i>Robert’s Rules of Order</i>. No leader in the gathering was elected by majority vote, but the spirit of God decided who filled every function (1 Cor 12:27-31). They had no pastors, deacons, or bishops. These came later (1 Tim 3:1-13). Leaders in the early gatherings were generally male (1 Cor 14:34-36), although there were exceptions (Rom 16:1, 3, 6, 12).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Personally, my time-travel self is a little uncomfortable with what I am finding in the Jesus gathering at Corinth. I am rather certain, as an heir of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment, that I am more comfortable in the Sunday service of a modern church, which follows <i>Robert’s Rules of Order</i>, checks the credentials of church leaders, and discourages an excessive spiritualism, than in a middle first-century gathering, which could be interrupted by outbursts of glossolalia, competing prophetic voices drowning out one another, and people standing around the room with both arms lifted heavenward simultaneously audibly praying (1 Tim 2:8).<sup>9</sup> My world today is not informed by spirits, holy or demonic.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">When groups today advertise the organization of a “new ‘Jesus Church,’” they need to be more specific about what it is, and what might be expected by those of us who are becoming increasingly more than wary of some forms of religious expression, where (as Paul put it) such confusion (1 Cor 14:33) makes them seem crazy (1 Cor 14:23). How do you see it?<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_(building)" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_(building)</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The term Christian appears in the New Testament three times (Acts 11:26, 26:28; 1 Pet 4:16).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Bettenson and Maunder, <i>Documents of the Christian Church </i>(3<sup>rd</sup> ed.; Oxford, 1999), 25-27.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, “Pondering the Origins of the Church,” Wry Thoughts about Religion, Blog: Feb 16:2017: </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/search?q=church+as+gathering" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/search?q=church+as+gathering</a>.</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">G. F Snyder, <i>Ante Pacem. Archaeological Evidence of Church Life before Constantine</i> (Mercer University, 1985), 2.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Lamoine Devries, <i>Cities of the Biblical World </i>(Hendrickson, 1997), 362.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">7</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Harold Johnston, <i>The Private Life of the Romans </i>(Scott, Foresman and Company, 1903), 117-47.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">8</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, “Putting Paul in his Place” <i>Unmasking Biblical Faiths </i>(Cascade, 2019), 124-27.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">9</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Compare the discussion of the Orante in Snyder, <i>Ante Pacem</i>, 19-20; and also </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orans" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orans</a>.</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-13389236244124725752023-09-05T06:04:00.000-05:002023-09-05T06:04:51.031-05:00Are the Parables of Jesus deliberate Enigmas?<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">I ask the question because they have been exhaustively studied by parable ponderers since the first century and explanations even today are still getting more diverse and contradictory. Scholars today cannot even agree on what a parable is, and how it is supposed to function, much less what a given parable means. Historical Jesus Scholar, John Dominic Crossan, in a dictionary article suggests that this is the very result intended by the historical Jesus himself. He says that parables in the Jesus tradition are problematic.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">This is probably because the parables were often told concerning the Kingdom of God and that explained a symbol by a metaphor…The presumption is that Jesus intended this effect, namely, that the parables would be both provocative and unforgettable so that the recipient would be forced inevitably to interpret.<sup>1<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">He concludes the essay this way:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">All these differing interpretations…should not be considered the interpreter’s failure but rather the parable’s success. It is a parable’s destiny to be interpreted and those interpretations will necessarily be diverse. When the diversity ceases, the parable is dead, and the parabler is silent.<sup>2<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">An enigma is defined in Webster’s New World College Dictionary as “a perplexing, usually ambiguous statement, a riddle.”<sup>3</sup> So far as I am aware no one has argued that parables are deliberate enigmas, but Crossan’s statement seems to lead us in that direction.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In the marketplace of the critical study of religion today there are at least six contemporary strategies for reading New Testament “parables.”<sup>4</sup> One of these strategies treats parables as allegories. An allegory is a coded story that describes something totally different from what it says on its surface. On its surface the story of the Sower (Mark 4:3-8) describes the successes and failures of farming in first-century Palestine (Mark 4:13-20), but as its Markan interpretation (Mark 4:13-20) shows, it is really about success and failure of early Christian preaching. Most ecclesiastical interpretation of parables today are still treating them as allegories, particularly in church circles.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In the late 19<sup>th</sup> century against the excesses of allegory, Adolf Jϋlicher, a German scholar, argued that parables were comparisons comprised of two parts, a picture part (the parabolic story) and a “matter” or substance part. The “matter” part was the unspoken “issue” of the comparison; the “matter” was the real subject of the picture part. Something learned in the picture part evoked the substance part in terms of a single point expressed in a universal moral of the widest and broadest generality. For example, Jϋlicher’s moral for the parable of the Two Farmer’s and a Fig Tree (Luke 13:6-9) was “all who do not repent will perish.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In 1935 C. H. Dodd, a British scholar, argued that parables are metaphors. A metaphor is a figure of speech that describes one known thing in language appropriate to another known thing. Dodd argued that parables, introduced by the frame “the Kingdom of God is like…” were intended to cast light on God’s reign. In other words, God’s reign is described in language appropriate to Palestinian village life. As things go in the story, so go things under the reign of God. The specifics of the comparison, however, are never quantified, but left for auditors/readers to fill in. For Dodd, the Parable of the Sower illustrates the arrival of God’s reign in Jesus’ ministry by means of a harvest image.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In 1967, Dan Via, an American scholar, argued that narrative parables are neither allegory nor metaphor (a strategy that treats them as figures). Parables are narrative, freely invented fictions that work like any narrative does. They are a form of literary art that can be appreciated for themselves. They are literary objects that do not reference but instead call attention to themselves. What Jesus intended with the parables is lost to us in the twentieth century. All we have are the parables and they should be studied for what they are. These brief stories dramatize how Jesus understood human existence. In the Laborers in the Vineyard (Matt 20:1-15). The complaining workers understood life in terms of merit and were unwilling to accept the risk of relying on God’s grace.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In 1994, W. R. Herzog, Jr., an American scholar, argued that the parables were stories typifying the oppressed situation of Palestinian peasants at the hands of a wealthy elite. In his stories Jesus mirrored the oppressed conditions under which the peasants lived; they were intended to teach the peasants about their oppressed situation. This explains why Jesus was crucified. He was a threat to the state precisely because he sought to inform the peasants about their oppression. The Laborers in the Vineyard (Matt 20:1-15) reflects Herzog’s understanding of the clash between wealthy elite and disfranchised peasants. The amount paid the workers was not a living wage because day laborers do not work every day. The banishment of the worker who confronts the owner is intended to intimidate the other workers.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In 1994, C. W. Hedrick, an American scholar, argued that the parables are open-ended narrative fictions that Jesus invented by observing the world around him. They realistically portray aspects of Palestinian village life and aspects of the world around him. Complications raised in the narratives are left unresolved leaving resolutions for auditors/readers to solve. Because their polysemy (meaning they are capable of multiple meanings) and what different readers bring to them, they are capable of a wide range of plausible readings, as the history of parables interpretation demonstrates. Narrative fictions work by pulling the auditor/reader into their fictional worlds where discoveries about self and one’s own world may be made. Discoveries are evoked for auditors/readers in the nexus between the narrative and what they bring to it. In the story a Pharisee and Toll Collector (Luke18:10-13) the auditor/reader is presented with two flawed characters praying in the temple. The complication facing the auditor/reader is this: which flawed character will be acceptable to God?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Jesus did not explain his stories to his auditors. Hence, no one has access to that information. We do, however, know how some were explained (or not) in manuscripts through the third/fourth century: Matthew, Mark, and Luke, the Gospel of Thomas, the Apocryphon of James, Pistis Sophia, and The Apocalypse of Peter. Interpretations in the modern period add more diverse explanations. Explanations do not generally agree, but each interpreter claims to know how Jesus understood them. My own theory is that we do not interpret parables, but they interpret us (their readers), by evoking from us personal responses. How do you see it?<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">“Parable,” vol. 5.146-52 in <i>The Anchor Bible Dictionary</i> (Doubleday, 1992), 150.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Ibid., 5.152.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4<sup>th</sup> edition, 2002.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">For the description of these six strategies, I have abbreviated and edited my dictionary entry on “Parable” in <i>The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible</i> (Abingdon, 2000), 374-76.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-17435397960179805392023-08-21T05:32:00.000-05:002023-08-21T05:32:59.189-05:00Is Prayer a Conversation with God?<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In 2022 I published a Blog in which I said that I had discovered that while praying:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">I was aware of no audible, or inaudible, “voice” in any language in my head, other than my own; I detected no indications of a presence other than me…Prayer was a one-sided conversation, and all efforts to communicate came from my end.<sup>1<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">This likely accounts for my reluctance to sign up for a 30-minute slot at a churchwide day of prayer at my local church recently. Later, I did agree to fill one of the slots and for 40-minutes I found I was still alone in my head. So, on the basis of personal experience, I must conclude that prayer is not a <i>conversation</i> with God; at least I have never been aware of voices responding to the thoughts in my head.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Do conversations with God ever take place? That is to say: do any of those among us who spend time praying ever “hear” voices in their heads other than their own? Julian Jaynes, a psychologist at Princeton University, argued that the minds of our ancient ancestors worked differently than do our own today.