The message of Christianity must ring out clearly in the modern tumult

 

Cornelius Van Til (1895 - 1987)

 

If Christianity is to be heard above the din and noise of modern irrationalism and existentialism, it must think in terms of its own basic categories. If it has to import some of its materials from the enemy, it cannot expect effectively to conquer the enemy. It is the Christian Faith that alone has the truth; this should be its claim. It should be made with all modesty; those who have accepted it once were blind. They have been saved by grace. Little would it behoove them to regard themselves as the source of wisdom. But disclaiming themselves as the source of wisdom, they cannot make apology for God and for Christ the Son of God. If men would be saved, if they would save their culture as well as themselves, they must meet the requirements of God. There is no other way to truth. “Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that the world by its wisdom knew not God, it pleased God through the foolishness of preaching to save those that believe” ( 1 Cor. 1:20–21)

Cornelius Van Til, A Christian Theory of Knowledge (pp. 23-4)

Jewish conceptualizations of inspiration

Image: Genesis 1:1-8 in the Complutensian Polyglot (1517)

 

INSPIRATION:

Of Persons.

The state of being prompted by or filled with the spirit of God. Bezaleel was "filled with the spirit of God" (Ex. xxxi. 3, xxxv. 31); that is, he planned the work of the Tabernacle by inspiration. Inspiration is essential to all prophetic utterances; "the Spirit of God came upon Balaam" to make him prophesy (Num. xxiv. 2); upon the seventy men selected by Moses (Num. xi. 17, 25, 26); upon Saul and Saul's messengers (I Sam. x. 6, 10; xi. 6; xix. 20, 23); upon Elisha as heir and successor to Elijah (II Kings ii. 15); upon Amasai (I Chron. xii. 18); upon Jahaziel the Levite (II Chron. xx. 14). Inspiration empowered Micah to "tell Jacob his transgression" (Micah iii. 8). The prophet, therefore, is called "the man of the spirit," that is, the inspired one (Hosea ix. 7 [A. V., incorrectly, "spiritual man"]). All true prophets have their visions by divine inspiration (Isa. xxix. 10, xxx. 1; Zech. vii. 12; Neh. ix. 30).

Ezekiel very frequently describes the working of the power of inspiration (Ezek. ii. 2; iii. 12, 24; viii. 3; xi. 1, 24; xxxvi. 1). Therefore he is compared to a man from the country who is demonstrative in his description of the king; whereas Isaiah is compared to a man of the city who is accustomed to seeing the king (Ḥag. 13b). The seer of the Exile also describes the mode of his inspiration (Isa. xlviii. 16, lxi. 1).

In the future all men will come under the influence of inspiration and prophecy, says Joel (ii. 28 et seq., iii. 1 et seq.; comp. Isa. xliv. 3, lix. 19). Daniel also was inspired; "the holy spirit of God was in him" (Dan. iv. 6, 8, 15; v. 11 [A. V. and R. V., incorrectly, "the spirit of the holy gods"]) and enabled him to interpret the dream correctly, as it did Joseph also (Gen. xli. 38). David, too, sang under the power of inspiration (I Sam. xvi. 13; comp. II Sam. xxiii. 2); and the Psalmist prays for inspiration (Ps. li. 12-14 [A. V. 11-13]). Othniel, Gideon, Jephthah, and Samson judged and led Israel under the power of inspiration (Judges iii. 10, vi. 34, xi. 29, xiii. 23 et seq.). Inspiration was occasionally brought upon the prophet by the power of music (II Kings iv. 15). According to the Book of Jubilees the Patriarchs were inspired when they blessed their children or grandchildren (xxv. 14, xxxi. 12). Ben Sira says of Isaiah that his visions of the future were inspired (Ecclus. xlviii. 24; regarding Daniel, see Susanna 45 [Theodotion] and Ascensio Isaiæ, v. 14). The great festivity of the drawing of water on Sukkot ("Simḥat bet ha-Sho'ebah") brought about the inspiration of the saints and miracle-workers ("ḥasidim we-anshe ma'aseh," Suk. v. 4), and occasioned a pouring out of songs and of other manifestations of spiritual rejoicing (Yer. Suk. v. 55a; Suk. 50-51, "the pouring out of the Holy Spirit," with reference to Isa. xii. 3). Similarly the people of Israel at the Red Sea were inspired when they sang their song, faith having caused the Holy Spirit to rest upon them (Mek., Beshallaḥ; comp. Ps. R. iv. 6).

Inspiration, in rabbinical theology, is the influence of the Holy Spirit which prompted the Patriarchs, the Prophets, and the sacred writers (Sifre, Deut. 176; Tosef., Soṭah, xii. 5, xiii. 2; Seder 'Olam xx.-xxi.), the Holy Spirit and the spirit of prophecy being considered as identical (Yer. Meg. i. 70a; Targ. to Ps. li. 13, Isa. xl. 13, and I Sam. xxiii. 3). Eber was regarded as having been inspired (Gen. x. 25; Gen. R. xxxv.; Seder 'Olam R. i.); so also were Sarah (Meg. 14a; Gen. R. lxxii.), Isaac and Rebekah (Gen. R. lxxv.), Jacob (Gen. R. xcviii.), Joseph (Gen. R. xciii.; Pirḳe R. El. xxxix.), King Solomon (Tan., Ḥuḳḳat, ed. Buber, p. 11), Balaam (Tan., Balaḳ, ed. Buber, pp. 11, 17), and Job and his four friends (B. B. 15b; Lev. R. i.; Seder 'Olam R. xxi.). Often (not always in the later Haggadah, as Zunz contends in "G. V." pp. 2, 188, 191, 255, 260, 266, 275, 277 el seq., 326, 365) the prophetical and hagiographal passages are quoted as having been uttered by the Holy Spirit through Solomon, David, Amos, Ezekiel, Elisha, the sons of Korah, etc. (Pesiḳ. R. vi., vii., x., xi., xx.; Gen. R. xlv., lxxv., cxiii.; Pes. 87b; et al.). The high priest, too, when giving the answer of the Urim and Thummim, was believed to be inspired (Yoma 73b; comp. Josephus, "Ant." iv. 8, § 14, who speaks of the prophet together with the high priest). See Holy Spirit.

Of the Holy Scriptures.

Whatever book has been included in the Bible canon must necessarily have been inspired or written by the Holy Spirit (Meg. 7a; Tosef., Yad. ii. 14). Often the words of Scripture are taken to be exclamations of the Holy Spirit intercepting the speaker, and, therefore, also the work of inspiration (Soṭah ix. 7; Tosef., Soṭah, ix. 2-9; Ab. R. N. 14; Pes. 117a; Gen. R. lxiii., lxxxv.; Num. R. xvii.; Deut. R. xi.). According to IV Esd. xiv. 38, Ezra and his coworkers reproduced from memory the lost twenty-four holy books, as well as the seventy apocryphal books, by the power of the Holy Spirit. The prevailing opinion is that with the last of the Prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, inspiration ceased (Tosef., Soṭah, xiii. 2; Seder 'Olam R. xx.; Sanh. 11a; I Mace. iv. 46).

