William H. Miles, Letter to Walter Murray Gibson (December 3, 1860) Recollecting Joseph Smith’s Prophecy on War (D&C 87)

 The following is taken from:

 

William H. Miles letter, Church History Library, Call no.: CR 1234 1

 

New York, Dec 3rd 1860.

 

Dear Bro. Gibson,

 

We are happy to hear of your safe arrival, and that you find your family well, at this moment while I write Bro. Pratt, Cannon and Snow are in my office, all well, they have met together here, expressly to call upon your friend Mr. Willard. Bro. G.Q. Cannon has already been introduced to him, by myself.

 

Dec 10th. Having commenced this letter one week since and my attention being drawn off by the preparations amongst the brethren, who were getting ready to go to Europe, I had accordingly placed it aside until this day, I now resume the pen, to say I have just come from a very interesting interview, which Bro. O. Pratt & Snow had with your friend Mr. Willard, it is the second interview they have had, and I think it will result in good, Bro. Pratt laid before him the principles of the Gospel, in great plainness, and simplicity, and Mr. Willard rejoiced greatly.

 

The brethren in Company with G.Q. Cannon left for Europe in the Arago, on Saturday, in good health and spirits, 16 Missionaries left on the City of Baltimore steamer, the Saturday before, and for the two last Sabbaths, the Saints here, have feasted upon the good things of the Kingdom of God. Bro Cannon, and wife stopped with me four or five days, and their visit produced a good influence upon my family, I felt greatly blest myself, and desirous of profiting by all the privileges I now enjoy, Bro. O. Pratt preached last night in the old Hall, to a full house, a great many strangers present, who listened with breathless attention to his discourse, which was upon the subject of Modern revelation and prophecy, he gave a very graphic description of the troubles which this Nation would soon be called upon to pass through, repeated Joseph's prophecy about the rebellion of South Carolina, and pointed out with clearness wherein it was and would be fulfilled even to the very letter, Said that no person who observed the signs of the times, could fail to be convinced of the truth of that revelation, and that we were now upon the very eve of the greatest event of this or any other age. Such a sermon I think has never been preached in this City. Would to God that he could have had his thousands of souls to hear it.

 

Bro. Gibson, it is now universally conceded by the press of this City, that we are to have Secession, the State of South Carolina leading off. She has called a Convention on the 17th of the present month, for the purpose of resolving on Secession. there is no longer any hope for our beloved Country. I feel to mourn on her account, but I know well that the prophecies must be fulfilled. we all feel that a great many honest souls, are yet to hear the Gospel in this nation and be gathered out, in the midst of troublous times, I hope to have the opportunity the coming Spring, if all is well of getting home to the Mountains to join the Saints, How I shall rejoice in that day, when my feet shall stand upon Mount Zion, among the Saints of the living God. I am glad that you have a tolerable good opinion of us here in the East, but I can say for myself, I feel unconscious of having done more than my duty towards you, it is always in my heart to bless and do my brethren all the good I can, the brethren you mention in your letter, Bro. [E.?] Pratt, Snow, Croxall, Taylor, Stone, Schettler, Lang, Dwyer, & others, have all had the pleasure of reading your kind letter, and all desire to kindly be remembered to you and family, remember me also to our beloved Pres. B. Young he will remember your humble [crossed-out word, illegible] servant I think. God bless you Bro. Gibson and Yours!

 

I remain very respectfully, and

 

Affectionately Your Brother in the Gospel

 

Wm H Miles

 

 

Further Reading:

 

Resources on Joseph Smith’s Prophecies

 

George Burkett, Letter to his Children (December 18, 1870) Recollecting Joseph Smith’s Prophecy of the Return of the Saints to Jackson County

 The following comes from:

 

George Burket letter, Eden Utah, Church History Library, Call no.: MS 14715

 

 

Eden City, Ogden Valley, Weber Co. December 18 / 67

 

Dear Children,

 

I now take the opportunity of writing to you, I received your letter on the 11 of this month. I feel very thankful for the present you send me in your letter it was very acceptable, in the situation I am at present. I have been sick 2 Months or more and confined to the House. I am not able to walk from the bed to the fire without help. I expect I have not more than 5 or 6 lbs of flesh on my body, am reduced to a complete skeleton, this probably may be the last letter you may receive from me, for I am uncertain how long I may last.

 

[A heavily overwritten passage follows here. The legible fragments appear to include “Grandmother” and “able to wait on me,” but the full sentence cannot be read with confidence.]

 

Corn is well and has all the work to do in tending and feeding the stock. Concerning my faith I am satisfied with this work and when the Lords will is that I am to go I shall die happy. As to my son John I know not where he is at the present time, O. M. Allen told me last spring that he heard of John being 200 Miles below St Joseph on the Missouri River when he was in Missouri last winter on a mission. I should be very much pleased to see you all, especially you and Eleanor. Grandmother wishes to see you so bad she would like to see you all. I can tell you the price of stock now but as the winter has set in early this year I do not know what price they will be in the spring.

 

Calves are about from 8 to 10 Dollars each that is spring Calves. Yearlings are about 15 Dollars and 2 Year Old from 20 to 25 Dollars. Cows about 35 Dollars and Sheep 4 Dollars per head. Flour is not dear only from 3 Dollars to 3.50 per Hundred, and though not so much Wheat has been raised through the Grasshoppers, enough corn has been raised to make up for the deficiency more corn than has ever been raised before, but money is very scarce, Store goods are cheap. William Allen left here last September and went to Dixie to see his Mother and Stepfather he says he will start back next April he promised only a week before he left that he would never leave his Grandfather and I have no Children now within 400 Miles and no Grandchildren nearer than Salt Lake Valley except Alma Taylor, though John Taylor has been up at times and been very kind in doing some chores and getting wood.

 

The people are very kind here in getting me wood and will not see me want for any thing I need. My faith is just the same as when I first embraced the gospel nothing could turn me out of the way and what I know about the Kingdom of God I know more now than I did then and my faith is increased. I do not be in a hurry of going to Jackson County for the land has to be cleared and the power of God to rest upon it before we think of returning there. I heard Joseph Smith say in my house when in Clay County that when we returned there there not would be a dog to wag his tail or move his tongue against us none but the pure in heart will go up there and the Lord will prepare his people they shall be clear as the sun fair as the moon and ⟨terrible⟩ as an army with banners these are our girls [?] the hundred and forty and four thousand that shall stand on Mount Zion these are the bride the Lambs wife.

 

This place is building up very fast the Kingdom of God is being built up in the mountains the highway is cast up for the children of Ephraim to return to their own land, and when the Lords time is they will return and not before. Grandmother would very much like if you would let Mandy come here to see us I would like to see all the children, we would like to see John and Nelly once more if we could.

