Melanchthon Misinterpreted Trent?

Here's another Called to Communion tidbit. This little nugget was buried in footnote #6-

When I was seeking Protestant sources and arguments to keep me from converting to Catholicism, I found that this misinterpretation came down to me from the very pen of John Calvin (6)


(6)Apparently Philip Melanchthon also misinterpreted Trent in the same way, but I have not found the source for this assertion.

So why mention Melanchthon? Without documentation, this is called "hearsay", or perhaps "myth".  It reminds me of the Melanchthon letter to Calvin myth that a Romanist source used to bring up.

Family Radio: New Website, Camping Stroke Update, Math Prophecy Update

http://www.familyradio.com/new-index.html

Including:

WHAT HAPPENED ON MAY 21?

"What really happened this past May 21st ? What really happened is that God accomplished exactly what He wanted to happen. That was to warn the whole world that on May 21 God’s salvation program would be finished on that day. For the next five months, except for the elect (the true believers), the whole world is under God’s final judgment. To accomplish this goal God withheld from the true believers the way in which two phrases were to be understood. Had He not done so, the world would never have been shaken in fear as it was."

And also:

Harold Camping, the president and general manager of Family Radio, suffered a mild stroke on the evening of June 9, 2011. Mr. Camping is receiving excellent care, and the doctors treating him are encouraged with the progress that he is making. Mr. Camping's family appreciates everyone's thoughts and prayers. Any additional information will be updated on this site.

From another source:

"Mr. Camping has been moved to a Skilled Nursing Facility, where he is undergoing rehabilitation to regain his strength. Mr. and Mrs. Camping greatly appreciate all the cards, letters and flowers they have received, as well as your continuing thoughts and prayers. God has been very merciful."

Check out this bit of prophecy math:

As many of you are aware the five months period between May 21st and October 21st is 153 days. We find this number in the 4th gospel (John 21:6-11).

-snip-

The 153 fish is described as “the multitude of fishes.” We’ve known for some time that this passage relates to the period of Great Tribulation that just finished on May 21st of 2011. These fish represented the “great multitude” that came out of Great Tribulation (see Revelation 7:9-14).

The number 153 breaks down into 9 x 17 or 3 x 3 x 17. The number three indicates it is God’s purpose (a biblical number is assigned meaning depending on how God uses it in the Bible). In this case, the number three is doubled indicating an even stronger emphasis upon the purpose of God concerning this great catch of fish (in other places the Lord makes sure we’re aware that fish typify men–for instance, Jesus told the disciples, “Behold, I will make you fishers of men”).

Seven Sacraments, Depending on Which Century

Here's another Called to Communion tidbit:

First, there are not two sacraments “ordained by Christ” but seven sacraments and this can be proved by the Sacred Scriptures alone.

Actually, it depends on which century:

There was no intention during early centuries to limit the number of sacraments to seven. Any ritual that celebrated a divine saving action was considered a mystery or sacrament: feasts days such as Easter and Pentecost, actions such as ritual washing of feet and imposition of blessed ashes, along with the more major ones we would come to know as "the seven." Some lists of sacraments were very short, others had as many as thirty. In the mid-13th century the number was finally set at seven. Other holy rituals came to be called sacramentals. [Greg Dues, Catholic Customs & Traditions (revised edition, 2007) (New London: Twenty-Third Publications, 2007)] pp.145-146].

"Only in the seventeenth century, when Latin influence was at its height, did this list [of seven sacraments] become fixed and definite. Before that date Orthodox writers vary considerably as to the number of sacraments: John of Damascus speaks of two; Dionysius the Areopagite of six; Joasaph, Metropolitan of Ephesus (fifteenth century), of ten; and those Byzantine theologians who in fact speak of seven sacraments differ as to the items which they include in their list. Even today the number seven has no particular dogmatic significance for Orthodox theology, but is used primarily as a convenience in teaching."Timothy Ware, The Orthodox Church (New York: Penguin Books, 1997), p. 275].

Called to Communion, the Vulgate, and Calvin

One of the latest blog entries from Called to Communion (CTC) is entitled Calvin, Trent, and the Vulgate: Misinterpreting the Fourth Session. The writer explains the "Reformed" popularly portray Trent as "enshrining the Vulgate" at the expense of Biblical linguistic research. Note the following excerpts:

Excerpt 1: When I first began to take interest in theology, and in Reformed theology in particular, during college, I learned the story of how the Catholic Church closed herself off to serious study of the Holy Bible at the Council of Trent (1545-1563). The act in question is the Council's enshrining the Vulgate, Jerome's Latin translation of Bible, in its first decree, which was adopted during the fourth session on April 8th, 1546... That the Catholic Church did such a thing only confirmed my predilection for the Reformed tradition.

Excerpt 2: Trent made it the official version in an astounding act of arrogance, locking her faithful up in the prison of ignorance about the Scriptures and thus about Christ. I believed this story as did several of my friends.

Excerpt 3: Everyone knew that the Vulgate had acquired errors that provided purportedly divine authorization for the Catholic view of justification, Purgatory, the penitential system, the veneration of Mary and the saints, and spurious sacraments such as confirmation and marriage. Trent made it the official version in an astounding act of arrogance, locking her faithful up in the prison of ignorance about the Scriptures and thus about Christ. I believed this story as did several of my friends.

The basic thrust of complaint is that Reformed Protestants say Trent's Vulgate decision was done in order to promote ignorance. Who exactly taught this? Which college taught this? Was it a Reformed college? The CTC blogger doesn't say, but does go on to locate the ultimate Reformed culprit, John Calvin:

The problem is that this story is a myth. It is a myth like the myth that the Catholic Church officially opposed the translation of Sacred Scripture into other vernacular languages in itself. When I was seeking Protestant sources and arguments to keep me from converting to Catholicism, I found that this misinterpretation came down to me from the very pen of John Calvin.

