Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews: a Pauline/Lukan Perspective

I just submitted the following paper proposal titled "Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews: a Pauline/Lukan Perspective" to the Evangelical Theological Society. I will keep our readers posted if I will be able to present this paper at this years annual ETS meeting in New Orleans, LA. Let me know what you think about my thesis. I would greatly appreciate any comments/criticisms to help make the paper as good as possible.

In this paper I will argue that the Epistle to the Hebrews was originally a sermon (or sermons) that was preached by the Apostle Paul and that Luke subsequently transcribed or collated. Since, as Acts informs us, Paul traveled with Luke for many years, there was ample time and opportunity for Luke to hear and transcribe or collate Paul’s preaching. This hypothesis would best explain such early manuscript evidence as P46, which includes Hebrews within the Pauline corpus and such early church fathers as Clement, who holds to Pauline authorship of Hebrews. In addition, this hypothesis would explain the Epistle’s difference in style and vocabulary from the rest of the Pauline corpus. Since Luke’s Greek style is sophisticated, he is a prime candidate for the person who penned Hebrews, whose Greek style is also sophisticated. Further, the fact that Hebrews was originally a sermon would explain the notable absence of any salutation, which is customary for Paul’s other letters. The method for proving this position will be to examine the sermonic material recorded by Luke in Acts and comparing it to Hebrews. Further, the unique Greek style and vocabulary that is found in Hebrews will be compared with Luke’s other material, Luke/Acts.

RSS Readers and You

Re-Post
A very helpful blog has been posted on the Desiring God site. This post, by Abraham Piper, explains, in a very easy to understand way, what an "RSS" reader is and why you should use it. Go read the post and then add us to your list of blogs. No really, go now, get started!

Once you are ready you can use the address below to add us or click the icon in the address bar:

http://bringthebooks.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default

The Mac Plunge

As some of you will know (from my facebook page) I bought a new MacBook this past week. Yes, I did it...I took the Mac plunge. So far I love it. I have not figure out all the ins-and-outs of the Mac operating system yet. But what I have figured out, I like a lot. For the uber-geeks out there who want to know exactly what I bought here you go:

-2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor

-2GB of memery

-250GB Serial ATA; 5400rpm Hard Drive

-backlight keyboard

-and a whole lot more. 

The Brick Testament

A Lego Moses? Who would have guessed? The folks from the Brick Testament guessed. The Brick Testament is the whole Bible depicted scene by scene in Legos. A few warnings are in order before you check out the site. First, it does depict scenes of a sexual nature in Legos, so be warned. Also, it does depict Jesus in Lego form (sorry RP guys). I am not sure what to make of the site, but I was pretty sure that our readers would find it interesting.

Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision

I received in the mail today from the U.K. a copy of N.T. Wright's new book Justification: God's Plan and Paul's Vision. This new book by Wright is mainly a response to John Piper's book The Future of Justification: A Response to N. T. Wright. As of yet I have not read the book, but there are two thing that struck me from the start. First, the name on the book is not N.T. Wright but Tom Wright. I have no idea why this is, but it seemed strange to me that it was not published under the name N.T. The second thing that struck me was a "blurb" on the back by Scot McKight which reads:

Tom Wright has out-Reformed America's newest religious zealots--the neo-Reformed--by taking them back to Scripture and to its meaning in its historical context. Wright reveals that the neo-Reformed are more committed to tradition than to the sacred text. This irony is palpable on every page of this judicious, hard-hitting, respectful study.

This is ironic to me. Apparently, McKight has not read any of Wright's critics. For example, Dr. Guy Waters' book is full of exegesis. Piper's book, which Wright is responding to, is mostly explanations of the biblical text. McKight has either not read these works or he is deliberately misrepresenting them because these books clearly do not show that they are "more committed to tradition than to the sacred text." Anyway, I look forward to read what Wright has to say on this important doctrine of justification. 