The Targum, as the recognized traditional interpretation of the Prophets, was regarded as having been written by Jonathan ben Uzziel under the inspiration of the last prophets (Meg. 3a). Similarly the Septuagint translation of the Pentateuch was regarded as the work of the Holy Spirit, or as having been inspired (Philo, "Vita Moysis," ii. 7; comp. Masseket Soferim i. 8; Aristeas Letter, §§ 305-317). Necessarily, inspiration was claimed for the translation of Holy Scripture as well as for the original text; while the Essenes made the same claim for their apocryphal writings (Wisdom vii. 27; IV. Esd. xiv. 38; see Eschatology; Essenes). It appears from Tosef., Shab. xiii. 1; Shab. 115a; and Masseket Soferim i. 7 that the earlier view regarding the inspired character of the Targum and the Septuagint was later discarded by the Rabbis, though it was maintained in Alexandria, where the apocryphal writings ranked with the canonical literature.

Traditional View.

The traditional view is that the Pentateuch in its entirety emanated from God, every verse and letter being consequently inspired; hence the tannaiticstatement that "he who says the Torah is not from Heaven is a heretic, a despiser of the Word of God, one who has no share in the world to come" (Sanh. xi. 1; ib. Gemara, 99a) is expressly explained to include any one that says the whole Torah emanates from God with the exception of one verse, which Moses added on his own responsibility, or any one that finds verses like Gen. xxxvi. 12 and 22 too trivial to assign to them a divine origin (Shab. 99a, b). The Pentateuch passages are quoted in the schools as the sayings of God ("amar Raḥmana" = "the Merciful One has said," B. M. 3b, and often). Moses wrote the whole Pentateuch at God's dictation, even, according to R. Simeon, the last eight verses, relating to his own death (B. B. 14b). On the other hand, some held that the curses in Lev. xxvi. were pronounced by "the mouth of the Divine Power," whereas those in Deut. xxviii., by Moses, were of his own prompting (Meg. 31b; but see Tosafot, "this does not exclude divine inspiration"). Every letter of the Torah was fixed by the Masorah and counted by the Soferim (Ḳid. 30a), and on each particle, such as "et," "we," "gam," "af" ("and" or "also"), were based important laws (Pes. 22b; Sanh. 70a); even the Masoretic signs formed the basis for halakic or haggadic interpretations in Akiba's system (see Akiba). The division of the Pentateuch into verses was ascribed to Moses (Meg. 22a). The final letters, also (), were fixed by the Prophets, and were therefore inspired (Shab. 104a; Yer. Meg. i. 71d; Gen. R. i.). R. Ishmael said to R. Meïr while the latter was occupied with the professional work of a scribe, "Be on thy guard concerning thy sacred task, for if thou omittest or addest one single letter to the Law thou destroyest the whole world" ('Er. 12b). This whole view of plenary inspiration was in the main (though the passage regarding the counting of the letters by the Soferim, Ḳid. 30a, includes the Prophets and Hagiographa) strictly held only in regard to the five books of Moses—the Torah. Upon the absolute completeness of the Torah rested the fundamental rabbinical principle, "No prophet after Moses was allowed to change anything in the Law" (Shab. 104a; Yoma 80a; Meg. 2b; based upon Lev. xxvii. 34 or Num. xxxvi. 13). Whatever is written in the other holy writings must therefore, somewhere or somehow, have been alluded to in the Torah (Ta'an. 9a). To the Pentateuch or Torah a higher degree of divine inspiration is accordingly ascribed than to the Prophets and Hagiographa, which are often called "dibre ḳabbalah" = "words of tradition" (see Zunz, "G. V." p. 44), or simply "sefarim" = "books" (Meg. i. 8, iii. 1), or "ketubim" (see Bible Canon). All the canonical books are "kitbe ḳodesh" = holy writings" (Shab. xvi. 1), and were read at divine the service as the divinely inspired Word ("Miḳra" = "the recited Word of God"). The prophetical and hagiographic books are implicitly included in the Torah (Tan., Re'ch, ed. Buber, p. 1), but the Torah is the standard by which their value or holiness is judged and gaged (see Shab. 13b, 30b; Meg. 7a; Ab. R. N. i.; Tos. Meg. iv. 19; Yer. Meg. iv. 73d). The final composition as well as the writing of the Hagiographa was ascribed to the "men of the Great Synagogue." who also were regarded as working under the influence of the Holy, or prophetic, Spirit, having among them the last of the Prophets (B. B. 15a; see Synagogue, Great).

Degrees of Inspiration.

As to the distinction between the plenary inspiration of the Pentateuch and the more general inspiration of the other sacred writings, a definite statement is nowhere to be found in Talmudic literature. Judah ha-Levi, in the "Cuzari" (iii. 32-39), distinguishes the books of Moses and of the other prophets from those that were only influenced by the divine power, claiming divine origin for every vowel or sign of the Pentateuch as having been given to Moses on Sinai; on the other hand, he places the inspired man, whether prophet, "nazir" like Samson, high priest, or king, above the category of common men, seeing in him one lifted to the rank of angels (iv. 15). The latter view is shared by Maimonides ("Yad," Yesode ha-Torah. vii. 1-6; "Moreh," ii. 32-35; see Prophecy). How far the view that certain passages, in the Pentateuch are emendations of the scribes ("tiḳḳune soferim," Mek., Beshallaḥ, Shirah, 6; comp. with Tan., Yelammedenu, Beshallaḥ; Gen. R. xlix.; Lev.; R. xi.; Num. R. iii.) is compatible with the idea of plenary inspiration is discussed by Albo ("'Iḳḳarim," iii. 22). In fact, the expression in Mek. l.c., "kinnah ha-katub" (Holy Writ has used a euphemistic form), is such as does not impugn the divine character of any part of the book (see I. H. Weiss in note i. 47 of his Mekilta edition, and Geiger, "Urschrift," pp. 308 et seq.).

According to Philo, whose idea of inspiration was more or less influenced by the Platonic conception of the ecstatic or God-intoxicated seer, the prophet spoke and wrote in an ecstatic state ("Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres Sit," §§ 51-52). Josephus ("Contra Ap." i., § 7) writes: "The Prophets have written the original and earliest accounts of things as they learned them of God Himself by inspiration." This view regarding the inspiration of the Bible as a whole is expressed also in II Tim. iii. 16: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (Φεόπνευστος, "given by the spirit of God," the same as the Hebrew "beruaḥ ha-ḳodesh"). Maimonides ("Moreh," ii. 45), enumerating the various degrees of prophecy, ascribes different degrees of inspiration to the Pentateuch, to the Prophets, and to the writers of the third class of Scripture—the Hagiographa. The view regarding the plenary inspiration of the Pentateuch maintained by the Rabbis and the philosophers of the Middle Ages, such as Saadia, Maimonides, and others, did not prevent them from resorting to allegorical interpretation when the literal meaning seemed opposed to human reason (Saadia, "Emunot we-De'ot," ii. 44, ix. 133; Maimonides, "Moreh," ii. 29, 47).



Modern Views.

