Tuesday, April 8, 2025

M. David Litwa on Egyptians Associating Seth with Yahweh

  

Seth-Yahweh

 

Our focus, however, is on the Egyptian depiction of the Jewish deity. From the Greco- Egyptian perspective, Yahweh and Seth shared several traits: they were both gods of foreigners, of the desert, and of frightening storms. They both sent calamities. Indeed, Egyptians could not help but notice that some of the plagues unleashed by Yahweh resembled disasters customarily inflicted by Seth: darkness, eclipse, and pestilence. Red was the distinctive hue of Seth, and Yahweh turned the Nile crimson before ordering the Hebrews to paint their lintels with blood. Mount Sinai, the desert crag from which Yahweh revealed his Law, quaked as it was enveloped in thunder, lightning, and fire— all phenomena associated with Seth. Finally, the Greek word for Yahweh (Iaō)— with a perverse twist of the tongue— sounded like the native Egyptian word for donkey (eiō or simply ). These factors, even if judged artificial today, were more than enough for Hellenized Egyptians to portray Yahweh as a form of Seth.

 

There was an additional motivation. For centuries, Jews had scorned the religion of Egypt as the worship of dumb beasts. One way for learned Egyptians to fight back was to depict the Jewish deity as himself the most vile and ridiculous beast. If Yahweh was a form of Seth, then he could be portrayed in Seth’s ass- like shape. Thus there arose the tradition that the Jews (secretly) worshiped Yahweh as a donkey or as a man standing upright with an ass’s head. (M. David Litwa, The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021], 23-24)

 

 

 

Excurses: Seth-Yahweh in Spells and Gems

 

as to suggest their close association and perhaps identity. The spells come from papyrus books discovered in Egypt and now held in Paris. The books are dated to the fourth century CE, but many of their spells are thought to come from second- or third- century prototypes.

 

In a multipurpose spell for restraining charioteers, sending dreams, and inspiring love, a cat- headed sun god is invoked under various names. One of the names inscribed on a metal leaf and inserted into the earholes of a drowned cat is “IŌ SETH.” The spell is relevant only if IŌ is a form of IAŌ (the Greek form of Yahweh). Even if IŌ represents the Egyptian word for donkey (EIŌ) or the donkey’s bray, however, a double meaning (IŌ = IAŌ) could be in play.

 

A second spell, written in the form of a letter from Nephotes (an Egyptian sage) to a Pharaoh of the seventh or sixth century BCE, promises Pharaoh the power to get special information from a deity revealed through bowl divination. The deity is a sun god identified with “mighty Typhon, ruler of the realm above and master, god of gods.” A long list of names for the god follows. Among the names can thrice be distinguished IAŌ. In this spell, Birger Pearson considered it “clear” that “Seth- Typhon is identified with the god of the Jews.” Pearson upheld a similar identification in the following two spells.

 

The first is an incantation of Typhon’s soul represented by the Great Bear constellation. The practitioner anoints his or her lips with the fat of a black donkey and uses hairs from the same donkey to make a plaited cord wrapped as a crown.70 The practitioner then kneels and prays to daemonic rulers, among them being SABAŌTH IAŌ. He or she then writes the hundredlettered name of Typhon on papyrus and ties it to the cord used as a crown. Another spell was designed to afflict a woman with terrible pains. The practitioner is bid to draw on an unbaked brick the picture of a running donkey with the title IAŌ IŌ on its face. The spell inscribed on the brick begins with the names of the deity addressed. The key deity invoked is “the great, great Typhon!”

 

Despite Pearson’s judgment, in none of these spells is it actually “clear” that Typhon is a form of Yahweh. The name of Yahweh may be invoked in its Greek form (Iao), but is it really the god of Jewish scripture? Granted, at least some magical practitioners knew that Iao was the god of the Exodus. Celsus (about 178 CE) observed that “the god of the Hebrews” and “the god who drowned the king of Egypt and the Egyptians in the Red Sea” was a common formula used by exorcists. In a curse tablet buried in a grave near Carthage (first to third century CE), we find reference to Iao who “split the sea,” who is also called “Adonai Sabao” (names for Yahweh in biblical Hebrew). Another spell refers to the one who appeared to Israel in a bright pillar (Exod 13:21– 22), “who delivered his people from Pharaoh and who inflicted the ten plagues.” This “mighty god Sabaoth,” made the “Red Sea uncrossable” after “Israel went through” (cf. Exod 14:27).

