Ecclesiastes 4:1 (Oppression in Qoheleth)-Is the Book Pessimistic?

"Then I looked again at all the acts of oppression which were being done under the sun. And behold I saw the tears of the oppressed and that they had no one to comfort them; and on the side of their oppressors was power, but they had no one to comfort them. So I congratulated the dead who are already dead more than the living who are still living. But better off than both of them is the one who has never existed, who has never seen the evil activity that is done under the sun" (Ecclesiastes 4:1-3 NASB).

For the record, I don't believe that Ecclesiastes is pessimistic, but here are some sources to consider:

https://academic.oup.com/jss/article-abstract/3/4/336/1655791?redirectedFrom=PDF

https://www.galaxie.com/article/bsac175-700-01

https://journals.co.za/doi/pdf/10.10520/AJA10109919_827

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/ecclesiastes-in-context-reclaiming-qoheleths-canonical-authority/

https://scholar.csl.edu/ctm/vol22/iss1/2/

Kavod and Doxa

The Hebrew "kavod" undoubtedly signifies weightiness, authority, and importance. But is the idea of brightness totally absent from that Hebrew word and from the Greek "doxa"? What about Exod. 16:10 (LXX); 33:18, 22; Ezek. 1:28, 43:2 and other verses?

The idea of brightness is clear in these occurrences. Compare 2 Cor. 3:7-11, 18; 4:4-6; 2 Peter 1:17; also see LSJ regarding doxa.

BDAG and other lexicons indicate that doxa is applied to women based on the rabbinic predilection for describing women as the imago dei. Paul actually writes that woman is the doxa of man, not that she "has" doxa per se (1 Cor. 11:7). Then later, the Apostle writes: γυνὴ δὲ ἐὰν κομᾷ, δόξα αὐτῇ ἐστίν; ὅτι ἡ κόμη ἀντὶ περιβολαίου δέδοται αὐτῇ (11:15).

The overall point is that doxa can have the meaning "glory" among other significations, and this post is by no means intended to suggest that women lack glory. Nor am I contending that Paul held such a belief.

Nescio Quis: A Little Latin for the Day

The Latin expression "nescio quis" has the potential meaning "somebody or other." It's often used in a contemptuous manner.

"Nescio quo pacto" denotes "in some way or other." Bennett's New Latin Grammar gives these examples:

Nescio quis forms a compound indefinite pronoun with the force of some one or other; as,—

    causidicus nescio quis, some pettifogger or other;

    mīsit nescio quem, he sent some one or other;

    nescio quō pactō, somehow or other.

See https://www.thelatinlibrary.com/bennett.html

Non nullus can be translated "not none," "some" or "several" (plural use).

Matthew 26:70 (Vulgate): at ille negavit coram omnibus dicens nescio quid dicis

Of course, in this passage, we have nescio, which is a 1st person verb.

The New American Commentary on Isaiah 45:18 (Gary V. Smith)

Michael Bird on Theopneustos (Screenshot)

 

Does Jehovah Always Determine The "Lot's" Outcome?

I've heard some argue that God always controls the outcome of the "lot" based on Proverbs 16:33. But comparing Proverbs with Joel 3:3 makes me think the verse is being taken out of context:

"and have cast lots for my people, and have given a boy for a prostitute, and sold a girl for wine, that they may drink" (Joel 3:3 WEB).

"The lot is cast into the lap; But the whole disposing thereof is of Jehovah" (Proverbs 16:33 ASV).

Myers-Briggs and Our Creator

I love studying personalities and finding out what makes people (including myself) tick. I'm consequently interested in personality inventory assessments like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. In looking over an old MBTI that I took back in the late 90s, which assessed me as INTJ-INTPish, I notice that INTPs (introverted, intuitive, thinking and perceiving) tend to have the following learning style:

Intensely curious, global and abstract learners, understand theories and underlying principles quickly, get so absorbed in reading and research that they wind up forgetting time and people. Finally, INTPs report 3-9 hours per week of non-required serious reading.