Modern Jewish theology of the Reform school, after making full allowance for the human origin of the Holy Scriptures, and recognizing that the matter recorded is sometimes in contradiction to the proved results of modern historical, physical, and psychological research, arrives at the following conclusion: While the ancient view of a literal dictationby God must be surrendered, and while the seers and writers of Judea must be regarded as men with human failings, each with his own peculiarity of style and sentiment, the Spirit of God was nevertheless manifested in them. The Holy Scriptures still have the power of inspiration for each devout soul that reads or hears them. They speak to each generation with a divine authority such as no other book or literature possesses. The inspiration of the Bible is different from the inspiration under which the great literary and artistic master-works of later eras were produced. The religious enthusiasm of the Jewish genius leavens the whole, and the truth uttered therein, whatever be the form it is clothed in, seizes men now as it did when prophet, psalmist, or lawgiver first uttered it, themselves carried away by the power of the Divine Spirit. This view of modern theology, compatible with Biblical science and modern research, which analyzes the thoughts and the forms of Scripture and traces them to their various sources, finds that prophet and sacred writer were under the influence of the Divine Spirit while revealing, by word or pen, new religious ideas. But the human element in them was not extinguished, and consequently, in regard to their statements, their knowledge, and the form of their communication, they could only have acted as children of their age.

Bibliography:

Hauck's Real Encylopädie, s.v.;
Bacher, Die Aelteste Terminologie, der Jüdischen Schriftauslegung, 1899, pp. 88-93, 117, 154, 168, 180.

Source: 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8126-inspiration

True theological science

Image: Erasmus of Rotterdam, by Albrecht Dürer (1526)

“True theological science consists in defining nothing which is not prescribed in Scripture, and these instructions should be set forth in simplicity and in good faith… One will not be condemned for being ignorant of whether the procession of the Holy Spirit is single or double, but one will not avoid damnation if one does not try to possess the fruits of the Spirit, which are love, joy, patience, goodness, sweetness, faith, modesty, continence…”

Desiderius Erasmus, Letter to the Archbishop of Palermo (published at Basel in 1523 as the preface to his edition of the works of Hillary)

Theological Reflections on the Canonical Witness

Image: Brevard Childs (1923-2007)

We should now like to attempt some theological reflections that go beyond the descriptive task of Biblical Theology, and use as the context the witness of the whole Christian canon. It is interesting to recall the other recent theological attempts to develop an understanding of God from a different context. One thinks especially of Tillich’s ontological approach from "the ground of being," of Bultmann’s existential stance that cannot talk of God except through the medium of anthropology, of Altizer and the "death of God" theologians who speak of the God of the Old Testament dying with Jesus to signal a freeing of man from superstition, and of the "new left" who identify God with service toward one’s fellows and the humanizing of the structures of society. Perhaps the only things held in common among these various contemporary alternatives is their failure to take the Biblical canon seriously.

What does it mean to interpret the New Testament in the light of the Old? First, the Old Testament witness to the God of Israel provides the matrix in which the Christological statements of the New Testament are made. We cannot understand Jesus Christ apart from what God was doing as creator of the world, convenanting with Israel, guiding and directing the nations in judgment and mercy. The faith of the Christian church is not built upon Jesus of Nazareth who had a Jewish background, but its faith is directed to God, the God of Israel, Creator of the world, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Old Testament testimony to God serves the church, not as interesting background to the New Testament, nor as historical preparation for Christ’s arrival, but as the living vehicle of the Spirit through which it continues to confront God.

Secondly, the Old Testament witness to God as the context from which to understand the New Testament guards the Christian against any truncated interpretation of God’s work in Christ that would separate the physical world from the spiritual, the objective action from the internal motivation, the people of God from the individual believer, and commitment to a covenant from authentic existence. Most of the heresies of the Christian church stem from a distorted emphasis of the New Testament that has been cut adrift from its Old Testament moorings.

Thirdly, the Old Testament witness to God continues to provide the primary witness to dimensions of God’s nature and purpose which, far from being corrected, are sustained and reiterated in the New. The righteousness of God is not bypassed but fulfilled in the cross. The holiness of God is not reduced by the incarnation but radicalized. The unity of God is not endangered by the Son but confirmed. The mystery of God is not made obvious but projected to new dimensions of wonder and praise.

Conversely, what does it mean to interpret the Old Testament in the light of the New? First, the New Testament testifies to the failure of Israel in its response to the covenant will of God. The Old Testament does not present a history of growing obedience or increasing illumination, but ends in dissidence and uncertainty. The easy continuity expressed in the phrase "the Judeo-Christian heritage" is opposed by the New Testament’s witness to Jesus Christ, which testifies to his suffering, rejection, and death at the hands of the chosen people. The New Testament remains an offense because it lays claim to the Scriptures of Israel and hears in them the testimony to the rejected Messiah of God.

Secondly, the New Testament’s witness to Christ as the context for understanding the Old Testament points to the fact that there is no aspect of the old covenant’s testimony which is unaffected by the Lord of the church. The New Testament confesses Christ as Creator, Eternal Wisdom, Redeemer of Israel, and Judge. There is no body of Old Testament teaching that stands by itself and is untouched by the revelation of the Son. This means that frequent appeal to the term "Christomonism" raises a false issue, which has failed to understand the dynamics of Trinitarian theology.

Thirdly, the New Testament’s witness to Christ provides the context from which to understand the tensions within the Old Testament’s witness to God. His justice and his mercy find a unity in the death of Jesus, his transcendence and immanence in the incarnation, and his Kingship over heaven and earth in the reign of his Christ. The claim for a unity within the Old Testament is a theological confession that views the promise from the perspective of its fulfillment.

Fourthly, the New Testament’s witness to Christ guards the Old Testament from distortions to which it is vulnerable when isolated from its whole context. The God of the Old Testament is not the God of Israel alone, but of all the nations. The physical blessings of this world -- life, land, the people -- are an inheritance that points to the ultimate reward which is God himself. Man’s worship, his deeds of charity, and search for God are vain and worthless strivings without the Spirit of God who breathes life into dead forms.

Lastly, what does it mean to interpret the Biblical witnesses to God in the light of God’s reality, and his reality m the light of the witnesses? First, the Scriptures are pointers to God himself. To know about God is not the same as knowing God. "Let him who glories glory in this, that he understands and knows me." (Jer. 9:24.) The God of the Bible is not a theological system, but a living and acting Lord, the one with whom we have to do -- now. We are confronted, not just with ancient witnesses, but with our God who is the Eternal Present. Prayer is an integral part in the study of Scripture because it anticipates the Spirit’s carrying its reader through the written page to God himself. Again, obedience is the source of the right knowledge of God. Peter said to Jesus: "Lord, what about this man?" Jesus said: "What’s that to you? Follow me." The Christian is led from faith to faith, but in the context of faithful response to God and his people. Finally, the Christian interpreter strives to learn to use the language of faith that he reads in the Bible. The ancient medium becomes a living vehicle into the presence of God only insofar as it becomes the witness of each new generation. He cannot ape the past, but he can be instructed by the prophets and apostles toward the end that he learns himself to speak the language of faith for his age.

Brevard Childs, Biblical Theology in Crisis (pp. 216-19)

"The reason for the predestination of some, and reprobation of others..."