<sup>2</sup> Before we humans developed a subjective consciousness, ancient human beings had a bicameral mind (i.e., two compartments). In their left brain they received from their right brain auditory hallucinations from their gods. Jaynes exhaustively tracked the literary evidence for the shift from bicameral mind into human consciousness to near the end of the second millennium B.C.<sup>3</sup> The interaction, however, in the bicameral mind between the right brain and the left was not a conversation but the hallucinated divine voices from their right brain directed their subjects to certain actions.<sup>4</sup> The biblical prophets of the ancient Hebrews are near the end of the shift, Jaynes argued and reflect the gradual loss of the bicameral mind, and its replacement by subjectivity over the first millennium B.C.<sup>5</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> A conversation is defined as a talking together, a casual or informal exchange of ideas or opinions between at least two persons. In Hebrew Bible I find few instances of a <i>conversation</i> between God and anyone. God is always the dominant party and the exchange is anything but casual or informal. For example, in Gen 2-3 compare the “verbal” exchange between Adam and God, and that between Adam/Eve and the serpent. The exchange with God is rather formal with God as the dominant party. The exchange between Adam and Eve and the serpent is more casual, more like a conversation. This assessment holds true for the exchanges between God and Cain (Gen 4:9-15), Noah (Gen 6-8; 9:1-17) and Abraham and Sarah (Gen 18). The dominance of God in any exchange is most pronounced in the exchange between God and Job (Job 38:1-42:6). My takeaway from these passages is that God (if God there be) doesn’t casually converse but during “verbal” exchanges, God dominates and directs, similar to Jaynes’ description of the bicameral mind.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> In the New Testament literature, the situation is more complicated because there are at least four divine figures whose “spoken” words are narrated: God (Mark 1:10-11; Mark 9:17), Jesus (Acts 9:3-11), the Holy Spirit (Acts 13:2), an angel (Acts10:1-7). Again, similar to Jaynes’ description of the bicameral mind.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">On the other hand, in places where people are formally portrayed as praying, God (or another divine figure) is not depicted as responding verbally (for example, John 17:1-18:1; Mark 14:32-42).<sup>6</sup> I would describe none of these examples of prayer as casual conversations in which an exchange of ideas and opinions takes place. The divine figure is dominant in every exchange I cited.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> The biblical examples, cited above, suggest that by definition one does not have a casual conversation with God, or any other divine figure. Divine figures are not given to casual conversation. They don’t do a lot of listening, but they are always directing, and human beings do a lot of listening, to judge from Job’s experience.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> So, what is prayer, if one were wanting to describe it from biblical models? To judge from the model prayer Jesus taught his disciples (Matt 6:9-13=Luke 11:1-4), prayer consists of several elements all cast as petitions from the human side: hallow your name; bring in your rule; grant each of us our bread for the day; forgive us our sins; do not test us. Not much casual conversation or small talk in the prayer.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, “Why Doesn’t God Speak English?” Saturday April 16, 2022. </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2022/04/why-doesnt-god-speak-english.html" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2022/04/why-doesnt-god-speak-english.html</a></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Julian Jaynes, <i>The Origin of Consciousness in the Break-down of the Bicameral Mind</i> (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1976).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Jaynes, <i>Origin of Consciousness</i>, 84-125. And <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicameral_mentality" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicameral_mentality</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Jaynes, <i>Origins of Consciousness</i>, 75.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; mso-ligatures: none;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; mso-ligatures: none;">Jaynes, <i>Origin of Consciousness</i>, 294.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; mso-ligatures: none;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; mso-ligatures: none;">The situation in 2 Cor 12:7-10 is not a portrayal of Paul in the act of praying with God’s “voice” depicted as responding. Paul is described as relating a prior experience of prayer, but in either case God was directing.</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-88343895913903475642023-08-07T05:31:00.002-05:002023-08-20T06:50:42.848-05:00Can you be too Goal Oriented?<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">I think there is something to be said for just “chilling out”; that is, relax and let life happen. My late wife was fond of telling me, “Relax and smell the roses,” but I was always much too busy trying to meet a goal of one sort or another. Goals are inevitably terminal by design. Once accomplished (or unrealized) we move on to set others. Goals proliferate, but occasionally the unexpected happens rendering all our goals insignificant in the face of some life-changing event.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Every goal-oriented person has at least four general periods in which time-sensitive goals are set, whether s/he knows it or not. Quotidian goals are activities that open or mark a given day. For example, most of us set goals for ourselves to meet in our daily routine: such things as a healthy breakfast, socially acceptable hygiene, personal appearance, and on-time arrival at obligations, or job interview. Goals such as these are almost the basic minimum for successful living in community. It would not be easy to eliminate them.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Many of us set short-range goals for ourselves to accomplish in the near-time frame. For example, one becomes dissatisfied with one’s job and starts looking for another, or we decide we want new living accommodations and look for another space. Neither of these is achievable overnight but as short-term goals they might occupy us for weeks, if not months. Short-term goals are part of life’s inevitable change but they also upset our set routines.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Many of us also set long-range goals for ourselves that take years and a lot of work to accomplish, such as working toward college graduation or completing graduate school, or perhaps one wants to make a trip abroad, something that cannot be done in the near-term but by laying money aside and planning we might just be able to swing a vacation on that Greek island of our dreams at some point in the future. Long-term goals usually involve setting many short-term plans that must be met first.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Strategic goals, on the other hand, are something quite different. They come near the end of life and constitute something we have been planning all our lives. Likely the achieving of these goals will only become evident in retrospect. For example, the goal of having a comfortable retirement involves the realization of a great number of other objectives throughout life that require planning as well: what will my final annual retirement annuity be, what will be the amount of my savings upon retirement, will my investments be secure and prosper? A strategic goal is something that one will fret over all through one’s working years.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">At some point, given time, we will also ponder our personal mortality. Another strategic goal, expressed here in the most general way, is the hope that we will be found to have satisfied the standards of the considerable powers of the universe with the time we were given. Some of us orient our lives around preparing for that moment of the “dying of the light”—others not so much. It is reported that even Jesus pondered his own mortality before his death (Mark 14:32-42), and the experience was greatly distressing and troubling to him (Mark 14:33-34).<sup>1</sup> According to Mark, he acquiesced, by accepting the inevitability of the moment. It is a rational act to accept the inevitably of one’s death. Nevertheless, that does not mean we cannot still “rage, rage, against the dying of the light.”<sup>2</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">My point in this odd essay is that if we are ambitious, goals are an inevitable part of life, and so is the end of life. Having too many goals, and the commitments they entail, can clutter our living with immeasurable minutiae, excessive pressure, and a great deal of time expenditure. Such a heavy investment of time may cause us to miss the wonder of Being altogether. So, find a way to relax, smell the roses, and chill out!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Here are three stanzas of a poem that is not writ in any book (perhaps wisely so). They express my own frustrations some years ago when I was feeling the pressure of too many irons in the fires of my own goal making. It seems obvious that I had too much on my plate.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Cloistered Space<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Blessed be Free-Spaces<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">who bestow sanity and peace,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">And Holy Passages-Between,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Who grants surcease<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">From demanding Musts<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">that loudly fill Silence<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">With shrill dis-ease,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Debilitating Indolence<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Cursed be Duty and Decorum,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Twin Nemesis of Ease,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Those who plunder the House of Idleness<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">With loathsome and irritating Demands,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Omnivorous, crude, belching Time-Eaters,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Who forage in the Holidays<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">On Leisure and Repose.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Curse thee, we curse thee, we curse thee.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Oh, Blissful Solitude,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Irenic eye of Charybdis!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Bless us with Hiatus;<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Seal us with infinite Vacuity.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">From Thrall we seek release.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Baleful Locked-in,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">She of the Ireful-Eye,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Chief Guard of Servitude.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br /></p><div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Mark composed the story, inventing its dialogue, but there is a kernel of history at its core as a second witness attests (Heb 5:7).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Dylan Thomas, “Do not go Gentle into that Good Night.”<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-74761371649451761592023-07-24T05:16:00.000-05:002023-07-24T05:16:21.708-05:00Jesus on the Management of Slaves<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Traditionally, scholars of the parabolic language attributed to Jesus will distinguish between types of parabolic sayings: <i>simile</i> (a saying that uses “like” or “as” for a comparison, Matt 13:33), <i>similitude</i> (an analogy, similar to a simile, but elaborated with more detail, Matt 13:31). A <i>parable</i>, on the other hand, is a fully formed narrative, a <i>story</i> with beginning, middle, and end (Matt 13:3b-8). There are relatively few similes in the gospels, and many think of similitudes as narrative parables with less detail.