 

We should also take into consideration certain engraved gems that depict a donkey- headed deity with snake legs and a shield bearing the name IAŌ. The donkey head indicates Seth, the snake legs indicate Typhon, and the name “IAŌ” indicates that Seth- Typhon is also Seth- Yahweh. The carvers of these gems are unknown. In the early twentieth century, Adrien Blanchet traced them back to the “Ophites.” But if the donkey image of Seth- Yahweh was widely recognized, a wide variety of persons could be responsible for them.

 

Other artifacts deserve brief mention. The first is an oval- shaped lead tablet featuring a snake- footed figure with the head of a donkey inscribed with the name IAŌ. The second is an amulet featuring on its obverse a large- headed snake with seven rays on its head. Above it are six stars with the name “IAŌ” inscribed on the left. On the reverse stands a donkey- headed god in a kilt

with a short staff and carrying an ankh (Egyptian symbol of life). A third item, a gem from the British Museum, shows the same donkey- headed figure in a kilt carrying an ankh and a scepter (see Figure 1.2). He is labeled “IAŌ” and is surrounded by the names of the four archangels (Uriel, Suriel, Gabriel, and Michael). It seems hard to deny that these donkey- headed figures are images of Seth- Yahweh.

 

Although we do not know who made them, who used them, and for what purpose they were made, they testify to the recognizability of Seth- Yahweh as a cultural symbol or “meme” recognizable in antiquity. (M. David Litwa, The Evil Creator: Origins of an Early Christian Idea [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021], 29-31)

 

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

Monday, April 7, 2025

Examining Bates Morris' Attempt to Parallel Mother Shipton's Prophetic Poem with Joseph Smith's Prophecies in D&C 87

In a booklet dedicated to downplaying the prophetic nature of D&C 87, one critic appealed to the “prophetic” nature of a poem attributed to Mother Shipton:

 

Mother Shipton's prophecy beats Jose Smith's away out of sight. It reads:

 

"Carriages without horses shall go,

And accidents fill the world with woe;

Around the world through shall fly

In the twinkling of an eye;

Water shall yet wonders do,

Now strange but yet they shall be true;

The world upside down shall be,

And gold be found at the root of a tree:

Through the hill man shall ride,

And horse nor ass be at this side;

Underwater men shall walk,

Shall ride, shall sleep, shall talk;

in the air shall men be seen,

In white, in blue, in green;

Iron in the water shall float

As easy as a wooden boat;

Gold shall be found and shown

IN land that's now not known;

Fire and water shall wonders do;

England shall at last admit a Jew;

The end of the world shall come

In eighteen hundred and eighty-one."

 

Whether Mother Shipton wrote this prophecy or some one else, it is a wonderful collection of the improbables and impossibles, as people then thought. Mother Shipton did not claim divine inspiration for it. It was written as a joke–just as much as "Mother goose when she wanted to wander–rode through the air on a very fine gander." The joke consisted in putting all the impossible things together and predicting the materialization as an accomplished fact in future years.

 

These lines date back to Charles the First. Mother Shipton speaks of England yet to admit a Jew. Well, the Jews were at one time banished from England, and were not allowed to return until Cromwell's time. So, the prophecy must have been written prior to Cromwell's time. Anyway, it dates back several centuries, and as near as I can figure it out it was not far from the time of Charles the First.

 

(1) Here is predicted the automobile,

(2) Many accidents

(3) The electric wire around the world

(4) Hydraulic pressure perfected

(5) Unrest of the "world–upside down"

(6) Buried gold "at the root of a tree"

(7) Railroad trains through the hills

(8) The submarine

(9) The airplane

(10) The iron clad boat

(11) Gold in California and Alaska

(12) fire and steam applied

(13) Jews return to England

(14) The only failure–the end of the world in 1881.

