One Salient Oversight: Moments in Reformed Theology (lots of pics)
These Moments in Reformed Theology are fun. But I wonder if I'm really understanding the author's humour, or missing his point on some of them?
Sunday, June 11, 2006
Saturday, June 10, 2006
A little bit pregnant?
Having just completed reading the bible through in the TNIV translation, I'm now reading it through using my Reformation Study Bible. I find the articles, study notes and references helpful, but am finding that the ESV in some places is harder to read.
But what I'm also finding is that the ESV seems to use a lot of the translation methods which its champions deplore in translations such as the TNIV. For example, in Hosea [which I read through yesterday and today], the translators change the person and number in the original Hebrew to make the meaning clearer.
Hosea 2 verse 6 is rendered
I will hedge up her way with thorns,
but the footnote says that the Hebrew text says your way.
In chapter 4 verse 19 the Hebrew original
A wind has wrapped her in its wings
is changed to
A wind has wrapped them in its wings.
Now this is not a problem to me, but the apologists for the ESV say that when the TNIV changes 3rd person to 2nd or from singular to plural, they are changing the Word of God. When the RSV revisers [which is a more accurate description of the ESV translation team] alter the original are they not also changing the Word of God?
But what I'm also finding is that the ESV seems to use a lot of the translation methods which its champions deplore in translations such as the TNIV. For example, in Hosea [which I read through yesterday and today], the translators change the person and number in the original Hebrew to make the meaning clearer.
Hosea 2 verse 6 is rendered
I will hedge up her way with thorns,
but the footnote says that the Hebrew text says your way.
In chapter 4 verse 19 the Hebrew original
A wind has wrapped her in its wings
is changed to
A wind has wrapped them in its wings.
Now this is not a problem to me, but the apologists for the ESV say that when the TNIV changes 3rd person to 2nd or from singular to plural, they are changing the Word of God. When the RSV revisers [which is a more accurate description of the ESV translation team] alter the original are they not also changing the Word of God?
Thursday, June 08, 2006
Reading the Bible by Genre
I am continuing to read through my ESV Reformation Study Bible, using Michael Coley's 52 week bible reading plan, which divides the bible up into an epistle reading for Sunday, Law for Monday, History for Tuesday, Psalms on Wednesday, other Poetry on Thursday, Prophecy on Friday and Gospels and Acts on Saturday.
I'm doing it eclectically, and now on the second week I've read, 1 John, Hebrews, Galatians in the Epistles column, Genesis 1-7 from Law, Psalms 1-8, Proverbs 1-4, Matthew 1-4, but so far, no History or Prophecy.
The ESV Reformation Study Bible is nicely produced, has a clear typeface, larger than many bibles I've used, and usually has helpful notes. Having just read through the bible using the TNIV bible, it is interesting to compare the two.
At times the language in the TNIV is unnecessarily politically correct: the translators tried to avoid the use of masculine language, and where this language has been imposed on the bible, or where it obscures the meaning, I welcome the use of inclusive language. But, at times, the change to the plural or the rewording of the traditional English rendering is not needed.
I appreciate the way the RSV revisers [which is what you may more properly call the ESV translators] have reworded its masculine language where there is inclusive language in the original Hebrew, Aramiac and Greek. This is a common feature of the ESV and TNIV.
But certain words, such as ADELFOI, are consistently rendered as masculine, despite the revisers inserting footnotes to the effect that the word is intended to be inclusive. This should have come out in the text, perhaps with a footnote that the original word is masculine, but is intended to have an inclusive meaning.
At times the ESV sounds like biblish [biblical English, a throwback to the King James Version and even the versions which preceded it]. A few days ago I read through Hebrews and found some renderings quite awkward. So far I've found the Old Testament passages read more smoothly. But I admit that in looking up a couple of passages, they are difficult to read in many English versions. Hebrews 2:10 is one of those.
I'm doing it eclectically, and now on the second week I've read, 1 John, Hebrews, Galatians in the Epistles column, Genesis 1-7 from Law, Psalms 1-8, Proverbs 1-4, Matthew 1-4, but so far, no History or Prophecy.
The ESV Reformation Study Bible is nicely produced, has a clear typeface, larger than many bibles I've used, and usually has helpful notes. Having just read through the bible using the TNIV bible, it is interesting to compare the two.
