Link for Open Access Book About Justin Martyr and His Dialogue With Trypho

See https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/oa-mono/10.4324/9781351243490/jews-heretics-matthijs-den-dulk

Many thanks to a reader and friend (Roman) for alerting me and others to this book.

Revelation 1:3 (Rogers and Rogers Comments)

Greek: μακάριος ὁ ἀναγινώσκων καὶ οἱ ἀκούοντες τοὺς λόγους τῆς προφητείας καὶ τηροῦντες τὰ ἐν αὐτῇ γεγραμμένα, ὁ γὰρ καιρὸς ἐγγύς.

"Blessed is he that readeth and they that hear the words of this prophecy and keep those things which are written therein for the time is at hand" (Revelation 1:3 KJV)

anadiplosis in James 1:3-4

Greek: γινώσκοντες ὅτι τὸ δοκίμιον ὑμῶν τῆς πίστεως κατεργάζεται ὑπομονήν·ἡ δὲ ὑπομονὴ ἔργον τέλειον ἐχέτω, ἵνα ἦτε τέλειοι καὶ ὁλόκληροι, ἐν μηδενὶ λειπόμενοι.

Definition for anadiplosis: "repetition in the first part of a clause or sentence of a prominent word from the latter part of the preceding clause or sentence, usually with a change or extension of meaning."

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/anadiplosis

See also James 1:19-20; 26-27. 

In James 1:3-4, the prominent word is "endurance" (ὑπομονήν and ἡ ὑπομονὴ)

Sources:

https://scholar.sun.ac.za/bitstreams/f7fa7aa5-b1ca-4d2f-904d-724a89651357/download

https://diu.edu/documents/jlcr/jlcr-3.1-2022.pdf

Richard A. Lanham. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London: University of California Press, 1991. Second Edition, Page 10.

Two Books I Love (Recommended Works About Aquinas and The Universe)-Images

Articles About Psalm 2:7 (Eternal Generation?)

Some Trinitarians attempt to invoke Psalm 2:7 as proof for their eternal generation doctrine. However, when the verse is read in context, this application of scripture to a doctrine seems like one big stretch. 

For some informative discussions, see the following:

https://www.thetorah.com/article/psalm-2-is-the-messiah-the-son-of-god

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/scottish-journal-of-theology/article/abs/psalm-27-and-the-concept-of/38E35D8CE5AF5718E0C3645047F93D8B

https://dbts.edu/2019/03/11/is-christs-receipt-of-life-in-himself-john-526-proof-of-eternal-generation/

https://www.atsjats.org/tornalejo-reexamining-the-eternal-generation-of-the-son-ats-2016.pdf

Ephesians 3:11-"Eternal Purpose"?

Two definitions given for the word "purpose" are:

A) "the reason for which something exists or is done, made, used, etc."

Synonyms: target, objective, object, rationale, point

B) "an intended or desired result; end; aim; goal."

See https://www.dictionary.com/browse/purpose

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that Jehovah God has an eternal purpose: he initially made the earth to be inhabited by righteous people. That was his original telos. But although Adam and Eve sinned and that purpose has not been realized yet, we believe it will be fulfilled since God's word cannot return to him "void" and God cannot lie (Isaiah 55:10-11; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18). However, some have criticized this way of framing, articulating, and thinking about what God does, is doing, and will do. Hence, do Witnesses have a sound basis for believing that God has an eternal purpose?

Ephesians 3:11 in Greek: κατὰ πρόθεσιν τῶν αἰώνων ἣν ἐποίησεν ἐν τῷ χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ τῷ κυρίῳ ἡμῶν,

C.H. Talbert writes (Ephesians and Colossians, pp. 99-100):

"This divine purpose—the reunification of the cosmos—now made known to the unruly powers is an eternal purpose, which he accomplished by means of the Christ, Jesus our Lord (en tō Christō, understood instrumentally, that is, by his death; Hoehner 2002, 464), by means of whom (en hō, understood instrumentally) we continually have boldness and access with confidence (cf. Heb 4:16; 10:19) through his faithfulness (3:11–12; pisteōs autou understood as a subjective genitive, thus Christ’s faithfulness; Foster 2002)."

Other commentaries and sources likewise point out that Ephesians 3:11 is talking about an eternal purpose formed in Christ or a purpose of the ages. Compare Genesis 3:15; Galatians 3:16. We have good reason for believing that God long ago formed an eternal purpose that will be fulfilled. 

Open Access Book: From Erasmus to Maius (The History of Codex Vaticanus in New Testament Textual Scholarship)

 https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783111453651/html

Making Righteous Judgments (Modified Talk)

The Insight book makes this illuminating observation about Jehovah’s righteousness:

“Jehovah himself is called ‘the abiding place of righteousness.’ (Jeremiah 50:7) He is therefore the Righteous One, and all righteousness on the part of his creatures comes from their relationship with him.”

While tonight’s material specifically applies to congregation elders, we all have the ability to learn about Bible principles that can help us to make righteous judgments in imitation of Jehovah.

The inspired writer Moses outlines the first Bible principle we're concentrating on tonight in Deuteronomy 16:18-19. (Read)

Firstly, elders must be impartial when making judgments (Acts 10:34-35). Bribes/favors should not be allowed to pervert justice or make us blind to wrongdoing and corruption. Nor should special treatment be shown to someone because of his/her race, ethnicity, familial relationship or socioeconomic status: we should be impartial like our God.

Secondly, elders must establish the facts when judging within the congregation. Notice Deuteronomy 17:4-6. (Read)

God adhered to this principle by presenting his Son to the world as mankind’s Savior. Jesus said: “In your own Law it is written, ‘The witness of two men is true.’ I am one that bears witness about myself, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me.”​—John 8:17, 18.

Thirdly, elders should get help for difficult cases of judgment. Deuteronomy 17:8-9 applied to ancient priests and judges. Similarly, elders may consult other elders, the circuit overseer or the branch. There is wisdom in a multitude of counselors (Proverbs 15:22).

Conditional and Counterfactual Statements (Logic)

Truth-functional logic is one of those funny things wherein two components of a conditional statement (P & Q) might be false, but yet the entire conditional statement would still be true. The Philonian interpretation of conditional statements teaches us that a conditional utterance is only false when the antecedent (P) is true, but the consequent (Q) is false.

For instance, "If all bachelors are married, then Immanuel [a bachelor] is married" is only false when the antecedent is true, but the consequent is false. Hence, although both parts of the statement could be false, the statement as a whole would still be true according to the Philonian interpretation of conditional statements. 

On the other hand, the truth value of counterfactual statements is ascertained on a case-by-case basis. The truth value of "If it were the case that P, then it would be the case that Q," can be sorted out by looking at substitution instances of contrary to fact P and Q utterances; in other words, we're now differentiating between material implication and strict implication.

David Lewis distinguishes counterfactual operators from modal operators. What I believe Lewis wants to say is that there's a difference between "If horses were wishes, then beggars would ride" and "If horses were wishes, then beggars might ride." I should say that he's making a distinction between "would" and "might" counterfactuals since both verbs are modal.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dialectical-school/

Appreciating the Longest Psalm and Biblical Genealogies

Written back in 2014:

I recently had a gentleman tell me that the 119th psalm is "awful" (or something to that effect) since it's long (176 verses) and it keeps mentioning laws, statutes, reminders (etc.). He just could not make sense of this psalm. I tried to reason with him on the purpose(s) of this biblical song; it elevates God's Torah and teaches us the value of divine guidance, but admittedly, trying to read this psalm or any other without some background can be tough.

At one Witness school I attended, we were given the assignment (some years ago) of reading a chunk of 1 Chronicles along with other scriptures. Now keep in mind that this chapter is nothing but genealogy, and it would have been the first time I had read that section of the Bible. I remember looking at the assignment, closing my book, and reading something else. No way was I going to read an ongoing list of men who begat other men who begat . . .

I now appreciate those parts that were once considered boring. Having some background information for "dry" parts of Scripture immeasurably enriches one's reading, so be patient and keep at it, if you can sympathize with the man mentioned at the outset.

Christ Qua ἱλάσμος For "Our Sins" (1 John 2:1-2)

In 1 John 2:1-2, the apostle professes that Christ is ἱλάσμος for "our sins," but not for "ours" alone. To demonstrate the referent of the pronoun "our," I believe some good verses to adduce would be the following:

"But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge" (1 John 2:20 ESV).

"As for you, the anointing which you received from him remains in you, and you don't need for anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is no lie, and even as it taught you, you will remain in him" (1 John 2:27 WEB).

"beloved, now, children of God are we, and it was not yet manifested what we shall be, and we have known that if he may be manifested, like him we shall be, because we shall see him as he is" (1 John 3:2 YLT)

1 John 3:2 is a complex scripture, but it seems that the most likely explanation of the passage is that it references the Father, whom anointed Christians will one day "beatifically" see.