The description fits me to a large extent although INTJ likewise says things that match my learning style. By the way, INTJ stands for introverted, intuitive, thinking, and judging. These type of people are inclined to study up to 30 hours per week according to the MBTI. Wow! Our Creator sure made humans to be fascinating and complex creatures. (Psalm 139:14-16)

Online Sources for Origen's Angelology

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/opth-2020-0158/html?lang=en

https://philarchive.org/archive/HAEOSA

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/04165.htm

Origen writes in Contra Celsum:

For we indeed acknowledge that angels are ministering spirits, and we say that they are sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation; and that they ascend, bearing the supplications of men, to the purest of the heavenly places in the universe, or even to supercelestial regions purer still; and that they come down from these, conveying to each one, according to his deserts, something enjoined by God to be conferred by them upon those who are to be the recipients of His benefits. Having thus learned to call these beings angels from their employments, we find that because they are divine they are sometimes termed god in the sacred Scriptures, but not so that we are commanded to honour and worship in place of God those who minister to us, and bear to us His blessings. For every prayer, and supplication, and intercession, and thanksgiving, is to be sent up to the Supreme God through the High Priest, who is above all the angels, the living Word and God. And to the Word Himself shall we also pray and make intercessions, and offer thanksgivings and supplications to Him, if we have the capacity of distinguishing between the proper use and abuse of prayer.

Was Origen a polytheist? Moreover, to counterbalance Origen's thoughts on prayer, see his work by the same name that deals with the subject. 

Greek Info of the Day: Genitives and Apposition (Blackwelder)

A noun in the genitive may stand in apposition to another noun in order to further define it. For example, Paul places his own name in apposition with “a servant of Christ Jesus” (Rom. 1:1). In II Corinthians 1:22 and 5:5, “the earnest [arrabon, seal, pledge, foretaste] of the Spirit” means the Holy Spirit is the pledge or down payment of salvation (cf. Eph. 1:14). Note the appositional use of the genitive in II Corinthians 5:1, where Paul calls our earthly house a tent-home. He uses this figure to contrast our present state with our future existence. According to the Apostle’s metaphor, our earthly life is temporary, like living in a tent which may be taken down at any hour. But when the terrestrial abode is no more, we have the celestial existence awaiting us, and it is everlasting. Note other genitives of apposition or definition such as “crown of life” (Rev. 2:10), “crown of righteousness” (II Tim. 4:8), and “crown of glory” (I Pet. 5:4).

Blackwelder, Boyce W. Light from the Greek New Testament (Kindle Locations 2907-2915). Reformation Publishers Prestonsburg, KY. Kindle Edition. 

Did Justin Martyr Read Ancient Platonic Texts in Latin?

An interlocutor of mine once claimed that Justin Martyr possibly wrote in Latin and used Latin translations of Plato. In this regard, some of you might recall that Justin was a Neoplatonist who was born in Flavia Neapolis (Nablus). While I agree that Plato was eventually translated into Latin, do we have evidence that his writings were already rendered into Latin by the first-second century CE? Do we have evidence for pre-Christian Latin MSS of Plato's writings or artifacts that would have been around for Justin to use and is there any indication that he used them?

Jerome (Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians), who was born in Stridon (located in the Roman province of Dalmatia) and died in 420 CE declares that only "a handful of idle old men" knew either the works or name of Plato in his day. While the scholar's account is undoubtedly rhetorical flourish to some degree, Raymond Klibansky observes: "As far as we know, surprisingly few translations of complete [Platonic] dialogues existed in late antiquity. Cicero's version of the Protagoras was known only to a few erudite men like Sidonius and to learned grammarians like Priscian; that of the Timaeus comprised no more than a small part of the work; Apuleius' translation of the Phaedo seems to have been a rarity, and disappeared, like Cicero's Protagoras, after the sixth century" (The Continuity of the Platonic Tradition, pp. 21-22). So, there is evidence for a few Platonic Latin translations existing in the first-second century BCE/CE, but these works were not that accessible and further research discloses there is only so much information about Plato that a scholar like Justin Martyr could have extracted from these Latin translations anyway. Additionally, he had to know Latin in order to read them. Admittedly, some sources argue that he did.

To illustrate what I mean, consider Gerard Boter's (The Textual Tradition of Plato's Republic. Leiden and New York: Brill, 1989) comments about ancient Latin MSS of Plato's Republic:

(1) The only direct Greek quotations of the Republic in the Platonic Latin MS tradition appear in Cicero's speeches. Verbatim translations of the same work occur in Cicero, Ammianus Marcellinus, Hieronymus, Calcidus, Valerius Maximus and Arnobius (Boter, page 287).

