Eusebius, EH.2.22: Festus and Paul's Roman Imprisonments

Image: Coin minted while Porcius Festus was procurator of Judea (AD 59-62).

Another installment has been added to the series on Eusebius of Caesarea’s The Ecclesiastical History: book 2, chapter 22 (listen here).

Notes and Commentary:

Eusebius here describes the things that transpired under the Roman governor Festus (succeeding Felix).

At this time Paul was sent as a prisoner to Rome, accompanied by Aristarchus (Col 4:10), where, as Luke records in Acts 28, he remained for two years, under arrest but freely preaching.

Eusebius adds that tradition holds that Paul was then released after this first Roman imprisonment and had his ministry extended until he was brought a second time to Rome.

It was during this second imprisonment, according to Eusebius, that Paul wrote 2 Timothy where he makes reference to his “first defense” and his release from “the lion’s mouth” (Nero).

Eusebius takes Paul’s reference in 2 Timothy to no one, including Luke, standing with him in this first imprisonment to indicate that Luke wrote Acts at that time.

Paul’s martyrdom came not at his first Roman imprisonment (when Nero might have been more lenient to the Christian movement) but at his second.

JTR

The Vision (6.7.19): His testimony is true

Image: Five young believers confessed "Jesus is Lord,"  were baptized, and admitted to membership and the Lord's table at CRBC last Sunday (6.2.19).

Note: The devotion is taken from last Sunday's sermon on John 21:20-25. This message was the ninety-first and concluding sermon in a series through the Gospel of John which began on May 21, 2017 with a sermon on John 1:1-5. Listen to the complete series here.

This is the disciple which testified of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true (John 21:24).

Some have held that the apostle John completed his writing of this Gospel at John 21:23 and another inspired author penned the last two verses retrospectively (vv. 24-25). One extra-biblical tradition suggests that John had a scribe named Prochorus and that he perhaps wrote these final words.

I am more inclined, however, to think that John is the human author of every word in this Gospel. Here, under the guidance of the Spirit, he simply wrote of himself in the third person, just as Moses described even his own death in Deuteronomy 34.

John tells us here that he is the beloved disciple, the author of this Gospel. And more importantly he tells us that what he has written is true.

This testifies not only to the inerrancy (“truth without any mixture of error”) and infallibility of Scripture generally but also to the truth of this Gospel in particular. Its witness to Christ and all he said and did is true.

When he said, “I am the bread of life” (6:35), it was true;

When he said, “I am the light of the world” (8:12), it was true;

When he said, “I am the door” (10:9), it was true;

When he said, “I am the good shepherd” (10:11), it was true;

When he said, “I am the resurrection and the life” (11:25), it was true;

When he said, “I am the way, the truth, and life” (14:6), it was true;

When he said, “I am the true vine” (15:1), it was true.

In his High Priestly Prayer Christ prayed for his disciples, “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth” (17:17).

Pilate cynically asked Christ: “What is truth?” (18:38). And John here answers: Christ is truth. His word is truth. This Gospel is truth.

In the end, John wants us, the readers, to know that this is truth. This is not some fanciful concoction of a deluded mind, but the reality of realities. His testimony is true.

Grace and peace, Pastor Jeff Riddle

WM 123: Text Note: The Doxology of the Lord's Prayer (Matt 6:13b)

I have recorded and posted WM 123: Text Note: The Doxology of the Lord's Prayer (Matt 6:13b) (Listen here).

Here are my notes:

When illustrating the differences between the modern and traditional text of the NT the doxology of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:13b) proves an important example, since this passage is so well known and loved in liturgy and personal piety.

The key questions: What did the Lord Jesus teach his disciples to pray? What did Matthew record when he included this prayer in his Gospel in the Sermon on the Mount?

Part One: An email exchange on the Doxology of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:13b):

Back on March 31 a listener wrote (exchange slightly edited):

Hello again Pastor,

I was wondering if you have done anything like a podcast on the ending of the Lord’s Prayer?

I was in a conversation the other day with someone from church and the authenticity of the ending of the Lord’s Prayer came up.  They said “it’s not in Erasmus”

I just said well I didn’t know that and that is interesting.

I wasn’t really looking for a debate.

I do see it in almost all the printed texts it seems from Beza, Steph.... but…I don’t see it in Erasmus from what I can tell at least.

