Via Gordon Watley on the facebook
Daily Archives: 23 Oct 2019
Of the faithless, Leviticus declares
The sound of a falling leaf will set them fleeing; they will flee as though fleeing from the sword, and fall when no one is pursuing. They will stumble over one another as though fleeing before the sword, when no one is pursuing. (Lev. 26:36-37)
Faithlessness breeds fear, gives birth to it, nurses it, raises it, and eventually kills everyone it touches.
I’ve added a couple more pieces to the list of manuscripts of dubious origins. These are more pieces that have shown up in Scott Carroll’s talks in recent years, and both of these items may also be connected to the manuscripts stolen from the Egypt Exploration Society. The first is a collection of papyrus fragments identified only as “a patristic text.”
Etc. I’m old enough to remember when scholarship wasn’t a get quick rich scheme.
Ancient Greek Grammar for the Study of the New Testament, by Heinrich von Siebenthal.
Having used, and benefited immensely by doing so, the Grammar in German, I can only presume that the English edition will be very much worth your time.
“Under Innocent III. (1198–1216) the papacy reached the acme of its power, and maintained it till the time of Boniface VIII. (1294–1303). Emperor Frederick II. (1215–1250), Barbarossa’s grandson, was equal to the best of his predecessors in genius and energy, superior to them in culture, but more an Italian than a German, and a skeptic on the subject of religion. He reconquered Jerusalem in the fifth crusade, but cared little for the church, and was put under the ban by pope Gregory IX., who denounced him as a heretic and blasphemer, and compared him to the Apocalyptic beast from the abyss. The news of his sudden death was hailed by pope Innocent IV. with the exclamation: “Let the heavens rejoice, and let the earth be glad.” His death was the collapse of the house of Hohenstaufen, and for a time also of the Roman empire. His son and successor Conrad IV. ruled but a few years, and his grandson Conradin, a bright and innocent youth of sixteen, was opposed by the pope, and beheaded at Naples in sight of his hereditary kingdom (October 29, 1268).”*
*Philip Schaff and David Schley Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 4 (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910), 258–259.
For you will not learn from his books what a Christian is to believe or what a righteous man is to do; he cannot and will not teach that. Much more, you will not even be able to tell from his books what he himself believes or what kind of man he is. He criticizes everything, but offers no alternative, nor does he discuss what a person ought to believe and maintain—save that, so far as I can trace and judge the scent with my nose, he is an enthusiast or spiritualist, who is not pleased with anything but “spirit, spirit, spirit”; who thinks nothing of the Word, Sacraments, and office of preaching. Instead, [he says,] people are supposed to live according to the spirit. That is the kind of life that Münzer lived with his peasants, refusing to hear or to look at a single letter, much less a book or writing.
[He] is not just a fanatic and perverter of the Sacrament, but, as I said, he is a spiritualist and an enthusiast, who refuses to be subject to God’s Word, or the Holy Scripture, but by the spirit he wants to be judge and master over them.
#Bam to the #holla, Martin.
Bugenhagen had written Zwingli asking him to clarify his view of the ‘Lord’s Supper’ and on the 23rd of October in 1525 Zwingli obliged with his Responsio ad epistolam Ioannis Bugenhagii.
Peppered with Scriptural proofs, Zwingli shows Bugenhagen in meticulous detail why ‘hoc est’ in the celebration of the body of Christ in the Supper should be understood “significat”. ‘This signifies my body…’ etc.
Here’s a fun section:
Sic ergo didicimus, urgente nos rudium cura, qui non bene norunt, quid tropus significet, quomodo ista vox “est” debeat pro “significat” accipi. Videbam τροπικῶς dictum esse “hoc est corpus meum” [Luc. 22. 19], sed in qua voce tropus lateret, non videbam. Ibi dei munere factum est, ut duo quidam et pii et docti homines, quorum etiamnum tacebo nomina, ad Leonem nostrum et me conferendi de hoc argumento causa venirent; cumque nostram hac in re sententiam audirent, gratias egerunt deo (suam enim ipsi celabant, quod tum non erat tutum cuique communicare, quod in hac re sentiret), ac epistolam istam cuiusdam et docti et pii Batavi, quae iam excusa est anonyma, soluta sarcina communicarunt. In ea foelicem hanc margaritam “est” pro “significat” hic accipi inveni.
Zwingli’s view persuaded many but it didn’t persuade Luther or the other Catholics of Luther’s mindset. It never could, because Luther was far too chained to his mystical past. Or, as Zwingli puts it in his colorful conclusion-
Non potest ex integro antichristus profligari, nisi et hoc errore labefactato corruat. Spectemus veri ante omnia faciem, non autoritatem hominum, quae nihil valere debet, ubi veritas illuxit.
That delightful phrase could be repeated daily concerning so many…
Whatevs. The media love to exploit ignorance and make all kinds of speculative leaps when some archaeological trinket is uncovered.
- There’s no way to know if Pilate built the road or not.
- If Pilate did build the road, and they find an in situ inscription that says so, so what?
It. Doesn’t. Matter. They are, once again, trying to make a whole suit out of one button.
On this day in 787,
The Nicene Council nullified the decrees of the iconoclastic Synod of Constantinople, and solemnly sanctioned a limited worship (proskynesis) of images. [Philip Schaff and David Schley Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 4 (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910), 460.]
That decision has never been rescinded by the Catholic Church.