Euangelion - Latest Comments

Re: Rachel Held Evans on Jesus the Racist

Jimmy Doyle — Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:32:09 -0000

Michael,

Thanks for this post. I have a question (that actually led me here):

I've noticed in several commentaries that b. Ḥagigah 13a is quoted as saying: ‘as the sacred food was intended for men, but not for the dogs, the Torah was intended to be given to the chosen people, but not to the Gentiles.’ You quote this passage this way as well. However, when I look up this passage in the Talmud I do not find it as making any comparisons or references to dogs.

Here's what I have found from the William Davidson Talmud (Koren - Steinsaltz) edition at Sefaria.org:

וְאָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי אֵין מוֹסְרִין דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה לְגוֹי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לֹא עָשָׂה כֵן לְכׇל גּוֹי וּמִשְׁפָּטִים בַּל יְדָעוּם

And Rabbi Ami said further: The words of Torah may not be transmitted to a gentile, as it is stated: “He has not dealt so with any nation, and as for His ordinances, they have not known them” (Psalms 147:20).

This is consistent with the Neusner's translation:

And said R. Ammi, “Teachings of the Torah are not to be handed over to gentiles: ‘He has not done so with any nation, and as for his ordinances, they ave not known them’ (Psa. 147:20).

Am I missing an edition out there that contains the "as the sacred food was intended for men, but not for the dogs" portion, or is this actually a case where an unverified citation has become used in many, even academic, sources?

Re: Is Inerrancy a Fundamentalist Doctrine?

Kenneth Macari — Mon, 07 Feb 2022 21:58:23 -0000

I stand by what I wrote. I read Jesus and John Wayne and Dr. Du Mez has some good points BUT errs in others

Re: Is Inerrancy a Fundamentalist Doctrine?

Ed Koonz — Mon, 07 Feb 2022 19:18:41 -0000

Who really cares whether one is a fundamentalist who believes in inerrancy of Scripture or a progressive Christian who believes Scripture is canonical witness? Certainly not Jesus who was open-minded and open-hearted with Scripture and people.

Re: Is Inerrancy a Fundamentalist Doctrine?

Steve Bailey — Sat, 05 Feb 2022 19:30:39 -0000

Unfortunately your demonizing of what you call the “ultra-inclusivity, ultra-pseudo-progressivist tribe” is totally inappropriate and based on shallow understandings and lack of insight into the dangerous situation that “the inerrancy tribe” has created for American Evangelicalism - which has now become a dangerous, cultish caricature of Christian faith and life. I recommend a thorough reading of Kristin Kobes Du Mez’s book “Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrputed a Faith and Fractured a Nation” in order to appreciate what ‘evangelicalism’ has done to the United States of America. Tragic indeed. “Inerrancy” is not the issue; faithfulness to the Gospel of Jesus is. And it is sorely lacking in most ‘evangelical’ circles.

Re: Is Inerrancy a Fundamentalist Doctrine?

Kenneth Macari — Sat, 05 Feb 2022 18:24:03 -0000

Peter Enns teaching at Eastern University (where my children attended) is a VERY different story. He has pivoted TOO far from his brilliant earlier books as his Exodus commentary for Zondervan. His latest books and lectures are VERY post-modernist and TRULY breathe of the ultra-inclusivist, ultra-pseudo-progressivist tribe.(think Diana Butler Bass, Brian McLaren, Duncan Pyle, Nadia Bolz-Weber and Brian Zahn)

Re: Is Inerrancy a Fundamentalist Doctrine?

Kenneth Macari — Sat, 05 Feb 2022 18:14:23 -0000

Calvin and Luther are the transitional figures from medieval to Renaissance

Re: Is Inerrancy a Fundamentalist Doctrine?

Kenneth Macari — Sat, 05 Feb 2022 18:11:16 -0000

Dr. Michaels was my professor at Gordon Conwell when I was a student in the 1970's. His New Testament Theology course opened new vistas for me. Dr. Michaels contributed an article to a book Inerrancy and Common Sense in which he articulated a preference for " infallibility" over "inerrancy." He then wrote a book in the late 1970's entitled Jesus: Servant and Son. This book probably reflected a too much redaction criticism. I read it--it is classic orthodox Christology! The Gordon-Conwell political winds blew against him and he resigned. Dr. Michaels then transitioned to Southwest Missouri State University aslo teaching at Bangor and Fuller Seminaries.