 

Write back as soon as you receive this and send us the best news you can. I have told you all I can think of to interest you I must now conclude as I feel very feeble.

 

Give our love to all enquiring friends and accept the same yourselves.

 

This is from your affection Parents

 

 

Further Reading:

 

Resources on Joseph Smith’s Prophecies

Lee Martin McDonald on the use of the Apocyphra and the LXX Additions to Proto-Canonical Books by the Early Christians

  

The Apostolic Fathers (ca. 90–150), the closest writers chronologically to the NT writings with some overlap in dating, have a number of parallels, quotations, and allusions to noncanonical literature. For example, Clement of Rome (ca. 90–95 CE) quotes Sir 2:11 (1 Clem. 60.1), Wis 12:10 (1 Clem. 7.5), and Wis 12:12 (1 Clem. 27.5, with allusions in 3.4 and 7.5), and he does not distinguish between the stories of biblical Esther and nonbiblical Judith (1 Clem. 55.4–6). The author of 2 Clement (ca. 150 CE) has several quotations and references of unknown sources (2 Clem. 11.2–4, 7; 13.2). The Epistle of Barnabas includes several quotations or citations from 1 En. 89:56 (Barn. 16.5), 4 Ezra 4:33 and 5:5 (Barn. 12.1). The Didache (ca. 70–90 CE), which itself was included in some fifth-century canonical lists, but was excluded by Athanasius, makes use of Wis 12:5–7 and 15:11 (Did. 5.2) and Wis 1:14 (Did. 10.3), along with an unknown quotation (Did. 1.6). Lastly, Polycarp, Phil. 10.2 cites Tob 4:10 and 12:9.

 

The later second-century church fathers are similar. In his Dial. 120.5, Justin Martyr (ca. 160) appears to refer to the Ascension of Isaiah in an authoritative or scriptural manner and yet seems to base his argument on the books accepted by the Jews. He also refers to Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, 1–2 Kings, 1–2 Samuel (possibly), Psalms, Proverbs, and Job and names the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, the Minor Prophets, and 1 Esd 2:36–37 (see Dial. 72.1). He quotes, without referring to them by name, Numbers, Deuteronomy, and 2 Chronicles. These references to biblical literature do not imply that Justin’s references suggest that he had in mind the full scope of a biblical canon, but only that he used these texts when addressing specific situations addressed in his Dialogue with Trypho. It is nevertheless possible that this text may be reflective of the accepted Scriptures among Christians in the middle of the second century. Justin is surely not unique in the various texts he quotes, but, like Jesus, he does not mention Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, and Esther. This silence may reflect the doubts that existed about these books in the rabbinic community and possibly also in the second- and third-century churches as can be seen in the earliest scripture lists . . . (Lee Martin McDonald, The Formation of the Biblical Canon, 2 vols. [London: T&T Clark, 2017], 1:312)

 

 

The Apocryphal additions to biblical books in the LXX further demonstrate this point. For example, the additions to Daniel – namely the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon – all became part of the LXX and were accepted by Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen. The additions to Esther mentioned in Josephus are also referred to by Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen. The Prayer of Manasseh is found in the Syriac Didascalia (third century CE), in the Apostolic Constitutions 2.22.12–14 (second half of the fourth century CE in Syria), and in Codex Alexandrinus (fifth century CE). According to Grant, an examination of the Apostolic Fathers shows conclusively that they appealed to apocryphal and pseudepigraphal literature in much the same way that they appealed to the Scriptures of the HB. He adds: “We cannot deny, of course, that the Apostolic Fathers did make use of apocryphal documents. Indeed, the only explicit quotation in the Shepherd of Hermas comes from the lost Book of Eldad and Modad (Herm. Vis. 2–4; cf. Num 11:26).” (Lee Martin McDonald, The Formation of the Biblical Canon, 2 vols. [London: T&T Clark, 2017], 1:313-14)

 

Why I Tithe

Simple: I am a faithful member of the Church and believe and defend its truth claims. I do not larp as a Latter-day Saint while in reality am an agnostic. Further, the Lord Jesus Christ (whose resurrection is a historical event I affirm) commanded such in both ancient and modern revelation.

Of course, there are also benefits; for example, the Church has made contributions in opposition to a citizen-led ballot, as the Church wishes to stop the holocaust that is abortion in Idaho. Such is "based" as the kids would say.

Lee Martin McDonald on the Use of the Wisdom of Solomon by Paul

  

The most obvious example, of course, is whether Paul cited Wisdom of Solomon as sacred scripture in Rom 1:19–32 (compare Wis 12–15). The parallels between Rom 2:4 and Wis 15:1–5 also suggest more than a casual familiarity with that book. The question this raises for Lim has to do with the way that Paul makes use of this text and whether he is citing it as scripture. He is not convinced that Paul thought of Wisdom as scripture, but he does not deny Paul’s awareness of this text. It may be that a reexamination of how the NT uses and cites the OT texts and other texts needs further clarification. Some scholars continue to insist that Paul cited Wisdom as scripture in this text and that may well be the case. Lim cites Dunn as an example. The lack of Paul’s use of citation formulae is not necessarily determinative here, as we see in other NT examples where Jesus, according to Mark 14:62, cites Dan 7:13, but does not use any scriptural formulae such as “as the scripture says.” It is generally conceded that Jesus saw and cited Daniel of sacred scripture. This practice of citing scriptural texts without the scriptural formulae is also found throughout the book of Hebrews in which its author regularly cites many OT texts, more than almost any other NT book, but with one exception (Heb 10:7) without the familiar introduction “as it is written.”

 

That author and others seems to be “writing with scripture,” to use Jacob Neusner’s line, which often reflects the way that the NT writers occasionally made use of scriptural texts, namely without the typical introductory formulae. Paul’s use of the Wisdom of Solomon, like other NT writers’ use of Wisdom of Jesus ben Sirach, may reflect what was common in the early churches who welcomed these books and subsequently included them in sacred scripture collections. While Sirach was a disputed book for generations in rabbinic Judaism, it was welcomed initially by the rabbis as scripture and it is also included in early Christianity scripture canons. Does this suggest that it was also accepted as scripture in the first century and cited as such in several texts in the NT? The history of the early churches’ reception of both of these books as scripture suggests that Paul too may have had a more positive view toward Wisdom as scripture than what some scholars have seen. (Lee Martin McDonald, The Formation of the Biblical Canon, 2 vols. [London: T&T Clark, 2017], 1:262)

 

Stacy Trasancos and George Elliott (RCs) on "this is my body" and "this is my blood"

 While defending Transubstantiation (which requires a virtual presence of the body, blood, soul, and divinity of Jesus after the words of consecration), two Catholics noted that:

 

. . . the copula “to be” (GK: εστιν) by itself does not require a literal translation. To understand the meaning of “is” in this context better, we have to turn to the underlying Aramaic and the context of the passage.