At times the language in the TNIV is unnecessarily politically correct: the translators tried to avoid the use of masculine language, and where this language has been imposed on the bible, or where it obscures the meaning, I welcome the use of inclusive language. But, at times, the change to the plural or the rewording of the traditional English rendering is not needed.
I appreciate the way the RSV revisers [which is what you may more properly call the ESV translators] have reworded its masculine language where there is inclusive language in the original Hebrew, Aramiac and Greek. This is a common feature of the ESV and TNIV.
But certain words, such as ADELFOI, are consistently rendered as masculine, despite the revisers inserting footnotes to the effect that the word is intended to be inclusive. This should have come out in the text, perhaps with a footnote that the original word is masculine, but is intended to have an inclusive meaning.
At times the ESV sounds like biblish [biblical English, a throwback to the King James Version and even the versions which preceded it]. A few days ago I read through Hebrews and found some renderings quite awkward. So far I've found the Old Testament passages read more smoothly. But I admit that in looking up a couple of passages, they are difficult to read in many English versions. Hebrews 2:10 is one of those.
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Calvin on Sola Scriptura
“Let us not take it into our heads . . . to seek out God anywhere else than in his Sacred Word, or to think anything about him that is not prompted by his Word, or to speak anything that is not taken from that Word.” Cited by Brian Hedges at his terrific Mere Theology blog.
After Darkness, Light
After Darkness, Light is a Reformation motto (originally Post Tenebras, Lux), but it is also the title of a great book of essays on the Five Points of Calvinism and the Five Solas of the Reformation.
The whole book is worth reading, but I particularly appreciated the discussion on Sola Scriptura (the bible alone). Keith Mathison points out that this teaching does not imply that there is no role for tradition and the Church, but that the bible is our supreme authority. It is the only ongoing source of God's revelation (which he did by speaking to humankind through the ages in many and various ways such as by sending prophets and especially through our Lord Jesus Christ and finally inspiring holy men of God to set down this revelation in writing). The bible is perfect (in its original autographs) and thus completely reliable.
The Church submits to the bible's authority, and does not pronounce it to be God's Word, as if the Church were above the bible, but simply recognises it as from God.
But, sitting under this divine Word, the Church has a role to play in teaching us to understand it, as the Scriptures themselves declare. Her historic creeds help us to understand what the Scriptures say. These creeds are helpful and trustworthy, but not infallible. In this limited sense, there is a role for tradition, but it is inferior to the one supreme authority of Scripture.
I found this articulation challenging, thought-provoking and helpful.
Mathison shows that if we say that there is no role for Christian tradition or for the Church, Sola Scriptura degenerates into my interpretation of the bible alone is authoritative, which leads to chaos.
The whole book is worth reading, but I particularly appreciated the discussion on Sola Scriptura (the bible alone). Keith Mathison points out that this teaching does not imply that there is no role for tradition and the Church, but that the bible is our supreme authority. It is the only ongoing source of God's revelation (which he did by speaking to humankind through the ages in many and various ways such as by sending prophets and especially through our Lord Jesus Christ and finally inspiring holy men of God to set down this revelation in writing). The bible is perfect (in its original autographs) and thus completely reliable.
The Church submits to the bible's authority, and does not pronounce it to be God's Word, as if the Church were above the bible, but simply recognises it as from God.
But, sitting under this divine Word, the Church has a role to play in teaching us to understand it, as the Scriptures themselves declare. Her historic creeds help us to understand what the Scriptures say. These creeds are helpful and trustworthy, but not infallible. In this limited sense, there is a role for tradition, but it is inferior to the one supreme authority of Scripture.
I found this articulation challenging, thought-provoking and helpful.
Mathison shows that if we say that there is no role for Christian tradition or for the Church, Sola Scriptura degenerates into my interpretation of the bible alone is authoritative, which leads to chaos.
Monday, June 05, 2006
But Don't All Religions Lead to God?
Michael Green's But Don't all Religions Lead To God? is a great book if you are interested in thinking about the differences between the various religions on offer today [well ... at least the most popular ones], and the unique claims of Christ.
In this book he helps us to think through these popular misconceptions:
1. All religions are much the same.
2. All religions lead to God.
3. It doesn't matter what you believe, as long as you are sincere.
4. Jesus Christ is only one of many great religious teachers.
Having helped us to see that each of these views is not logical, Green then shows us the greatness of Jesus who:
*was the only great religious leader who claimed to be able to bring us to God.