But all my old Reformed commentaries have it from John Calvin to John Gill.

My response (a month later on May 1):

Sorry to be so long in getting back.

I'd love to do a WM on Matt 6:13b sometime. Hopefully, I'll get to it eventually.

I checked my digital copy of Erasmus's first edition (1516), and it is there in both Greek and Latin. I'll attach a picture.

You may know that the doxology also appears in the Lord's Prayer when cited in chapter 8 of the Didache (but omitting "the kingdom"), which dates to c. 100, so it is the earliest attested reading.

Hope this helps, JTR

Image: Erasmus 1516 Greek and Latin NT (including Matt 6:13b):

To which he responded the next day (May 2):

Thanks for the response. It does help.

Oddly it was my Pastor that said it wasn’t in Erasmus. He probably just heard someone blabbering nonsense about the ending one day. There is so much! bad information out there on this issue of the text.

Have a great day

Part Two: Tyndale and the Doxology of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:13b):

I thought of that exchange recently when someone pointed me to a blog article on text criticism that appeared on the Gospel Coalition website on April 11, 2019. The article is by Justin Dillehay, pastor of Grace BC in Hartsville, TN, and titled “4 Ways to Shepherd Your Flock Through Textual Variants” (read it here), and it also addresses the doxology of the Lord’s Prayer (Matt 6:13b).

In the article he makes reference to Tyndale’s omission of Matt 6:13b in the first edition of his English Bible (1526).

So, I wondered if the earlier writer’s pastor had confused Tyndale with Erasmus (or the if the writer had confused his pastor’s words).

I also wanted to be sure this was factually accurate, so I checked a digital copy of Tyndale’s 1526 online, and it does, indeed, omit Matt 6:13b. Here is an image from Tyndale's 1526 NT:

I then, however, checked my copy of David Daniell’s modern spelling edition of Tyndale's 1534 NT (Yale, 1989, 1995) and found it includes the doxology: “For thine is the kingdom and the power, and the glory for ever. Amen.” So, I searched for a digital copy of the original of Tyndale's 1534 NT also:

In his introduction to his edition of Tyndale’s 1534 NT, David Daniell writes:

“Tyndale translated the New Testament twice, and continually revised. His 1534 New Testament was his greatest work.”

We are left to ponder why Tyndale omitted Matthew 6:13b in his 1526 edition. It is possible that he did so in order to bring his translation of the prayer into conformity with the Latin Vulgate which also omits it. This is one of many examples  of places where the modern critical text adopts readings in line with the Vulgate. The Clementine Vulgate concludes the Lord’s Prayer: “Et ne nos inducas in tentationem. Sed libera nos a malo. Amen.” (Matt 6:13). The Lord’s Prayer which includes the doxology might therefore be considered a distinctively Protestant understanding of the prayer.

It is important to remember that it was the 1534, not the 1526 edition, which is considered to be Tyndale’s “greatest work.” The fact that he omitted the doxology of the Lord’s Prayer in the preliminary 1526 NT, therefore, should not be used as a justification for its omission today, especially since upon later consideration Tyndale determined to include it.

Part Three: A Brief Look at the External Evidence:

In support of the modern critical text’s omission: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, along with D, Z, 1070, family 1, Lectionary 2211. Among versional support we have the Latin tradition, Middle Egyptian (Mesokemetic), and some Bohairic Coptic mss. Among the Fathers Origen is cited.

In support of the traditional text we have K, L, W, Delta, Theta, family 13, 33, etc. and the Majority tradition. Among the versions we have some individual Latin mss. like f and q, the Harklean Syriac, some Boharic Coptic mss., etc.

Most interesting is the reading in chapter 8 of the Didache (c. 100) which includes the doxology but omits “the kingdom” reading: “thine is the power and glory forever.” It also omits the “Amen” and is followed by the injunction: “Pray thus three times a day.”

The NA 28 puts a thumb on the scale by prefacing the textual variants by a reference in parenthesis to the prayer of David in 1 Chronicles 29:11-13. The implication apparently being that later scribes would have tried to make David’s doxology part of the prayer of Jesus, the Son of David. But this begs the question as to whether Christ himself appropriated these words in order intentionally to echo David.