 

Here are thirteen points in Mother Shipton's prophecy that all came true, and she failed on only one. She put that so far ahead that she did not live to be jeered at for the one failure.

 

But Joe Smith's prophecy on the rebellion was plagiarized from politicians and divine inspiration claimed for it.

 

Mormonism, with such a leader, was founded on lies from beginning to end, and perpetrated by fraud and deception. (Bates Morris, Joe Smith's Prophecy on the Rebellion: Examined and Found Wanting [Bates Morris, 1927], 27-29)

 

For Morris, the “prophetic” poem came from either Shipton or a contemporary, and “predicts” many events and inventions, with 13/14 (or ~92%) accuracy. However, this prophecy is an invention, not by a contemporary of Shipton, but from Charles Hindley, and dates to 1862.

 

The following appeared in Macon Weekly Telegraph (Georgia) (July 30, 1880):

 

“In 1862, Mr. Charles Hindley of Brighton, England, issued what purported to be an exact reprint of “A Chap-book Version of Mother Shipton’s Prophecies, from the Edition of 1448.” In this, for the first time, there were pith and point, and special application. All modern discoveries were plainly described, and one prophecy which began,

 

“Carries without horses shall go,”
and set forth the railroads, telegraphs, steamers, and other modern inventions, wound up with
“The world unto an end shall come
In eighteen hundred and eighty-one.”

This, of course, quite startled the public. In all other important events of the nineteenth century had been so aptly described, why should not the last prediction be fulfilled? (source)

 

However, Hindley would admit his fraud. William H. Harrison, in his 1881 monograph on Shipton, provided the following details:

 

The following is the most largely circulated form of one of Mother Shipton’s reputed prophecies, which of late years has been exercising the public mind. I quote it from p 450 of Notes and Queries, December 7th, 1872, but since as well as before then, its circulation has been extensive.

 

“ANCIENT PREDICTION,
“(Entitled by popular tradition ‘Mother Shipton’s Prophecy,’)

 

“Published in 1448, republished in 1641.

 

[RB: Poem is recounted, same as above as provided by Morris]

 

. . .

 

The three earliest records in the British Museum Library, in relation to Mother Shipton, agree closely with each other, and none of them contain the lines printed on page 13, in my first Chapter, ending with the too celebrated couplet:--

 

“The world to an end shall come,
in eighteen hundred and eighty one.”

 

The lines in question and the notorious prophecy about the end of the world were fabricated about twenty years ago by Mr. Charles Hindley. The editor of Notes and Queries says, in the issue of the journal dated April 26th 1873:--

 

“Mr. Charles Hindley, of Brighton, in a letter to us, has made a clean breast of having fabricated the Prophecy quoted at page 450 of our last volume, with some ten others included in his reprint of a chap-book version, published in 1862.” (William H. Harrison, Mother Shipton Investigated: The Result of Critical Examination in the British Museum Library, of The Literature Relating to the Yorkshire Sibyl [London: W. H. Harrison, 1881], 12-13, 42-43)


Needless to say, many of the discoveries/inventions "predicted" in the poem were discovered/invented prior to 1862. The first submarine was designed and built by Cornelis Drebbel in 1620, while the principle of hydraulic pressure was discovered by Blaise Pascal in the 1640s.

The attempt to parallel the poem, falsely attributed to Shipton, with Joseph Smith’s prophecies (plural), as contained in D&C 87, is fallacious. There is probably a reason why I have only found this in Morris' 1927 booklet.

 

Further Reading:

 

Resources on Joseph Smith’s Prophecies

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

Bede on Luke 18:13-14

  

How much assurance of forgiveness he rightfully offers to penitents, in that the tax collector, who perfectly recognized the guilt of his wickedness, wept and confessed, and if he came to the temple an unjust man, he returned from the temple justified. Allegorically, the Pharisee stands for the people of the Jews, who extoll their own merits from the justification of the Law. But the tax collector is the people of the Gentiles, who standing at a distance from God, confess their sins. Of these, the first drew away from God, humbled by pride; the second, exalted by lamentation, deserved to draw near him. (Bede, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke [trans. Calvin B. Kendall and Faith Wallis; Translated Texts for Historians 85; Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2025], 517)

