"An expository sermon rises and falls on exegesis. Exegesis involves a thorough, analytical study of a biblical passage in order to develop a useful interpretation of the passage. Before we can preach any passage, we need to thoroughly understand it; exegesis is the process by which we determine the meaning.”
Paul D. Wegner, Using Old Testament Hebrew in Preaching: A Guide for Students and Pastors (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2009), 68–9.
Recently I read this article on how to make apologies for verbal faux pas in the work place. This article got me to thinking about apologies and the Bible. It seems to me that the Bible tends to emphasize confession rather than apology. But, Is a confession the same as an apology? Just thinking out loud here. What do you think?
"Some critics of Christianity seem to think that you can get rid of the idea of the divinity of Christ, and leave every other Christian doctrine untouched. They seem to think it's like some sort of precision surgery, allowing you to remove apparently unnecessary parts of the human body - it's not taking away something unimportant, but the very source of it's life and power! These words of C. S. Lewis sum up the situation perfectly: "The doctrine of Christ's divinity seems to me not something stuck on which you can unstick, but something that peeps out at every point so that you'd have to unravel the whole web to get rid of it." To deny the divinity of Christ is unnecessary and leads to a totally inadequate version of Christianity."
Alister McGrath, Explaining Your Faith (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 61.
I must confess that I have been a bit uncomfortable with how the Bible is sometimes being used in the current immigration debate. Here is an article by Jason Poling at the Washington Post website that exposes just some of the problems.
Ancient coins are often an overlooked aspect of primary source material for biblical backgrounds. Coins can shed light on a number of historical questions as seen in this article.
“The chuch as the body that lives under—or indeed on—the cross is expressing in its disciplined and triumphant life the very nature of its Lord; and this is not in any sense peripheral.”
C. K. Barrett, Church, Ministry, and Sacraments in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 26.
“I am arguing that, at crucial points, Luke gives evidence that he maintains an ethic which transcends Torah (and hence may overturn it): (a) the enthroned Messiah, Jesus, places new demands on humankind; (b) the recipients of salvation (and hence, the people of God) are not determined by Mosaic law, but by faith in Jesus; (c) the Mosaic law is not the criterion which determines the modus vivendi of the Gentile believers; (d) the Mosaic law need not govern the conduct of Jewish believers either.”
M. A. Seifrid, “Jesus and the Law in Acts,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 30 (1987): 40.
Second Peter 1:20 is well known as crux interpretum. Bill Mounce has a good discussion of the issues here. For what its worth, I happen to agree with Mounce's conclusion. I offer the following four reasons for the the "origins" view (I prefer inspiration view).
(1) This view fits the context of authentication (v. 19). Peter never states how one is to properly interpret the Scriptures.
(2) Grammatically, v. 20 goes with v. 19 rather than v. 21 Thus, Peter is not talking about interpretation but authentication (Green, 2 Peter and Jude, 90).
(3) The conjunction ga,r is often used inferentially to indicate the basis of or conclusion for something previously stated. It is easier to see how the logic fits this view (Scripture is inspired → how inspiration occurs) rather than the other (Scripture must be properly interpreted → how inspiration occurs).
(4) While the termevpi,lusij can be translated as “interpretation,” it is never used this way elsewhere to refer to the interpretation of Scripture (Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 230–31).
Eisenbraun's deal of the day has Gordon Fee's 1-2 Thessalonians commentary (NICNT) on sale at 50% Off ($22.00). The sale is only good until tomorrow at noon. Check it out here.
I have been working through Jonathan Bayes, The Weakness of the Law: God’s Law and the Christian in New Testament Perspective, Paternoster Biblical Monographs, ed. I. Howard Marshall et al. (Carlisle: Paternoster, 2000). Here is a section in which Bayes discusses the end of the ceremonial aspects of the Mosaic Law in Luke-Acts.