<sup>1</sup> A case on point is Luke 17:7-9, a story with less detail.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Who among you having a slave ploughing or tending sheep, when he comes in from the field will say to him: “Come here at once and take your place at the table?” On the contrary, will he not rather say to him: “Prepare my meal, and after girding yourself, serve me while I eat and drink, and after these things, you can eat and drink?” He would not thank the slave because he did what was ordered, would he?<sup>2<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The saying reflects the schema of a story: the <i>beginning</i> of the story: a man’s slave was working in the field. The <i>middle</i> of the story: the slave comes in from the field. The <i>end </i>of the story: his work day is not yet done. It is as much a story as is the “parable of the leaven,” Matt 13:33b.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Luke 17:7-9 is cast in the form of a conundrum, a series of three questions about how to treat slaves, and appeals to common social practice for the definitive answer: “Who among you having a slave…will say…?/On the contrary, will he not say…?/Does he thank the slave…?” (Luke 17:7, 8, 9). The conundrum provides one example of the treatment of slaves and allows it to stand for the customary practice as a whole: slaves do not eat before their owners; slaves exist only to make the owner’s life more comfortable.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The evangelist strains to find an appropriate religious moral for the story (Luke 17:10). Comparing disciples to the slave in the story (“So also you...”), the evangelist tells the disciples to admit that they are worthless slaves because they only did what was commanded (by God)—that is, they should have done more. Luke 17:10 is not part of the story; it is the evangelist’s interpretation of the story.<sup>3</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The complication, which is left unresolved in the story, is: how should owners treat their slaves? The story leaves that question unresolved. It only describes what people usually do. Hence some readers are left pondering if there might be a better way of treating slaves, and that eventually raises the issue of the institution of human slavery itself for a thoughtful reader.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Slavery was ubiquitous in both ancient Greece and the Roman Republic and Empire. The general view of slaves is that they were chattel (a self-moving item of personal property). Aristotle argued that slaves should be thought of as a “live tool”; that is, as a living item of property (<i>Pol. </i>1.2.3-6). Slaves had no legal rights and the slave owner had the power of life or death over them. The institution of slavery was based on violence, and the slave’s life was harsh. Hence, the best admonition for slaves was “Slaves obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling with single-hearted devotion” (Eph 6:5; <i>Did</i>. 4:11). The slave in the story of Jesus was a farm slave, where life was even more difficult than the lives of town slaves.<sup>4<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">We may be surprised that Jesus does not outright condemn such an inhumane social institution, but his stories are not frontal assaults on human degeneracy. His stories realistically mirror situations designed to provoke auditors into pondering their own situations in life through the story. Here is Adolf Jϋlicher’s description of the situation in Luke 17:7-9:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The Jesus who speaks in 17:7-9 is not the ethicist but the knower of men, who describes things, as they were at the time, without sentimentality also without exaggeration of the wretched conditions of slaves.<sup>5<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">His invention of a heartless slave owner and his treatment of a (single?) slave as characters for this story may be taken as a subtle criticism because it raises the question: might there be a better way of treating this particular slave? Paul, likewise, offered a subtle criticism of slavery, when he violates his own directive of “remain as you are” in view of the imminent end of the world (1 Cor 7:17-20). As I read the text, Paul allows an exception for slaves. If they can gain their freedom, they should do so (1 Cor 7:21).<sup>6 </sup>The short letter to Philemon (particularly verses 10-17) also support the idea that freedom is better than servitude, even though Paul does not specifically ask Philemon to free Onesimus.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The story in Luke 17:7-9 constitutes a subtle criticism of slavery. A better example, however, is the behavior of the appreciative slave owner in Luke 12:35-39. The slave owner dons an apron and serves his slaves a meal (Luke 12:37). There are other sayings attributed to Jesus that also suggest better ways in human relationships in general (for example, Matt 5:6; Luke 6:29a; Luke 6:32), and, hence, they obliquely apply to the treatment of slaves. A similar subtle criticism of slavery is reflected by Paul in his suggestion of a “better way” for the Jesus gathering at Corinth (1 Cor 12:31b-14:1a). The later writings of the New Testament, however, seem oblivious to the evils of slavery. Their authors advise slaves to obey their masters (even the hard or merciless ones) so as to reflect well on their religious faith (Eph 6:3; Col 3:22-23; 1 Tim 6:1; Tit 2:9-10; 1 Pet 2:18). On the whole, the Bible’s record on the institution of slavery is rather poor.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The Jesus Seminar voted that Luke 17:7-9 was not a genuine saying of Jesus.<sup>7 </sup>As I look today at the rationale for that decision, the reasons do not seem cogent. Our rationale at that time was that Luke invented the saying out of Israelite wisdom and Greco-Roman symposium traditions, but the meal in the story is not a symposium and no parallels are offered from Israelite wisdom traditions in support of the Seminar’s rationale. On the positive side, Luke 17:7-9 has the same oblique quality as Mark 12:17b (“Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s”), which was voted Red (assuredly genuine)<sup>8</sup> at the University of Redlands in 1986. Luke 17:7-9 is, therefore, also likely a genuine saying of Jesus, the historical man.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick, <i>Many Things in Parables. Jesus and his Modern Critics </i>(Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 2004), 6-7.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">My translation.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, <i>Many Things in Parables</i>, xvi, 12-14.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">On slavery, see K. R. Bradley, “Slavery,” 1415-17 in <i>The Oxford Classical Dictionary </i>(eds. S. Hornblower and Antony Spawforth; 3<sup>rd</sup> ed.; Oxford, 1999); H. W. Johnston, <i>The Private Life of the Romans</i> (New York: Scott, Foresman,1903), 87-111.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Die Gleichnisreden Jesu</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"> (2<sup>nd</sup> ed.; 2 vols.; Freiburg: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1899), 1.16. My translation.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">How the translation of 1 Cor 7:21 (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">μαλλον χρησαι</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">) should be rendered in translation is disputed. For example, E. J. Goodspeed: “If you were a slave when you were called, never mind. Even if you can gain your freedom, make the most of your present condition instead.” RSV: “Were you a slave when called? Never mind. But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.” Goodspeed’s translation slights the adversative (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">αλλα</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">) that suggests a strong contrast between the two states of servitude and the slave’s opportunity to gain freedom.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">7</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">R. W. Funk and R. W. Hoover, <i>The Five Gospels and the Jesus Seminar</i> (New York: Macmillan, 1993), 363. The Jesus Seminar, “Voting Records,” <i>Forum </i>6.3-4, 265.<i> </i>At Cincinnati in 1990, the vote on Luke 17:7-10 was Red=0, Pink=13, Grey=30, Black=57. Hence, the saying was considered nongenuine.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">8</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Jesus Seminar, “Voting Records,” <i>Forum</i>, 6.3-4, 302.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-82471152116358979592023-07-10T04:51:00.001-05:002023-07-10T06:19:16.472-05:00Flawed Characters in the stories Jesus told<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">There is a subtle grittiness reflected in many of the stories Jesus told, that many readers of the parables seem to miss. Likely because most readers are searching for religious morals among the parables Jesus invented. For example, the story of the Samaritan (Luke 10:30b-35) occurs in the aftermath of a vicious assault and robbery on the Jericho Road that left the victim almost dead (10:30b). The first travelers on the scene after the mugging ignore the man lying in the ditch. The Violent Tenants (Mark 12:1b-8) is a story about some ruthless tenants who, in the course of the story, committed several murders, beatings, and multiple stonings of rent collectors; the story concludes with them murdering the son of the property owner. One story, The Killer (Gos. Thom 98), narrates the calculated planning and the cold-blooded murder of an important man.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Other stories, while not as violent, feature characters seriously flawed by their less than ethical practices. For example, the story of The Manager Fired for Cause (Luke 16:1b-7) features a manager accused of wasting the owner’s goods. The owner summoned him and fired him on the spot. Before his firing became common knowledge, the ex-manager conspired with those in debt to the owner to pay less than they owed in hopes they would reward him in the future. The story is followed by three awkward attempts to find some religious value in the story (Luke 16:8-9). Another story features the blatantly unethical practice of paying day laborers the same amount of money for unequal amounts of work performed, and then taunting those who worked the longest number of hours by paying them last (Matt 20:1-15). Those paid first no doubt were delighted with their pay. Those paid last who worked the longest felt unfairly treated and their efforts unappreciated.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> In other stories the flaws of the protagonist are not immediately obvious. Consider the story Jesus told about a dysfunctional family (Luke 11b-32). The characters include a pampered younger son who wastes his inheritance in a distant land, an indulgent father who dotes on the younger son, and an elder brother, who is thoroughly piqued at being slighted by his father, after his years of faithful service to the family business. Another example is the striking lack of compassion by the protagonist over a small debt owed to him by another, when his own much larger debt, had just been forgiven (Matt 18:23-34). Luke 13:6-9 features a story about two bumbling and incompetent farmers, neither of whom knows nearly enough about the care of a fig tree planted in a vineyard. On the other hand, The Pharisee and Toll Collector (Luke 18:10-13) features two men praying in the temple. Both are counting on God’s forgiveness for different reasons. Both seem to know how God will respond to them: the Pharisee stands before God on his own merits, having fulfilled the law perfectly (he claims). The toll collector, with eyes cast downward, cries for God’s mercy for his sins, apparently with no intention of mending his ways.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Sometimes the evangelist misreads certain characters in the stories and either commends or criticizes them. For example, Luke denigrates the personal character of the judge in Luke 18:1-5 by calling him “unjust” (Luke 18:6), when he appears to be a thoroughly honest judge who calls his cases based on how he sees the evidence (18:2, 4). The judge, however, considers compromising his integrity because of a perceived physical threat from a widow. The story ends before he renders his judgment, and the reader is left pondering how the story might have ended.