*was the only great teacher who claimed to be able to deal radically with human wickedness.
*came back to life, showing us that what he said is true.
*promises to live within us, empowering us to live fulfilled lives which please God.
In this book he helps us to think through these popular misconceptions:
1. All religions are much the same.
2. All religions lead to God.
3. It doesn't matter what you believe, as long as you are sincere.
4. Jesus Christ is only one of many great religious teachers.
Having helped us to see that each of these views is not logical, Green then shows us the greatness of Jesus who:
*was the only great religious leader who claimed to be able to bring us to God.
*was the only great teacher who claimed to be able to deal radically with human wickedness.
*came back to life, showing us that what he said is true.
*promises to live within us, empowering us to live fulfilled lives which please God.
Sunday, June 04, 2006
Keep in Step With the Spirit
Keep in Step with the Spirit is a terrific book. If you are puzzled by the Holy Spirit, or by all the different slants in various Christian circles on his ministry, you will find this book enlightening. Packer writes in a forthright, yet fair way. He does not seek to knock other views for the sake of it, but often shows how they have valuable insights, though they may be emphasising some things too greatly, or omitting other essentials.
His book is not only about the Holy Spirit, and also features important teaching on the trinity, holiness, Christian living and bible reading. I think this book is every bit as good as Knowing God. I'm sorry that I have only recently discovered this book, originally published in 1984.
The new edition includes a 2005 "Preface to the Preface" and a short chapter on assurance, entitled "Heaven on Earth -a Pentecost Exposition." They are worth reading, but maybe not worth the cost of a new book if your copy is still in good nick.
His book is not only about the Holy Spirit, and also features important teaching on the trinity, holiness, Christian living and bible reading. I think this book is every bit as good as Knowing God. I'm sorry that I have only recently discovered this book, originally published in 1984.
The new edition includes a 2005 "Preface to the Preface" and a short chapter on assurance, entitled "Heaven on Earth -a Pentecost Exposition." They are worth reading, but maybe not worth the cost of a new book if your copy is still in good nick.
Saturday, June 03, 2006
The Race Set Before Us
The Race Set Before Us is one of the most helpful Christian books I've read, and it is terrific that Ardel Caneday has set up a blog to discuss it with his readers. There have been some great posts at this blog so far: if you haven't read the book yet, it is well worth your time to read and re-read.
Friday, June 02, 2006
Helpful guide to all those Christian books
I have just completed reading a book that has been helping me to make sense of the many Christian books I read. I began in September, and completed about 15% of it by Christmas, then plowed through the rest from February to the end of May.
The book is the TNIV translation of the Bible. I read the NT using Greg Oliffe's handy guide to reading through the New Testament in 91 days, then simply used the reading plan in the back of my bible for the Old Testament.
I must admit, though, that reading the bible answers some questions, while raising lots of others. But I bore in mind Moses' words in Deuteronomy 29 verse 29:
I enjoyed this read-through so much, I'm doing it again, but it may take longer this time, as I am attempting to read through my ESV Reformation Study Bible, and this time I'm using Michael Coley's 52 week bible reading plan. This innovative plan divides the bible up into 7 genres: one for each day of the week. You have an epistle reading for Sunday, Law for Monday, History for Tuesday, Psalms on Wednesday, other Poetry on Thursday, Prophecy on Friday and Gospels and Acts on Saturday.
I can't promise I'll keep to Michael's exact order, but I hope to use his chart to tick off what I've read somewhat eclectically.
The book is the TNIV translation of the Bible. I read the NT using Greg Oliffe's handy guide to reading through the New Testament in 91 days, then simply used the reading plan in the back of my bible for the Old Testament.
I must admit, though, that reading the bible answers some questions, while raising lots of others. But I bore in mind Moses' words in Deuteronomy 29 verse 29:
The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.
I enjoyed this read-through so much, I'm doing it again, but it may take longer this time, as I am attempting to read through my ESV Reformation Study Bible, and this time I'm using Michael Coley's 52 week bible reading plan. This innovative plan divides the bible up into 7 genres: one for each day of the week. You have an epistle reading for Sunday, Law for Monday, History for Tuesday, Psalms on Wednesday, other Poetry on Thursday, Prophecy on Friday and Gospels and Acts on Saturday.
I can't promise I'll keep to Michael's exact order, but I hope to use his chart to tick off what I've read somewhat eclectically.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