World Traveler and Textual Critic

I have been back from the Alpha and Omega Cruise for about a month now. Boy was it a great time. This cruise was a late honeymoon for my wife and I, since we could not afford one when we got married. We saw and did some great things. The highlight of the trip, as far as traveling goes, were the underwater scooters (see picture). I would say everyone needs to do this at least once in their life. We met a lot of great new people and made some new friends.
It was a lot of fun to be on a cruise with other like minded Christians. It made for some great conversations and interaction. There were two highlights of the trip, as far as the theology aspect goes. The first was smoking a Cuban cigar and talking theology with Gary Demar on the deck of the ship. He gave me some great advice as I move forward with my life and get closer to finishing seminary.

The second theological highlight was the debate between Dr. Bart Ehrman and Dr. James White on the topic of "Does the Bible Misquote Jesus." This is the second debate I have seen live with James White and there is something unique about actually being at the debate live. With this particular debate, it was interesting to watch Ehrman's reactions to White's presentations. There was one point in the debate, during Whites first rebuttal, that I was sure Ehrman was going to stand up and interrupt Dr. White. Ehrman was getting so animated.

I have since then listened to the debate a few times on my iPod. I think Dr. White did a great job of showing that an evangelical Christian can be scholarly and stand toe-to-toe with modern biblical scholarship. As someone who is an aspiring New Testament scholar, this was very encouraging. Thanks Dr. White.

Since the debate there has been a few developments in regard to New Testament Textual Criticism (NTTC) and Dr. White. The first was an interaction with fellow believer Joel McDurmon, who was at the debate. You can find some of Dr. White's comments about this on his blog. The second development was with a NT textual critic who blogs on Evangelical Textual Criticism, Dr. Tommy Wasserman. This discussion was started on a disagreement about the state of modern NTTC and devolved into a "he-said-she-said" conversation when Dr. Wasserman misunderstood Dr. White's article.

All and all, the trip was great. I learned a lot. Had a great time with my wife traveling around the world and meeting some new friends. 

Atheism and Gregory House

On the latest episode of House, Dr. House (an avowed atheist) takes on a patient who is a priest who has forsaken his faith and yet still goes through the motions of being a priest. The priest has abandoned his faith after being falsely (though the staff doubts that the accusations were false and thus think him to be a pedophile) accused by a young boy of molesting him. The priest has been transferred many times between parishes and ultimately finds himself working at a homeless shelter where he becomes very sick. I find the following conversation to be more than a little interesting for network television...

PATIENT: Everything I've told you is true.

HOUSE: You lost your faith because a teenager got 'confused'.

PATIENT: ...and my church abandoned me, and my God forsook me, and I couldn't come up with a reason why God would do that.

KUTNER: He gave the church and the kid free will. Their exercise of that free will hurt you, it means you're just a victim of God's gift to mankind.

PATIENT: Oh yeah. God wants life to have meaning, life's meaningless without free will, with free will there's always suffering, so God wants suffering; I got tired of that argument before I even finished saying it. And even if I bought that, what the hell is God doing? Just the big stuff? The acts of God, the hurricanes, the earthquakes, the random killings of millions of innocent people? We'd better damn pray.

HOUSE: ... ... God I wish you weren't a pedophile!

Throughout the episode, House is (or seems to be) glad to see that the priest is an atheist, but something changes. By the end of the episode, the boy who (we discover "falsely") accused the priest of molesting him as a young boy returns while he is in the hospital to seek forgiveness and say he is sorry for what he did to the priest's life by lying about him. In addition to this, he receives healing after House figures out what is causing his sickness. However, in order to discover the priest's ailment he has to eliminate the priest's vision of Jesus as a hallucination. The end result is that the sickness only makes sense if the vision of Jesus that priest saw was not a hallucination at all. This, along with the forgiveness the priest receives shakes him in his atheism. The following conversation ensues...

PATIENT: What about my hallucination?

HOUSE: Scotch explains that.

PATIENT: That was just a coincidence...

HOUSE: Coincidences do happen.

PATIENT: That coincidence is what brought me to you in the first place.

HOUSE: You promised you wouldn't go there.

PATIENT: Einstein said 'coincidences are God's way of remaining anonymous.'

HOUSE: A woman in Florida said, 'Look, Jesus is on my cheese sandwich.'

PATIENT: You didn't even want to take my case; you didn't even think I was sick.

HOUSE: The fact that I was wrong is no proof of God.