 

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

William R. Schoedel on Ignatius to Polycarp 6:2

  

Be pleasing to him whose soldiers you are, from whom you also receive your wages; let none of you be found a deserter. Let your baptism serve as (your) arms; your faith as (your) helmet; your love as (your) spear; your endurance as (your) panoply; your works are your deposits that you may have the savings you deserve. Be patient, then, with one another in gentleness, as God is with you. May I always benefit from you. (Ignatius to Polycarp 6:2)

 

The imagery shifts in the next section from the household to the army. But just as those who obey the bishop are regarded as servants of God, so the Christian soldiers are called on to please God (“him whose soldiers you are”). The writer of 2 Tim 2:4 also speaks of “pleasing” the one who enlists the Christian soldier. Military metaphors are found across a wide range of religious and philosophical (especially Stoic) literature of the period and were familiar to Jews as well as pagans. Ignatius’ method of comparing parts of the armor with aspects of the Christian faith is reminiscent particularly of Eph 6:11–17 (cf. 1 Thess 5:8); but he introduces a different range of vocabulary and handles the comparisons so didactically that there is less reason here than in the parallel to suspect the influence of Gnostic conceptions of a cosmic conflict between the forces of light and darkness. Three Latinisms occur in the passage: “deserter” (desertor), “deposits” (deposita), and “savings” (accepta). “When gifts of money were given the army on special occasions, the individual soldier received only half of what was due him; the rest was deposited to his credit in the regimental treasury, and he received it (as ἄκκεπτα) if and when he was honorably discharged.” Hahn could find no other instance of these Latinisms in Greek sources. But Preisigke gives an example of δησέρτωρ (“deserter”), and Kiessling several examples of δηπόσιτον or δηπόσειτον (“deposit”) from the papyri. The Latinisms may be as concentrated as they are here because of the conversation of the bishop’s Roman guard. As for his references to the parts of armor, there seems to be some imprecision: “weapons” (any defensive or offensive weapon is covered by the term), “helmet,” and “spear” are clear enough; but “panoply” generally included at least shield, sword, lance, and helmet and seems unnaturally narrowed here. It may be that the passage moves to a climax. In that event, the theological entities may follow some more or less logical order: baptism provides the basic protection and corresponds to the “arms” (ὅπλα) by which the soldier is protected; faith and love represent the fundamental Christian virtues (see on Eph. 1.1; 14.1) and correspond more particularly to the two important weapons named; finally, endurance corresponds to the whole armor (πανοπλία “panoply”) because it must characterize the exercise of all the previously mentioned arms if they are not to fail. Endurance is probably treated as the climax here because Ignatius seeks to confirm the Smyrnaeans in their unity and their support for his cause (see on Pol. 6.1). These are the “deeds” (ἔργα) put on deposit for the Smyrnaeans that will have their reward. Note that support of Ignatius’ plans is shortly to be identified as a “deed” (ἔργον) in which God and the Smyrnaeans cooperate (Pol. 7.3). In our passage the emphasis is on the deeds that make the deed on Ignatius’ behalf possible, namely, those acts in which the Smyrnaeans demonstrate their willingness to bear with one another (in imitation of God’s gracious dealings with them). In any event, Ignatius assumes compliance with his recommendations. For the concluding wish is a formula that he uses to express satisfaction with what he can expect of his addressees (see on Pol. 1.1).

 

Ignatius’ remark about the “gentleness” (πραότης) of God that the Smyrnaeans are to imitate bears a trace of the theory alluded to elsewhere that divine punishment is delayed because of God’s goodness (see on Eph. 11.1; Sm. 9.1). The thought, as we have seen, has a Hellenic coloring; and it is worth noting that Plutarch (De ser. num. vind. 5, 550f) speaks specifically of God’s πραότης (“gentleness”) in discussing reasons for the delay of the punishment of evil-doers. (William R. Schoedel, Ignatius of Antioch: A Commentary on the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch [Hermeneia–a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985], 275-76)

 

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

Gregory of Narek (d. 1003) Identifying Peter with the “Rock” of Matthew 16:18

  