 

The underlying Aramaic that Jesus used at the Last Supper is speculative but largely agreed upon by biblical scholars, Catholics and non-Catholic alike. Through an analysis of the Greek text, Jesus likely pronounced the words dēn biśrî (literally, “this is my body”) and dēn ‘idmî (literally, “this, my blood”) over the bread and wine respectively. The Greek is a faithful translation of this Aramaic wording. While this construction in Aramaic can be interpreted as literal, it does not entirely dismiss the possibility of a figurative understanding of the text. (Stacy Trasancos and George Elliott, Behold, it is I: Scripture, Tradition, and Science on the Real Presence [Gastonia, N.C.: TAN Books, 2021], 37-38)

 

Gary Campbell (former SSPX Priest) Calling the SSPX a "Cult"

  

When I left the SSPX in 1999 I did not keep in contact with any members of the movement. Neither did I frequent the legitimate communities granted the pre-reform missal by Rome. I was traumatized, as anyone escaping a cult is, and I wanted to assimilate into Catholic life quietly and without obstacles. (Gary Campbell, I Will Go Unto the Altar of God: A Reply to the Traditionalists on the Mass of Paul VI [St. Louis: Enroute, 2026], 3)

 

Lee Martin McDonald on Josephus Recognizing Holy Spirit Empowered Prophetic Speech During His Time

  

While Josephus argued that the era of prophecy was over with Artaxerxes (ca. 465 BCE, cf. Ag. Apion 1.40–41), he still recognized that the Holy Spirit empowered prophetic speech and that there was a way of knowing when it was false (Ant. 8.408). While recognizing the inspiration of the Jewish prophetic scriptures, he thought that he too was “inspired” (War 3.351–53). He claims this in his ability to prophesy Vespasian’s ascent to become Roman Emperor (War 3.399–408). Although believing that the prophetic voice was largely gone in Israel, Josephus shows awareness that occasionally some still claimed prophetic status, as in the case of Theudas who apparently believed that he was a prophet and led some 400 Jews to the Jordan River, but he and his followers were killed by the Roman soldiers (see Josephus, Ant. 20:97–98a; cf. Acts 5:34–37; See also War 6.286). While Josephus never claims that he is a prophet, he does claim prophetic-like actions for himself (see War 3.400–402), and refers to a divine “voice” that gave clarity and vision to one named Jesus who proclaimed a voice predicting the destruction of Jerusalem (War 6.300–309). (Lee Martin McDonald, The Formation of the Biblical Canon, 2 vols. [London: T&T Clark, 2017], 1:182)

 

Lorenzo Snow's Couplet: "God" as a Reference to Jesus, not the Father?

Don Bradley, in a recent interview with Pastor Jeff of Hello Saints (Do Latter-day Saints Actually Believe in the Trinity? | HONEST Conversation), pointed out that Lorenzo Snow’s couplet seems to have been focused more on Jesus, not the Father. As it has been a while since I read the Journal of Discourses (I read the set back in 2007), I decided to check this out, and Don seems to be correct (emphasis added):

 

As man now is, God once was—even the babe of Bethlehem, advancing to childhood—thence to boyhood, manhood, then to the Godhead. This, then, is the "mark of the prize of man's high calling in Christ Jesus."

 

Source: Lorenzo Snow, "No Prominent Latter-Day Saint Who Lives His Religion Need Expect Justice in the Courts—the Same Sacrifices May Be Required of Modern As of Ancient Apostles—the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Established By Divine Revelation—We Will Be Made Perfect By Suffering—Our Character As Latter-Day Saints Must Be Preserved Inviolate—Visit of Jesus to Kirtland Temple—Farewell," January 10, 1886, Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. (Liverpool: Daniel H. Wells, 1886), 26:368

John Chrysostom Against Icon Veneration in his Homiles on the Psalms

  

Praise the Lord, my soul. Let us sing this together with David: if he is not present in body, at least he is in spirit. For proof that the righteous are present with us, and sing along with us, listen to what Abraham says to the rich man: when he said, “Send Lazarus so that my brothers may learn what happens in Hades and put their affairs in order,” he replied to him, “They have Moses and the prophets.” Actually, Moses and all the prophets were long dead in the body, but in their writings they had them. After all, if a person sets up a lifeless image of son or dear one and thinks that person, though dead, is present, and through the lifeless image he imagines him, much more do we enjoy the communion of the saints through the divine Scriptures, having in them images not of their bodies but of their souls, the words spoken by them being of their very souls. (John Chrysostom, Homily on Psalm 146, in St. John Chrostom: Old Testament Homilies, 3 vols. [trans. Robert Charles Hill; Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodoxy Press, 2007], 3:116)

 

Further Reading:

 

Answering Fundamentalist Protestants and Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox on Images/Icons

 

Lee Martin McDonald on the Canon of the Old Testament Among the Essenes at Qumran

  

All of the HB books, except perhaps Esther and Nehemiah, have been found at Qumran. In the case of Esther, it is likely that it was never considered as a sacred text among the Covenanters at Qumran not just because no portion of it was found there, but more importantly, it is not cited, quoted, or alluded to in any of the literature found at Qumran, and the festival of Purim, which is central to the later use of the book, is not mentioned in any of the calendar texts at Qumran. The scriptures of Qumran are not equal to the biblical canon of later rabbinic Judaism or any Christian OT canon and it is clear from what has survived that there were more non-biblical texts discovered at Qumran than biblical texts and their sacredness or scriptural status is not easily distinguishable from the biblical manuscripts.

 

No listing of a fixed collection of sacred books can be discerned at Qumran, though some scholars have suggested one. Also, the psalmic texts at Qumran exhibit significant variations from the later MT that became the fixed text of the HB. (Lee Martin McDonald, The Formation of the Biblical Canon, 2 vols. [London: T&T Clark, 2017], 1:239-40)

 

Scriptural Mormonism Podcast Episode 111: Wyatt Evans on his Conversion Story from Reformed Protestantism

 

Episode 111: Wyatt Evans on his Conversion Story from Reformed Protestantism

Lee Martin McDonald on the Reception of Athanasius's 39th Festal Letter (367)

  