So it was none other than John Calvin that probably popularized the "myth" that Romanism officially authorized an inferior Latin translation of the Bible to be her "official" translation to keep her people ignorant.  CTC later states, "According to Calvin, Trent swept away the need for studying Greek and Hebrew in marking the Vulgate as the authentic text of the Church." According to CTC, the truth is that the decree of Trent "was above all aimed at standardizing the Latin text of the Bible for the Church, especially the Latin Rite." Trent's decree had nothing to do with keeping the Roman church ignorant. Rather, Trent simply wanted to standardize the Latin text.

It is quite true that there were problems with the Latin manuscripts during this period of history. William Whitaker's Disputations on Holy Scripture outlines this problem succinctly (see the discussion beginning on page 128). However, the notion that John Calvin perpetuated a Reformed (or Reformation) "myth" is not the case. Nor do I think CTC understands Calvin's actual arguments or the actual issues surrounding the Vulgate during this time period. 

CTC quotes Calvin's Antidote to the Council of Trent (1547). Henry Beveridge notes, "It is believed to be the earliest publication in which the proceedings of that body were fully and systematically reviewed." Calvin's introduction is dated November 21,1547. Take notice that it was only a short time previous (April 8, 1546) that Trent's Insuper decree stated:

Moreover, the same holy council considering that not a little advantage will accrue to the Church of God if it be made known which of all the Latin editions of the sacred books now in circulation is to be regarded as authentic, ordains and declares that the old Latin Vulgate Edition, which, in use for so many hundred years, has been approved by the Church, be in public lectures, disputations, sermons and expositions held as authentic, and that no one dare or presume under any pretext whatsoever to reject it.

John Steinmueller explains that this decree is commonly held to be a disciplinary Decree based upon the dogmatic fact that the Vulgate conforms substantially with the originals, and therefore contains no errors in faith and morals (John Steinmueller, S.T.D., S.Scr.L., A Companion to Scripture Studies (New York: Wagner, 1941), Volume I, General Introduction to the Bible, p. 186, n.13). When Trent picked the Old Latin Vulgate, she meant business. It appears in Trent's collective mind, the old Vulgate was at least faithful enough to serve the church as her official Bible. John Calvin died in 1564.  The actual revised Vulgate appeared in 1590. Therefore, throughout John Calvin's entire life, an inferior Bible translation was indeed the standard for Roman Catholicism. The Insuper decree is dated 1547. So it was actually 43 years later in which a new edition of the Vulgate came out, and even that translation was a mess (including an interesting subterfuge / cover up perpetuated by Bellarmine and Gregory XIV). The first Calvin quote utilized by CTC states:

But as the Hebrew or Greek original often serves to expose their ignorance in quoting Scripture, to check their presumption, and so keep down their thrasonic boasting, they ingeniously meet this difficulty also by determining that the Vulgate translation only is to be held authentic. Farewell, then, to those who have spent much time and labor in the study of languages, that they might search for the genuine sense of Scripture at the fountainhead!

According to CTC, here Calvin went beyond what Trent said: "Trent nowhere forbids the use of the original languages." There are though a few things that should jump out from this Calvin quote. The first is "Hebrew or Greek original" and secondly, "the Vulgate translation only is to be held authentic" and thirdly, the relationship of these two statements. Calvin's concern here is to protect the actual text of the Bible: the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. That is, if one wants to declare what the authentic text is, look no further than the Bible written its original tongue. But shouldn't it go without saying that the Hebrew and Greek texts are the authentic text of Scripture? Shouldn't it be assumed Trent held that the Hebrew and Greek were included among the authentic text? Actually, no. In David King's book Holy Scripture The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith Volume 1 (Battle Ground: Christian Resources inc., 2001),  there is a fairly detailed discussion on Rome and the Latin Vulgate (pp. 162-169). Speaking on the proceedings at Trent, King states,

Cardinal Pacheco demanded that all other versions excepting the Vulgate be condemned, but this was largely rejected by the Tridentine Council. Cardinal Pole requested that the 'Hebrew and Greek originals' be included among the authentic text. This request was likewise rejected (p.162).

In laying out the points of Trent, Calvin states in the Antidote, "Thirdly, repudiating all other versions whatsoever, they retain the Vulgate only, and order it to be authentic." He later goes on to state, "What! are they not ashamed to make the Vulgate version of the New Testament authoritative, while the writings of Valla, Faber, and Erasmus, which are in everybody's hands, demonstrate with the finger, even to children, that it is vitiated in innumerable places?" Calvin's concern is that Trent picked a severely handicapped and inferior translation as the official Bible of the church. The Cambridge Companion to John Calvin points out, "Calvin was furthermore disappointed that instead of going to the original Greek and Hebrew texts of the Bible, it chose the Latin Vulgate as the authoritative version."

William Whitaker also provides an interesting look at this period in history verifying Calvin's concern. One of the major arguments during this time period was over what exactly constituted the authentic text of Scripture. Whitaker states, "Our adversaries determine that the authentic scripture consists not in the Hebrew and Greek originals, but in the Vulgate Latin version. We, on the contrary side, say that the authentic and divinely-inspired scripture is not this Latin, but the Hebrew edition of the old Testament, and the Greek of the new." Whitaker then states actual Roman Catholic arguments as espoused by Bellarmine in favor of the Vulgate Latin being the actual authentic text of the Scriptures: "He proposes his First argument in this form: For nearly a thousand years, that is, from the time of Gregory the Great, the whole Latin church hath made use of this Latin edition alone" (p. 135). Bellarmine goes on to make a number of arguments in favor of the Latin text, all responded to by Whitaker.  Whitaker also documents that it simply wasn't Bellarmine arguing for the Latin Vulgate:

Certain English popish divines, who have taken up their abode in the seminary of Rheims, some years since translated the new Testament into the English tongue, not from the Greek text, but from the old Latin Vulgate. In order to persuade us of the wisdom and prudence of this proceeding, they produce in their preface ten reasons to prove that this Latin Vulgate edition is to be followed in all things rather than the Greek (p.141).

