Friday, January 1, 2021

Jerome on Isaiah 53:12 and How Jesus would be "Reckoned" Among the Unjust (Sinners)

In his commentary on the Book of Isaiah, Jerome (d. 420) understood the Suffering Servant of the Fourth Hymn (Jesus) being “reckoned” among sinners not as teaching the imputation of sin to Jesus but that he would be among the sinners, in his sufferings on the cross and his descent into Hades:

 

Now the Evangelist Mark understands “the unjust” with whom “he was reckoned” as the thieves, since he writes, “And with him they crucified two thieves, the one on his right hand, and the other on his left, and the Scripture was fulfilled, which says: ‘And with the unjust he was reckoned’ ” [Mark 15:27–28]. This can also be understood in a deeper sense, since the Lord says of himself, “I have been reckoned with those who go down to the pit, I became as a man without help; free among the dead” [Ps 88:4–5]. For he was truly “reckoned” among sinners and the unjust, when he descended into hell (infernum), which in many passages of Scripture is called “the pit,” and he set free those bound in prison. “Who was handed over for our sins, and rose again for our justification” [Rom 4:25]. It was characteristic of such great mercy to pray on the cross for transgressors, no, for his persecutors, and say, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” [Luke 23:34]. (St. Jerome's Commentary on Isaiah: Including St. Jerome's Translation of Origen's Homilies 1-9 on Isaiah [trans. Thomas P. Scheck; Ancient Christian Writers 68; Mahwah, N.J.: The Newman Press, 2015], 676-77)

 

On imputation, be sure to read:


Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness (a review of John Kauer, “Are You Considered as Good as Jesus? The Imputation Approach” in Eric Johnson and Sean McDowell, eds. Sharing the Good News with Mormons [Eugene, Oreg.: Harvest House Publishers, 2018), 273-81, 339]; also discusses Rom 4:1-8, a common "proof-text" for Reformed soteriology)


Jerome on Isaiah 7:14

 

 

Now when it is said, The Lord himself shall give you a sign, this must be something new and amazing. But if, as the Jews think, a young woman or a girl gives birth, and not a virgin, what kind of sign would it be, since this is a term of age, not of integrity? And indeed, let us fight toe to toe with the Jews, and in our tug-of-war let us offer them no occasion for laughter at our ignorance.43 In Hebrew, a virgin is called bethula. This word is not used in the present passage, but instead alma is recorded, which everyone except the Septuagint translated as “young girl.” Moreover, among them alma is an ambiguous word, for it is used both of “young girl” and of one who is “hidden,” that is αποκρυφος. This is why even in the heading of the ninth Psalm, where in Hebrew almanoth is recorded, the other translators rendered it, “for the youth,” which the Septuagint translated, “for the hidden things” [cf. Ps 9:1]. And we read in Genesis, where Rebecca is called alma [cf. Gen 24:16, 43], that Aquila translated it neither as “young girl” nor “girl,” but “hidden.” The Shunammite woman too who had lost her son, when she prostrated herself at Elisha’s feet and Gehazi thrust her away, heard from the prophet, “Dismiss her, for she is in grief, and the Lord has hidden from me” [2 Kgs 4:27]. What is said in Latin as, “has hidden from me,” is written in Hebrew as, eelim memmenni. Therefore alma is said not only of a “girl” or a “virgin,” but has an extension (cum επιτασει) of a “hidden” and “secret” virgin, who has never been exposed to the sight of men, but who has been guarded by her parents with great diligence. In the Punic language too, which is derived from Hebrew sources, alma is said of a virgin proper. And that we might offer an occasion for laughter to the Jews, in our speech too alma means “holy.” The Hebrews use words from nearly all languages; for example, there is that word in the Song of Songs [cf. Song 3:9] from Greek, φοριον, that is, the “litter Solomon made for himself,” which we read thus also in the Hebrew. In the same manner and with the same meanings, the Hebrews also use the words nonsense50 and measure. And the more I struggle to remember, the more I think that I have never read alma used in reference to a married woman, but in reference to one who is a virgin. Consequently, she is not only a virgin, but a virgin of younger age and in the years of her youth. For it can happen that a virgin is old. But this virgin was in the years of her girlhood, or at least a virgin, not a girl, and she was one who was not able to know a man yet, but was already marriageable. Finally, even in Deuteronomy a virgin is understood by the term girl and young girl. It says,

