Commenting on the popular belief that Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the church door in Wittenberg, P. Finton Lyons, a Catholic monk who has a PhD in Reformed theology and taught Reformation History in the Angelicum University and the Pontifical Liturgical Institute, Rome, and member of the Pentecostal-Roman catholic International Commission, wrote:
Despite the tradition that he nailed his Ninety-Five Theses to the door of the Castle Church, he never referred directly to having done so, but he did send letters to the relevant bishops, Albrecht of Mainz and Hieronymus of Brandenburg, enclosing copies of the theses and warning Albrecht in a covering letter: ‘What a horror, what a danger for a bishop to permit the loud noise of indulgences among his people, while the gospel is silenced’. (LW 48:43-49) This source for the traditional account of the nailing o the theses to the chapel door was his friend Melanchthon, writing an introduction to his works among years later, but there has been a discovery of a note by Luther’s secretary in his later years, apparently confirming the tradition. But neither man was in Wittenberg at the time. (Lyndal Roper, Martin Luther: Renegade and Prophet, 1) (P. Fintan Lyons, Martin Luther: His Challenge Then and Now [Dublin: Columba Press, 2017], 56)
Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it . . . (D&C 135:3)
Today is the 212th anniversary of the birth of the Prophet Joseph Smith, so I think it is apropos to plug a few articles on this blog about the role and status of the Prophet Joseph Smith in Latter-day Saint theology:
Incidentally, one of my favourite stanzas in the LDS hymnal is the third stanza of this hymn which captures the importance of the Prophet Joseph Smith:
"Great is his glory and endless his priesthood. Ever and ever the keys he will hold. Faithful and true, he will enter his kingdom, crowned in the midst of the prophets of old."
There are many texts glossed over in the so-called Romans Road approach to the gospel, including Rom 6:1-5 which explicitly teaches baptismal regeneration (a doctrine Corner rejects). To quote two Reformed authors on this:
The explanatoryγαρin 6:5 links the verse with his previous comments about the believer’s death with Christ through water-baptism in 6:3-4. His argument appears to be that believers died to sin and should no longer live under its power (6:2). Their water-baptism proves that they participate in the death of Jesus and experience a spiritual death to the power of sin (6:3). Therefore, Paul concludes that believers have been buried with Jesus through their participation in water-baptism, a baptism that identifies them with the death of Jesus (their representative [5:12-21]) and thereby kills the power of sin in their lives, so that they would live with Jesus in the resurrection just as Jesus presently lives in the power of his physical resurrection (6:4). Believers who died to the power of sin by being baptized into Jesus’ death will certainly (αλλακαι) participate in a physical resurrection just as Jesus died and resurrected, because those who died to the power of sin (just as Jesus died =τωομοιωματιτουθανατουαυτου) will participate in a future resurrection (just as Jesus has already been resurrected) (6:5). (Jarvis J. Williams,Christ Died for Our Sins: Representation and Substitution in Romans and their Jewish Martyrological Background[Eugene, Oreg.: Pickwick Publications, 2015], 178).
The first thing we note is that Paul equates being baptized into Christ as being baptized into his death (Rom 6:3). Here Paul employs a metaphor. The believer does not necessarily die in baptism in a physical sense, but he or she is described as dying with Christ by way of spiritual analogy. They have died to their old self (cf. 2 Cor 5:17). Here we see baptism functioning as an identity marker in that the believer in baptism is identified with Christ in his death. Another metaphor that Paul includes with baptism is that of the believer in baptism being identified with Christ in his burial (Rom 6:4), but again this is not literal but metaphorical. Paul proceeds to use a third metaphor in relation to baptism to show that as Christ was raised from the dead to a new life by the glory of the Father, so believers have been identified with him to walk in a new life on a spiritual plane (Rom 6:4). This new life vis-á-vis baptism is often marked by calls and exhortations to ethical living . . . Paul reasons that since Christian believers are united by baptism with Jesus in his death, they will also consequently be united with Jesus in the resurrection. What happened to Christ on a physical plane is applied metaphorically to the believer on a spiritual plane. In tying baptism to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, Paul is identifying and associating believers via baptism to Christ in his salvific work. The essence and heart of the gospel upon which believers are saved according to Paul is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor 15:14). These are the very three points with which believers are identified with Jesus in baptism. Thus Paul presents baptism first and foremost as an identification of the believer with Jesus in his death, burial, and resurrection. The idea of identity with Jesus in baptism is similarly stressed by Paul in Gal 3:27, ὅσοι γὰρ εἰς Χριστὸν ἐβαπτίσθητε, Χριστὸν ἐνεδύσασθε//”As many of you as were baptized into Christ, you have clothed yourselves with Christ.” The idea of identification in baptism in Gal 3:28 is seen in the metaphor of being clothed with Christ. (Tony Costa, Worship and the Risen Jesus in the Pauline Letters [Studies in Biblical Literature vol. 157; New York: Peter Lang, 2013], 219-220)
I have said time and time again, both on this blog and elsewhere, that what Roman Catholicism teaches about Mary is the single greatest disproof of her claim to be the Church Jesus established. It has led to many pernicious errors, including the over-inflated view of Mary, often at the expense of Jesus.