(2) References or allusions from Plato's monumental book (the Republic) are again found in Cicero, Apuleius, Calcidus, Macrobius, Augustine, Boethius, Lactantius, and Tertullian. I think this data should demonstrate that there were not a large number of Platonic Latin translations floating about Rome's territory in Justin's day. One either read it in Greek as did Cicero and no doubt Justin and Tatian or one relied on what those who could read Greek had to say about the Platonic text. It thus seems highly unlikely that Justin was privy to a Latin translation of Plato's Republic or Timaeus. Moreover, when he taught pupils like Tatian, he probably communicated in the Greek tongue to them.

Book for Sale on Ebay (VG Condition)-Rogers and Rogers for the GNT

 Please see https://www.ebay.com/itm/387284547801

A Comparison of Leviticus 13:28 (LXX) with Hebrews 1:3 (Greek)

ἐὰν δὲ κατὰ χώραν μείνῃ τὸ αὐγάζον καὶ μὴ διαχυθῇ ἐν τῷ δέρματι, αὐτὴ δὲ ᾖ ἀμαυρά, ἡ οὐλὴ τοῦ κατακαύματός ἐστιν, καὶ καθαριεῖ αὐτὸν ὁ ἱερεύς· ὁ γὰρ χαρακτὴρ τοῦ κατακαύματός ἐστιν (Leviticus 13:28 LXX).

ὃς ὢν ἀπαύγασμα τῆς δόξης καὶ χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ, φέρων τε τὰ πάντα τῷ ῥήματι τῆς δυνάμεως αὐτοῦ, καθαρισμὸν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ποιησάμενος ἐκάθισεν ἐν δεξιᾷ τῆς μεγαλωσύνης ἐν ὑψηλοῖς (Hebrews 1:3 UBS5)

Scholar Mark Edwards on Christological Subordinationism (John 1:1, Etc.)

"There is little in the New Testament to suggest that the Son is equal to the Father, and not even an explicit assertion of their coeternity. The Word (not yet called the Son) was with the Father in the beginning (John 1.1)—an expression which takes us no further back than the origin of the world, perhaps no more than four thousand years before the incarnation on a strict construal of biblical chronology. He (or should we say 'it'?2) is said to be theos, but the absence of the definite article—used in the previous clause when the subject is God the Father–permits, or may even embolden, us to take this usage of theos as predicative rather than denominative. The New English Bible captures this well in its rendering 'what God was the word was', and the closest parallel in the Bible itself is Exodus 7.1, 'I shall make thee theos to Pharaoh', where the implication is evidently that Moses will be all that Pharaoh knows of God, not that he will be God in substance. There is no other passage in which the word theos is incontrovertibly applied to the Son: even Thomas’s exclamation 'My Lord and my God' (John 20.28) is understood by a minority of readers as a prayer of thanksgiving rather than an apostrophe to the resurrected Jesus."

Source: Edwards, Mark Thomas. “Is Subordinationism a Heresy?” TheoLogica: An International Journal for Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology (2020): pages 2-3.

Codex Sinaiticus: A Testament to Ancient Christianity

"The fourth century Codex Sinaiticus is the oldest and most complete copy of the New Testament in Greek known to exist.1 All twenty seven books of the Bible are represented including the epistle of Barnabas and part of the Shepherd of Hermas, the concluding sections are lost with the final pages of the manuscript."

Mitchell, Timothy N. (2014) "Codex Sinaiticus as a Window into Early Christian Worship," Eleutheria: Vol. 3: Iss. 1 , Article 2. 

Available at: https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/eleu/vol3/iss1/2

But compare the article by Brent Nongbri here: https://academic.oup.com/jts/article/73/2/516/6652265

The Codex Sinaiticus Project: https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/schools/ptr/departments/theologyandreligion/research/projects/codex-sinaiticus

Codex Sinaiticus-Matthew 6:4-32 (Public Domain Image). Kudos to Wikimedia Commons.

1 Corinthians 4:2-Paul's Use of the Word "Pistos" in Corinthians

According to Louw-Nida, the adjective πιστὸς has the potential meaning: "pertaining to being trusted - ‘faithful, trustworthy, dependable, reliable.’"