 

If a man finds in the field a girl that is betrothed, and overcoming her by force he sleeps with her, you will kill only the man who lay with her, and you will do nothing to the girl; in the young girl there is no sin [worthy] of death. For just as if someone rises up against his neighbor and takes his life, so does this business come to pass. He found her in the field; the betrothed girl cried out, and no one was found to help her. [Deut 22:25–27]

 

And we read in the Book of Kings that they sought a virgin girl by the name of Abishag and brought her in to the king, who slept and kept him warm; and the girl was exceedingly beautiful and was serving him, and the king did not know her [cf. 1 Kgs 1:1–4].

 

And what follows, And you shall call his name Emmanuel, both the Septuagint and the three others have translated similarly. In Matthew this is written as, “They shall call” [cf. Matt 1:23], which is not found in the Hebrew. Therefore let that child who will be born of a virgin, O house of David, now be called by you Emmanuel, that is, God with us, since by these facts you will prove that you have God present, having been delivered from the two hostile kings [cf. Isa 7:1]. And let him who will later be called Jesus, that is, Savior, in view of the fact that the whole human race will be saved, now be called by you by the designation Emmanuel. The verb carathi, which all have translated “you will call,” can be understood as “she will call,” namely because the virgin herself, who will conceive and give birth, will designate Christ by this name. One should pay very careful attention to the fact that in many testimonies that the evangelists or apostles have adopted from the old books, they did not follow the order of the words but the meaning. This is why even in the present passage, in place of, she will conceive in the womb, Matthew recorded, “She will have in the womb” [Matt 1:23]; and in place of, you will call, “they will call.”

 

The Hebrews think this is prophesied about Hezekiah son of Ahaz, because Samaria was captured when he was ruling. This cannot be completely proven, if indeed Ahaz son of Jotham reigned over Judah and Jerusalem for sixteen years [cf. 2 Kgs 16:1–2]. His son Hezekiah succeeded him in the kingdom at the age of twenty-five years and reigned over Judah and Jerusalem for twenty-nine [cf. 2 Kgs 18:1–2]. How then, granting that this prophecy was made to Ahaz in his first year, is there talk of the conception and birth of Hezekiah, when at that time when Ahaz began to reign, Hezekiah was already nine years old, unless perchance they say that the sixth year of Hezekiah’s rule [cf. 2 Kgs 18:10] when Samaria was captured was called his infancy not in terms of his age but of his rule? It is plain even to fools that this is a forced and violent interpretation.

 

Some of our own contend that Isaiah the prophet had two sons, Jashub and Emmanuel; and Emmanuel was born from his wife, a prophetess [cf. Isa 8:3], as a type of the Lord and Savior, so that the first son Jashub [cf. Isa 7:3], which means “abandoned” or “turning,” signifies the Jewish people, who were abandoned, and afterward will return; but the second, that is Emmanuel and God with us, [signifies] the calling of the Gentiles, after “the Word became flesh and dwelled among us” [John 1:14]. (St. Jerome's Commentary on Isaiah: Including St. Jerome's Translation of Origen's Homilies 1-9 on Isaiah [trans. Thomas P. Scheck; Ancient Christian Writers 68; Mahwah, N.J.: The Newman Press, 2015], 169-71)

 

Jerome teaching Baptismal Regeneration in his Commentary on Isaiah 1:16, 18

 

 

21. (1:16a) Wash yourselves; be clean.