As part of his New Year's (twitter) message, Pope Francis posted the following:
May the Virgin Mary help us to open the doors of our hearts to Christ,
Redeemer of man and of history; may she teach us to be humble, because God
looks upon the lowly; may she enable us
to grow in understanding the value of prayer, of inner silence, of listening to
God’s Word; may she spur us to seek
God’s will deeply and sincerely, even when this upsets our plans; may she
encourage us while we wait for the Lord, sharing our time and energies with
those in need.
Mother of God, Virgin of expectation, grant that the God-who-comes will
find us ready to receive the abundance of his mercy.
May Mary Most Holy, “Woman of the Eucharist” and Virgin of
Advent, prepare us all to joyfully
welcome Christ’s coming and to celebrate worthily his sacramental presence in
the mystery of the Eucharist.
All I can say is thank God for the Restoration of the Gospel and the Latter-day Saint possession of correct Mariology.
And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) (Luke 2:1-2)
Christadelphian apologist, Christ Matthiesen, has a 7-part survey on the historicity of the Lukan Census which one can access here.
In defence of the historicity of this census, also consider the following comments:
Another chronological indication [of the date of Jesus’ birth] is the census which, according to St. Luke (ii, 1-2), made it necessary for Joseph and Mary to go to Bethlehem. This census which the Gospel records as taking place “when Cyrinus was governor of Syria” has provoked a great deal of argument. History knows this Cyrinus as Publius Suipicius Quirinius, a member of the Senate, formerly a Consul, who had served with the African armies and was in fact the Imperial Legate in Syria. He it was who, being deputed to keep an eye on Tiberius, then in more of less voluntary exile in Rhodes, got on so well with the future emperor that they became firm friends. It is this same Quirinius or Cyrinus who caused a scandal by his action against his divorced wife, Emilia Lepida, according to Tacitus. But unfortunately no pagan author mentions the decree “by which the whole world was to be taxed.” This is not surprising, for Dio Cassius, the only historian who wrote a detailed life of Augustus, is known to us for this period only by a few fragments. Tacitus did not begin his Annals until later and neither Suetonius nor Josephus has come down to us complete. The famous inscription of Augustus at Ancyra (Ankara) mentions three censuses made by the Emperor: one in 726 (28 B.C.), another in 746 (8 B.C.) and the last in 767 (14 A.D.). It is not known whether these returns were of all the inhabitants of the Roman Empire or only of Roman citizens or whether Quirinius was Governor at the time of the second census (8 B.C.). Only two things about his official career are definitely established: that he was twice Legate in Syria (an inscription in the Lateran Museum proves this) and that one of his terms o office was about 6 A.D. We do not know whether this was his first or second term because there is a break in the roll of his Imperial Legates in Syria as it has come down to us between the years 4 B.C. and 1 A.D. but 4 B.C. is not 8 B.C., the date given on the Ancyra tablet, so we must assume some other census which is not recorded, some local enumeration by Quirinius in his own provinces. This sort of thing was common enough in Roman administration which was addicted to detailed records and piled up masses of documents. The Evangelist would naturally describe this census as “the first” to distinguish it from that taken later, ten years after the death of Herod, which is mentioned in both the Acts of the Apostles and in Josephus. (Daniel-Rops, Jesus and His Times, Volume 1 [New York: Image Boos, 1958], 120-21)
But it is urged that a Roman census, even if held elsewhere, could not have been made in Palestine during the time of Herod the Great, because Palestine was not yet a Roman province. In a.d. 6, 7, when Quirinius certainly did undertake a Roman census in Judæa, such a proceeding was quite in order. Josephus shows that in taxation Herod acted independently (Ant. xv.10. 4, xvi. 2. 5, xvii.2. I, II. 2; comp. 17:8, 17:4). That Herod paid tribute to Rome is not certain; but, if so, he would pay it out of taxes raised by himself. The Romans would not assess his subjects for the tribute which he had to pay. Josephus, whose treatment of the last years of Herod is very full, does not mention any Roman census at that time. On the contrary, he implies that, even after the death of Herod, so long as Palestine was ruled by its own princes, there was no Roman taxation; and he states that the census undertaken by Quirinius a.d. 7 excited intense opposition, presumably as being an innovation (Ant. 18:1. 1, 2:1).
