Quote for the day

"There is no human perfection in this world and there are no golden ages in the life of the Church. There are simply moments when the Church is either less authentic or more authentic."—David Wells in Above All Earthly Pow'rs.

Quote for the day

"Already yesterday's concerns are consigned to forgetfulness, and tomorrow's are too far away to obligate us today. The burden of yesterday is shaken off by glorifying shadowy time of old; the task of tomorrow is avoided by talking about the coming millennium. Nothing is fixed, and nothing holds us. The film, vanishing from memory as soon as it ends, symbolizes the profound amnesia of our time. Events of world-historical significance, along with the most terrible crimes, leave no trace behind in the forgetful soul. One gambles with the future. Lotteries and gambling, which consume an inconceivable amount of money and often the daily bread of the worker, seek the improbable chance of luck in the future. The loss of past and future leaves life vacillating between the most brutish enjoyment of the moment and adventurous risk taking. Every inner development, every process of slow maturing in personal and vocational life, is abruptly broken off. There is no personal destiny and therefore no personal dignity. Serious tensions, inwardly necessary times of waiting, are not endured. This in evident in the domain of work as well as in erotic life. Lasting pain is more feared than death. The value of suffering as the forming of life through the threat of death is disregarded, even ridiculed. The alternatives are health or death. What is quiet, lasting and essential is discarded as worthless."—Dietrich Bonhoeffer in Ethics

Wow, that was written in 1940, but it could describe today. I just started Ethics over the weekend. Debbie looked at it and said, "Wow, that's a big book." She's right, it is almost 600 pages. Of course, with Bonhoeffer, you don't read quickly. I figure this will last me through the end of the year :)

UPDATE: Sorry, the links didn't work. I fixed them (I think). —Thanks for pointing it out, Andy.

Just arrived

We weren't expecting this until tomorrow, but we'll take it a day early!

Introduction to Reading the Pentateuch

by Jean-Louis Ska
Eisenbrauns,2006
xvi + 285 pp.,English
Paper,6 x 9
ISBN: 1575061228
List Price: $29.50
Your Price: $26.55
www.eisenbrauns.com/wconnect/wc.dll?ebGate~EIS~~I~SKAINTROD

Only two more books to arrive before we ship everything off to AAR/SBL: The Na'aman and Dever Festschriften.

Quote for the day

"With what reality will we reckon in our life? With the reality of God's revelatory word or with the so-called realities of life? With divine grace or with earthly inadequacies? With the resurrection or with death? This question itself, which none can answer by their own choice without answering it falsely, already presupposes a given answer: that God, however we decide, has already spoken the revelatory word and that we, even in our false reality, can live no other way than from the true reality of the word of God. The question about ultimate reality already places us in such an embrace by its answer that there is no way we can escape from it. This answer carries us into the reality of God's revelation in Jesus Christ from which it comes."—Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Ethics

Some thoughts on church

Seems it is the week for long titles. Over at Vintage Faith, Dan has a long post entitled Pews, Pulpits, Pastors, Preaching and other things that can get in the way of the church "being" the church. Well worth the–long–read. I only quote a brief section or two:

…my growing theory of most churches is that when churches become so inwardly focused, we can produce the fruit of knowledgable but usually negative and critical people always pointing out the wrongs in everything. Or when we become so outwardly focused, we can become shallow theologically and produce Christians who barely know the Bible. Or when we become so felt-needs and methodology focused , we can produce consumer Christians who end up depending on which church best meets their needs which produces a bigger and better cycle for the church leaders to deal with. All of these things can produce a people who aren't seeing themselves as missional Christians being the church throughout the week - but people who have faulty (in my opinion) definitions of church and then they "go to church" for meeting the faulty expectations we have set up for them to define "church" by…

He goes on to name pews, pulpits, pastors, and preaching. Here is the one on pulpits:

Pulpits – There were no such things as "pulpits" in the early church or first in the 300 years of the church. They were primarily adapted from Greek and Roman forms of communicating and at first people sat to speak and standing to "preach" developed later. Pulpits became a focal point and raised high primarily after the Reformation. They create a definite distinction between the people in the seats and the person who gets behind the pulpit.

You really owe it to yourself to trot on over and read the other ones. You may not agree with all of it, some of it, or any of it, but you should at least let your horizons be broadened. One last quote, and then I’ll stop “preaching”

I am wondering more about what we produce whether house, small, or large church and how we do things and why we do what we do, when there isn't any biblical basis for most of what we do (in method and style and format).