Romans 8:38-39 ("nor angels")

"For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 8:38-9 NRSV).

I've heard it suggested that the angels who cannot separate Christians from God's love in Christ Jesus are not demons, but holy angels. Or some claim they're possibly "angelic" humans in the ecclesia. However,  Paul evidently uses the word "angels" sometimes to reference demons. See 1 Corinthians 4:9; 6:3; 11:10; 13:1; 2 Corinthians 11:14. Compare the usage in 2 Corinthians 12:7; Galatians 1:8; 4:14.

Douglas Moo (The Epistle to the Romans, page 545):

Words of the Month (July 2024)

1. Aphaeresis-The Encyclopedia of Rhetoric defines this term as "a subtractive metaphoneme that omits sounds at the beginning of a word." An example of this device is found in Shakespeare: "Use every man after his desert, and who should 'scape whipping?" (Hamlet 2.2.529-530)

2. Occasionalism-Malebranche and al-Ghazali apparently held to this line of thought. Simply put, it  teaches that God makes our thoughts and bodily motions coincide and that God is the only cause of our mental and somatic activities.

SEP: "A full-blown occasionalist, like Malebranche, then, might be described as one who subscribes to the following two tenets: (1) the positive thesis that God is the only genuine cause; (2) the negative thesis that no creaturely cause is a genuine cause but at most an occasional cause."

3. Inter alios/inter alia-See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inter%20alios

Pondering Genesis 28:11-12 (Ladder, Stairs, Ramp)

Looking at Genesis 28:11-12 again, it's funny how new details become salient each time and things become clearer with one more read. The word normally translated "ladder" (sullam) in that account could be rendered "stairway" or ramp. Moreover, the ladder/stairway could have been made from stone steps.

Another important detail is that Jehovah (YHWH) possibly was at the top of the ladder on which angels ascended and descended (Genesis 28:13) or others understand the text to say YHWH was beside Jacob. The Hebrew allows for different renderings, but I still have my reservations about the idea that Jacob beheld a heavenly sanctuary at the top of the ladder. Of course, he was having a dream/vision, which is another thing to keep in mind.

Revelation 3:12 (Latin Vulgate)

The resurrected Lord Christ Jesus utters these words to the first-century Christian congregation in Philadelphia (western Asia Minor):

"qui vicerit faciam illum columnam in templo Dei mei et foras non egredietur amplius et scribam super eum nomen Dei mei et nomen civitatis Dei mei novae Hierusalem quae descendit de caelo a Deo meo et nomen meum novum" (Revelation 3:12 Biblia Vulgata)

Freed on Colossians 1:15

 

Chomskyan Top-Down and Bottom-Up Processing (Deep Structure and Surface Structure)

In any conversation or discourse,  there normally is a lingual sender and a receiver. How does the lingual sender convey ideas/messages to the receiver? How does the receiver decode the message initiated by the sender and in turn send reciprocating messages? Chomsky's answer appears to be or have been top-down and bottom-up processing. When producing speech, the sender engages in top-down processing: he or she gradually moves from abstract and regulative meaning (deep structure) to lingual structures like phrases, sentences, morphemes (words, prefixes, and suffixes) and phonemes (minimal units of sound). In essence, the speaker glides from the abstract underlying representation of a sentence to the surface structure when producing speech. Conversely, when decoding the message of the sender, the receiver decodes the phonemes and deciphers the morphemes of the sender (and so forth). Only after decoding the basic sounds and words of a sentence can the receiver unravel sentential meaning. While this process sounds complex, it remarkably happens in a matter of seconds (Morris 236-240). What is responsible for this remarkable procedure? What are the mechanics of this process?

Ever since the nineteenth century, psychologists have been aware of two significant cerebral areas that could potentially explain Chomskyan transformations via top-down and bottom-up processing. These two areas respectively are Broca's and Wernicke's areas. Wernicke's area is located in "the left posterior superior temporal gyrus." and seems to be responsible for understanding speech. Broca's area is located in the left frontal lobe of the cerebral cortex and could be vital for the utilization of language. Some describe the location of Broca's area as "a cortical region in the posterior inferior frontal gyrus" and note that the area "is still considered to be critically involved in speech production." See  https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1414491112?doi=10.1073%2Fpnas.1414491112 and https://carta.anthropogeny.org/moca/topics/brocas-and-wernickes-areas#:~:text=Broca%27s%20and%20Wernicke%27s%20areas%20are%20cortical%20areas%20specialized%20for%20production,left%20posterior%20superior%20temporal%20gyrus.

Some psycholinguists have likewise posited that entities labeled images, concepts, and prototypes are the building blocks of thought. For instance, seeing a cat generates the image of a cat; nevertheless, the mind does not merely catalog the cat as a single instance or token, but the human intellect conceptually places specific animals or events into ontological categories. Eleanor Rosch states that we construct mental prototypes, which help us to distinguish one animal from another. For example, we know the difference prototypically between a mouse and rat. But although these prototypes evidently originate from our somatic experiences and may be derived by dint of induction, they still remain ever "fuzzy."

The processes hitherto described seem complex, yet George Yule insists that the description given here is a "massively oversimplified version of what may actually take place" (164). Language largely remains mysterious to linguists and there is not a "logical, internally consistent theory that neatly ties up brain, language, and mind" (Restak 230231).

See https://corpling.hypotheses.org/252

Is Greed, Avarice or Covetousness Good?

"But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people" (Ephesians 5:3 NIV).

Contra Gordon Gekko, greed is not good.

The Reliability of Jehovah God's Spoken Word (Gary V. Smith)-Isaiah 40:8

The Hebrew text does not mention the “glory” (NIV follows the Old Greek translation here)52 of the grass or humanity that will wither and fade. Humanity's “faithfulness, dependability” 53 fades and is like the dependability of a bloom on a flower. The people who oppose God's plans will fall just like the flower petals of a rose when God comes in all his glory. In contrast to man's fading lack of dependability is the sure and totally dependable word of the Lord (40:5,8). One should not trust other people or put any hope in them, for God's promises are man's only solid and a sure source of strength (55:10-11). The contrast is clear; flowers “fall,” but God's word “will stand.” What he promises will happen.

Smith, Gary V. The New American Commentary - Isaiah 40-66: 15B (Kindle Locations 2548-2554). B&H Publishing. Kindle Edition. 

[Applies to the written Word too-EF]

Hebrews 6:19

Greek (WH): ἣν ὡς ἄγκυραν ἔχομεν τῆς ψυχῆς, ἀσφαλῆ τε καὶ βεβαίαν καὶ εἰσερχομένην εἰς τὸ ἐσώτερον τοῦ καταπετάσματος,

"We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner place behind the curtain" (Hebrews 6:19 ESV)

Smyth's Greek Grammar: 2989. Relative ὡς as, how is originally an ablative (in which way) from the relative stem [ιγλιδε]ο-, whence come also ὅς, ἥ, ὅ. For the -ς, see 341. Relative ὡς has various uses as an adverb or a conjunction, all of which represent the primitive meaning.

The occurrence of ἣν tells us that ὡς functions as a relative in Hebrews 6:19.

ἄγκυραν signifies an anchor or hook (Acts 27:29-30, 40).

Do the words ἀσφαλῆ τε καὶ βεβαίαν modify "anchor" or "hope"?

Christopher W. Cowan answers:

While ἄγκυραν is the closest noun in agreement, commentators have frequently found the image of an anchor entering through the curtain into the heavenly holy place to be problematic.96 As a result, many have argued that either (1) “sure and steadfast” are modifying “anchor,” while the participle, “enters,” reaches back to modify “hope,”97 or (2) all three attributes modify “hope.”98 But such concerns seem unnecessary. Of course anchors do not reach up into the heavens, nor do they enter into the holy place! But the imagery accomplishes what the author intends: to illustrate and reinforce his message of a hope that is firmly secured.99 Moreover, attempts to argue that the attributes modify “hope” but not “anchor” seem hollow since the author identifies the two—hope is “like an anchor.”100

See Cowan, “Confident Of Better Things”: Assurance Of Salvation In The Letter To The Hebrews, page 148 (2012 Ph.D. Diss.).

Compare https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2014/12/jesus-entered-within-curtain-how.html

Morphology, Syntax, and the Wonder of Language

Morphemes are minimal units of meaning,  but what a difference they make. The Greek morpheme δελφύς/Δελφός means "womb." However, if one prefixes an alpha to it, the word refers to a brother. Conversely, ἄτομος contains an alpha-privative so that the prefix negates the morpheme to produce the meaning, "uncuttable" or "indivisible," etc. The same phenomenon occurs in Latin with the morpheme utilis. By simply adding in to this adnominal, a "useful" tool becomes a "useless" one. These shifts in morphological signification take place due to the derivational feature of morphology.

