"That we may apply the medicine of the scripture..."

Image: William Tyndale (1494-1536)

Though a man had a precious and rich jewel, yet if he knew not the value thereof, nor wherefore it served, he were neither the better nor richer of a straw. Even so though we read the scripture, and babble of it ever so much, yet if we know not the use of it, and wherefore it was given, and what is therein to be sought, it profits us nothing at all. It is not enough, therefore, to read and talk of it only, but we must also desire God, day and night, instantly, to open our eyes, and to make us understand and feel wherefore scripture was given, that we may apply the medicine of the scripture, every man to his own sores. Unless we intend to be idle disputers, and brawlers about vain words, ever gnawing upon the bitter bark without, and never attaining unto the sweet pith within; and persecuting one another in defending of wicked imaginations, and phantasies of our own invention.”

William Tyndale, prefixed to the translation of the Pentateuch (1530)  

When Christians & Jews Cleaned Up Hollywood

Image: Paramount photographer "Whitey" Schafer's "Thou Shalt Not" (1940)

“The Storm of ’34"

As Protestant clergy urged their congregations “to unite with Catholics in their campaign to raise the moral standards of pictures,” the Central Conference of American Rabbis called for cooperation “with other religious and civic bodies in bringing home to the picture producers their responsibility for taking immediate steps to elevate the standards of pictures.” American Jews had special reason to work shoulder to shoulder with Christian America. An antisemitism that was never too thinly veiled lay behind at least some of the attacks on Hollywood as the Sodom on the Pacific. Largely ruled and disproportionately populated by American Jews, the motion picture industry was a conspicuous national stage for a people whose every historical instinct counseled against conspicuous displays. Perhaps noting the significant omission of the “Judeo” from the possessive “our Christian civilization” in Cardinal Dougherty’s pastoral letter, Rabbi Sidney E. Goldstein of the Central Conference of American Rabbis averred that Jews should be more concerned than other religious groups in making sure movies were wholesome, “for if the screen is not kept clean, the disgrace will fall on the shoulders of the Jews.”

Thomas Doherty, Pre-Code Hollywood: Sex, Immorality, and Insurrection in American Cinema 1930-1934 (p. 322)

The first attempts at modern New Testament scholarship

Image: Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536)

Breaking with the medieval tradition, failing to anticipate the Reformation style, the humanists exhibited continuity instead with the modern world with respect to New Testament scholarship. Humanist philology came to dominate New Testament study and created a new brand of scholarship that has worked a profound influence on modern culture. Humanist philology not only made possible a more accurate understanding of the New Testament, but also led to a new vision of Christian antiquity itself. With the humanists works, the New Testament world began to retreat into history, and the Christian scriptures would figure in later centuries less as the arbiter of doctrine, more as the object of professional philological and historical analysis. By no means do I wish by this interpretation to try to restore currency to the old, discredited notion that the Renaissance humanists posed a secular or anti-religious alternative to a supposedly spiritual, Christian worldview developed in the Middle Ages. The fundamentally Christian character of the humanists’ thought is now well established. Far from weakening the Christian tradition, the humanists took philological studies as a new way to express their devotion to that tradition. One can only take at face value the refrain Erasmus often repeated in his prefatory and apologetic works, that he undertook his scholarly labors not in order to harm religion, but rather to provide purer texts and an improved understanding of the New Testament.

Yet one must also recognize in the humanists’ works the first attempts to apply philological criteria in establishing accurate texts, producing sensitive translations, and providing sound, historical explanations of the New Testament. That is to say, in their efforts one finds the first attempts at modern New Testament scholarship.

Jerry H. Bentley, Humanists and Holy Writ: New Testament Scholarship in the Renaissance  (pp. 218-19)  

Latin Vulgate readings found in the Textus Receptus compared with the Complutensian Polyglot

Image: Complutensian Polyglot open to the Gospel of John (source)

This article concerns the Latin Vulgate readings found in the Textus Receptus (TR) as compared with the Greek text of the Complutensian Polyglot (CP) New Testament.

Of the nine (most important and familiar) Latin readings found in the Textus Receptus listed by E. F. Hills in his book The King James Version Defended (pp. 200-202) the CP agrees with only two: John 3:25 and Romans 16:25-27.

With regard to these particular readings, I’m of the opinion that the scholars who produced the 1514 Complutensian Polyglot New Testament likely did a better job of going back to the original Greek of the New Testament than did those scholars who compiled later editions of what became known as the Textus Receptus. Hills believed these Latin readings were the true readings; that they had become lost in the Greek but had been preserved (by God's providence) in the Latin.

My studies of the Complutensian Polyglot will continue. I've not been able to find much information about the CP thus far, which has been rather disappointing.

++++

Most Greek manuscripts and the CP are missing “raise the dead” at Matthew 10:8, whereas the Vulgate and TR include this passage.

Most Greek manuscripts and the CP are missing “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots” at Matthew 27:35, whereas the Vulgate and the TR include this passage.

Most Greek manuscripts, the CP, the Vulgate, and the TR read “the Jews” (Ἰουδαίων) as opposed to “a Jew” (Ἰουδαίου) at John 3:25.

Most Greek manuscripts and the CP are missing Acts 8:37 “And Philip said: If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest. And he answering, said: I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God”, whereas the Vulgate and the TR include this passage.

Most Greek manuscripts and the CP are missing “It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks” at Acts 9:5, whereas the Vulgate and the TR include it.

Most Greek manuscripts and the CP are missing “And he trembling and astonished, said: Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” at Acts 9:6, whereas the Vulgate and the TR include this.

Most Greek manuscripts and the CP at Acts 20:28 read “church of our Lord and God” as opposed to “church of God,” which is the reading found in the Vulgate and the TR.

The Vulgate, the TR, and the CP include the doxology at Romans 16:25-27. In the majority of Greek manuscripts this doxology is placed at the end of chapter 14.

All the Greek manuscripts, except possibly one or two, and the CP have “tree of life” at Rev. 22:19 whereas the Vulgate and the TR have “book of life.”

++++

E. F. Hills (The King James Version Defended pp. 200-202) on the Latin readings found in the Textus Receptus…

The following are some of the most familiar and important of those relatively few Latin Vulgate readings which, though not part of the Traditional Greek text, seem to have been placed in the Textus Receptus by the direction of God's special providence and therefore are to be retained. The reader will note that these Latin Vulgate readings are also found in other ancient witnesses, namely, old Greek manuscripts, versions, and Fathers.

Matt. 10:8 raise the dead, is omitted by the majority of the Greek manuscripts. This reading is present, however, in Aleph B C D 1, the Latin Vulgate, and the Textus Receptus.

