Evidences

                   “Beyond the Jordan” is a recurring biblical phrase that requires detailed study. It has relevance to locating unknown places like “the threshing floor of Atad” in Genesis 50:10, 11. In this reference “beyond the Jordan” occurs twice as an explanatory note for the position of the threshing floor.

         Matthew                      Mark                           Luke                            John

1.   (Un)conscious desire to avoid the demand made on a person’s life if these materials are

      true

2.   Anti-supernatural bias (note distinctions between atheistic, agnostic, deistic, neo-

Précis

      Scripture does not readily adapt itself to the eons of time projected for accomplishing what evolutionary theory postulates, particularly in the biosphere. With varying degrees of likelihood, certain possibilities might push the date A.M. beyond the 4000 + B.C. minimum reading of scripture as in fiat creationism.

Introduction

Can we put in sequence the origin of reciprocating parts that are necessary for the viability of the organism and the parts themselves? If we can put their origin in sequence, they are not reciprocal. But the parts of plants and animals are in fact reciprocally interdependent unto viability. All parts have to be present and functional at all times. Disorganization destroys functionality.

    I. Definition of Canonicity

  1.    Only letter to speak of Christ’s descent to Hades (3:18-20; 4:6), although some see a parallel in Ephesians 4:9

    1.    Along with Luke, Acts has short paragraphs that summarize periods of time the author

1.      Has the greatest number who send salutations of any New Testament writing. Philemon has a goodly number as well. Romans has by far the greatest number of saluted people.                                    

  1.    distinctive expressions include

             “in the heavenlies [ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς]”: 1:3, 20; 2:6; 3:10; 6:12

    1.    the only canonical New Testament epistle without any statement of authorship (John’s three epistles do not very clearly identify their author either.)

           1.   With the exception of Luke 20:16, Romans is the book that most uses the Pauline expression God forbid (μὴ γένοιτο, mē genoito): 3:4, 6, 31; 6:2, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1, 11. It appears also in 1 Corinthians 6:15; Galatians 2:17; 3:21; cp. 6:14.*

1.     All come from an imprisonment: Ephesians 3:1; 4:1; Colossians 4:3, 18; Philemon 1, 9-10

            We face a challenge in fleshing out our worldview. Sometimes a well-informed perspective needs to incorporate information of such a technical and detailed nature that we non-specialists are never sure how well we grasp it. On the other hand, specialists who work at the detailed level in a few fields have the opposite disadvantage: they are not well equipped to grapple with the big picture. They tend to make unwarranted extrapolations, which they set contrary to theism and creationism. Scientists frequently let “hard science” bleed over into philosophy of science without seeming to realize it. As a result, the relative certainty scientists may have about the specifics of their research they tend to transfer to the philosophical inferences they make from that work.

Although the problem of evil is not “easy” to answer, we can understand some things about how a degree of evil could occur in a holy God’s universe. But why an all-powerful God allows extreme evil to happen is more difficult. Scripture itself does not explain why he lets evil operate to the degree it does. Nevertheless, some observations make the issue more understandable. 

            A formal similarity could be seen between “emergent evolution” and progressive creationism. The “emergent points” of emergent evolution might appear to correlate with the “intervention points” of progressive revelation. From a scientist’s viewpoint, we could consider the possibility that a connector in a progression is a natural one rather than a supernatural one, as previously supposed. We may not already know that a natural “force” exists for accomplishing this complexification. There is a difference, however, between keeping the natural category potential for explanation in such cases and making it the necessary category for explanation by disallowing the supernatural category in principle. The latter is what methodological naturalism does by assuming that its method, good in itself, somehow becomes the only legitimate method. Creationists, however, want to keep the supernatural category open after the initial creation of mass-energy. The formal similarity is limited because of the internal-external variable in the respective formats at their correlating junction points.

     I. Authorship

            A.  External

                  1.  Earliest allusion in Polycarp (Ad Phil. 7)

 I.   Destination Geographical

 I. Authorship

            A.  External

                        The external attestation to 2 John is not so strong as that for 1 John. Absence of citations from the book may have been due to its subject matter. It is significant that the objections to apostolic authorship come from the later Christian writers.

            No epistle of the New Testament (Thiessen) “has earlier or stronger attestation than 1 Peter,” while (Moorehead) “the Second Epistle of Peter comes to us with less historical support of its genuineness than any other book of the New Testament.”

 I. Authorship

It is uncertain whether there is any evidence for 3 John ‘s being cited before the third century, if the Muratorian Canon speaks only of two epistles of John. This lack of citation and mention is understandable because of its brevity and the character of its contents. What was said of “the Elder” in connection with 1 John applies here also.