PATIENT: I'm just trying to understand how my life could completely turn around in a single day.

HOUSE: Don't worry; your life will go back to sucking soon enough. ... Everything that happened to you can be rationally explained.

PATIENT: I know. It's just... Man, that's a lot of coincidences.

Covenant Theology Part 1

Of Covenants in General listen here

Major Theme of Scripture: The Kingdom of God offered to man by way of covenant.

Definition:
Covenant is from the Hebrew [ber-eeth] meaning to cut, and by extension means a promise or pledge to do something. "It is an agreement upon the promises concerning the relationship between two or more parties. In Biblical terms the covenant is the prime agency of God's self-revelation in history. God reveals Himself to be the covenant God. The essence of the covenant between God and man is "I will be your God, and you will be My people."

Covenant makeup:
Historical prologue
New order
Stipulations
Sanctions
Administrations

Treaty Between Equals - PARITY COVENANT (bi-lateral)

A. Partners in the covenant are called brothers.
B. Stipulations:
1. Acknowledgment of mutual boundaries.
2. Return of each others run away slaves.
C. Biblical Examples:
1. Midianite Treaty - Exodus 18
2. Between King David and King Hiram - 1 Kings 5:1ff
3. Genesis 21:27; 26:31; 31: 44-54; 1 Kings 15:19; 20:32-34.

Treaty Between a Great King and a Minor King - SUZERAIN or VASSAL COVENANT

1. Preamble - This included the titles and attributes of the Great King and serves to introduce the document.
2. Historical Prologue - Summary of the relationship between the two kings and their ancestors. Actual historical events are cited, especially those that were benevolent on the part of the Great King.
3. Stipulations:

A. Exclusive relationship between the two kings
B. Hostility prohibited against other vassals of the Great King
C. Help in time of war - both ways
D. Slander against the Great King reported
E. Return runaway slaves
F. Vassal to appear yearly to renew the covenant and pay his taxes
G. The covenant is to be written down and placed in the temple of the vassal
H. Covenant to be read periodically

4. Blessings and Curses

A. List of gods called to witness the document
B. Sometimes natural phenomena are also called as witnesses to the document
C. Curses go into effect if the covenant is broken and the Blessings if it is kept
D. One of the blessings was usually a guarantee of the perpetual reign of the descendants of the vassal king
B. Biblical Examples:

1. Gibeonite Treaty - Joshua 9-10
2. Covenant at Mt. Sinai - Exodus 20, Deuteronomy
3. Davidic Covenant - 2 Samuel 7
4. Genesis 17:1ff; Ezekiel 17:13-18; Hosea 12:1.
2 Kings 24:1, 1 Kings 17:3

Treaty Between a King and a loyal servant - ROYAL GRANT COVENANT

A. Royal Land Grants were given to a servant or subordinate for faithful or exceptional service to the king
1. This type of covenant was usually perpetual with no specific conditions. It was, however, understood that the behavior of the heirs would continue to follow the original recipient's loyal example.
2. Most covenants of this type contained the same kind of blessings and curses found in the Vassal Covenant with gods being called on as witnesses.
B. Biblical Examples:
1. Noahic Covenant - Genesis 9:8-17
2. Abrahamic Covenant - Genesis 15: 9-12
3. New Covenant - Jeremiah 31:31-44
4. Numbers 25:10-31; 1 Samuel 8:14; 22:7; 27:6; 2 Samuel 7:5-16; Esther 8:1.

Of the Covenant of Works (fodeus operum) listen here

Of the Contracting Parties in the Covenant of Works:
God as the Suzerain King makes covenant with Adam the vassals servant. This covenant not only is non-negotiable on the part of Man (as represented by Adam) but it is essential to being the Image bearer of God. God enthroned Himself over creation and entered into His eternal Sabbath. The image bearer is to designed to obtain the same blessedness by the same means, that is work. Gen 1-2

Of the Law or Condition of the Covenant of Works:
The covenant was conditional Hos 6:7 The conditioned contained Adam keeping the law of the conscience Rom 2:15, not eating of the tree of Knowledge and taken dominion Gen 1:26-28

Of the Promises of the Covenant of Works:
The promise of eternal life was offered Man if he was to fulfill all the terms of the covenant. Eternal life is glorification. Glorification is abiding where God is enthroned over creation. This was represented by the tree life which served as a pledge of that future inheritance.