In meeting this objection, let us admit with Schürer and Zumpt that the case of the Clitæ(?) is not parallel. Tacitus (Ann. vi. 41. 1) does not say that the Romans held a census in the dominions of Archelaus, but that Archelaus wished to have a census after the Roman fashion. Nevertheless, the objection that Augustus would not interfere with Herod’s subjects in the matter of taxation is untenable. When Palestine was divided among Herod’s three sons, Augustus ordered that the taxes of the Samaritans should be reduced by one-fourth, because they had not taken part in the revolt against Varus (Ant. xvii. 11, 4; B. J. ii. 6. 3); and this was before Palestine became a Roman province. If he could do that, he could require information as to taxation throughout Palestine; and the obsequious Herod would not attempt to resist.. The Value of such information would be great. It would show whether the tribute paid (if tribute was paid) was adequate; and it would enable Augustus to decide how to deal with Palestine in the future. If he knew that Herod’s health was failing, he would be anxious to get the information before Herod’s death; and thus the census would take place just at the time indicated by Lk., viz. in the last months of the reign of Herod. For “Clitæ” we should read Kietai; Ramsay, Expositor, April, 1897. (Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to S. Luke [5th ed; London: T&T Clark, 1896], 48-49)
Suzan Haneef, a former Christian who converted to Islam, wrote the following:
The Holy Qur’an is the only divinely-revealed scripture in the history of mankind which has been preserved to the present time in its exact original form. For although parts of earlier revelations, such segments of the Torah (Taurat) given to Moses, the Psalms (Zaboor) revealed to David, and the Evangel (Injeel) revealed to Jesus still remain, they are so heavily intermixed with human additions and alternations that it is very difficult to determine what part of them constitutes the original Message. (Suzanne Haneef, What Everyone Should Know About Islam and Muslims [Lahore, Pakistan: Kazi Publications, 1979], 18)
This is a very common modern Islamic claim. The problem is that, if true, this falsifies, not supports, the Qur'an, as the Qur'an affirms the preservation and authority of the Bible at the time of its reception (610-632). Note the following examples from the Qur'an (I am using the M.A.S. Abdel Haleem translation):
Except for what Israel made unlawful for himself, all food was lawful to the Children of Israel before the Torah was revealed. Say, ‘Bring the Torah and read out [the relevant passage] if you are telling the truth. Those who persist in making up lies and attributing them to God after this are the wrong doers.’ (3:93-94)
We sent Jesus, son of Mary, in their footsteps, to confirm the Torah that had been sent before him: We have him the Gospel with guidance, light, and confirmation of the Torah already revealed—a guide and lesson for those who take heed of God . . . We sent to you [Muhammad] the Scripture with the truth, confirming the Scriptures that came before it, and with final authority over them . . . (5:46, 48)
Once again, We gave Moses the Scripture, perfecting [Our favour] for those who do good, explaining everything clearly, as guidance and mercy, so that they might believe in the meeting with their Lord. This, too, is a blessed Scripture which We have sent down—follow it and be conscious of your Lord, so that you may receive mercy—lest you say, ‘Scriptures were only sent down to two communities before us: we were not aware of what they studied,’ or ‘If only the Scripture had been sent down to us, we would have been better guided than them.’ (6:154-57)
Now could this Qur’an have been devised by anyone other than God. It is a confirmation of what was revealed before it and an explanation of Scripture. Let there be no doubt about it, it is from the Lord of the Worlds. (10:37)
Truly, this Qur’an has been sent down by the Lord of the World: the Trustworthy Spirit brought it down to your heart [Prophet], so that you could bring warning in a clear Arabic tongue. This was foretold in the scriptures of earlier religions. Is it not proof enough for them that the learned men of the Children of Israel have recognized it? (26:192-97)
Even now that Our truth has come to them, they say, ‘Why has he not been given signs like those given to Moses?’ Did they not also deny the truth that was given to Moses before? They say, ‘Two kinds of sorcery, helping each other,’ and, ‘We refuse to accept either of them.’ Say [Muhammad], ‘Then produce a book from God that gives better guidance than these two and I will follow it, if you are telling the truth.’ (28:48-49)
We gave Moses the Scripture—so [Muhammad] do not doubt that you are receiving it—and We made it a guide for the Children of Israel. (32:23)
The Scripture We have revealed to you [Prophet] is the Truth and confirms the scriptures that preceded it. God is well informed about His servants, He sees everything. (35:31)
Yet the scripture of Moses was revealed before it as a guide and a mercy, and this is a scripture confirming it in the Arabic language to warn those who do evil and bring good news for those who do good. (46:12)
[Prophet], consider that man who turned away: he only gave a little and then he stopped. Does he have knowledge of the Unseen so he can see [it]? Has he not been told what was written in the Scriptures of Moses and of Abraham, who fulfilled his duty: that no soul shall bear the burden of another. (53:33-38)
For a book-length discussion, see Gordon D. Nickel, The Gentle Answer to the Muslim Accusation of Biblical Falsification (Calgary: Bruton Gate, 2015) which documents the positive view of early Islamic exegetes and the Qur'an itself on the authority and preservation of the Bible.