Athanasius was probably the first to use the term canon (κανών) in reference to a closed body of sacred literature, and he also appears to be the first to list the twenty-seven books of our current NT canon, though in a different order (the Catholic Epistles follow Acts and precede Paul). As he indicated in the closing comments, one should not conclude from the use of the verb κανονιζομένων (“canonized” or “listed”) in Athanasius’s letter that all current and subsequent church leaders agreed fully with his catalogue of sacred texts. He unhesitatingly accepted the book of Revelation as a part of his biblical canon, but several other churches in the East did not agree with him. Cyril of Jerusalem and Gregory of Nazianzus, for example, left it out, and even today, as we saw above, the Greek Orthodox lectionary does not include readings from Revelation. While the canon set forth by Athanasius ultimately prevailed in the majority of the churches in succeeding centuries – it was adopted with the help of Augustine at the church councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397, 416) – there is no evidence, however, that Athanasius’ letter had a determining impact on all of the churches of his day whether in the east or even in his own region of Egypt, but it is likely that his list was reflective of the majority of churches with which he was acquainted in his generation. Certainly the list was not something that he himself created, but it reflected the books that most, not all, of the Christians acknowledged as Scripture. The multiple manuscript discoveries in Egypt from this time and later periods do not support the pervasive influence of Athanasius’ list even in Egypt, but as in most cases, there was considerable overlap. Not until almost seven hundred years later was the book of Revelation universally accepted into the NT canon of most churches, though many churches appear to have simply ignored it if we consider the content of the surviving manuscripts. We saw above the considerable difference in the number of manuscripts containing the Gospels, Acts, Paul, and the Catholic Epistles compared to Revelation. (Lee Martin McDonald, The Formation of the Biblical Canon, 2 vols. [London: T&T Clark, 2017], 2:306-7, emphasis in bold added)

 

“Mormon” Mariology | Can Latter-day Saints Venerate Mary?

 

“Mormon” Mariology | Can Latter-day Saints Venerate Mary?

Samuel Hawthornthwaite (1857) As a Hostile Witness to 19th-century Latter-day Saint Belief in Baptismal Regeneration

Samuel Hawthornthwaite, a former Latter-day Saint, in his 1857 book written against "Mormonism" acts as a hostile witness to early Latter-day Saint belief in baptismal regeneration (a doctrine many modern Church members seem to be embarrassed of):

No sooner was my head above water, and I felt my feet again, than I made a rush from the watery element to terra firma, leaving my companion to get out as best he could. The Saints struck up a Mormon hymn, while two or three of the brethren gathered round me, and gave me an extraordinary good rubbing with a rough towel, which in a few minutes transported me from the torrid zone to a tropical climate. Before I went into the water I was a Gentile and an alien, but now, being born again, I entered into the brotherhood in first-rate style; the consequence was, they flocked round me in groups, to wish me happiness on my advent into the new family.

 

. . .

 

On the Sunday afternoon following my water baptism, I attended the meeting of the Saints in the Hall of Science, Manchester. This was a large square room, well filled with brethren and sisters, who had assembled for the purpose of receiving the sacrament of bread and wine, and holding their usual Church meeting. I no sooner entered the room than I became the "observed of all observers," all eyes being fixed upon me as their new-born brother. I seated myself in the most obscure part of the room I could find, in order to screen myself from the scrutiny of my too inquisitive relations. After singing and prayer, the presiding Elder gave out the notice, that if there were any persons present who had been baptized and had not had hands laid upon them for the gift of the Holy Ghost, they must sit on a certain form placed near the stand. A person led me to the top of the room, where I sat myself down on the form; the three principal Elders came down from the platform and surrounded me; they then put their hands on my head, and one of them delivered the following speech in a very solemn and distinct tone:

 

"Dearly beloved brother, we, the servants of the Most High God, lay our hands upon your head in the name of Jesus Christ, and by virtue and authority of the Priesthood invested in us, to confirm you a member in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- Day Saints; and, inasmuch as you have been baptized for the remission of sins, we say unto you, that your sins are all forgiven you. And also, by the same authority, we give and confer upon you the gift of the Holy Ghost, which shall be in you as a well of water springing up to eternal life; it shall show you things past, things present, and things to come, and guide you into all truth. Which blessing we seal upon you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and by virtue and authority of the Priesthood invested in us. Amen." (Samuel Hawthornthwaite, Mr. Hawthornthwaite’s Adventures Among the Mormons as an Elder, During the Last Eight Years [Manchester, UK: Samuel Hawthornthwaite, 1857], 84, 85-86)

 

Maurice E. Vellacott on "the perfect" (τὸ τέλειον) in 1 Corinthians 13:10

  

CHAPTER 13 AND VERSE 10

 

1 Corinthians 13:10 indicates that “when the perfect (teleion Greek) comes, the partial will be done away.”

 

This clause is amplified by Paul’s words, before and after, in 1 Corinthians 13: 9–13. After stating in verse 8 that various manifestations of the Spirit would be rendered inoperative or cease, he explains in 1 Corinthians 13:9 and 10: “For we know in part (“in” is the Greek ek meaning “from” or “out of”), and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes (Greek to teleion, “attaining an end or purpose, complete” “meeting the highest standard”—BDAG, s.v. τέλειος, §1; “brought to its end, finished; lacking nothing necessary to completeness”—Thayer, s.v. τέλειος, §1), the partial will be done away (Greek brought to an end).” The sense of the word points to the ultimate, not to some intermediate state. Therefore, the phrase “when the perfect comes” (τέλειον/teleion), likely refers to entering the eternal state—the new heavens and the new earth (Rev. 21:1; cf. Isaiah 65:17–25).

 

There has been lots of debate on the precise meaning of the Greek word teleion. Thomas Edgar (1996:246) sums up his conclusion in the following insightful words:

 

If, as seems apparent in the passage, the teleion [“perfect”] refers to the individual’s with the Lord, this passage does not refer to some prophetic point in history. These factors mean that this passage does not teach when gifts will cease or how long they will last. It serves to remind the Corinthians of the abiding nature of love in contrast to the gifts, which by their inherent nature are only temporal, only for this life.

 

Put succinctly, Edgar (1996:246) believes that the “perfect” (teleion) occurs when the individual believer enters into the presence of the Lord, whether that be at the Lord’s return or the believer’s passing on to heaven, whichever first. When the believer meets the Lord Jesus face-to-face, there will be no need for the spiritual gifts, because “then I shall know fully just as I also have been fully known” (1 Cor 13:12; cf. 2 Cor 5:8–9). Calvin (1573:360), in answer to when that “perfect” will come, says, “It begins, indeed, at death, for then we put off, along with the body, many infirmities; but it will not be completely manifested until the day of judgment.” Note that Calvin (1573:360) says that the “perfect” begins at death, but its full application is not to that intermediate state.

