Short Reflection from Hebrews 1-13

[Originally posted in a WhatsApp group (OVU) as a daily reading update (reflection) from each chapter of the Bible]

[9:59 pm, 21/05/2022] S.R:

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟙:𝟙𝟜

"Are they not all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation?"

Angels are for us. Angels will help us

This "us" is referring to only true Christians, of course.

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟚:𝟙𝟜

"Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil,"

It's God who gives and takes life but He often uses Satan to take life. It's the device of Satan that brought sin upon the world and also its consequence—death.

But Jesus has destroyed that power. We will still die, but we don't need to fear what will happen to the dead and living if we are in Christ.

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟛:𝟙𝟜

"For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end,"

Notice the word "𝕚𝕗"

It's conditional... In other words, the importance of endurance till the end. Holding on to the faith.

Christian life is till the end. No holiday no resignation.

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟜:𝟙𝟞

"Therefore let us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need."

I am confident to do and say things whatever I want in front of someone I know who knows me and loves me.

That's what we need to be in front of God. God knows and loves us more than we can ever imagine, but we aren't knowing that. We are of little faith and holiness!

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟝:𝟙𝟚-𝟙𝟜

"For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you have need again for someone to teach you the elementary principles of the oracles of God, and you have come to need milk and not solid food. For everyone who partakes only of milk is not accustomed to the word of righteousness, for he is an infant. But solid food is for the mature, who because of practice have their senses trained to discern good and evil."

There are a lot of pastors who are still needing milk because they have not been laboring in the word of God consistently.

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟞:𝟙𝟝

"And so, having patiently waited, he obtained the promise."

Let's learn to wait— that's patience, that's trusting God. In it lies the calmness of life, and the blessings of God.

Disappointment, Anxiety, Anger, Fear, Suspicion, and Doubt are the telling signs that we haven't really learned to wait on God.

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟟:𝟚𝟝

"Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them."

Salvation is forever because Jesus lives forever!

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟠:𝟞

"But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises."

And we are workers of this better ministry. Think of that!

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟡:𝟚𝟚

"Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins."

That's why Jesus had to shed blood in His death. Blood is sacred in Christian Theology. Blood is life. Respect blood!

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟙𝟘:𝟛𝟙

"It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

We need to bring back the terror of God in our conversation, thinking, imagination, and public square.

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟙𝟙:𝟙

"Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen."

The most repeated word in this chapter is "Faith"

How important, powerful, and beautiful it is!

 

ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟙𝟚:𝟜-𝟞

"You have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood in your striving against sin; and you have forgotten the exhortation which is addressed to you as sons, "MY SON, DO NOT REGARD LIGHTLY THE DISCIPLINE OF THE LORD, NOR FAINT WHEN YOU ARE REPROVED BY HIM;  FOR THOSE WHOM THE LORD LOVES HE DISCIPLINES, AND HE SCOURGES EVERY SON WHOM HE RECEIVES."

God would surely say this of us, I am sure! Let's not be so disappointed with the circumstances of our life!

 

[2:07 pm, 02/06/2022] S.R: ℍ𝕖𝕓𝕣𝕖𝕨𝕤 𝟙𝟛:𝟝

"Make sure that your character is free from the love of money, being content with what you have; for He Himself has said, "I WILL NEVER DESERT YOU, NOR WILL I EVER FORSAKE YOU,"

Flee from the love of money. Flee from easy money. Flee from an illegal and immoral business.

Don't look only for a high-salaried job. Make sure you get Sunday off.

The New Testament in the Original Greek: Introduction, Appendix: Book Review — Part II

B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort. The New Testament in the Original Greek: Introduction, Appendix. Cambridge and London: Macmillan and Co., 1882, pp. xxxi + 324 +173.

Review of pp. 163–324 [Part II]

Pp. 1-162 deals with the necessity, methods, and application of textual criticism. The following pages 163-324 deal with the application of the principles of textual criticism and the nature and details of this edition [Volume I & II]. Page 163 begins with section V of chapter 2 of Part III with the title “Identification and estimation of readings as belonging to the chief ancient texts.” Genealogical evidence method is widely considered for the determination of the readings (p. 162.) Pre-Syrian readings are identified, and Syrian readings are rejected. Hort wrote “Readings having only characteristic Western and characteristic Syrian attestation must have belonged to the Western text: readings having only characteristic Alexandrian and characteristic Syrian attestation must have belonged to the Alexandrian text” (p. 167). Pre-Syrian readings which are neither Western nor Alexandrian are considered “Neutral” (p. 170). Hort commented that B is more neutral than other documents (p. 171). Omission of words in Alexandrian and Syrian are rare but not in the Western text (p. 175). Section VI is the review of previous criticisms with reference to the ancient texts. Textual Criticism gained momentum in 1707 with Mill’s collection of documentary evidence (p. 181), followed by the work of Bentley and Bengel. Griesbach further developed historical criticism in contrast with Hug’s theory of recensions (p. 182). However, Hort said that Griesbach was confused between the classification of ancient texts and the classification of documents derived from them (p. 183).

