Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • St. John Chrysostom on Being Strangers

    From Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews (Christian Classics Ethereal Library), commenting on Hebrews 11:13-16.  All emphasis is mine.

    What then? Did they mean that they were “strangers” from the land that is in Palestine? By no means: but in respect of the whole world: and with reason; for they saw therein none of the things which they wished for, but everything foreign and strange. They indeed wished to practice virtue: but here there was much wickedness, and things were quite foreign to them. They had no friend, no familiar acquaintance, save only some few.

    But how were they “strangers”? They had no care for things here. And this they showed not by words, but by their deeds. In what way?

    He said to Abraham, “Leave that which seems thy country and come to one that is foreign”: And he did not cleave to his kindred, but gave it up as unconcernedly as if he were about to leave a foreign land. He said to him, “Offer up thy son,” and he offered him up as if he had no son; as if he had divested himself of his nature, so he offered him up. The wealth which he had acquired was common to all passers-by, and this he accounted as nothing. He yielded the first places to others: he threw himself into dangers; he suffered troubles innumerable. He built no splendid houses, he enjoyed no luxuries, he had no care about dress, which all are things of this world; but lived in all respects as belonging to the City yonder; he showed hospitality, brotherly love, mercifulness, forbearance, contempt for wealth and for present glory, and for all else.

    And his son too was such as himself: when he was driven away, when war was made on him, he yielded and gave way, as being in a foreign land. For foreigners, whatever they suffer, endure it, as not being in their own country. Even when his wife was taken from him, he endured this also as being in a strange land: and lived in all respects as one whose home was above, showing sobermindedness and a well-ordered life.  // For after he had begotten a son, he had no more commerce with his wife, and it was when the flower of his youth had passed that he married her, showing that he did it not from passion, but in subservience to the promise of God.

    And what did Jacob? Did he not seek bread only and raiment, which are asked for by those who are truly strangers; by those that have come to great poverty? When he was driven out, did he not as a stranger give place? Did he not serve for hire? Did he not suffer afflictions innumerable, everywhere, as a stranger?

    [5.] And these things (he says) they said, “seeking” their “own country.” Ah! how great is the difference! They indeed were in travail-pains each day, wishing to be released from this world, and to return to their country. But we, on the contrary, if a fever attack us, neglecting everything, weeping like little children, are frightened at death.

    Not without reason we are thus affected. For since we do not live here like strangers, nor as if hastening to our country, but are like persons that are going away to punishment, therefore we grieve, because we have not used circumstances as we ought, but have turned order upside down. Hence we grieve when we ought to rejoice: hence we shudder, like murderers or robber chiefs, when they are going to be brought before the judgment-seat, and are thinking over all the things they have done, and therefore are fearful and trembling.

    They, however, were not such, but pressed on. And Paul even groaned; “And we” (he says) “that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened.” ( 2 Cor. v. 4.) Such were they who were with Abraham; “strangers,” he says, they were in respect of the whole world, and “they sought a country.”

    What sort of “country” was this? Was it that which they had left? By no means. For what hindered them if they wished, from returning again, and becoming citizens? but they sought that which is in Heaven? Thus they desired their departure hence, and so they pleased God; for “God was not ashamed to be called their God.”

  • NLT for Academic Study

    Chris Heard asked via Twitter whether the NLT was suitable for academic study.  T. C. Robinson has given an answer:

    Concluding thoughts: The NLT, New Living Translation, is simply too loose to be considered a serious academic Bible.

    While I have some sympathy with this point, I have to ask just what the definition of “serious” and “academic” are in relation to a particular Bible translation.  Most of my teaching has been of lay people, and thus I’m probably not looking for a serious academic Bible however those labels are defined.  Nonetheless it seems to me that this is too broad an answer to a question that needs a bit of definition.

    For example, what are these serious academic students doing with the particular Bible?  If they are doing exegesis suitable for scholarly publication, or perhaps for training in order to do scholarly publishing, then I would argue that no translation is sufficient to the task.

    On the other hand if they are doing a survey type of study, the NLT might be a quite workable option.  I would especially recommend it for reading whole books.  I should note here that even when teaching lay people I’m in the habit of asking for such shocking things as reading of an entire book, and not the book of Philemon.  Try Ezekiel or Isaiah.

    In reading a whole book I find such translations as the NLT, CEV, TNIV, and a few others quite helpful.  Personally, I like to read a book through in several versions as I follow the 12x reading recommendation I learned from my mother.  I find it difficult to maintain concentration when reading something 12 times from the same version, so I’ll use a variety.  For that purpose, the NLT is certainly helpful.

    I also find the NLT very useful in comparison with my own translations.  Normally if I’m going to preach or teach a text I will do a written translation of my own.  I then like to compare that translation to a range of versions.  Normally I prefer to teach from an English version which is available to my class, provided there are not too many variations in the way I read the text.

