In the Peshitta of Gen 14:18, the text reads:
wmlkyzdq mlk shlym. ʾpq lḥmʾ wḥmrʾ. whw kwmrʾ hwʾ dʾlhʾ
mrymʾ
What is interesting is that,
in this verse, Melchizedek is called a kwmr', the Syriac cognate of
Hebrew komer (כמר), not cohen (כהן).
Further Reading:
The Use of כמר KMR at Elephantine and the Etymology of "Cumorah"
Brother Joseph Smith invited us to the upper room of the
Public Store. He shook hands with us and informed us that his enemies had been
hunting him. He greeted us warmly and told us that we must not look for
perfection in him. If we did, he would look for perfection in us. (John
Oakley Journal, MS 8828, Church History Library)
I was called to act in the office of a Teacher and with
my companion had a district assigned to us, and Brother Heber C. Kimball and
Joseph Smith were in our district. We hesitated to visit such prominent men, as
we well knew we are not capable of teaching them, yet we could not find any
excuse to pass by their houses, so we ventured. The Presiding Bishop, Newel K.
Whitney, gave us a routine of questions to ask everyone in our district. Among
the questions was, “do you keep the word of wisdom?” We found that Brother
Joseph Smith was the most submissive of any in our district. After he had
answered our questions, he called his wife Emma to answer also. I then asked
him the meaning and purport of the word of wisdom, as at that time there was a
great diversity of opinion concerning it. He answered and said, “I understand
the Word of Wisdom to mean that we must get in wisdom all things. If I think a
glass of Brandy will do one good, or a cup of Coffee, or to some a cigar, I
will use these things.” Thus, in short, he gave us the meaning of the Word of
Wisdom. (John
Oakley Journal, MS 8828, Church History Library)
First Session (Fourth Council of Constantinople, 869-870):
The original Word of God, which is Truth itself, namely Christ, the Lord and Saviour of us all, who possesses in himself the cognizance and survey of all the ages and knows everything before it even exists, . . . (The Acts of the Council of Constantinople of 869-70 [trans. Richard Price; Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2022], 109)
In their commentary on Second Corinthians, Richard D. Draper and Michael D. Rhodes wrote about the apostleship:
Suggesting that the office was not
meant to exist for only a short time is that, after the Resurrection again
personally commissioned the Twelve and gave them their assignments (Matt.
28:16-20; Acts 1:4-9). Thus, they took his place as earthly leaders of his
“kingdom” and pushed forward his work. It is clear from Acts that the Lord’s
intent was not for the Twelve to minister for a brief span of time but for the
whole period until his coming. Thus, the Lord cemented the calling’s place into
his Church. This requirement demanded the following of the vacancy left by
Judas (Acts 1:21-26) and, by extension, others. (Richard D. Draper and Michael
D. Rhodes, Paul’s Second Epistle to the Corinthians [Brigham Young
University New Testament Commentary; Provo, Utah: BYU Press, 2023], 75)
However,
it appears that the source they reference does not support the Latter-day Saint
understanding:
With the post-Easter situation, which
cannot be separated from the experience of the absoluteness of Jesus in the
circle of the disciples, there is linked the lasting character of the
commission which they are now given. The risen Lord does not now appoint His
representatives merely for a limited span but for the whole period, of unknown
duration, between Easter and His return. Yet He makes only the one
appointment, and therefore it is only logical that the apostolate should be
limited to the first generation and should not become an ecclesiastical office.
(Karl Heinrich Rengstorf, “Ἀποστέλλω (πέμπω), Ἐξαποστέλλω, Ἀπόστολος,
Ψευδαπόστολος, Ἀποστολή,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament,
ed. Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, 10 vols.
[Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1964–], 1:432, emphasis in bold added)
On
October 24, 2023, I emailed Michael Rhodes querying this, asking Michael:
would I be correct that you view that
what Rengstorf writes supports LDS ecclesiology in light of the belief that the
earliest NT Christians (or at least, many) believed that the parousia
would be in their lifetime, so it was their position that “apostle” would be an
office until the second coming, so what Rengstorf writes is not at odds with
your referencing him//LDS ecclesiology? (this, btw, is not a “gottcha”
question—I am LDS, just want to be sure before citing your comments as well as
TDNT 1:432 if/when post-NT era apostleship comes up in a discussion with
non-LDS).
I
never got a response from Michael Rhodes.
