Thursday, November 24, 2016

Kevin L. Barney on Genesis 21:33


And Abraham planted a grove in Beer-sheba, and called there on the name of the lord, the everlasting God. (Gen 21:33)

Commenting on this passage, LDS scholar, Kevin L. Barney wrote:


A more literal rendering might be "And Abraham planted a tamarisk tree at Beer-sheba, and called there on the name of Yahweh El Olam." Note the combination of the divine names "Yahweh" and "El," together with Olam "Eternal [lit. (of) Eternity]," an epithet of El. The final form of the text as it has been preserved has no direct mention of Asherah, but it seems likely that this planting of a sacred tree by the patriarch Abraham was an act to venerate her. (How to Worship Our Mother in Heaven [Without Getting Excommunicated], pp. 127-128)

Wednesday, November 23, 2016

Biblical Thanksgiving

My American friends will be celebrating Thanksgiving tomorrow. Of course, as Latter-day Saints, we should focus especially on the "Thanksgiving" in the Bible. In the New Testament, the verb "to give thanks" is εὐχαριστέω. In 1 Cor 11:24-25, the apostle Paul writes:

And when he [Christ] had given thanks (εὐχαριστέω), he brake it, and said, take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.  After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.


The most important "Thanksgiving" is that of the sacrament and the sacrificial remembrance (αναμνησις) we have therein of the atoning work of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The Baptism Debate

While I don't agree with everything in the following video, this sermon was on the topic of the salvific efficacy and necessity of water baptism and answers many of the more common objections one encounters against this biblical truth:


Is Muhammad predicted in Deuteronomy 18:18?


I [God] will raise up for them a prophet like you [Moses] from among their own people; I will put my words in the mouth of the prophet, who shall speak to them everything that I command. (Deut 18:18 | NRSV; square brackets added for clarification)

This text has been appealed to by many Muslim apologists as a prophecy of Muhammad. This is one of the more popular "go-to" texts from the Old Testament Muslim apologists appeal to (another one would be Song of Solomon 5:16). However, there are numerous exegetical difficulties with such a perspective taken by Shabir Ally and other Muslim apologists. As liberal New Testament scholar, Robert Miller, wrote:

The consensus among biblical scholars is that this prophecy promises a line of prophets after Moses, for the context (Deut 18:19-22) clearly presupposes multiple prophets. The prophecy is thus an assurance that every generation in Israel will have the benefit of prophetic guidance. In the Hellenistic period, when many Jews perceived that God had stopped sending prophets to Israel, the prophecy in Deut 18:18 was reinterpreted eschatologically, as a promise that one ideal prophet would arise in the Last Days. Christians, naturally, applied this prophecy to Jesus (e.g., in Acts 3:22).

A biblical prophecy about a coming prophet-like-Moses would attract the interest of Muslims, for the Quran often describes Muhammad as completing the prophetic revelations given to Moses and Jesus . . . [according to Muslim apologists] Muhammad fulfilled this prophecy because he was a descendant of Ishmael, the brother of Isaac. However, this reading of "brothers" defies the sense of the passage and the use of that term elsewhere in Deuteronomy. The prophecy says that God will raise up a prophet "for them," that is, for the people of Israel. How would a foreign prophecy, even one from a related people (such as the Arabs), be construed as having a mission for Israel? Furthermore, Deut 17:15 ordains that when the Israelites choose their king, he must be "from among your brothers," (i.e., from among the Israelites), which is explicitly reinforced by "not a foreigner."

Deut 18:18 predicts that the prophet(s) to come will be "like Moses." In the context of Deuteronomy, a prophet "like Moses" means simply a prophet that is appointed by God rather than self-appointed; see Deut 18:20-22, which explains how to tell if a prophet is truly sent by God. Nasir and Badawi both impute very specific meanings to "like Moses," meanings that enable them to interpret this detail so that it points to Muhammad but excludes Jesus. Nasir asserts that "like Moses" means that the prophet will govern a new nation and promulgate "a new Law . . . to replace an old one." Since Jesus denied replacing the Law of Moses (Matt 5:17-18), and since the Quran claims to be a guide for the righteous (Quran 2:3), the prophecy in Deuteronomy points to Muhammad, not Jesus. Badawi goes much further than Nasir, and arranges a series of comparisons that demonstrate, not only that Muhammad and Moses were "very much alike in many respects," but also that the "Prophet Jesus does not fit this particular prophecy." Badawi points out, for example, that Muhammad and Moses were born naturally, were married and had children, died of natural causes, were "heads of states," were forced to flee as adults to escape plots to kill them, defeated enemy armies sent to destroy them, and have "comprehensive codes of law." Jesus shared none of these similarities with Moses.

In asserting this argument, we start with the observation that any two individuals are like each other in some respects and unlike each other in other respects. In his comparisons of Moses to Muhammad and then to Jesus, Badawi selects criteria that allow him to draw the preordained conclusion, ignoring the ways in which Muhammad is unlike Moses. A different set of comparisons could be devised that leads to an opposite result. For example, Moses and Jesus were rescued as infants from a mass murder of baby boys ordered by a king; Moses and Jesus worked miracles; Moses and Jesus chose those who would inherit their authority. Muhammad shares none of those similarities with Moses. Whether Jesus or Muhammad (or Jeremiah, for that matter) is more like Moses is not an objective judgment based on neutral criteria.