On the other hand, syntax refers to word order or the architecture of linguistic signs. Cambridge Dictionary defines syntax as "the grammatical arrangement of words in a sentence." The importance of syntax depends on the extent of lingual inflection that a language possesses, yet this does not mean that syntax goes out the window when languages are less inflected with respect to morphology: syntax is still important whether one speaks English, German, French or Spanish.

For example, English, Greek, Latin and other languages distinguish between grammatical subjects and objects (e.g., "The dog bit the man") but the latter tongues indicate which word is the subject or object by means of morphological inflections. For example, in the Latin sentence canis mordet hominem, one knows which word is subject primarily through recognizing morphemic inflections such that canis is the subject and hominem is the direct object of mordet. Furthermore, Latin and Greek display syntactic patterns that are recurrent (subject--verb-object), so syntax is important even in highly inflected languages.

Language is a fascinating wonder that is unique to human beings: it is "one of the skills that separates humans from the rest of the animal kingdom" (Pat Kuhl qtd. in Restak 230). The human ability to utter meaningful sentences is another indication that we are made in a wonderful and awe-inspiring way (Psalm 139:14).

Further Reading:

Fasold, Ralph W., and Jeff Connor-Linton, eds. 2006. An Introduction to Language and Linguistics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Restak, Richard. The Mind. New York: Bantam, 1988.

https://petaa.edu.au/litportal/litportal/Resources-for-Curriculum/Upper-primary/Spelling/Morphemic-awareness-upper.aspx

Job Was Chaste (Modified Talk)-Job 31

James 3:17 states that divine wisdom (the wisdom from above) is first of all "chaste" or clean. As we consider Job's example of chasteness tonight, our focus will be on moral and spiritual chasteness. Furthermore, we'll focus on chastity when it comes to our personal behavior and entertainment choices. So let's consider how Job remained chaste, then discuss how we can imitate his example.

Job 31:1 (read): Job made a covenant with his eyes. The Insight book gives this definition for "covenant": "An agreement between two or more persons to do or refrain from doing some act; a compact; a contract." We could equally define covenant as a binding or solemn agreement. The point is that covenant-making is serious; it is not something that we should take take lightly.

Job concluded a contract with his eyes; he refused to look improperly at another woman. Job recognized the strong link between seeing and desiring.

How can imitate Job?

[Show picture]

We too can strike a covenant with our eyes by making a firm resolve to avoid looking at others improperly and we can avoid pornography, which is implicitly designed to stir up improper desire via the eyes.

A second way that we can remain chaste is found in Job 31:2-3 (read).

We need to think about the potential consequences of our actions. Notice the powerful question that Job posed in verse 3.

Before violating Jehovah's laws on fornication or his principles on viewing unclean entertainment, we could ask ourselves, what are the potential consequences of committing porneia? Some of the bad results could be sexually transmitted diseases, unwanted pregnancies, abortions, ruined relationships, a guilty conscience and a damaged relationship with Jehovah. Like Job, we need to think seriously about the potential consequences of our actions. Are a few minutes of pleasure worth losing our eternal inheritance?

To further assist us, Job mentions a final safeguard in Job 31:4 (read).

The eyes of Jehovah are everywhere (Proverbs 15:3). If we keep this attitude, it can be a protection for us. Whether at school, at work or alone at home, may we always remember that Jehovah considers our steps and he can read our hearts. 

Job's example teaches us how to remain chaste. An essential part of keeping clean is making a firm resolve to avoid impropriety with our eyes. In line with Job, Jesus later warned that anyone who keeps on looking at a woman so as to have passion for her in his heart has already committed adultery in his heart (Matthew 5:28). This scripture reveals that chastity is not just a matter of the mind, but it's a heart matter as well. By imitating Job, we'll be happier and experience the joy of pleasing Jehovah our God. 

Words of the Month (June 2024)

1. Kakistocracy (noun)- "government by the worst citizens." See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kakistocracy

The word has a Greek etymology.

2. Apodeictic-"unquestionably true by virtue of demonstration"

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/apodeictic

The adjective has Latin and Greek roots.

3. "Pusillanimity" which means "Want of that firmness and strength of mind which constitutes courage or fortitude; weakness of spirit; cowardliness; that feebleness of mind which shrinks from trifling or imaginary dangers" (Webster's 1928 English Dictionary. From the Latin abstract noun "pusillanimitas.")

4. Egoism-"Ethics. the view that morality ultimately rests on self-interest."

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/egoism

Chomsky, Surface Structure and Deep Structure (Linguistics)

[This is part of some research I did years ago. Please, let's not relitigate whether Chomsky is right or not: I merely want to discuss surface and deep structure here. On-topic comments welcomed. Thank you.]

In the 1960s, Noam Chomsky discovered that "language has an outer and inner aspect" (Chomsky 32). He called the outer aspect of language "surface structure" and the inner aspect he termed "deep structure." Surface structure refers to "the particular words and phrases used to make up a sentence" (Morris 237). Yule defines surface structure as 'the syntactic form taken in actual sentences.' Conversely, deep structure is "the underlying abstract structure that determines [the] semantic interpretation" of a sentence (Chomsky 33). The deep structural component of language is what enables linguists to study the various language systems of the world: it provides the basis for a universal grammar that operates according to certain well-defined rules despite numerous variations in surface structure (Black 18). The example that psychologist Charles Morris gives demonstrates this fact:

The ocean is unusually calm tonight.

Tonight the ocean is particularly calm.

Compared to most nights, tonight the ocean is calm.

These examples indicate that language is systematic and contains not only a surface, but also an inherent or underlying grammatical structure. Every language has both a surface and underlying grammar that determines how sounds and words are combined and utilized to communicate meaning within the language. Two major components of grammar are semantics and syntax.

Sources:

Black, David A. Linguistics for Students of NT Greek: A Survey of Basic Concepts and Applications. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1995.

Chomsky, Noam. Cartesian Linguistics: A Chapter in the History of Rationalist Thought. New York: Harper and Row, 1996.

Morris, Charles, G. Understanding Psychology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1996.

Yule, George. The Study of Language. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996. 

Determinism, Free Will, and Neuroscience

I believe that neuroscience tends to be deterministic. Now to be clear, I would not say that all neuroscientists are determinists but it seems that neuroscience continuously moves in that direction. This point seems to be substantiated by what I've read in one book that covers four views of free will. Furthermore, the late Francis Crick suggested that free will is an illusion created by the brain such that we have a sense of free will, which is not the same thing as having free will:

"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that 'You,' your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules" (Francis Crick, The Astonishing Hypothesis, page 3).

Owen Flanagan (a philosopher and Duke professor of neurobiology) appears to reject free will and views it as a disease while Joel B. Green provides evidence that science is leading us to believe "free won't" is more likely than free will: he too works in neuroscience. Many other examples could be given of neuroscientists who affirm determinism rather than free will. Even the notable Churchlands (Patricia and Paul) are known as "eliminative materialists," which means they want to replace talk of emotions (mental states) with neuroscientific terminology (brain states) and flatten any distinction between the two categories. I would be very surprised if either Patricia or Paul believed in libertarian free will.

To summarize, it is my contention that neuroscience largely tends to be deterministic and increasingly so; on the other hand, there are many neuroscientists who affirm free will for one reason or another. But none of what I say here is meant to be a repudiation of neuroscience in toto: I greatly appreciate its useful insights.

Sources Consulted: Watson, Gary (editor). Free Will. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

Flanagan, Owen J. The Problem of the Soul: Two Visions of Mind and How to Reconcile Them. New York: Basic Books, 2002.

Green, Joel B. Body, Soul, and Human Life: The Nature of Humanity in the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academics, 2008. Print.

See also https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18958759-investigating-life-s-meaning

Christ Condemned Sin "in the flesh" (Romans 8:3)

Jesus was like his brothers/sisters in every way except he was without sin (Hebrews 4:15-16; 1 Peter 2:21-25).

The Apostle Paul writes under inspiration: "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" (Romans 8:3, KJV)

So Christ was manifested in the "likeness" of sinful flesh (ἐν ὁμοιώματι σαρκὸς ἁμαρτίας), but he himself "condemned sin in the flesh" (κατέκρινε τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἐν τῇ σαρκί). Zerwick's Grammatical Analysis of the Greek NT states:

"ὁμοίωμα likeness; not identity, because not prone to sin, not mere resemblance, as truly flesh" (p. 475).

See BDAG Greek-English Lexicon for more info on ὁμοίωμα.