Matt. 27: 35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted My garments among them, and upon My vesture did they cast lots. Present in Eusebius (c. 325), 1 and other "Caesarean" manuscripts, the Harclean Syriac, the Old Latin, the Vulgate, and the Textus Receptus. Omitted by the majority of the Greek manuscripts.

John 3:25 Then there arose a questioning between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying. Pap 66, Aleph, 1 and other "Caesarean" manuscripts, the Old Latin, the Vulgate, and the Textus Receptus read the Jews. Pap 75, B. the Peshitta, and the majority of the Greek manuscripts read, a Jew.

Acts 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. As J. A. Alexander (1857) suggested, this verse, though genuine, was omitted by many scribes, "as unfriendly to the practice of delaying baptism, which had become common, if not prevalent, before the end of the 3rd century." Hence the verse is absent from the majority of the Greek manuscripts. But it is present in some of them, including E (6th or 7th century). It is cited by Irenaeus (c. 180) and Cyprian (c.250) and is found in the Old Latin and the Vulgate. In his notes Erasmus says that he took this reading from the margin of 4ap and incorporated it into the Textus Receptus.

Acts 9:5 it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. This reading is absent here from the Greek manuscripts but present in Old Latin manuscripts and in the Latin Vulgate known to Erasmus. It is present also at the end of Acts 9:4 in E, 431, the Peshitta, and certain manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate. In Acts 26:14, however, this reading is present in all the Greek manuscripts. In his notes Erasmus indicates that he took this reading from Acts 26:14 and inserted it here.

Acts 9:6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do? and the Lord said unto him. This reading is found in the Latin Vulgate and in other ancient witnesses. It is absent, however, from the Greek manuscripts, due, according to Lake and Cadbury (1933), "to the paucity of Western Greek texts and the absence of D at this point." In his notes Erasmus indicates that this reading is a translation made by him from the Vulgate into Greek.

Acts 20:28 Church of God. Here the majority of the Greek manuscripts read, Church of the Lord and God. The Latin Vulgate, however, and the Textus Receptus read, Church of God, which is also the reading of  Aleph B, and other ancient witnesses.

Rom. 16:25-27 In the majority of the manuscripts this doxology is placed at the end of chapter 14. In the Latin Vulgate and the Textus Receptus it is placed at the end of chapter l6 and this is also the position it occupies in Aleph B C and D.

Rev. 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life. According to Hoskier, all the Greek manuscripts, except possibly one or two, read, tree of life. The Textus Receptus reads, book of life, with the Latin Vulgate (including the very old Vulgate manuscript F), the Bohairic version, Ambrose (d. 397), and the commentaries of Primasius (6th century) and Haymo (9th century). This is one of the verses which Erasmus is said to have translated from Latin into Greek. But Hoskier seems to doubt that Erasmus did this, suggesting that he may have followed Codex 141.

++++

Screen grabs from the Complutensian Polyglot New Testament, which can be found online at the Library of Congress here: https://www.wdl.org/en/item/10636/

CP Matthew 10:8

Matthew 27:35

John 3:25

Acts 8:37

Acts 9:5-6

Acts 20:28

Roman 16:25-27

Revelation 22:19

Acts 20:28 variant: Church of [the Lord and] God

Image: The Complutensian Polyglot at Acts 20:28 reads: ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ

Acts 20:28 Church of God. Here the majority of the Greek manuscripts read, Church of the Lord and God. The Latin Vulgate, however, and the Textus Receptus read, Church of God, which is also the reading of [the critical text, as well as] Aleph B, and other ancient witnesses. (E. F. Hills, The King James Version Defended (p. 201)

Church of God = ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ θεοῦ
Church of the Lord and God = ἐκκλησίαν τοῦ κυρίου καὶ θεοῦ

“The word of God” in the Acts of the Apostles

Image: Acts 4:31 ff. in the Complutensian Polyglot

τὸν/ὁ λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ (the word of God)

I oftentimes hear people call the Bible the word of God, and sometimes people can make the mistake of thinking that whenever Scripture mentions "the word of God" it's talking about the Bible when, in fact, it's not talking about itself (Scripture) but about someone speaking the word of God which, in the New Testament, is the (spoken) gospel.

A reading of the Acts of the Apostles reveals that whenever the writer is referring to Scripture he writes "scripture" and whenever the writer is referring to the gospel he writes "the word of God" or something similar (e.g., the word of the Lord, the word of the gospel, the word of his grace, the word, these words, etc (see below).

The word of God in Acts is always spoken. It is both preached and taught, and there are times in Acts when the Jewish (Old Testament) Scriptures are used in the preaching and teaching of the (New Testament) gospel...

And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness (Acts 4:31). The word of God = the gospel. (the word of God = τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ)

Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables (Acts 6:2). The word of God = the gospel. (the word of God = τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ)

And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith (Acts 6:7). The word of God = the gospel. (the word of God = ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ)

Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: (Acts 8:14). The word of God = the gospel (word = λόγον)

And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God (Acts 11:1). The word of God = the gospel (τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ = the word of God).

But the word of God grew and multiplied (Acts 12:24). The word of God = the gospel (λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ = word of God).

And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: (Acts 13:5). The word of God = the gospel (τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ = the word of God).

But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people. (Acts 17:13). The word of God = the gospel (the word of God = ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ).

And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them (Acts 18:11). Teaching the word of God = the gospel and Christian living (teaching the word of God = διδάσκων ἐν αὐτοῖς τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ).

Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God (Acts 19:7). The word of God = the gospel (τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ = the word of God).

+++++

Below are all of the passages in Acts related to this topic…

Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs… (Acts 2:22). These words = the gospel. (words = λόγους)

And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation (Acts 2:40). Many other words = The gospel. (words = λόγοις)

Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; (Acts 4:4). The word = the gospel. (word = λόγον)

And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word (Acts 4:29). Thy word = the gospel. (word = λόγον)

And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness (Acts 4:31). The word of God = the gospel. (the word of God = τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ)

And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost (Acts 5:5). These words = God’s word of prophetic judgement. (words = λόγους)

Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life (Acts 5:20). The words of this life = the gospel. (words = ῥήματα)

Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables (Acts 6:2). The word of God = the gospel. (the word of God = τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ )

But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word (Acts 6:4). The ministry of the word = the gospel. (word = λόγου)

And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith (Acts 6:7). The word of God = the gospel. (the word of God = ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ)

Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word (Acts 8:4). The word = the gospel. (word = λόγον)

Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: (Acts 8:14). The word of God = the gospel (word = λόγον)

And they, when they had testified and preached the word of the Lord, returned to Jerusalem, and preached the gospel in many villages of the Samaritans (Acts 8:25). The word of the Lord = the gospel (word = λόγον)

The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:) That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; (Acts 10:36-37) The/That word = the gospel (the word = λόγον, that word = ῥῆμα).