His foremost comrade and partner, first in number and primacy, the solid Rock, the seven-word confession to his credit, the chosen and glorified in harmony with the mystical cycle of this world’s beginning and end, is Cephas, who was pronounced blessed by the lips of the Giver of Life, was inspired by the Father’s benevolence and made wise. And moved by the Spirit of Wisdom to confess rightly, having discerned the eternal purpose for the inscrutable birth, he was deservedly blessed by the statement of the uncreated one: “Blessed are you, Simon, heir to Jonah.” This indescribable gift of blessedness recorded in the Gospel, the very voice of the Creator, is bestowed on all those who join in making the same confession of faith. For when we are in accord with their confession, we become partakers in (their) glory. And by (their) petitioning the Existence who became man, we become fortified by the power of their words and shielded by (their) eternal hope. For the incarnate Savior asked for the redemption of Adam’s progeny, saying: “O my Father on high, I pray that just as in their case, (you bless also) those who will believe in me through their word.” (Gregory of Narek, Encomium on the Holy Apostles 10:45-48, in The Festal Works of St. Gregory of Narek: Annotated Translation of the Odes, Litanies, and Encomia [trans. Abraham Terian; Collegeville, Minn.: Pueblo Book, 2016], 332-33)

 

 

You were sent with deserved glory by the One who descended from the concealed bosom. Through your ordination Agabus and Timothy became prophets. From your ranks the evangelists arose: Mark, the saintly youth who was named High, a disciple of the Rock; Luke, the bearer of the resplendent resurrection, teller of the story of the ascension, an Antiochian young man, a master healer of souls rather than of bodies; others from among you (were) shepherds and teachers. (Encomium on the Holy Apostles 12:60, in ibid., 334)

 

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

Sunday, April 6, 2025

Bede on Jesus’ Words to Peter in Luke 21:31-32

  

273/10 [Luke 22:31-32] And the Lord said: Simon, Simon, behold Satan has sought after you all to sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. Lest the eleven apostles boast or attribute to their own power that they were almost the only ones amongst so many thousand Jews who were said to have stood by the Lord in his trials, he also shows them, that if they had not been protected by the succouring aid of the Lord they could have been destroyed by the same tempest with the others. But when Satan seeks to test them, and to shake them, like one who cleans wheat by winnowing, the Lord teaches that no one’s faith is tested by the devil unless God allows it. Of course, it is Satan’s part to seek to sift the good, /383/ to paint after their affliction with surges of malice. For where he is his jealousy longs to try them, there he seeks, as if craving their assent. But when the Savior, praying for Peter, entreats not that he not be tempted, but that his faith not fail—that is, that after his fault of denial he rise again to his former condition by doing penance—he recommends that it is useful for the saints to be tested by the flames of trials, so that either they may be seen to be tempted because they were strong, or, having recognized their frailty, through their temptations, that they may learn to become stronger, and so, after they have been tested, that they themselves may also receive the crown of life, which God has promised to those who love him.

 

274/9 [Luke 22:32b] And you, when once you have turned back, strengthen your brothers. Just as I myself, he says, protected your faith by praying, lest it fail when Satan puts you to the test, so remember also to raise up and strengthen any weaker brothers by the example of your penance, lest they perchance despair of forgiveness. He exhorted the same thing after the resurrection when Simon Peter declared for the third time that he loved him (for it was fitting that the love of a third confession was clean the fear of a third denial), and likewise on that third occasion Christ entrusted to him the feeding of his sheep. (Bede, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke [trans. Calvin B. Kendall and Faith Wallis; Translated Texts for Historians 85; Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2025], 594-95)

 

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

Gregory of Narek (d. 1003) Identifying the "Ancient of Days" of Daniel 7 with Jesus

  

The ranks of the prophets
Sing on that mountain:
“Behold him, God, the Ancient of Days,
Becoming a child, taking a body.”
(Gregory of Narek, Alternate, 21-24, in The Festal Works of St. Gregory of Narek: Annotated Translation of the Odes, Litanies, and Encomia [trans. Abraham Terian; Collegeville, Minn.: Pueblo Book, 2016], 51)