The Bible's View of Prostitution

Does the Bible ever say there is nothing wrong with prostitution or with being a prostitute? No it does not.

https://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/P/prostitute.html

https://www.openbible.info/topics/prostitution

https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/pure-worship/survives/bring-end-to-your-prostitution/

https://biblehub.com/topical/p/prostitute.htm

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/ancient-cultures/ancient-israel/sacred-prostitution-in-the-story-of-judah-and-tamar/

https://www.proquest.com/openview/86440a167e523162b886d0222e80f4f9/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/prostitution

Galatians 3:19 (NIV)-"given through angels"

Greek (WH): Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος; τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν προσετέθη, ἄχρις ἂν ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται, διαταγεὶς δι' ἀγγέλων ἐν χειρὶ μεσίτου·

"The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator" (NIV)

The context strongly indicates that the Mosaic Law is the ὁ νόμος under discussion in this text (Galatians 3:17-18). The Law was "added" until Messiah should come in order that transgressions could be made manifest. Moreover, Paul writes that ὁ νόμος had become a tutor (παιδαγωγὸς ἡμῶν) until τῆς πίστεως arrived (Galatians 3:24-25).

The Exodus account concerning Sinai is silent about angels transmitting the Law to Moses, but the NT speaks about angels/messengers of ὁ νόμος more than once (Acts 7:53; Hebrews 2:2; compare Acts 7:35, 38). I'm not surprised by Paul's reference since the angels shared in distributing the ten plagues and guided Israel through the wilderness, etc.

For a thorough analysis of the grammar in Galatians 3:19, see Porter, Stanley E., ed. 2019. Paul and Scripture. Leiden: Brill. Pages 327-330.

A Few Recommended Books (May 2024)

                        

Antonio Damasio on Reason

Interesting thought from Antonio Damasio (a "renowned" neurologist):

"Nature appears to have built the apparatus of rationality not just on top of the apparatus of biological regulation, but also from it and with it. The mechanisms for behavior beyond drives and instincts use, I believe, both the upstairs and the downstairs: The neocortex becomes engaged along with the older brain core, and rationality results from their concerted activity." (Descartes' Error, page 128).

Upstairs=neocortex

Downstairs=subcortex

Bibliographical Information: Antonio Damasio, Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Penguin Books, 2005.

Life and Death Are in the Power of the Tongue (Proverbs 18:21)

All of us have to watch  how we use our tongues (how we speak). We're imperfect and prone to "stumble many times" in word and deed (James 3:2). In fact, one proverb warns us that life and death are in the power of the tongue and those who love its fruit will eat the tongue's fruitage (Proverbs 18:21).

The ancients recognized this looming danger: hence, one writing states:

"The human tongue is not free, like some other members of the human body,  but is confined in the mouth, and moreover is constantly in moisture:  yet how many burns can it cause with its sharp edge and its fire. How  much worse then would it have been, were that dangerous member of the  human body possessed of more facilities."--Levit. Rabba 16.

James 3:6 (NAB)-"The tongue is also a fire. It exists among our members as a world of malice, defiling the whole body and setting the entire course of our lives on fire, itself set on fire by Gehenna."

Divine Hiddenness?

I've given little attention to the problem of divine hiddenness, but one treatment of the subject is by Peter van Inwagen. See his book, The Problem of Evil. I read the book some years ago and it covers the logical problem of evil in an interesting way, then discusses divine hiddenness toward the conclusion of the book. By LPE, I mean the supposedly contradictory set of propositions that 1) God is omnipotent; 2) God is omnibenevolent; 3) Evil exists.

Buut regarding the issue of hiddenness, I would say that God is hidden in one sense or Deus absconditus (Exodus 33:20; Isaiah 45:15; John 1:18; 1 John 4:20), but revealed in another sense (Deus revelatus). No one can see his face, yet he speaks face-to-face with Moses (Exodus 33:11). Merold Westphal says we are too ontologically inadequate to see God: having a glimpse of his brilliant doxa would overwhelm us, like looking directly at the sun (Ezekiel 43:2).

On the other hand, God's invisible qualities are clearly perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and divinity (Psalm 19:1-3; Romans 1:20). Paul said that God has not left himself without witness by the rains he provides and the crops that grow (Acts 14:17). Moreover, Jehovah directly communicated with some men, even supplying miraculous evidence that he exists. As someone pointed out earlier, critics might take issue with these accounts, but they illustrate the possibility that God is not completely hidden.

Besides, Peter van Inwagen rightly argues that God wants us to do more than believe in him: he wants humans to love and worship him. If Jehovah always provided visible evidence that he existed, it might conflict with the ultimate goal that he is trying to achieve. The inspired apostle likewise wrote that we walk by faith, not by sight (2 Corinthians 5:8). One day, God will reveal himself in order that all may know he is Jehovah.

The Council of Nicea Ecclesiastically Changed Things (Studer)

"The council of Nicea may with good reason be regarded as signalling a new era of Church history. In fact, it marks the beginning of a close co-operation between the Churches of early Christianity and the Roman empire, which was to bring about unforeseeable consequences for all fields of ecclesiastical life.  As far as the more outward aspect is concerned, a structure was fashioned at that time which resembled a good deal that of the civil organization of the empire, out of which the five great patriarchates were to emerge" (Basil Studer, Trinity and Incarnation, 101).

This relationship affected "all fields of ecclesiastical life" including the liturgy, kerygma, spirituality and theology (102).

Reading Zechariah 12:10---How?

The operative Hebrew words in Zechariah 12:10 are ELAY ET ASERDAQARU ("They shall look upon me whom they have pierced"). S.R. Driver recommends the MT emendation ELAYW ("to him" instead of "upon me") and Driver insists that more than fifty instances in the Hebrew text buttress this reading (See Driver, The Minor Prophets, p. 266).

Even if one reads "upon" or "to me" rather than "to him," it is still possible to understand the text as a reference to the representative of YHWH, that is, His shepherd (compare Zech 11:12-13; 13:7).

Another friend of mine once noted:

"Et-asher [--> 'whom'] is chosen here, as in Jer. 38:9, in the place of the simple 'asher' [whom], to mark 'asher' more clearly as an accusative, since the simple 'asher' might also be rendered 'who pierced (me).'" -- (K-D, Volume 10, page 609.)

Thus, one possible function of ET in Zechariah 12:10 is to clarify and specify the referential significance of the personal object, the one whom is pierced.

Prepare Spiritually As the Fiery-Colored Horse Gallops Along (Modified Talk)

As the end of this system approaches, we can expect more civil unrest, war, and violence to occur. As Revelation 6:4 prophesies, the fiery-colored horse that represents war will continue galloping until Jesus steps in to destroy Satan's godless system of things (compare Zechariah 6:1-2).

Since we can expect more civil unrest in the future, it is imperative for us to be prepared, both spiritually and physically. How can we prepare in both ways?

To prepare spiritually, we should identify Bible principles and scriptural accounts that build our trust in Jehovah and his earthly organization. Moreover, we should strengthen our determination to be neutral regarding this world's political affairs. 1 Peter 4:7-8 likewise emphasizes the need to have intense love for one another, so it is important to build strong friendships within the Christian congregation.

We can prepare physically by having an effective plan to shelter in place and we need to have a reasonable amount of supplies to facilitate such preparation.

What if we have to leave our homes? In that case, we'll need a go bag, personal protective equipment and money, and we'll want to make sure that the elders know how to contact us. Furthermore, we need to know their contact details. Isaiah 32:1-2 reminds us that the elders are a source of protection within the congregation: they have our best interests at heart.

Watch the video

Ask the questions after watching the video

Conclude

Words of the Month (May 2024)

1) Magniloquent:
"speaking in or characterized by a high-flown often bombastic style or manner."

Its usage dates "back to 1650–60; back formation from Latin magniloquentia elevated language, equivalent to magniloqu ( us ) speaking grandly ( magni- magni- + loqu ( ī ) to speak + -us adj. suffix) + -entia -ence.

See https://www.merriam-webster.com/word-of-the-day/magniloquent-2019-03-24?pronunciation&lang=en_us&dir=m&file=magnil02

2) Schonheit (German)-"beauty, fineness, belle." See https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/german-english/schonheit

3) Vermissen (German)-"to miss, to be missing, to fail to see, to regret."

4) Χήρα (Greek)-primarily, a "widow" or a woman left without a husband. See https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.04.0057:entry=xh/ra

Language and the Mind (Richard Restak)

"Language allows us to convey our emotions, to share ideas, to create fresh forms of expression, and to communicate our most intimate thoughts. Without language the very notion of human civilization would be unthinkable. It is not only confirmation of the mind within us; the need to communicate with other humans through language seems as fundamental as the existence of the mind itself" (Richard Restak, The Mind, page 197).

Source: Richard Restak, The Mind. Bantam, NY: 1988.

Compare Psalm 139:14. 

Restak is a neurologist and neuropsychiatrist (born in 1942). 

Titus 2:12 (Divine Χάρις teaches "us")

Greek (WH): παιδεύουσα ἡμᾶς, ἵνα ἀρνησάμενοι τὴν ἀσέβειαν καὶ τὰς κοσμικὰς ἐπιθυμίας σωφρόνως καὶ δικαίως καὶ εὐσεβῶς ζήσωμεν ἐν τῷ νῦν αἰῶνι,

Our text begins with the present active participle nominative singular feminine form of the verb παιδεύω + the accusative plural first person of ἡμεῖς: translate "teaching us."