I. External Citation and Authorship Evidence (see Salmon, pp. 473ff.)

      The three main issues in Jude are (1) its canonicity, (2) its relationship to 2 Peter, and (3) its use of extra-canonical literature.

        Book             Guthrie          Harrison        Thiessen            Hiebert

                  The main introductory problems associated with Galatians are its destination and date. Determining the destination affects the time frame for the date. Since the readers are called “Galatians” (3:1; cp. 1:2), the question is whether Paul uses the term to mean (1) the ethnic group of Gauls, who gave their name to the ancient Hellenistic kingdom, or (2) the citizens of the Roman province of Galatia. The “northern Galatia” theory refers to the first option; the “southern Galatia” theory indicates the second. By that time the Roman province extended farther south to include Lystra, Derbe, and Iconium, cities Paul and Barnabas evangelized on the first missionary tour. Northern Galatia was a less extensive territory in the mountainous inland area around Pessinus and Ancyra.

Introduction:  The Antilogism

Introduction:  The Antilogism

    I.      Presentation of Evidence

Introduction: Possible significances of added names in Paul’s salutations

            Science deals with the experience of recurrent natural processes in the present. The technology science uses enhances the degree and kinds of sense perception in the natural realm.

 I. Mood shift between 3:1 and 3:2

The resurrection of Jesus provides a plausible explanation for his followers’ continued and growing zeal for claiming him as the Messiah although he had been killed. Messiah indeed “abides forever” as per the Old Testament witness, but killing him does not necessarily eliminate him from that role if he resurrected, especially if he arose and ascended to God with the understanding that he was to return and pick up the Messianic work in whatever fashion that proves to be.

            To locate the study of critical introduction to the Old Testament within the total picture of apologetics, we give here an abstract of the flow of apologetics. Instead of beginning with objective Christian evidences, as traditionally done, we include a prior step so that evangelism and apologetics become much the same kind of thing. Coming to conviction begins in the present with (1) our sense of need to be loved, to feel innocent and meaningful, and to have something to depend on. (2) The answer in Christianity comes as a cluster of historical events surrounding the person of Jesus the Messiah, especially his resurrection and the meaning of his life, death, and resurrection for human need in any age. (3) When we begin to carry out the principles of living that Christ taught and to receive in experience Christ’s love, the purposefulness of life, the freedom from guilt, and the confidence of living under One we can trust, we confirm subjectively that the truth is also the truth for us. Living in the new condition helps us identify more clearly the real needs among, and plus, perceived needs. This stage helps us understand the message itself more clearly, and so on. The process forms an ongoing dynamic of reciprocal causations between the three “poles.”

            To locate the study of critical introduction to the Old Testament within the total picture of apologetics, we give here an abstract of the flow of apologetics. Instead of beginning with objective Christian evidences, as traditionally done, we include a prior step so that evangelism and apologetics become much the same kind of thing. Coming to conviction begins in the present with (1) our sense of need to be loved, to feel innocent and meaningful, and to have something to depend on. (2) The answer in Christianity comes as a cluster of historical events surrounding the person of Jesus the Messiah, especially his resurrection and the meaning of his life, death, and resurrection for human need in any age. (3) When we begin to carry out the principles of living that Christ taught and to receive in experience Christ’s love, the purposefulness of life, the freedom from guilt, and the confidence of living under One we can trust, we confirm subjectively that the truth is also the truth for us. Living in the new condition helps us identify more clearly the real needs among, and plus, perceived needs. This stage helps us understand the message itself more clearly, and so on. The process forms an ongoing dynamic of reciprocal causations between the three “poles.”

Evil/sin was defined as a kind of being/“stuff” rather than a way of acting.

Good triumphs over evil.

            Good and evil are not equal opposites in power or legitimacy.

            Good and evil are not equally eternal. Evil has a beginning and an end.

1.   Ephesians reflects no definite, localized, historical situation which it is intended to meet.

1.   The only reasons for associating Hebrews with Alexandria are that (1) the earliest favorable attestation comes from there and that (2) it supposedly uses the allegorical method of interpretation.

1.   Hebrews uses the Old Testament text more than any other New Testament book does. (Matthew is next.) It has the longest Old Testament quotation of any book in the New Testament: 8:8-12 > Jeremiah 31:31-34.