NA 28 also adds to the apparatus an obscure variant from the fifteenth century ms. 1253 which reads: “for thine is the kingdom of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit forever. Amen.” This suggests that the ending was malleable and open to orthodox “improvement.” But the ending in 1253 is clearly late while the doxology is very early (cf. Didache, W, etc.).

Metzger’s textual commentary (second edition) offers more insight on the modern text critical assessment.

Part Four: Conclusion:

The doxology (including the Amen) is the fitting ending to the Lord’s Prayer. It’s appearance in the Didache proves it to be the earliest attested reading. Clearly, it is not a late development. It was the reading affirmed in the majority of Greek manuscripts, including some of the earliest age (like W) and is only excluded by a handful of Greek mss. Though omitted in the Latin tradition, it was nevertheless, preserved in the West, with the printing of the TR and distinctively affirmed by various Protestant translations, including Tyndale’s definitive 1534 English translation.

JTR

Eusebius, EH 2.21: The Egyptian False Prophet

A new episode has been added to the occasional series upon Eusebius of Caesarea’s The Ecclesiastical History: book 2, chapter 21 (listen here).

Notes and Commentary:

Eusebius continues his account of disturbances among the Jews which occurred during the Roman governorship of Felix.

Here the focus is on an Egyptian false prophet, who is described by Josephus. Eusebius says he appeared in the wilderness as a “sorcerer” and “secured for himself the faith due to a prophet.”

He led 30,000 followers to the Mount of Olives where Felix and the Roman garrison attacked and defeated them.

Eusebius also notes that Josephus’s account is matched by that in Acts 21:38 where Luke records that the “chief captain” [KJC; Greek: chiliarchos; the same term is used here by Eusebius, though Lake renders it as “centurion”] asks Paul if he is the Egyptian prophet. Paul makes clear that he is not [see v. 39]. Luke calls his followers “four thousand men of the Sicarii [tōn sikariōn]” (cf. KJV: “four thousand men that were murderers”).

Again, we see the tumultuous political and religious times of Jesus and the apostles.

We also see Eusebius drawing on Josephus and showing its harmony with Acts.

JTR

The Vision (5.31.19): CRBC 2019 "Puritan" VBS Coming!

June 17-20 (Monday-Thursday)

VBS is for children ages preschool to 12.  Older children (ages 13-18) will be youth helpers.  Parents and family may also stay and participate in the sessions if they like.

VBS meets from 10:00 am—12:30 pm, Monday-Thursday. Light Lunch will be served on site for participants and families daily from 12:30—1:00 pm.

Theme:  The Life of Jesus According to Matthew

VBS Daily Schedule:

9:45 am—10:00 am           Arrival

10:00 am—10:15 am        Opening (procession, songs, etc.)

10:15 am—10:45 am        Bible Lesson

10:45 am—11:15 am        Recreation

11:15 am—11:30 am        Refreshment Break

11:30 am—12:00 pm        Craft/Drama

12:00 am—12:15 pm        Bible Lesson Review

12:15 pm—12:30 pm        Closing

12:30 pm—1:00 pm          Lunch/Pick-up

VBS Daily Bible Topics:

Monday: Jesus Begins His Ministry (Matthew 1—4)

Topics: Birth in Bethlehem (1-2); Baptism (3); Temptation (4); Calling Disciples (4)

Tuesday: The Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5—7)

Topics: The Sermon on the Mount

Wednesday: Jesus Continues His Ministry (Matthew 8—25)

Topics: Jesus Feeds 5,000 (14); Peter’s Confession (16); Sheep and Goats (25).

Thursday: The Cross and Resurrection (Matthew 26-28)

Topics: The Last Supper (26); the Cross (27); The Resurrection and Great Commission (28)

Grace and peace, Pastor Jeff Riddle

Peter J. Williams on why the "telephone game" analogy is ill chosen for the transmission of Jesus traditions in the NT Gospels

Image: Norman Rockwell's "The Gossips" which appeared on the cover of the March 6, 1948 edition of The Saturday Evening Post.

I’ve been reading Peter J. Williams’s book Can We Trust the Gospels? (Crossway 2018).

In the book Williams provides reasonable arguments as to why the information about Jesus in the NT Gospels should be considered historically reliable.

At one point he offers a response to those who use the “Chinesewhispers” or “telephone game” analogy to argue for corruption in the transmission of factual information in the Gospels.