The remaining element of Deut 18:18 is, "I will put my words into his mouth, and he will speak to them everything that I command." Badawi acknowledges that his description fits any messenger of God. He therefore does not argue that Jesus did not fulfill this aspect of the prophecy. Instead, he argues that Muhammad fulfilled it par excellence. Nasir takes a different tack, arguing that the description does not apply to Jesus. "Strange as it may seem, there is not a single example of words which Jesus may be said to have received from God with the command to pass them on." When put in this strict form, Nasir's comment is true: the gospels nowhere depict Jesus prefacing his teaching with "Thus says the Lord," as it is the custom for the OT prophets. But then Nasir overplays his hand, pointing out that "Jesus did not claim to be a prophet," citing Matt 16:13-16, in which Nasir believes that "Jesus denied being either John the Baptist or Elias or one of the prophets." This misinterprets the Matthean passage, which reports only that Jesus did not acknowledge being a prophet from the past come back to life. Furthermore, Nasir's implication that Jesus was not a prophet is bizarre for a Muslim to make because Islam reveres Jesus as a great prophet. (Robert J. Miller, Helping Jesus Fulfill Prophecy [Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade Books, 2016], locations 9005-9043 in the kindle edition)

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

C.K. Barrett on 1 Corinthians 8:6



Jesus Christ is not described as God, and the fact that Lord (κυριος) serves very frequently in the Greek Old Testament as an equivalent of the Hebrew name of God (YHWH) loses some force from the fact that it was also used in a variety of other senses, for example, it might be no more than ‘Sir’, used as a polite form of address. It is always important to note the context in which Lord is used. Here it evidently stands in close relation, but is not identical, with God. Christ, in Paul’s usage, is seldom more than a second personal name, but its use means that Paul accepted the belief that Jesus was the Messiah whose coming Judaism awaited; in him the promises of the Old Testament were fulfilled (cf. 2 Cor. i.20). To the Hellenistic world Lord was a more meaningful way of expressing the divine kingship of Jesus than messianic terminology could provide. (C.K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians [2d ed.; Black’s New Testament Commentaries; London: A&C Black, 1971], 193)

Monday, November 21, 2016

Brief Notes on 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6

In 2 Pet 2:4, we read the following:

For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to chains of deepest darkness to be kept until judgment. (NRSV)

"Cast [them] into hell" comes from the verb ταρταρόω, which means "to cast into Tartarus." This verb is used only in this verse in the Greek New Testament; notwithstanding, it appears in other Greek texts pre-dating the New Testament. BDAG defines the verb thusly:

7265  ταρταρω
ταρταρω (Τρταρος ‘the Netherworld’) 1 aor. ταρτρωσα (Acusilaus Hist. [V BC]: 2 fgm. 8 Jac. I p. 50; Lydus, Men. 4, 158 p. 174, 26 W.; cp. Sext. Emp., Pyrrh. Hypot. 3, 24, 210 Ζες τν Κρνον κατεταρτρωσεν [this compound several times in Ps.—Apollod.: 1, 1, 4; 1, 2, 1, 2; 1, 2, 3]. Tartarus, thought of by the Greeks as a subterranean place lower than Hades where divine punishment was meted out, and so regarded in Israelite apocalyptic as well: Job 41:24; En 20:2; Philo, Exs. 152; Jos., C. Ap. 2, 240; SibOr 2, 302; 4, 186) hold captive in Tartarus 2 Pt 2:4.—DELG s.v. Τρταρος. M-M.

With respect to the Enochian literature, 1 Enoch 20:2 reads:

Οριλ, ες τν γων γγλων π το κσμου κα το ταρτρου.

Uriel, one of the holy angels, the one over the world and Tartarus.

It is clear that Peter is appealing to the myth of fallen angels from Enochian traditions in his comments, as did Jude in the parallel passage in Jude 6:

And the angels who did not keep their own position, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains in deepest darkness for the judgment of the great Day. (NRSV)

It is rather clear that both Peter and Jude are affirming the existence of fallen angels and, furthermore, that they are appealing to Enochian traditions positively to make their arguments against their opponents. Furthermore, it highlights the importance of knowing extra-canonical texts to help engage in exegesis of the biblical texts.

Further reading:

Archie T. Wright, The Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6:1-4 in Early Jewish Literature


Sunday, November 20, 2016

George Haydock on baptism being by immersion in Romans 6

The following comes from a popular 19th century pro-Roman Catholic commentary on the Bible by George Haydock. On Rom 6, he admits that the apostle Paul taught water baptism to be done by immersion without any hint whatsoever of any other modes of baptism:

Ver. 3. &c. We … are baptized in his death. Greek, unto his death. The apostle here alludes to the manner of administering the sacrament of baptism, which was then done by immersion or by plunging the person baptized under the water, in which he finds a resemblance of Christ’s death and burial under ground, and of his resurrection to an immortal life. So must we after baptism rise to lead a quite different life: having been also, when we were baptized and made Christians, planted as branches ingrafted in Christ, let us endeavour to bring forth the fruits of a virtuous life


Haydock, G. L. (1859). Haydock’s Catholic Bible Commentary (Ro 6:3). New York: Edward Dunigan and Brother.

Blog Archive