[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
b-greek-digest V1 #911
b-greek-digest Sunday, 15 October 1995 Volume 01 : Number 911
In this issue:
Hebrews 6:4, 'PhWTIZW' (read first)
Hebrews 6:4, 'PhWTIZW' (long! 3 pg.)
Re: Matthew had a copy of Luke?
Re: Matthew had a copy of Luke?
Please be concise
tremendous explanatory power
Re: here's what's wrong with Q
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rod Decker <rdecker@accunet.com>
Date:
Subject: Hebrews 6:4, 'PhWTIZW' (read first)
Hebrews 6:4, 'PhWTIZW'
Note re. long (3 pg.) post following:
This past August there was a fairly active thread regarding Hebrews 6. At
the time I argued that the reference to "falling away" should not be taken
in a soteric sense. I suggested that it was better understood in light of
the context of the original recipients: Jewish Christians facing the
Neronian persecutions in the mid-60s, the warning being directed toward
those who attempted to hide their faith and deny Christ to save their life.
I do not intend to renew that particular thread, but I do want to fulfill a
promise I made at the time.
In arguing that the participles in 6:4-6 must refer to those who were
genuine believers (i.e., "regenerate"), I proposed that PhWTIZW should be
taken as a soteriological reference to regeneration. In defense I appealed
to a paper presented by Steve Spencer at an ETS conference several years
ago. I was asked for details of and from the paper, but at the time did not
have time to retrieve the paper (it was the week before my doctoral comps
at the time). I'm late getting back to do so, but I'm finally far enough
into the semester to start catching up. So the following post is a brief
summary of that paper. Direct quotes are "marked"; other comments are my
summary of his argument.
Rod
__________________________________________________________________
|=[]========================== About... ===========================|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Rodney J. Decker Calvary Theological Seminary |
| Asst. Prof./NT 15800 Calvary Rd. |
| rdecker@accunet.com Kansas City, Missouri 64147 |
|__________________________________________________________________|
------------------------------
From: Rod Decker <rdecker@accunet.com>
Date:
Subject: Hebrews 6:4, 'PhWTIZW' (long! 3 pg.)
Spencer, Stephen R., "The New Testament Doctrine of Enlightenment: A
Proposal for Reinterpretation," Mid-Western Section, Evangelical
Theological Society, 4/12/86 (held at Grand Rapids Baptist Seminary where
Steve taught at the time; he is presently teaching at Dallas Theol. Sem.).
The purpose of the paper is to examine the meaning of the light imagery in
the NT and propose an interpretation of enlightenment. Two positions are
summarized and then a third is defended.
1. Universal epistemic enlightenment
This position appeals to John 1:9 and defines enlightenment as a
work of Christ/the Logos that enables rationality on an epistemic level.
This is related to man's nature as God's image bearer.
* Patristic advocates: Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen
* Recent advocates: Ronald Nash, _The Word of God and the Mind of
Man_ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982), 9, 12, 59-69; Bruce Demarest,
_General Revelation_ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982), 228-29; and Carl F.
H. Henry, _God, Revelation, and Authority_ (Waco, TX: Word, 1976-), 1:228,
3:184, 205, 209, 271, 344, 401.
2. Christian hermeneutical enlightenment
This is a more recent view and may be seen, e.g., in the
_Evangelical Dictionary of Theology_ (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984), s.v.
"illumination" by C. C. Ryrie. This views enlightenment/illumination as a
work of the Holy Spirit that enables believers to understand the truth of
Scripture.
3. Redemptive-Revelational enlightenment
In defending this view, the writer first summarizes three basic
uses of the 'PhWS' word group: a. literal, the presence of light bearers or
their effects (ca. 12x, e.g., Mk. 14:54); b. disclosure of something hidden
(2 or 3x, e.g., Mt. 10:27); c. figurative use: moral or religious (over
40x). This third "applies supremely to God (1 John 1:5) and to Christ (John
8:12) but it also applies derivatively to those who are 'sons of light'
because of God's saving work (1 Thes 5:5; Matt 5:14; Eph 5:8)." A
"revelational dimension" is also involved: what is revealed is "the
salvation of God or perhaps more particularly the Incarnate God as Savior.