While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (Acts 10:44) These words = the gospel (words = ῥήματα). The word = the gospel (word = λόγον).

And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of God (Acts 11:1). The word of God = the gospel (τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ = the word of God).

Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved. (Acts 11:14). Words = the gospel (words = ῥήματα).

Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. (Acts 11:16). The word of the Lord = the gospel (the word of the Lord = τοῦ ῥήματος [τοῦ] κυρίου).

Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only. (Acts 11:19). The word = the gospel (word = λόγον).

But the word of God grew and multiplied (Acts 12:24). The word of God = the gospel (λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ = word of God).

And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: (Acts 13:5). The word of God = the gospel (τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ = the word of God).

Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent (Acts 13:26). The word of this salvation = the gospel (ὁ λόγος τῆς σωτηρίας ταύτης = the word of this salvation).

Long time therefore abode they speaking boldly in the Lord, which gave testimony unto the word of his grace, and granted signs and wonders to be done by their hands. (Acts 14:3). Word of his grace = the gospel (word = λόγῳ).

And when they had preached the word in Perga, they went down into Attalia: (Acts 14:25). Word = the gospel (word = λόγον).

And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. (Acts 15:7). The word of the gospel = the gospel (word = λόγον).

And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: (Acts 15:15-16). The words of the prophets; as it is written = prophet words written = scripture ( word = λόγοι; γέγραπται = written).

Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment: (Acts 15:24). Words that subvert souls = false gospel (words = λόγοις).

And Judas and Silas, being prophets also themselves, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them. (Acts 15:32). Exhorted with many words = prophetic exhortations (words = λόγου).

Paul also and Barnabas continued in Antioch, teaching and preaching the word of the Lord, with many others also. (Acts 15:35). The word of the Lord = the gospel (the word of the Lord = τὸν λόγον τοῦ κυρίου).

Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia, (Acts 16:6). The word = the gospel (word = λόγον).

And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house (Acts 16:32). The word of the Lord = the gospel (word = λόγον).

And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ (Acts 17:2-3). This is an example of 1) utilizing Scripture and 2) preaching the gospel (reasoned with = διελέγετο; scriptures = γραφῶν).

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11). Word = gospel; Scriptures = Old Testament (received the word = ἐδέξαντο τὸν λόγον; scriptures = γραφὰς).

But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people. (Acts 17:13). The word of God = the gospel (the word of God = ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ).

And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them (Acts 18:11). Teaching the word of God = the gospel and Christian living (teaching the word of God = διδάσκων ἐν αὐτοῖς τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ).

Sergius Paulus, a prudent man; who called for Barnabas and Saul, and desired to hear the word of God (Acts 19:7). The word of God = the gospel (τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ = the word of God).

And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks. (Acts 19:10). The word of the Lord Jesus = the gospel (the word of the Lord Jesus = τὸν λόγον τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ).

And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified. (Acts 20:32). Word of his grace = the gospel (the word of his grace = τῷ λόγῳ τῆς χάριτος αὐτοῦ).

I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive. (Acts 20:35). The words of our Lord Jesus = the gospel teachings of our Lord Jesus ( the words of our Lord Jesus = τῶν λόγων τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ).

And they gave him audience unto this word, and then lifted up their voices, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that he should live. (Acts 22:22). This word = the gospel (word = λόγου).

But he said, I am not mad, most noble Festus; but speak forth the words of truth and soberness (Acts 26:25). The words of truth = the gospel (words = ῥήματα).

And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves (Acts 28:29). Having said these words = having said the gospel (having said these words = ταῦτα αὐτοῦ εἰπόντος).

And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him, Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him. (Acts 28:30-31). Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ = the gospel (Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ = κηρύσσων τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ διδάσκων τὰ περὶ τοῦ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ) 

The cults of blood and race and nation

Image: Soldiers in South Sudan

“There has emerged a secularism which claims to represent the same high moral ideals that Christianity does, but without dependence upon the religious beliefs which are characteristic of the church . . . It is an atheistic movement which claims to cultivate moral ideals of the same value as those defined by the church.” This man-centered religion “has made man himself the end-all and be-all of existence.” And as long as man lives for himself the world will be filled “with the cults of blood and race and nation. And in so far as that doctrine continues to dominate Western thought we may expect the recurring horrors of war and revolution, because it is a doctrine whose logic deprives mankind of a common frame of reference and in the end sets every man against every other man.”*

Guy Franklin Hershberger, War, Peace, & Nonresistance (pp. 185-86)

* H. R. Neibuhr, W. Pauck, and F. P. Miller, The Church Against the World (Chicago, 1935) pp. 32-33; 110-11

On confessing the sins of our nation

Image: The Pharisee and the Publican

When racial discrimination and other forms of social injustice abound on every hand, it is the Christian’s duty to set forth the way of love which does justice to all men, regardless of station, color, race, or creed. As Edward Yoder has said, When the nation errs, in this and in other ways, the Christian citizen rightly may “feel a genuine sorrow and express genuine repentance and confession for the sins of his national community. As did Daniel and Nehemiah and other prophets in Israel, so should Christians feel moved to confess the sins of the nation of which they are a part. To stand aloof in a self-righteous manner and assert that the sins and evils of the community are not our responsibility seems just a little like the action of the Pharisee who prayed in the Temple and proudly thanked God that he was not as bad as some other people.”*

Guy Franklin Hershberger, War, Peace, & Nonresistance (p. 170)

*Edward Yoder, “The Obligation of the Christian to the State and Community,” Mennonite Quarterly Review (April 1939) 

The present secular civilization of western society is disintegrating

Image: Planet of the Apes (1968)

The evolutionary view of society, and the progress of modern science and education, seemed to argue for a growing human enlightenment to the point where war would no longer be possible. This view, however, did not give sufficient consideration to the sinfulness of man and his need of redemption. Furthermore, those modern students of society who are less influenced by the evolutionary idealism of the past century find little evidence in the scientific study of society itself for belief in an approaching warless world. Pitirim A. Sorokin, outstanding sociologist of our day, has shown that the curve of war in the history of the nations is at times upward and again downward, but he finds no evidence of a trend in a direction which points to the end of war. On the contrary, in the early 1920’s he predicted that the twentieth century would be the bloodiest of all centuries in history to date, although believing the upward curve would in future centuries again recede. Sorokin’s prediction was based on his belief that the present secular civilization of western society is disintegrating, and that such a period of disintegration and transition is always accompanied with much warfare.