UPDATE: I fixed the link, sorry about that.

The politics of Jesus?

I’ve been meaning to point out a very good post by Ted Gossard over at The Jesus Community. On Tuesday, October 10, he posted about Confidence in Politics. Here are a few snippets:

I believe that we, as those of the Jesus community, and I'm speaking for those of us who live in the United States- we tend to put too much stock in politics. I don't want to be misunderstood. I'm not saying that politics doesn't have its place, and that, in fact, it is an insignificant place. No. But I do believe our confidence in this political process and in political parties all but borders on being idolatrous…

What is needed is nothing less than a revolution. But not from either the Democrats or Republicans or some other political party or entity. Oh, we'd do well to want to see them all turned on their heads, for that matter.

No. What we need is a major revolution in seeing the kingdom of God in Jesus have an impact through us, as the Jesus community, first in our homes, then in our neighborhoods, workplaces, schools, and in all spheres of life to which God calls us.

To get an idea of what this revolution would look like we should read and meditate on Matthew 5-7, for a start. If we concentrated on living this out, we would not put so much stock in the political process. We would not be sweating over who is going to win what race. We would know that these things can have their place. That God can truly be at work in them (look at William Wilberforce). But that the way of Jesus and the kingdom of God is a way that will cross out the ways of the world. It will run counter to it in how we live in Jesus. And we will be calling people to and endeavoring to live in no less than Jesus and his teaching.

And then, today, he has another post, this one entitled a small editorial: political (and talk radio) arrogance: let's avoid it. Quite a mouthful, that. The actual post is almost shorter than the title, so I will quote it in full:

I am fascinated by the charges of arrogance given by talk radio against the political party they oppose. There is really arrogance on every side. And the devastating part is when we Christians are caught up in all of this. Then we unwittingly can become partakers in this same kind of arrogance.

I am sad at saying this. I really can't take seriously much of what I catch on talk radio. Because those ready to do eye surgery on others, or ready to stone others, fail to see their own blindness and sin.

It is refreshing to see people talk about issues and with respect to their opponents, as Eikons of God- when that happens. Let's not lower ourselves, as those in the Jesus community, to the thoughts and standards that are common fare- and even more so, this political season.

<idle musing>
Well put. I couldn’t say it better myself. As Christians, we are called to live differently from the world. We are a light placed on a lamp stand; we are salt, but if the salt loses it saltiness, what good is it except to be thrown out and trampled under foot. I submit that christians earn a good deal of the scorn which is cast upon them. I include myself in that statement; anytime I don’t allow Christ to shine through me, I am bringing scorn upon His name. As it says in Romans 2:24: “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.” RSV

Now, lest you think I am saying we can do it, let me disabuse you of the idea that outside of the power of the Holy Spirit resting and abiding in us we can do it. It must be the power of God, as we abide in Christ, living His life through us. Works won’t cut it. You and I will just end up failing—usually pretty dramatically, too.
</idle musing>

AAR/SBL

Hey, check out this article from the NY Times. And this is the place where AAR/SBL will be held this year :) I can't get the URL to work, so I didn't post it, but here is an excerpt:

October 10, 2006
That Which Simmers Is Not to Be Dissed
By IAN URBINA

WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 — Time was when it seemed safe to regard the works of Plato as intellectually superior to the racy romance novels of, say, Nora Roberts. In underground Washington, those days are over.

Consider the hoo-ha over new subway posters that try to capitalize on the percentage of people with advanced degrees living in the region.

The Greater Washington Initiative, a business group devoted to attracting investment to the area, put up the posters, which feature side-by-side photographs: of a man reading Plato’s “Republic,” under the caption “Greater Washington Subway Reading,” and of the same man poring over a romance novel, under the caption “Average Subway Reading.”

The reaction from romance writers — and readers — was as fast and heated as a steamy sex scene.

“I’m an erotic romance/romance publisher, and I live in your marketing area,” Stephanie V. Kelsey, editor in chief and chief operations officer of Mojocastle Press, wrote to the group. “Despite the erroneous position many take that romance is ‘easy money,’ it requires the same hard work, honing of skill and commitment as any other genre. To insinuate otherwise in a media representation of your company is not recommended, and we are not amused.

<idle musing>
It would be funny if it weren't so sad. Obviously I need to lose my out-moded meta-narrative and embrace the new po-mo one that there is no meta-narrative. After all, who has the right to say that Plato is better than a romance novel? Aren't they both of equal value in nourishing your mind and soul?