<sup>1</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Why would a teacher of wisdom and religious values, who is touted as working miracles through the power of God, pepper his stories with such violent, unethical, and otherwise flawed behavior? The answer is: such appears to be the nature of the society in which Jesus lived. The stories of Jesus were realistic fictions and he invented his characters from the world around him. As John Kloppenborg aptly puts it:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The parable, in order to challenge or problematize prevailing values or beliefs, <i>must</i> be told in a realistic vein and evoke a world in which the audience is at home if it is to succeed in its rhetorical purpose of deconstructing or challenging that world.<sup>2<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Ancient Palestine was a world in which banditry was commonplace suggesting that those on the bottom of the social scale, rural peasants and urban poor, were always at risk. Their world was not a safe place. There are few ancient sources describing their plight (the works of Josephus being the principal nonreligious source).<sup>3</sup> The parables themselves are part of the evidence for the dangerous conditions of that world. The elements of these stories invented by Jesus are problematic: his characters are flawed, his settings are realistic, his plots are gritty, and there is no resolution to his complications. All of which leads a reader to ponder, and that is how the parables of Jesus work.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In that nexus (that is in the reader’s mind reflecting on the story within the parable’s world) readers find affirmation, challenge, or subversion to the constructs under which they live their own lives.<sup>4<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See C. W. Hedrick, <i>Parabolic Figures or Narrative Fictions? Seminal Essays on the Stories of Jesus</i> (Cascade: 2016), 171.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">J. Kloppenborg, <i>The Tenants in the Vineyard</i> (WUNT 195; Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 107. For a discussion of parables as realistic fiction see pp. 106-109 and Hedrick, <i>Parables as Poetic Fictions. The Creative Voice of Jesus</i> (Hendrickson, 1994), 39-56, and idem, <i>Many Things in Parables. Jesus and his Modern Critics </i>(Westminster John Knox, 2004), 53-54.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">L. R. Lincoln, <i>A Socio-Historical Analysis of Jewish Banditry in First Century Palestine: 6-70 CE</i>. Masters Thesis, University of Stellenbosch, Nov. 2005: </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://scholar.sun.ac.za/server/api/core/bitstreams/f1d8d7ae-222a-4b10-b5c3-258c5504d31d/content" target="_blank">https://scholar.sun.ac.za/server/api/core/bitstreams/f1d8d7ae-222a-4b10-b5c3-258c5504d31d/content</a></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Hedrick, <i>Many Things in Parables</i>, 85.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-15329850262170860392023-06-25T06:31:00.000-05:002023-06-25T06:31:22.735-05:00An Early Christian Slogan?<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">There is a pithy statement in 1 Tim 2:5-6, written in terse prose omitting certain verbal forms that would help with the clarity of the piece, were they present. It is a concise statement of a slogan-like character.<sup>1</sup> Line 4 has the character of a “tag line,” possibly functioning as a title. Likely for these reasons and the fact that the unit appears formulaic, the editors of the Nestle-Aland critical Greek text of the New Testament (NT) chose to print it in a structured format, a printing not generally followed by English translators of the NT:<sup>2<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">For one God<o:p></o:p></span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">and one mediator of God and humanity<o:p></o:p></span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">a human being, Lord Anointed Jesus<o:p></o:p></span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">the one giving himself a ransom for all<o:p></o:p></span></p><p align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">the testimony at the right time<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">There are six other narrative units in the pastoral letters<sup>3</sup> published by the Nestle-Aland Greek text in the same stylized manner.<sup>4</sup> English Bible translators print some of these in a formulaic manner.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> The narrative unit 1 Tim 2:5-6 is a traditional piece, likely liturgical. It is tied loosely to the surrounding context and hence was likely not composed by the author of First Timothy. It was inserted at this point to support the author’s statement that God “desires all people to be saved.”<sup>5</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Line 1</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">: taking the word “one” (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">εις</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">) as the predicate, the translation should be rendered as “God is one” (Rom 3:30; 1 Cor 8:6; Eph 4:5-6), rather than “there is one God,” as modern translators generally render it.<sup>6<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Lines 2-3</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">: These two lines comprise one thought. A mediator is one who mediates or arbitrates between two parties. That is to say the mediator brings about at-one-ment between two parties. There is no description given as to how the mediation occurs. The appellation “Christ” signals not divinity necessarily but rather that Jesus is “the Anointed of God.” (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">χριστος</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">=Christ/Messiah=Anointed). The slogan uses the general term for human beings, or people (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">ανθρωπος</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">). The appellation “lord” is a term used in ancient texts of a person who commands respect or exercises authority. In Hebrew Bible it is used as a substitute for the personal name of God, Yahweh. As applied to Jesus, it is not necessarily a term of divinity. “Giving himself” (stated again in Titus 2:14) is not the same thing as “giving his life” (as it appears in Mark 10:45 and Matt 20:28); compare 2 Cor 8:5 where it is said of the Corinthians that “they first gave their own selves” (see similar statements at 2 Tim 2:15; Rom 6:13). The lack of specificity as to how he gave himself is surprising. The word “ransom” (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">αντιλυτρον</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">) immediately brings to mind the crucifixion (it is </span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">λυτρον</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> in Mark 10:45 and Matt 20:28), but that is not the only way in the NT Jesus is said to have offered himself. In Heb 2:10 Jesus was the pioneer of a certain kind of faith. By being perfected through his own suffering, his own faith (Gal 2:16) established the way of faith for others to follow. The “price of their release” (ransom) was his suffering for his own perfecting; that is, it was not “in our behalf.”<sup>7</sup> “Ransom” in Heb 2:10 (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">αντιλυτρον</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">) in the NT appears only in 1 Tim 2:6, and is a word otherwise only attested in the post NT period.<sup>8</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Line 4</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">: It is unclear whether the “tag line” was composed by the author of First Timothy or if it is part of the liturgical quotation. “At the proper time” (also in Tit 1:3) in 1 Clem 20:4 refers to the processes of nature.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Evaluation</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">: This liturgical statement is interesting for its lack of detail in the language describing Christ’s role in redemption; compare 2 Tim 1:9-10; Titus 3:4-7; Phil 2:6-11; 1 Pet 2:21-25. The stripped-down statement in 1 Tim 2:5-6 fails to mention his suffering and death in our behalf on the cross and his resurrection. The oneness of God and Jesus performing the work of redemption as a human being reads today like an anti-trinitarian formula. Compare, for example, the detail in Paul’s statement in 1 Cor 15:3-4: I have delivered to you what I also received:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">That Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures;<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">And that he was buried;<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">And that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures;<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">And that he appeared to Cephas, then to the Twelve.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">To consider 1 Tim 2:5-6 “Christian orthodoxy,” one must make a lot of assumptions.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slogan#:~:text=A%20slogan%20is%20a%20memorable,a%20more%20defined%20target%20group" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slogan#:~:text=A%20slogan%20is%20a%20memorable,a%20more%20defined%20target%20group</a></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hendiatris" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hendiatris</a></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Out of the fourteen English translations of the New Testament on my shelf, only the following render 1 Tim 2:5-6 in a formulaic manner: Holman, New American, New Revised Standard, and Ehrman. All fourteen, however, with the exception of the King James, render 1 Tim 3:16b in a formulaic way.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The Pastoral Epistles are 1, 2 Timothy, and Titus.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1 Tim 3:16b, 6:11-12, 6:15b-16; 2 Tim 1:9-10, 2:11b-13; Titus 3:4-7.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Martin Dibelius, <i>The Pastoral Epistles</i> (Hans Conzelmann, ed. of the German edition; Philip Buttolph and Adela Yarbo, trans.; Helmut Koester, ed. of English edition. Hermeneia: Fortress: Philadelphia), 41-43.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Dibelius, <i>Pastoral Epistles</i>, 41, note 38. For an adjectival predicate: H. W. Smyth, <i>Greek Grammar, §</i>910b, 944-48; Blass, Debrunner, Funk, <i>A Greek Grammar of the New Testament</i>, §270 (1); 127-28. Dibelius (p. 35) renders the expression “God is one.” Dibelius, <i>Die Pastoral Briefe</i> (Handbuch zum Neuen Testament 13; 2<sup>nd</sup>.rev. ed.; Tϋbingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 26.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">7</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See Hedrick, “On Calling Jesus my Brother,” March 4, 2021 and “How is Jesus the Son of God,” March 22, 2021: </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2021/03/" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/2021/03/</a></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">8</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">F. Bϋchsel, “</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">λυτρον</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">,” in <i>Theological Dictionary of the New Testament</i>, 4.349.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-5021766844322570992023-06-09T05:20:00.000-05:002023-06-09T05:20:32.415-05:00Hope and Faith in the New Testament and Modern Science<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Hope is not just a small township in Arkansas.<sup>1</sup> It turns out to be the primary anchor that makes religious faith possible: Hope is the slender thread by which believers are anchored to the bedrock of their faith.<sup>2</sup> Hope for the future and religious faith are attitudes reflecting certain expectations. Yet all of us share hopeful expectations that have no religious associations; basically, it turns out, hope is a secular attitude with secular and existential expectations. Hope is also an essential aspect of religious faith, a necessary complement to religious belief.