    I don’t know whether I agree with T. C. or just how I’d answer Dr. Heard’s question.  I have a hard time conceiving of recommending any single English translation for serious academic study.  But perhaps I’m thinking of something other than what was intended in the question.

  • Book: In the Stormy Red Sky

    David Drake has, as expected, written another enjoyable far future action story with lots of military detail featuring Lt. Daniel Leary and Officer Adele Mundy along with a cast of varying characters.

    As this book begins, Daniel is promoted to Captain and sent on what should be a fairly simple mission as a sort of shakedown cruise. But things are not as they appear, which is quite usual, and Daniel is not willing to leave them as they are, and thus begins an adventure. There’s an annoying Senator, who nonetheless ends up being quite helpful. Adele and Tovera get more personality development in this one as well.

    Daniel’s scope is much greater as a Captain with a cruiser as his command, but as you might expect, this just means the enemies are bigger and nastier. He still must deal with situations that are proportionally as much greater as his resources have increased.

    Many series deteriorate over time. I think David Drake has nicely avoided the problem of escalation. This is another Daniel Leary story, not something even more ridiculously difficult than the last one. One can generally predict what Daniel will do, at least in outline, but that’s the nature of this sort of series. If he ceased to be Daniel Leary, what good would the series be?

    I continue to strongly recommend this entire series.

  • Congratulations to Dispatches from the Culture Wars

    My friend Ed Brayton of Dispatches from the Culture Wars, who encouraged me to get into blogging, has just attained a great new record–over 1,000,000 page views for the month of March.

    Congratulations!

  • Beyond Complementarian

    I found this story appalling. In making decisions about a Christian school and whether the principal should be fired, women were not even allowed to speak.

    While I do believe that a denomination or local church should have the right to do what it believes is right with a school it finances, including expecting the teachers to support the party-line, I do not think that it is right to maintain such narrow boundaries. Both the offense and the way it was handled speak more of paranoia than of concern for education.

    What I really wanted to note, however, is that complementarians of my acquaintance would pretty much unanimously oppose this type of action as well. It seems that what often happens in controversies happens in the egalitarian debate–those who are not egalitarian are complementarian, and those who are not complementarian are egalitarian, and the line is drawn very near to the opposite end of the spectrum. (Please notice that I’m aware this is not the topic of the original story, nor of Cheryl Schatz’s blog post.)

    It’s sort of like the political spectrum where everyone who is not 100% laissez faire can get labeled a socialist, while on the other hand people who would support many socialist ideas are labeled as laissez faire by the “real” socialists.

    We should realize that there are many shades in these camps, and that the labels can be problematic, especially if we narrow one and broaden the other, from either direction. Labeling is useful; mislabeling is confusing.

  • The Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon Site

    (Edited July 10, 2018 to update link.)

    I discovered this site some time ago and have used the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon site it as a reference before, but P. J. Williams on Evangelical Textual Criticism reminded me today that it’s nice to link to and recommend resources such as this.

    You have to be ready to do a bit of work to find what you want but there are some wonderful resources, including lexical information and texts linked to a lexical breakdown.  For someone like me, who uses Aramaic occasionally, and thus lacks some of the best library materials, this site is extremely helpful.

    Spend a little bit of time scouting around and looking for the options.  The information on how to use it is there; it’s just not always obvious.

  • Flowers from My Dog Walking

    I don’t usually post pictures because I’m not a very visual person and I’m definitely not a photographer. But I enjoyed using my Palm Centro phone to take pictures of a few flowers I saw while walking my dog. He’s getting a bit older, so the walk is only about a third of a mile, but here are the pictures I took yesterday.

    Flowers 1 Flowers 2 Flowers 3
    Flowers 4 Flowers 5 Flowers 6
    Flowers 7 Flowers 8 Flowers 9
    Flowers 10 Flowers 11

    And sorry, no, I don’t have names for them.

  • Another KJV-Only Comment

    Every so often a KJV-Only advocate comes by this blog to comment.  They normally don’t hang around long, but I occasionally feel inclined to respond.  I like to tolerate and even celebrate other points of view, but I don’t make an idol of it; it’s one value, not the value.  KJV-Only is one of those views I simply cannot respect.  It’s too divorced from reality.

    This most recent comment was no exception.  It resulted from my poll on Bible translation.

    There were 5 versions of the Biblical Scriptures/Sources-printed–

    Really?  Which five were these, and which versions will you exclude from your list?

    The One in English from the Textus Receptus(received Text) was the Authorized King James Version-1611-

    Well, at least this is approximately correct.