 

Instead of the sacrifices named above [cf. Isa 1:11, 13, 14] and burnt offerings and the fat of fatlings and the blood of bulls and goats [cf. Heb 10:4]; instead of incense and new moons, the Sabbath, the feast day and fasts, calends and other solemnities, the religion of the gospel pleases me: that you should be baptized in my blood through the bath of regeneration [cf. Titus 3:5], which alone is able to forgive sins. For unless someone is reborn from water and the spirit, he will not enter into the kingdom of heaven [cf. John 3:5]. The Lord himself too, when ascending to the Father, says, “Go and teach all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” [Matt 28:19] . . .  25. (1:18b–c) If your sins be as scarlet, they will be made as white as snow. And if they be red as crimson, they will be like white wool.

 

The progression is excellent; for it does not suffice to have said, “Wash yourselves” [Isa 1:16a], without adding, “Be clean” [cf. Isa 1:16a], so that after the bath in water, they have purity of heart. For “blessed are the pure of heart, for they shall see God” [Matt 5:8]. And when they have purity of heart, they ought to remove evil from their minds [cf. Isa 1:16a], not in the sight of men, but in the sight of God, which nothing can cover. And what he adds, Cease acting perversely [Isa 1:16b], harmonizes with the words of the Gospel: “Behold you have been healed; sin no more, lest something worse happen to you” [John 5:14]. Therefore, by withdrawing from vices, let him learn good, and let him seek judgment, let him come to the aid of the oppressed, let him sustain the orphan and the widow [cf. Isa 1:17]. And if he does this, then sins that at first had been blood-red like scarlet will be forgiven, and the works of gore and blood will be changed in the garment of the Lord, which has been made from the wool of a lamb, which in the Apocalypse those follow who are resplendent with the brightness of virginity [Rev 14:4]. (St. Jerome's Commentary on Isaiah: Including St. Jerome's Translation of Origen's Homilies 1-9 on Isaiah [trans. Thomas P. Scheck; Ancient Christian Writers 68; Mahwah, N.J.: The Newman Press, 2015], 84, 85-86)

 


Robert Sungenis (Amillennial) on the Early Christian Witness Favouring Premillennialism

That the earliest Christian witness about the Millennium is one that reflected a form of “pre-millennialism” (AKA Chiliasm) is admitted even by critics of this understanding. Note the following from one proponent of the Amillennial view:

 

To begin the analysis, since Tertullian was one of the more vocal proponents of both Chiliasm and the Enoch/Elijah theory, we will begin with him. He writes the following:

 

. . . for Christ is the proper and legitimate High Priest of God. He is the Pontiff of the priesthood of the uncircumcision, constituted such, even then, from the Gentiles, by whom he was to be more fully received, although at his last coming he will favor with his acceptance and blessing the circumcision also, even the race of Abraham, which by and by is to acknowledge him. (Tertullian Against Marcion, Book 5, Ch. 9, ANF, p. 448)

 

Although Tertullian was quite prolific, this is the only statement in his writings that addresses the issue of a future Jewish conversion. Similar to many other Fathers who speak on this passage, however, Tertullian does not offer any detailed exegesis of the key passage in question, Romans 11:25-27; rather, he seems to be reiterating an idea that came prior to him. As it stands, Tertullian is writing the above lines from his Adversus Marcionem between 207 and 212 A.D., hence, he is very close to the time of Papias (c. 130 A.D.); Irenaeus (140-202 A.D.), Justin Martyr (100-165 A.D.) and later Lactantius (250-317 A.D.), who were all promoting the Chiliastic view of eschatology, i.e., that Christ would reign on earth for a 1,000-year period after his Second Coming; and that the Jews would be converted and reign in the millennium.