Acts                                                      Secular Sources                              Galatians

    I. Jeremiah as a test case

   II. New Testament books where the unity issue has been raised

            The presentation here is not for solving the creation-evolution problem, but for clarifying the issue and correcting inappropriate thinking patterns.

Identifying the Issue

            Creationism as such vs. the Christian formulations of it. There is a difference between creation as a concept and the Judaeo-Christian—or even Islamic—formulation of it. The Christian formulation gets into additional matters, which vary according to the manner interpreters handle the relevant biblical materials.

            Determining from internal evidence the authorship of John’s gospel requires establishing the identity of “the disciple whom Jesus loved”: “This [disciple that Jesus loved] is the disciple that bears witness of these things and wrote them, and we know his testimony is true” (21:24 + 20). A similar comment appears in the account of the spear thrust: “He that has seen has borne witness, and his witness is true; and he knows he says true things that you may believe” (19:35; cp. 20:30-31). The characteristic description appears five times in the gospel beginning with the night before Christ’s death: 13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, and 21:20.1 Other more vague references to unnamed men include the second of “two disciples” of John that heard Jesus speak (1:35-39), the first being Andrew (1:40); and “another disciple,” known by the high priest (18:15).

I. Authorship

            The “we passages” in Acts provide the best indication of its authorship. They occur in a series of sections as follows:

                Historical backgrounds are important because they illuminate scripture. In addition, they often confirm the biblical record and occasionally may even help prove its trustworthiness in regard to things that can be tested. Consequently, we tend to view historical backgrounds favorably as a valuable resource. This presentation, however, stresses another observation. Like all sources of information, historical background, misused, can harm rather than help biblical studies. In the wrong hands, it can be invoked in ways that detract from hermeneutical and apologetic concerns.

            A. Observations against Jonah as history

Limitations of science

            Science has three major limitations. First, (1) science cannot deal with universals, or absolutes. It is subject to “the plague of particularity” because it is limited to the inductive approach. Science can form and test hypotheses, which are mental deductions from previous particulars; but these hypotheses are approximate, since they are based on limited previous experience. Since science cannot deal with the absolutes of universal space or eternal time, science cannot lead to an adequate understanding of “the big picture.” In short, science cannot produce a worldview. It deals more with particulars than with systematics.

I.  Selectivity

            The fact that the book does not recount all the events means that selection has occurred. If selection has occurred, the writer does not just tell about a bunch of things that happened (“stream of consciousness”). Rather, he is a historian that makes a judgment about what events are epitomes and direction-setting events. Seeing the big picture, a historian chooses events that—from the vantage point of God above or of later perspective—prove to be more important because of their impact on subsequent events or prove more useful to any distinctive purpose the author may have.

            Higher critics do not allow a wide enough range of style variance in New Testament authors. The items below have implication for greater variety in style.

            Scholars look at a number of phenomena in Pauline literature to assess whether Paul actually wrote the piece: (a) words (new words not in Paul, Pauline words not in this writing, Pauline words used in non-Pauline ways), (b) syntax (complex vs. simple sentence structure, Hebraisms and other solecisms), (c) topics addressed, and (d) mood of the writing.

For Christians, critical introduction to the Old Testament has the advantage of inspired external evidence to confirm and complement the internal evidence for authorship, date, and character of the earlier literary works. That approach represents logical order, not necessarily chronological order. The Christian method (1) begins with the New Testament verdict of Christ and the apostles insofar as they speak on critical Old Testament issues and (2) examines the data in those books to see whether they fit the verdict. Lastly, the method (3) crosschecks each book with information available from archaeology and ancient Near Eastern literature. The New Testament sets the framework for any view of the character and manner of origin for the Jewish canon. Tshe procedure could begin with the claims in the Old Testament books and measure the contents against the claims. In fact, that is what critics do with any book, but they would not be doing it as Christians. Critics do not have to do it necessarily as Christians, but Christians can take advantage of a factor already in place for clarifying and confirming matters where it can.

A few comments on Romans 1-2 relate to a natural theology. We can distinguish here what may be true from what Paul is arguing in this passage. Natural theology may be possible, but our conviction is that Paul does not have that in mind in Romans 1. He means that natural revelation is sufficient for making people without excuse for leaving truth already known; getting to that truth via nature is more difficult. The first format makes general revelation primary proof while the second makes a lesser truth claim by saying that it confirms special revelation.  

