Threads from Henry's Web

Author: henry

  • Two Notes on the Authorship of Hebrews

    The first is an interview at Euangelion with Andrew Pitts regarding his forthcoming essay on Hebrews (in a collection).  It discusses the authorship and proposes Paul as the author, but in a speech rather than a letter, and Luke as stenographer, which he differentiates from an amanuensis.  I didn’t get a completely clear picture of the difference.  In modern English usage a stenographer would have as little freedom in production as would an amanuensis, or so it seems to me.  But that is just a quibble about word choice.  Pitts is clearly proposing that Luke had more to say about the language than would a simple amanuensis.

    I personally find the idea of having both Luke and Paul involved to be a very interesting proposal, though I would tend more toward Luke as the writer (composer) based on things he had learned from Paul, thus explaining some differences in vocabulary and theology.  Ken Schenk comments with some useful notes, and I think Andrew Pitts dismisses his position as a strawman too quickly.

    All of that, of course, is from someone (me!) who really is unconvinced by any hypothesis.  I refuse to go beyond “the author of Hebrews” because I simply don’t think any proposal gets above the background noise level.

    The second post is from J. K. Gayle, who finds Pitts dismissal of the proposal that Priscilla might be the author a bit too quick.  I would agree that other authorship proposals are dealt with rather briefly and summarily in the interview, but it is, after all, a blog post.  I would hope some more effort was made in the book, which I have not read.  Hopefully I’ll lay hands on it when it is released.

    I previously reviewed Ruth Hoppin’s book Priscilla’s Letter and remained totally unconvinced.  I think the problem is evidence and not the desire of some to dismiss one particular author or another.  There simply isn’t enough written evidence for any of the proposals (Barnabas, Apollos, Priscilla, for example) to make a valid judgment. The primary attraction for Luke, I think, is that we have lots of literature with which to compare the book, and Luke demonstrates some of the skills displayed in the text of Hebrews.

    I would be quite delighted to believe that Priscilla wrote the letter, or to believe that the problem was thoroughly solved, but I don’t see that at this point.

  • Augustine on the Need to Know Hebrew and Greek

    … a quote at The Sacred Page.

  • Glenn Beck is Right – He Should Run from Social Justice

    Why? My pastor, Geoffrey Lentz, says it’s because following Jesus in social justice is hard and demanding and might mess up our lifestyes:

    What would happen if we “let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an everlasting stream” (Amos)? It wouldn’t work out very well for me.

    This one hits us right where it hurts!

  • On Academic Freedom and Denominational Colleges

    No, I’m not talking about my former denomination, the Seventh-Day Adventists. In this case, it’s Erskine College and the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church.

    Let me make clear that I believe a denomination has the right to do what it wants to do with its institutions, always assuming that they uphold existing contracts. For example, if they contract to do one thing and then change their mind, I don’t think they are less liable for their contractual obligations than any other person or business. But apart from that if they want a doctrinally narrow faculty and even student body, that is their prerogative.

    It is also, however, the prerogative of accreditation boards to take all of this into consideration, and outsiders can comment on the resulting educational quality. I would like to add one note, however, which I have gleaned over time. It is possible for informal structures to be as restrictive as formal ones. An academic department or institution can become very narrow without enshrining that narrowness in regulations.

    I make this side-comments to introduce an excellent article on academic freedom, titled The Nature of Academic Freedom, from Tony Mitchell. It’s well worth reading and discussion. So go read it and discuss already!

  • St. John Chrysostom: The Law a Shadow

    I thought this was one of the most beautiful ways I have heard this expressed:

    “For” (he says) “the Law having a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things”; i.e. not the very reality. For as in painting, so long as one [only] draws the outlines, it is a sort of “shadow” but when one has added the bright paints and laid in the colors, then it becomes “an image.” Something of this kind also was the Law.  (Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews 17.5)

    Again, credit CCEL.

  • Origen: Stumbling Blocks in Scripture

    The following is from Origen, On First Principles, 4.1.15.  All emphasis is mine.  (Also from CCEL.)

    But since, if the usefulness of the legislation, and the sequence and beauty of the history, were universally evident of itself, we should not believe that any other thing could be understood in the Scriptures save what was obvious, the word of God has arranged that certain stumbling-blocks, as it were, and offences, and impossibili­ties, should be introduced into the midst of the law and the history, in order that we may not, through being drawn away in all directions by the merely attractive na­ture of the language, either altogether fall away from the (true) doctrines, as learn­ing nothing worthy of God, or, by not departing from the letter, come to the knowledge of nothing more divine.  And this also we must know, that the principal aim being to announce the “spiritual” connection in those things that are done, and that ought to be done, where the Word found that things done according to the history could be adapted to these mystical senses, He made use of them, concealing from the multitude the deeper meaning; but where, in the narrative of the develop­ment of super-sensual things, there did not follow the performance of those certain events, which was already indicated by the mystical meaning, the Scripture interwove in the history (the account of) some event that did not take place, sometimes what could not have happened; sometimes what could, but did not.  And sometimes a few words are interpolated which are not true in their literal acceptation, and sometimes a larger number.  And a similar practice also is to be noticed with regard to the legislation, in which is often to be found what is useful in itself, and appro­priate to the times of the legislation; and sometimes also what does not appear to be of utility; and at other times impossibili­ties are recorded for the sake of the more skilful and inquisitive, in order that they may give themselves to the toil of investi­gating what is written, and thus attain to a becoming conviction of the manner in which a meaning worthy of God must be sought out in such subjects.