Just think if they had shown the same person reading The Republic in a Loeb or Oxford Classical Text!
</idle musing>

New Scholar's Source available for download

For those of you who can't wait the 2 weeks or so that it takes for it to arrive in the mail, here is the download link for the latest Scholar's Source.

Enjoy!

It's Here!

I walked over to the warehouse before lunch, as I usually do, and there it was. Big as life, still in the boxes from Germany. Jessica looked at me like I was crazy, but I couldn't help it. I tore open the box, pealed back the shrinkwrap and flipped through the pages. John Cook, our acquisitions editor, walked in just then. He let out an excited yelp and grabbed it from my hands. We both were acting like crazy people. Why, you ask? Because it finally arrived:

Ezra-Nehemiah
Biblia Hebraica Quinta
Biblia Hebraica Quinta - BHQ 20
Edited by David Marcus
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft Stuttgart,Forthcoming Late 2006
296 pages,Hebrew
Paper
ISBN: 3438052806
List Price: $98.00
Your Price: $73.50
www.eisenbrauns.com/wconnect/wc.dll?ebGate~EIS~~I~BHQEZRANE

Wouldn't you get excited? I promise, I only drooled a little, and only on one of them. They will start shipping tomorrow, so watch for it. If you haven't ordered it yet, we still have a few from this shipment left and another one on the way...

More pacifism

I'm a bit slow on things these days. Blame it on trying to get too many things done—the AAR/SBL/ASOR order forms and quantities, the new catalogs in time to get them in your hands before AAR/SBL, my in-laws moving to Winona Lake/Warsaw in 3 weeks, the list goes on. Anyway, this post has been up since Saturday, but I only found out about it today, and then only because Jim Eisenbraun mentioned it to me in conversation... OK, enough introduction.

Ben Witherington has an excellent post on the Amish community in PA and their willingness to forgive.

This friends is real Christianity. Christians do not retaliate. They do not seek revenge, for the Bible says that vengeance should be left in the hands of the Lord. In fact they do quite the opposite. They offer forgiveness even to their tormentors. They seek peace at the least and reconciliation at the most with those who revile them, harm them, kill them...

Somewhere out there, there is someone who is muttering about meekness being weakness. There is someone out there suggesting that violence is the way to answer and silence senseless violence. There is someone simply ignoring the words of Jesus that those who live by the sword die by the sword.

As I've said before, I don't usually read Witherington's blog, but this post definitely is worth reading.

On a related note, Ben Myers is letting Kim do another guest blog on pacifism. Check it out here. A brief excerpt, but you really should read the whole thing.

Second, opponents of pacifism are also surprisingly – or perhaps I should say unsurprisingly – quiet about the pacifist church of the first three centuries. Did the church get it wrong? Or is it that the changing circumstances of the church under empire, and then under nations, changed everything? But if so, why? What does Constantinople – or Washington – have to do with Jerusalem? If Christians were pacifist under pagan rule, why should they abandon pacifism under Christian rule? Indeed, what constitutes “Christian rule”? Is not the very idea that a Christian ruler/government may wield the sword an oxymoron? This is certainly a question that needs to be answered rather than begged.

Quote for the day

“If our standards were higher, if we really proclaimed the truth of genuine repentance—does this sound like radical religion? It ought to be the normal, the ordinary thing. The Lord told us that power must come to our lives. We must experience the presence, the revelation of God as we believe in Jesus Christ, His Son. This is not radical. It is the other thing—the deadness, the lack of power, the uncertainty—that is abnormal.”—A.W. Tozer

The revenge of Arianism, part 2

<idle musing>
Still not convinced by my last post? OK, maybe I’m wrong. Rather than arguing grammar, let’s use the New Testament itself. Turn to Revelation and we’ll find out who the Alpha and Omega, First and the Last is:
Revelation 1:8

“I am the Alpha and the Omega,”says the Lord God, “the one who is and who was and who is to come, the almighty.”

Now, clearly the Alpha and Omega here is God, no doubt about it. So, let’s look at Revelation 21:5-7:

The one who sat on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.” Then he said, “Write these words down, for they are trustworthy and true.” He said to me, “They are accomplished. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give a gift from the spring of life-giving water. The victor will inherit these gifts, and I shall be his God, and he will be my son.

