Earlier this semester I read through the OT Apocrypha. I had read many parts of it before, but a good bit of it was fresh. One of my favorite stories that I had not heard before is the contest between King Darius’ three bodyguards. It’s witty and enjoyable. (And it would serve nicely as an illustration of “truth” in a sermon or lecture.)
Here’s the story from 1 Esdras 3:1–4:42 (NRSV). [Read more…] about What Is the Strongest? The Contest Between King Darius’ Three Bodyguards
In Douglas J. Moo’s concise article on Romans in the New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, he highlights “six aspects of justification in Romans”:
Moo concludes,
While not the centre of Romans, justification by faith is nevertheless a critical component of Paul’s presentation of the gospel in Romans. The doctrine expresses, in the sphere of anthropology, a crucial element in Paul’s understanding of God’s work in Christ: its entirely gracious character. Not only, then, does justification by faith guard against the Jewish attempt to make works of the law basic for salvation in Paul’s day; it expresses the resolute resistance of Paul, and the NT authors, to the constant human tendency to make what people do decisive for salvation.
I can’t wait to sing about this tomorrow morning with my church!
D. A. Carson opens his chapter entitled “Logical Fallacies” in Exegetical Fallacies (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996; pp. 87–123) with this:
Why Are Fire Engines Red?
They have four wheels and eight men;
four plus eight is twelve;
twelve inches make a ruler;
a ruler is Queen Elizabeth;
Queen Elizabeth sails the seven seas;
the seven seas have fish;
the fish have fins;
the Finns hate the Russians;
the Russians are red;
fire engines are always rushin’;
so they’re red.I do not remember where I learned this little gem, but it raises in an extreme form the subject of logic. We see the argument is ridiculous; but why is it ridiculous? What is the nature of the breaches as we move from line to line, or even within one line? Why should we not accept this argument as a valid answer to the question, “Why are fire engines red?”
Carson proceeds to discuss “The Nature and Universality of Logic” followed by “A Select List of Logical Fallacies” (with explanations and illustrations):
Carson concludes,
These are certainly not the only logical fallacies than can trip up those of us who are intimately involved in the exegesis of the Bible; but they are among the most common. All of us will fall afoul of one or more of these fallacies at some time or another; but alert awareness of their prevalence and nature may help us escape their clutches more frequently than would otherwise be the case.
Like the other chapters of this book, this one is more negative than positive; but if it results in interpreters who are marginally more self–critical in their handling of Scripture, and in readers who are somewhat more discerning when they devour commentaries, expositions, and other studies, this sustained critique will be amply rewarded (p. 123).
About four hours ago, I downloaded The Lexham Greek-English Interlinear Septuagint, edited by Randall Tan. A Logos employee emailed, “I believe you are the first person outside of Logos to get it.” Cool. The product is projected to ship on November 24, so the pre-pub special ($109.95) will soon elevate to a sale price ($122.95), so now is the time to lock in on the best price.
You can get a decent overview of this LXX by reading the product page.
Here are some thoughts after playing with my new toy/tool: [Read more…] about Lexham Greek-English Interlinear Septuagint
Quote of the day:
I was raised on the KJV, so I’m bilingual.
–Walter Kaiser this afternoon in a Panel Discussion of Three Views on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament at ETS
Douglas J. Moo concisely summarizes the meaning of Romans 10:6–8 in the NLT Study Bible:
10:6-8 Here Paul quotes three phrases from Deut 30:12–14 dealing with the law, and he applies them to the Good News about Christ. We do not need to go up to heaven to find Christ (and thus to be made right with God), because God has already brought him down to earth as a man. Nor do we need to go down to the place of the dead to find Christ, because God has already raised him from the dead. To find Christ, we must simply believe in the message that is close at hand.
Last night Jenni and I finished reading Paul Maier‘s The Flames of Rome. It is outstanding! It is a bit more explicit than Maier’s Pontius Pilate (sometimes uncomfortably so, e.g., re Nero’s depravity), but overall, it is a fine tool to engage one’s mind with first-century Greco-Roman, Jewish, and Christian history in a way that is virtually impossible by reading only encyclopedia-type summaries of the day. Bravo!
I would not be surprised if both of these books become required reading for NT classes I may teach in the future. They’re that useful.
Related: “Pontius Pilate”: A Documentary Novel by Paul Maier
Here are some good reminders re scholarship from Rethinking the Synoptic Problem (ed. David Alan Black and David R. Beck; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001), emphasis added:
1. Scot McKnight, “A Generation Who Knew Not Streeter: The Case for Markan Priority,” p. 66:
The unfortunate, however unintended, implication of coming to grips with modern scholarship is that in learning contemporary scholarship, students put the previous generation on the shelf. These scholars are sitting there full of chat, but, sadly, modern students don’t have time for older studies, and so the books become forlorn as the faces of the scholars become lonely, sad, and unknown. It is a fact that modern scholarship’s improvements do not necessarily make older scholarship obsolescent.
2. Grant R. Osborne, “Response,” pp. 150–51:
There are no certainties in life. It must be said that scholarship, like all other earthly endeavors, runs in fads, especially in the post-Enlightenment setting. Scholars are essentially Athenians at heart, always searching for some new thing (Acts 17:21). The four-source hypothesis [which Osborne holds] has dominated for almost a century now, and that is a fairly long time. So we can never know when some new genius will come along and establish a new theory that will carry the day. However, it is the purpose of symposia like this to sum up the “state of the art” on the issue, and I believe we have done as well as we can. It seems to me that the evidence points clearly to the modified Streeter theory that Mark was first, and that it existed alongside a sayings source that we now call Q. Later, Matthew utilized both and supplemented them with his own (M)emory material. At the same time (it is nearly impossible to know which was first), Luke used Mark and Q along with other sources he had gathered (L), and wrote his Gospel. Again, certainty is impossible, and it is good for us to be “iron sharpening iron” as we debate the proper approach to interpreting the Gospels on the basis of the sources they used (redaction and composition criticism). The only mandate for all of us is humility. We need each other, for without these challenges we become arrogant and falsely certain of our community-shaped theories.