I
am bringing this to people’s attention as I try my best to be careful with my
handling of sources, and I do call up critics when they are sloppy—all the more
so when it comes to those on my side of the debate.
[Mary] indeed, conceived without shame, gave birth without pain, and went hence without corruption, according to the word of the angel, or rather (the word) of God through the angel, so that she should be proved to be full, not merely hall filled, with grace and <so that> God her Son should faithfully fulfill the ancient commandment that he had formerly given, namely, to treat one’s father and mother with honor, and that thus the virginal flesh of Christ, which had been taken from the flesh of his virgin Mother, should not be totally different from her own.
Heinrich Denzinger, Compendium of Creeds, Definitions, and Declarations on Matters of Faith and Morals, ed. Peter Hünermann, Robert Fastiggi, and Anne Englund Nash (43rd ed; San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2012), 245
The verb εκηρυξεν is often associated in the NT with the verb ευαγγελιζω or the noun ευαγγλελιον, linking preaching with the gospel. (See Matt 24:14; Mk 1:14; 13:10; 14:9; Lk 8:1; 1 Cor 1:23; 1 Thess 2:9) However, in each of these cases, the connection between the proclamation and the good news explicitly stated. There are, however, other instances within the NT in which εκηρυξεν is used in a more general or neutral sense of making an announcement. (Lk 12:3; Rom 2:21; Rev 5:2) Therefore the verb εκηρυξεν does not necessarily involve preaching the good news. (Chad Pierce, "Spirits and the Proclamation of Christ: 1 Peter 3:18-22 in its Tradition-Historical and Literary Context" Ph.D. Thesis, Durham University, 2009], 204, emphasis added)
ὠδίνω fut. 3 pl. ὠδινήσουσιν Hab 3:10; aor. 3 sg. ὠδίνησεν LXX (s. prec. entry; Hom.+; Kaibel 321, 12; 1103, 2; UPZ 77 col. 2, 27 [160 b.c.]; LXX; Philo, Mos. 1, 280 al.; SibOr 5, 514; Just., D. 111, 2) to experience pains associated with giving birth, have birth-pains
ⓐ lit. to have birth-pains, be in labor abs. Rv 12:2 (cp. Is 66:7; Mi 4:10); Ro 8:22 v.l. As a voc. ἡ οὐκ ὠδίνουσα you who have no birth-pains Gal 4:27; 2 Cl 2:1, 2 (all three Is 54:1).
ⓑ in imagery, be in labor = suffer greatly (PGM 2, 92; Philo, Just.) τέκνα μου, οὓς πάλιν ὠδίνω Gal 4:19 (the acc. as in the lit. sense ‘bring forth in pain’ Trag.; Is 51:2).—DELG s.v. ὠδίς. M-M. TW.
William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1102.
Joseph Smith, Agreement with John Taylor, January 23, 1844 (in the handwriting of William Clayton):
This article of agreement made and entered into this twenty third day of January in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and forty four between John Taylor of the County of Hancock and State of Illinois of the one part and Joseph Smith of the County and state aforesaid of the other part . . .
One should compare this with the verbiage of D&C 20:1 and other texts.
And on the fifth day they reappeared. They were seen in the water by the people. The two of them looked like catfish when their faces were seen by Xibalba. And having germinated in the waters, they appeared the day later that as two vagabonds, with rags before and rags behind, and rags all over too. They seemed unrefined when they were examined by Xibalba; they acted differently now.
It was only the Dance of the Poorwill, the Dance of the Weasel, only Armadillos they danced.
Only Swallowing Swords, only Walking on Stilts now they danced. They performed many miracles now. They would set fire to a house, as if they were really burning it, and suddenly bring it back again. Now Xibalba was full of admiration.
Next they would sacrifice themselves, one of them dying for the other, stretched out as if in death. First they would kill themselves, but then they would suddenly look alive again. The Xibalbans could only admire what they did. Everything they did now was already the groundwork for their defeat of Xibalba. (Popol Vuh: The Definitive Edition of the Mayan Book of the Dawn of Life and the Glories of Gods and Kings [trans. Dennis Tedlock; New York: Touchstone, 1985], 132)
S[unday] S[chool] Conference convened . . . Class exercise Anna Ivins. Bro. [Alonzo] Farnsworth report Garcia. Some of the teachers do not observe the Word of Wisdom.