Image: Thomas Aquinas

The reason for the predestination of some, and reprobation of others, must be sought for in the goodness of God. Thus He is said to have made all things through His goodness, so that the divine goodness might be represented in things. Now it is necessary that God's goodness, which in itself is one and undivided, should be manifested in many ways in His creation; because creatures in themselves cannot attain to the simplicity of God. Thus it is that for the completion of the universe there are required different grades of being; some of which hold a high and some a low place in the universe. That this multiformity of grades may be preserved in things, God allows some evils, lest many good things should never happen, as was said above (I:22:2). Let us then consider the whole of the human race, as we consider the whole universe. God wills to manifest His goodness in men; in respect to those whom He predestines, by means of His mercy, as sparing them; and in respect of others, whom he reprobates, by means of His justice, in punishing them. This is the reason why God elects some and rejects others. To this the Apostle refers, saying (Romans 9:22-23): "What if God, willing to show His wrath [that is, the vengeance of His justice], and to make His power known, endured [that is, permitted] with much patience vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction; that He might show the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He hath prepared unto glory" and (2 Timothy 2:20): "But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver; but also of wood and of earth; and some, indeed, unto honor, but some unto dishonor." Yet why He chooses some for glory, and reprobates others, has no reason, except the divine will. Whence Augustine says (Tract. xxvi. in Joan.): "Why He draws one, and another He draws not, seek not to judge, if thou dost not wish to err." Thus too, in the things of nature, a reason can be assigned, since primary matter is altogether uniform, why one part of it was fashioned by God from the beginning under the form of fire, another under the form of earth, that there might be a diversity of species in things of nature. Yet why this particular part of matter is under this particular form, and that under another, depends upon the simple will of God; as from the simple will of the artificer it depends that this stone is in part of the wall, and that in another; although the plan requires that some stones should be in this place, and some in that place. Neither on this account can there be said to be injustice in God, if He prepares unequal lots for not unequal things. This would be altogether contrary to the notion of justice, if the effect of predestination were granted as a debt, and not gratuitously. In things which are given gratuitously, a person can give more or less, just as he pleases (provided he deprives nobody of his due), without any infringement of justice. This is what the master of the house said: "Take what is thine, and go thy way. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will?" (Matthew 20:14-15).

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica (Part 1, Question 23, Article 5, Reply to Objection 3)

Whether sacred doctrine is a matter of argument?

Image: Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) by Nat Ewert

This doctrine is especially based upon arguments from authority, inasmuch as its principles are obtained by revelation: thus we ought to believe on the authority of those to whom the revelation has been made. Nor does this take away from the dignity of this doctrine, for although the argument from authority based on human reason is the weakest, yet the argument from authority based on divine revelation is the strongest. But sacred doctrine makes use even of human reason, not, indeed, to prove faith (for thereby the merit of faith would come to an end), but to make clear other things that are put forward in this doctrine. Since therefore grace does not destroy nature but perfects it, natural reason should minister to faith as the natural bent of the will ministers to charity. Hence the Apostle says: "Bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ" (2 Corinthians 10:5). Hence sacred doctrine makes use also of the authority of philosophers in those questions in which they were able to know the truth by natural reason, as Paul quotes a saying of Aratus: "As some also of your own poets said: For we are also His offspring" (Acts 17:28). Nevertheless, sacred doctrine makes use of these authorities as extrinsic and probable arguments; but properly uses the authority of the canonical Scriptures as an incontrovertible proof, and the authority of the doctors of the Church as one that may properly be used, yet merely as probable. For our faith rests upon the revelation made to the apostles and prophets who wrote the canonical books, and not on the revelations (if any such there are) made to other doctors. Hence Augustine says (Epis. ad Hieron. xix, 1): "Only those books of Scripture which are called canonical have I learned to hold in such honor as to believe their authors have not erred in any way in writing them. But other authors I so read as not to deem everything in their works to be true, merely on account of their having so thought and written, whatever may have been their holiness and learning."

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Question 1 (The nature and extent of sacred doctrine) Article 8 (Whether sacred doctrine is a matter of argument?) Reply to Objection 2 (emphasis added)

Why many pastors are confessional or received text advocates

Image: Trinitarian Bible Society's Η ΚΑΙΝΗ ΔΙΑΘΗΚΗ (The New Testament)

Like it or not, confessional or received text folks now constitute a particular sect of Protestantism. A traditional, or traditionalist, sect.

Why would someone seek to follow the 17th century traditional Protestant scriptural text and theological confession? Probably in order to have a firm faith foundation, which provides them with maximum certainty, with well established theological doctrines, and a well established traditional Protestant canonical text.

Such a foundation allows these believers to make continual progress in living their Christian faith.

Foundational issues of the Christian faith, such as Scripture and doctrine, must be settled, well established, in order to make such progress. This is especially important for those who are new believers, who are reading the Scriptures and learning Christian doctrine for the first time.

This is why many pastors are confessional or received text advocates.

The academic challenges and uncertainties of modern text criticism certainly appeal to the intellect, and to intellectuals, but having the certainty of a settled sacred text and doctrine appeals to the hearts and minds of pastors and ordinary Christian believers.

Sadly, the academic challenges and uncertainties of modern criticism also leads some people—both intellectuals and ordinary believers—to loss of faith in Scripture and traditional Christian doctrines.

Does it seem somewhat anti-intellectual for Christians to believe in and hold to these old ways?

I’m sure it does seem so to some people. But what is it really hurting to hold on to the old theology and the old text? Couldn't holding on to these actually be very helpful to them, and to those they are pastoring?

The goal of pastors isn’t to instruct their churches about the latest trends in modern speculative theology, doctrine, and text criticism. Although this sort of thing does have an immense appeal to both the ego and the intellect, especially in well educated and well read Protestant circles.

We should keep in mind that God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble (see: Proverbs 3:34; 1 Peter 5:5; James 4:6).

Knowledge puffs up, but charity edifies (1 Corinthians 8:1).

Do we want proud pastors who are knowledgeable about the latest trends in modern theology, doctrine, and text criticism? Or do we want pastors who will follow the old, proven ways of making faithful disciples of Jesus Christ?

Personally, I want a pastor who builds me up in the faith. 

If there’s one major difference between the old 17th century Protestant theology with its traditional text of Scripture, and the modern theology with its critical text of Scripture it is this: the old way edifies, builds people up in their faith, whereas the new way promotes doubt and uncertainty, diminishing people’s faith, while at the same time puffing them up with knowledge, so-called (1 Timothy 6:20).

Let's encourage people in their walk of faith without filling their minds (and the margins of their Bibles) with doubts and uncertainties.    

Cultivate the fruits of the Spirit

The ancients philosophized very little about divine things… The curious subtlety of the Arians drove the orthodox to greater necessity… Let the ancients be pardoned… but what excuse is there for us, who raise so many curious, not to say impious, questions about matters far removed from our nature? We define so many things which may be left to ignorance or in doubt without loss of salvation. Is it not possible to have fellowship with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit without being able to explain philosophically the distinction between them and between the nativity of the Son and the procession of the Holy Ghost? If I believe the tradition that there are three of one nature, what is the use of labored disputation? If I do not believe, I shall not be persuaded by any human reasons… You will not be damned if you do not know whether the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son has one or two beginnings, but you will not escape damnation, if you do not cultivate the fruits of the Spirit which are love, joy, peace, patience, modesty, continence, and chastity.

Desiderius Erasmus, Preface to his edition of the works of St. Hilary of Poitiers (1523)

Erasmus and Luther: The Holy Spirit and the Bible Translator

Erasmus' New Testament edition of 1516

If it is possible and desirable to translate the Scriptures into different languages, who should be the translators? Is translation merely a work of scholarship, or is special insight required? Two answers are possible and these two answers are represented by the work of two translators: Erasmus and Luther. Erasmus, the humanist, translated the New Testament into Latin; Luther, the Reformer, translated the whole Bible into German.

Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536) was a Christian humanist from Rotterdam. He opposed the view that translators should be theologians and church leaders. This view was exemplified by the belief that the Septuagint translators were inspired in some way and in the ecclesiastical authority that had been granted to the Latin Vulgate. Erasmus wished to liberate the church from the dominion of Scholastic theologians and lead it back to the simplicity of the old church. According to Erasmus, translating was primarily the work of the philologist or linguistic scholar. As an impartial scholar reads and translates the ancient texts, he mediates between the modern age and antiquity. He frees people from scholastic speculation so that they may read the original truth in the writings of the ancient world. The scholar well versed in text and languages may tell the church what is written. Only after the linguist has done his work may the theologian begin his reflections upon meaning. Philology can be compared to Jethro, theology to Moses. Moses (theology) needs the help of Jethro (philology) to do his work. The root of the matter is the distinction between philology and theology. Christian scholarship has always held that a knowledge of the language was necessary for one to translate, but knowledge was not held to be neutral. It was also believed that a spiritual insight into Scripture was required.

No one objected to Erasmus’ publishing the Greek text of the New Testament. Much exception was taken, however, to the fact that Erasmus did not print the Vulgate translation alongside the Greek. He offered instead his own Latin translation. Erasmus thus gave the impression that a philologist could determine on his own how to read Scripture.

Luther opposed Erasmus precisely at this point: That the pure philologist should be the translator of Scripture. Luther also translated the Bible, but he did not ground his right to act as translator on his knowledge of the original languages, but rather on the theological insight into Scripture that the Lord had given him. Luther believed that the translator needed grace to understand the Bible. For example, the scholar who does not necessarily understand certain Psalms to be Messianic or prophetic of the Lord Jesus Christ may choose alternative readings that obscure the Messianic meaning. It is Christ who opens the eyes of the translator to the meaning of Scripture. This does not mean that the translator receives an inspiration similar to that received by the original authors, but it does point up the fact that philology alone is not enough. Translators invariably must interpret, and godly interpretation requires the ministry of the Holy Spirit.

Luther did not oppose Scholasticism by means of philology, but by means of a better and more scriptural theology. He did not depreciate the value of linguists—Melancthon assisted him in Greek and Aurogallus in Hebrew—but theology was his battlefront. Luther respected the gifts of the Holy Spirit; each scholar in his circle used the gift or gifts God had given him in the common task. In practice, Luther’s translation is an accomplishment of fellow-workers in the Spirit, but Erasmus’ is the work of an individual linguist. Luther treasured the work of linguists, but he believed that Bible translating demands faith and a deep understanding of the Scriptures as a whole.

The viewpoints of Erasmus and Luther were really an intensification of those held before by Jerome and Augustine. Erasmus extended Jerome’s position to a belief in an antidogmatic and independent philological translation. Luther emphasized Augustine’s belief that spiritual insight must underlie a translation. The differences between Erasmus and Luther are important. Erasmus offered a translation in the language of scholars, but Luther provided a translation for the German people and for the church, and for centuries his translation has helped many find the way to God.

Jakob Van Bruggen, The Future of the Bible (pp. 44-46)

[Note: I believe these (two) views also apply to text criticism.]

Luther’s Works (Volume 54) edition of Table Talk

I recently finished reading the Luther’s Works (Volume 54) edition of Table Talk. I found it to be, as expected, a very good introduction to the man’s thought. Below are a few quotations I wrote down as I was reading through the book:

“One ought to love one’s neighbor with a love as chaste as that of a bridegroom for his bride. In this case all faults are concealed and covered over and only the virtues are seen.” (p. 28)

“For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.”  (Galatians 5:6)

“Concerning the verse in Galatians [5:6], ‘faith working through love,’ we also say that faith doesn’t exist without works. However, Paul’s view is this: Faith is active in love, that  is, that faith justifies which expresses itself in acts. Now, it is assumed by some that the fruits of faith make faith to be faith, although Paul intends something different, namely, that faith makes the fruit to be fruit. Faith comes first and then love follows. This also happens to be the case of God’s works. Circumcision, in so far as it is a work by itself, is of no account. But this, he says, is what counts: ‘Believe in me and be godly.’” (p. 74)

“When somebody asked about Moses and how he could write about the creation and other things that happened so long before his time, he [Martin Luther] said, ‘I think many things had been written before Moses and that Moses took these things and added to them what God commanded him. No doubt he had the story of the creation from the tradition of the fathers.’” (pp. 40-41) 

“This is especially so if the devil turns the gospel into law. The teachings of the law and gospel are altogether necessary, but they must be distinguished even when they are conjoined, otherwise men will despair or become presumptuous. Consequently Moses describes these teachings well when he speaks of an upper and lower millstone (Deut. 24:6). The upper millstone rumbles and pounds. This is the law. It’s very well set up by God so that it grinds. On the other hand, the lower millstone is quiet, and this is the gospel. Our Lord God has suspended the upper millstone in such a way that the grain is crushed and ground only on the lower stone.” (pp. 276-277)

“In the cart [wagon] he [Martin Luther] spoke about Italian marriages [pederasty]. “These [he said] exceeded by far all the lewdness and adulteries of the Germans. The latter are nevertheless sins, but the former uncleannesses are satanic. God protect us from this devil! By God’s grace none of the native tongues in Germany was at all acquainted with this heinous offense.” (p. 278)

“This is what that fellow [Copernicus] does who wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down. Even in these things that are thrown into disorder I believe the Holy Scriptures, for Joshua commanded the sun to stand still and not the earth.” (p. 359)

“For a long time I went astray [in the monastery] and didn’t know what I was about. To be sure, I knew something, but I didn’t know what it was until I came to the text in Romans 1 [17], ‘He who through faith is righteous shall live.’ That text helped me. There I saw what righteousness Paul was talking about. Earlier in the text I read ‘righteousness.’ I related the abstract [‘righteousness’] with the concrete [‘the righteous One’] and became sure of my cause. I learned to distinguish between the righteousness of the law and the righteousness of the gospel. I lacked nothing before this except that I made no distinction between the law and the gospel. I regarded both as the same thing and held that there was no difference between Christ and Moses except the times in which they lived and their degrees of perfection. But when I discovered the proper distinction—namely, that the law was one thing and the gospel another—I made myself free.” (pp. 442-443)

Then somebody said, “It is nevertheless asserted in the Creed ‘he descended into hell.’” Luther responded, “This must be believed. We can’t understand it. That’s the way it is. There will be debate about how the Trinity is in the unity (when there’s no relation between the infinite and the finite), how nature can produce such a strange marvel as the God-man, etc. [While occupied thus with disputation] men will let the article concerning justification go. If only we would study in the meantime how to believe and pray and become godly! We’re not content with that which we can understand and insist on disputing about something higher, which we can’t possibly understand and which our Lord God doesn’t want us to understand. That’s the way human nature is. It wishes to do what is forbidden; the rest it ignores and then starts asking Why? Why? Why? This is what happens when philosophy is introduced into theology." (pp. 447-448) 

Source: Luther’s Works, Volume 54: Table Talk https://www.amazon.com/Luthers-Works-54-Table-Talk/dp/0800603540 

Also of interest is Martin Luther’s Table Talk: Abridged from Luther’s Works Volume 54 https://www.amazon.com/Martin-Luthers-Table-Talk-Abridged-ebook/dp/B074VSR8Y1 

Review: Institutes of the Christian Religion (1541 edition)

Review: Institutes of the Christian Religion (1541 edition)

Institutes of the Christian Religion ($23.14) 920 pages
 Banner of Truth (1541 edition)
https://www.amazon.com/Institutes-Christian-Religion-John-Calvin/dp/1848714637

I really enjoyed reading this book. I found it to be very edifying.