 

In other words, without fear of being contradicted, we know that various “spiritual ministries” will fade into complete irrelevance, at a different time for me than my grandchildren, assuming they outlive me and that the Lord doesn’t return before I depart this present earthly scene. (Maurice E. Vellacott, The Earliest View of New Testament Tongues: Understood as Non-Supernatural, Learned Earthly Languages [Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf & Stock, 2024], 227-28)

 

Arthur A. Tiger on the Pastoral Implications Concerning the Debate Among Protestants Concerning Arminian vs. Reformed/Calvinistic Theology

  

The pastoral implications of TULIP create both comfort and controversy. The assurance that salvation depends entirely on God’s sovereign choice, not human performance, provides deep security for believers. The teaching that God ordained everything for His glory gives meaning to suffering and providence. However, critics argue this system undermines evangelism (why share the gospel if God already chose?), promotes fatalism (why strive if everything is determined?), and makes God author of evil (if He ordains all things). These practical concerns, not merely theological abstractions, fuel ongoing resistance to Calvinist soteriology. (Arthur A. Tiger, The Encyclopedic Handbook of Protestant Denominations: Systematic Analysis of History, Theology, and Contemporary Challenges [His Story for Us Publishing, 2025], 438-39, emphasis in original)

 

Arthur A. Tiger on the Debates Among Protestants Concerning Soteriology

  

The doctrine of salvation stands at the heart of Protestant theology, yet no area generated more passionate disagreement among orthodox believers than the precise nature of how God saves sinners. These soteriological debates, involving questions about divine sovereignty and human responsibility, the nature of faith, the security of salvation and possibility of apostasy, represent not merely academic theological disputes but fundamental differences in understanding God’s character, human nature, and the very essence of the gospel. With hundreds of millions of Protestants aligned with different soteriological systems—Reformed, Arminian, Lutheran, Baptist, Wesleyan—these debates shape preaching, evangelism, discipleship, and Christian experience across denominational lines. (Arthur A. Tiger, The Encyclopedic Handbook of Protestant Denominations: Systematic Analysis of History, Theology, and Contemporary Challenges [His Story for Us Publishing, 2025], 437, emphasis in original)

 

 

These debates matter profoundly because they affect every aspect of Christian life and ministry. The Calvinist preaching God’s sovereign grace to totally depraved sinners, the Arminian calling for decisive faith response to prevenient grace, the Lutheran proclaiming objective justification through Word and Sacrament, and the Wesleyan pursuing entire sanctification through grace-empowered holiness each reflect different soteriological convictions with practical consequences. The contemporary resurgence of Reformed theology among young evangelicals, the growth of “Traditionalist” Southern Baptists opposing Calvinism, and the popularity of “Free Grace” theology demonstrate these ancient debates’ ongoing vitality and divisive potential. (Arthur A. Tiger, The Encyclopedic Handbook of Protestant Denominations: Systematic Analysis of History, Theology, and Contemporary Challenges [His Story for Us Publishing, 2025], 438)

 

Robert Alter on Psalm 45:13 (Hebrew: v. 14)

  

All the princess’s treasure is pearls. The Masoretic Text reads literally “all the princess’s treasure is inward,” which Jewish tradition has taken as a slogan for the virtuous wife’s conjugal modesty. But the immediately following word has a superfluous mem at the beginning. If one moves it back to the end of the previous word and inserts a second nun for the mem in the middle of the word, instead of penimah, “inward,” the consonantal text would read peninim, “pearls,” which makes more sense and a much better parallelism. There is also a syntactic problem here, because “princess” would have to be a vocative (“All the treasure, princess”), but because the royal bride is spoken of in the third person in the last half of the verse, the translation does not represent the vocative. (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 3:120)

 

Robert Alter on Psalm 38:19 (Hebrew: v. 20)

  

my wanton enemies. The Masoretic Text reads ʾoyvay ḥayim, literally, “my enemies of life,” which some construe as “my mortal enemies,” though it is not a biblical idiom as it is worded here. A scroll of Psalms found at Qumran reads ʾoyvay ḥinam, “my wanton enemies” (that is, “enemies for no good reason”), which is nicely idiomatic and makes the parallelism in the two versets here exactly that of 35:19 (where sheqer, “unprovoked,” appears in the first verset and ḥinam in the second, rather than the other way around as here). (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 3:105)

 

The BHS of this verse reads:

 

‎  וְאֹיְבַי חַיִּים עָצֵמוּ וְרַבּוּ שֹׂנְאַי שָׁקֶר

 

The verse in 4Q83 Psalms a (fragment 9, column ii, line 3), the text from Qumran Alter references, reads:

 

וֿאיב̇י ח֯נ̇ם

 

Arthur Weister on Psalm 38 and לְהַזְכִּיר (cf. εἰς ἀνάμνησιν [LXX: Psalm 37])

  

A Psalm. Of David. For the purpose of making a confession(?) (Arthur Weiser, The Psalms: A Commentary [The Old Testament Library; Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1998], 323)

 

 

Cf. the title of Ps. 70. Luther translates: for a memorial (l hāzkīr). Others relate the term to the’ azkārā, the offering of incense, which was part of the ‘meal offering’ (minḥā) and in the course of which the worship of late Judaism is said to have used the psalm as a prayer. (Ibid., n. 1)

 

Robert Alter on Psalm 38 and לְהַזְכִּיר (cf. εἰς ἀνάμνησιν [LXX: Psalm 37])

  

to call to mind. The Hebrew infinitive lehazkir is anomalous in the superscription of a psalm, appearing here and at the beginning of Psalm 70. It may simply refer to the speaker’s intention to bring to mind his suffering in his supplication to God. It might also have a connotation of confession: compare the words of Pharaoh’s chief cupbearer in Genesis 41:9, “My offenses I recall [mazkir] today,” and those of the widow from Zarephath to Elijah in 1 Kings 17:18, “You have come to me to recall [lehazkir] my crime.” (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 3:104)

 

Nathan B. Oman on Extended "Families" or "Kingdoms" and Early Latter-day Saint Plural Marraige Among Brigham Young and Others

  

During the 19th century, what can be called kingdom theology dominated sealing practices. Kingdom theology can be seen most clearly in the law of adoption, where sealings between non-biologically related adults were designed to bind individuals in eternal, dynastic structures with patriarchal heads. Joseph Smith’s sealing practice was confined to marriage, but shortly after his death. Brigham Young and his associates instituted adoptive sealings. Initially these took the form of sealing nonbiological relationships in which adults were sealed to high church leaders as members of their extended adoptive “families” or “kingdoms.” These massive “families” proved important organizational structures during the Mormon exodus to the Great Basin. Thereafter the so-called law of adoption was suspended until the first Utah temple was dedicated in 1877 at St. George. At that point, there was an effort to reinstitute the practice. Within this theological frame, marriage sealings were another mechanism for creating priestly connections, at times in disregard of temporal family relationships. Where modern Latter-day Saints think of such sealings in terms of “eternal families” using ideas of companionate marriage and nuclear families, their 19th-century forebearers thought in terms of kingdom and sacral networks. (Nathan B. Oman, Living Oracles: Law and the Latter-day Saint Tradition [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2026], 168-69)