Chapter 3, Result of Internal Evidence of Groups and Documents (pp. 187–271), has two sections. The first section deals generally, and the second section deals specifically (B and א). The homogeneousness of the fundamental texts of all important groups may be safely trusted (p. 189). On page 191, Hort said that the Syrian text as a whole must be condemned. According to Hort, אBCDL 33 in the Gospels, אABCDE, I3 6I in Acts, אABC I3 in the Catholic Epistles, and אABCD₈G₈ I7 in the Pauline Epistle are uncontestably the primary documents (p. 192). Hort contended that the Versions are excluded from the primary category even if they were non-Western and pre-Syrian for they cannot outweigh “trustworthy attestation” (p. 198). The authors observed that one of the most common forms of paraphrase in the Versions is the change of word order (p. 200). Hort also considered patristic sources to be doubtful of their accuracy; and when they are accurate, he said it is nothing more than an accidental coincidence (p. 203-4).

Section 2 deals specifically with reference to B and א (p. 207–271). Westcott and Hort considered these documents to be more trustworthy (paragraph 285). Comparison of manuscripts against these documents must either be Alexandrian or Western and cannot be mixed of both to be trustworthy (p. 208). They reported their findings on page 210: “Every group containing both א and Β is found, where Internal Evidence is tolerably unambiguous, to have an apparently more original text than every opposed group containing neither; and every group containing B, with the exception of such Western groups as include Β in the Pauline Epistles, is found in a large preponderance of cases, though by no means universally, to have an apparently more original text than every opposed group containing א.”

They also compared B to א to seek its independent nature, and they stand alone in numerous readings (p. 213). They presumed that the scribe of B was a corrector of א (p. 214), but remarkable differences were observed in their divisions into sections and other externals. They also adopted the strategy to exclude any manuscript which has no other attestation (p. 216). They proposed that the readings of א B should be accepted until strong internal evidence is against its readings, and if it has no support from Versions or Fathers, it cannot be rejected absolutely but must be on an alternative footing (p. 225); examples are listed on paragraph 304. Regarding the reliability of scribes, Hort wrote that no scribe can make the text better than he found it, and his best is to not make it worse (p. 232). He also suggested that the manuscript which is closer to the original will have more omissions than the Textus Receptus (p. 235).

Westcott and Hort argued that that B preserved a very pure line of a very ancient text, and that there is a greater integrity of text in B than in א (p. 251), however, the book of Revelation is missing in B. Hort admitted that it is “by no means sure” but they are convinced that “such relative insecurity” are removed through examination of the genealogical relations of the documents (p. 262). The most reliable documents for the Book of Revelation are A and C (p. 272). Regarding the birthplace of א and B, Westcott and Hort suggested that it must be in the West (p. 266), probably at Rome; ancestors of B were wholly Western, and ancestors of א were Alexandrian in a geographical sense (p. 267).  On pages 270–1, Hort discussed briefly the nature of scribes and correctors with reference to א and B.

Chapter 4 attempts to present the transmitted text as trustworthy copies of the original text (pp. 271–287). Variations of text must have existed in the early centuries and were forgotten through eclectic texts (p. 274). Regarding the immunity of the New Testament, Hort wrote, “If among the very ancient evidence now extant, collected from various quarters, so little can be found that approves itself as true in opposition both to Β and א, there is good reason at the outset to doubt whether any better readings have perished with the multitudes of documents that have been lost” (p. 277–8). Hort believed one does not need to lose confidence just because there were some instances of tampering with the text by dogmatic theologians like Tatian (p. 283).

Part IV is about the nature and details of this edition [Volume I & II] (pp. 288–324). The aim of this edition is “to obtain the closest approximation to the apostolic text itself” (p. 288). Hort assured that the “text” was based on “direct ancient authority of the highest kind” (p.290); when they weren’t certain, alternate readings were supplied. Precedence of documentary authority over internal evidence was employed. Notations were used to express probabilities of variant readings, and they hope that future textual criticism will reduce them to very few. Different markings like ⸂ ⸃, [[ ]], [ ], etc. were employed in this edition [Volume I & II]. Hort also admitted that a considerable number of readings that deserved to be mentioned are excluded because of no sufficient claim (p. 298) but are catalogued in the Appendix.

