Greetings to all,
I once came across something in Richard Swinburne's Revelation: From Metaphor to Analogy that might interest my blog readers.
The Oxford University professor writes:
"There are scriptural passages which taken with their
normal meanings imply doctrines contrary to later
orthodoxy: for example Christ's statement in St John's
Gospel (14:28) that 'the Father is greater than I.'
There are other scriptural passages which are
ambiguous, but which perhaps more naturally seem to
imply doctrines contrary to later orthodoxy, for
instance the reference to Christ in the Epistle to the
Colossians (1:15) as 'the first born of all creation.'
What rather has happened is that one party in the
Church proposed, and eventually a Church proclaimed as
official doctrine, one interpretation which they claim
is the most plausible interpretation of the Message of
Scripture and Church tradition as a whole. This forces
them to claim that certain past ways of worship were
misleading, and certain statements of past theologians
false, and that certain passages of Scripture have to
be interpreted with other than their normal meanings
(i.e. their meanings if taken in isolation)."
See page 138 of Revelation. This quote is taken from the Clarendon Press, 1992 edition.
Sporadic theological and historical musings by Edgar Foster (Ph.D. in Theology and Religious Studies and one of Jehovah's Witnesses).
HI Edgar.
ReplyDeleteYes, very appropriate.
The ( forced ) interpretation verses the ( natural ) interpretation.
QUOTE: "...but which perhaps - ( more ) naturally - seem to
imply doctrines contrary to later orthodoxy..."
QUOTE: "...This forces
them to claim that certain ( past ) ways of worship were
misleading, and certain statements of ( past ) theologians
false, and that certain passages of Scripture ( have to
be ) interpreted with other than their normal meanings..."
Yes, such as Origen, Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Dionysius, were to Rufinus in his "On the Corruption of Origen's Works."
Such as, Basil's coments about Gregory of Thaumturgus etc.
Rufinus went as far as to say "...ALL..." the older Chrisitan writers had been corrupted in a worldwide conspiracy by the Arians.
Yes, 2nd Century "Orthodoxy" (for want of a better word) had, now, (later), become embarassing.
You could also say, since they now had gone in for an "un-natural" interpretation, it's easy to see how they adopted the ideas, concepts and language of those who were ( earlier ) considered to be heretics in Tri{3}nitarian theology.
Hi Mt13:
ReplyDeleteCrouzel (the famous Origen scholar tried to whitewash Origen's record by arguing that he did not believe in the Arian type of subordinationism, which is slightly misleading. Athanasius also attempted to make Dionysius of Alexandria's statements conform to orthodoxy. But see RHC Hanson's big study on the Arian Controversy. I've quoted Crouzel in my Christology and the Trinity. He says that if we impute a certain understanding of subordinationism, essentially all of the early fathers would be considered heretical. And we can't have that. :)
Thanks for the reference of RHC Hanson's work.
ReplyDeleteIt's very detailed and a valuable reference source.
Interesting couple of quotes from his work:
LATIN TEXT: “...Primus factus creaturae est, secundus hominis vel humani generis, ut ait apostolus...” - (8, 11 (? ll ), 10-11 Haussleiter.)
VICTORINUS OF PETAVIUM (circa. C.E.): “...He is made first of the creation and second of man or of the human race ...” - (Page 76-77, “De Fabrica Mundi,”The search for the Christian doctrine of God: the Arian controversy 318-381
By Richard Patrick Crosland Hanson, R. P. Hanson.)
[FOOTNOTE]: Mentioned as being martyred in Diocletians persecution by Jerome “De Viris Illustribus,” LXXIV.
I would translate:
"...He is the first made of the creatures..."
LATIN TEXT: “...Iseum Christum ante originem saeculi spiritaliter apud patrem genitum...” - (Comm. In Apoc. XI.I, Page 96,6,7.)
“...Jesus Christ spiritually begoteen by the Father before the origin of the world...” - (Page 77 The search for the Christian doctrine of God: the Arian controversy 318-381 By Richard Patrick Crosland Hanson, R. P. Hanson.)