Here we have the Alpha and Omega—clearly God, not Jesus—equated with the
beginning and the end. Remember that and let’s look at Revelation 22:13:

“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”

Here we clearly have God equated with Alpha and Omega, first and last, beginning and end. Quite a set of attributes. So, we have 3 passages which clearly define God, the Father, not the son as Alpha and Omega, beginning and end, first and last. Bear that in mind as we turn to one more passage in Revelation, Revelation 1:17:

When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand upon me, saying, “Fear not, I am the first and the last,”

Seems like a reasonable response, you see the first and the last, whom we have already seen is God, and you fall at his feet as a dead man. That was the normal response in the Hebrew bible when people got a glimpse of God. But, there was a comma there, not a full stop, so let’s see what verse 18 has for us:

and the living one; I died, and behold I am alive for evermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.”

Hmm, what do you say now? Did God ever die? Did the Almighty, who sits on the throne ever die, except in the form of Jesus?

Ponder that for a while and then tell me that the New Testament never equates Jesus with God the Father.
</idle musing>

John 1:1 and the deity of Jesus, or Arianism on the rise

<idle musing>
It seems that Arianism (the belief that Jesus in not fully God) has been on the rise of late. In the last year, I have seen more discussions on e-mail lists questioning the deity of Christ than in any other time. Perhaps it is just coincidence, perhaps it is just the same people on different lists. Perhaps it is the rise in gnosticism, as witnessed by the huge publicity stunt around the Gospel of Judas. But, people are definitely becoming more vocal in their questioning of who Jesus is/was.

The most common line of attack for those who know some Greek is to use John 1:1c: KAI QEOS HN O LOGOS (I am using the standard Greek transliteration for e-mail here, Q equals theta, H equals eta). For those of you who don’t know any Greek, the line of reasoning is that since the word for God doesn’t have a “the” (article) in front of it, it should be translated “a god.” In English the usual translation is “and the word was God.”

There is a sound grammatical reason for no article in front of QEOS; in Greek, when the copula (to be) is used, the subject has the article, and the predicate has no article. How else will you know what the subject is? Greek is not a word order language like English, it depends on the form of the word to determine what is what. This construction is elementary Greek; for those of you who have access to Smyth’s Greek Grammar—the standard reference grammar in English—take a
look at paragraph 1150

A predicate noun has no article, and is thus distinguished from the subject.

Perhaps you would prefer a different grammar, maybe a New Testament one? Try Brooks & Winberry, Syntax of New Testament Greek, page 140-141:

Note: When the article is used with one of two nominatives connected by a copulative verb, the noun with the article is the subject nominative. If one of the two nouns is a proper name, it is the subject. If a pronoun is joined with a noun, the pronoun is the subject (italics theirs)

Or, maybe you prefer Dana & Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (basically an abridgement of Robertson’s A Grammar of the Greek New Testament), try reading pages 137-140, it’s too long for me to write out here. Robertson himself has a discussion of John 1:1 on pages 767-769. They all explain why the Greek QEOS is anarthrous, but is still definite and translated “God.”

Perhaps another Classical Greek Grammar would convince you? Try Goodwin & Gulick, Greek Grammar, paragraph 954: “A predicate noun seldom has the article.”

Pretty straightforward explanations, aren’t they? How else could John have written it in good Greek?

Still not convinced? OK, let’s look at a couple of other anarthrous (without the article) uses of QEOS in John 1:1-18:

John 1:12 in English reads “He gave them authority to become children of God.” The Greek for children of God reads TEKNA QEOU. Now, I have never heard anyone argue that this should be translated “children of a god.”

John 1:13 in English reads “They were born by the will of God.” The Greek reads EK QEOU EGENNHQHSAN. Using the lack of article as a guide, we should translate it “they were born [by the will of] a god.”

How about John 1:18: “No one has seen God at any time, but the only begotten God...” Greek: QEON OUDEIS hEWRAKEN PWPOTE MONOGENHS QEOS. So, should we translate that as “No one has seen a god at anytime, an only begotten god...” Clearly, that is a nonsense statement, yet both cases of QEOS are anarthrous.

Or how about this, an anarthrous occurrence of PATHR (father) in verse 14: MONOGENOUS PARA PATROS. Who would translate this as “the only begotten from a father?” That is patent nonsense! Or, should we start a new version of Christianity that says there are multiple God the fathers? Oh, too late, that’s Mormonism.