Concert recitation. Word of Wisdom. Song [“]In Our Lovely Deseret.[“] (Anthony W. Ivins, Journal, March 15, 1902, in Cowboy Apostle: The Diaries of Anthony W. Ivins, 1875-1932, ed. Elizabeth Oberdick Anderson [Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2013], 293, 294)
Attended meeting of Council of 12. 10 A.M. Politics. Republicans sell out to whiskey interests. Bro. [Francis M.] Lyman spoke on the word of wisdom. Urged its observance. We should keep out of debt. (Ibid., January 14, 1909, 433)
9 A.M. Officers meeting. R.S.
10-30 regular services. Sacrament. Counselor [Albert] Barrus made opening remarks. Good. Elder Call. Returned Elder from England. Embarrassed but good. Remarks. I occupied the remaining time. Met with Primary officers. (See Sister [Louie B.] Felt about leaflets treating on the subject of record keeping & kindred subject of order & system.) Shall men who engage in the liquor business be excommunicated. Two saloons the liscenes being $1,500.00 pr year each.
2. p.m. Prest. Clarence Gardner after opening exercises. Presentation of Names of Authorities by Stake Clark [Joseph] Rackstraw. Rulon S. Wells 2-56 to 3-40. Amusement & liquor conditions bad. Mayor A. O. call stands in with liquor element, ^revenue^ for amusement hall poor. (Ibid., June 7, 1914, 530)
[Robert] Judd & B. F. Grant met us at Cedar [City] this A.M. We ate breakfast at the Escalante Hotel, drove across the mountain to Cedar Brakes [Breaks] and on to Kanab via Long Valley for lunch, after which we drove to Bright Angel point, on the Kaibab Mountain where we passed the night. Governor [George] Dern and party, and representatives of the Union Pacific Ry. and Natl. Parks Company joined us here and on the 14th we drove over to the bridge together.
The bridge across Marble Canyon is a marvel of engineering accomplishment. It is 750 feet in length and about 450 feet above the water. We arrived at the bridge at 1 o’clock. A large number of people had already assembled. The Gov[ernor]s of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah were present. After lunch the bridge was formally dedicated and opened by the three governors. A meeting was held at which addresses were made from an elevated platform. There was no protection from the sun, no seats. The sun beat down, wind blew and dust enveloped the camp. It was typical desert environment.
I had brought with me some packages of tea, sugar, tobacco, and some candy for the children which I distributed among the Indians, for which they appeared very gratified. (Ibid., June 13, 1929, 603)
7:30 p.m. General Priesthood Meeting. Opening exercises. President John R. Winder. Congratulated the brethren. Never since I have been connected with the Presiding Bps. Office has the business of the church been so well reported. The tithes of the people have bene fairly well paid. The presidency desire to get the church out of debt. Brethren do not go in debt. Debt is bondage. Do not mortgage your homes for any purposes where it can be avoided. (Anthony W. Ivins, Journal, April 4, 1902, in Cowboy Apostle: The Diaries of Anthony W. Ivins, 1875-1932, ed. Elizabeth Oberdick Anderson [Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2013], 296-97)
Semi-Annual Conference. Opening exercises.
Prest. [Joseph F.] Smith made preliminary remarks. Joseph E. Robinson reported the California Mission. Good.
Ben E. Rich. Prest. [Ephraim H.] Nye reported the Southern States Mission. Good
Ben. R. Rich reported the Middle States Mission, or rather he preached a sermon on the subject of blood atonement, taking for his text the recent murder committed at N.Y. had better talked on some other subject. (Anthony W. Ivins, Journal, October 4, 1902, in Cowboy Apostle: The Diaries of Anthony W. Ivins, 1875-1932, ed. Elizabeth Oberdick Anderson [Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2013], 310)
This A.M. I brought up ^with Prests [Heber J.] Grant & [Charles W.] Nibley^ the question of the obligations of the Utah Idaho Sugar Co. to the Church for money loaned to them for the purpose of meeting current expenses. The Church has loaned the Co. $750,000.00 Cas[h] for which the Church has accepted the unsecured notes of the Sugar Co. The President has agreed with the banks who are leaning money to the sugar Co. that he will carry this loan unsecured until the banks have been paid in full of amnts. due them. I do not regard this as a safe loan, or one that it is proper for the Church to make.
The Church loaned this money to the sugar Co. several years ago and have never been able to collect. In discussion of the subject this A.M. Prest Nibley said that unless the Church came to the rescue the Utah Idaho Sugar co. would go into the hands of a receiver. Since 1919 the Church has had the following transactions with the Nibley Co.