These "popish divines" went on to argue that "The sacred council of Trent, for these and many other very weighty reasons, hath defined this alone of all Latin translations to be authentic" (p.143). Whitaker raises some interesting objections, noting that even at the time Trent spoke, what she said was open to interpretation:

I answer: In the first place, that Tridentine Synod hath no authority with us. Secondly, What right had it to define this? Thirdly, It hath proposed no grounds of this decree, except this only, -that that edition had been for a long time received in the church; which reason, at least, every one must perceive to be unworthy of such great divines. Fourthly, I desire to know whether the council of Trent only commanded this Latin edition to be considered the authentic one amongst Latin editions, or determined it to be absolutely authentic? For if it only preferred this one to other Latin translations, that could be no reason to justify the Rhemists in not making their version of the new Testament from the Greek; since the council of Trent prefers this, not to the Greek edition, but to other Latin translations. Do they, then, make both this Latin and that Greek edition authentic, or this Latin only? Indeed, they express themselves in such a manner as not to deny the authenticity of the Greek, while nevertheless they really hold no edition of either old or new Testament authentic, save this Latin Vulgate only. This is the judgment of these Rhemists who have translated the new Testament from the Latin; and this the Jesuits defend most strenuously, maintaining that, where the Latin differs from the Greek or Hebrew, we should hold by the Latin rather than the Greek or Hebrew copies. And it is certain that this is now the received opinion of the papists (p.143).

So one of the main arguments during this time period was: what exactly constituted the authentic text of the Bible? Whitaker's entire discussion is a worthy read. I wonder if the CTC author even had this basic text during the years he claims to have been "Reformed." When dealing with history Roman Catholic converts are often prone to look down from their current perspective and chastise someone (like John Calvin) without at least trying to understand what informed his perspective in the first place. There is indeed "myth" going on here, but it isn't from Calvin's hand. Rather, I think CTC has missed Calvin's main concern and also engaged in a bit of anachronism.

The Gospel According to Mark: "The Amazing Jesus"

John MacArthur recently preached from Mark 16:8-20, , making it the last sermon in his 43 year ministry in which he has preached all the way through the New Testament, verse by verse, book by book; a great model for expository preaching. (exposing the meaning of the text, in its context, preaching through each book from beginning to end, verse by verse, chapter by chapter.) I highly recommend his other sermons, all available there at www.gty.org

He gives a good summary of the confidence we have from all the many extant Greek manuscripts that we do have about the Bible, specifically focusing on the New Testament; and by comparing all of them, we can tell where a scribe made an error or added something in (as in Mark 16:9-20; I John 5:7-8 (KJV) - "the Comma Johannine"). No textual variant affects any doctrine in the word of God, the Scriptures.

A good introductory book on the reliability on the NT is F. F. Bruce's The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? He answers yes.

http://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Documents-They-Reliable/dp/0802822193

"I like Mark's ending!" John MacArthur (speaking on verse 8, where the women are amazed, trembling, astonished, and afraid at the empty tomb and the resurrection and what the angel said to them.)

Verses 5-8 are key, and include the amazement, the crucifixion, the empty tomb, and the angel's statement: "Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him."

Whatever criticism Muslims and skeptics and atheists have about Mark 16:9-20, the crucifixion and the resurrection are still affirmed as true, even without verse 9-20. Chapter 15 - Crucifixion, 16:1-8 - Empty Tomb, resurrection, women who are eyewitnesses of the empty tomb. "He has been crucified." This is historical fact. The Qur'an has that embarrassing verse of 4:157 of denying historical fact.

MacArthur has a great approach to handling the long version of Mark, 16:9-20, and that this section is not in the oldest extant Greek manuscripts. He shows how verses 9-20 were cobbled together from the other 3 gospels and Acts, and added onto Mark.

v. 9 - summary from Luke 8:1-3

v. 10 - from John 20:18

v. 12 - summary from Luke 24:13-32

v. 13 - from Luke 24:36-38

v. 15 - summary from Matthew 28:19

v. 16 - different way of saying John 20:23

v. 17-18 - from Luke 10, Matthew 10, tongues in the book of Acts, and Acts 28:3-6 (God protected Paul from the harm of the snake bite; but there is no text of anyone drinking poison as in Mark 16; and there is no command to pick up snakes in a worship service context as they do in some churches in the Appalachian Mountains of USA. )

I would add this about the summary of verse 19. McArthur points out that Irenaeus quoted Mark 16:19 around 180-200 AD.

v. 19 - John 20:17; Luke 24:51; Acts chapter 1; Luke 22:69; Acts 7:55 ff; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1; Heb. 1:3; Heb. 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; I Peter 3:22; Psalm 110:1)

MacArthur focused on verse 8, the Amazement, astonishment, fear, and being astounded all through the book of Mark: (which points to the probability that that was Mark's real ending.)

Mark 1:22

Mark 1:27

Mark 2:12

Mark 4:41

Mark 5:15

Mark 5:33

Mark 5:42

Mark 6:51

Mark 9:6

Mark 9:15

Mark 9:32

Mark 10:24

Mark 10:32

Mark 11:18

Mark 12:17

Mark 15:5

Mark 16:5

Mark 16:8

MacArthur ends with joyful exuberance quoting from the hymn: (text and music by Charles H. Gabriel)

"I stand amazed in the presence of Jesus the Nazarene, and wonder how He could love me, a sinner, condemned, unclean! O How wonderful, O How marvelous, and my song shall ever be, O How wonderful, O How marvelous, is my Savior's love for me!"

Indeed, Jesus is Amazing!

Calvin on How Far to Speculate on Predestination

James, good morning. I need a reference for a quote from Calvin. He said something like, "Where God has stopped speaking, we should also stop speaking." In other words, don't try to pry into areas where God has not revealed any information. Where can I find this quote from Calvin? Thanks.

See Calvin's comment on Romans 9:14

14. What then shall we say? etc. The flesh cannot hear of this wisdom of God without being instantly disturbed by numberless questions, and without attempting in a manner to call God to an account. We hence find that the Apostle, whenever he treats of some high mystery, obviates the many absurdities by which he knew the minds of men would be otherwise possessed; for when men hear anything of what Scripture teaches respecting predestination, they are especially entangled with very many impediments.