Of the Penal Sanction:
God threatens Adam with the curse of being under the wrath of God if he does not keep the terms of the Covenant Gen 2:15-17. This is represent with the tree of Knowledge.

Of the Sacraments of the Covenant of Works:
The Tree of Life is sacramental of eternal life. Access to this tree would have be granted to Adam upon confirmation of justification Rev 22:2,19. The Tree of Knowledge is sacramental of eternal damnation. Adam ate of this tree as and violates the Covenant of works.

Of the First Sabbath:
The first Sabbath is sacramental of the eternal Sabbath rest that man could one day enjoy if he had kept the Covenant of Works. It served as a reminder of that future inheritance.

Of the Violation of the Covenant of Works on the part of Man:
Adam by partaking of the Tree of Knowledge violated the Covenant Works; consequently placing himself and his posterity under the curse of God, resulting in amenity between man and God.

Of the Abrogation of the Covenant of Works on the part of God:
Although man, because of the transgression Adam, is now incapable of keeping the demands of the Covenant man is still obligated to keep the Covenant. The Covenant is a reflection of God’s immutable character therefore it is irrevocable.

Christianity and Copyrights

I have recently been reading a book called Against Intellectual Monopoly, and found an interesting article entitled "Christianity and IP [Intellectual Property Laws]." The author takes the position that the laws of the State are only legitimate and worthy of obeisance insofar as they comport with God's law. Since ideas cannot be owned, says the author (Paul Green), then federal copyright laws are arbitrary manifestations of the state alone (not God) and bear no moral weight for anyone. In other words, according to Green, not only do the Scriptures not speak about intellectual property rights, but they cannot reasonably be used to argue in favor of the monopoly on ideas which copyrights or patents represent.

Some Christians believe that the State, as a "minister of good" writes laws which any and all citizens are morally required to obey. According to the author, it is an incorrect reading of Scripture to believe that any and all laws created by the state are good and must be obeyed. He points out that Romans 13 was abused by Hitler to "neutralize" the Christian churches; certainly, most will agree, WWII Germany is a good example of a state that was not "good."

Romans says there is "no authority except God's" – that is, if it is not God's law it has no proper authority (but we should be prudent...for the Lord's sake and our own...) Only in so far as the state is punishing an actual wrongdoer should we support (including by taxation) any action from our conscience rather than just prudently comply due to the threat of official "wrath."

Another interesting insight near the end of Green's article:

Regarding prudence in the face of an immediate tax demand, Jesus enlightened his disciples when He said in Matthew 17:26 "the children of the king don’t have to pay taxes… but we don’t want to make these tax collectors angry… pay the tax for you and me."

His argument being that Jesus did not view the State's rule as binding upon the conscience or posessing an intrinsically moral quality; rather, Jesus obeyed the temple tax so as to "not give offense" (ESV). So what is it, guys? Does the State write good laws? Or its laws only good so far as they reflect God's will? Also, then, is Green correct regarding what he says are the implications of this for copyright laws?

Another interesting article dealing with Copyrights is by Gary North, which I also recommend.

Out to Sea

Josh is going to be away this week, because he is joining the guys from Alpha & Omega Ministries for their cruise. I don't know many details, but I do know that when he called me from the airport he was sitting next to Gary Demar, which - even though name dropping is not classy - is still pretty cool in my book. I'm sure he'll be blogging about the highlights when he returns next week.

Book Review: Tactics by Greg Koukl

For anyone who is familiar with Greg Koukl, they know that he is a very thoughtful man. This book is no exception. Tactics is basically a handbook on how to be an ambassador for Christ. It is broken up into two parts: The Game Plan and Finding the Flaws.

The first section deals primarily with an overview of his approach. The most helpful chapter is the one on the "Columbo Tactic." This tactic, named after the famous T.V. lawyer, is to ask questions. Asking questions in an evangelistic/apologetic situation will disarms the person you are talking to and help remove unneeded barriers and emotions. Further "[a]sking question enables you to escape the charge, 'You're twisting my words.'" Koukle provides different questions that will guide his reader in using the Columbo Tactic effectively.