Hort devoted a section on orthography expressing the importance of it, and attempting to present the spelling as nearly as to the autographs by means of documentary evidence (p. 303). To Hort, “orthography deals with elements of text transmitted uninterruptedly, with more or less of purity, from the autographs to the extant MSS” (p. 311). Careful attention was given to breathing, accents, and other accessories of printing (pp. 311–318). The last section of this book concludes with a discussion on Punctuation—Division of Text, and Titles of Books—and Acknowledgement (pp. 318–324).

The strength of this book lies in the detailed explanation of their methods of textual criticism with some examples. The book is properly outlined, and each paragraph is numbered making the reading easy to trace. There is even a change in font size when certain paragraph deals with specific issues. I wish some of the paragraphs were shorter. And I get lost in some of his continuous descriptions; it would have been better if they had included some more examples or illustrations of what they are writing about.  I am quite aware this was their first edition of (Volume II), perhaps, subsequent editions were much better and easier to read and comprehend.

Westcott Hort considered א and B to be the most reliable Manuscripts of the New Testament. Even among the two, they prefer א though the book of Revelation is missing. They appealed to manuscripts that are Pre-Syrian Non-Western Non-Alexandrian to be the reliable sources, calling “Neutral,” represented by א and B. They accused Textus Receptus of an eclectic text, however, their method of constructing the text is also eclectic. However, the way the book concluded with an attempt to make the readers feel confident of the retention of the original writings of the sacred writer is commendable (which Metzer and Ehrman failed to do in their book).

The New Testament in the Original Greek: Introduction, Appendix: Book Review — Part I

B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort. The New Testament in the Original Greek: Introduction, Appendix. Cambridge and London: Macmillan and Co., 1882, pp. xxxi + 324 +173.

Review of pp. 1-163 [Part I]

This book has been in different editions and prints over the years. It was the second volume that appeared in 1882, after the publication of the first Volume in 1881 which contained the Text of the New Testament and shorter introduction. It was perhaps the most significant work of textual criticism in the New Testament at the time of its publication and has a lasting influence even at present. It was known for differing from the Majority Text, especially the Textus Receptus. Wescott and Hort were professors at Cambridge, and this work was a result of their 28 years of partnership. This edition (Volume II) has 324 pages of introduction and 173 pages of Appendix. It was prepared mainly by J.J.A. Hort (p. 18) in the last two to three years of their 28 years of partnership. This book has versification for each paragraph, having 425 verses or paragraphs in the section Introduction (pp. 1–324).

The Introduction has four parts: 1. The need for criticism of the text of the New Testament (pp. 4–18), 2. The methods of textual criticism (pp. 19–72), 3. Application of principles of criticism to the text of the New Testament (pp. 73–287), 4. Nature and details of this edition [Volume I & II] (pp. 288–324). The title of the book “… in the original Greek” must mean that the original language is in Greek and should not be confused with the supposition that what Westcott-Hort had come up with was the original Greek the sacred writers employed. This can be seen from the acknowledgment they made regarding the doubts they had for some variant readings (p. 2), however “attempt to determine the original words of the Apostles and writers of the New Testament” (p. 16) seems to indicate otherwise. Hort presented textual criticism as the detection and rejection of error (p. 3).

Part 1 discusses transmission by writing and printed edition, and the history of this edition [Volume I & II] (4–18). Manuscripts [handwritten] were destroyed by various means even through war and invasions (p.9). No uncial manuscripts earlier than the time of Constantine were discovered (p.11). Ximenes’s polyglot version of the Greek New Testament was printed in 1514, and Erasmus’s version in 1516 (p. 11). The second Elzevir edition of 1633 (p. 12) became widely known as “Received Text” (which by the way is 22 years later than the 1611 King James Version Bible). Lachmann in 1831 attempted to carry out the wishes of Bentley in advancing textual criticism which was further developed by his successors Tischendorf and Trigelles (p. 13). Westcott-Hort considered Textus Receptus unworthy of trust and since there were no critical editions available other than those of Lachmann and Tischendorf, they decided to come up with this edition [Volume I & II] (p. 16). They worked independently and discussed their results with “free and full criticism” if they happened to have disagreements (p.18). 