The predestination of God is indeed in reality a labyrinth, from which the mind of man can by no means extricate itself: but so unreasonable is the curiosity of man, that the more perilous the examination of a subject is, the more boldly he proceeds; so that when predestination is discussed, as he cannot restrain himself within due limits, he immediately, through his rashness, plunges himself, as it were, into the depth of the sea. What remedy then is there for the godly? Must they avoid every thought of predestination? By no means: for as the Holy Spirit has taught us nothing but what it behoves us to know, the knowledge of this would no doubt be useful, provided it be confined to the word of God. Let this then be our sacred rule, to seek to know nothing concerning it, except what Scripture teaches us: when the Lord closes his holy mouth, let us also stop the way, that we may not go farther. But as we are men, to whom foolish questions naturally occur, let us hear from Paul how they are to be met.

The Deaths of the Reformers According to "Fanatical Romanists"

Luther reconverted to the Roman Church on his deathbed? No he didn't. I receive many Google visits to this blog from people searching for information on "Did Luther Recant on His Deathbed?"

I recently came across this related section from Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Church vol. 8 (pp. 827-828) on the deaths of the major Protestant Reformers from what Schaff calls "fanatical Romanists." I've added some hyper-links to Schaff's text of the sources he mentions.

NOTE. A CALUMNY.
It is painful to notice that sectarian hatred and malice followed the Reformers to their death-beds. Fanatical Romanists represented Zwingli’s heroic death as a judgment of God, and invented the myths that Oecolampadius committed suicide and was carried off by the devil; that Luther hung himself by his handkerchief on the bed-post and emitted a horrible stench; and that Calvin died in despair.


The myth of Luther’s suicide was soberly and malignantly repeated by an ultramontane priest (Majunke, editor of the "Germania" in Berlin), and gave rise to a lively controversy in 1890. It must be added, however, that learned and honest Catholics indignantly protested against the calumny. (Cf. my article, Did Luther commit Suicide? in "Magazine of Christian Literature," New York, for December, 1890.)


As to Calvin, it is quite probable that his body, broken by so many diseases, soon showed signs of decay, which put a stop to the reception of strangers, and may have given rise to some "calumnies," of which Beza vaguely speaks. But it was not till fifteen years after his death, that Bolsec, the Apostate monk, fastened upon Calvin’s youth an odious vice (see above, p. 302), and spread the report that he died of a terrible malady,—that of being eaten by worms,—with which the just judgment of God destroys His enemies. He adds that Calvin even invoked the devils and cursed his studies and writings. ("Il mourut invoquant les diables … . Même il maudissait l’heure qu’il avait jamais étudié et écrit.") But he gives no authority, living or dead.


Audin (Life of Calvin, p. 532, Engl. transl.) repeats this infamous fabrication with some variations and dramatic embellishments, on the alleged testimony of an unknown student, who, as he says, sneaked into the death-chamber, lifted the black cloth from the face of Calvin and reported: "Calvinus in desperatione furiens vitam obiit turpissimo et faedissimo morbo quem Deus rebellibus et maledictis comminatus est, prius excruciatus et consumptus, quod ego verissime attestari audeo, qui funestum et tragicum illius exitum et exitium his meis oculis praesens aspexi. Joann. Harennius, apud Pet. Cutzenum!"


We regret to say that a Roman Catholic archbishop, Dr. Spalding, whose work on the Reformation gives no evidence of any acquaintance with the writings of Calvin or Beza, retails the slanders of Bolsec and Audin, and informs American readers that Calvin was "a very Nero" and "a monster of impurity and iniquity!" (See above, § 110, p. 520.)


Calvin’s whole life and writings, his testament, and dying words to the senators and ministers of Geneva, and the minute account of his death by his friend Beza, who was with him till his last moments, ought to be sufficient to convince even the most incredulous who is not incurably blinded by bigotry.

Good Evidence for Historical Reliability for 2 Peter as written by Peter Himself

2 Peter is constantly being attacked by Muslims and liberals and skeptics as not an authentic book of the NT and not written by Peter, the disciple of Jesus Christ. Shabir Ally makes this one of his main points in debates. We believe that 2 Peter was inspired by God, God-breathed ( 2 Timothy 3:16-17) and written by the apostle Peter around 64-66 AD, before his martyrdom by Nero, and we have good and reasonable evidence to back up that faith.

Dr. James White has a little article with an excellent graphic of an ancient manuscript of P-72
which has both I and 2 Peter (and Jude) in it. One of the pages of this manuscript shows the end of 1 Peter and the beginning of 2nd Peter and this manuscript called P-72 is dated at around 200 AD. That is very good early dating for a copy of one of the most attacked books of the NT by skeptics, atheists, and Muslims and others, sometimes by good scholars. (the Muslims like to use Bruce Metzger as authoritative evidence that 2 Peter was not written by the apostle Peter. But many other conservative scholars and all Christians who believe in inerrancy believe that 2 Peter is "God-breathed" and was written by Peter. ( 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20-21)

Dan Wallace makes an excellent case for Peter himself being the author of 2 Peter, before his death at the hands of Nero sometime around 64-65 AD. Dan Wallace on 2 Peter.
-->I Peter was authored by Peter, but Silvanus actually wrote it for Peter, because Silvanus' Greek was excellent. ( I Peter 5:12) This also explains why the Greek of I Peter is so excellent and the Greek of 2 Peter is not as polished. It is reasonable, based on the evidence that Peter, a Hebrew Galilean, wrote 2 Peter, and used Silvanus as his secretary or amanuensis for I Peter.

Dr. White did us a great service by blowing up the lines of this manuscript so we can see the Granville-Sharp rule and the use of scribes in those days to save space by using a short-hand for God's name, called using the "nomina-sacra" (Sacred Name). God, (Theos) θεος is shortened. ιησου χριστου (Jesus Christ) is also shortened here.