In 1919 the Nibley Co gave the Church a note for $80,000.00 for the interest of the Church in the Herald Republican. In 1925 the note was paid with 1000 shares of the Nibl[e]y Stoddard Lumber Co. this stock has no value at all today so far as I am able to determine. The Church had invested in the Herald republican $544.000.00 all they recd in return was the lumber stock referred to.
In 1921 the Church bought from Nibley 150,000 shares of Sugar stock from Nibley for which the Church paid $200,000.00 and $3000,000.00 worth of Utah Hotel bonds bearing 7% interest. The bonds today are worth more than par. The Sugar stock is quoted at 50¢ per share with no buyers. The loss to the Church on these transactions including interest is more than $900,000.00.
Besides this the Church has suffered a loss of nearly four million dollars in depreciation in sugar and other stocks which it has purchased the total loss sustained as loss making a total of at least six million dollars. It appears to me that no farther investments in sugar should be made, and that the sugar Co. should secure the Church for the loans already made. (Anthony W. Ivins, Journal, September 4, 1930, in Cowboy Apostle: The Diaries of Anthony W. Ivins, 1875-1932, ed. Elizabeth Oberdick Anderson [Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2013], 607; Anderson notes that “Ivins corrected the number five by writing four over it” [ibid., 607 n. 52)
Although
Paul does not explicate his understanding of the notion ο κυριος της δοξης in 1
Cor 2:8 there can be little doubt that he points to the religious significance
of the figure of Jesus and of His death. In Ps. 29/28:3 ‘The God of glory’ is
said to be also ‘the Lord over mighty waters’; in Ps. 24/23:7-8 the author
refers to the ‘King of glory’: ‘Who is the King of glory?’—it is asked in v. 8;
κυριος is the answer. In Acts 7:2 Stephen addresses the God of Israel as ‘the
God of glory’ (ο θεος της δοξης) while in Eph. 1:17 God is said to be ‘The
Father of glory’’ (ο πατηρ της δοξης). Also in 1En. 63.2 God is said to
be ‘The Lord of glory.’ (Andrey A. Romanov, One God as One God and One Lord:
The Lordship of Jesus Christ as a Hermeneutical Key to Paul’s Christology in 1
Corinthians (with a special focus on 1 Cor. 8:4-6) [Early Christian Studies
20; Macquarie Centre, Australia: 2021], 7 n. 24)
If,
however, it is assumed that Paul uses the designation ο κυριος της δοξης in 1
Cor. 2:8 in order to underline Christ’s religious status as a pre-existent
being, then all the puzzles concerning the specific character of His
crucifixion seem to be solved. First of all, this assumption makes clear why
Jesus’ crucifixion cannot be compared to the deaths (even violent) of other
righteous human beings, such as the death of John the Baptist (prior to Jesus’
crucifixion) or the death of Stephen (prior to Paul’s writing of 1
Corinthians), for Paul proclaims the crucifixion of the One who is both a man
and a pre-existent person. Secondly, this assumption elucidates why some Jews
and Greeks consider Christ’s crucifixion as foolishness or a stumbling block:
the factual crucifixion of the One who participated in creation was not easy to
comprehend. Finally, this assumption explains why ‘the rulers of this age’ are
‘doomed to perish’ (2:8,6): they crucified the One who will judge the world at
His second coming and ‘the rulers of this age’ will be destroyed by Him (see
also 15:24). The cross of Christ obtains a religious significance in Paul’s
eyes not because it was a violation against the righteous man Jesus, but
because it was the crucifixion of Jesus as both a man and the
true Lord of Glory. (Ibid., 570-71)
In
Matt 1:18, we read:
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on
this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came
together (συνερχομαι), she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
While
the general meaning of συνερχομαι is simply “to come together” (as in to meet/assemble),
it does have a sexual connotation. In BDAG, we read the following (note how it
references Matt 1:18 in support for this meaning):
3. to unite in an intimate
relationship, come together in a sexual context (X., Mem. 2, 2, 4;
Diod. S. 3, 58, 4; Ps.-Apollod. 1, 3, 3; Philo, Virt. 40; 111; Jos., Ant. 7,
168; 213) ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό σ. 1 Cor 7:5 v.l. In πρὶν ἢ συνελθεῖν
αὐτούς Mt 1:18 domestic and marital relations are
combined. (In marriage contracts in pap πρὸς γάμον τινὶ συνελθεῖν
means ‘marry’. Also
without πρὸς γάμον: BGU 970, 13
[II AD] συνηρχόμην τῷ προγεγραμμένῳ μου ἀνδρί).—M-M. TW.