I read sections of it each morning as part of my morning devotional reading, after I’d read the Bible.
As the publisher says:

Among the intermediate editions of the Institutes, none deserves to be better known than the first French edition of 1541. Avoiding the technical details and much of the polemics of the final work, the Institutes of 1541 offer a clear and comprehensive account of the work of Father, Son and Holy Spirit in creation, revelation and redemption, in the life of the individual Christian and in the worship and witness of the church.

As I said, I really enjoyed this book. I found it to be very edifying, the Spirit of God speaking to me at various times throughout this book. It was amazing to me how many times I’d read something in my daily reading of the Bible that was also in my daily reading of the Institutes.

Anyone interested in a good, basic introduction to Protestant theology will find it in this book. It’s very biblically based. Not philosophical, scholastic, or verbose.

The book is Smyth sewn, so it won’t fall apart on you. At 800+ pages, that’s very important. The book has clear and readable font. And it’s also available for a very good price.

Below are a few passages taken from the book…

“To summarize, then, the precept means this. As the truth was revealed to the Jews in symbolic form, so now, devoid of symbols, it is made known unto us. Throughout our lives we must think of perpetual rest from our works, so that God may work in us by his Spirit. Second, we should observe legitimate church order in the hearing of the word, the celebration of the sacraments and the offering of solemn prayers. Third, we should not place excessive burdens on those who are under our authority. In this way, there will be an end to the lies of those false teachers who in times past have fed poor common folk on Jewish beliefs, making no distinction between Sunday and the Sabbath except by saying the seventh day, which was formerly in force, has been revoked, but that one day should nevertheless be kept. That is simply to maintain that the day has been changed to spite the Jews, and to remain wedded to the superstition which Paul condemns. It is to preserve some secret meaning, as was the case under the Old Testament.” (144)

“He [the Holy Spirit] is the one who, refreshing us by his dew, distills for us the energy of life, which is why he is called ‘oil’ and ‘anointing’ (1 John 2:20, 27). He is the one who, by burning away and consuming our base appetites, kindles the flame of love in our hearts, a work for which he is called ‘fire’ (Luke 3:16). He is the one who breathes into us divine life, so that we should no longer live for ourselves but should follow his prompting and leading. So if there is any good in us, we owe it all to his grace and power. On the other hand, whatever we have of our own is only blindness of mind and crookedness of heart.” (258)

“For the Christian life should be so soberly controlled as to appear, from first to last, as a kind of perpetual fast.” (302)

“A Christian’s life is a perpetual study and exercise in the mortification of the flesh, until it is finally crushed and the Spirit of God rules within us.” (304)

“Since it is the Lord who forgives, forgets, and wipes away sins, let us confess them to him, in order to obtain grace and pardon. He is the physician; let us then show him our wounds. He is one who has been offended and injured; so let us ask him for mercy and peace. He is the one who knows hearts and who sees every thought; let us then open our hearts to him. He is the one who calls sinners; let us turn back to him.” (313)

“We accept and possess Jesus Christ by faith as he is presented to us by God’s goodness, and by partaking of him we receive grace twice over. First, being by his sinlessness reconciled to God, instead of a Judge in heaven to condemn us we have a most merciful Father. Second, we are sanctified by his Spirit, so that we may turn our minds to holiness and innocence of life.” (351)

“Now if men need some inducement to do good, there is nothing better to spur them on than to make them see the purpose of their redemption and calling. That is what God’s word does when it reveals that our consciences are cleansed from dead works by the blood of Christ so that we may serve the living God (Heb. 9:14); that we are delivered from the hand of our enemies so that we may walk before God in righteousness and holiness all the days of our life (Luke 1:74-75); that the grace of God has appeared so that, renouncing ungodliness and worldly desires, we may live sober, holy, and righteous lives in this world, as we await the blessed hope and revelation of the glory of our great God and Saviour (Titus 2:11-13); that we have not been called to provoke God’s wrath, but to obtain salvation in Christ (1 Thess. 5:9); that we are temples of the Holy Spirit, which it is not lawful to defile (1 Cor. 3:16-17); that we are not darkness but light in God, and that therefore we must walk as children of the light (Eph. 5:8); that we are not called to uncleanness but to holiness, and that God wills our sanctification, so that we abstain from all willful desires (1 Thess. 4:3, 7); that since our calling is holy, we can only answer it with purity of life (2 Tim. 1:9); that we have been delivered from sin in order to obey righteousness (Rom. 6:18).” (396)

“We must everywhere serve the cause of love and think of our neighbor’s edification.” (717)

“If, then, we are not our own, but belong to the Lord, it is clear what we must do to avoid going astray, and what our goal must be in every department of life. We are not our own: let not reason and will therefore determine our plans or the things we need to do. We are not our own: let us not therefore choose as our goal whatever might suit the flesh. We are not our own: let us therefore forget ourselves as much as we can — ourselves and everything around us. Again, we are the Lord’s: let us then live and die for him. We are the Lord’s: let his will and wisdom govern all we do. We are the Lord’s: let every part of our lives be directed to him as to their sole end. What progress that man has made who, knowing that he is not his own, denies his reason lordship and dominion over him and surrenders it instead to God! For just as there is nothing which leads to ruin more surely than self-satisfaction, so also the only haven of salvation is to cease to be wise in oneself, and to want nothing on one’s own account, but simply to follow the Lord.” (790)

“All believers, as long as they live in this world, will inevitably be as sheep to the slaughter, that they may be made like Jesus Christ their Head (Rom. 8:36).” (819)

Review: The Presence of the Kingdom, by Jacques Ellul

Review: The Presence of the Kingdom, by Jacques Ellul


I’ve read quite a few of Jacques Ellul’s books over the years but I just got around to reading his first book, which was written in 1948: The Presence of the Kingdom by Jacques Ellul https://amzn.to/2ls7k8J


I had high hopes for this book, and I wasn’t disappointed. Ellul can be a challenge to read. And the fact that he wrote in French, and everything he wrote must be translated, doesn’t help. But it’s mostly his thinking that is challenging. Most people, including myself, simply haven’t thought about things as much as Ellul did, so it’s hard to get a grasp on his thinking.

The Presence of the Kingdom is the easiest of his books that I’ve read thus far, and this is probably because it’s his first book and the many thoughts he later fleshed out are, in The Presence of the Kingdom, in a more germinal stage.

This makes the book more interesting to me because, although he expands upon his ideas in later books, this book allows me to think for myself, and try to imagine where we should go next, as though he never wrote another book, which is exactly what Ellul was hoping for when he wrote The Presence of the Kingdom.

We need to know where we are before we can know where we need to be going. We need to realize the trouble we’re in and how to get out of it. We need to reach the world for Christ by living a different style of life in the world around us.

If you want to know why politics and wars never solve problems but only create new ones… if you want to know why we can never say “no” to the latest new technology… if you want to know why communication technology has created a lack of genuine human relationships… if you want to know how we can reach the world with the gospel of Jesus Christ… buy this book. You’ll be very glad you did.