This is true salvation-historically, denoting the coming of the Messiah
into the world (Matt 4:16; Luke 2:32; John 3:19; 12:46), but it is also
true in the life-history of each individual believer (2 Cor 4:6; Eph 5:8;
Col 1:12, 13; 1 Peter 2:9)." This individual enlightenment is both
epistemic (the individual now knows God) and also moral (their condition is
changed). "There are thus legal, epistemic, and personal aspects to the
shining of the light into our hearts (2 Cor 4:6), all of which constitute
the redemptive work of God."
Against this background the 11 uses of PhWTIZW are considered. Four
are category a (Lk. 11:36; Rev. 18:1; 21:23; 22:5) and three fit b (1 Cor.
4:5; Eph. 3:9; 2 Tim. 1:10). This leaves John 1:9; Eph. 1:18; Heb. 6:4;
10:32 (and the uses of PhWTISMOS in 2 Cor. 4:4, 6).
1. The verb must be understood as part of the "light cluster of terms.
There seems no good reason _prima facie_ to bracket _photizo_ from" [other
uses].
2. "None of the use of the nouns 'light' and 'darkness' seemed to fit
either of the two views of enlightenment summarized at the beginning of the
paper."
John 1:9
After considering the textual issues, Spencer concludes that the
context "is the conclusive evidence for the meaning of 'enlighten' in verse
9." The Johannine prologue is to be interpreted as the introduction of a
Messianic-redemptive theme that emphasizes the coming of Jesus (9, 11, 14,
15), describing various aspects of that coming with light terminology (4,
5, 7, 8, 9), etc. "None of this seems to refer to the establishment of
human beings' fundamental rationality." Instead, "'Enlighten' in this
passage describes the transforming effect of Christ upon His people,
bringing life and grace and truth to them."
Eph. 1:18
"What Paul seems to have in mind is a growth in understanding on
the part of the Ephesians as a result of God's graciousness to them. This
growth in knowledge...is possible because the precondition of their
enlightenment has been met already. That is, the darkness of their
minds...and of their foolish hearts...already having been dispelled, they
may now continually progress in the understanding of God.... Paul speaks
here of continuing effects of the salvific enlightenment, not of 'a
continuous process' of illumination."
Heb. 6:4; 10:32
"It is the clearly redemptive overtones of 'enlighten' which has
caused the many disputes over Heb 6:1-8. These occurrences of the term
clearly fit the general New Testament pattern of usage." Spencer
understands the reference of PhWTIZW in both these verses as essentially
synonymous with "being converted/becoming a Christian."
2 Cor. 4:4, 6 (the only NT use of the noun form, 'enlightenment')
The context is "clearly redemptive," describing the "ministry of
the gospel by which God brings men and women 'the light of the knowledge of
the glory of God..." This contrasts with the darkness: Satan's reverse
work. "Blindness and darkness are never used of believers in their
relationship to the Scriptures. Rather [they describe] the awful condition
of those outside of Christ."
Conclusion
"On the grounds both of the general usage of 'light' and 'darkness'
terms and of individual consideration of relevant passages, it seems that
we should use 'enlighten' to designate the profound transformation of an
individual in salvation.... Consequently, we must reject the two
conceptions of enlightenment noted at the beginning of the paper. Neither
the fundamental human rationality nor the Spirit's hermeneutical assistance
to the believer should be termed, 'enlightenment.' I do not deny at all the
reality of a fundamental human rationality nor the Spirit's hermeneutical
assistance for Christians. Both are clearly Biblical conceptions. Neither
of them should be described as 'enlightenment,' however. That term is not
available to describe those realities. It is already claimed by Scripture
and given a specific meaning.... Enlightenment...is appropriate only for
...the redemptive-revelational transformation of an individual by the
Spirit and the Word."
