May 9.2022 Fr. Panayiotis of the Greek Orthodox Church has been my resource in many subjects relating to the Post-Apostolic faith.
Hello again Fr. Panayiotis, I have been reading and studying the Orthodox Study Bible. I have found a mistranslation based on St. John Chrysostom's Homily on Matthew 16:24. The NKJV which is basically Protestant translates aparneomai as "deny (arneomai)" instead of "renounce". I found out that even Mark 8:34 has the same Greek word. Luke however, Luke 9:23, uses arneomai but he emphasized carrying the cross twice (Luke 14:27) and added "daily". I am NOT Greek literate so I read the commentaries of the Greek fathers.
This is from John Chrysostom:
"So also Christ; He said not, " Let him not spare himself, " but very strictly, " Let him renounce himself; " that is, let him have nothing to do with himself, but give himself up to all dangers and conflicts; and let him so feel, as though another were suffering it all.
"And He said not, " Let him deny, " but " Let him renounce; " even by this small addition intimating again, how very far it goes. For this latter is more than the former. "
And let him take up his cross. " This arises out of the other. For to hinder your supposing that words, and insults, and reproaches are to be the limits of our self-renunciation, He says also how far one ought to renounce one's self; that is, unto death, and that a reproachful death. Therefore He said not, " Let him renounce himself unto death, " but, " Let him take up his cross; " setting forth the reproachful death; and that not once, nor twice, but throughout all life one ought so to do. " Yea, " says He, " bear about this death continually, and day by day be ready for slaughter. For since many have indeed contemned riches, and pleasure, and glory, but death they despised not, but feared dangers; I, " says He, " will that my champion should wrestle even unto blood, and that the limits of his course should reach unto slaughter; so that although one must undergo death, death with reproach, the accursed death, and that upon evil surmise, we are to bear all things nobly, and rather to rejoice in being suspected. "
Although I am not Greek Orthodox, I look up the Greek fathers for Bible interpretation before I interpret it myself. I am hoping the the OSB will be revised accordingly based on the nuances of the Greek language. The NKJV is still very Protestant to me.
Thank you
April 2022
April 2022 Larry V Brown, DMin DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHRISTIAN CANON
One important point you missed in your paper and which all modern denominations missed except the Orthodox church is "What Scripture did Christ and the Apostles use and quoted from?" For example: Christ's reading in the synagogue in Luke 4:17-19 is a verbatim Greek quote from the LXX and in verse 21 Christ explicit says "this Scripture is fulfilled...." I believe the Greek Orthodox church canon is the closest to what Christ used and it was a collection of writings which include the Apocrypha. This is where the Protestant canon is definitely amiss and the Roman Catholic canon seems to be the best compromise between Greek Orthodox which considers the Apocrypha as canonical and modern Protestants who do not even know that the Apocrypha used to be part of the KJV. BTW, this also challenges verbal inspiration since Christ did not read the Hebrew.
February 6, 2022
November 19, 2021 Bill Wenstrom
My point was not so much to state that the LXX is inspired (although such is the claim of the post-Apostolic fathers) but to point out that the current understanding of inspiration is faulty as preached or taught in many churches and seminaries.
This post-Apostolic belief betrays the concept that it is not the "very words" which would be Hebrew for the OT but it is the message that is inspired. Words come from the human vehicle who was given a divine concept to declare or explain to their audience. Perhaps a compromise would be to say that "the contextual concept given by the asssembly of the author's words is inspired taking into account the original context of his purpose and his audience"
What other proof do we have than the millions or billions that have been saved and transformed by the word of God who are completely ignorant of the Hebrew or the Greek original language (if they even exist since these manuscripts are mainly rabbinical constructs after decades of oral tradition).
Does this undermine our faith in the inerrancy and "canonicity (there are different Christian churches with different canons) of the sacred writings in our hands? God forbid, in fact it should strengthen our faith that God has sovereignly preserved his MESSAGE (NOT the "very words" as verbal inspirationists misleadingly put it) despite the human distortions (intentional and unintentional) over the past 2,000 to 3,000 years. That is how to appreciate the more robust meaning of "God-breathed" (not God-spoke, in fact).
To further conclude, ALL extant manuscripts (including the Masoretic Text and the LXX) as are ALL translations, are ALL IMPERFECT COPIES of the word of God. The message is what remains PERFECT and/or COMPLETE. The simple man understands the basic message and has all the information required to respond to it's offer of salvation. On the other hand, students and teachers of the word are compelled to compare parallel versions and MOST ESPECIALLY the commentaries of the post-Apostolic writers (who had varying "canon's") before they develop their interpretation of the text.