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Hope is “a feeling that what is wanted is likely to happen, a desire accompanied by expectation”; or stated differently, hope is an attitude that what is desired could come to pass. Faith, as exercised in Christian faith, “is an unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence.” As I understand these hopeful attitudes, they are similar but not the same. In First Peter (1:21) and 1 Corinthians (13:13) they are stated as different attitudes. They are both attitudes but they differ in the degree of confidence in which one holds the expectation that what one hopes-for could actually come to pass. Nevertheless, hope is a secular attitude utilized by religious believers in their faith. In its secular form hope is an attitude one holds toward what might be possible (not probable) in the future.<sup>3</sup> As expressed in its secular form, hope is not necessarily oriented toward God or a particular God (for example, Acts 24:26; 27:20; Rom 5:4;1 Cor 9:10; 13:13; 2 Cor 10:15).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The word faith is also used in the New Testament to designate a body of religious belief to which one gives mental assent. Hence, in the New Testament faith is both an attitude (for example, Matt 8:10; Mark 5:34; Luke 8:48; Rom 3:28; 4:5, 19-20; 2 Cor 5:7; Gal 3:23-24) and the particular system of religious belief to which one ascribes (for example, Gal 1:23; 6:10; Eph 4:5; 4:13; Col 2:7; 1 Tim 1:2; 3:9; 4:1, 6).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">There is a certain arrogance on the part of some writers of the New Testament who completely discount hope apart from that as exercised in their own sectarian faith (for example, Rom 1:21; 1:28-32; Eph 2: 11-12; 4:17-18; 1 Thess 4:13; 1 Pet 1:14). Nevertheless, “in Philebus 39e,” Plato “shows how human existence is determined not merely by the perception (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">αισθησις</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">) which accepts the present but also by the recollection (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">μνημη</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">) of the past and the expectation of the future.”<sup>4</sup> In other words, hope for the future is a natural aspect or corollary of being human. Human beings are born with the capacity to hope. They are endowed by their “creator” with the inalienable right of having future expectations, as best it seems to each one. Someone who shares no religious faith might be led to express the following secular hope for continuity beyond the mortal field:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: justify;"><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">I hope that the considerable powers of the universe will not consign my personal consciousness to oblivion.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Such a hope would neither be directed toward a supernatural divine entity, nor would it be expressed confidently and unwaveringly. There is no certain proof or evidence to support such a secular hope. Yet, a glimmer of hope is encouraged in the fact that death is the great waster of consciousness in the universe and, to judge from life cycles on earth, the universe resists waste. Countless millions spend their lifetimes developing unique complex personalities that apparently disappear in the moment of death. Such universal waste and the tendency of nature to resist waste might lead someone to hope, in spite of the odds against hope, that something more may yet lie in our future. In earth’s ecosystem of life nothing material is wasted, but all is recycled; even some energy is transformed and reclaimed at each level of the food chain in earth’s ecosystem.<sup>5</sup> This tendency of nature not even to waste nonmaterial energy encourages the slim hope that something more may yet lie before us. Such a hope is at least as certain as Abraham’s “hope against hope” (Rom 4:18; that is, continuing to have hope even though it appears baseless). Under the second law of thermodynamics, however, every energy transfer reduces the amount of usable energy in the universe and eventually no usable energy will be available. Thus, even this slender thread of hope is a hope against hope.<sup>6<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Other unincorporated areas and tiny villages in the U.S. also bear the name Hope.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">I posted an essay of the subject on hope on July 16, 2018: See Hedrick. “What lies behind Gospel Music.” </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="http://blog.charleshedrick.com/search?q=Hope" target="_blank">http://blog.charleshedrick.com/search?q=Hope</a></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Kierkegaard: “Hope, as a form of expectation, is an attitude towards the possible.” </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/Archives/win2021/entries/hope/" target="_blank">https://plato.stanford.edu/Archives/win2021/entries/hope/</a></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Rudolf Bultmann, “</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Ελπις</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">: The Greek Concept of Hope,” in <i>Theological Dictionary of the New Testament</i> (Gerhard Kittel, ed.; Geoffrey Bromiley, trans.; Eerdmans, 1964), 2.517-18.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/energy-transfer-ecosystems/" target="_blank">https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/energy-transfer-ecosystems/</a></span><span class="MsoHyperlink"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; text-decoration: none;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Stephen Leacock, “Theory and Common Sense,” pp. 369-70 in Louise B. Young, <i>Exploring the Universe </i>(Oxford, 1971) and </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics" target="_blank">https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://www.khanacademy.org/science/ap-biology/cellular-energetics/cellular-energy/a/the-laws-of-thermodynamics" target="_blank">https://www.khanacademy.org/science/ap-biology/cellular-energetics/cellular-energy/a/the-laws-of-thermodynamics</a></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-23763920873627484782023-05-23T05:55:00.000-05:002023-05-23T05:55:25.168-05:00Variations in the Bible<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">When I was a youth, our church leaders encouraged us to memorize scripture, likely in accord with the prayer of the Psalmist: “Thy word have I hid in my heart that I might not sin against Thee” (Psalm 119:11 KJV). They even ran contests for memorizing scripture with rewards at the end. At that point in my youth, I only knew one translation, the King James Version, written in 16<sup>th</sup> century English. It was not until my later teenage years that I even became aware of multiple translations. I discovered that even if the translators are working from the same critical Greek text, all translations are somewhat different.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">I suppose one can be comforted that the translations generally sound the same. If one reads closely, however, the differences subtly suggest different meanings to the reader. For example:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In the Revised Standard Version, Ps 119:11reads: “I have laid up thy word in my heart that I might not sin against thee.” In an American Translation, it reads: “I have stored thy message in my heart, that I may not sin against thee.” In the English Standard Version, it reads: “I have stored up your word in my heart, that I might not sin against you.” In the New American Bible, it reads: “Within my heart I treasure your promise, that I may not sin against you.” In the English translation of the Septuagint, it reads: “I have hidden thine oracles in my heart, that I might not sin against thee.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">To point out one subtle difference: “treasuring your promise,” “storing thy message,” and “hiding thine oracles” in one’s heart do not sound like one is memorizing the words of the Bible.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">On the other hand, if one always reads the New Testament using two different translations, one is sometimes surprised because the translations occasionally contradict one another! It is not that a slightly different meaning is being suggested, it is a clear contradiction. For example, in 2 Thess 2:13 in the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) the translation reads: “…because God chose you as the <i>first fruits</i> for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit…” whereas the Revised English Bible (REB) reads: “<i>From the beginning of time </i>God chose you to find salvation in the Spirit who consecrates you….” This disagreement is not a case of different translators translating the same Greek text differently. This is a situation where the ancient Greek manuscripts of Second Thessalonians disagree between themselves by using different words. Some Greek manuscripts read </span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">απαρχην </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">(first fruits) while others read </span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">απ απρχης </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">(from the beginning). The critical Greek text used by most scholars (Nestle-Aland 28<sup>th</sup> edition) reads “first fruits” in the text and gives as an alternate reading “from the beginning” in the apparatus.<sup>1</sup> The translators of the REB preferred the alternate reading.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Sometimes the contradiction is more extensive. For example, the Revised English Bible skips from Matt 16:2 to 16:4. Verses 2-3 are missing in the REB. The text reads: (verse 2): “He answered them: (verse 4) ‘It is a wicked and godless generation that asks for a sign and the only sign that will be given it is the sign of Jonah…’” The NRSV on the other hand includes verses 2-3. (Verse 2) “He answered them. ‘When it is evening you say, “It will be fair weather for the sky is red. (Verse 3) And in the morning, “It will be stormy today for the sky is red and threatening.” ‘You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.’” Most scholars regard verses 2-3 as a later insertion into the Greek text from a source similar to Luke 12:54-56, or from the parallel Lukan passage itself.<sup>2</sup> The Nestle-Aland critical Greek text includes verses 2-3 in the text but place it in square brackets indicating: “that textual critics today are not completely convinced of the authenticity of the enclosed words.”<sup>3</sup> Hence the translators of the REB disagree with the Nestle-Aland critical text, and the NRSV agrees but omits the verses entirely. This disagreement between modern scholars raises the question, who is correct? Is Matt 16:2-3 a part of the Bible or not? These verses are after all in some Greek manuscripts.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> I stumbled across the latter two discrepancies in the preaching services of the church following along in the Greek text with the minister who was reading his text for the day in English. No mention was made of the problems that existed in the text. Should ministers inform their congregations of these kinds of difficulties existing in the biblical text?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> These discrepancies leave a “wanna-be-true-to-the-core-but-not-really-succeeding” Baptist pondering the situation. It appears that the Bible we read today does not spring unaided from the mind of God, but, in the final analysis, the versions of the Bible that eventually reach the hands of the reading public are products from the desk of the text critic and the translator.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">How do you see it?<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The apparatus consists of notes at the bottom of the page of Greek text. It was a committee decision to make the text read “first fruits.” For the rationale see Bruce M. Metzger, <i>A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament</i> (2<sup>nd</sup> ed.; 2000), 568.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Metzger, <i>Textual Commentary</i>, 33.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Nestle-Aland, <i>Novum Testamentum Graece</i>, page 9*.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-1076141033956088842023-05-09T05:59:00.000-05:002023-05-09T05:59:13.182-05:00Words with Double Meanings in the New Testament<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The French have a word for this phenomenon: double-entendre or double-entente. It occurs when an author deliberately chooses a word for its ambiguity in which the word has a second meaning.