    The more things change, the more they are the same!  We discuss these same sorts of things today.  The more I read Origen, the more I like him!

  • Origen: Threefold Understanding of Scripture

    My reading today in Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, X, Hebrews was unusually rich, commenting on Hebrews 10:1-11.  This is the first of three extracts.  As usual, I’m taking these from CCEL and I urge you to support them as you can.

    The way, then, as it appears to us, in which we ought to deal with the Scrip­tures, and extract from them their mean­ing, is the following, which has been ascer­tained from the Scriptures themselves.  By Solomon in the Proverbs we find some such rule as this enjoined respecting the divine doctrines of Scripture:

    “And do thou portray them in a threefold manner, in counsel and knowledge, to answer words of truth to them who propose them to thee.” [reference to Proverbs 22:20-21, but the usage is a bit obscure-HN]

     The individual ought, then, to portray the ideas of holy Scripture in a threefold manner upon his own soul; in order that the simple man may be edified by the “flesh,” as it were, of the Scripture, for so we name the obvious sense; while he who has ascended a certain way (may be edified) by the “soul,” as it were.  The perfect man, again, and he who resem­bles those spoken of by the apostle, when he says, “We speak wisdom among them that are perfect, but not the wisdom of the world, nor of the rulers of this world, who come to nought; but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom, which God hath ordained before the ages, unto our glory,” (may receive edification) from the spiritual law, which has a shadow of good things to come.  For as man consists of body, and soul, and spirit, so in the same way does Scripture, which has been arranged to be given by God for the salvation of men. …

    (On First Principles 4.I.II)

    //

  • The Swerve – Too Close to the Truth

    … like right there!

    (HT: Language Log)

  • Harvest of Souls International Ministries Web Site

    Via Dave Black Online and Nick’s blog I found that biblioblogger Nick Norelli’s church, Harvest of Souls International Ministries, has a new web site.

    Now why do I link to this particular church web site at this moment? Is it merely to congratulate them? Well, I do congratulate them, but I had something more specific in mind. Recently I’ve been going back to one of my favorite topics, Christian essentials. One of my hopes in this area is that Christians will spend more time thinking about this topic. (Bob MacDonald has written a very interesting post that takes a substantially different view than I do, and I want to link that here.)

    I want to call attention to the Harvest of Souls page regarding their beliefs. I really like this page, even though it expresses beliefs that would probably mean I would never become a member there. We start out explicitly stating the basic position, and then defining what is essential. Following that we have a list of more detailed doctrines. It is in these more detailed doctrines that I would find some significant disagreements.

    But based on the second paragraph, I find it easy to believe that I would be comfortable as a brother in Christ in working with folks from that congregation even if we tended to disagree enough regarding the second rank doctrines that we might not fit in the same congregation.

    I find this outline for a belief statement to be very admirable. It lets the reader get a clear idea both of what’s most important to the particular church family, but also what they hold to be important, though not essential. I’m again reminded of my friend Alden Thompson’s illustration of the castle. There’s a keep, a courtyard, and there’s “outside the walls.” In the keep are essentials, in the courtyard are things that are important to us, but not critical, while outside the walls are all the issues that we really aren’t taking a position on. As Nick notes in his blog post, he can “can affirm the statement of faith with one or two small variations, none of which concern any of the major doctrinal tenets set forth therein.”

    The issue I’m raising right now is not whether we agree on the list, but whether we have thought about what beliefs (if any) are critical for each of us and for our respective fellowships.

    So both congratulations and “good job!”

  • Contest and Possible Blogswarm

    Well, it may not be as spontaneous as all that.  And with that, commercial warning …

    My company, Energion Publications, is sponsoring a contest and inviting people to blog about Christianity during Consider Christianity Week,  (March 21-27) which is the project of one of my authors, Elgin Hushbeck, Jr.  You can get full details on Energion.net.

    For the blogswarm, we will link to each post of which we are notified that fits into a Consider Christianity Week topic from both the company blog and from Energion.net.  This means at least two links for each post.  In addition, I personally will be trying to link to each from this blog and my Threads blog with some sort of classification and a bit of commentary.

    Please note:  This isn’t just for Christians.  We will link to posts opposing Christianity as well as to those supporting it.  When I link here, my preference will be for posts which are in conversation with one another.

    The contest involves one particular question, with a $50 Barnes & Noble gift card to the best (by popular vote) post in the affirmative, and another to the best post in the negative.  Again, see Energion.net for details.

    I know the fact that this is company sponsored may keep some folks away, but I would certainly appreciate any publicity you can give.  I’d like to see a good number of posts on Christianity linked together.