It is generally agreed that our present civilization is extremely sensate and materialistic, and many believe that for this reason it is in the process of decay. As William Pauck has said, since the Middle Ages a worldly, materialistic spirit has steadily drawn our western civilization away from God until today it “is disintegrating because it does not correspond to the divine . . . order of things.” In the mind of this writer there is no hope for the future until men become willing once more to heed the voice of the living God. With this every Christian lover of peace must agree.

Guy Franklin Hershberger, War, Peace, & Nonresistance (pp. 12-13)

Prayer for Justice with Charity

I found this prayer card today in my late father’s missal…

Prayer for Justice with Charity

Heavenly Father, Who has created all men according to Your own image and redeemed us all by the Blood of Your Divine Son, teach us how to live together as brothers, in dignity, justice, charity, and peace. May we afford to each other now the total measure of human rights guaranteed us by the law of our beloved land. But beyond that, graciously give us the vision to see clearly the full meaning of Your Command to love our neighbor as ourselves, and grant us the grace to observe this precept in our daily lives.

                                                                                                                                                  AMEN.

This is written on the back of the card…

The heart of the race question is moral and religious. It concerns the rights of man and our attitude toward our fellow man. . . .

For the welfare of our nation we call upon all to root out from their hearts bitterness and hatred. The tasks we face are indeed difficult. But hearts inspired by Christian love will surmount these difficulties.

Clearly, then, these problems are vital and urgent. May God give this nation the grace to meet the challenge it faces. For the sake of generations of future Americans, and indeed of all humanity, we cannot fail.

Statement of the American Bishops on Discrimination and the Christian Conscience, November 1958

++++

Read Discrimination and the Christian Conscience in its entirety here: http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/cultural-diversity/african-american/resources/upload/Discrimination-Christian-Conscience-Nov-14-1958.pdf

Charles Hodge on Paul's Epistle to the Romans (Chapter One)

Image: Charles Hodge (1797-1878)

 
Romans 1:1-17

DOCTRINE

1. The apostolic office, except as to what was peculiar and extraordinary, being essentially the same with the ministerial office in general, Paul teaches, 1. That ministers are the servants of Christ, deriving their authority from him, and not from the people; 2. That their calling is to preach the gospel, to which all other avocations must be made subordinate; 3. That the object of their appointment is to bring men to the obedience of faith; 4. That their field is all nations; 5. That the design of all is to honor Christ; it is for his name, vers. 1-5. 


2. The gospel is contained in its rudiments in the Old Testament. It is the soul of the old dispensation, ver. 2.

3. Christ is the Alpha and Omega of the Gospel. In stating the substance of the gospel, Paul says, ‘It concerns Jesus Christ,’ ver. 3.

4. Christ is at once God and man; the son of David and the son of God, vers. 3, 4.

5. Christ is called the Son of, God in reference to his Divine nature, and on account of the relation in which, as God, he stands to the Father. The name, therefore, is expressive of his Divine character, vers. 3, 4.

6. He is the proper object of prayer, and the source of spiritual blessings, ver. 7.

7. He is the Mediator through whom our prayers and thanksgiving must be presented to God, ver 8.

8. God is the source of all spiritual good; is to be worshipped in spirit, and agreeably to the gospel; and his providence is to be recognized in reference to the most ordinary affairs of life, vers. 8-10.

9. Ministers are not a class of men exalted above the people, and independent of them for spiritual benefits, but are bound to seek, as well as to impart good, in all their intercourse with those to whom they are sent, vers. 11, 12.

10. Ministers are bound to preach the gospel to all men, rich as well as poor, wise as well as unwise; for it is equally adapted to the wants of all, vers. 14, 15.

11. The salvation of men, including the pardon of their sins and the moral renovation of their hearts, can be elected by the gospel alone. The wisdom of men, during four thousand years previous to the advent of Christ, failed to discover any adequate means for the attainment of either of these objects; and those who, since the advent, have neglected the gospel, have been eventually unsuccessful, ver. 16, etc.

12. The power of the gospel lies not in its pure theism, or perfect moral code, but in the CROSS, in the doctrine of justification by faith in a crucified Redeemer, ver. 17, etc.

REMARKS

1. Ministers should remember that they are “separated unto the gospel,” and that any occupation which, by its demands upon their attention, or from its influence on their character or feelings, interferes with their devotion to this object, is for them wrong, ver. 1

2. If Jesus Christ is the great subject of the gospel, it is evident that we cannot have right views of the one, without having correct opinions respecting the other. What think ye of Christ? cannot be a minor question. To be Christians we must recognize him as the Messiah, or Son of David; and as Divine, or the Son of God; we must be able to pray to him, to look for blessings from him, and recognize him as the Mediator between God and man, vers. 1-8.

3. Christians should remember that they are saints; that is, persons separated from the world and consecrated to God. They therefore cannot serve themselves or the world, without a dereliction of their character. They are saints, because called and made such of God. To all such, grace and peace are secured by the mediation of Christ, and the promise of God, ver. 7.

4. In presenting truth, everything consistent with fidelity should be done to conciliate the confidence and kind feelings of those to whom it is addressed; and everything avoided, which tends to excite prejudice against the speaker or his message. Who more faithful than Paul? Yet who more anxious to avoid offense? Who more solicitous to present the truth, not in its most irritating form, but in the manner best adapted to gain for it access to the unruffled minds of his readers? vers. 8-14.

5. As all virtues, according to the Christian system, are graces (gifts), they afford matter for thanksgiving, but never for self-complacency, ver.8.

6. The intercourse of Christians should be desired, and made to result in edification, by their mutual faith, ver. 12.

7. He who rejects the doctrine of justification by faith, rejects the gospel. His whole method of salvation, and system of religion, must be different from those of the apostles, ver. 17.

8. Whether we be wise or unwise, moral or immoral, in the sight of men, orthodox or heterodox in our opinions, unless we are believers, unless we cordially receive “the righteousness which is of God” as the ground of acceptance, we have no part or lot in the salvation of the gospel, ver. 17.

Romans 1:18-32

DOCTRINE

1. The punitive justice of God is an essential attribute of his nature. This attribute renders the punishment of sin necessary, and is the foundation of the need of a vicarious atonement in order to the pardon of sinners. This doctrine the apostle assumes as a first principle, and makes it the basis of his whole exposition of the doctrine of justification, ver. 18.

2. That sin is a proper object of punishment, and that, under the righteous government of God, it will be punished, are moral axioms, which have “a self-evidencing light,” whenever proposed to the moral sense of men, vers. 18, 32.

3. God has never left himself without a witness among his rational creatures. Both in reference to his own nature and to the rule of duty, he has, in his works and in the human heart, given sufficient light to render the impiety and immorality of men inexcusable, vers. 19, 20, 32.