Here
are the sources referenced by BDAG:
Xenophon,
Memorabilia 2.2.4:
|
καὶ μὴν ουʼ τῶν γε ἀφροδισίων ἕνεκα παιδοποιεῖσθαι τοὺς ἀνθρώπους
ὑπολαμβάνεις, ἐπεὶ τούτου γε τῶν ἀπολυσόντων μεσταὶ μὲν αἱ ὁδοί, μεστὰ δὲ τὰ
οἰκήματα. φανεροὶ δʼ ἐσμὲν καὶ σκοπούμενοι ἐξ ὁποίων ἂν γυναικῶν βέλτιστα ἡμῖν
τέκνα γένοιτο· αἷς συνελθόντες τεκνοποιούμεθα |
Of course you don’t suppose that lust provokes men to beget
children, when the streets and the stews are full of means to satisfy that?
We obviously select for wives the women who will bear us the best children,
and then marry them to raise a family. |
Diod. 3.58.4:
|
τὴν οὖν Κυβέλην εἰς ἀκμὴν ἡλικίας ἐλθοῦσαν
ἀγαπῆσαι τῶν ἐγχωρίων τινὰ νεανίσκον τὸν προσαγορευόμενον μὲν Ἄττιν, ὕστερον
δ᾽ ἐπικληθέντα Πάπαν: συνελθοῦσαν δ᾽ εἰς ὁμιλίαν αὐτῷ λάθρᾳ καὶ γενομένην ἔγκυον
ἐπιγνωσθῆναι κατὰ τοῦτον τὸν καιρὸν ὑπὸ τῶν γονέων. |
At that time Cybele, in the prime of
life, came to be loved by the villagers a young man called Attin, later
called Pope: they gathered to speak to him secretly and became pregnant at
that time it was known by the parents. |
Ps.-Apollod.
1, 3, 3
|
Ευρε δε 'Ορφευς και τα Διονυσου μυστηρια,
και τεθαπται περι την Πιεριαν διασπασθείς υπο των μαιναδων. Κλειω δε Πειρου
του Μάγνητος ηρασθη κατά ημνιν 'Αφροδίτης (ωνειδισε γαρ αυτή τον του
'Αδωνιδος ερωτα), συνελθουσα δε εγεννησεν εξ αυτου παιδα 'Υαχινθον, ου
Θαμυρις ο Φιλαμμωνος και 'Αργιοπης νυμφης ισχει ερωτα, προωτοσ αρξαμενος εραν
αρρενων. |
Orpheus and the Mysteries of Dionysus were found, and they were
scattered around Pieria under the Maenads. Clio and Pyrrhus of Magnetus fell
in love with Aphrodite (for she made Adonis love her), and when she came
together, she gave birth to a child from him, Hyachinth, and Thamyris,
Philammonus, and Argiope, the nymph, were in love, the first of which was
male. |
Philo,
De virtutibus 1:40:
|
καὶ πλησίον γενόμεναι βλέμμασιν ἑταιρικοῖς καὶ στωμυλίᾳ λόγων καὶ
σχέσεσι καὶ κινήσεσιν ἀκολάστοις δελεάζουσι τῆς νεότητος τὴν ὀλιγόφρονα μοῖραν,
ἀνερμάτιστα καὶ ἀνίδρυτα ἤθη· καὶ διὰ τῆς τῶν σωμάτων αἰσχύνης ἀγκιστρευσάμεναι
τὰς ψυχὰς τῶν συνελθόντων, ἐπὶ θυσίας ἀθύτους καὶ σπονδὰς ἀσυμβάτους καλέσασαι
τῶν χειροκμήτων, ἀλλοτριοῦσι τῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς καὶ ὄντως ὄντος θεραπείας θεοῦ.