Re: Is Inerrancy a Fundamentalist Doctrine?

Tom Hanson — Sat, 05 Feb 2022 07:29:19 -0000

How can you possibly call Calvin a medieval Christian?

Re: What Happens in the Lord’s Supper and Why it’s a Big Deal

Kyllein MacKellerann — Sun, 16 Jan 2022 17:41:10 -0000

Let us face facts: Communion, whether the spirit of Jesus is there or not, is Ritual Cannibalism. Think about it: The belief is that you are 1: Eating the Flesh of Christ (in the wafer) and drinking His blood (in the wine/grape juice/fruit juice/ etc.)
Why? Ritual Cannibalism is symbolically the assumption of some person's nature by eating their flesh and drinking their blood; in essence one becomes the desired person by digestion, absorbing the "Sacred Nature" / Spirit / Mana / whatever by consuming that nature.
Ritual Cannibalism is actually an act of profound respect and an honest desire to gain some part of the sanctified subject by literally consuming them and incorporating their nature into one's own.
Admittedly, not all cultures see this as a good thing... allegedly, Moctezuma told Cortez, "You EAT your God?" since apparently this sort of cannibalism was forbidden in Aztec society (although other forms weren't).
So eat your God and by doing so gain some degree of that God's sanctity and vitrue. Jesus knew what he was doing. He understood the symbolic nature of the feast he'd created.
So: Eat Jesus and for heaven's sake, TRY to be like him...Ok?

Re: Rom 3:21-26 – Translates, Paraphrase, Notes

Gary M — Sun, 09 Jan 2022 15:28:15 -0000

Off topic question: In what type of body did Moses and Elijah appear to the disciples on the Mount of Transfiguration and how were their bodies different from the body of Jesus in his post-death appearances? Thanks.

Re: What is Biblicism?

Alin Christoph Cucu — Sun, 28 Nov 2021 03:27:13 -0000

Very good and helpful article, succinctly sums up the core ideas of biblicism. Contrary to the way the post makes it appear biblicism is not per se self-refuting, but only to the extent to which it invokes extrabiblical guidelines to interpret Scripture.

Re: Sandra Richter Responds to John Piper

Chris Arch — Wed, 24 Nov 2021 10:42:32 -0000

I am sorry, but a theologian with Dr. Richter's reputation, training, and influence should not make as basic of a theological error as she does in this brief response. "Reality is that the Holy Spirit is the head of the Church..." Better scan your notes for Ecclesiology 101, I believe you will find Jesus Christ to be head of the Church and not the Holy Spirit (Col. 1:17-18a; Eph. 5:22-25).

Re: The Case for the Dynamic View of Biblical Inspiration

Gary M — Tue, 16 Nov 2021 15:11:15 -0000

Protestants are great about denouncing the "infallible" pronouncements of Catholic popes...except when it comes to the inspiration of the New Testament, then they appeal to the pronouncements of "pope" Peter and "pope" Paul. The truth is, there is no good evidence that the New Testament is divinely inspired. Jesus left no letters nor did he commission anyone to write his message for him. Muslims and Mormons have much better evidence for the divine inspiration of their holy books than do Christians.

https://lutherwasnotbornaga...

Re: Plenary Verbal Inspiration and its Problems

Gary M — Tue, 16 Nov 2021 01:21:01 -0000

The Koran and The Book of Mormon have more evidence supporting their divine inspiration than does the New Testament. Why do Protestant apologists appeal to Peter and Paul for their belief in the divine inspiration of the New Testament? When exactly did God make Peter or Paul the infallible vicar of Christ on earth? When it comes to the divine inspiration of the New Testament, are Protestant apologists papists?

https://lutherwasnotbornaga...

Re: The Myth of Tolerant Paganism

kn83 — Mon, 15 Nov 2021 02:32:50 -0000

The so-called "hardline" Muslims (Salafis/Wahhabis) aren't actual traditionalists, they are modern revisionists like all other religious fundamentalists.