4. Natural religion is not a sufficient guide to salvation. What individual or what nation has it ever led to right views of God or of his law? The experience of the whole world, under all the variety of circumstances in which men have existed, proves its insufficiency; and, consequently, the necessity of a special divine revelation, vers. 21-23.

5. The heathen, who have only the revelation of God in his works and in their own hearts, aided by the obscure traditionary knowledge which has come down to them, need the gospel. In point of fact, the light which they enjoy does not lead them to God and holiness, vers. 21-23.
69

6. Error (on moral and religious subjects) has its root in depravity. Men are ignorant of God and duty, because they do not like to retain him in their knowledge, vers. 21, 28.

7. God often punishes one sin by abandoning the sinner to the commission of others. Paul repeats this idea three times, vers. 24, 26, 28. This judicial abandonment is consistent with the holiness of God and the free agency of man. God does not impel or entice to evil. He ceases to restrain. He says of the sinner, Let him alone, vers. 24-28.

8. Religion is the only true foundation, and the only effectual safeguard for morality. Those who abandon God, he abandons. Irreligion and immorality, therefore, have ever been found inseparably connected, vers. 24-28.

9. It evinces, in general, greater depravity to encourage others in the commission of crimes, and to rejoice in their commission, than to commit them one’s self, ver. 32.

10. The most reprobate sinner carries about with him a knowledge of his just exposure to the wrath of God. Conscience can never be entirely extirpated, ver. 32.

REMARKS

1. It lies in the very nature of sin, that it should be inexcusable, and worthy of punishment. Instead, therefore, of palliating its enormity, we should endeavor to escape from its penalty, vers. 18, 32.

2. As the works of God reveal his eternal power and Godhead, we should accustom ourselves to see in them the manifestations of his perfections, vers. 18-21.

3. The human intellect is as erring as the human heart. We can no more find truth than holiness, when estranged from God; even as we lose both light and heat, when we depart from the sun. Those, in every age have sunk deepest into folly, who have relied most on their own understandings. “In thy light only, God, can we see light,” ver. 21, etc.

4. If the sins of the heathen, committed under the feeble light of nature, be inexcusable, how great must be the aggravation of those committed under the light of the Scriptures, ver. 20.

5. As the light of nature is insufficient to lead the heathen to God and holiness, it is one of the most obvious and urgent of our duties to send them the light of the Bible, vers. 20-23.

6. Men should remember that their security from open and gross sins is not in themselves, but in God; and they should regard as the worst of punishments, his withdrawing for them his Holy Spirit, vers. 24-28.

7. Sins of uncleanness are peculiarly debasing and demoralizing. To be preserved from them is mentioned in Scripture as a mark of the divine favor, Ecclesiastes 7:26; Proverbs 22:14; to be abandoned to them, as a mark of reprobation.

8. To take pleasure in those who do good, makes us better; as to delight in those who do evil, is the surest way to become even more degraded than they are themselves, ver. 32.

The Ordinary Christian and the Text of the Greek New Testament

Image: The Received Greek Text of the New Testament (British and Foreign Bible Society)

One of my problems with the modern critical text of the Greek New Testament is that it places access to the original Greek of the New Testament beyond the ability of ordinary Christians. This is due mainly to the modern critical text's dependence upon (hand written) manuscripts, which the average Christian has little-or-no access to. And, even if we did, the sheer number of manuscripts and fragments of the Greek New Testament (5,000+) is too vast for ordinary Christians to process. 

As a Christian with a working knowledge of New Testament Greek, I can easily access many of the (27) printed editions of the Renaissance/Reformation era Greek New Testaments, either in print or online, and I can make my own comparisons and determinations regarding variant textual readings. I do not need priest-scholars in Münster providing me with their esoteric occult (=hidden) knowledge of the Greek text (think especially CBGM here) because I can access the Greek text for myself. And this access to the text of the Greek New Testament by ordinary Christians was, I think, one of the reasons for reforming the church during the 16th century. 

What we need today is a renewed priesthood of ordinary believers who can determine—for themselves—what the text is according to the various printed editions of the 16th and 17th (and later) centuries. 

We don't need modern textual criticism in order to do this. We can do this ourselves. We simply need a working knowledge of New Testament Greek.

What we don't need are priest-scholars in Münster handing down to us their critical text, which they expect us to receive uncritically.    

++++

Learn New Testament Greek...

John H. Dobson, Learn New Testament Greek https://www.amazon.com/Learn-Testament-Greek-John-Dobson/dp/0801017262

Online editions...

1514 Complutensian Polyglot https://www.wdl.org/en/item/10636/

1516 Erasmus 1st Novum Instrumentum omne https://cudl.lib.cam.ac.uk/view/PR-C-00002-00009

1519 Erasmus http://www.bibles-online.net/1519/ 

1521 Erasmus http://www.bibles-online.net/1521/

1550 Robert Estienne (Stephanus) 3rd - Editio Regia https://biblehub.com/tr/matthew/1.htm

1598 Beza http://textusreceptusbibles.com/Beza

1624 Elzevir http://www.textusreceptusbibles.com/Elzevir

1894 Scrivener https://biblehub.com/tr94/matthew/1.htm

1904 text of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople https://www.goarch.org/chapel/greek-new-testament

Print editions... 

The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ: According to the Received Greek text (Elzevir 1624) together with the English Authorised Version (arranged in paragraphs) http://net.ondemandbooks.com/google/A2EwAQAAMAAJ  

The Greek and English Testament (Stephanus 1550) together with the English Authorised Version arranged in parallel columns (verse by verse) Edited for the Syndics of the University Press Cambridge, by James Scholefield http://net.ondemandbooks.com/google/WM9DAQAAMAAJ 

George Ricker Berry Interlinear Greek-English New Testament (Stephanus 1550 and KJV) https://www.amazon.com/George-Ricker-Interlinear-Greek-English-Testament/dp/B00RWQAQWM

Scrivener TBS printed edition (primarily Beza 1598) https://www.amazon.com/Koine-Greek-Testament-Trinitarian-Bible/dp/1862280975


 

Errors of the Jews controverted by Paul in his epistle to the Romans

Charles Hodge (1797 – 1878)

The apostle, therefore, in this, as in all his other epistles addressed to congregations similarly situated, refutes those doctrines of the Jews which were inconsistent with the gospel, and answers those objections which they and those under their influence were accustomed to urge against it. These different elements of the early churches were almost always in conflict, both as to points of doctrine and discipline. The Jews insisted, to a greater or less extent, on their peculiar privileges and customs; and the Gentiles disregarded, and at times despised the scruples and prejudices of their weaker brethren. The opinions of the Jews particularly controverted in this epistle are: 1. That connection with Abraham by natural descent, and by the bond of circumcision, together with the observance of the law, is sufficient to secure the favor of God. 2. That the blessings of the Messiah’s reign were to be confined to Jews and those who would consent to become proselytes. 3. That subjection to heathen magistrates was inconsistent with the dignity of the people of God, and with their duty to the Messiah as King. 