Here is a clearer typed out Greek text line of the part that Dr. White has blown up for us:


--> λαχουσιν πειστιν εν δικεοσυνη του θυ̅ ημων και σωτηρος ιη̅υ χρ̅υ
It says, "to those who have received a faith by/in the righteousness of the God of ours and savior Jesus Christ." It is saying that Jesus Christ is both "God and Savior".
_ _ _ _
You can see the θυ and ιηυ and χρυ more clearly now. (with the lines over them indicating they are abbreviations for the "sacred name" (nomina sacra). θυ is the "nomina-sacra" short for "Theos" θεου (Theou is the genitive form of Theos) and ιηυ is short for Ιησου (easou = Jesus) and χρυ is the short form for Christ ( χριστου). (with the lines over the last letters indicate these are nomina-sacra.) [as I preview this, the lines are not coming out over the letters I want them to; so I needed to point that out. Blogger moved the lines to the far left.]

-->
Dr. White explains the Granville-Sharp rule.
This a clear teaching of the Deity of Christ, "the God of ours and Savior, namely Jesus Christ". when only the first noun has the definite article ( του = tou = "the") it points to the definite article functioning for both "God and Savior". Titus 2:13 also has this Granville Sharp construction, more evidence of the Deity of Christ - "our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ".
By the way, did you know that Granville Sharp, the man whom this Greek syntax structure was named after, not only was an excellent scholar, and studied the Greek text, but also helped William Wilberforce get the slave trade abolished in England? A true Christian, both in mind and heart and life and action. Certainly, these are fruits of the Holy Spirit!

From the Wikipedia article about Granville Sharp:
"One of Granville's letters written in 1778 (published in 1798), propounded what has come to be known as The Granville Sharp Rule (in actuality only the first of six principles involving the article that Sharp articulated):

“When the copulative kai connects two nouns of the same case, if the article ho, or any of its cases, precedes the first of the said nouns or participles, and is not repeated before the second noun or participle, the latter always relates to the same person that is expressed or described by the first noun or participle ...”^[4]

This rule, if true, has a profound bearing on Unitarian doctrine, which led to a ‘celebrated controversy’, in which many leading divines took part, including Christopher Woodsworth.
Daniel B. Wallace says about Sharp:

“His strong belief in Christ’s deity led him to study the Scriptures in the original in order to defend more ably that precious truth ... As he studied the Scriptures in the original, he noticed a certain pattern, namely, when the construction article-noun-και-noun involved personal nouns which were singular and not proper names, they always referred to the same person. He noticed further that this rule applied in several texts to the deity of Jesus Christ.”^{[5] "}

Turretinfan also has an excellent article on 2 Peter showing that some ancient Christians had Bibles and how the α on the page stands for 1st Peter and the β (beta or letter B, used for 2nd) shows where 2nd Peter starts.

Here is an interesting web-site [August 8, 2013 - Addendum:  I just noticed, that, unfortunately, all of those excellent clear photos of many Greek manuscripts is no longer there. ]  that shows very clear photos of many of the ancient Greek manuscripts that give us more and more evidence for the reliability of the NT. It has the same photos of 1 and 2 Peter that Dr. White showed and even more extensive.

And here is an excellent lecture on the reliability of the NT from scholar Peter Williams.

And here is another lecture by Dr. White on the general reliability of the NT.

The Bible has not been hopelessly corrupted. Puny man cannot change the word of God. For Muslims: "No one can change the word of Allah"! The Injeel is reliable! The Bible is reliable. And we are honest and open about the few textual variants. And 2nd Peter was written by Peter, a disciple of Jesus the Messiah, and eye-witness of His life, miracles, teachings, death, resurrection, and ascension.

Winning a Prize from Rome

http://www.zenit.org/article-32861?l=english

Winners of Ratzinger Prize Announced

The Ratzinger Prize was inaugurated by the new Joseph Ratzinger-Benedict XVI Vatican Foundation, founded last March.

These first three winners will get their prize -- €50,000 ($70,000) -- from the Holy Father on June 30. The ceremony will include an address from Father Heim and from the Pontiff.

Rome's "Significant Common Ground" Found With Pentecostals

http://www.zenit.org/article-32883?l=english

"The Vatican said participants 'rejoiced in the significant amount of common ground that was identified despite the differences between the two traditions. Both Catholics and Pentecostals recognize the abundance of gifts given freely by the Holy Spirit, and that the Church has a discerning role to play concerning their exercise.'

The group considered topics such as the biblical foundations of charism, the historical and theological overview of the subject, the spontaneity or permanence of gifts, and the roles of clergy and laity."

Female Priests Defy Catholic Church At The Altar

http://www.npr.org/2011/06/12/137102746/women-priests-defy-the-church-at-the-altar


As members of the Roman Catholic Church, these female priests are all breaking church rules, which allow ordination only to baptized males. No member of the Roman Catholic Womenpriests has been excommunicated by the Church, but they have felt repercussions. They've not only been threatened but also have lost friends and colleagues within the Church — many of whom fear they will lose their jobs if they support the women's ordination movement openly.

LaRosa recognizes they are breaking Church law — specifically Canon 10:24 — but says, "when you have an unjust law, sometimes it needs to be broken before it can be changed."

The Ironic Missing Relic

A 780-year-old religious relic of St. Anthony of Padua has been stolen, and parishioners at a Southern California Catholic church are praying to the patron saint of lost causes and missing objects for its speedy return.

..."I'm hoping we've got some higher sources who've got our backs here and we can get it back," Magana said. "People here are pretty upset but they're praying. They're praying to St. Anthony for the return of his own object." Source

Curator of the Vatican Secret Archives

In his capacity as Curator of the Vatican Secret Archives, James Swan discovered a long lost letter from Leo X to Luther, in which Leo admitted that Exsurge Domine was all a big misunderstanding, and preemptively excommunicated anyone who denied sola Scriptura or sola fide. [source]

The first thing I would do is send Tfan and Skyman in to do the hard work. I'd then sift through the crumbs left. All kidding aside, in 1880, Leo XIII opened the secret archives of the Vatican to Roman Catholic scholars. Luther’s then-unknown Roman’s treatise was found by Denifle. He was working as an assistant archivist and was able to utilize it in his Luther biography, which was highly anticipated in the academic world, until the biography actually came out, and now proves to be an embarrassment to Roman Catholic scholarship. It would indeed be interesting to find out what they've got.