Williams offers this response:

The analogy is, however, ill chosen. After all, this game is specifically optimized to produce corruption. Hence come the rules that one must whisper, passing on the message only once and only to a single person, and there must be sufficient people playing to ensure that the message is corrupted.

The circumstances surrounding the passing on of reliable information in the Gospels could not be more different. Not only are the names of people and places authentic, showing that they could not have been passed through multiple unreliable steps in transmission, but the very conditions in early Christianity were unsuitable for producing corruption: they were marked by a high emphasis on truth, a sense of authoritative teaching, a wide geographical spread among followers of Jesus, and a high personal cost to following him. A plausible scenario for accidental corruption simply was not there. By contrast, the view that people passed on reliable information explains the data more simply (77-78).

JTR

Eusebius, EH 2.19-20: Jewish Unrest in the Time of Felix

Image: Modern view of the Western or "Wailing" Wall in Jerusalem.

A new installment has been added to the series on Eusebius of Caesarea’s The Ecclesiastical History: book 2, chapters 19-20 (listen here).

Notes and Commentary:

Eusebius here continues to survey the history of the Jews in Palestine in the time between the ministry of Christ and the First Jewish War and he continues to rely on Josephus as a historical source.

First, in chapter 19 he reports on a riot in Jerusalem during the Passover during the reign of the Emperor Claudius in which 30,000 Jews were trampled to death. He also notes Claudius’s appointment of Herod Agrippa II as King of the Jews and Felix as the Roman governor.

At Claudius’s death, Nero becomes Emperor.

Next, in chapter 20 he conveys a report from Josephus about unrest among the priests in Jerusalem at the time of Felix.

He also reports on “a certain kind of bandits” in Jerusalem who hid short daggers under the clothing and carried out daily assassinations, including that of Jonathan the High Priest.

We get a picture here of the turbulent political climate and the unrest between Jews and Romans in the first century that both sheds light on the death of Jesus but also upon the Jewish revolt against Roman rule that would break out in AD 66.

JTR

Calvin on the 153 fish and unbroken nets of John 21:11: A Rationalizing Trajectory?

Note: I’ve been preaching through John’s Gospel on Lord’s Day mornings over the past two years or so [and am nearing the end of that study]. Along the way, I have been reading the corresponding commentary by Calvin, and I have been struck by Calvin’s usual aversion to mystical or allegorical interpretation, no doubt a reaction to the excesses of the RCC of his own day. The text below is taken from my sermon last Sunday on John 21:1-14 and focuses on v. 11 which includes two details seemingly ripe for spiritual interpretation: the meaning of the 153 fish and the unbroken net. Calvin, as usual resists the allegorical. We happened to have a brother OPC pastor visiting with us last Sunday and over lunch we were discussing Calvin’s interpretation of this passage. I shared with him that while on one hand I greatly appreciate Calvin’s "plain sense" take, on the other I wondered if this rationalizing tendency in Calvin set a trajectory for the rise of the modern historical critical method, especially in Protestant lands, that eventually led to the exclusion nearly altogether of the spiritual, supernatural, and mystical understandings of the text. Here is the excerpt from my sermon manuscript:

John 21:11: Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great fishes, and hundred and fifty three: and for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken.

In v. 11 we read that Simon Peter went up drew the net to land “full of great fishes.”

There are two intriguing details which are shared here:

First, John says that the number of the fish was one hundred and fifty-three. On one hand, we might take this simply as a vivid detail provided by the inspired evangelist to show the historicity of this event. It really happened and he recalls the exact number of fish caught in that net that day.

Interpreters of this passage, however, have been prone to find spiritual significance in this exact number.

One commentator I read notes, “Some Greek zoologists held that there were 153 kinds of fish, thus this catch fulfilled Ezekiel 47:10” (William E. Hull, John, Broadman Commentary, 373).

Ezekiel 47:10 And it shall come to pass, that the fishers shall stand upon it from Engedi even unto Eneglaim; they shall be a place to spread forth nets; their fish shall be according to their kinds, as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many.

The same commentator adds: “Further 153 represented the sum of the first seventeen numbers (1 + 2 + 3 …. + 17), and so may be represented by an equilateral triangle with 17 units in the base and one each side…. This ideal figure could stand for “the full number of the Gentiles” (Rom 11:25), to be brought in by the apostolic mission.”