Rarely, after reading a book, do I feel like buying a case of them and passing them out to neighbors, friends, and strangers on the street. But with The Presence of the Kingdom I feel like doing exactly that.

“At the present moment we are confronted by a choice: either a mass civilization, technological, ‘conformist’ — the ‘Brave New World’ of Huxley, hell organized upon earth for the bodily comfort of everybody — or a different civilization, which we cannot yet describe because we do not know what it will be; it still has to be created, consciously, by men. If we do not know what to choose, or, in other words, how to ‘make a revolution,’ if we let ourselves drift along the stream of history, without knowing it, we shall have chosen the power of suicide, which is at the heart of the world. But we cannot have any illusions; confronted by the power of organization, our revolutionary knowledge can scarcely be used. On the other hand, where are the men and women, at the present time, who have a true sense of ‘revolution’?”

Jacques Ellul, The Presence of the Kingdom (p. 31)

“We do not have to strive and struggle in order that righteousness may reign upon the earth. We have to be ‘just’ or ‘righteous’ ourselves, bearers of righteousness. The Bible tells us that where there is a just man justice prevails… Thus justice is not a goal to attain, or a balance to be acquired, but it is the gift of God, free and inexplicable, which exists in our life so that our means are not intended to ‘bring in’ justice, but to manifest it.”

Jacques Ellul, The Presence of the Kingdom (p. 66)

“When I speak of ‘life’… I simply mean the expression of the Holy Spirit, working within us, expressing himself in our actual life, through our words, our habits, and our decisions. Thus what we need is to rediscover all that the fullness of personal life means for a man standing on his own feet in the midst of the world, who rediscovers his neighbor because he himself has been found by God. In the powerful presence of the Holy Spirit we receive the answer to this work of God, and we are bewildered because we are no longer very sure about the way forward, which no longer depends upon us. The end, as well as the means, has been taken away from us, and we hesitate as we look at this way which lies open before us, whose end we cannot see; we have only one certainty, and that is the promise which has been made to us of a certain order, which God guarantees: ‘Seek ye first His Kingdom and His righteousness, and all things shall be added unto you’ (Matt. 6:33).”

Jacques Ellul, The Presence of the Kingdom (pp. 77-78)

“Day after day the wind blows away the pages of our calendars, our newspapers, and our political regimes, and we glide along the stream of time without any spiritual framework, without a memory, without a judgment, carried about by ‘all winds of doctrine’ on the current of history, which is always slipping into a perpetual past. Now we ought to react vigorously against this slackness—this tendency to drift. If we are to live in this world we need to know it far more profoundly; we need to rediscover the meaning of events, and the spiritual framework which our contemporaries have lost.”

Jacques Ellul, The Presence of the Kingdom (p. 138)

The World Perceived: A Theological and Phenomenological Approach to Thinking, Perceiving, and Living In-The-World

This link is to the Facebook page for my theology/philosophy book: "The World Perceived: A Theological and Phenomenological Approach to Thinking, Perceiving, and Living In-The-World" - https://www.facebook.com/TheWorldPerceived 

100% of my royalties from the sales of this book go to support the Dorothy Day Catholic Worker House in Washington, D C in order to assist their good works of charity: http://dccatholicworker.wordpress.com/. 

Links to purchase the trade paperback, Kindle, Google e-book, and free ebook editions are available in the “About” section of the book’s Facebook page and are linked below. 

The DC Catholic Workers are aways very grateful for every dollar I am able to donate to them, and so am I. The many peoples they help in DC are very thankful too.

The book is the culmination of over ten years of research and four years of writing, and it’s publication was announced in the "Newsletter For Phenomenology."

See: Newsletter For Phenomenology (September 2009) - http://www.phenomenology.ro/newsletter/newsletter_296.html

The DC Catholic workers receive the most (= $8.00 per copy) when purchased from my online e-store: CreateSpace (publisher): https://www.createspace.com/3359491 and they receive $5.00 per copy when purchased from all other online retailers, such as Amazon, B&N, and Indiebound (see links below).

The World Perceived: A Theological And Phenomenological Approach To Thinking, Perceiving, And Living In-The-World

Authored by A. J. MacDonald, Jr.

List Price: $16.00

5.5" x 8.5" (13.97 x 21.59 cm) 

Black & White on White paper

276 pages

(c) 2009

ISBN-13: 978-1440462146

ISBN-10: 1440462143

OCLC Number: 698623831

BISAC: Religion / Philosophy

Description 

How are we to make sense of the Bible in the context of the modern world? 

In this book, you will discover a new way of perceiving the world; a way in which the biblical view of the world can be seen as just as true-for-us as the modern scientific view of the world. 

The World Perceived explores how we think about the world, how we perceive the world, and how we choose to live our lives in-the-world. Using phenomenology as a philosophical framework for the construction of a biblical theology of appearances, the author illustrates how the biblical description of reality is of far greater relevance to us than are the descriptions of reality given to us by modern science and popular science writers. 

By exploring the epistemological bases of both science and theology as a forms of knowledge along with the assumptions implicit within both worldviews, The World Perceived invites the reader upon an intellectual journey into the world of phenomenal reality. The author makes a strong case for the validity of the biblical description of the world and reality by demonstrating how the modern scientific description of the world and reality are in no way superior to the biblical description. 

Using three examples of conflicting scientific and biblical descriptions of the world (i.e., the geocentric versus the heliocentric conception of the universe, creation versus evolution, and absolute time versus relative time) The World Perceived demonstrates the Bible's relevancy to the modern world, which is often hostile to both religion and the Bible, like no other book on the market today.

Author's royalties go to support the Dorothy Day Catholic Worker House in Washington, D C in order to assist their good works of charity.

Available for purchase here:

Google Books: http://tinyurl.com/9t7ujnw 

Amazon (trade paperback): http://www.amazon.com/World-Perceived-Theological-Phenomenological-World/dp/1440462143 

Amazon Kindle: http://www.amazon.com/World-Perceived-Phenomenological--World-ebook/dp/B002MKN5LM/ 

CreateSpace (publisher): https://www.createspace.com/3359491

Barnes and Noble: http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-world-perceived-a-j-macdonald/1018397920 

Indiebound: http://www.indiebound.org/book/9781440462146 

Better World Books: http://tinyurl.com/cwy2k9b 

The World Perceived is available for free download and to read online here:

Internet Archive: http://archive.org/details/TheWorldPerceivedATheologicalAndPhenomenologicalApproachToThinking 

Scribd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/18013481/Phenomenology-Theology-and-The-World-Perceived 

Author contact information:

Cell - 717-414-3821

Email - ajmacdonaldjr@gmail.com 

LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/pub/a-j-macdonald-jr/41/460/998/ 

The World Perceived Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/TheWorldPerceived

A. J. MacDonald, Jr. - Amazon Author Page - https://www.amazon.com/author/ajmacdonaldjr 

VIDEO - The author explains his book of Christian philosophy: “The World Perceived” - http://en.gloria.tv/?media=320837  

VIDEO - The World Perceived: A Theological and Phenomenological... - http://youtu.be/Um2lM4Tvj2o

Why I Wrote The World Perceived

Why I Wrote The World Perceived

I wrote my book The World Perceived because, after many years of studying theology and philosophy, I couldn’t find a book that reflected the theological and philosophical conclusions I had come to. I was looking for a book that would use phenomenology as a philosophical superstructure for the construction of a new sort of theology, one that valued phenomenal appearances. And since I was unable to find such a book, I decided to write one.