The second half of the book deals with different ways to spot flaws in someone's arguments. One of my personal favorite tactics in the "Suicide" one. This tactic is uses to show that a particular view or argument is self-destruct, i.e. it kills itself. As a presuppositionalist, this is one argument and tool that I find extremely useful in discussions about the Christian faith. Koukl does a great job in illustrating just how to use this tool, which can be a powerful weapon when wielded properly.

This book is well written and easy to understand. I would have no problem handing this book to a new or young believe to equip them in sharing their faith. Koukl takes an evidentialist approach to apologetic, but that is not on the surface of every page and when it does come to the front, he does not linger on it for long.

The Myth of the Christian Nation

Openly gay and non-celibate Episcopal church leader Eugene Robinson bestows the Lord's blessing on Obama's inauguration:

Perspicuity of Scripture and its Implications

London Baptist Confession of Faith, Chapter 1 Paragraph 77.
All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them.( 2 Peter 3:16; Psalms 19:7; Psalms 119:130)

I begin with the LBCF Chapter 1 Paragraph 7 that clearly (no pun intended) teaches the perspicuity of scripture on the matters of salvation and redemption. This biblical truth sets Christianity above all other religious claims. For example, the Bahai faith teaches that revelation is a manifestation of divine ideas that don't actually give transcendent unchanging truth. Or Islam that teaches that Allah is unknowable, or the Gnostics who believes in secret knowledge, or Buddhist that believe you should empty yourself of thought in order to reach nirvana. All such views of revelation are self defeating, undermining the very claim of having divine revelation. But in Scripture we have the very thoughts of God communicated to man by way of revelation in the form of propositional truths (Deut 18:18, 1 Cor 2:16b, Col 1:26). This of course is what makes the gospel news (Rom 1:16). We know that it is news because it disclosures the truth of the only way of man's salvation, which others wise would not be knowable (Eph 2:12). This is a wonderful truth that we can know truth! And that those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them. This has many implications. It means that the gospel is to be known and understood; it is not meant to be some unsolvable conundrum or paradox. But rather it is the very Word of God spoken to man that is able to save our very souls! (Jam 1:21) With this being the case it means that churches have no excuse in getting the essential gospel message wrong. It can not be the failure of the all wise God who has sufficiently communicate his will to man through the faith once and for all delivered to the saints (Jud 3). But rather the failure of the saints, or supposed saints, who have in some cases for some reason, decided to distort gospel truth in order to promote some ulterior agenda.

But that being said, true saints love the gospel, some are willing even to die for it. However, there are still some challenging implications for churches that have the gospel and believe in the perspicuity scripture. First, it implies that we should be busy with evangelism, after all we have the good news (Mark 16:15). But secondly, and this is where I have observed some deficiencies, we should be training up other man in order that the gospel can impact the church of tomorrow. Paul instructed Timothy that he was to entrust the gospel to other faithful man, who in turn would be able to teach others (2 Tim 2:2). How could Paul say this to Timothy if he didn't have a degree in theology? The reason he could instruct Timothy this way is because of what he was entrusting to him; namely the perspicuous teachings of Scripture concerning salvation in Jesus Christ. Now of course there is much need for scholarship and higher academic training today, but we can't make such training the necessary prerequisite for church leadership or missionary work.

So my challenge would be this: Does your church right now have men ready to the lead after the current leadership is no longer there? Thank God for the perspicuity of scripture, which allows us teach timeless transcendent understandable truth to all people from every walk of life. Lets us make the most of what God has revealed to us in scripture for the generations to come. Enough said.