There are clear indications in other parts of Scripture, as well as in their own writings, that the Jews placed their chief dependence upon the covenant of God with Abraham, and the peculiar rites and ordinances connected with it. The Baptist, when speaking to the Jews, tells them, “Say not, We have Abraham to our father; for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham,” (Luke 3:8) It is clearly implied in this passage, that the Jews supposed that to have Abraham as their father was sufficient to secure the favor of God. The Rabbins taught that God had promised Abraham, that his descendants, though wicked, should be saved on account of his merit. Justin Martyr mentions this as the ground of confidence of the Jews in his day. “Your Rabbins,” he says, “deceive themselves and us, in supposing that the kingdom of heaven is prepared for all those who are the natural seed of Abraham, even though they be sinners and unbelievers.” (Dialogue with Trypho.) They were accustomed to say, “Great is the virtue of circumcision; no circumcised person enters hell.” And one of their standing maxims was, “All Israel hath part in eternal life.”

The second leading error of the Jews was a natural result of the one just referred to. If salvation was secured by connection with Abraham, then none who were not united to their great ancestor could be saved. There is no opinion of the Jews more conspicuous in the sacred writings, than that they were greatly superior to the Gentiles; that the theocracy and all its blessings belonged to them; and that others could attain even an inferior station in the kingdom of the Messiah only by becoming Jews.

The indisposition of the Jews to submit to heathen magistrates, arose partly from their high ideas of their own dignity, and their contempt for other nations; partly from their erroneous opinions of the nature of the Messiah’s kingdom; and partly, no doubt, from the peculiar hardships and oppressions to which they were exposed. The prevalence of this indisposition among them is proved by its being a matter of discussion whether it was even lawful to pay tribute to Caesar; by their assertion that, as Abraham’s seed, they were never in bondage to any man; and by their constant tumults and rebellions, which led first to their banishment from Rome, and finally to the utter destruction of their city. The circumstance of the church at Rome, composed of both Jewish and Gentile converts; surrounded by Jews who still insisted on the necessity of circumcision, of legal obedience, and of connection with the family of Abraham, in order to salvation; and disposed on many points to differ among themselves sufficiently account for the character of this epistle.

Charles Hodge, A Commentary on Romans (pp. 7-8)

The children of God are freed from the law

Image: Charles Hodge (1797-1878)

The gospel proposes the only method by which God will justify men — a method which is entirely gratuitous; the condition of which is faith; which is founded on the redemption of Christ; which reconciles the justice and mercy of God; humbles man; lays the foundation for an universal religion, and establishes the law (chap. 3:21-31).

The truth of this doctrine is evinced from the example of Abraham, the testimony of David, the nature of the covenant made with Abraham and his seed, and from the nature of the law. He proposes the conduct of Abraham as an example and encouragement to Christians (chap. 4:1-25).

Justification by faith in Christ secures peace with God, present joy, and the assurance of eternal life (chap. 5:1-11). The method, therefore, by which God proposes to save sinners, is analogous to that by which they were first brought under condemnation. As on account of the offense of one, sentence has passed on all men to condemnation; so on account of the righteousness of one, all are justified (chap. 5:12-21).

The doctrine of the gratuitous justification of sinners cannot lead to the indulgence of sin, because such is the nature of union with Christ, and such the object for which he died, that all who receive the benefits of his death, experience the sanctifying influence of his life, chap. 6:1-11. Besides, the objection in question is founded on a misapprehension of the effect and design of the law, and of the nature of sanctification. Deliverance from the bondage of the law and from a legal spirit is essential to holiness. When the Christian is delivered from this bondage, he becomes the servant of God, and is brought under an influence which effectually secures his obedience (chap. 6:12-23).

As, therefore, a woman, in order to be married to a second husband, must first be freed from her former one, so the Christian, in order to be united to Christ, and to bring forth fruit unto God, must first be freed from the law (chap. 7:1-6).

This necessity of deliverance from the law, does not arise from the fact that the law is evil, but from the nature of the case. The law is but the authoritative declaration of duty; which cannot alter the state of the sinner’s heart. Its real operation is to produce the conviction of sin (vers. 7-13), and, in the renewed mind, to excite approbation and complacency in the excellence which it exhibits, but it cannot effectually secure the destruction of sin. This can only be done by the grace of God in Jesus Christ (chap. 7:7-25).

Those who are in Christ, therefore, are perfectly safe. They are freed from the law; they have the indwelling of the life-giving Spirit: they are the children of God; they are chosen, called, and justified according to the divine purpose; and they are the objects of the unchanging love of God (chap. 8:1-39).

Charles Hodge, A Commentary on Romans (pp. 10-11)

That all things must be fulfilled...

Image: John 19 in the TBS edition of Scrivener's TR

I was reading Luke 24:44-49 tonight and it struck me that this was the fulfillment Jesus was speaking of in Matthew 5:17-18…

“And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things. And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.” (Luke 24:44-49)

“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (Matthew 5:17-18)

The Nephilim? or Giants?

Image: The Nephilim?

“There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.” (Genesis 6:4, KJV)

“The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown.” (Genesis 6:4, ESV) 

“The Nephilim” came up in a sermon I heard at church today and I did a little research on it after I got home. 

Personally, I don’t believe fallen angels copulated with human women and produced offspring. Thomas Aquinas held the same opinion (see below, at bottom). 



But the Nephilim as a half-angelic/half-human species is a very popular myth, which, it would seem, originated with the Jews. 



Nephilim: Fallen Angels, Giants or Men? https://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/1987422/jewish/Nephilim-Fallen-Angels-Giants-or-Men.htm 



I use the King James Version of the Bible, which translates the Hebrew word נְפִיל (nephilim) into English as “giants.” Most modern versions, however, transliterate the Hebrew word into English as “Nephilim.” 

Both the Latin Vulgate and the Greek Septuagint translate the Hebrew word נְפִיל (nephalim) as gigantes and γίγαντες (gigantes) respectively. So the English “giants” and Latin “gigantes” is simply a transliteration of the Greek γίγαντες.



The modern versions’ use of “Nephilim” is, I think, problematic, as it can lead people to think of “The Nephilim” as a hybrid race of half-angelic (= half-demonic!) half-human mighty men of renown who existed both before and after the flood, perhaps having even escaped the flood. Whereas the truth is more likely that these (100%) human giants existed, both before and after the flood, as part of the human race in those ancient times.