Part 2 has six sections on methods of textual criticism. 1. Internal Evidence of Reading, which is determined by Intrinsic probability and Transcriptional probability. In p.25, Wescott and Hort wrote that scribes were “moved by different impulses” “of a much greater variety,” and could be accounted for the variant readings. 2. Internal Evidence of Documents. One of the consistent principles to employ is “Knowledge of documents should precede final judgment upon readings” (p.31). [I need more reading regarding Internal Evidence of documents. How scholars identify what document is more reliable than others is still puzzling to me. Paragraph 40 discusses it to some extent.] 3. Genealogical Evidence. The principle involved here is that “all trustworthy restoration of corrupted texts is founded on the study of their history” (p. 40). In this section, the theory of common ancestor which was lost is taken into consideration (p. 54). 4. Internal Evidence of Groups. This comes between internal evidence of documents and genealogical evidence (p. 60). Here, Hort explained that internal evidence of a document concerns a single document, whereas its method is applicable to groups of documents (p. 60).

Section 5 is a recapitulation of the four methods in relation to each other. Here, Hort explained that the Genealogy method is similar to the method of internal evidence of documents. It involves three processes: analysis and comparison for a succession of individual variations, investigation of genealogical relation between the documents and their ancestors, and application of these relations to the interpretation of documentary evidence for each variation (p. 62). Paragraph 82 states the preference of methods in various cases. Genealogical evidence is of higher value (p. 64). Section 6 is criticism as dealing with errors antecedent to existing texts. On p. 67, Intrinsic evidence is presented as dealing with absolute originality, whereas all other kinds of evidence deal with relative originality. Paragraphs 93–95 are about Conjectural Emendation; however, the scholars did not believe in its worth in textual criticism of the New Testament (p. 72).

Part 3 has four chapters. Chapter 1 is a preliminary chronological survey of documents. The Greek manuscripts: Only 4 Uncials New Testament copies are extant of which only Codex Sinaiticus has the entire books of the New Testament (p. 75). Paragraphs 98–106 provide a helpful reference. While manuscripts of earlier centuries are not many, the manuscripts of the ninth and the tenth centuries are numerous (p. 76). About 30 Cursive manuscripts of New Testament copies between the ninth to sixteenth centuries are extant (p. 76). Cursive manuscripts are largely ignored by most people (p.77). Other versions include Latin, Syriac, and the Egyptians: Latin versions were in circulation by the beginning of the third century (p. 78). Syriac has three versions, the most popular being Peshito (p. 84); it must be as old as the Latin version. Egyptian versions are also known as the Coptic versions, they must not be later than the second century (p. 85). The third class of documents are the writings of the Fathers (pp. 87–89). Hort acknowledged the fresh evidence they have was from the writing of the Fathers (p. 89). 

Chapter 2 is titled “Results of genealogical evidence proper.”  It has six sections. Section 1 deals with the determination of genealogical relations of the chief ancient texts. Some principles include— the priority of variation over conflated reading and the posteriority of Syrian reading to Western, Neutral, and Alexandrian readings. Examples of conflated reading are given on pp. 94–95, 99–104. Three matters of evidence show the posteriority of Syrian readings: Conflated reading, ante-Nicene Patristic evidence, and internal evidence of Syrian readings. On p. 116, Horts suggested that the authors of Syrian text must have had the knowledge of three earlier forms of text, which are Western, Alexandrian, and Neutral. On p. 118, Syrian text is presented as “a modified eclectic combination of earlier text” whose authority lies only in itself.

Section 2 deals with the characteristics of the chief ancient texts: Western readings love paraphrasing (p. 122); Neutral Text is non-western and pre-Syrian, and is generally Alexandrian (p. 129); Alexandrian readings are not corrupt like Western readings, they were the work of careful scribes (p. 131); and Syrian text, which must be the result of ‘recension’ (p. 133), and is known for lucidity and completeness (p. 134). Section 3 gives the sketch of post-Nicene textual history; it is about the Syrian text. Two stages of Syrian text are proposed (p. 137); followed by a mixture in the fourth century (p. 139), perhaps made possible by circumstances under the persecution of Diocletian; eventually leading to the multiplicity of Syrian text (p. 141). Horts observed that the text recognized at Constantinople became the standard New Testament of the East (p. 143).

Section 4 deals with the relation of the principal extant document to the chief ancient texts (pp. 146–162). The extant documents are those found in Greek MSS, Versions, and Greek Fathers. This comparison gave “moral certainty” to assign the documents to various groups (p. 147). B is found to be pre-Syrian and unique (p. 150). Codex Sinaiticus is free from Western and Alexandrian corruption and is also pre-Syrian (p. 151). Other MSS aren’t as good as B and Sinaiticus (paragraph 206). A is mixed with Syrian text in the Gospels (p. 152). Versions (Latin, Syriac, Egyptians, Armenians) were found to have Syrian readings as well especially those of the fourth century or later (p. 159). Quotations found in the Fathers are variously blended and need further examination (p. 159).