Raymond F. Collins points out that it is ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ that has appeared to instruct "us" (i.e., Christians); see Titus 2:11 and note the use of an explanatory γὰρ there. Collins writes:

"Now the Pastor makes reference to the saving beneficence of God. The 'beneficence' or 'grace' (he charis) about which he writes is not grace in the Pauline sense, that is, the grace of God that justifies; rather, the word is to be taken in its usual Hellenistic sense of 'favor' or 'beneficence.' In the Pastor’s world the granting of favors was often associated with royal 'appearances' ” (1-2 Timothy and Titus in the NTL Series, page 349).

I personally don't find Collins' take on Χάρις to be all that convincing. Granted, looking at ancient royal appearances or "divine" visits is fair game for trying to determine a word's semantic range, but the immediate literary context and normal usage of the word must have some influence on how we understand Χάρις. 

BDAG makes these comments about this particular use of Χάρις:

— χ. to denote beneficent dispensations of the emperor: OGI 669, 44 [I a.d.]; BGU 19 I, 21 [II a.d.] χάρ. τοῦ θεοῦ Αὐτοκράτορος; 1085 II, 4) and of Christ, who give (undeserved) gifts to people; God: δικαιούμενοι δωρεὰν τῇ αὐτοῦ χάριτι Ro 3:24. Cp. 5:15a, 20f; 6:1; 11:5 (ἐκλογή 1), 6abc; Gal 1:15 (διά A 3e); Eph 1:6f (KKuhn, NTS 7, ’61, 337 [reff. to Qumran lit.]); 2:5, 7, 8; cp. Pol 1:3; 2 Th 1:12; 2:16; 2 Ti 1:9; Tit 2:11 (ἡ χάρ. τοῦ θεοῦ σωτήριος; s. Dibelius, Hdb. exc. after Tit 2:14); 3:7; Hb 2:9 (χωρίς 2aα); 4:16a (DdeSilva, JBL 115, ’96, 100–103); 1 Cl 50:3; ISm 9:2; IPol 7:3. ἐν χάρ[ιτι θεοῦ] AcPl Ha 7, 23 (restoration uncertain). κατὰ χάριν as a favor, out of goodwill (cp. Pla., Leg. 740c; schol. on Soph., Oed. Col. 1751 p. 468 Papag.) Ro 4:4 (opp. κατὰ ὀφείλημα), 16.—The beneficence or favor of Christ: διὰ τῆς χάριτος τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ πιστεύομεν σωθῆναι Ac 15:11. Cp. Ro 5:15b; 2 Cor 8:9; 1 Ti 1:14; IPhld 8:1. On Ac 2:47 in this sense s. TAnderson, NTS 34, ’88, 604–10.

Compare 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 3:5-7. Note also the goal of divine instruction that occurs via Χάρις manifested through Christ: ἵνα ἀρνησάμενοι τὴν ἀσέβειαν καὶ τὰς κοσμικὰς ἐπιθυμίας σωφρόνως καὶ δικαίως καὶ εὐσεβῶς ζήσωμεν ἐν τῷ νῦν αἰῶνι.

Hebrews 7:16 (Rogers and Rogers Screenshot)

Greek: ὃς οὐ κατὰ νόμον ἐντολῆς σαρκίνης γέγονεν ἀλλὰ κατὰ δύναμιν ζωῆς ἀκαταλύτου:

What Did the Ancient People of Israel Eat? (A Quote from Nathan MacDonald)

"There is a vast amount of nonwritten archaeological evidence that provides insight into the diet of the ancient Israelites. A number of the structures that have survived from ancient Israel were used for the production, storage, and preparation of food. Wine and olive presses, storage rooms, and ovens have been found at Iron Age sites throughout Israel. These remains of agricultural installations and storage facilities provide evidence of land use and can give some idea of the level of food production. Food is not only prepared and consumed: that which cannot be digested has to be disposed of. At every archaeological dig large numbers of animal bones are excavated. These provide evidence not only of meat consumption, but also of the nature of the rural economy. The ratio of sheep bones to cattle bones can indicate whether a community was primarily pastoral or agricultural, since cattle were primarily kept for traction rather than milk production. Unfortunately, the sheer quantity of animal bones seems to have prevented anything more than ad hoc attempts at synthesis of the accumulated data."

Nathan MacDonald. What Did the Ancient Israelites Eat?: Diet in Biblical Times (Kindle Locations 174-179). Kindle Edition. 

Greek New Testament for Sale: Tyndale House (Like New)

 https://www.ebay.com/itm/386936399252

Occurrences of διαθήκη in Hebrews

Hebrews 7:22-κατὰ τοσοῦτο καὶ κρείττονος διαθήκης γέγονεν ἔγγυος Ἰησοῦς.

Hebrews 8:6-νῦν δὲ διαφορωτέρας τέτυχεν λειτουργίας, ὅσῳ καὶ κρείττονός ἐστιν διαθήκης μεσίτης, ἥτις ἐπὶ κρείττοσιν ἐπαγγελίαις νενομοθέτηται.

Hebrews 8:8-μεμφόμενος γὰρ αὐτοὺς λέγει Ἰδοὺ ἡμέραι ἔρχονται, λέγει Κύριος, καὶ συντελέσω ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον Ἰσραὴλ καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν οἶκον Ἰούδα διαθήκην καινήν,

Hebrews 8:9-οὐ κατὰ τὴν διαθήκην ἣν ἐποίησα τοῖς πατράσιν αὐτῶν ἐν ἡμέρᾳ ἐπιλαβομένου μου τῆς χειρὸς αὐτῶν ἐξαγαγεῖν αὐτοὺς ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου, ὅτι αὐτοὶ οὐκ ἐνέμειναν ἐν τῇ διαθήκῃ μου, κἀγὼ ἠμέλησα αὐτῶν, λέγει Κύριος.

Hebrews 810-ὅτι αὕτη ἡ διαθήκη ἣν διαθήσομαι τῷ οἴκῳ Ἰσραήλ μετὰ τὰς ἡμέρας ἐκείνας, λέγει Κύριος, διδοὺς νόμους μου εἰς τὴν διάνοιαν αὐτῶν, καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίας αὐτῶν ἐπιγράψω αὐτούς, καὶ ἔσομαι αὐτοῖς εἰς θεόν καὶ αὐτοὶ ἔσονταί μοι εἰς λαόν.

Hebrews 9:4-χρυσοῦν ἔχουσα θυμιατήριον καὶ τὴν κιβωτὸν τῆς διαθήκης περικεκαλυμμένην πάντοθεν χρυσίῳ, ἐν ᾗ στάμνος χρυσῆ ἔχουσα τὸ μάννα καὶ ἡ ῥάβδος Ἀαρὼν ἡ βλαστήσασα καὶ αἱ πλάκες τῆς διαθήκης,

Hebrews 9:15-Καὶ διὰ τοῦτο διαθήκης καινῆς μεσίτης ἐστίν, ὅπως θανάτου γενομένου εἰς ἀπολύτρωσιν τῶν ἐπὶ τῇ πρώτῃ διαθήκῃ παραβάσεων τὴν ἐπαγγελίαν λάβωσιν οἱ κεκλημένοι τῆς αἰωνίου κληρονομίας.

Hebrews 9:16-ὅπου γὰρ διαθήκη, θάνατον ἀνάγκη φέρεσθαι τοῦ διαθεμένου·

Hebrews 9:17- διαθήκη γὰρ ἐπὶ νεκροῖς βεβαία, ἐπεὶ μὴ τότε ἰσχύει ὅτε ζῇ ὁ διαθέμενος.

Hebrews 9:20-λέγων Τοῦτο τὸ αἷμα τῆς διαθήκης ἧς ἐνετείλατο πρὸς ὑμᾶς ὁ θεός·

Hebrews 10:16-Αὕτη ἡ διαθήκη ἣν διαθήσομαι πρὸς αὐτούς μετὰ τὰς ἡμέρας ἐκείνας, λέγει Κύριος, διδοὺς νόμους μου ἐπὶ καρδίας αὐτῶν, καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν διάνοιαν αὐτῶν ἐπιγράψω αὐτούς,

Hebrews 10:29-πόσῳ δοκεῖτε χείρονος ἀξιωθήσεται τιμωρίας ὁ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ καταπατήσας, καὶ τὸ αἷμα τῆς διαθήκης κοινὸν ἡγησάμενος ἐν ᾧ ἡγιάσθη, καὶ τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς χάριτος ἐνυβρίσας.

Hebrews 12:24-καὶ διαθήκης νέας μεσίτῃ Ἰησοῦ, καὶ αἵματι ῥαντισμοῦ κρεῖττον λαλοῦντι παρὰ τὸν Ἅβελ.