I am following your articles because, like me, you seem to base your exegetical studies using the backdrop of history, a method that seems to elude most protestant exegetes (with the notable exception of John Wesley, whose father, Samuel Wesley encouraged him to know the primitive church by heart). Most Protestant exegesis seem to assume that the New Testament was handed down to us by God himself as a complete book.
Thx again.
November 22, 2021 Kristofer Carlson (I bought his book after reading this)
That we may believe on the authority of Holy Scripture that such is the case, hear how in the Book of Maccabees, where the mother of seven martyrs exhorts her sons to endure torture, this truth is confirmed. Origen (c. 225, E), 4.270.
Holy Scripture instructs us, saying, “Prayer is good with fasting and almsgiving” [Tobit 20:8]. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.456.
In the Book of Wisdom, a book full of all virtue, the Holy Spirit sings in this manner, now openly drawing His hearers to celibacy and chastity: “It is better to have no children and to have virtue. For the memorial thereof is immortal” [Wis. 4:1, 2]. Methodius (c. 290, E), 6.312.
The Book of Wisdom confirms this, saying, “For God created all things that they might have their being” [Wis. 1:14]. Methodius (c. 290, E), 6.365.
The Book of Wisdom says, “For God created man to be immortal and made him to be an image of His own eternity” [Wis. 2:23]. Methodius (c. 290, E), 6.367.
I have not attempted to establish proof about Christ from the passages of Scripture that are not admitted by you [Jews]—which I quoted from the words of Jeremiah the prophet, Esdras, and David. But [I have proved this] from those which are even now admitted by you. However, had your teachers comprehended these things, be well assured they would have deleted them, too, just as they did those writings about the death of Isaiah, whom you sawed asunder with a wooden saw. Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.259.
[The Jewish scribes] hid from the knowledge of the people as many of the passages as they could that contained any scandal against the elders, rulers, and judges. Some of these have been preserved in hidden writings. Take, for example, the story told about Isaiah. This is corroborated by the Epistle to the Hebrews. Yet, it is found in none of their public books. For the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, in speaking of the prophets, and what they suffered, says, “They were stoned; they were sawn asunder.” To whom, I ask, does the “sawn asunder” refer? Now, we know very well that tradition says that Isaiah the prophet was sawn asunder. And this is found in one of the hidden works. The Jews have probably purposely tampered with this work, introducing some phrases that are manifestly incorrect, so that discredit might be thrown on the whole. Origen (c. 240, E), 4.388.
[The Book of Enoch] may now seem to have been rejected by the Jews for that very reason—just like nearly all the other portions that speak of Christ. Nor, of course, is this fact surprising: that they did not receive some Scriptures that spoke of Him whom they did not receive. For they did not receive Him even when He was here in person, speaking in their presence. Tertullian (c. 198, W), 4.16.
These philosophers have also made their attacks upon those writings which are condemned by us under the title of spurious—certain as we are that nothing should be received that does not agree with the true system of prophecy, which has arisen in this present age. Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.182.
Let the following books be considered venerable and holy by you, both of the clergy and the laity. Of the Old Testament: the five books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy); one of Joshua, the son of Nun; one of the Judges; one of Ruth; four of the Kings; two of the Chronicles; two of Ezra; one of Esther; one of Judith; three of the Maccabees; one of Job; one hundred and fifty Psalms; three books of Solomon (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs); and sixteen Prophets. Besides these, take care that your young persons learn the Wisdom of the very learned Sirach. Apostolic Constitutions (compiled c. 390, E), 7.505.
Finally when Julius Africanus tried to challenge Origen on the the use of the "apocryphal writings", Origen replied as follows:
Origen to Africanus, . . . greeting. From your letter, I learned what your thoughts are as to the Susanna in the Book of Daniel, which is used in the churches. . . . In answer to this, I have to tell you what it is necessary for us to do in the cases of not only the history of Susanna, but also of thousands of other passages that I found in many places when, with my little strength, I was collating the Hebrew copies of Scripture with our copies. Susanna is found in every church of Christ in that Greek copy that the Greeks use. Yet, it is not in the Hebrew. Likewise, the two other passages you mention at the end of the book, containing the history of Bel and the Dragon, are not in the Hebrew copy of Daniel. . . . In many of the other sacred books, I sometimes found more in our copies [i.e., in the LXX] than in the Hebrew; sometimes, I found less. . . . When we notice such things, are we to abruptly reject as spurious the copies in use in our churches? Should we command the brotherhood to put away the sacred books that are currently used among them? Should we coax the Jews and persuade them to give us copies that will be free from tampering and forgery? Are we to suppose that the Providence that has ministered to the edification of all the churches of Christ in the sacred Scriptures, had no concern for those who were bought with a price, the ones for whom Christ died? Origen (c. 240, E), 4.386, 387.
No comments:
Post a Comment