Scripture Over the Church and the Devastating Results of Not Following that Rule

An Evangelical Introduction to Church History, Part 4

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

The sad reality of the history of the Church in North Africa after Augustine died in 430: The effects of the Donatist Controversy and the Vandal Barbarian Invasions, who were Arian in their theology.

This is an excellent summary of some of Augustine’s statements on the priority of Scripture above the church against the Donatists, from Augustine’s work, “On the Unity of the Church” ( De Unitate Ecclesiae), which has never been fully translated into English and is not part of the standard Early Church Fathers book sets.

Addendum: (Oct. 20, 2016)
Augustine's "On the Unity of the Church" has been recently fully translated into English.
see here.

Credit goes to David T. King for putting them in a com-box a while back at “Green Baggins” blog. (scroll up to comment # 136 - I have not learned how to get it exact yet. )

They are provided here without the original Latin text, but Pastor King has the Latin text with it at his posting. I am fairly certain that all of these are in the three volume set, Holy Scripture: The Ground and Pillar of Our Faith, by David King and William Webster. (also highlighted at the side bar of this web site.) Most of these are also quoted in James White’s excellent book, Scripture Alone.

This demonstrates the truth of the often quoted statement by B. B. Warfield, “For the Reformation, inwardly considered, was just the ultimate triumph of Augustine's doctrine of grace over Augustine's doctrine of the Church. “ (Warfield, Calvin and Augustine, p. 321-322)

http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/whitaker-on-the-canon-part-1/#comment-75498

·comment # 136

D. T. King said,

Augustine (354-430): Let us not hear, You [i.e., the Donatists] say this, I say that; but let us hear Thus saith the Lord. There are the Dominical books, whose authority we both acknowledge, we both yield to, we both obey; there let us seek the Church, there let us discuss the question between us. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p 164. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput III, §5, PL 43:394.

Augustine (354-430): Therefore let those testimonies which we mutually bring against each other, from any other quarter than the divine canonical books, be put out of sight. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 164. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput III, §5, PL 43:395.

Augustine (354-430): I would not have the holy Church demonstrated by human testimonies, but by divine oracles. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, pp. 164-165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput III, §6, PL 43:395.

Augustine (354-430): Whoever dissents from the sacred Scriptures, even if they are found in all places in which the church is designated, are not the church. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput IV, §7, PL 43:395-396.

For trans., See Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3 Vols., trans. George Musgrave Giger and ed. James T. Dennison (Phillipsburg: reprinted by Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1992), Vol. 3, pp. 109-110.

Augustine (354-430): We adhere to this Church; against those divine declarations we admit no human cavils. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XI, §28, PL 43:410.

Augustine (354-430): I have the most manifest voice of my pastor commending to me, and without any hesitation setting forth the church, I will impute it to myself, if I shall wish to be seduced by the words of men and to wander from his flock, which is the church itself, since he specially admonished me saying, “My sheep hear my voice and follow me”; listen to his voice clear and open and heard; who does not follow, how will he dare to call himself his sheep? Let no one say to me, What hath Donatus said, what hath Parmenian said, or Pontius, or any of them. For we must not allow even Catholic bishops, if at any time, perchance, they are in error, to hold any opinion contrary to the Canonical Scriptures of God. Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, trans. George Musgrave Giger, ed. James T. Dennison, Jr., (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 1992),Vol. 3, pp. 91-92 and William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XI, §28, PL 43:410-411.

Augustine (354-430): All such matters, therefore, being put out of sight, let them show their Church, if they can; not in the discourses and reports of Africans, not in the councils of their own bishops, not in the writings of any controversialists, not in fallacious signs and miracles, for even against these we are rendered by the word of the Lord prepared and cautious, but in the ordinances of the Law, in the predictions of the Prophets, in the songs of the Psalms, in the words of the very Shepherd himself, in the preachings and labours of the Evangelists, that is, in all the canonical authorities of sacred books. Nor so as to collect together and rehearse those things that are spoken obscurely, or ambiguously, or figuratively, such as each can interpret as he likes, according to his own views. For such testimonies cannot be rightly understood and expounded, unless those things that are most clearly spoken are first held by a firm faith. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XVIII, §47, PL 43:427-428.

Augustine (354-430): We ought to find the Church, as the Head of the Church, in the Holy Canonical Scriptures, not to inquire for it in the various reports, and opinions, and deeds, and words, and visions of men. For trans., see William Goode, The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, 2nd ed., (London: John Henry Jackson, 1853), Vol. 3, p. 165. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XIX, §49, PL 43:429.

Augustine (354-430): For we do not say that we ought to be believed because we are in the Church of Christ, or because that Church to which we belong, was commended to us by Optatus, Ambrose, or other innumerable Bishops of our communion; or because miracles are everywhere wrought in it. . . . These things are indeed to be approved, because they are done in the Catholic Church, but it is not thence proved to be the Catholic Church, because such things are done in it. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, when He rose from the dead, and offered His body to be touched as well as seen by His disciples, lest there should be any fallacy in it, thought it proper to convince them, rather by the testimony of the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, showing how all things were fulfilled which had been foretold; and so He commanded His Church, saying, that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His Name, among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. This He testified was written in the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms; this we hold, as commended from His mouth. These are the documents, these the foundations, these the strong grounds of our cause. We read in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 17:11), of some believers, that they daily searched the Scriptures if these things were so. What Scriptures? but the canonical books of the Law and the Prophets; to which are added the Gospels, the Apostolical Epistles, the Acts of the Apostles, and the Revelation of St. John, Search, then, all these, and bring forth something manifest, by which you may prove the Church to have remained only in Africa, or come out of Africa in order that it might be fulfilled which the Lord said, “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.” For translation, see Charles Hastings Collette, Saint Augustine: A Sketch of His Life and Writings, A.D. 387-430 (London: W. H. Allen & Co., 1883), pp. 48-49. De Unitate Ecclesiae, Caput XIX, §47-51, PL 43:430.