<sup>1</sup> Here is an example:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="background: white; color: #202122; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">In Homer’s <i>The Odyssey</i>, when Odysseus is captured by the Cyclops Polyphemus, he tells the Cyclops that his name is Oudeis (ουδεις = No-one). When Odysseus attacks the Cyclops later that night and stabs him in the eye, the Cyclops runs out of his cave, yelling to the other Cyclopes that "No-one has hurt me!", which leads the other Cyclopes to take no action under the assumption that Polyphemus blinded himself by accident, allowing Odysseus and his men to escape.<sup>2</sup></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">In a double-entendre the word chosen by the writer constitutes a bit of word play, if you will. Usually, but not always, in the contemporary use of a double-entendre one of the words will have a frivolous or bawdry meaning.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> One can object, however, that the ambiguity creates the following problem: Has the writer deliberately <i>intended </i>a word play or has a creative reader <i>invented</i> a word play about which the writer would be surprised to learn? Not all readers catch-on to what other readers find to be a double-entendre. Usually, the biblical text is thought to be comprised of serious and straight forward language. Nevertheless, some have found double-entendres in the New Testament. Here is one example (Mark 8:14-21) where Jesus uses a word (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">ζυμη</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> = leaven/yeast) with respect to the Pharisees and Herod (Mark 8:15). Leaven was used both as a negative symbol for malice and evil as well as for sincerity and truth (1 Cor 5:6-8). The disciples completely missed the word play and regarded it as a reference to the leavening agent in bread (Mark 8:15-16, 21). They heard yeast when Jesus was talking about malice and evil. The author Matthew makes the double-entendre even more clear (Matt 16:11-12).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Another double-entendre occurs when Jesus speaks to a woman of Samaria by a well (John 4:4-26). Jesus asks her for a drink of water (John 4:7). She replies why are you a Jew asking me a Samaritan for a drink (and the narrator clarifies that Jews and Samaritans do not associate with one another, John 4:9)? Jesus offers her “living” water (John 4:10), which she persists in understanding as “well” water (John 4:11-12, 15). Even after Jesus explains he is talking about a different kind of “water” (John 4:13-14), she still does not get the word play (John 4:1). She thought he was talking about well water that one imbibes for physical life and Jesus meant a spiritual water that brought eternal life (John 4:14).<sup>3<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-top: 12pt; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">A possible instance of a double-entendre may be concealed in Paul’s comment to an addressee in Phil 4:3. What is the name of the person to whom Paul refers (translated in virtually all translations) as his “genuine fellow of the yoke” or “yokefellow” (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">γνησιε συζυγε</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">),<sup>4</sup> from whom Paul is requesting help to settle a difference of opinion between two women (Euodia and Syntyche) in the community of Jesus followers at Philippi, a Roman colony.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to be of the same mind in the Lord. Yes, and I ask you, a genuine fellow of the yoke, to help these women who shared my struggles in the cause of the gospel, along with Clement, and the rest of my co-workers, whose names are in the book of life. (Phil 4:2-3)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">It seems odd that Paul would leave unnamed one he regards as a “genuine fellow of the yoke” in their common struggle for the success of the gospel, in a section where he names three other coworkers and he also insists that all his co-workers have their <i>names</i> inscribed in the book of life (Phil 4:2-3). The inference I draw from the image is that the addressee as “a genuine fellow of the yoke” (in the sense, perhaps, of Matthew 11:28-30 or 1 Clement 16:17) would understand the requirements of being yoked as part of a pair. Such a person would best be able to assist Euodia and Syntyche in resolving their differences.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Many suspect that Paul did indeed name this figure in the very language he used, in what I am calling a double-entendre: </span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">συζυγε</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">, = vocative form of </span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Συζυγος</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">, which many think may be the name of the man. His name is comprised of two Greek words: </span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">συν</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> (with) + </span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">ζυγος</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> (yoke), or “a person with the yoke.” His name (if indeed it is a name) would be Latinized in most translations as Syzygus. Many translators suspect this might be the case, and will add the name of Syzygus as an alternative translation in a note at the bottom of the page, even though the word has not yet been found as a proper name among the inscriptions.<sup>5</sup><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">How do you read these passages? Are there yet other secrets to be uncovered from New Testament language? Bible translators are good honest folk, but the products they produce are no better than their skill, professional training, critical judgment, and that their subconscious agendas will allow.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See Hugh Holman and William Harmon, <i>A Handbook to Literature</i> (6<sup>th</sup> ed.; New York: Macmillan, 1992), 147-48.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_entendre" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_entendre</a><u><span style="color: #0563c1;"><o:p></o:p></span></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Here are a few other passages that are generally thought to contain a deliberate play on words: Matt 16:18 (Peter/rock= </span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Πετρος</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">/</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">πετρα</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">); John 2:19-21; John 3:3-8 (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">ανωθεν</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;"> = born from above/born anew); John 7:37-39.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Sometimes the expression is translated as “yokefellow.” For example, in the New International Version, or “companion” in Ehrman, or “comrade” by Goodspeed. It is translated as Syzygus in Eugene H. Peterson, <i>The Message, The New Testament in Contemporary Language </i>(NAVPRESS, 1993).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">For a brief summary of critical thinking about the issue that hasn’t changed much since 1868, see J. B. Lightfoot, <i>St Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians</i> (12<sup>th</sup> ed.; Lynn, MA: Hendrickson, 1981), 158-59.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-8253561406100240702023-04-25T05:54:00.000-05:002023-04-25T05:54:29.221-05:00Time at the Far End of Life<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">This is a very personal note to my brothers and sisters nearing the end of their allotted term. It is time to start thinking in critical time. Life eventually boils down to time, particularly for those of us at the far end of life: how much time do we have left and what shall we do with it? At age 89 I have just begun to ponder both of these questions some three months after the death of my wife of 67 years from Alzheimer’s. From age 20 through her passing she, and later our children, formed the basis of all my decisions about time. The time we spent was always our time together or, when the children came along, family time. When Alzheimer’s manifested itself, I became her caregiver and my time became her time.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">How much time is left and what to do with it are not existential questions that necessarily trouble those in youth or middle age. The very young initially have their time taken-up with schooling mandated by the state, family associated activities, and, later, things concerned with preparation for life’s long haul: occupation, marriage, children, etc. For the middle aged there is daily work for paychecks to pay for the things of life that have claimed one’s time. All things being equal, these two questions about critical time belong particularly to those of us at the far end of life, and those terminally ill. Once life has irrevocably changed (retirement, death of a spouse, advanced old age, terminal illness, etc.) we stand in a critical moment, at a critical juncture, where we are turning into that period of life we begin to recognize as our final days.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> The ancient Greeks recognized the nature of critical time and distinguished generally between two words for time: <i>Chronos </i>(</span><i><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">χρονος</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">) and <i>Kairos</i> (</span><i><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">καιρος</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">). <i>Chronos </i>designated “a definite time, a period of time, a while, a season,” but <i>Kairos </i>with respect to time designated “the right point of time, the proper time or season for action, the exact or critical time.”<sup>1</sup> The latter moment is where many of us now find ourselves, at a critical juncture facing the end of our days at some unknown point in the not-too-distant future. The question is very personal: what to do with these final days?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Since Peggy died, I have received advice for dealing with loneliness and grief in various forms: pamphlets from funeral homes, personal advice from good friends, calls from social workers, etc. The advice, probably coming from experience (personal and otherwise), is informally the same: seek counseling from a licensed therapist; find a support group; volunteer with some social service agency, hospital, or charity; take a class; perhaps take a trip where one is forced to make new acquaintances; find reasons to visit with old friends; take up a hobby or immerse oneself in hobbies of long standing. All of these are helpful suggestions. But, somehow, they have not resonated with me, being so close to the end of this final term of life (pardon the academic allusion). I have strong family support from my children, grandchildren, great grandchildren, most of whom live right near in my neighborhood.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">What religious rationalists might do, when confronted with a ponderable crisis, is pick up a Bible. In spite of its many blemishes, mistakes, and other shortcomings it records the ponderings of religious folk of two ancient religions over a 1300- year period, roughly from the Israelite Exodus (around 1250 BCE to the writing of 2 Peter (around 125CE).<sup>2</sup> Not unreasonably one may expect here and there to find helpful suggestions. I found a convenient “hook” for pondering my last days in Eph 5:15-16 and Col 4:5. Two of Paul’s students, writings under the pseudonym of “Paul, an apostle” (i.e., they are putting words in Paul’s mouth)<sup>3</sup> urge their readers to be wise “making the most of crucial time” (</span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">εξαγοραζομενοι τον καιρον</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">),<sup>4</sup> the only two instances in the New Testament that these two words are used together. How does one “make the most of crucial time”? The authors of these two texts do not share the specifics of their thinking about that question. Hence, everyone must decide for themselves what will be their specific response to their latter days. In short, they must decide in what they will invest themselves, considering their abilities, health, and interests.