Hebrews 13:20-Ὁ δὲ θεὸς τῆς εἰρήνης, ὁ ἀναγαγὼν ἐκ νεκρῶν τὸν ποιμένα τῶν προβάτων τὸν μέγαν ἐν αἵματι διαθήκης αἰωνίου, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν,

Over half of the thirty NT occurrences of διαθήκη appear in Hebrews. Furthermore, there are numerous books and journal articles dealing with covenant theology/semantics in Hebrews: I will list a couple.

https://www.academia.edu/44332163/_The_Concept_of_%CE%B4%CE%B9%CE%B1%CE%B8%CE%AE%CE%BA%CE%B7_in_Hebrews_9_16_17_

https://www.academia.edu/18498642/A_Comparison_of_17th_Century_and_Modern_Interpretations_of_the_Meaning_and_Significance_for_Covenant_Theology_of_Diatheke_%CE%94%CE%B9%CE%B1%CE%B8%CE%AE%CE%BA%CE%B7_in_Hebrews_9_16_17?rhid=27836246220&swp=rr-rw-wc-19918245

Double Predestination and A Loving God? John (Jean) Calvin

About ten years ago, someone asked me about Jean Calvin. They were trying to wrap their heads around the fact that he believed in "double predestination" and simultaneously thought "God is love" (1 John 4:8).

Please let Calvin himself explain:

"I again ask how it is that the fall of Adam involves so many nations with their infant children in eternal death without remedy unless that it so seemed meet to God? Here the most loquacious tongues must be dumb. The decree, I admit, is, dreadful; and yet it is impossible to deny that God foreknow what the end of man was to be before he made him, and foreknew, because he had so ordained by his decree. Should any one here inveigh against the prescience of God, he does it rashly and unadvisedly. For why, pray, should it be made a charge against the heavenly Judge, that he was not ignorant of what was to happen?"

"Nor ought it to seem absurd when I say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it. For as it belongs to his wisdom to foreknow all future events, so it belongs to his power to rule and govern them by his hand."

See Institutes of the Christian Religion 3.23.7

Bildad in Job 25-The Distortion of Truth

In Job 25, Bildad speaks the truth in a sense, but he distorts matters when he speaks to Job or concerning him: Job 25:6 while true in the abstract must have felt like the pangs of a sword to Job. The rhetorical questions with presupposed negative answers in Job 25:4 are worth quoting: "How then can a mortal be righteous before God? How can one born of woman be pure?" (NIV)

Rebecca R. Clark writes:

Finally, Bildad asks, “How then can a mortal be righteous before God? How can one born of woman be pure?” (25:4).115 Ash proposes, “This is the answer of human religion. But it is also the satan’s answer.”116 Unbeknownst to Job’s friends, in aiming to proclaim the truth about God, they are spokesmen of the satan.117 Although the satan is not present in the remainder of the narrative, he continues to be voiced.

See  https://firescholars.seu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=mats

 

 

Psalm 51:5 (Guilt or Iniquity?)

Hebrew (Leningrad Codex): הֵן־בְּעָוֹ֥ון חֹולָ֑לְתִּי וּ֝בְחֵ֗טְא יֶֽחֱמַ֥תְנִי אִמִּֽי׃

NET: "Look, I was guilty of sin from birth, a sinner the moment my mother conceived me."

ESV: "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me."

The Hebrew word avon sometimes bears the meaning "guilt," but it may also denote iniquity or punishment for iniquity. 

Compare Jeremiah 2:22 (NET), but see the translation's notes. Cf. Romans 7:18-20. BDB makes the point that it's hard at times to distinguish the concept of guilt from iniquity when it comes to the Hebrew avon. NWT 2013 opts for the "guilty" aspect of the word.

https://www.academia.edu/99185796/_Indeed_I_was_born_guilty_Reading_Psalm_51_7_in_a_Canonical_Context?rhid=27729000667&swp=rr-rw-wc-37767435

God Is A Necessary Being

A student once asked me the question that a lot of people wonder about: who made God? A few scriptures directly address this question, but I referenced Psalm 90:2 in my answer to the student and one might also consider 1 Timothy 1:17. Furthermore, I tried to reason with her concerning the difficulty of understanding how God could have always existed without being created by invoking concepts in physics that are hard to understand (i.e., they are comparable to understanding God's necessary existence). For example, most people do not comprehend the math for relativity theory. But two arguments for God's existence that seem compelling to me are (1) the argument from possibility and necessity or Aquinas' third way; (2) the need to avoid an infinite regress. 

Regarding number (1), it seems reasonable to suppose that "if all things possibly fail to exist at some time then possibly there is a time when nothing exists" (Robert E. Maydole).

If it's logically possible that nothing finite once existed, then it is logically possible that if non-existent things did come to have actual existence instead of just potential existence, then a necessary being (one who exists without any other entity sustaining the being's existence) brought once non-existent things into existence. Nevertheless, I think Aquinas' third way (proof) only works if one modalizes it like Maydole does.

But my student objects that we can't see God or empirically detect him like we are capable of measuring or detecting physical entities (e.g. the wind, atoms, and gravity). While I grant this point, it does not seem that the objection is fatal to belief in God. Many things in physics are less than certain (to understate the matter) and science has even predicted the existence of some things that were not detected at the time, for instance, in chemistry, cosmology and with string theory. There are still some things that science has never detected but these things are widely thought to exist. Besides, to suppose that we must see/hear something (etc.) to believe it exists is a metaphysical position or an article of faith: the proposition itself is not a fact.

Quite frankly, it takes more faith to believe this universe arose from absolute nothingness without God than it does to believe in God, the ens realissimum and ens necessarius. Peter van Inwagen has a great point about the odds of the universe coming into existence from absolutely nothing, including no God. Try 0% on for size.

1 Corinthians 11:27 (A Brief Comment)

Greek: ὥστε ὃς ἂν ἐσθίῃ τὸν ἄρτον ἢ πίνῃ τὸ ποτήριον τοῦ κυρίου ἀναξίως, ἔνοχος ἔσται τοῦ σώματος καὶ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ κυρίου.

I've been wanting to address this verse because someone recently told me that they thought Jehovah would never forgive a person who ate the bread during the Memorial (Lord's evening supper) or who drank the cup, but who was not anointed. But I assured them that while it is a serious thing to partake of the bread and wine, there are at least two things to consider.

1) When Paul spoke of partaking "unworthily," whom was he referencing? At the time 1 Corinthians was written, all Christians shared the "one hope" (Ephesians 4:5) and they were anointed with God's holy spirit through the Lord Jesus. Hence, Paul likely was not telling them to make sure they were children of God: the spirit already imparted that knowledge to them. Rather, per the context, his point involved how they lived each day and their perspective towards the holy bread and the cup of wine.

2) While Jehovah promises to recompense inveterate sinners and those who utterly disrespect sacred things, if a person genuinely commits an error respecting the bread and the cup, would God not extend mercy to one who sinned unintentionally or who later realized his/her error? The Bible assures us that he would (Psalm 86:5).

Jehovah forgave David, Manasseh and Saul of Tarsus. Why would he not forgive a person who wrongly partook of the emblems, but maybe had extenuating circumstances that account for his/her actions.

Brief Notes from Donald Bloesch's "God the Almighty"

Donald G. Bloesch. God the Almighty: Power, Wisdom, Holiness, Love. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1995. 

Bloesch lived from 1928-2010. He was an evangelical theologian and prolific writer. 

"The God of the Bible cannot be described in univocal language, only by means of analogy, metaphor and simile." (page 32). 

"The God of philosophy is capable of being thought and thereby mastered. The God of theology remains hidden and inscrutable until he makes himself known" (p. 32).

God is "being-in-person" (32).

"How God accomplishes his purposes in conjunction with human effort and striving is a mystery that lies beyond human comprehension. Like creation and redemption, providence is a mystery open only to faith" (116).

Bloesch considers both determinism and indeterminism to be heresies (ibid.).

On pages 116-117, he poses some interesting questions about God's putative relationship to creatures and time.

How to Say "battle ally" in Greek

The word σύμμαχος is technically an adjective of sorts (cf. LSJ Greek-English Lexicon) meaning "allied with" someone in battle. But at times, I have used it as a substantive with the meaning "battle ally," a usage that appears in ancient Greek literature (s.v. LSJ). The plural substantival nominative form is οἱ σύμμαχοι.
.

Psalm 1:2 and the Torah

Latin Vulgate: Sed in lege Domini voluntas eius et in lege eius meditabitur die ac nocte (Psalm 1:2).

Douay-Rheims Translation: "But his will is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he shall meditate day and night."

Amplified Bible: "But his delight and desire are in the law of the Lord, and on His law (the precepts, the instructions, the teachings of God) he habitually meditates (ponders and studies) by day and by night."

ASV: "But his delight is in the law of Jehovah; And on his law doth he meditate day and night."