 

 

We who are gathered together (to worship you, Ancient (of Days), the Existent,
lift up our petitions with the sound of festal celebration.
With your rewarding glory come to us who are gathered together, you who are close to everyone,
because of the mediation of your mother, the Virgin
who took away the anguish of the foremother Eve (Gregory of Narek, Litany of St. John the Baptist Recited by Narek, 105-109, in ibid., 67-68)

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

Saturday, April 5, 2025

Bede on Luke 22:44 and the Text Speaking of Literal Blood

  

[Luke 22:44] And his sweat became like drops of blood, falling down on the ground. Let no one impute this sweat to weakness, because it is also contrary to nature to sweat blood. It does not support the heresy of weakness, but the sweat of blood establishes the reality of Christ’s body against the heresy which claims that it was only an apparent body. But rather, by the earth watered and sanctified by Christ’s blood, one may understand that it was declared—not to Christ, who knew it, but openly to us—that he already achieved the purpose of his prayer, namely that he should cleanse by his blood the faith of the disciples that earthly weakness still accused; and whatever stumbling block that weakness endured because of his death, he himself destroyed it all by dying. On the contrary, by his innocent death he restored to heavenly life the whole world that was dead far and wide from sins. (Bede, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke [trans. Calvin B. Kendall and Faith Wallis; Translated Texts for Historians 85; Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2025], 600)

 

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

Thomas J. Lane (Roman Catholic) on Romans 15:16

  

Paul’s Priestly Service of the Gospel (Rom 15:16)

 

In Romans 15:16, Paul uses language that compares his ministry to the Gentiles with that of a Jewish priest in the temple. Paul describes himself as a leitourgos (λειτουργός), a minister of Christ to the Gentiles in the priestly service, hierourgounta (ἱερουργοῦντα), of the Gospel. The word leitourgos is not in itself confined to priesthood or worship, but it is prone to being applied in that way, and its context here in Romans 15:16 gives it such a cultic meaning. The word hierourgounta (ἱερουργοῦντα) is obviously from the same root as hiereus (ἱερεύς), priest. Nevertheless, Vanhoye notes that the verb hierourgeo does not necessarily refer to priestly activity, and taken by itself does not clarify whether Paul compares himself to a Levitical priest offering sacrifice, a Levite assisting the priest, or the layman bringing the offering, but in this context, it must be priestly, because it refers to the Gentiles giving an offering to Paul and then Paul, as God’s leitourgos, offering the oblation of the pagans to God. Joseph Fitzmyer sees Paul comparing himself to a Jewish priest: “In his mission to the Gentiles Paul sees his function to be like that of a Jewish priest dedicated to the service of God in his Temple.” Jean Galot goes further than Vanhoye and Fitzmyer and describes as superficial the view that would hold these verses as a figure of speech for Paul’s ministry, and he regards these verses as a demonstration of Paul’s awareness “that in the act of carrying out his apostolic mission he exercises a priesthood that is real and genuine.” Paul is using terminology that compares his ministry to that of Jewish priesthood, but showing that his ministry is of a different order, since he is a leitourgos of Christ. Paul does not merely compare himself with a Jewish priest; he realizes that he is a leitourgos and exercising priesthood coming from Christ. (Thomas J. Lane, The Catholic Priesthood: Biblical Foundations [Steubenville, Ohio: Emmaus Road Publishing, 2006], 154)

 

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

Friday, April 4, 2025

The Interpretation of Numbers 23:19 in Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus

  

"God is not as a man." He thus shows that all men are indeed guilty of falsehood, inasmuch as they change from one thing to another (μεταφερόμενοι); but such is not the case with God, for He always continues true, perfecting whatever He wishes. (Fragments from the Lost Writings of Irenaeus XXIV [ANF 1:572])

 

The Greek reads:

 

Ουχ ως ανθρωπος ο Θεος. Δεικνυσιν, ως παντες μεν ανθρωποι ψεύδονται μεταφερομενοι ο δε Θεος ουχ ούτως αει γαρ μενει αλητης επιτελών οσα βούλεται. (PG 7:1241)

 

The Latin reads:

 

Non est Deus ut homo. Ostendit omne hominum genus mandax, qui ex alio in aliud ferantur; non sic autem Deum: sepmer enim verus manet omnia implens quaecunque velit. (PG 7:1242)

 

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

David F. Wright on Purported Evidence that Infants Were Among the Recipients of Baptism in the Apostolic Fathers

  

Do References to baptism in the Apostolic Fathers throw any light on the inclusion of infants among its recipients?