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> I have not yet finished the pondering process, but I have come up with four general suggestions (devoid of specifics because everyone is different) that have been helpful to me for staying engaged: 1. Make an effort to stay involved in living to the best of your abilities, and resist withdrawing into yourself. 2. Aim to make a contribution to the lives of others. 3. Learn something new every day (you just have to be curious). 4. Keep a sense of humor about yourself and your situation in life. There is nothing in these suggestions that is profound, but they are certainly cogent.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">One other suggestion comes from the Apostle Paul himself. Writing from prison (Phil 1:7, 12-17) from Rome, Caesarea, or Ephesus (Phil 1:13; 4:22),<sup>5</sup> Paul harbored hopes that his situation might yet change for the better (Phil 1:19, 26-27; 2:24). But whether it did or not was unimportant and he asserts: “I have learned how to manage in whatever circumstances I find myself” (Phil 4:11).<sup>6</sup> Good advice for those of us at the far end.<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The abridged version of Liddell and Scott, <i>An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon</i> (from the 7<sup>th</sup> edition of Liddell and Scott; Oxford: Clarendon, 1975). Here are some examples in the New Testament of time used as “the proper time or season for action”: Mark 1:15; 11:13; Matt 13:30; 21:34; 26:18; Luke 12:56; 21:8; John 7:6, 8; Acts 3:20; 7:20; Rom 9:9; 13:11; 1 Cor 4:5; 7:29; Eph 5:16; Col 4:5.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See Hedrick, <i>Unmasking Biblical Faiths</i> (Cascade, 2019), 2.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">For the pseudonymity of these two letters, see W. G. Kϋmmel, <i>Introduction to the New Testament</i> (Howard Kee, trans. 17<sup>th</sup> ed. rev.; Abingdon, 1975), Colossians, 340-46; Ephesians, 357-163.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">This is my translation of the expression in Eph 5:16 and Col 4:5. In some older translations (for example, King James Version) one may find the expression translated as “redeeming the time,” which doesn’t quite communicate the Greek, in my view.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">5</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See Kϋmmel, <i>Introduction</i>, 324-32.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">6</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">A. J. Dewey, et al., <i>The Authentic Letters of Paul</i> (Polebridge, 2010), 181. This is the only occurrence of </span><span lang="EL" style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">αυταρκης </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">in the New Testament. The usual translation of the word as “contented,” is inadequate.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-23066465137052088782023-04-11T05:52:00.001-05:002023-04-11T05:52:31.532-05:00Provocative Possessive Pronouns in Matthew<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">This essay began when I was struck by an unexpected use of a plural possessive pronoun ("their") modifying synagogue (Matt 10:17), when the simple article, "the," would have been sufficient. There is no antecedent specifically identifying who these "owners" of synagogues are. In the immediate context "they" (Matt 10:17), that is, those people and "their synagogues" appears to be the "wolves" in 10:16, a rather harsh term for those who are Jews themselves to use for other Jews (<i>Ioudaioi</i>), who worship in synagogues. The possessive pronoun is provocative because it immediately calls attention to the other group in Matt 10:17 ("you") whom the Jews allegedly will flog in "their synagogues"; this group is unnamed, but in the larger literary context it is possible they are the twelve whom Jesus sends forth (Matt 10:5) with his instructions in Matt 10:1-11:1. There may be another possibility, however.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The use of the possessive "their," for those who gather in synagogues, is odd because Jesus and his disciples were also Jews and attended synagogues. The possessive pronoun (their) and the designation of Jews as wolves, on the other hand, suggest that Jesus and his disciples are in no way identified with the synagogue, which is obviously not the case in first-century Palestine. They also attended synagogues. By using the third-person possessive pronoun to modify synagogue, the author of Matthew has evoked for the reader another shadowy group who does not identify with the synagogue but who consider themselves over against those who gather in synagogues. Here is the rationale for this statement: If you say an object is "theirs," it implies an ownership not shared by the one who speaks.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The use of this pronoun without clarification raises the question, who is this group that is not identified with the synagogue? Has Matthew deliberately evoked them, or is it simply an accidental verbal slip? Has Matthew inadvertently, momentarily, let slip aside his cover as a (theoretically) neutral describer of earlier events and opened for readers a window into events current in the author's own later time, as happens at Matt 28:15 (and Matt 11:23 and 27:8): "And this story is still told among the Jews <i>to this day</i> (italics mine). That is to say, the story is still being told in Jewish communities in the author's own later lifetime, but it is not being told by those in the author's different community.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The word "synagogue" appears in Matthew's Gospel a total of 9 times.<sup>1</sup> Out of 9 times Matthew modifies synagogue by the third-person possessive pronoun "their" a total of 5 times and once by the second-person plural possessive pronoun "your" (23:34). Mark, on the other hand, uses a possessive pronoun to modify synagogue only twice (1:23, 39) out of eight uses. Luke uses a possessive pronoun with synagogue only once (4:15) out of fifteen uses with synagogue. John uses synagogue only twice, both times without a possessive pronoun. In Acts, Luke uses synagogue 19 times, none of which are used with a possessive pronoun but he does modify synagogue with a prepositional phrase as the "synagogue of the Jews" (Acts 13:5; 17:10). James uses synagogue once with the possessive pronoun "your" (2:2).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Possibly the use of the possessive in "their synagogue" might allude to Jews in a specific geographical location. For example, if the possessive pronoun "their" modified synagogue in connection with the village of Capernaum, "their synagogue" would likely be the synagogue of the Jews who lived in Capernaum, as happens in Mark 1:21, 23. But no named villages are mentioned in Matthew with respect to any of the passages where Matthew writes "their synagogue." There are two unspecific general regional locations, however, in Matt 4:23 ("throughout Galilee") and 9:35 ("all the cities and villages"). Another general location sets-up a contrast in an area where Jesus was brought-up (Matt 13:54) in which "they" have "their synagogue." That is to say, there was a synagogue in the general area of Jesus' own part of the country (<i>patris</i>). This passage (Matt 13:54-58) sets up a negative contrast between the people of the synagogue and Jesus. The synagogue folk were quite familiar with the family of Jesus (Matt 13:55-56), yet what he said "astounded" them, and they became "offended" at him for what he said in "their synagogue" (Matt 13:54).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">If one will allow that Matthew has inadvertently allowed his/her cover to slip and thereby evoked another religious group competing with the synagogue of the Jews in his (Matthew's) day by modifying synagogue with the third-person possessive pronoun "their" rather than an expected "the," how might this group be characterized? Apparently, they did not think of themselves as Jews, for synagogues are worship centers for Jews: the force of the pronoun is that "Jews use synagogues; we don't." This other group apparently used the anachronistic term "church" (<i>ekkl</i></span><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">ē</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">sia</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">, is usually translated as "church"), which turns up three times in Matthew. Matthew apparently conceived this later term as a worship gathering, which was not so used in Jesus' lifetime, to contrast with "their synagogue" at 16:18 (18:17 twice).<sup>2</sup> Matthew even describes the term in connection with a few early community rules (18:17) of the later formal Christian ecclesiastical order (18:15-22).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Relationships between the church and synagogue in Matthew's later day appear less than cordial. The group represented by Jesus' church ("my church," 16:18) and who worship Jesus' Father ("my Father"),<sup>3</sup> viewed those of the synagogue negatively, effectively replacing them as the people of God (Matt 21:43; 8:10-12). Jesus was sent to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" (10:5-6; 15:24). The people of Jesus will in the end-time judge the twelve tribes of Israel (19:28). Matthew chapter 6 contrasts the people of the synagogue (6:2, 5, 16; 23:2-7) with the followers of Jesus (6:3-4, 6-15, 17-18; 23: 8-12). The people of the synagogue and the leaders of the Jewish people are excoriated and execrated for their behavior in Matt 23:13-36. And the Judean mob at Jesus' trial before Pilate audaciously accepts the blame for the death of Jesus (27:24-26).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Read in this way Matthew's Gospel reveals hostile relationships between the church and the synagogue in Matthew's day in the period from 80 to 100 CE when the Gospel of Matthew was likely written.<sup>4<o:p></o:p></sup></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">With possessive pronoun: Matt 4:23; 9:35; 10:17; 12:9; 13:54; 23:34; without possessive pronoun: Matt 6:2, 5; 23:6.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">In Jesus' day, and even in the later time of Paul, the term <i>ekkl</i></span><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">ē</span></i><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">sia </span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">should be more loosely translated as "gathering." The term "church" does not appear in Mark, Luke, or John.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">My Father: Matt 7:21; 10:32-33; 11:27; 12:50; 16:17; 18:10, 19, 35.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Werner G. K</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">ϋ</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">mmel, <i>Introduction to the New Testament</i> (rev. ed.; from the 17<sup>th</sup> German ed.: SCM, 1975), 119-120.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-44780680789902227712023-03-28T05:29:00.000-05:002023-03-28T05:29:38.764-05:00A Chance Meeting that produced a Book<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.5in; margin-right: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 0in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Here is something a little different. I have asked Rev. Dr. Jerry B. Cain, retired President of Judson University in Elgin Illinois, to provide a guest essay announcing the appearance of an important new book on the history of Christianity in Myanmar: by Angelene Naw, <i>The History of the Karen People of Burma</i> (ed. Jerry Cain; King of Prussia, PA: Judson Press, 2023).* What follows is Jerry’s review of the book for the curious reader.</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype", serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 0.5in; margin-right: 0in; mso-margin-top-alt: 0in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick</span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype", serif; font-size: 12pt;"> </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The History of the Karen People of Burma</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> recounts the interactions of the three m’s that historians of the nineteenth century colonial period always have to negotiate—merchants, missionaries, militaries. The Karens (CAH-ren) were an animistic minority in Burma who took to the message of American Baptist missionary Adoniram Judson (1788-1850) while the majority Buddhist Burmese ignored or even persecuted him. Primed by a legend that a white man with a book would arrive on a ship from the west and show them their destiny, the Karens responded positively when Ann and Adoniram Judson disembarked from the <i>Georgiana</i> in the summer of 1813 with a Bible. Prophecy fulfilled!