The Cambridge History of the Bible states that ancient Judaism emphasized 'a renewed study of the Torah' after the book of Deuteronomy was written. We then read: "It [the Torah] was to be the Book of Meditation for every pious Jew, great and humble. Believed in its time to offer the most complete and up-to-date version of the 'Mosaic' code, it was to be the daily vade mecum of the king" (1:200). This information was written by G. Vermes, Reader of Jewish Studies at Oxford University during the year 1970.

Vermes then cites Deut. 17:18-19 where the King rather than a Levite priest is exhorted to make a copy of the Law and "read in it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the LORD [YHWH] his God, by keeping all the words of this law and these statutes, and doing them."

Compare Joshua 1:7-8.

But the CHOB does not stop there. It shows that the previously mentioned hortatory dicta were "extended to all Israel" as shown by Ps. 1:2 and 1 QS VI, 6-7. It was only later that "this wide preoccupation with the Bible created a demand for authoritative interpreters, and a particular class of men emerged from the ranks of priests and Levites whose sole business was professional exegesis." See Ecclesiasticus 39:1-8 and Neh. 8:1-8. 

Consult Pirke Aboth and Jub. 23:26 as well (cf. Malachi 2:7). Jub. 23:26 foretold that "In those days, children shall begin to study the laws and to seek the commandments, and to return to the path of righteousness." This text and others like it show that the ancient rabbis thought everyone, yes even children, should zealously study the Torah.

John Chrysostom: "I also always entreat you, and do not cease entreating you, not only to pay attention here to what I say, but also when you are at home, to persevere continually in reading the divine Scriptures."

https://www.orthodox.net/journal/2011-09-08-saint-john-chrysostom-on-the-necessity-of-reading-scripture-daily.html

Asimov and the Marvelous Atom

"Because quantum theory deals with things so far removed from what we are used to in ordinary life, scientists speak of 'quantum weirdness.' There are aspects about it that seem so paradoxical that scientists have simply not managed to agree on what it all means. Perhaps someday, new discoveries, new concepts, new thoughts will clarify what seems now to be hopelessly mysterious" (Isaac Asimov).

Asimov wrote these words in the book Atom: Journey Across the Subatomic Cosmos, published in 1991, page 121.

Has his desire come to fruition?

See Romans 1:20; Revelation 4:11

Are You Ready to Obey, Even When Directions Are Hard to Understand? (Modified Talk)

                                            Based on Ezra 5 and 6

From time to time, it's good to ask ourselves whether we are "ready to obey" (James 3:17) even when the direction given is hard for us to understand. In going over this material for the talk, it's a question that I pondered for myself and my household.

When we think back to Israel's situation in the 6th century BCE, we know they experienced the fall of Babylon in 539 BCE by the Medes and Persians. Then Cyrus gave the decree that allowed Jehovah's people to repatriate Judah and start building the second temple in Jerusalem. Of course, there was a delay in building the temple because some Israelites got diverted by material interests; moreover, the Persians imposed a ban on the work in the days of King Artaxerxes.

Nevertheless, please notice how Ezra 5:1-2 describes the action taken by faithful Israelites who returned to Judah.

(After reading)

Two men who took the lead in the trip back to Babylon and the rebuilding work were Governor Zerubbabel and High Priest Jeshua. Yet there was one problem even in 520 BCE.

Due to the crafty activity of some avid Persian opposers, a ban was still imposed on the building work in Jerusalem. Hence, what would the faithful Israelites do? Would they prove to be readily obedient despite the ban? After all, it must have been difficult for them to understand how they were supposed to keep working with a ban in place.

However, let's see what Ezra 5:3, 17 reveals.

So what happened? Instead of being deterred by the opposers, the Israelites reminded their opponents of Cyrus' decree. This was a manifestation of wisdom on their part since the wrong response could have hindered the temple-building work.

Nevertheless, it was no coincidence that the work continued. If we remember from the opening part of Ezra, Jehovah initially stirred the heart of King Cyrus to put this decree into effect and now we see Jehovah further directing the work in this part of Ezra.

What was the outcome of the Israelites acting with tactfulness and relying on Jehovah's direction? Please turn with me to Ezra 6:7-8.

We can see Jehovah's hand at work in the ancient temple-building process. Not only were God's people allowed to continue working but King Darius gave the order that "From the royal treasury, from the tax collected in the region Beyond the River, the temple-building expenses" were to be "promptly given" to the builders so that they could "continue without interruption." What a blessing Israel received since the nation readily obeyed Jehovah even when the command seemed hard to understand, and we know the temple was eventually completed in 515 BCE all to Jehovah's praise.

Picture and application:

Natural disasters (fire, hurricanes), pandemic, and the building of our local Kingdom Hall.

As we contemplate future events and the precious promises that Jehovah has given us, may all of us be ready to obey as we keep busy in theocratic work.

Colossians 2:9 and πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος

Here is something I wrote long ago, which may need to be amended in spots. In his capacity as a spirit creature, the πλήρωμα τῆς  θεότητος resides in Christ. The use of θεότητος, however, does not mean that Christ is ὁ παντοκράτωρ: he simply possesses "divinity" but not in the strict sense of the word like Almighty God does.

Trinitarians have doubted this understanding of θεότητος and have tried to draw a sharp line between θεότητος and "divinity" in the less strict sense. The fallacy of this argument is clearly demonstrated by a cursory perusal of Jerome's Latin Vulgate where the Vulgate at Col. 2:9 uses the Latin word dīvīnitātis (genitive singular of dīvīnitās) to render θεότητος. Dīvīnitās is the abstract Latin word for "divinity" as attested by the speeches and writings of Constantine (See Michael Grant's Constantine The Great).

Anointed Christians will one day possess the "divine nature"; they will see God and be like unto Him. (2 Pet. 1:4; 1 John 3:2). Therefore, divinity is not per se synonymous with or equivalent to being God. I thereby conclude that Col. 2:9 does not teach that Christ possesses a fleshly body now, nor is he coequal with God.

See also Nash, H. S. “Θειότης: Θεότης, Rom. 1. 20; Col. 2. 9.” Journal of Biblical Literature, vol. 18, no. 1/2, 1899, pp. 1–34. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/3268966. Accessed 3 Apr. 2024.

Words of the Month (April 2024)

1. Etymological origin of rigmarole:

"alteration of obsolete 'ragman roll' (long list, catalog)

First Known Use: circa 1736"

Thanks, M-W!


2. Anosognosia.

Neuroscientist Vilayanur S. Ramachandran describes this phenomenon as a "curious disorder" that entails being unable to determine whether one's left arm or leg is paralyzed (Phantoms in the Brain, p. 128). The French neurologist Joseph Francois Babinski evidently coined this term after he observed it clinically in 1908.

"The term anosognosia now more broadly refers to a neurologically based denial of illness and unawareness of disability, not limited to patients with hemiplegia."

(Taken from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4140620/)

The etymology of anosognosia is ancient Greek, coming from nosos + gnosis.

Both of the next words are German terms:

3. Zeitschrift-"periodical, journal, magazine."

4. Wirkungsgeschichte-"historical consequences" or "reception history."

https://www.dict.cc/deutsch-englisch/Wirkungsgeschichte.html

Zodhiates, Hasker, and the Question of God's Temporality

In Psalm 90:2, we read that God is “from eternity to eternity” (me olam ad olam); it could be said that Jehovah is “from hidden time to hidden time” (Gesenius). It thus appears that the Hebrew-Aramaic scriptures (Tanakh) depict YHWH as a dynamic being within time somehow. Concerning the God of the Hebrews, we read: “temporal categories are inadequate to describe the nature of God's existence” (Zodhiates 2348). Nevertheless, olam when used of the Creator in Ps. 90:2 expresses “the idea of a continued, measurable existence, rather than a state of being independent of time considerations” (2348).  

Moreover, the question regarding how a timeless deity possibly responds to prayer might lend support to the temporal view of God: “For in responding to another it is of the essence that one first acts, then waits for the other to react, then acts responsively, and so on. There seems to be no way this sequence could be collapsed, as it were, into a single timeless moment” (William Hasker in God, Time, and Knowledge, page 156).

See also https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2011/06/omniscience-god-and-time.html

https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2015/02/god-time-and-divine-immutability-duncan.html

Recommendations for Books About "Spirit" (Roman)-In Process

Here are some books/publications I own. I'm not going to put them in alphabetical order due to time constraints, but some of these might be helpful for the study of pneumatology:

George Johnston, The Spirit-Paraclete in the Gospel of John. Cambridge UP, 1970.

Cornelis Bennema, The Power of Saving Wisdom: An Investigation of Spirit and Wisdom in Relation to the Soteriology of the Fourth Gospel. Mohr/Siebeck, 2002. 

Roberto Pereyra, "The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul," DavarLogos XIII, 2 (2014): 5-24.

John R. Levison, Filled With the Spirit. Eerdmans, 2009. 