 

Justin Martyr: “But I and such other Christians as judge rightly in everything believe that there will be . . . a thousand years in which Jerusalem will be built up, adorned and enlarged, as the prophets Ezechiel and Isaias and the other declare.” (Dialogue with Trypho, 80, JR, vol. 1, p. 61)

 

Irenaeus: “that it behooves the righteous first to receive the promise of the inheritance which God promised to the fathers, and to reign in it, when they rise again to behold God in this creation which is renovated, and that the judgment should take place afterwards.” (Against Heresies, 5:21:1, ANF)

 

“The predicted blessing, therefore, belongs unquestionably to the times of the kingdom, when the righteous shall bear rule upon their rising from the dead; when also the creation, having been renovated and set free, shall fructify with an abundance of all kinds of food, from the dews of heaven, and from the fertility of the earth: as the elders who saw John, the disciple of the Lord, related that they had heard from him how the Lord used to teach in regard to these times, and say: The days will come, in which vines shall grow, each having ten thousand branches . . . And these things are borne witness to in writing by Papias, the hearer of John, and a companion of Polycarp, in his fourth book; for there were five books compiled by him. And he says in addition, ‘Not these things are credible to believers.’” (Against Heresies, 5:33:3-4, ANF)

 

Lactantius: “But He when He shall have destroyed unrighteousness, and executed His great judgment, and shall have recalled to life the righteous, and shall have recalled to life the righteous, who have lived from the beginning, will be engaged among men a thousand years, and will rule them with most just command. While the Sibyl proclaims in another place, as she utters her inspired predictions . . . Then they who shall be alive in their bodies shall not die, but during those thousand years shall produce an infinite multitude, and their offspring shall be holy, and beloved by God; but they who shall be raised from the dead shall preside over the living as judges . . . About the same time also the prince of the devils, who is the contriver of all evils, shall be bound with chains, and shall be imprisoned during the thousand years of the heavenly rule in which righteousness shall reign in the world, so that he may contrive no evil against the people of God. After His coming the righteous shall be collected from al the earth, and the judgment being completed, the sacred city shall be planted in the middle of the earth, in which God Himself the builder may dwell together with the righteous, being rule in it.” (Divine Institutes, Book 7, Ch. 24, ANF)

 

Tertullian had been promoting Chiliasm in his own writings, and it is only natural to expect that he would attempt to fit a conversion of the Jews into his Chiliastic end-time scenario. In the very book from which Tertullian says at, at the Second Coming, he expects Christ “will favor with his acceptance and blessing the circumcision,” he writes of his belief in a future kingdom on earth:

 

As for the restoration of Judaea, however, which even the Jews themselves, induced by the names of places and countries, hope for just as it is described, it would be tedious to state at length how the figurative interpretation is spiritually applicable to Christ and His church, and to the character and fruits thereof; besides, the subject has been regularly treated in another work, which we entitle De Spe Fidelium. At present, too, it would be superfluous for this reason, that our inquiry relates to what is promised in heaven, not on earth. But we do confess that a kingdom is promised to us upon the earth, although before heaven, only in another state of existence; inasmuch as it will be after the resurrection for a thousand years in the divinely-built city of Jerusalem, “let down from heaven,” which the apostle also calls “our mother from above,” which the apostle also calls “our mother from above;” and, while declaring that our politeuma, or citizenship, is in heaven, he predicates of it that it is really a city in heaven. This both Ezekiel had knowledge of and the Apostle John beheld. . . . Of the heavenly kingdom this is the process. After its thousand years are over, within which period of completed the resurrection of the saints, who rise sooner or later according to their deserts there will ensue the destruction of the world and the conflagration of all things at the judgment: we shall then be changed in a moment into the substance of angels, even by the investiture of an incorruptible nature, and so be removed to that kingdom in heaven of which we have now been treating, just as if it had not been predicated by the Creator. (Tertullian Against Marcion, Book 3, Ch. 25, ANF).