 

 

This explains, for example, the bewildering variety of Brigham Young’s plural marriages. Fifty-five women were sealed to Young. Only sixteen of these women bore his children. Twenty-three of the women belonged to Young’s households, although some of these wives likely did not have a sexual relationship with Young. The other women were sealed into Young’s eternal kingdom without becoming part of his earthly family. Some of these women were much older when they were sealed to Young, including one woman sealed on her deathbed. Some of them held themselves out as “wife of President Young” without being part of his household. Some of the women were sealed to Young while continuing to be married to other men, presumably to be included in Young’s postmortal dynasty. See generally Jeffrey Ogden Johnson, “Determining and Defining ‘Wife’: The Brigham Young Households,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 20, no. 3 (1987): 57-70. (Ibid., 274 n. 43)

 

Scriptural Mormonism Podcast Episode 110: Stanford Carmack on Early Modern English and the Book of Mormon

 

Episode 110: Stanford Carmack on Early Modern English and the Book of Mormon

Eliza R. Snow (October 20, 1874): The Return to Jackson County to Build the Temple (cf. D&C 84) Being Contingent

On October 20, 1874, Eliza R. Snow stated that:  

I have always felt myself in the United Order, and I expect the sisters will have more time to improve their minds, and it will help us the sooner to go back to Jackson County and build a temple where the glory of God will rest upon it. (Eliza R. Snow, “I Would Have Walked to the Ends of the Earth,” Salt Lake City Nineteenth Ward Relief Society, Nineteenth Ward Hall, Salt Lake City, October 20, 1874, in Rise Up and Speak: Selected Discourses of Eliza R. Snow, ed. Jennifer Reederm, Sharlyn D. Howcroft, Elizabeth A. Kuehn, and Jessica M. Nelson [Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2026], 158)

 

It appears that she believed that the return to Jackson County to build the temple was contingent upon the actions of the Latter-day Saints. On this, and other issues relating to Joseph Smith's prophecies, see:

Resources on Joseph Smith's Prophecies

Eliza R. Snow (October 20, 1874) on Temptation and Christ's Peccable Nature

  

We have had some very good instructions this afternoon, and the question is, How can we live up to them and live so as to have the constant companionship of the Holy Spirit? It is not to be obtained except in the way God has appointed. We are frail and subject to many trials and temptations—it is no sin to be tempted, but the sin is yielding to temptation. Had Jesus yielded when Satan tempted Him, He would have lost the smiles of His Father. We should be always on our guard. Paul says, “Pray without ceasing and in everything give thanks,” and if we do this, we shall not have time to brood over our troubles, and the little vexations and cares of life would not be noticed. Gratitude is sweet to our fellow beings, but it is elevating and ennobling in the sight of our Father in Heaven. (Eliza R. Snow, “I Would Have Walked to the Ends of the Earth,” Salt Lake City Nineteenth Ward Relief Society, Nineteenth Ward Hall, Salt Lake City, October 20, 1874, in Rise Up and Speak: Selected Discourses of Eliza R. Snow, ed. Jennifer Reederm, Sharlyn D. Howcroft, Elizabeth A. Kuehn, and Jessica M. Nelson [Salt Lake City: The Church Historian’s Press, 2026], 156)

 

Here, Eliza (correctly) notes that temptation, in and of itself, is not sinful (contrary to Calvinism and other theologies); further, she also (correctly) rejects the impeccability of Christ.

Heber J. Grant (Journal Entry for September 8, 1887)

  

Moses Thatcher, Jos. F. Smith, John Hy. Smith each favored calling men, instead of allowing them to come or go, when we desire to establish settlements.

 

Moses thought that fully one million of dollars had been wasted by our people in wandering up and down the country aimlessly.

 

If we feel that we should establish settlements in Canada and Mexico, the brethren felt that our only way to do so successfully will be to call men and not ask them to volunteer. Under Brigham Young’s administration men were called and had no idea of leaving a place unless they were released.

 

Franklin D. Richards, regretted very much that he had not felt to endorse the policy of allowing men to go or not when a call was made to help one of our settlement. He did not think the gospel could ever be preached or the Church built up upon any such a principle and in his inmost soul he had no faith that we could ever build up Zion on the volunteer principle. When men are called on a mission or to locate in any place they feel by the Spirit within them that they were working where the Lord desired them to do so. He related the failure of attempts to get needed help in Arizona and San Juan on account of the people feeling that they were at perfect liberty to go or not. Brother Franklin’s remarks were very spirited indeed and while he was talking I felt that his remarks were dictated by the good spirit.

 

Erastus Snow felt that the Twelve should report names of men and that then we should send them with the backing and support of the Priesthood. He felt that Bro. Franklin had struck a keynote which most of the Twelve have experienced during the administration of Prest. Taylor and that his policy of only using volunteers had discouraged the labors of our quorum.

 

In the days of Brigham Young some men had felt that they were sent on missions because of some private spite. The feeling existed that brother Young had not counseled as much with the Council of the Apostles as with those persons with whom he was surrounded.

 

Prest. Taylor desiring to correct this evil had gone to an extreme on the other hand that had made the efforts of the brethren in attempts to strengthen up our settlements, a failure.

 

A motion was carried that Pres Card be informed to continue his labors in Canada, and that additional help will be sent to him. ... (Heber J. Grant, Journal, September 8, 1887, in The Diaries of Heber J. Grant, 1880-1845 Abridged, comp. D. Michael Quinn [Digital Edition; Salt Lake City, 2015])

 

 

Theodoret of Cyrus (393-457) on Baptismal Regeneration and Paul's Epistles

  

1 Cor 15:15-17:

 

We are found to be giving false witness to God as well, because we testified of God that he raised Christ, whereas he did not raise him (v. 15): we are liable on the score of calumny for presuming to claim God raised Christ, whereas he did not raise him. Then in turn he reverses the same ideas, intent on strengthening faith in the resurrection with further arguments, saying, After all, if the dead are not raised, neither has Christ been raised. But if Christ had not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins (vv. 16-17): baptism is a type of the Lord’s death, but the type has no force if it does not involve the forgiveness of sins; so the burden of sins is still to be carried. He included this in view of the statement, Christ died for our sins, in keeping with the scriptures. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 1:226)

 

 

Eph 2:8-9:

 