    All Others were from the Catholic Codexes/Manuscripts found from 1841 -1881

    Well, no, not precisely.  In fact, many other versions were translated from the TR or something similar, many manuscripts were discovered outside that time frame, and I have no idea what makes a manuscript “Catholic.”  If one uses any definition that doesn’t make practically every manuscript at the time Catholic, then relatively few would be.  One wonders whether all manuscripts copied in the eastern church are Catholic or not.

    –which were in Philosophical Greek-Not Koine-

    No, they were not.  They were in the same dialect as the rest.

    that were being used as fire-starters in the churches-

    This is a falsehood built from a falsehood.  The initial one was that Sinaiticus was being used to start fires, which would comment on the stupidity of the person so using it rather than on the value of the manuscript, but even then we can hardly jump to “fire-starters in churches.”  But even the fire starting in the monastery is not factual.  (See here.)

    and Not complete/or Preserved as God Promises- which Add,Subtract, and Change the Word of God

    By what standard do you judge completeness and preservation?  Is not a manuscript with additions just as corrupt (if that is even the correct word) as one with deletions?  In order to determine which is the case, one needs to have some idea of the source text.

    And on another note, why can’t KJV-Only advocates punctuate normally and write complete sentences?

    /Perverts Doctrines–contrary to the Word of God–From these the American People Seek to make Profit in the Churches like the “Money-Changers” of Old that Jesus chased – out of the Churches ??–

    The folks who print KJV Bibles also make a profit.

    The 70 Translaters of the King James Bible did Not Hide their Identities like those of the Modernistic Versions-

    This is simply false.  Many modern translations include lists of the translators. For editions that do not, a little bit of web research will turn up the information.

    Many who themselves claimed to be Atheists, Agnostics, and Members of “Cults” ??—

    … assuming that atheists, agnostics, and members of cults cannot translate.  But the fact is that most of the translators of modern versions belonged to churches that would fall within orthodoxy.

    My Great Grandparents readily understood the King James Bible- SO are people today More Stupid or What ??—

    The argument about readability, as anyone should be able to tell, is not that people are getting less intelligent, it is that language has changed.  Modern English would be similarly difficult for people of a few centuries ago.  The reason KJV-Only advocates generally can’t read Greek isn’t that they’re stupid; it’s that they haven’t learned Greek.

    The King James Bible IS The Bible–Not Just Another “Version”–or should I say — a “Perversion” ??

    On the contrary, the KJV is a version.  It is not the original.  It is not the best.  It’s not extraordinarily inspired.  It’s just one translation of a set of texts into a new language.

    The sad excuse of “Interpretation(s)”–is Weak at the Best-for those who Reject the Authority of God’s Word in their Lives..

    Well, no.  Any translation involves interpretation.  Any preaching involves interpretation.  You can’t get away from it.

    I have found that the KJV 1611 Bible woks just fine with those that I witness to in other countries that are 3rd World countries–

    I’m sure you imagine that you do.  It’s amazing to me how many people can convince themselves they are communicating when they are not.

    But these Modern Perversions only Confuses them !!!

    I suspect that the problem is that the modern version make them question what you have to say.

    – In Cambodia I found that the Mormons(a Cult) even PAYS People to come to Church ??–Further Proof that their “Another Testament of Jesus Christ ” has NO Power in the Word !!!

    Of course, use of modern versions is not connected to Mormonism, so this is just a red herring.

    And thus we come to the end of another KJV-Only comment.  I spent too much time on it, but on occasion it’s fun.

  • 50 Great Books Every Christian Should Read

    At least so says the Online Christian Colleges blog.  I received a notice of the post in e-mail.  Usually that’s not a very productive way to get me to blog about something unless you’re someone I know, and more importantly, someone who knows what I like to blog about.  So, folks, don’t make a habit of it.

    In this case, I almost didn’t bother to look at the post, as lists of things every ____ should read generally drive me nuts, but I did go and look, and there are some rather interesting items but as a list of 50 books every Christian should read, I’d say, “Not so much.”

    For example, The Talmud.  Should Christians be acquainted with Judaism to some extent?  Yes, I would agree.  But reading the entire Talmud?  Have you tried?  It really isn’t a book to be read so much as one to be diligently studied.  And no, I haven’t read all or even most of it myself.  My interests went the other direction, back to the ancient near east.  Now Enuma Elish, the Hymn to Aten, Gilgamesh, and Hammurabi’s code–those everyone should read, and in the original languages.  (No, I don’t mean that about the original languages.  Just joking.)

    What about The Purpose Driven Life, #19 on the list?  In this case, I have read it, though I must confess to a “seminary read” of large portions.  I really don’t find it profound enough to be on the top 50.  If our pastor hadn’t been preaching through it, I would never have bothered.

    There are quite a few good suggestions, though I think many will object to particular selections, such as Tillich’s Systematic Theology.  I love it, but it is really slow reading for most.  I haven’t found that many people who want to hear quotes from it.

    In any case, check out the list.  What would you add?  What would you remove?