"There are indications already in Luke’s Gospel that the coming of Jesus as the Christ who must suffer (Lk. 9:20, 22), heralds the displacement of the ceremonial law by the new reality of fulfillment in Him. It is noteworthy that five references to the law are clustered in 2:22–39, but the word occurs only four more times in the Gospel thereafter. For this reason the authenticity of Luke 1–2 has been doubted, but this view has been compellingly refuted. More likely, the phenomenon is symbolic of the fact that a transition to something new has begun with the event described in chapter 2. Luke notes that, for the angels, it was more important that the One who had been born was the Christ than that His name was Jesus (2:11). Later, Jesus twice pronounces “Woe” on the lawyers (11:46, 52): this again may be an indication of the approaching demise of the law. In 22:37, in connection with the fulfillment in Him of the Scripture prophesying His identification with the transgressors (avno,mwn), Jesus says: “The things concerning Me have an end (te,loj).” Perhaps there is a deliberate double entendre here: the te,loj (goal) of what was prophesied about Jesus, and the life which He lived, was this identification in his death with the lawless, but that very death spells the te,loj (termination) of the law which thus pointed forward to Him.
“Because Jesus is the Christ, His coming, and particularly His death have rendered the old ceremonies unnecessary, since He is their fulfillment. Without Him, the law was incomplete; now that He has come the law is obsolete, and the time would come when that would be recognized and the ceremonies would cease.”
“Luke’s account of this momentous incident in Acts 15 has been described as ‘the most crucial chapter in the whole book,’ since it is positioned both ‘structurally and theologically at the very heart’ of Acts. “The chapter describes the turning point of Luke’s story. The threat to the expansion of the gospel to Gentiles is not only dealt with, but is turned around so that the Christian mission now extends to western Asia and Europe (15:36–19:41). After the council the Jerusalem church is hardly mentioned in Acts. Once the decision has been made, there is no further mention of the Jerusalem apostles (apart from 16:4), and the focus of the book is on the irresistible progress of the gospel to 'the ends of the earth' through Paul.”
Andreas J. Köstenberger and Peter T. O’Brien, Salvation to the Ends of the Earth: A Biblical Theology of Mission, ed. D. A. Carson (Downers Grove, IL, 2001), 151.
In John Sailhamer's The Meaning of the Pentateuch, he compares interpreting the Pentateuch to interpreting a Rembrandt painting (p. 150). Here is his paragraph.
Since the biblical narratives are like an artist’s painting, in order to understand a painting, we must look at what the artist has painted on the canvas. We would not attempt to understand a Rembrandt painting by taking a photograph of his model and using it to fill in places in the painting that are not clear or are cast in the shadows. That may help us see or understand the people and places Rembrandt painted, that is, his subject matter, but it would not help us understand the painting itself. To understand a Rembrandt painting, one must look at it and see its colors, shapes and textures. One must understand what he meant to do with each brushstroke. In the same way, to understand the Pentateuch, one must look at it and the words of its author.”
The first issue of the new journal, Early Christianity, is now available as a free pdf here. This issues theme is new directions in Pauline theology. New Directions in Pauline Theology Michael Wolter: Die Entwicklung des paulinischen Christentums von einer Bekehrungsreligion zu einer Traditionsreligion 15–40
Judith M. Lieu: “As much my apostle as Christ is mine”: The dispute over Paul between Tertullian and Marcion 41–59
Matthias Konradt: Die Christonomie der Freiheit. Zu Paulus’ Entfaltung seines ethischen Ansatzes in Gal 5,13-6,10 60–81
John M. G. Barclay: “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy”: The Golden Calf and Divine Mercy in Romans 9-11 and Second Temple Judaism 82–106
Jonathan A. Linebaugh: Debating Diagonal Δικαιοσύνη: The Epistle of Enoch and Paul in Theological Conversation 107–128
New Discoveries Peter Arzt-Grabner, Neues zu Paulus aus den Papyri des römischen Alltags 131–157
Claire Clivaz, A New NT Papyrus: 126 (PSI 1497) 158–162
New Books
Robert Jewett, Romans (Mark Reasoner) 165–174
Martin Vahrenhorst, Kultische Sprache in den Paulusbriefen (Martin Meiser) 174–179
Douglas Campbell, The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Rereading of Justification in Paul (Francis Watson) 179–185
New Projects Rainer Hirsch-Luipold, Ratio Religionis. Religiöse Philosophie und philosophische Religion in der frühen Kaiserzeit 189–191
New Discoveries Peter Arzt-Grabner, Neues zu Paulus aus den Papyri des römischen Alltags 131–157
Claire Clivaz, A New NT Papyrus: 126 (PSI 1497) 158–162