The giants before the flood drowned in the flood, and the giants who appear in Numbers 13:33 were different giants who came to exist after the flood, being descendants of Noah and his family.

“And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.” (Numbers 13:33, KJV)

“And there we saw the Nephilim (the sons of Anak, who come from the Nephilim), and we seemed to ourselves like grasshoppers, and so we seemed to them.” (Numbers 13:33, ESV)

Who are the Nephilim in Genesis 6? https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/who-are-the-nephilim-in-genesis-6 



Who Were the Nephilim? Genesis 6 and Numbers 13—a Fresh Look https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/who-were-the-nephilim/



“Nephilim: giants, name of two peoples, one before the flood and one after the flood. Properly, a feller, i.e. A bully or tyrant -- giant. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Lexicon (1908) gives the meaning of nephilim as 'giants', and holds that proposed etymologies of the word are all very precarious.” (Strong’s) https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5303.htm



“As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei xv): "Many persons affirm that they have had the experience, or have heard from such as have experienced it, that the Satyrs and Fauns, whom the common folk call incubi, have often presented themselves before women, and have sought and procured intercourse with them. Hence it is folly to deny it. But God's holy angels could not fall in such fashion before the deluge. Hence by the sons of God are to be understood the sons of Seth, who were good; while by the daughters of men the Scripture designates those who sprang from the race of Cain. Nor is it to be wondered at that giants should be born of them; for they were not all giants, albeit there were many more before than after the deluge." Still if some are occasionally begotten from demons, it is not from the seed of such demons, nor from their assumed bodies, but from the seed of men taken for the purpose; as when the demon assumes first the form of a woman, and afterwards of a man; just as they take the seed of other things for other generating purposes, as Augustine says (De Trin. ii.), so that the person born is not the child of a demon, but of a man.” (

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica (Part 1, Question 51, Article 2, Reply to Objection 6)

The universe is ordained towards God as its end

Image: Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem (c) National Geographic

Now if we wish to assign an end to any whole, and to the parts of that whole, we shall find, first, that each and every part exists for the sake of its proper act, as the eye for the act of seeing; secondly, that less honorable parts exist for the more honorable, as the senses for the intellect, the lungs for the heart; and, thirdly, that all parts are for the perfection of the whole, as the matter for the form, since the parts are, as it were, the matter of the whole. Furthermore, the whole man is on account of an extrinsic end, that end being the fruition of God. So, therefore, in the parts of the universe also every creature exists for its own proper act and perfection, and the less noble for the nobler, as those creatures that are less noble than man exist for the sake of man, whilst each and every creature exists for the perfection of the entire universe. Furthermore, the entire universe, with all its parts, is ordained towards God as its end, inasmuch as it imitates, as it were, and shows forth the Divine goodness, to the glory of God. Reasonable creatures, however, have in some special and higher manner God as their end, since they can attain to Him by their own operations, by knowing and loving Him. Thus it is plain that the Divine goodness is the end of all corporeal things.

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica (Part 1, Question 65, Article 2)

Whether the multitude and distinction of things come from God?

I answer that, The distinction of things has been ascribed to many causes. For some attributed the distinction to matter, either by itself or with the agent. Democritus, for instance, and all the ancient natural philosophers, who admitted no cause but matter, attributed it to matter alone; and in their opinion the distinction of things comes from chance according to the movement of matter. Anaxagoras, however, attributed the distinction and multitude of things to matter and to the agent together; and he said that the intellect distinguishes things by extracting what is mixed up in matter.

But this cannot stand, for two reasons.

First, because, as was shown above (I:44:2), even matter itself was created by God. Hence we must reduce whatever distinction comes from matter to a higher cause.

Secondly, because matter is for the sake of the form, and not the form for the matter, and the distinction of things comes from their proper forms. Therefore the distinction of things is not on account of the matter; but rather, on the contrary, created matter is formless, in order that it may be accommodated to different forms.

Others have attributed the distinction of things to secondary agents, as did Avicenna, who said that God by understanding Himself, produced the first intelligence; in which, forasmuch as it was not its own being, there is necessarily composition of potentiality and act, as will appear later (I:50:3. And so the first intelligence, inasmuch as it understood the first cause, produced the second intelligence; and in so far as it understood itself as in potentiality it produced the heavenly body, which causes movement, and inasmuch as it understood itself as having actuality it produced the soul of the heavens.

But this opinion cannot stand, for two reasons. First, because it was shown above (I:45:5) that to create belongs to God alone, and hence what can be caused only by creation is produced by God alone—viz. all those things which are not subject to generation and corruption. Secondly, because, according to this opinion, the universality of things would not proceed from the intention of the first agent, but from the concurrence of many active causes; and such an effect we can describe only as being produced by chance. Therefore, the perfection of the universe, which consists of the diversity of things, would thus be a thing of chance, which is impossible.

Hence we must say that the distinction and multitude of things come from the intention of the first agent, who is God. For He brought things into being in order that His goodness might be communicated to creatures, and be represented by them; and because His goodness could not be adequately represented by one creature alone, He produced many and diverse creatures, that what was wanting to one in the representation of the divine goodness might be supplied by another. For goodness, which in God is simple and uniform, in creatures is manifold and divided and hence the whole universe together participates the divine goodness more perfectly, and represents it better than any single creature whatever.

And because the divine wisdom is the cause of the distinction of things, therefore Moses said that things are made distinct by the word of God, which is the concept of His wisdom; and this is what we read in Genesis 1:3-4: "God said: Be light made . . . And He divided the light from the darkness."

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica (Part 1, Question 47, Article 1)

Thomas Aquinas, Joachim of Fiore, and the Trinity

Image: Saint Thomas Aquinas (Detail from Valle Romita Polyptych
by Gentile da Fabriano (c. 1400)

This article is related to the previous one, which can be found here: Translation of marginal note at 1 John 5:7-8 in the Complutensian Polyglot http://theworldperceived.blogspot.com/2019/08/translation-of-marginal-note-at-1-john.html

1 John 5:7-8

“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”

Marginal Note at 1 John 5:7-8 in the Complutensian Polyglot (1514)

“Saint Thomas, in his exposition of the second Decretal concerning the Most High Trinity and the Catholic faith, treating of this passage, ‘There are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit,’ in opposition to the Abbot Joachim, uses precisely the following language: — And to teach the unity of the three persons it is subjoined, And these three are one; which is said on account of their unity of essence. But Joachim, wishing perversely to refer this to a unity of affection and agreement, alleged the text that follows it. For it is immediately subjoined, And there are three that bear witness on earth, namely, the Spirit, the water, and the blood. And in some books it is added, And these three are one. But this is not contained in the true copies, but is said to have been added by the Arian heretics to prevent the text that precedes from being correctly understood as relating to the unity of essence of the three persons.’ — Thus the blessed Thomas, as above referred to.”