By grace, in fact, you are saved through faith (v. 8): the grace of God regaled us with these good things; we had only faith to offer, but divine grace worked with it. He went on in this vein: This is no doing of yours; it is the gift of God, not from works lest anyone boast (vv. 8-9): we have not believed of our own volition; rather, we made our approach when called, and when we did he did not require of us purity of life—instead, he accepted faith alone and granted us forgiveness of sins. In other words, we are of his making, created in Christ Jesus for good works for which God prepared us so that we should walk in him (v. 10). He used created there of the regeneration: he called us (he is saying) out of ins ineffable goodness; we responded, and by coming to faith we attained salvation. Before baptism, however, he did not require of us the practice of virtue, whereas after baptism he urges us to cling to it as well. This, in fact, is what he means by for good works so that we should walk in him. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 2:39; on “faith alone” in the patristics, see this post)

 

The translator Robert Charles Hill offered this note:

 

In these vv. 8-10, where Paul is stressing the gratuity of the divine call, Theodoret is prepared to concede it, achieving his usual Antiochene balance by seeing faith as a personal response to the call in the first place, and then a virtuous life in consequence of reception of baptism and its forgiveness of sins. (Ibid., 1:59-60 n. 4)

 

 

Col 2:11-13:

 

In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision not done by human hand, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh through the circumcision of Christ (v. 11). In other words, since under pressure they embraced the way of life of the Law, he brings out once again the difference in circumcision: it is not of the flesh (he is saying). But of the spirit, not done by human hand but divine, not a removal of a fragment of flesh but freedom from all corruption. IT is not the Law that is responsible for this but Christ the Lord, the giver of the Law; he says, note, in him also you were circumcised, and again, through the circumcision of Christ. By putting off the body of the sins of the flesh he referred to saving baptism: in it we put off the soiled garment of sin. In the life to come, on the other hand, the body, rendered incorruptible and immortal can no longer be affected by the stain of sin. Now, to the fact that this refers to baptism the sequel also testifies. Buried with him in baptism (v. 12). Since he called saving baptism a type of death (implying this in buried), he gives the good news of resurrection: in whom you were also raised. And since we still have a mortal nature, he went on, through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead: believing is the power of God we await the resurrection, having the resurrection of Christ the Lord as a pledge.

 

And you, dead as you were in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, he made alive with him, forgiving you all your trespasses (v. 13): sin destroyed us all, imposing on us the sentence of death. But the God of all made us sharers in the life of Christ the Lord, and bestowed on us forgiveness of sins. By uncircumcision of the flesh he referred to wickedness, explaining that whereas uncircumcision of the body causes no harm to those in that condition, uncircumcision of the body causes no harm to those in that condition, uncircumcision of the soul harms both body and soul. From this he shows that bodily circumcision is of no benefit to the circumcised; on the other hand, it is removal of wickedness that brings about true salvation. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 2:93-94)

 

 

2 Tim 2:11-13:

 

Having thus brought out the reward for the hardships, he went on, The saying is trustworthy (v. 11), that is, true, indubitable, free of falsehood. If we died with him, we shall also live with him; if we endured with him, we shall also reign with him (vv. 11-12). The phrase, we died with him, he applied not only to those taken up for burial but also to the baptized: those who sincerely believe and give evidence of a life in keeping with their faith will share life with the Lord. If we deny him, he will also deny us. The Lord himself said as much in the sacred Gospels, “Whoever denies me before human beings I myself shall deny before my Father, who is in heaven.” Then he explains that the one denying him will not harm him but will bring harm on himself. If we are unfaithful, he remains unfaithful: he cannot deny himself (v. 13): those with faith do not render him God, nor do those without faith remove the divine nature from him; rather, whether we believe or not he is God. So it is we the believers who reap the benefit. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 2:241)

 

The translator, Robert Charles Hill, offered the following comment on the above:

 

The bishop, we have seen, is always ready to recall the baptismal ritual in connection with death and rising. (Ibid., 2:250 n. 4)

 

 

Titus 3:4-7:

 

But when the goodness and lovingkindness of God our Savior, appeared be saved us, not through works of righteousness we had done but in his mercy through the washing of regeneration and through renewal of the Holy Spirit, which he poured out richly on us through Jesus Christ our Savior that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life (vv. 4-7). Exercising lovingkindness, he is saying, the Lord freed us from our former vices through the Only-begotten, according us forgiveness of our sins through saving baptism, creating us anew and renewing us, regaling us with the gift of the Spirit, and showing us the way of righteousness. To those traveling by this way he promised the kingdom of heaven. And since this way is not visible (hope which is seen, remember, is not hope), he was obliged to add, The saying is sure (v. 8), that is, true: let no one be in any doubt. I want you to harp on this so that those who believe in God may be sure to devote themselves to good works: for those devoid of good works faith is not sufficient for salvation. These things are good and of benefit to everyone: believing in God and living according to the laws. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 2:257, emphasis in bold added)

 

 

Theodoret of Cyrus (393-457) on the Epistle of Philemon and Slavery

  

Phlm 1:21:

 

I have written to you in the knowledge that you will do even more than I ask (v. 21): I know your obedience of soul—hence my writing, trusting that you will provide more than I asked. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 2:264)

 

The translator, Robert Charles Hill, offered this note:

 

A modern commentator, like Fitzmyer wonders if Paul is asking for the emancipation of the slave. Perhaps Theodoret in his time would prefer not to entertain the possibility of what “more” could involve (cf. his comment on v. 25). (Ibid., 2:265 n. 9)

 

Phlm 1:25:

 

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen (v. 25). It behooves those who vouchsafed the divine teaching to follow these laws, and thus to teach the servants to give service to their masters, so that in every way Christ the Lord may be celebrated, to whom with the Father and the all-holy Spirit belong glory and magnificence, now and forever, for ages and ages. Amen. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 2:264-65)

 

For Those Who Wish to Support the Blog/Youtube Channel

Just a regular-ish reminder for those who wish to support the blog and/or youtube channel:

Paypal: 

Amazon Wishlist

Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com

Email for Logos.com Gift Card: Irishlds87@gmail.com

Patreon

Theodoret of Cyrus (393-457) on 1 Thessalonians 2:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:13

1 Thess 2:15:

 

So then, brethren, stand firm, and hold fast to the traditions you have been taught, either in word or in our latter (v. 15): keep as the norm of doctrine the words offered you by us, which we preached to you when present and wrote when absent. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 2:130)

 

 

2 Thess 2:13:

 

We also give thanks unceasingly to God for this, that you received the word of God you heard from us and accepted it, not as a word of human beings, but as it really is, word of God, which is also at work in you believers (v. 13). Since he had instilled fear into them with his adjuration, he comforted them with commendation, saying, You accepted not as human words but as divine words what was offered by us. Actual experience also shows them to be like that: in receipt of the charism of inspiration, they themselves prophesied, spoke in tongues and performed remarkable wonders. The text hinted not only at that but also at the perils brought upon them by the adversaries; the sequel indicates as much, In fact, you became imitators, brethren, of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea in suffering the same things form your own compatriots as they did from the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and drove us out. They are not pleasing to God, and are hostile to everyone (vv. 14-15). (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 2:111, emphasis in bold added)

 

Theodoret of Cyrus (393-457) on 2 Corinthians 5:18-21

  

Now, all this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Jesus Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation (v. 18). He indicated God’s ineffable lovingkindness: who was not reconciled to us (he is saying), although he it was who was insulted by the Fall; rather, he reconciled us to himself, not employing a human being as mediator, but making the only-begotten Son a mediator of peace. To us he also entrusted the good news of reconciliation. Namely, God it was. A break must be observed here. In Christ reconciling the world to himself (v. 19): the God of all it was who by means of Christ achieved reconciliation with human beings. Now, what is the manner of this reconciliation? Not reckoning their falls against them, and assigning to us the preaching of reconciliation: he granted the forgiveness of sins, and commissioned us as ministers of peace.