 

Combining Tertullian’s two above quotes, we can see that he envisioned a future 1000-year kingdom that would house the Jews who had been converted to Christianity. But Tertullian was not the first to espouse this unique viewpoint. The earliest was probably Papias (c. 130 A.D.). The historian Eusebius (263-340 A.D.) writes about the eschatological views of Papias in his famous book on Church history:

 

And Papias, of whom we are now speaking, confesses that he received the words of the apostles form those that followed them . . . The same writer gives also other accounts which he says came to him through unwritten tradition, certain strange parables and teachines of the Savior, and some more mythical things. To these belong in his statement that there will be a period of some thousand years after the resurrection of the dead, and that the kingdom of Christ will be set up in material form on this very earth. I suppose he got these ideas through a misunderstanding of the apostolic accounts, not perceiving that the things said by them were spoken mystically in figures. For he appears to be of very limited understanding, as one can see from his discourses. (Ecclesiastical History, Book 3, Ch. 9, “The Writings of Papias,” ANF)

 

Origen is also suspected to have accepted the Chiliastic view, although his words on this matter are rather obscure for us to know precisely what he believed. From his testimony we can at least understand why there were many divergent views on eschatology. He writes:

 

But what existed before this world, or what will exist after the world, has not become certain knowledge among the man; for no clear statement in this matter is to be found in ecclesiastical teaching. (The Fundamental Doctrines, 1, Preface, 7, JR, vol. 1, p. 192. Origen also doubts other important details. On the meaning of “all Israel,” he writes: “What all Israel means or what the fullness of the Gentiles will be only God knows . . .” [Commentary on Romans, 4:304])

 

In any case, we can see rather easily where the combined prospects for a future millennial kingdom and an en masse conversion of the Jews to inhabit that kingdom originated. It did not originate with a thorough and detailed exegesis of Rm 11:25-27 or any other passage of Scripture, but with a idiosyncratic tradition passed down by Papias to which other Fathers in his era gloomed on. This anomaly is not surprising if we consider that even in St. Paul’s day there were various erroneous propositions circulating in the churches concerning the end of time. At one point, the bodily resurrection was being doubted (1Co 15:1-9). At another point it was believed that Christ would return in the first century (2Th 2:1-4). Paul squelched both of those movements. Somehow, however, the idea of a future millennial kingdom persisted beyond the middle of the second century until about the late third century. So prevalent was this teaching that two thousand years later modern evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants refer to the eschatology espoused by Papias, Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Lactantius and Origen to support their Dispensational Premillennial views of a future millennial reign of Christ on earth in which the Jews will convert to Christianity and rule over the Gentiles for 1,000 years. They also use this early patristic testimony to undercut the Catholic Church’s dependence on Augustine, et al. and the Amillennial view of eschatology—the view that rejects a future millennial kingdom for the Jews. (Robert Sungenis, Catholic/Jewish Dialogue: Controversies and Corrections [State Line, Pa.: Catholic Apologetics International Publishing, Inc., 2010], 638-43)

 

Does Romans 7:1-4 teach that the Law of Moses is still Legally In Force for Faithful Jews?

In Rom 7:1-4, we read:

 

Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. 4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. (Rom 7:1-4)

 

Some have argued that this text supports the belief that, for faithful Jews, the Old Covenant (i.e., Law of Moses) is still effectual. We will return to this pericope later.

 

It should first be noted that, in the New Testament is explicit that the Old Covenant (Law of Moses) is revoked. Note the following (taken from texts written by Paul or are considered to be strongly “Pauline” in theology):

 

But their minds were hardened; for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted, because it is removed in Christ. (2 Cor 3:14 NRSV)

 

Blotting out of the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross. (Col 2:14 [on this verse, see Allan R. Bevere on the "handwriting" (χειρογραφον) in Colossians 2:14 being the Law of Moses in light of Ephesians 2:15])

 

For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. (Heb 8:7)

 

There is, on the one hand, the abrogation of an earlier commandment because it was weak and ineffectual. (Heb 7:18 NRSV)

 

Then he added, "See, I have come to do your will." He abolishes the first in order to establish the second. (Heb 10:9 NRSV)

 

This was also the understanding of the earliest Christians. Consider the following from Justin Martyr:

 

"There will be no other God, O Trypho, nor was there from eternity any other existing" (I thus addressed him), "but He who made and disposed all this universe. Nor do we think that there is one God for us, another for you, but that He alone is God who led your fathers out from Egypt with a strong hand and a high arm. Nor have we trusted in any other (for there is no other), but in Him in whom you also have trusted, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob. But we do not trust through Moses or through the law; for then we would do the same as yourselves. But now--(for I have read that there shall be a final law, and a covenant, the chiefest of all, which it is now incumbent on all men to observe, as many as are seeking after the inheritance of God. For the law promulgated on Horeb is now old, and belongs to yourselves alone; but this is for all universally. Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law--namely, Christ --has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy, after which there shall be no law, no commandment, no ordinance. Have you not read this which Isaiah says: ‘Hearken unto Me, hearken unto Me, my people; and, ye kings, give ear unto Me: for a law shall go forth from Me, and My judgment shall be for a light to the nations. My righteousness approaches swiftly, and My salvation shall go forth, and nations shall trust in Mine arm?' And by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: ‘Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand, to bring them out of the land of Egypt'). If, therefore, God proclaimed a new covenant which was to be instituted, and this for a light of the nations, we see and are persuaded that men approach God, leaving their idols and other unrighteousness, through the name of Him who was crucified, Jesus Christ, and abide by their confession even unto death, and maintain piety. Moreover, by the works and by the attendant miracles, it is possible for all to understand that He is the new law, and the new covenant, and the expectation of those who out of every people wait for the good things of God. For the true spiritual Israel, and descendants of Judah, Jacob, Isaac, and Abraham (who in uncircumcision was approved of and blessed by God on account of his faith, and called the father of many nations), are we who have been led to God through this crucified Christ, as shall be demonstrated while we proceed. (Dialogue with Trypho, 11)

 

The Book of Mormon is explicit that, even when the Law of Moses was binding, it was not salvific at all. This was the errant attitude of the wicked priests of king Noah:

 

And it shall come to pass that ye shall be smitten from your iniquities, for ye have said that ye teach the law of Moses. And what know ye concerning the law of Moses? Doth salvation come by the law of Moses? What say ye? And they answered and said that salvation did come by the law of Moses. (Mosiah 12:31-32)

 

Such was refuted by the prophet Abinadi:

 

And now ye have said that salvation cometh by the law of Moses. I say unto you that it is expedient that ye should keep the law of Moses as yet; but I say unto you, that the time shall come when it shall no more be expedient to keep the law of Moses. And moreover, I say unto you, that salvation doth not come by the law alone; and were it not for the atonement, which God himself shall make for the sins and iniquities of his people, that they must unavoidably perish, notwithstanding the law of Moses. (Mosiah 13:27-28)

 

This was also the same attitude of the newly converted Anti-Nephi-Lehies:

 

Yea, and they did keep the law of Moses; for it was expedient that they should keep the law of Moses as yet, for it was not all fulfilled. But notwithstanding the law of Moses, they did look forward to the coming of Christ, considering that the law of Moses was a type of his coming, and believing that they must keep those outward performances until the time that he should be revealed unto them. Now they did not suppose that salvation came by the law of Moses; but the law of Moses did serve to strengthen their faith in Christ; and thus they did retain a hope through faith, unto eternal salvation, relying upon the spirit of prophecy, which spake of those things to come. (Alma 25:15-16)

 

In light of this, we can make better sense of Rom 7:1-4. As one critic of the “two-covenant” theory, as it is called, wrote:

 