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica (Part 1, Question 39, Article 5)

“I answer that, Concerning this, the abbot Joachim erred in asserting that as we can say ‘God begot God,’ so we can say ‘Essence begot essence’: considering that, by reason of the divine simplicity God is nothing else but the divine essence. In this he was wrong, because if we wish to express ourselves correctly, we must take into account not only the thing which is signified, but also the mode of its signification as above stated (Article 4). Now although ‘God’ is really the same as ‘Godhead,’ nevertheless the mode of signification is not in each case the same. For since this word ‘God’ signifies the divine essence in Him that possesses it, from its mode of signification it can of its own nature stand for person. Thus the things which properly belong to the persons, can be predicated of this word, ‘God,’ as, for instance, we can say ‘God is begotten’ or is ‘Begetter,’ as above explained (Article 4). The word ‘essence,’ however, in its mode of signification, cannot stand for Person, because it signifies the essence as an abstract form. Consequently, what properly belongs to the persons whereby they are distinguished from each other, cannot be attributed to the essence. For that would imply distinction in the divine essence, in the same way as there exists distinction in the ‘supposita.’ [that is: a distinct subsistent individual in a particular nature].”

Source: Summa Theologica (Part 1, Question 39) The persons in relation to the essence: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1039.htm

The Abbot and the Doctors: Scholastic Reactions to the Radical Eschatology of Joachim of Fiore

“Thomas' second period in Paris (1269-72) brought all these insights together in systematic fashion in the Summa. Joachim's Trinitarian errors are dealt with in q. 39, a. 5 of the Prima Pars, ‘Whether essential names signified in the abstract are able to stand for the [divine] Person.’ In its clarity and brevity the article shows an advance over the more diffuse treatment of the In Decretalem Secundum Expositio.”

Source: The Abbot and the Doctors: Scholastic Reactions to the Radical Eschatology of Joachim of Fiore (page 39) https://tinyurl.com/yy5djl9y   

The Second Decretal of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215)

2. On the error of abbot Joachim

We therefore condemn and reprove that small book or treatise which abbot Joachim published against master Peter Lombard concerning the unity or essence of the Trinity, in which he calls Peter Lombard a heretic and a madman because he said in his Sentences, “For there is a certain supreme reality which is the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit, and it neither begets nor is begotten nor does it proceed”. He asserts from this that Peter Lombard ascribes to God not so much a Trinity as a quaternity, that is to say three persons and a common essence as if this were a fourth person. Abbot Joachim clearly protests that there does not exist any reality which is the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit-neither an essence nor a substance nor a nature — although he concedes that the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit are one essence, one substance and one nature. He professes, however, that such a unity is not true and proper but rather collective and analogous, in the way that many persons are said to be one people and many faithful one church, according to that saying : Of the multitude of believers there was one heart and one mind, and Whoever adheres to God is one spirit with him; again He who plants and he who waters are one, and all of us are one body in Christ; and again in the book of Kings, My people and your people are one. In support of this opinion he especially uses the saying which Christ uttered in the gospel concerning the faithful : I wish, Father, that they may be one in us, just as we are one, so that they may be made perfect in one. For, he says, Christ’s faithful are not one in the sense of a single reality which is common to all. They are one only in this sense, that they form one church through the unity of the catholic faith, and finally one kingdom through a union of indissoluble charity. Thus we read in the canonical letter of John : For there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father and the Word and the holy Spirit, and these three are one; and he immediately adds, And the three that bear witness on earth are the spirit, water and blood, and the three are one, according to some manuscripts.

We, however, with the approval of this sacred and universal council, believe and confess with Peter Lombard that there exists a certain supreme reality, incomprehensible and ineffable, which truly is the Father and the Son and the holy Spirit, the three persons together and each one of them separately. Therefore in God there is only a Trinity, not a quaternity, since each of the three persons is that reality — that is to say substance, essence or divine nature-which alone is the principle of all things, besides which no other principle can be found. This reality neither begets nor is begotten nor proceeds; the Father begets, the Son is begotten and the holy Spirit proceeds. Thus there is a distinction of persons but a unity of nature. Although therefore the Father is one person, the Son another person and the holy Spirit another person, they are not different realities, but rather that which is the Father is the Son and the holy Spirit, altogether the same; thus according to the orthodox and catholic faith they are believed to be consubstantial. For the Father, in begetting the Son from eternity, gave him his substance, as he himself testifies : What the Father gave me is greater than all. It cannot be said that the Father gave him part of his substance and kept part for himself since the Father’s substance is indivisible, inasmuch as it is altogether simple. Nor can it be said that the Father transferred his substance to the Son, in the act of begetting, as if he gave it to the Son in such a way that he did not retain it for himself; for otherwise he would have ceased to be substance. It is therefore clear that in being begotten the Son received the Father’s substance without it being diminished in any way, and thus the Father and the Son have the same substance. Thus the Father and the Son and also the holy Spirit proceeding from both are the same reality.

When, therefore, the Truth prays to the Father for those faithful to him, saying I wish that they may be one in us just as we are one, this word one means for the faithful a union of love in grace, and for the divine persons a unity of identity in nature, as the Truth says elsewhere, You must be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect {2} , as if he were to say more plainly, You must be perfect in the perfection of grace, just as your Father is perfect in the perfection that is his by nature, each in his own way. For between creator and creature there can be noted no similarity so great that a greater dissimilarity cannot be seen between them. If anyone therefore ventures to defend or approve the opinion or doctrine of the aforesaid Joachim on this matter, let him be refuted by all as a heretic. By this, however, we do not intend anything to the detriment of the monastery of Fiore, which Joachim founded, because there both the instruction is according to rule and the observance is healthy; especially since Joachim ordered all his writings to be handed over to us, to be approved or corrected according to the judgment of the apostolic see. He dictated a letter, which he signed with his own hand, in which he firmly confesses that he holds the faith held by the Roman church, which is by God’s plan the mother and mistress of all the faithful.

Source: Fourth Lateran Council (1215) https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum12-2.htm

++++

Some critics assert that the marginal note at 1 John 5:7-8 of the Complutensian Polygot was added after Erasmus’ Greek New Testament was printed in 1516, because Erasmus did not include the passage, but this assertion is weak and inconclusive: see pages 67-68 in Ignacio J. García Pinilla, “Reconsidering the relationship between the Complutensian Polyglot Bible and Erasmus’ Novum Testamentum” here: https://tinyurl.com/y28add2l

Joachim of Fiore (1132-1202): http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08406c.htm

St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274): http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14663b.htm 

Complutensian Polyglot: https://www.wdl.org/en/item/10636/