<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">This first generation of missionaries codified the language of the Karens (and the Burmese) setting up schools to teach them how to read and write their own language as well as English. When the British colonizers needed local bureaucrats, the Karens were skilled to fill these administrative positions often at the expense of the less-trained majority Burmese Buddhists. And the tensions grew as the British took more and more of Burma through three wars (1824-26, 1852-53, 1885) and animosity grew between the majority Burmese and the minority Karens.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Then came the twentieth century and the independence movements in India and southeast Asia. WWII stalled those independence efforts and in Burma the Karens sided with the British while the Burmese sided with the Japanese creating more hatred. Then the players changed, the war ended and independence was experienced, sort of. The story continues into the twenty-first century as both groups, Burmese and Karens, remember their sectarian and ethic struggles of the past 200 years.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Dr. Angelene Naw is uniquely qualified to describe the history of the Karen people,<b><i> </i></b>which is most often retold as oral history. She was born during the insurgencies of post-WWII Burma and lived her first six years in the jungles where her father was an officer for the Karen army in rebellion against the new government of Burma. Dr. Naw finished two degrees from the University of Rangoon before completing her PhD at the East-West Center of the University of Hawaii. I am honored that she came to the US to teach Asian history and culture at Judson University in Elgin, Illinois, where I served as president.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The first Burmese I ever met was John Shandy, a former Buddhist monk, who was employed on the plant operations staff by Judson University. The arrival of Dr. Naw made number two from Myanmar. Soon another refugee couple came to town and the only place the Baptist church could find them a job was at the local casino. Under the leadership of Dr. Naw, who was a rock star in the diaspora Karen-American community, we gathered about 50 families and started the Karen Baptist Church of Western Chicago. (When I retired and moved to Kansas City, I affiliated with the Grace Baptist Church that hosts a Karen congregation every Sunday afternoon.)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">My role in creating the book was to make Dr. Naw’s book readable for the western reading public. We had two audiences in mind for this publication, the student studying Southeast Asian history and the Karen diaspora spread around the world who will never return to Burma nor experience their desired independent nation, which they named Kawthoolei. Persecuted in Myanmar, the Karens have been emigrating to the US, Australia, Norway, Singapore, and other places from four major refugee camps in Thailand where they were settled by the United Nations. <i>The<b> </b>History<b> </b>of<b> </b>the<b> </b>Karen<b> </b>People<b> </b>of<b> </b>Burma</i> is now being translated into the Karen language to better reach these two audiences.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The<b> </b>History<b> </b>of<b> </b>the<b> </b>Karen<b> </b>People<b> </b>of<b> </b>Burma</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> describes pre-colonial Burma before 1824 when the British military moved in and the impact of the American missionaries in establishing Karendom. The educational thirst of the Karen people was addressed by the missionaries creating tension between the minority Karens and the majority Burmese. The political and military intrigues of WWII between the Japanese, British, Burmese, and the Karens are described in detail because Dr. Naw and her family were intimately involved. The post-WWII political and military struggles by the Karen people take this story into the 21<sup>st</sup> century.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Since the last military coup of February 1, 2021, the Karens have again been given the “dirty end of the stick,” as they would say. Public focus has been on the Muslim Rohingya on the western side of Myanmar but forced labor, targeted bombing, and discrimination against Christian Karens on the eastern side continues as it has for the past 200 years. Their plight has been captured in major motion pictures including a 2008 <i>Rambo</i> movie starring Sylvester Stallone. The story of democratic leader Aung San Suu Kyi has been told and retold with great appreciation, but there has been little political movement from the outside world. She has been sentenced to 33 years imprisonment since the 2-1-21 junta took over.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">The<b> </b>History<b> </b>of<b> </b>the<b> </b>Karen<b> </b>People<b> </b>of<b> </b>Burma</span></i><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> is important for anyone who wants to understand the recurring discord and dysfunction of cultural and political systems in modern Myanmar. It provides a 30,000-foot overview of the recycling military rule and futile attempts at democracy, and the recurring religious turmoil involving Buddhists, Muslims, and Christians from one who has lived it and continues to love her country with all its problems.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Jerry Cain<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">*For details on how to purchase the book see </span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"><a href="https://www.judsonpress.com/Products/J306/the-history-of-the-karen-people-of-burma.aspx" target="_blank">https://www.judsonpress.com/Products/J306/the-history-of-the-karen-people-of-burma.aspx</a></span><span style="color: black; font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"><o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2828101829504518203.post-5307610498524967422023-03-15T06:09:00.000-05:002023-03-15T06:09:44.156-05:00Does God Tempt People to do the Wrong Thing?<div class="WordSection1"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Or put another way the question is: does God as depicted in the Bible entice, seduce, or lure us humans into improper behavior? I know the question may sound strange, until you recall that one petition of the Lord's Prayer is usually translated as "do not lead us into temptation" (Matt 6:13; Luke 11:4; Didache, 8:2). Each week the Lord's prayer is recited in Christian congregations around the world. It is believed by the faithful to be a prayer Jesus taught his disciples to pray. I have often wondered, did Jesus himself pray such a prayer?<sup>1</sup> And when the prayer is offered at funerals and church meetings for what exactly is a person praying when s/he says "do not lead us into temptation"? Why would anyone suppose God would entice us to do something we should not do?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> Some translations attempt to resolve the situation by translating the petition used in the prayer as "do not put us to the test," or "do not bring us to the time of trial," as, for example, the New Revised Standard and Revised English Bible translate the word. The Greek word used in the prayer (<i>peiraz</i></span><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">ō</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">), however, according to the lexicons can be used both ways, as either a temptation to do something wrong, or as a test to prove someone. The Bauer-Danker, <i>Greek-English Lexicon </i>prefers the translation of an "attempt to make someone do something wrong, <i>temptation, enticement </i>to sin" for both Matt 6:13 and Luke 11:4.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> The Greek word <i>peiraz</i></span><i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">ō</span></i><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> is used a number of times in the New Testament where it is clear that the situation depicted concerned an enticement to behave improperly, as for example, when the devil is tempting Jesus (Matt 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13; see also 1 Thess 3:5 and Jas 1:13-15). In other instances, the situation clearly involves a testing: 1 Cor 10:13; 2 Cor 13:5; Rev: 3:10.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> In the Hebrew Bible God is frequently depicted as testing the Israelites. For example, God tested the faith of Abraham by telling him to offer his only son as a sacrifice (Gen 22:1-2). The stated reason was that God wanted to test his faith (Gen 22:12).<sup>2</sup> There are also other passages where the Israelites tested God,<sup>3</sup> although God specifically said they should not put the Lord to the test (Deut 6:16).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;"> I know of only one passage where God is involved in a situation clearly deceiving people in order to tempt them to improper behavior (1 Kgs 22:19-23). The prophet Micaiah had a vision of the Lord on his throne surrounded by the host of heaven. In the passage the Lord wanted to deceive King Ahab and solicited a "lying spirit" to "entice Ahab so that he would go up and fall at Ramoth-Gilead" (1 Kgs 22:20). One Spirit came forward saying "I will entice him" (1 Kgs 22:21). And the Lord said, "you are to entice him and you will succeed, go forth and do so" (1 Kgs 22:22).<sup>4</sup> One might well suspect from this passage that the ancient Israelite belief included a God who tempted them to improper or hurtful conduct (of course, believing a thing to be so does not make it so). At this point one may recall comedian Flip Wilson's immortal line: "The devil made me do it," which is the prevailing view amongst the faithful: the devil is our tempter. But still the Lord's prayer in most translations petitions God not to tempt us. Why?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">One might also well suspect that God should have known the probable outcome when he placed Adam and Eve in the Garden, telling them there was only one tree whose fruit they must avoid (Gen 3:1-7). Of course, it was the serpent that actually tempted Eve (2 Cor 11:3; 1 Tim 2:14), but one might make a credible case that the enticement was actually caused by God who set Eve up for her lapse, particularly since the popular belief is that God always knows what is going to happen. What was the serpent doing in the Garden of Eden, if it wasn't by divine design in the first place?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-indent: 0.5in;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">And this brings us back to where we began; for what exactly does one pray when one utters the words of the Lord's prayer: "lead us not into temptation"? Did Jesus think that God brought people into temptation in order to test them? Why not, if God also tested them in other ways? What is temptation if not simply another way of testing the faithful? So how should we pray that one line of the Lord's prayer?<o:p></o:p></span></p><div style="line-height: 150%; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Charles W. Hedrick<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Professor Emeritus<br /></span><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 150%;">Missouri State University</span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">1</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">See R. Funk and R. Hoover, <i>The Five Gospels. What did Jesus Really Say? </i>(Polebridge/Macmillan, 1993). The Jesus Seminar colored this line of the petition Grey, meaning for the Seminar that Jesus did not say it.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">2</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">Here are other instances where God tested the Israelites: Exod 17:2, 7; Deut 8:2, 16; 13:3; 33:8; Jdg 2:21-22; 3:1, 4; 2 Chron 32:31; Ps 26:2; Ps 78:41.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">3</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">In some passages The Israelites tested God: Exod 17:2, 7; Num 14:22; 2 Kgs 20:8-11); Ps 78:18, 41, 56; 95:9; 106:14; Isa 7:10-12.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal;"><sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">4</span></sup><span style="font-family: "Palatino Linotype",serif; font-size: 12pt;">The same Hebrew word is used also in the following instances, where enticement seems the better translation: Exod 22:16; Jdg 14:15; 16:5; Prov 1:10-11; 16:29.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4