[Summary by Rod Decker]
__________________________________________________________________
|=[]========================== About... ===========================|
|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
| Rodney J. Decker Calvary Theological Seminary |
| Asst. Prof./NT 15800 Calvary Rd. |
| rdecker@accunet.com Kansas City, Missouri 64147 |
|__________________________________________________________________|
------------------------------
From: BBezdek@aol.com
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 21:12:37 -0400
Subject: Re: Matthew had a copy of Luke?
I suppose this is a very "unscholarly" view, but none-the-less:
Is it possible that at least some of the apparant descrepancies between the
synoptics could be due to different occasions of very similar events? I
think we know from common experience, that we often have to repeat ourselves,
and it seldom comes out the same twice, at least it doesn't for me.
Aren't three authors going to present three different views even of the same
events?
Byron
------------------------------
From: BBezdek@aol.com
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 21:12:38 -0400
Subject: Re: Matthew had a copy of Luke?
I suppose this is a very "unscholarly" view, but none-the-less:
Is it possible that at least some of the apparant descrepancies between the
synoptics could be due to different occasions of very similar events? I
think we know from common experience, that we often have to repeat ourselves,
and it seldom comes out the same twice, at least it doesn't for me.
Aren't three authors going to present three different views even of the same
events?
Byron
------------------------------
From: Paul Dixon - Ladd Hill Bible Church <pauld@iclnet93.iclnet.org>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 18:28:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Please be concise
I get 75-100 email messages daily, so am in the habit of glancing
and deleting quickly. The mail that attracts my attention the most is
concise (usually no more than one page). An excellent way to attract
attention quickly is to summarize in the Subject area.
Occasionally I read long letters and am richly rewarded, but all
to often I have read through page after page and been discouraged by so
doing.
I emplore you who want to be read to carefully think through and
be concise.
Paul Dixon
------------------------------
From: perry.stepp@chrysalis.org
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 95 20:35:45 -0600
Subject: tremendous explanatory power
Regarding my balking at the phrase "tremendous explanatory power"--
No, I'm not denying that we should scientifically test our hypotheses against
the available data to see which hypothesis best accounts for the data in front
of us. If that's what PMoser meant by the phrase, I have no problem with it.
I simply did not understand "tremendous explanatory power" to mean that.
Grace and peace,
Perry L. Stepp, Baylor University
------------------------------
From: Stephen Carlson <scc@reston.icl.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 95 23:28:42 EDT
Subject: Re: here's what's wrong with Q
About the explanatory power of the 2SH:
Actually I would dispute the explanatory power of the 2SH, in this
sense. What does Q tell us beyond the mathematical operation of
(Mt*Lk)-Mk? Not very much. It's not a pure sayings gospel, like
Thomas, because it includes at least one miracle story and narrative
about John the Baptist. When ad-hoc material is thrown into a
source that violates its genre, one has to wonder whether the source
critic is "curve fitting" as the physicists call it. Both the
astronomical theories of Ptolomy and Copernicus/Kepler explained the
data from a mathematical perspective, but Ptolomy's theory had to
resort to curve-fitting, or "epicycles," to get the numbers to work
out. Does the inclusion of the non-sayings material in the Sayings
Gospel Q constitute the epicycles of the Two Source Hypothesis?
Curve-fitting is usually a sign that one's theory is running out of gas.
Stephen Carlson
- --
Stephen Carlson : Poetry speaks of aspirations, : ICL, Inc.
scc@reston.icl.com : and songs chant the words. : 11490 Commerce Park Dr.
(703) 648-3330 : Shujing 2:35 : Reston, VA 22091 USA
------------------------------
End of b-greek-digest V1 #911
*****************************
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
To unsubscribe from this list write
majordomo@virginia.edu
with "unsubscribe b-greek-digest" as your message content. For other
automated services write to the above address with the message content
"help".
For further information, you can write the owner of the list at
owner-b-greek@virginia.edu
You can send mail to the entire list via the address:
b-greek@virginia.edu