David King wrote, citing Joseph Ignaz Von Dollinger, the Roman Catholic historian who opposed the Infallibility of the Pope dogma in 1870:

“But of all the works of Augustine that have been translated, there is one work, De Unitate Ecclesiae that has never been fully translated into English; . . .

But in his controversy with the Donatists, Augustine wrote this work to refute their schism from the Church Catholic. Notice how Augustine does not lodge his argument in an appeal to apostolic succession in this particular work, in fact he bids his adversaries not to look in the direction of human testimonies. Over and over, he argues with the Donatists that the church is to be found in and defined by the Scriptures. Obviously, Augustine did not share the skeptical pessimism of our present day opponents with respect to the testimony of Holy Scripture. Of Augustine’s writings and this one in particular, Johann Joseph Ignaz von Döllinger observed:

“St. Augustine has written more on the Church, its unity and authority, than all the other Fathers put together. Yet, from all his numerous works, filling ten folios, only one sentence, in one letter, can be quoted, where he says that the principality of the Apostolic Chair has always been in Rome,—which could, of course, be said then with equal truth of Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria. Any reader of his Pastoral Letter to the separated Donatists on the Unity of the Church, must find it inexplicable, on the Jesuit theory, that in these seventy-five chapters there is not a single word on the necessity of communion with Rome as the centre of unity. He urges all sorts of arguments to show that the Donatists are bound to return to the Church, but of the Papal Chair, as one of them, he knows nothing. “

See Janus, The Pope and the Council, trans. from the German, 2nd ed. (London: Rivingtons, 1869), pp. 88-89.

The Islamic Invasions and conquests - wiping out Christianity in North Africa:

Age of the Caliphs

Expansion under Muhammad, 622–632/A.H. 1-11

Expansion during the Rashidun Caliphate, 632–661/A.H. 11-40

Expansion during the Umayyad Caliphate, 661–750/A.H. 40-129

A.H. = After the Hegira (Muhammad's flight to Medina from Mecca in 622 AD)

Sad Reality of Church History in North Africa: Donatist Controversy, Vandals Invade, Muslims Invade and Conquer

The sad reality of church history is that the Donatist controversy sapped the life out of the church in N. Africa (In summary, it seems that the violence and lack of flexibility of the Donatists, coupled with the Catholic church at that time labeling them not only schismatics, but eventually heretics outside of the church, Augustine's change from using debate and persuasion to sanctioning the state to use force and violence to 'compel them to come in', and the state using force, based on Augustine's statement, the false doctrine of the Vandals and their violence also; all contributed to the life of the church being gone by the time the Muslims came.) The barbarian invasions, especially the Vandals had a lasting impact upon the next generations. The Vandals were Arian in their theology – they rejected the doctrine of the doctrine of the Deity of Christ, so “a generation arose that did not know the Lord” (see book of Judges 2:10) Between 430 – 632 AD, most of N. Africa became Arians. As a result, when the Arab Muslims invaded after 632 – 732 AD, the peoples of N. Africa, a mixture of the Berbers, Punic, and Latinized Berbers on the coasts with the Vandals and other Germanic invaders, became Muslims, because they had already given up the gospel and the doctrines of the Deity of Christ and the Trinity. Only the Coptic Church in Egypt survived the Arab Muslim invasions in N. Africa. The Coptic Church was Monophysite (or as they like to call themselves, Miaphysite, “that Christ’s divine nature absorbed His human nature”, so that He had only one Divine nature.) Their holding on the doctrine of the Deity of Christ and the Trinity seems to have given them strength to survive under Islamic domination and persecution.

Failure to Contextualize the Gospel for the frontier fields

Today in North African countries such as Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Libya, Muslims make up 96 to 99% of these countries populations. Turkey is 99% Muslim. What happened to Christianity that was once there? The Church in North Africa was once a thriving church, with famous church leaders such as Tertullian in the second century, Cyprian in the 3rd Century, and Augustine of Hippo, the great theologian in the fourth Century. Kane asks the question, “How shall we account for the demise of such a church?” [1] After mentioning some of the social and political factors that contributed to the fall of the North African church, he writes, “The real reason for the disappearance of the church in North Africa must be sought somewhere else. Actually, the church was not so strong as it appeared. Numerically it was large, but spiritually it was weak. To begin with, it had never become truly indigenous. It was too closely identified with Latin culture and Roman power. The congregations were composed mostly of Latin-speaking people in and around Carthage. Few of the Punic people ever embraced the Christian faith, and the Berbers were left untouched. Because of this the church never took root in the native soil. “[2]

Indeed, historian David F. Wright writes in the Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity, that Augustine “. . . was born to African parents of Romanized Berber origins in Tagaste in Numidia (modern Algeria) in 354 AD.” [3] Augustine himself was not Berber in his culture or thinking, but only ethnically tied to his people through his parents. (his father was pagan, but his mother Monica was a Christian, and she has become a very famous one because of her prayers for Augustine.) Augustine's father would be like the second generation son of a Japanese or Arab immigrant born in the U. S. , who has never been to the country of his parents and does not speak the language. This points out one of the most tragic trends in mission history, especially in the history of missions to Muslims: that converts are too often extracted from their own people and eventually take on a new foreign culture, totally separated from their own people and culture, even though many times they are near-neighbors geographically. This is called “extraction Evangelism” by many missiologists, but sometimes it is unavoidable as some believers have eventually fled persecution in Muslim lands.