|
And when they came near to them they put forth immodest wanton
looks, and sought to entice them with caressing words, and dances, and
lascivious movements; and in this way they enticed the shallow-minded company
of the young men, youths whose dispositions had no ballast nor steadiness in
them. And by the shame of their own bodies they captivated the souls of those
who came to them, bringing them over to unholy sacrifices which ought not to
have been sacrificed, and to libations which should never have been offered
in honor of deities made with hands, and thus they alienated them from the
worship of the one only and truly divine God. And when they had accomplished
their purpose, they sent the glad tidings to the men of their nation; |
Philo,
De virtutibus 1:111:
|
ἐπικουφιεῖς δὲ τὰς μὲν τῆς κεφαλῆς τρίχας ἀποκείρας, περιελὼν δὲ
ὄνυχας, ἀπαμφιάσας δὲ τὴν ἐσθῆτα ἣν ἔχουσα ἐζωγρήθη, τριάκοντα δὲ ἡμέρας ἀνεὶς
καὶ ἐπιτρέψας αὐτῇ πενθῆσαι καὶ ἀποδακρῦσαι μετὰ ἀδείας πατέρα καὶ μητέρα καὶ
τοὺς ἄλλους οἰκείους, ὧν ἀπεζεύχθη τεθνεώτων ἢ θανάτου χείρους ὑπομενόντων τὰς
ἐν δουλείᾳ συμφοράς· μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα ὡς γαμετῇ νόμῳ συνέρχου. |
and you will alleviate her sufferings if you cut the hair of her
head, and trim her nails, and take off from her the garment which she wore
when she was taken prisoner, and leave her alone for thirty days, during
which period you shall permit her with impunity to mourn and bewail her
father and her mother, and her other relations, from whom she has been
separated by their death, or by their being subjected to the calamity of
slavery which is worse than death. |
Josephus,
Antiquities of the Jews 7:168:
|
ὡς δὲ τὸ κελευσθὲν ἐγένετο τὴν ἀδελφὴν ἠξίωσεν εἰς τὸν ἐνδοτέρω
τὸ δεῖπνον οἶκον αὐτῷ παρενεγκεῖν ποιησάσης δὲ τοῦτο τῆς κόρης λαβόμενος αὐτῆς
συνελθεῖν αὐτῷ πείθειν ἐπειρᾶτο ἀνακραγοῦσα δ᾽ ἡ παῖς ἀλλὰ μὴ σύ γε τοῦτο βιάσῃ
με μηδὲ ἀσεβήσῃς εἶπεν ἀδελφέ τοὺς νόμους παραβὰς καὶ δεινῇ περιβαλὼν σαυτὸν
αἰσχύνῃ παῦσαι δ᾽ οὕτως ἀδίκου καὶ μιαρᾶς ἐπιθυμίας ἐξ ἧς ὀνείδη καὶ κακοδοξίαν
|
As soon as what he had commanded was done, he desired his sister
to bring his supper to him into the inner parlour; which, when the damsel had
done, he took hold of her, and endeavoured to persuade her to lie with him.
Whereupon the damsel cried out, and said, ``Nay, brother, do not force me,
nor be so wicked as to transgress the laws, and bring upon yourself the
utmost confusion. Curb your unrighteous and impure lust, from which our house
will get nothing but reproach and disgrace.'' |
Josephus,
Antiquities of the Jews 7:213:
|
μεμένηκε δ᾽ ἐπὶ τῆς αὐτῆς υἱοῦ παραλαβόντος ταῦτα λέγων ἔπειθεν ὕποπτον
γὰρ αὐτὸν εἶχε καὶ καλέσας τὸν Ἀχιτόφελον συνεβουλεύετο αὐτῷ τί δεῖ ποιεῖν ὁ
δὲ παρῄνεσε ταῖς τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτὸν παλλακαῖς συνελθεῖν ἐκ τούτου γὰρ εἴσεσθαι
τὸν λαὸν ἔλεγε πιστεύσαντα ὡς ἀδιάλλακτά σοι τὰ πρὸς αὐτόν ἐστι καὶ μετὰ πολλῆς
συστρατεύσεσθαι προθυμίας ἐπὶ τὸν πατέρα μέχρι δεῦρο γὰρ φανερὰν ἔχθραν ἀναλαμβάνειν
δεδιέναι προσδοκῶντας ὑμᾶς ὁμονοήσειν |
This speech persuaded Absalom, who before suspected Hushai. And
now he called Ahithophel, and consulted with him what he ought to do: he
persuaded him to go in to his father's concubines; for he said, that ``by
this action the people would believe that your difference with your father is
irreconcilable, and will hence fight with great alacrity against your father,
for hereto they are afraid of taking up open enmity against him, out of an
expectation that you will be reconciled again.'' |
1
Cor 7:5 in P46 (early/middle 2nd century):
|
μη αποστερείτε αλληλους ει μητι εκ συμφωνου προς καιρον ινα
σχολασητε τη προσευχη και παλιν επι το αυτό συχερχεσθε ινα μη πειραζη υμασ ο
σατανος δια την ακρα σιαν υμων (taken from Philip Wesley Comfort and David P.