Writing can be very difficult work. I’d many written articles and papers over the years, but never anything approaching the length of a book. Because I’m well aware of how much rewriting is required in order to produce a decent article or paper, I knew that writing a book would require an incredible amount of rewriting, which it certainly has. In short, the task of writing the book I wanted to write would be a great challenge for me.

I began the work of writing the book in November 2005. I had moved to Pennsylvania to be close to my mother after my father’s death six months earlier. I was beginning a new chapter in my life, I was approaching my forty-seventh birthday, and I had in my mind the idea for this book that I wanted to write and I realized the time was right for me to begin writing it. After all the reading, studying, and thinking I had done over the years, I knew I was ready to write the book I was unable to find.

I wanted the book to outline the theological conclusions I had come to, but I also wanted it to be relatively easy to understand. Due to the philosophical nature of theological writings, this was not an easy thing to do. And I’m not even sure just how well I’ve managed to do it. In many ways, this book was to be the book I wish I’d been able to read when I was younger, say in my early twenties. My intention was to write the book in such a way that young seminary students would find the concepts expressed in the book intellectually stimulating and that these concepts would inform their own theological reflections and writings.

I imagine someone who is interested in theology, perhaps a seminary student, reading the book, grasping its most basic concepts, and keeping them in mind as they put together their own theological beliefs. If my book can help just one person to become a better theological thinker, I will be forever thankful for the opportunity I’ve had to write it.

New Theology Book Explores Phenomenal Reality

August 24, 2009 – Tucson, AZ –A.J. MacDonald, Jr.—a student of theology and philosophy for many years and lay member of Saint Francis Cabrini Catholic Church in Tucson, Arizona—has recently (August 2009) released his new book: The World Perceived: A Theological and Phenomenological Approach to Thinking, Perceiving, and Living In-The-World (Trade paperback, 275 pp. w/index, 5.5 x 8.5, $16.00), which is now available online from Amazon.com.

The World Perceived explores how we think about the world, how we perceive the world, and how we choose to live our lives in-the-world. The author constructs a biblical theology of appearances which illustrates how the biblical description of reality is of far greater relevance to us than are the descriptions of reality given to us by modern science and popular science writers. The study of reality may belong to philosophers, scientists, metaphysicians, and theologians, but the responsibility of making a decision regarding what that reality is belongs to everyone and The World Perceived was written in order to aid the reader in making this decision an informed one.

In considering the epistemological basis of science as a form of knowledge and the assumptions implicit within the modern scientific worldview, The World Perceived invites the reader on an intellectual journey into the world of phenomenal reality. The author makes a strong case for the validity of the biblical description of the world and of reality by demonstrating how the modern scientific descriptions of the world and of reality are in no way superior to the biblical description.

By using three examples of conflicting scientific and biblical descriptions of the world and of reality—the geocentric versus the heliocentric conception of the universe, creation versus evolution, and absolute time versus relative time—The World Perceived demonstrates the Bible’s relevancy to the modern world, which is so often hostile to both religion and the Bible, like no other book on the market today. Written for the seminary student, the believing or unbelieving college student, the skeptic, and the general reader who is interested in such matters, The World Perceived is a wonderful introduction to how we, as Christians, should be thinking, perceiving, and living in-the-world.

For more information about The World Perceived, or to schedule an interview, please contact A.J. MacDonald, Jr. by email at: ajmacdonaldjr@gmail.com, or on the web at: http://www.theworldperceived.freewebspace.com/.

Science Fiction, Space, and Phenomenology

I have always enjoyed science fiction. Although, as the years have gone by, I am less and less convinced that life exists on other planets. At least complex life (see Ward and Brownlee, Rare Earth, Why Complex Life is Uncommon in the Universe (New York: Copernicus iiBooks) 2000, 2004.

The main premise of most works of science fiction concerns life on other planets, and I simply don't find much credibility with this premise. Science, if anything, has disproven the possibility of life existing on other worlds. Science fiction, good science fiction, can certainly be done apart from the notion that life exists on other worlds (see the works of Philip K. Dick), but most sci-fi stories have to do with life on other planets.

Considering the vastness of the universe, it seems reasonable to us that some other intelligent life forms must exist somewhere out there, but there is no scientific evidence of this. Many sci-fi stories also deal with similarly unbelieveable notions, such as life existing on planets that have two suns, or two moons. Can you imagine the gravitational influence of two moons? or of two suns? (Not to mention, the heat coming from two suns?)

I say this in order to bring up a point: Why do people continue to believe that space is a sort of final frontier, in which other worlds, like our own, will be discovered? It is very unlikely that any such worlds will ever be found (the distances between the stars and their planets alone make such discoveries virtually impossible).

Television shows like Star Trek, The Next Generation, are certainly entertaining, but are hardly believeable. Yet people persist in their belief that they are not alone in the universe. Maybe the vastness of space is what provides the hope that somewhere out there exist beings like us.

If complex life does exist somewhere in the universe, besides earth, it must look a lot like us, and that would make for rather boring science fiction. Strange beings and strange creatures are very entertaining, and yet their existences are very unlikely, due to the fact that, for complex life to exist at all, a very select combination of chemical events must occurr and must arrange themselves in a very precise order. In other words, any other worlds with complex life would be virtually identical to the earth.

But the fantastic belief in life on other worlds persists. Perhaps what drives this hope is simply the hope that there is no Creator-God, that the world is a random occurrence, in a random universe, where random things just happen.

New Ideas in Theology and Philosophy

You can check out some of my new theological and philisophical ideas by going to my website and reading my book: The World Perceived.

Download A Free Book Concerning Theology and Phenomenology

My book, The World Perceived, A Theological and Phenomenological Approach to Thinking, Perceiving, and Living In-The-World has yet to be published, but you can download the PDF version for free.

Simply visit my web site and click on the download PDF version link:

http://www.geocities.com/ajmacdonaldjr/TheWorldPerceived.html

Space and Time, Phenomenology Style

Space and time have more to do with our perceptual experience of motion than anything else. Our understanding of space and time come from our perception of motion through space, without motion we couldn't perceive time. Modern science thinks of time and space as being tangible things: the fabric of spacetime. Some scientists believe that time is an illusion: "It seems that a choice has to be made between two irreconcilable notions of time. I argue that the only satisfactory solution is to abolish time altogether. " (Julian Barbour, see: http://www.platonia.com/index.html )

Time, it seems to me, is simply motion perceived; and space is simply that which material objects appear to occupy and move through.

Neither time nor space can be totally divorced from subjective perception, but neither can they be totally divorced from objective motion: they are a synergy of the two (perception and motion). As is everything else in the world. What we really know best is our experience of the world, and of ourselves.

The World Perceived

I have recently completed my book: The World Perceived, which concerns a theological and phenomenological approach to thinking about, perceiving, and living in-the-world, and I have also uploaded it for viewing.

I hope to have the book published soon (either by a publisher or as a print-on-demand book), but for now the book is only available on the web. You may download the book by clicking the link on the right side of this page. Please feel free to print out one copy of the book and to provide me with any feedback (positive or negative) that you may have.