Wescott and Hort have a deplorable view of Syrian Text in comparison to other types of text. Many times, the basis of rejection is weighed upon the presence or influence of Syrian text. They argued that Syrian text is relatively younger and therefore is farther from the original. Other reasons include the presence of conflations and the attempts to make the text more lucid than the original.

I am not sure how they date the manuscripts, but much of the arguments will only stand or fall if the dating of the manuscripts is correct. I wonder why scholars aren’t paying much attention to the cursive (minuscules) and the quotations of the Fathers.

Short Reflection from Philemon

[Originally posted in a WhatsApp group (PG) as a daily reading update (reflection) from each chapter of the Bible]

ℙ𝕙𝕚𝕝𝕖𝕞𝕠𝕟 𝟙:𝟟

"For I have come to have much joy and comfort in your love, because the hearts of the saints have been refreshed through you, brother."

Good reports of Christian leaders are encouraging; sinful reports are discouraging. We don't live for ourselves; We affect others!

Short Reflection from Titus 1-3

[Originally posted in a WhatsApp group (PG) as a daily reading update (reflection) from each chapter of the Bible]

[10:49 pm, 01/06/2022] S.R:

𝕋𝕚𝕥𝕦𝕤 𝟙:𝟙𝟝

"To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled."

Liberty in Christ but it's to be rich in good works.

 

𝕋𝕚𝕥𝕦𝕤 𝟚:𝟙𝟙-𝟙𝟚

"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age,"

To renounce worldly desire!

 

𝕋𝕚𝕥𝕦𝕤 𝟛:𝟙𝟜

"Our people must also learn to engage in good deeds to meet pressing needs, so that they will not be unfruitful."

Necessity of abundance of good deeds in the Christian life!

 

Short Reflection from 2 Timothy 1-4

[Originally posted in a WhatsApp group (BRW-M) as a daily reading update (reflection) from each chapter of the Bible]

[23:04, 3/1/2021] S.R:

2 TIMOTHY 1:12

"For this reason I also suffer these things; nevertheless I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep what I have committed to Him until that Day."

There's a wonderful hymn written by El Nathan (alias D.W. Whittle) from this verse. The rich theology of this hymn makes us fall in love with it. It is a song of assurance and confidence.

Tonight, I realise that this verse is written in the context of suffering and shame. Paul made this statement so that Timothy will remember what Christian life looks like, and that he should be courageous, to suffer along with him even to death (verse 8).

 

𝟚 𝕋𝕚𝕞𝕠𝕥𝕙𝕪 𝟚:𝟚𝟜-𝟚𝟞

"And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will."

Dealing with an opponent in a gentle manner is hard, very hard. I don't want to even deal with it sometimes!

 

𝟚 𝕋𝕚𝕞𝕠𝕥𝕙𝕪 𝟛:𝟜-𝟝

"treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; Avoid such men as these."

It has been foretold. Not to be surprised. But to endure faithfully!

 

𝟚 𝕋𝕚𝕞𝕠𝕥𝕙𝕪 𝟜:𝟙𝟞

"At my first defense no one supported me, but all deserted me; may it not be counted against them."

If there was none with Paul, let us not be surprised when people abandon this and that!

Short Reflection from 2 Thessalonians 1-3

[Originally posted in a WhatsApp group (PG) as a daily reading update (reflection) from each chapter of the Bible]

[1:18 pm, 23/05/2022] S.R:

𝟚 𝕋𝕙𝕖𝕤𝕤𝕒𝕝𝕠𝕟𝕚𝕒𝕟𝕤 𝟙:𝟙𝟚

"so that the name of our Lord Jesus will be glorified in you, and you in Him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ."

Two people will be glorified: Jesus in us and we in Jesus.

When we live for God's glory we are also living for our glory.

When I live for my glory, it dishonors God and brings destruction to myself.

 

𝟚 𝕋𝕙𝕖𝕤𝕤𝕒𝕝𝕠𝕟𝕚𝕒𝕟𝕤 𝟚:𝟙𝟙-𝟙𝟚

"For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness."

It's God's way or our way. And we don't want our way in reality because we know how to choose only evil way like Adam choosing the knowledge of bad by eating the fruit.

 

𝟚 𝕋𝕙𝕖𝕤𝕤𝕒𝕝𝕠𝕟𝕚𝕒𝕟𝕤 𝟛:𝟚

"and that we will be rescued from perverse and evil men; for not all have faith."

There are people like this. If Paul sought prayer from others to be rescued from such people, we would be a fool to be ignorant of the schemes of man.