Barrett, The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts, 2
vols. [3d ed; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Kregel Academic, 2019], 1:237) |
. . . Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you
. . . |
Joseph Smith said, on another occasion, in the hearing of
some of the saints still surviving, that the City of Enoch would again take its
place in the identical spot from which it had been detached, now forming that
chasm of the earth, filled with water, called the Gulf of Mexico. (Joseph
Young, Snr., History
of the Organization of the Seventies [Salt Lake City: Deseret
News, 1878], 12)
. . . there
are good grounds on which to conclude that it is some form of vicarious
baptism. In other words, the Corinthians’ baptism for the dead was a practice
believed to make some difference to the fate of the dead, to effect or ensure
their transfer to salvation. This is, of course, somewhat different from the
notion of the dead having an opportunity to respond to the gospel—the kind of
idea that may be hinted at in 1 Pet 4.6—but it is relevant enough to cast
considerable doubt over the assertion that notions of post-death
conversion/initiation are entirely absent from the NT. Likewise, John 5.25–29
may well indicate belief in a proclamation of Christ in the realm of the dead.
(Travis B. Williams and David G. Horrell, 1 Peter, 2 vols. [ICC
Commentary; London: T&T Clark, 2023], 2:349])
Deut. 10:17a
and 1 Cor. 8:5-6: Lordship as a comparative category
Barrett
maintains that the OT ‘presupposes’ the existence of celestial beings, for
example ‘in Deut. X. 17, which like the present verse [1 Cor. 8:5] puts gods
and lords together’. (Barrett, Commentary, 192) Barrett is one among
many who recognize the connection between Deut. 10:17a and 1 Cor. 8:5-6. . . .
The text of the verse goes as follows:
כִּ֚י
יְהוָ֣ה אֱלֹֽהֵיכֶ֔ם ה֚וּא אֱלֹהֵ֣י הָֽאֱלֹהִ֔ים וַאֲדֹנֵ֖י הָאֲדֹנִ֑ים
(LXX: ὁ γὰρ
κύριος ὁ θεὸς ὑμῶν οὗτος θεὸς τῶν θεῶν καὶ κύριος τῶν κυρίων). (In the NRSV:
‘The Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords.’)
Scholars
interpret the meaning of the text differently. Waaler, for instance, opines
that ‘From a grammatical point of view it is not necessary to take the OT
statement ‘God of gods and Lord of lords’ as confirming the reality of foreign
gods. Normally expressions like [these] are seen as superlative, meaning the
greatest or supreme God and Lord.’ (Waaler, The Shema, 387). This
argument is not fully clear. The use of a superlative construction here implies
a certain form of comparison: God can be the ‘greatest’ or ‘supreme’ one only
if He is so presented in contrast with other beings who are considered as
‘minor’ or ‘lesser’ gods. The author does not claim YHWH is the only existing
God, nor explicitly that the existence of other gods is an allusion. In the
context of 10:17a the author time and again alludes to the stone tablets with
God’s commandments. In the first commandment (Deut. 5:6) YHWH is opposed to
other ‘gods’; Deut. 10:17a seems to remind the Israelites of this point. A
reference to other gods similar to that in Deut. 10:17a is also found in Deut.
3:24. There are no reason to maintain that the author uses the superlative here
to deny the very existence of the religious figures called ‘gods’ or ‘lords’
even if, as Waaler notes, ‘only one person is in focus, namely God’. (Waaler, The
Shema, 379)(Andrey A. Romanov, One God as One
God and One Lord: The Lordship of Jesus Christ as a Hermeneutical Key to Paul’s
Christology in 1 Corinthians (with a special focus on 1 Cor. 8:4-6) [Early
Christian Studies 20; Macquarie Centre, Australia: 2021], 664-65)
[Re.
the view that “lord” in “Lord of lords” is a reference to mortal kings]:
First of all,
there is no reference to earthly lords or kinds in the context of Deut. 10:17a.
Not a word in twenty two verses of ch. 10 is devoted to the attempt to compare
God’s authority to that of kings. Only in 11:3 the author mentions Pharaoh, the
king of Egypt, but the motif of the comparison of the king with YHWH is not
explicitly articulated. Secondly, it is noteworthy that the text of 10:17a uses
אדני to characterize the God of Israel as the Lord. It has been already noted
that אדני (unlike אדון) has in the MT predominately a religious meaning . . .