 

The directions for baptism in the Didache envisage responsible participants as its subjects. There is no provision for young children, but nor are they explicitly excluded. If we recall that only one small paragraph betrays the place for infants in the lengthy baptismal order in the Hippolytan Apostolic Tradition, such that most questions about their inclusion are left unanswered, we should hesitate to regard the Didache as debarring them. Its text does contribute, however, to the general picture which emerges from all the patristic sources, that the rite of baptism developed throughout the era as a rite for believing respondents, into which non-responding babies when they came to be baptized were accommodated with adaptation minimal to the point of being often near invisible.

 

The Epistle to Barnabas also furnishes an explicit discussion of baptism, from the perspective of its Old Testament foreshadowing. Not only does the writer with unmistakable purposefulness trace no connection between baptism and circumcision (see section 7 below), but what he does say about baptism clearly has responsible agents in view. They go down into the water (καταβαινω, 11. 8, 11) ‘with their hopes set on the cross’ (11. 8), and ascend out of it ‘bearing the fruit of fear in [their] hearts and having hope in Jesus in [their] spirits’ (11. 11). How instinctively Barnabas avoided envisaging infants as subjects of Christian initiation appears earlier in his work.

 

So we are the ones whom [God] brought into the good land. What then do ‘milk and honey’ mean [in Exod. 33. 3]? That a child is brought to life first by honey and then by milk. So accordingly we too are brought to life by faith in the promise and by the word, and will then go on to live possessing the earth. (6. 16–17)

 

When Ignatius through Polycarp exhorts the Smyrnaean Christians, ‘Let your baptism remain as your weapons, your faith as a helmet, your love as a spear, your endurance as your panoply’ (Ign. Pol. 6. 2), is it fair comment that baptism Its better with faith, love, and endurance in this context as a recognizable feature of their conscious Christian experience? The assumption would be similar to that made by Paul in Rom. 6. 3– 4.

 

Hermas was given the explanation of the stones which fell away from the tower near water, yet could not be rolled into the water: ‘These are those who have heard the word and wish to be baptized into the name of the Lord,’ but subsequently return to their former wickedness (Vis. 3. 7. 3). The author’s preoccupation with repentance as the prerequisite for baptism is writ large throughout the work, as is the necessity of baptism (‘water’) for salvation (Vis. 3. 3. 5; Sim. 9. 16. 2– 4). Yet in all of Hermas’s elaborate symbolism, no category appears which might specifically accommodate those originally baptized in early infancy.

 

2 Clement’s interest in baptism is restricted to keeping it ‘pure and undefiled (6. 9). Twice ‘seal’ is used of the baptism to be preserved at all costs. (2 Clem. 7. 6; 8. 6). Nothing can be confidently inferred from these references. (David F. Wright, “The Apostolic Fathers and Infant Baptism: Any Advance on the Obscurity of the New Testament,” in Trajectories through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers, Andrew F. Gregory and Christopher M. Tuckett [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005], 126-27)

 

Do note that Wright is a proponent of infant baptism.

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com

David F. Wright: There is No Explicit References to Infant Baptism in the Apostolic Fathers

  

Are there any explicit references to infant baptism in the Apostolic Fathers?

 

The first is likely to prove the easiest to answer, since no scholar known to me now answers in the affirmative. (David F. Wright, “The Apostolic Fathers and Infant Baptism: Any Advance on the Obscurity of the New Testament,” in Trajectories through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers, Andrew F. Gregory and Christopher M. Tuckett [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005], 124)

 

This is significant as Wright himself is a proponent of infant baptism.

 

To Support this Blog:

 

Patreon

Paypal

Venmo

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com