Compare 1 Peter 4:19.

1 Corinthians 4:2 (Greek): ὧδε λοιπὸν ζητεῖται ἐν τοῖς οἰκονόμοις ἵνα πιστός τις εὑρεθῇ.

Paul's use of πιστός in 1 and 2 Corinthians:

1 Corinthians 1:9-πιστὸς ὁ θεὸς δι' οὗ ἐκλήθητε εἰς κοινωνίαν τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν.

1 Corinthians 4:17-Διὰ τοῦτο ἔπεμψα ὑμῖν Τιμόθεον, ὅς ἐστίν μου τέκνον ἀγαπητὸν καὶ πιστὸν ἐν κυρίῳ, ὃς ὑμᾶς ἀναμνήσει τὰς ὁδούς μου τὰς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, καθὼς πανταχοῦ ἐν πάσῃ ἐκκλησίᾳ διδάσκω.

1 Corinthians 7:25-Περὶ δὲ τῶν παρθένων ἐπιταγὴν κυρίου οὐκ ἔχω, γνώμην δὲ δίδωμι ὡς ἠλεημένος ὑπὸ κυρίου πιστὸς εἶναι.

1 Corinthians 10:13-πειρασμὸς ὑμᾶς οὐκ εἴληφεν εἰ μὴ ἀνθρώπινος· πιστὸς δὲ ὁ θεός, ὃς οὐκ ἐάσει ὑμᾶς πειρασθῆναι ὑπὲρ ὃ δύνασθε, ἀλλὰ ποιήσει σὺν τῷ πειρασμῷ καὶ τὴν ἔκβασιν τοῦ δύνασθαι ὑπενεγκεῖν.

2 Corinthians 1:18-πιστὸς δὲ ὁ θεὸς ὅτι ὁ λόγος ἡμῶν ὁ πρὸς ὑμᾶς οὐκ ἔστιν Ναί καὶ Οὔ·

2 Corinthians 6:15-τίς δὲ συμφώνησις Χριστοῦ πρὸς Βελίαρ, ἢ τίς μερὶς πιστῷ μετὰ ἀπίστου;

Job and the Creation of Jehovah (Modified Talk)

The name Job apparently means "object of hostility." From the Bible book of Job, we know that Satan poured out much hostility on a man of integrity who was blameless and upright (Job 1:1). Satan took away his wealth, his beloved children, he attacked Job's health and three companions of Job told him that he was suffering because of some sin that he had committed. Furthermore, Job's wife told him to curse God and die.

[use the picture here]

How do you think Job felt after this vicious attack? Quite frankly, he became consumed with his own problems and the unfair criticism he received from his "comforters." However, notice what Jehovah said in Job 37:14

" Listen to this, Job; Stop and consider carefully the wonderful works of God."

What did Job need to do to regain his spiritual balance?

Allow the audience to comment.

Afterwards:

When we feel overwhelmed by our trials, observing creation can help us to remember Jehovah’s greatness; it can strengthen our desire cleave to him and build our confidence in God's ability to care for us. See Matthew 6:26.

Show the video

Then ask the audience:

How did this video strengthen your trust in Jehovah?

Conclude

Words of the Month (August 2024)

1. Haecceitas (Latin)-"Thisness" or specificity: it's a neologism evidently coined by the medieval philosopher-theologian Duns Scotus (died 1308 CE).

2. Postlapsarian (Latin)-When used theologically, the word can be defined this way:  "occurring after or due to the fall of humankind as expounded in the Bible"

See https://www.thefreedictionary.com/postlapsarian

3. Infralapsarian (Latin)-"any of a group of Calvinists who held that God's plan of salvation for some people followed and was a consequence of the fall of humankind from grace"

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/infralapsarian

4. Hypostatic union (Greek derivation)- "union in one hypostasis

especially : the union of the divine and human natures of Christ in one hypostasis"

See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypostatic%20union

Once Threads Close (Mod Note)

Greetings all,

I'm going to post some comments from Nincsnevem to a thread that just closed this morning. However, in the future, I will be less amenable to adding comments once threads close. I try to keep these discussions focused on the OP, but they inevitably glide into other subjects. 
However, that is not what I desire. 

Best regards, 
Edgar