Merely because St. Paul alludes to “law” in Romans 7:1-4 does not mean he is either referring to the Mosaic Law or that the Mosaic Law is still legally in force. In 1 Cor 9:9, for example, Paul says, “It is written in the Law of Moses: You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing.” Obviously, Paul is not saying that the Mosaic law concerning oxen still has legal force; rather, Paul is merely extracting the Mosaic principle of providing for the needs of the worker, in this case, the Gospel preacher. Likewise, whatever law is cited or practiced today in Christianity, whether it is natural law, Mosaic law, canonical law, etc., it is only because the Church, under its own legal authority, decided to incorporate those particular principles into the New Covenant. The Church, under the New Covenant, has the power to decide which doctrine and practices are most beneficial for the Christian community, leading her to incorporate various laws from the Old Covenant, albeit with her own modifications (e.g., Rom 13:1-10; Acts 15:28); while discarding others as useless (Col 2:16; Acts 15:10-12). But whatever law is utilized, it will be legalized and controlled by the New Covenant, not the Old. At the present time, the Old Covenant’s purpose is to serve as a model, a precedent, a teacher, for the divine principles that will be needed to allow the New Covenant to function as efficiently as it possibly can. But there is only one covenant that has legal force; there is only one covenant that can save and condemn; there is only one covenant that God recognizes today, and that is the New Covenant in Jesus Christ.

 

The idea that the New Covenant would borrow principles from the Old Covenant should not be hard for us to understand. We have many good examples from which to appeal, such as the relationship between the US Constitution and the Magna Carta. The Magna Carta had some very beneficial insights concerning law and life. These were incorporated into the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Magna Carta itself became obsolete and was revoked, but whatever principles were borrowed from it, they became part of the Constitution, and it was only from the Constitution that those principles acquired legal force. In the same way, Scripture declares that the Old Covenant was legally revoked (Heb 7:18; 10:9) but its spiritual and moral principles were utilized in the New Covenant (Heb 10:16-18; Gal 5:14; 1Co 9:9; Rm 7:7-12). (Robert Sungenis, Catholic/Jewish Dialogue: Controversies and Corrections [State Line, Pa.: Catholic Apologetics International Publishing, Inc., 2010], 41-42)

 

 

Some Interesting Excerpts from the Journal of Discourses that have Apologetic Value

Today I read some sermons in the Journal of Discourses. Here are some interesting passages that have some apologetic value: 

The Nature of God the Father (cf. Rom 1:23)

 

When you are prepared to see our Father, you will see a being with whom you have long been acquainted, and He will receive you into His arms, and you will be ready to fall into His embrace and kiss Him, as you would your fathers and friends that have been dead for a score of years, you will be so glad and joyful. Would you not rejoice? When you are qualified and purified, so that you can endure the glory of eternity: so that you can see your Father, and your friends who have gone behind the vail, you will fall upon their necks and kiss them, as we do an earthly friend that has been long absent from us, and that we have been anxiously desiring to see. This is the people that are and will be permitted to enjoy the society of those happy and exalted beings. (Brigham Young, JOD 5:54-55| September 21, 1856)

 

The Holy Spirit Allowed the Apostles to Remember Accurately Jesus’ Teachings When Teaching (and later, composing the New Testament)

 

The office of the Spirit, when given in ancient times, was to make manifest truth—to quicken the memory of the man of God, that he might communicate clearly things which he had once learned, but partially forgotten.

 

For instance, the Apostles heard, during three years and a half, many sermons and a vast amount of conversation and private teaching. The office of the Spirit of truth was to bring to their remembrance the things that Jesus had formerly taught them. So it is the office of the same Spirit in these days to bring to our remembrance the words of the ancient Prophets and Apostles, and the words of Jesus, inasmuch as we have faith and confidence in God. (Orson Pratt, JOD 6:349-50| July 24, 1859)

 

The “New and Everlasting Covenant” is not Plural Marriage (cf. D&C 22:1)

 

All Latter-day Saints enter the new and everlasting covenant when they enter this Church. They covenant to cease sustaining, upholding and cherishing the kingdom of the devil and the kingdoms of this world. They enter into the new and everlasting covenant to sustain the Kingdom of God and no other kingdom. They take a vow of the most solemn kind, before the heavens and earth, and that, too, upon the validity of their own salvation, that they will sustain truth and righteousness instead of wickedness and falsehood, and build up the Kingdom of God, instead of the kingdoms of this world. (Brigham Young, JOD 12:230| May 17, 1868)