" Lots of non-Middle Eastern Muslims don't know what the Qu'ran says on many subjects, and thus aren't really bothered about certain matters that might be considered sycnretistic"

That's just a Western myth, and statically is actually the other way around, its the Middle Eastern Muslims that are often less educated on the Quran than Muslims from certain other regions due to lower levels of religiosity.

Re: Do We Need a Code of Ethics for Mega-Pastors Who Write?

Rodrigo Avila — Tue, 05 Oct 2021 17:15:02 -0000

This is a false accusation. Here's an article written by Phil Johnson in which he explains the process of editing MacArthur´s sermons: http://teampyro.blogspot.co...

Re: Before I Went to Seminary I Thought That …

Steven Watson — Sat, 25 Sep 2021 12:32:22 -0000

I'll still laugh and point at the majority of you, but > Xtianity: It is more than just a joke.

There were a lot of things that went into me walking away, but Fr. Peyton getting his own parish certainly had something to do with it. Amongst other things Xtianity should be about good humour, and Fr. Peyton's sermons were very good humour while being very good teaching.

Re: Rom 3:21-26 – Translates, Paraphrase, Notes

Steven Watson — Sat, 25 Sep 2021 10:31:51 -0000

dia pistis Iēsous Christ I suspect the ambiguity, both here and in other places, is deliberate and being all things to all men Paul means both.

Re: Philo, the Two Powers within Israel’s God, and 1 Cor 8:6

an old scribe — Fri, 24 Sep 2021 00:24:46 -0000

Second Temple Judaism spoke of YHWH being two "prescences". After Christianity the rabbis declared this idea a heresy.

Re: Rom 3:21-26 – Translates, Paraphrase, Notes

James Allman — Thu, 23 Sep 2021 16:54:49 -0000

Good stuff, Mike! Thanks for posting this.

Re: God Promises Blessings Not Prosperity

Enzo De Vincentis — Wed, 22 Sep 2021 20:17:32 -0000

You say "who can lend........." well look at this verse - Pro 19:17 He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the LORD; and that which he hath given will he pay him again. Blessings to you!

Re: God Promises Blessings Not Prosperity

Chris Goswami — Wed, 22 Sep 2021 04:06:42 -0000

Thank you for a very clear explanation of blessing V prosperity Michael!

Re: Romans 13:1-7 – Translates, Paraphrase, and Notes

Roger McKinney — Fri, 17 Sep 2021 18:21:05 -0000

Good points! This passage us similar to Ephesians 6 telling women to submit to husbands. No one would argue that is an absolute command or that the husband has the authority to do anything to the wife he wants.

Maybe for rhetorical reasons, Paul starts both with what appears to be a shocking absolute statement. But at the end he tempers the command to wives by telling them to respect their husbands.

In a similar way, Paul limits the authority if governments to punishing evil doers in vs 4.

Husbands and governments are under Christ's authority and have only the authority he gives them.

Re: Theological Anthropology Rejigged

Joshua — Tue, 07 Sep 2021 10:45:13 -0000

Good questions. Thanks for your interaction. I just saw this post, so I am just now responding. I engage in one way or another with all these issues in the intro referred to in the article above. I agree there are several passages that use a term in reference to both the part and the whole (i.e., merism). This is often done with respect to both the body and the soul used together (or one may be implied). When referring to whole people, the OT Scripture often use the designation 'soul' or 'living soul' to refer to the whole person, which is made sense of by an anthropology that takes seriously the fact that humans are at their core, souls.

Concerning the resurrection of the body and the immortality of the soul, I see these as related to the purpose of humankind. Humans are set apart to experience the vision of God. Now, there are different views on 'when' that begins (e.g., the disembodied state or resurrection) or the degree to which those occur. Certainly, Christ's resurrection body is necessary for the salvation of all mankind. There are reasons why we are resurrected as well, if we have an anthropology that makes sense of the fact that I am naturally embodied and function normally with a body and flourish with a body along with all of its powers and capacities or structure that is conducive to the soul.

I do take it that the biblical view is the traditional view. Certainly there needs to be more nuance than that, but the common or normative voice in the tradition is basically right and helps us, moderns, to capture all aspects of Scripture without having to pick and choose one aspect at the expense of another.

Re: Christ as “Firstborn”

Patrick — Mon, 06 Sep 2021 09:53:16 -0000

I think a textual case can be made that prototikos also means pre eminence