In Deuteronomy the term is also found in Deut. 3:24 and 9:26 as a part of God’s
double designation (אדני יהוה). In 3:24 the author compares the Lord God of
Israel to other gods (without any mention of earthly rulers) and, strikingly,
the alleged rival gods are located ‘in heaven or on earth’ (εν τω ουρανω
. . . επι εης γης)
in the LXX). In 9:26 the double designation of the MT is remarkably
complemented in the LXX, the Greek text characterizing the God of Israel is not
only as GK (as the translation of אדני יהוה), but also as βασιλευς των θεων
(the ‘king of the gods’). This addition indicates that the focus of the Greek
translator(s) was on the incomparability of YHWH with regard to other religious
beings. The formula βασιλευς των θεων in
9:26 seems to anticipate the parallel formula in 10:17a, namely θεος των θεων
and κυριος των κυριων.
One should not overlook the presence of the motif of God’s might/strength which
is common for the Greek texts of Deut. 3:24, 9:26 and 10:17 (see the use of the
noun ισχυρος in
3:24 and 9:26 and of the adjective ισχυς in 10:17b).
In other words, Deut. 3:24, 9:26 and 10:17 similarly place the religious
superiority of the God of Israel (primarily over other religious beings) in the
centre of their message and, correspondingly, the phrase ואדני האדנים in Deut
10:17a should also be regarded from this perspective.
The
construction ‘the God of gods’ and ‘the Lord of lords’ is also found in Ps.
136/135:2-3. The second half of the Psalm indeed speaks about God’s acts
against the earthly kings (see vv.17-20 and the mention of the Pharaoh in
v.15). There is, however, no direct connection between אדנים/κυριοι
and מלכים/βασιλεις. In the Psalm, the description of God as ‘the God of gods’ and
‘the Lord of lords’ is followed by the description of the act of creation: He
‘by understanding made the heavens’ (v.5a), ‘spread out the earth on the
waters’ (v.6a), etc. Only after this presentation of YHWH as the Creator, the
author of the Psalm depicts His redeeming acts such as defeating some earthly
rulers. Moreover, it seems very likely that God’s victories over the kings
should be considered as an implicit reference to His victories over other
‘gods’ as the protectors of these kings and their territories . . . In other
words, even the redeeming defeat of the kings is to be better interpreted as
the confirmation of the religious significance of YHWH as ‘the God of gods’ and
‘the Lord of lords’.
Deut 10:14
vies an important description of God’s status: ‘heaven and the heaven of
heavens belong to the Lord your God, the earth with all that is in it’. This
seems to be the author’s expression of God’s absolute dominion over everything
that exists within the created realm. In order to exclude any doubts concerning
God’s position with regard to other celestial beings, the author specifies the
notion ‘heaven’: ‘heaven and the heaven of heavens.’ This is the closest
connection to the description of God as ‘God of gods and Lord of lords’ in
10:17a.
The
view that the construction κυριος των κυριων should be understood in terms of
the comparison of God to the earthly kings, originates probably from the
interpretation of Dan. 2:47 where the king Nebuchadnezzar hails the God of
Daniel as θεος των θεων και κυριος των βασιλεων. A similar formula is found in
Dan. 4:37 LXX where God is said to be θεος των θεων και κυριος των κυριων και
βασιλευς των βασιλεων (the exact equivalent is not found in the MT). This motif
is also discernible in 1En. 9.4 where God is addressed as κυριος των
κθριων και ο θεος των θεων και βασιλευς των αιωνων. It is noteworthy, however,
that the meaning of βασιλευς in these superlative constructions is specified by
the references to the specific character of God as the King. He is said to be
incomparable to the earthly kings and His Kingdom is of a special nature. God’s
Kingdom shall never be destroyed (Dan. 6:26/27), God is the ‘King of heaven’
(4:37: the MT 4:34; מלך שׁמיא). God’s authority is said to be over everything
and ‘stands throughout all the generations’ (cf. 1En. 9:4-5). In other
words, the religious significance of God’s lordship is articulated even when it
is compared to earthly powers. (Andrey A. Romanov, One God as One God and
One Lord: The Lordship of Jesus Christ as a Hermeneutical Key to Paul’s
Christology in 1 Corinthians (with a special focus on 1 Cor. 8:4-6) [Early
Christian Studies 20; Macquarie Centre, Australia: 2021], 666-8)