Introduction

            The majority of New Testament writings are letters, so we expect them to reflect practices in first-century letter writing. One custom was using an amanuensis, a stenographer who wrote down the contents. Biblical studies do not give this factor much attention even though New Testament writers used amanuenses. The oversight seems unusual to us today since most of us in the Western world write our own correspondence. If we do employ a secretary, it is primarily for computer skills. We are accustomed to reproducing by typeset, copiers, or computer printers. But ancient writers had to use different methods. If the work of an amanuensis can impact New Testament studies, we should allow that to affect our thinking where appropriate.

Criteria for Source Identification

Structure. A brief statement of the literary basis for source documents here anticipates objections raised against the approach. The theory appeals to parallel accounts as a phenomenon that betrays variant origins for the story they tell. Important doublets are the following:

  I. Literary Form

            At least three household churches existed in Rome by the time Paul wrote to the

    I. Preliminary Definitions and Concepts

Introduction: Ways of Defining Religion

            Apologetics, used in a non-technical sense, deals with three components that unite in the process of coming to faith and continuing in it. The conviction is that the process of apologetics is the same as the process of evangelism. Apologetics and evangelism see it from different viewpoints. Evangelism thinks of it from the viewpoint of the communicator and sees it as communication; apologetics thinks of it from the viewpoint of the hearer and sees it as conversion. What is seen and thought about, however, is the same thing.

      I.   Description of General Evolution and Special Creationism

Date:               Fluctuates according to the dating of Paul’s first imprisonment in Rome; not      

                                                         Writing of 2 Corinthians (2 Cor. 1:1-2)

? painful                                             2 Corinthians 9:2; 8:10

Introduction

Events in Galatians                                                 Events in Acts

1:16-17                Paul is converted, goes to                

                              Arabia, then back to                                                

                              Damascus (3 years)                                                

1.   Emphasizes the corporeality of the resurrected Christ as well as the fleshliness of Jesus

1.   Indicates most noticeably the prayer life of Jesus

         2.  More attention given to women involved in the life and ministry of Jesus, which could fit

1.  Most characterized by the expression εὐθύς (euthys, “immediately”: 42 times vs. 4 times in Matthew and once in Luke). Does καὶ εὐθύς [kai euthys] amount to “and by and by,” “and at another time”?

           1.  Among the gospels, greatest number of Old Testament citations of prophecies fulfilled in

                 the life of Jesus

A.D.          34 (perhaps 37)       Accession of Aretas               Paul’s   conversion   had   to   follow   this                                      date (Gal. 1:17-18; 2 Cor. 11:32).

                 36                         Pontius Pilate deposed            Does   the   absence   of   a   procurator   in                                     Palestine  account  for  the  possibility  of                                                                                           executing      Stephen     and     of     Paul’s                                     putting   others   to  death?   (Acts  7:1-8:3;                                                                                          9:1-2; 26:9-11)

Basic proposition: Place leads to purpose.

    I. Traces the spread of the gospel from Jerusalem to Rome

                  The criteria for the prison-epistles imprisonment are (1) a lengthy imprisonment with (2) an expected release (3) where Onesimus would have access to Paul.

            Some scholars suppose the apostles did not consider their work as something for the subsequent ages of the church. They were writing for the then and there. They had supposed that Christ would return within the lifetime of some first-generation Christians. Writing for posterity did not enter their minds. If their literary activity took place under these conditions, collecting their writings to establish a permanent canon would not have been a concerted effort either. Only when it became evident that Christ would not immediately return did the early Christians begin to locate and assemble apostolic writings.

1.   Change of situation

1.   Placements of the doxology (16:25-27 in the standard English text)

      a.   At end

Introduction

            The following observations evaluate the possibility of general evolution in the organic realm, particularly in the animal kingdom. They address features of living reality that highlight reciprocal causation, its necessary accompanying features, and its implications in contrast to all forms of straight-line causal series.

                        Resolving apparent contradictions in scripture calls for proper methods of interpretation. The approach assumes the inerrancy of scripture; brain teasers often become paradoxes in wording rather than real contradictions. The approach also assumes that scripture is divine in such a way that makes it harmonious throughout. The mechanisms available for harmonizing scriptures with each other and with experience amount to the same mechanisms for interpreting human language in general. What we do to clear up ambiguities we do to resolve difficulties. Apparent difficulties arise because either or both sides of a dilemma are unclear, but readers do not realize that when they sense a problem with the text. The following list is a brief list of mechanisms for resolving apparent discrepancies.