 

"Third Heaven" in 2 Enoch and the Apocalypse of Moses

 

 

2 Enoch 8:1-9:1

 

8 |About the taking of Enoch to the 3rd heaven. Word “7.”|

 

1* And those men took me from there, and they brought me up to the third heaven, and set me down |there|. Then I looked downward, and I saw Paradise. And that place is inconceivably pleasant.

2* And I saw the trees in full flower. And their fruits were ripe and pleasant-smelling, with every food in yield and giving off profusely a pleasant fragrance.

 

3 And in the midst (of them was) the tree of life, at that place where the LORD takes a rest when he goes into paradise. And that tree is indescribable for pleasantness and fine fragrance, and more beautiful than any (other)

 

created thing that exists. 4 And from every direction it has an appearance which is gold-looking and crimson, and with the form of fire. And it covers the whole of Paradise. And it has something of every orchard tree and of every fruit. And its root is in Paradise at the exit that leads to the earth.

5* And paradise is in between the corruptible and the incorruptible. And two streams come forth, one a source of honey and milk, and a source which produces oil and wine. And it is divided into 4 parts, and they go around with a quiet movement. 6 And they come out into the paradise of Edem, between the corruptible and the incorruptible. And from there they pass along and divide into 40 parts. And it proceeds in descent along the earth, and they have a revolution in their cycle, just like the other atmospheric elements.

7* And there is no unfruitful tree there, and every tree is well fruited, and every place is blessed.

8 And there are 300 angels, very bright, who look after Paradise; and with never-ceasing voice and pleasant singing they worship the LORD every day and hour. And I said, “How very pleasant is this place!” And those men said to me:

 

 

9 |The revelation to Enoch of the place of those who are righteous and kind. Word “8.”|

 

1* “This place, Enoch, has been prepared for the righteous,

 

        who

    suffer every kind of calamity in their life

    and

    who

    afflict their souls,

    and

    who

    avert their eyes from injustice

    and

    who

    carry out righteous judgment

        who

    give bread to the hungry,

    and

    who

    cover the naked with clothing,

    and

    who

    lift up the fallen,

    and

    who

    help the injured and the orphans,

        who

    walk without a defect before the face of the LORD,

    and

    who

    worship him only—

 

even for them this place has been prepared as an eternal inheritance.” (F.I. Andersen, "2 (Slavonic Apocalypse of) Enoch," in James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Volume 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments [New York: Yale University Press, 1983], 114–11)

 

2 Enoch 42:3

 

And I ascended to the east, into the paradise of Eden, where rest is prepared for the righteous. And it is open as far as the 3rd heaven; but it is closed off from this world. (Ibid., 168)

 

Apocalypse of Moses 37:4-5

 

4* He lay three hours, and so the Lord of all, sitting on his holy throne, stretched out his hands and took Adam and handed him over to the archangel Michael, saying to him, 5* “Take him up into Paradise, to the third heaven, and leave (him) there until that great and fearful day which I am about to establish for the world.” And the archangel Michael took Adam and brought him away and left him, just as God told him at the pardoning of Adam. (M.D. Johnson, "Life of Adam and Eve," in James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Volume 2: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works [New York: Yale University Press, 1985], 291 [The Apocalypse or Revelation of Moses is the Greek edition of The Life of Adam and Eve])

 

Apocalypse of Moses 40:1-2

 

Then he spoke to the archangel Michael, “Go into Paradise in the third heaven and bring me three cloths of linen and silk.” 2* And God said to Michael, Gabriel, Uriel, and Raphael, “Cover Adam’s body with the cloths and bring oil from the oil of fragrance and pour it on him.” And thus they did and prepared his body (Ibid., 291)

 

Blog Archive