Evangelical Protestant apologist David Wood debated Shabir Ally, a leading Islamic apologist, on this particular issue:
Elsewhere, Haneef attempts to argue that the Qur'an is scientifically accurate in ways only God could be its author:
[W]as there anyone during [Muhammad’s] time who understood the detailed stages and processes by which a drop of sperm become a human infant? (p. 29, square brackets added for clarification)
The problem is that the Qur’an discussion of human reproduction is one of the biggest errors. Note what the Qur’an affirms:
Man should reflect on what he was created from. He is created from spurting fluid, then he emerges from between the backbone and breastbone. (86:5-6)
As William Campbell notes:
Since the verse is speaking of the moment of adult reproduction it can't be talking about the time of embryonic development. Moreover, since "sulb" is being used in conjunction with "gushing fluid", which can only be physical; and "tara'ib" which is another physical word for chest or thorax or ribs, it can't be euphemistic. Therefore, we are left with the very real problem that the semen is coming from the back or kidney area and not the testicles. (William Campbell, The Qur'an and the Bible in the light of history and science, taken from the section "Anatomy, Embryology and Genetics"—see this portion for a fuller discussion of Surah 86:5-6)
If there is anything one should take out of this post is that it is essential that one check the claims of any author (yes, even me!) and the importance of ensuring one checks the primary sources (in this instance, the text of the Qur'an itself).
While reading Keith Ward’s book, The Word of God? I came across the following which is “spot on”:
The question, ‘Are the historical narratives of the Bible true or false as they stand?’ is natural but misleading. They are dramatic presentations of religious attitudes, projected onto the past, elaborating core discernments of God that cannot now be recovered in literal detail. These dramatic presentations are meant to be rehearsed in thought by their hearers. Repeating these paradigmatic episodes of their tradition, hearers are to renew in themselves a sense of the demand, calling, judgment, promise and power of their God. But they are to do so in the knowledge that the ancient narratives must take a new form in their lives, in conditions of life which are very different, and in the light of later qualifications and re-interpretations that are found in later biblical texts. These episodes are recited rituals, whose repetition is intended to renew devotion to the God whose presence they symbolize.
The ritual narratives are found in history, and in discernments of a historically active God who has a moral goal for the world and a moral vocation for Israel. The original history is never exactly recoverable and what is primary is the symbolic efficacy of the narratives in a present religious community. Is there a transcendent reality, a God with this character, who can be known and worshipped in this tradition? Can these ritual narratives, now so ancient in origin, still carry the power to evoke a sense of God, despite all their limitations of perspective and understanding?
Prophecy provides the best example of the projection of historical narratives onto a cosmic scale, when it speaks of contemporaneous political dangers for Israel, for example, in terms of judgment on the world (the ‘Day of the Lord’), of the darkening of the powers of the heavens, and of a Davidic king who will return to lead a faithful remnant into renewed world and to the true worship of God. These prophetic symbols were, Christians think, fulfilled in Jesus, and so they are tremendously important as pointers to future disclosures of God. But they were fulfilled in quite new and unexpected ways—for Jesus did not rule as a king in a Jerusalem palace, but he was crucified on a hill outside the city walls. So, for Christians, the Hebrew Bible anticipates and points to fuller discernments of God, but often in very obscure and imperfect ways. (Keith Ward, The Word of God? The Bible After Modern Scholarship [London: SPCK, 2010], 40-41)