So, the first reason that Kane gave was a failure to contextualize [by "contextualize" we mean the good and proper kind of contextualization of translation of the gospel into another language and culture and communication of it accurately, not the modern or post-modern extremes of it.] the gospel into the culture of the North Africans. “A second reason of the demise of the church in N. Africa was the failure to give the Scriptures to the people in their own language. They were available in Latin, but no translations were ever made into the language of the Punic people or the Berbers.”[4] The third reason was emphasizing the truth without the love and power to go with it: “Moreover, theological controversies had sapped the energies of the church. Before the time of Augustine, the church had been racked by the Donatist controversy. Theologians, instead of closing their ranks and presenting a united front to the common enemy, were pre-occupied with fratricidal warfare. They were more interested in defending the purity of the gospel than in demonstrating its power.”[5] Of course, the church must do both, defend the purity of the gospel and demonstrate its power by preaching the gospel accurately, defending the truth and being willing to suffer for it; and loving our enemies and living holy lives.

It seems the church had long since "left its first love" (see Revelation 2:4-5), as it had in Asia Minor, in Ephesus especially, and Jesus warned the churches about this issue. There was false doctrine and unholy living in some of the other churches in Revelation 2-3 also. Eventually, the newly converted to Islam, the Seljuk Turks in the 900s to 1071 AD conquered the eastern areas of Anatolia known as Turkey today. Then came the Crusades (1095-1299 AD); then the Ottoman Turks conquered the rest of the Byzantine Empire. Constantinople fell in 1453 AD and was renamed Istanbul.

As we have pointed out before, Muhammad, the founder of Islam, never heard the gospel or the full truth of the Bible in his own language. The Bible was not translated into Arabic until around 900 AD. Muhammad heard that Jesus was the Messiah ( Al Masih); that He was born of the virgin Mary, and did miracles, was sinless, and had "the Gospel" (the Injeel), but he thought the Trinity was God, the Son Jesus, and the mother, Mary. (Surah 5:116; 5:72-75; 6:101). He said that Jesus the Messiah was not crucified. (Qur'an, Surah 4:157) He said Jesus was not the Son of God and was only a prophet. ( Surah 4:171) This is proof that that the Qur'an is not inspired by God, as it denies clear historical facts, doesn't get the doctrine of the Trinity right, and denies things that Christians had been teaching for around 600 years. False doctrine had corrupted the churches; they exalted Mary too much. The combination of both sound doctrine and evangelism and missions is so important.

Muslims use Surah 2:78-79 to accuse Christians and Jews of making up Scriptures. The context there in the Qur'an is the Jews at the time of Moses. It says that there are some illiterate folk who only know the Scriptures through hearsay; and then it pronounces a "woe" on them that write something and say, "this is from Allah". This is honestly what Muhammad seems to have done. They admit he was illiterate and the Bible was not in Arabic yet. Which one gives the greater historical evidence of just "making up Scriptures"? Who is the one who just "heard" about some stuff without actually knowing what the Scriptures taught?

[1] J. Herbert Kane, A Global View of Christian Missions, Baker Books, 1971, pp. 52.

[2] Ibid, p. 52.

[3] David F. Wright, “Augustine of Hippo”, in Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity, edited by Tim Dowley, Eerdman’s, 1977, p. 198.

[4] Kane, p. 52.

[5] Ibid, Kane, p. 52.

Addendum:

For an interesting read of the History of the Donatists, and perspective that they were falsely accused and unjustly persecuted, first by Constantine, then Augustine himself. It seems Augustine started with argument, debate, and persuasion, as we see in the quotes above in this post, but later justified the use of force.

http://www.reformedreader.org/history/benedict/donatists/toc.htm

Augustine's Letter 173, written in 416 AD, where he [wrongly] uses the passage in Luke 14:23, "compel them to come in" as justification for state and police force against the Donatists. This famous mis-usage of Scripture by Augustine was subsequently used a lot by many in Church history to justify the use of force against heretics, schismatics, inquisitions, crusades, etc.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1102173.htm

Years ago, a pastor said to me, when I was first studying the Early Church Councils, schisms, excommunications, etc. and then the application of harshness of some of them in church history, namely against the Donatists in N. Africa, the Monosphysites in Egypt, Syria, and Armenia, and the Nestorians in Persia (Mesopotamia, today's Iraq): "The balance of mercy and love was needed with the battle for truth in "contend earnestly for the faith" (Jude 3)". See I Peter 3:15, Jude 20-23, and Ephesians 4:15.

A Setback for Positive Thinking?

Crystal Cathedral, California's Famous Multimillion-Dollar Megachurch, Is Up For Sale

Scott Thumma, a professor at Hartford Seminary who studies megachurches, said troubles at Crystal Cathedral don't necessarily "foreshadow doom and gloom for the megachurch phenomenon. Schuller and the Crystal Cathedral have always been outliers," Thumma said, though "his ideas and innovations propelled several prominent mega-pastors."

"This announcement ought to teach astute large church leadership teams [to] not to over-build, especially monuments to architectural and ministerial hubris ... to make sure to have a reasonable plan of succession, and above all, to engage in wise fiscal policies," Thumma added.

Harold Camping in the Hospital, Stroke?

I'm looking to get this verified.  It's interesting how fast "news" travels as Wikipedia already includes  the fact that Camping's had a stroke.

Update: I listened to the entire Open forum for June 9, and did not notice anything odd. As of the posting of this entry, the link for the June 10 Open Forum was not posted.

Looking through news feeds, as of 2 pm Eastern Time, I haven't found any stories reporting this.

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "AudioHQ@..."
To: Latter_Rain@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, June 10, 2011 8:51:02 PM
Subject: [LR] MR. CAMPING


Hello Group,

Sorry to report that Mr. Camping suffered a stroke last night shortly after the Open Forum and is currently in a local hospital. I have no other details. Please just pray for him and do not try to contact anyone at his home or Family Radio. He and Shirley have enough family members to handle the situation. I'm sure we'll be able to publicly update everyone on Monday.

Meanwhile, tonight's Open Forum is a repeat from 1991 from my achieves and KFTL and WFME-TV is a repeat of a very recent program.

Once again, let's continue to pray for his swift recovery.

Charlie Menut
WFME

A few Recent Camping Clips

I caught these clips from the Open forum, 6/2/11

Mr. Camping's advice to a Campingite

The Earthquake on October 21, 2011

Interesting stuff.

If Mr. Camping survives his stroke, perhaps he'll spiritualize the earthquake on October 22.