Pieter De Vries, “The Relationship between the Glory of YHWH and the Spirit of YHWH in Ezekiel 33-48,” OTE 28/2 (2015): 326-350. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/2312-3621/2015/v28n2a7

Gordon D. Fee, God's Empowering presence: the Holy Spirit in the letters of Paul. Hendrickson, 1994.

Gitte Buch-Hansen, »It is the Spirit that Gives Life«: A Stoic Understanding of Pneuma in John’s Gospel. De Gruyter, 2010.

James A. Davis, Wisdom and Spirit: An Investigation of 1 Corinthians 1.18-3.20 Against the Background of Jewish Sapiential Traditions in the Greco-Roman Period. UPA, 1984.

Frank Yin-Chao Lin, "The Significance of the Spirit of Adoption to Christian Life: An Exegetical Study of Romans 8:12-30." Ph.D. Diss., 2017.

Marie E. Isaacs, The Concept of Spirit: A Study of Pneuma in Hellenistic Judaism and its Bearing on the New Testament. H. Charlesworth and Co., 1976.

Anthony Briggman, Irenaeus of Lyons and the Theology of the Holy Spirit. Oxford UP, 2012.

JoAnn Davidson, "Power or Person: Nature of the Holy Spirit" (2016). Faculty Publications. 864. https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/pubs/864

John R. Levison, The Spirit in First-Century Judaism. Brill, 2002.

Anthony C. Thiselton, The Holy Spirit--in Biblical Teaching, through the Centuries, and Today. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2013.

C. F. D. Moule, Holy Spirit. Continuum, 2000.

See https://www.proquest.com/openview/b5bed0aab3996deae393e1ff3f42319d/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=51922&diss=y

Comments From Augustine of Hippo on Romans 5:12

Augustine of Hippo has some interesting remarks pertaining to Romans 5:12:

"But if the apostle had wished to assert that sin entered into the world, not by natural descent, but by imitation, he would have mentioned as the first offender, not Adam indeed, but the devil, of whom it is written, that 'he sinneth from the beginning'; of whom also we read in the Book of Wisdom: 'Nevertheless through the devil's envy death entered into the world.' Now, forasmuch as this death came upon men from the devil, not because they were propagated by him, but because they imitated his example, it is immediately added: 'And they that do hold of his side do imitate him.' Accordingly, the apostle, when mentioning sin and death together, which had passed by natural descent from one upon all men, set him down as the introducer thereof from whom the propagation of the human race took its beginning" (On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins 1.9).

Nisan 14, 2024

I'm taking a break from blogging today and will not be checking much for comments either. I want to express my desire that fellow Witnesses will have a nice memorial of Jesus' death tonight, and any readers who might be so inclined are welcome to attend the memorial.

Thanks to Jehovah through Jesus Christ for such a blessed and loving act whereby our Lord gave his body in our behalf.

Christian love,
Edgar

I Statements in Logic and Their Contraposed Forms

Logic textbooks traditionally teach about four kinds of categorical statements (i.e., propositions) when discussing the Aristotelian square of opposition: they are A, E, I, and O propositions. The first two are universal statements whereas the last two are particular utterances. I will now explain briefly how I propositions work. These are particular affirmatives:

Example of an I proposition:

A) Some trees are oaks.

But what happens if we contrapose an I proposition? This would entail switching subject and predicate, then adding the complement (a term not belonging to the class) of the switched subject and predicate.

Here is the contraposition of an I proposition:

B) Some non-oaks are non-trees.

What?

Notice that B) is similar to the utterance:

C) Some non-Greeks are non-humans.

C)  is the contraposition of Some humans are Greek.

An interesting result of contraposing an I proposition is that the true value of the statement differs after one does the contraposition; it is not preserved with I propositions.

Whether one is doing logic, theology or some other discipline, reasoning correctly is important.

Impossibility and God

Among the things that seem impossible, I guess an angle cannot be trisected using only a straightedge and compass, 7 + 5 cannot be made to equal 13, nor can anyone create square circles, and I doubt that unmakeable hammers can be made. Also, it seems analytic that a Euclidean triangle cannot be four-sided: some things are impossible by their very nature just like uncreatable worlds are impossible to create.

Biblically, we are taught that God cannot sin, lie or be tempted (Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18; James 1:13); you can take what Jehovah proclaims to the bank (2 Corinthians 1:20-22 Revelation 21:3-5).

Updated Version: On the Lord's Evening Meal and Communion Sacrifices

One Scriptural passage that helps me to appreciate tomorrow night's upcoming Memorial of Christ's death on Nisan 14 is 1 Corinthians 10:18:

"Behold Israel after the flesh: have not they that eat the sacrifices communion with the altar?" (ASV)

When posing this rhetorical query, Paul alludes to the OT practice of communion sacrifices. One encounters a lovely description of such offerings in Leviticus 7:1-38. I want to recount briefly what that biblical chapter recounts and apply it to the apostolic words in 1 Corinthians 10:18ff.

The communion sacrifices were peace offerings designed to restore the broken relationship that obtained between God and His ancient worshipers; they constituted a holy presentation to Almighty God (YHWH), and when offering a communion sacrifice, an Israelite was supposed to offer Jehovah his or her best.

Leviticus 7:28-30 mandates that one presenting a communion sacrifice to Jehovah should offer the "fat upon the breast" to God as a wave offering: Leviticus 7:30 briefly explains what a wave offering entailed. In addition to offering the fat and the blood to Jehovah (Leviticus 7:33), the one giving peace offerings to God also was commanded to present "the right leg" of his sacrifice as "a sacred portion" to the officiating priests. Furthermore, the High Priest and his sons were to have a share in this communion offering. What a privilege all those who offered communion presentations enjoyed! Paul rightly said that those who sacrificed upon the altar became (by their respective gifts to God) sharers in the altar. But how might this Levitical practice apply to Christians today?

As Paul intimates, the Lord's Evening Meal (1 Corinthians 11:20) or Lord's Supper is the antitype of the OT peace offerings. Just as ancient worshipers of God brought their sacrifices to Jehovah in order to repair the breach that obtained between themselves and God, so anointed Christians annually observe the Memorial of Jesus' death in order to remember how God repaired the figurative breach between him and sinful humanity, thereby fully reconciling humanity from sin and death.

Anointed Christians share in the antitypical communion meal by partaking of Christ's blood (the cup of wine) and his body (the bread). The emblems at the Memorial are symbols or signs of the spiritual reality effectuated by God and Christ. Those who partake of the cup and wine on Nisan 14 share with God's altar as they have a meal in effect with Jehovah, his High Priest Jesus and fellow anointed ones (underpriests). It is still an inestimable privilege to convene for a meal with God. Anointed Christians therefore esteem the undeserved kindness that Jehovah has shown to them through the Son of God's ransom sacrifice. However, they are not the only ones who benefit from being present at the yearly communion meal.

The great crowd of other sheep who possess a hope of living forever on earth while not partaking of the emblems and thus sharing in the altar still have their appreciation for Christ's sacrifice deepened as they listen to the discourse given about Jesus' death and watch the symbols of his death being passed around the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses. Therefore, I hope that everyone attending the Memorial this year reflects deeply on what Christ's death means for us, and may you continue to grow in love and appreciation for Jehovah God (YHWH) and his only-begotten Son.

Jehovah Is Unequivocally the Grand Creator

Nehemiah 9:6 (HCSB)-"You alone are Yahweh. You created the heavens, the highest heavens with all their host, the earth and all that is on it, the seas and all that is in them. You give life to all of them, and the heavenly host worships You."

Jehovah created the stars (Psalm 8:4-5; 19:1-4; 1 Corinthians 15:39-41). Scientists estimate that the cosmic stars outnumber the multitudinous grains of sand on earth. For example, the Milky Way galaxy contains an estimated 100-400 billion stars, and it is but one of an estimated 2 billion to 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe.

Galaxies are arranged into clusters, which some have compared to grapes.

Clusters are organized into superclusters and certain scientists describe clusters this way:

"These usually consist of chains of about a dozen clusters which have a mass of about 10^16 solar masses (ten million billion suns). Our own Local Supercluster is centred on Virgo and is relatively poor having a size of 15Mpc. The largest superclusters, like that associated with Coma, are up to 100Mpc in extent. The system of superclusters forms a network permeating throughout space, on which about 90% of galaxies are located."

See https://www.icc.dur.ac.uk/~tt/Lectures/Galaxies/Clusters/Cambridge/gal_lss.html
Furthermore,, think of the many oceans, lakes, and rivers on earth: Scotland has the impressive Loch Lomond and we all know about the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

One academic website provides this data: "The total number of tree species on Earth is around 73,000, including roughly 9,000 not yet known to science."

See https://seas.umich.edu/globalchangebiology/publications/number-of-trees-on-earth

All of these things testify to the power and wisdom of Jehovah, our grand creator (Ecclesiastes 12:1 NWT 2013).