 I. Origin

            Paul wrote Romans after the acquaintances previously known from elsewhere had moved to the imperial city (16:3-16), after he had preached from Jerusalem to Illyricum (Romans 15:19, cp. 23), while he was in route to Jerusalem with the offering for the saints (Romans 15:25-28, 31), and at a time when he anticipated preaching the gospel in Spain (15:24, 28-29). According to Acts 19:21-22, while Paul was still in Ephesus on the third tour, he planned to go to Jerusalem and then to Rome. On this third tour, Paul organized the collection for the poor Christians in Jerusalem (cp. Acts 20:4; 21:15; 1 Corinthians 16:1-9;     2 Corinthians 8-9). Having left Ephesus after the riot, Paul journeyed north through Troas, across through Macedonia, and down to Greece (20:1-6) before returning through Macedonia and down the east coast of the Aegean Sea to Miletus and on to Palestine. He had not planned to minister again in Asia (Acts 20:25, 38). His three-month stay in Corinth during this trip would have given him time to compose Romans.

        I. Derivation of סֶלָה 

 I. 2 Thessalonians follows 1 Thessalonians.

    I.      While 2 Samuel 7:14 must refer to Solomon because Solomon so understood it (1 Kings 6:11-13; 8:17-21), it cannot refer exclusively to him since the context speaks of an eternal seed (2 Samuel 7:16).

Introductory Guidelines

    I.      Need to Get Rid of Parochial Self-Centeredness

List of Views

                     Besides historical narrative in The Acts, Luke includes significant verbal presentation from conversations, prayers, letters, and sermons. Below in order of appearance are the major examples of spoken material.

According to the higher critical reconstruction of Hebrew history, ritual sacrifice developed later than the time of Moses. The prophetic movement, beginning with Amos, opposed blood sacrifice as an appropriate way to draw near to God. The reconstruction takes certain statements as reminiscent of this earlier attitude in Israel and call for examination in light of the Wellhausen claim.

     I. A combination of doctrines in one group, rather than two or three doctrines held by

Introduction

                  In keeping with the structure of apologetics, the following sketch deals with the principles for determining whether a writing belongs in the Judaeo-Christian canon.

 I. Form

            A. Large portions cover the triumphal entry to the ascension: Matthew 21-28, Mark

                  11-16, Luke 19:29-24:53, John 12-21

            The presentation in Genesis is from Moses’ viewpoint in time and place.

     I. Views of the Flood

      We do know about a highly developed form of Gnosticism in the second century, but that fact has no bearing on the date and content of Colossians as a Pauline production in the first century.

 I. Historical Problem

            Those who  reject  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the  pastoral  epistles  (1  Timoty,  2
Timothy, Titus ) contend that there is no time in Paul’s life as recorded in Acts when he could have written these epistles.

            In working out the purpose of Acts, we consider three items:

            When the Christian gospel came on the scene of redemptive history, the status and nature of the Mosaic Law came under question. Not only was that question relevant to the Jews, but the Gentiles also had to cope with it because Christianity came out of a heritage different from their own. Christendom has demonstrated five ways of dealing with the issue.

        I. Literary Analysis

Part I: Recurring Elements

The Set-Up: Behind the Scenes: 1-2

Job 3

                  Scholars speculate about synoptic origins in an effort to create a scenario for the features of the first three gospels as a set. We do not have to settle on what actually explains the phenomena; we need only develop credible possibilities for explaining those features.

Introductory Comment

            Belief in the resurrection does not wholly depend on the evidence for one unique event. That event ties into other matters that anticipated it in prophecy and issued from it in history. To a significant extent, accepting Jesus as Messiah depended on the Jews’ proper understanding of Old Testament anticipations for the Messiah. This web of evidence increases exponentially the power of the data. A different understanding of Messiah and his kingdom, however, predisposed most patriotic Jews to reject him on doctrinal grounds. Nevertheless, as Gamaliel’s presentation shows in Acts 5, the argument from the very existence of the church tended to short-circuit that doctrinal objection sufficiently to force a re-evaluation of prophetic interpretation and current policy toward Jesus’ disciples.

Introduction

                           spring 51 (or 50)                                

                                                                                    Paul’s arrival in Corinth

Acts 17:1          Paul comes to Thessalonica.

         17:2          Paul spends three Sabbaths there.

Critical introduction addresses several issues related to the study of documents. In this setting, “introduction” does not mean getting acquainted with a book’s contents for the first time. “Critical” introduction does not “criticize” the book as if to degrade it. Critical introduction evaluates the nature of a book and matters surrounding its origin.

     I. Basic Data Regarding Amanuenses

                  Paul used amanuenses                                    Paragraphs explained as Pauline

Introduction

      The New Testament contains several literary genres:

            gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John)