Regaining Perspective During Hard Times

I have been thinking a great deal about the economic situation we find ourselves in. As a young person with two children, I find myself tremendously angry with the older generation because I know that it is they and their entitlement mentality which will be enslaving my children and I for many many years paying off the massive debt that they have accumulated for themselves in a matter of a few short years (federal deficits result in inflation, which is a form of hidden taxation which hurts low-income people the most). I find myself reading books on the Great Depression (Murray Rothbard's book America's Great Depression is quite good), and thinking about how things will turn out in the long run. "Will massive inflation set in?" (There's really no doubt that it will; I just think about it a lot.) "Will I be able to put a roof over my childrens' heads?" "What kind of world will we live in three or four years from now?" "Will America still be standing, or will it eventually collapse, as all Empires have in the past?" "Do I need to learn survival tactics and other stuff that crazy mountain-men are experts at?" These are questions I find myself laboring over. And they are the wrong questions for me - as a person who loves God and loves His glory - to be laboring over.

What I'm trying to say is, I've lost perspective. I have focused intensely on the human side of things, on the fiscal side of things, but I have lost focus on the big-picture questions about what economic downturns mean for the promotion of God's glory. Historically speaking, economic downturns usually mean religious revival (a subject which probably deserves further study and consideration in times like these, to be sure). This is of the utmost importance to those of us who love the glory of God and want His name to be delighted in above all else.

I really want to thank John Piper for the video below because of the encouragement and focus it helped me to regain. I hope it will benefit the rest of you as well.

Slumdog Millionaire: Predestination in the 21st Century

Jamal Malik is one question away from winning 20 million rupees. How did he do it?

A: He cheated
B: He's lucky
C: He's a genius
D: It is written

And thus begins one of the most beautifully done films in recent years. A stark contrast to the dark and emotionally complex world of Revolutionary Road, Slumdog Millionaire is as uplifting and generous as the blurbs hype it up to be. As a Christian, however, my primary interest in the film stems from the fact that predestination is central to the entire story.

The film follows two narratives; one running in the present surrounding the events of Jamal's success on the Indian version of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire, and the other narrative following events in his life which gave him the answers to every question he is asked on the game show. Though it could initially be seen as pure luck or massive improbability realized, Jamal seems to believe that his success on the show has been predestined. However, he does not believe that it has been predestined simply because he is destined for success and money; rather, he believes that he is meant to be with Latika, his love interest whom he has been separated from for years. Jamal claims that he went on the game show in hopes that Latika would be watching. Jamal seems to have an almost fairytale trust and belief that his correct answers have been "written." Though the source of this predestination is never named, I presume that given Jamal's Muslim faith and the phrase "it is written" (a decidedly Muslim phrase), Allah is the one Jamal sees as ordering the events of his life.

More metaphysical than spiritual, however, director Danny Boyle bring this predestination to the forefront; as Jamal gets each question correct you begin to sense that something larger than life is going on here and that there are other forces at work in the universe bringing Jamal closer and closer to the final question. In the end, Jamal trusts so greatly in the forces at work that he literally guesses the million dollar question. I won't spoil whether he gets the answer right or not, but the audience knows that if Jamal gets the question right, then he is destined to be with Latika. It's as simple as that.

The film is upfront about what it has to show from the very beginning. From the earliest parts of the movie, you know that Jamal Malik gets all the questions up to the last one right. You know that he survives all of the events in the flashbacks that bring him to this point in his life; you just want to see how it all happens. The interesting thing is, that's sort of what predestination is like. Detractors of predestination argue that our actions have no meaning if they are already decided beforehand; Jamal, however, seems to believe otherwise. Though God knows everything that will happen (He has determined it already, after all), we still must do what He has planned, and sometimes it's as interesting to see things unfold as it is to know the ending ahead of time.

Since the film is not direct about the nature of the destiny Jamal experiences or the source of it, it would be difficult to get into the doctrinal minutiae of predestination or the fact that this is not a Christian form of predestination being presented. To my mind, the predominantly interesting fact is that any movie could be shot in this day and age which presents predestination as a positive thing and not as a grim and fearful "doom."



A beautiful, emotionally rich fairytale, it is really hard to think of anything negative to say about the film. Many Americans won't be interested in the film because about a third of it is subtitled in Hindi, but my hope is that the positive word of mouth and the potential flood of awards will make this movie the sleeper hit of the year. First 28 Days Later, then Sunshine, and now with Slumdog Millionaire, Danny Boyle is on a roll in my book; I can't wait to see what else he has up his sleeve.