This has gotten long enough for now, but clearly the grammatical construction of John 1:1 is a non-starter for arguing Arianism. Perhaps that is why the Early Church Fathers—both pro-Nicene and pro-Arius—never used the grammatical argument? It was always a philosophical/theological argument. The grammar of John 1 has only been an argument in the last 2-3 centuries, and usually by those with just enough Greek to get into trouble...
</idle musing>

Pacificism, again

Run on over to Faith and Theology." Kim Fabricius has a great 10 point post on peace and war. A brief excerpt:

6. And so-called Just War theory? It is the Trojan horse in the city of God. If ever there was a knockdown incrimination against natural theology this is it. Its origins lie in Stoicism, the pinnacle of philosophy in the Pax Romana – which, of course, is spin for “imperial terror.” Augustine (who, in fact, was less than satisfied with the implications of his own teaching) acted in haste – and ever since the church has been repenting at leisure. Just War theory is the elephant in the confessional, the bad faith of the church.

9 more excellent points, read them for yourself.

Quote for the day

Too often we have reduced the gospel invitation to a formula. ‘Put a nickel in the slot, pull down the lever, pick up your prize and go on your way. You believe on Jesus? Then take this tract and everything will be fine!’ That may be the beginning of Christianity. It is something, but it certainly is not the sum of the gospel.

“What does the Bible say about true Christianity? It says that if you will take Christ, follow Him and do what you should about Him, letting Him do what He wants with you, He will certainly take the bitterness out and put His love in. He willl take the avarice out and put generosity in. He will take the hatred out and put peace in its place. That is what Christianity teaches and promises.

“Those enemies of Jesus were perfectly sure that they were right because they believed the right things. They could have joined some of our fundamentalist churches that ask: ‘Do you believe the Bible? Do you believe it is God’s inspired Word?” The Pharisees claimed to believe the right things. They appeared to be relatively right and clean. But there was hatred in their hearts.”—A.W. Tozer

Quote for the day

"It was Christ, with all of his painful demands of obedience, not comfortable country clubs that early Christianity was about. It was what God had done in space and time when the world was stood on its head that was its preoccupation, not the multiplication of programs, strobe lights, and slick drama. Images we may want, entertainment we may desire, but it is the proclamation of Christ crucified and risen that is the Church's truth to tell."—David F. Wells in Above All Earthly Pow'rs: Christ in a Postmodern World, pages 231-232.

Now this is neat!

This was just posted to the B-Greek e-list:

"The Cambridge New Greek Lexicon has already been nearly eight years in the making. But the growing range and sophistication of the project made it imperative to find extra funding, which until now has had to be raised independently of the research grant system, with the help of various benefactors.

" The project to create a new lexicon was begun in 1998 by Dr John Chadwick, a Cambridge academic distinguished for his collaboration with Michael Ventris on the decipherment of Linear B. His initial aim was simply to revise the intermediate edition of Liddell & Scott's Greek-English Lexicon, a student version published unchanged since the end of the 19th century. However, once the inadequacies of the work became clear, the decision was taken to start afresh.

"To achieve this, the Cambridge team entered into collaboration with Perseus, an American digital library with a huge databank of Classical texts. From it, a database has been created large enough to fill 30 CD-Roms, which enables them to find each occurrence of an individual word in the original Greek texts."

Read the whole story here. I had heard rumblings of something like this for years, but I'm glad to see it is coming along.

AAR/SBL

Yes, already! It is looming closer by the day!

I have been working on what books to bring and how many. This is a time consuming and, ultimately, futile task. It never works out right, we always run short on some titles and have too many of others. You need to let me know what and how many you are going to buy :)

So far I have 111 titles for our distribution partners—not including Carta or Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht—and 94 Eisenbrauns titles. Harrassowitz will also be in our booth this year, so that means more titles still. Isreal Antiquities Authority is also sending us all IAA Reports to sell at a 30% discount for all you archaeologists out there (Joe, are you listening?). We also will have the 3 latest 'Atiqot volumes–50-52, also at 30%.

How's that for teasers? More later...

Three years!

No, that is not how long I have been blogging, nor my emotional maturity level. Three years ago today, I started working at Eisenbrauns.

I had been planning to start October first, but the truck rental company didn't deliver on time. In fact, I ended up driving to the north side of St. Paul to get an available truck (an extra 60 miles and two days later). We loaded up the truck, cleaned the townhouse and started on the long road to Indiana from Chaska, Minnesota...

October sale at Eisenbrauns

October's monthly sale offers you all available volumes of the highly acclaimed Göttingen Septuagint project for 20% off. Several of the volumes have recently been reprinted after being unavailable for some time.
All the details here.

Additionally, we are offering a used book special: during the month of October, purchase $500 worth of used books in a single order, and we'll give them to you at 10% off. Want more used books for a better price? Spend $1000 for a 15% discount, or $1500 to receive 20% off the used book total on your order.