 

We act, therefore, as ambassadors of Christ (v. 20). Since he claimed to have appointed minister of reconciliation, he was obliged to set the ambassadorship; and to show its trustworthiness he went on, since God’s exhortation comes through us. Now, what is the message he brings as ambassador? We beg you in Christ’s name, be reconciled to God. The words are sufficient to make even the most unfeeling be ashamed: he said first that with the execution of Christ he not only did not bear resentment but sent us as ambassadors to win all people over, respect his longsuffering, be ashamed at the murder of Christ, and be reconciled to the Creator, God and Lord. He goes on to add to the aforesaid the dishonor of the passion. After all, the one who did not know sin he made sin for our sake so that in him we might become the righteousness of God (v. 21): though free of sin he underwent the death of sinners in order to undo people’s sins, and bearing the name that we have he gave us the name of what he himself is—that is, he regaled us with the riches of righteousness. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 1:273-74)

 

Theodoret of Cyrus (393-457) on Romans 5:12

  

From this point on he reveals the mystery of the Incarnation, and brings out the reason for becoming man. Hence, just as through one human being sin entered the world, and through sin death, and thus death spread to all human beings for the reason that all sinned (v. 12). On creating Adam and dignifying him with the gift of reason, the Lord God gave the single commandment of exercising his reason; it was impossible that, sharing in reason and enjoying the discernment of good and its opposite, he should live his life apart from any law. He was deceived and broke the law; and from the beginning the lawgiver linked the threat of punishment to the commandment. Becoming subject to the rule of death, then, Adam begot Cain, Seth and the others. All of them, therefore, on the grounds of their lineage from his man, had a nature subject to death; such a nature is in need of many things—food and drink, clothing and habitation, and diverse skills. Use of these things, however, often stimulates the passions to intemperance, and intemperance generates sin. Consequently, the divine apostle means that, since Adam had sinned and death had occurred through sin, both spread to the race: death spread to all human beings for the reason that all sinned. In other words, it is not because of the sin of the first parent but because of their own that each person is liable to death. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentary on the Letters of St. Paul, 2 vols. [Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2001], 1:72)

 

The translator Robert Charles Hill noted that:

 

Theodoret, like all the Greek Fathers before John Damascene, reads εφ’ ω in this verse and renders it “for the reason that”; he is well aware that Paul is referring to the etiological story of the Fall in Gen 3 but does not see Adam as an antecedent to the pronoun (as likewise in commenting on Ps 51.5). Adam’s sin is beyond question for him, and—without explaining how—he sees both sin and death spreading to the whole race; but he is insistent that each person’s sin and not Adam’s is responsible for each one’s liability to death. As always, he avoids the heavy moralizing tone of preachers like Chrysostom in commenting on the Fall, as well as their tendency to transfer guilt to the woman. (Ibid., 1:146 n. 7)

 

Theodoret of Cyrus (393-457) Teaching Baptismal Regeneration in his Commentaries on Jeremiah and Ezekiel

  

Jer 31:34 (LXX: 38:34):

 

They will no longer teach one another, each one their neighbor and each one their brother, saying, Know the Lord, because all will know me, from the least to the greatest of them (v. 34). The future life achieves the fulfilment of these words: in it we shall no longer need instruction from one another, things being patently obvious, sufferings at an end, bodies incorrupt, souls immune to change. Now it is customary with the divine Scriptures to mix the prophecies together: it connects those about the recall with those about the captivity, and the Lord in the sacred Gospels cites at the one time the sayings about Jerusalem and those about the consummation. Because I shall be merciful to their iniquities, and shall no longer remember their sins. The grace of all-holy baptism grants this favor: after forgiveness, he does not remember the former sins. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentaries on the Prophets, 2 vols. [trans. Robert Charles Hill; Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2006], 1:117-18, emphasis in bold added)

 

 

Ezek 36:25:

 

The blasphemy will be canceled though your being saved, which will demonstrate my power; learning how my name is great and sufficient for the assistance of my own, they will glorify and sing the praises of my lordship. He indicated as much, in fact, by saying, The nations will know that I am the Lord God when I am sanctified in you before their eyes. I shall take you from the nations, and gather you from all the races, and I shall bring you into your land (vv. 23-24).

 

While this applies to all who returned, since those wanting to return were granted the right of return, what follows applies not to everyone but only to those choosing to believe in the Gospel. He says, in fact, I shall sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be cleansed of all your uncleanness, and I shall cleanse you of all your idols (v. 25). By clean water he referred to the water of rebirth, in which we are baptized and receive the forgiveness of sins. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentaries on the Prophets, 2 vols. [trans. Robert Charles Hill; Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2006], 2:242, emphasis in bold added)

 

As Robert Charles Hill, the translator, noted about Theodoret reading baptismal regeneration into various Old Testament texts:

 

The bishop can always find a baptismal reference in a text. (1:220 n. 15)

 

Theodoret is simply reflecting the unanimous consent of the earliest Christians on water baptismal regeneration.

Examples of "Non-Calvinistic" Interpretations of Passages in Theodoret of Cyrus's (393-457) Commentary on Jeremiah

  

Jer 1:4-5:

 

The word of the Lord came to me, saying, Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you left the womb I consecrated you (vv. 4-5). The election was not without basis: knowledge preceded it. He had knowledge, note, and then he consecrated; for he knows everything before its coming to be. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentaries on the Prophets, 2 vols. [trans. Robert Charles Hill; Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2006], 1:23)

 

 

Jer 18:7-8:

 

Do not despair of salvation, he is saying: even if I condemn a nation and threaten ultimate punishment, I extend mercy. On the other hand, if I promise an abundance of good things, but they scorn me and embrace wickedness, I shall not fulfill the promise of good things. Knowing this, then, do not despair of better things, but apply repentance and reap salvation. (Theodoret of Cyrus, Commentaries on the Prophets, 2 vols. [trans. Robert Charles Hill; Brookline, Mass.: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2006], 1:85)