Another commentator suggests the passage fulfills Jeremiah 16:16a: “Behold, I will send for many fishers, saith the LORD, and they shall fish for them…” (Orthodox Study Bible).

Augustine apparently managed to take the number 153 as denoting the law and the gospel (so Calvin says).

Calvin offers the sensible conclusion: “As to the number of fishes, we ought not look for any deep mystery in it.” Instead, we ought simply to receive it as an evidence of Christ’s divine power.

The second intriguing detail: “and for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken.” Remember that in the earlier episode recorded in Luke 5, their nets had broken under the load of the great catch (v. 6). But now we have the miracle of the unbroken net.

It is hard not to see this as pointing to the unity that will be shared among genuine disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ. They will come from many times, many nations, many cultures, many languages, and they will have differences among them, but they will have a genuine unity among them that will come from Christ himself.

Think again of Christ’s prayer for us in John 17:21: “That they all may be one….”

Though many, the net will not be broken.

Again, I tend to see in these actual “physical” events a “spiritual” foreshadowing of what will happen in evangelism.

Calvin, however, sees it much more pragmatically. His insights are worth considering.

He says that the spiritual lesson to be gleaned here is the importance of perseverance in laboring for the kingdom even we see little with respect to visible results. The disciples fished all night and caught nothing, but it due time and at Christ’s direction, they received a great and unexpected result.

He observes:

“In the same manner , also, God often tries believers, that he may lead them the more highly to value his blessing. If we were always prosperous , whenever we out our hand to the labor, scarcely any man would attribute to the blessing of God the success of his exertions, all would boast of their industry, and would kiss their hands.”

And:

“Now if we dislike our calling, because the labor which we undertake appears to be unproductive, yet, when the Lord exhorts us to steadiness and perseverance, we ought to take courage; in the end we shall obtain a happy result, but it will be at the proper time.”

This could be applied to many circumstances:

To a parent despairing at not seeing spiritual fruit in a wayward child.

To a believer meeting hostility for Christ’s sake in his workplace.

To one bearing witness that seems fruitless to an unsaved friend or family member.

To a pastor laboring without the outward signs of progress he might earnestly desire.

It may seem you have fished all night but caught nothing. Do not despair, for so did the disciples at the Sea of Tiberias till Christ did intervene and direct.

JTR

The Vision (5.24.19): Come and dine

Note: Devotion taken from last Sunday's sermon on John 21:1-14.

Jesus saith unto them, Come and dine (John 21:12a).

Let’s return to that last statement of the risen Lord to the seven disciples by the Sea of Tiberias, “Come and dine.”

Many interpreters have found in this invitation overtones of the Eucharist, or the Lord’s Supper, as a means of grace, even though the food here is not the bread and cup, but the bread and fish.

That’s possible, but rather than an invitation to the Lord’s table I think we can see it more broadly as a general invitation to discipleship, to join in having that nourishing and soul-satisfying communion with Christ, which includes being part of God’s people, that fellowship which Christ has built and to which the apostles and those who have come after have added in his name.

Come and enjoy. Come and be fed. Come and be ministered unto by the risen Christ himself. Christ satisfies the hungry soul. Christ fills the empty life. Christ gives rest to the weary. Come and dine.

Christ’s statement might be described as the New Covenant equivalent to Isaiah 55:1: “Ho, everyone that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat: yea, come buy wine and milk without money and without price.”

And to Psalm 34:8: “O taste and see that the Lord is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him.”

And it anticipates that ultimate communion which is to come: “Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb” (Revelation 16:9).

Come and dine.

Grace and peace, Pastor Jeff Riddle

Scenes from 2019 CRBC Youth Conference (May 17-18)

Last weekend we enjoyed our annual Youth Conference at the Machen Retreat Center in beautiful Highland County, Virginia.

This year's theme was "Understanding the Doctrine of the Trinity" and I had the privilege of teaching the young people. Unfortunately, we did not do an audio recording of the sessions, but here are the four session topics and links to the teaching handouts given the participants:

Session One: The Biblical basis of the Trinity

Session Two: What the Trinity Is

Session Three: What the Trinity Is Not

Session Four: Why the Trinity Matters

We also had a lively Q & A at the end with some very insightful questions. Aside from the teaching, there was also time for fellowship. recreation, and the annual "Chopped" dessert competition (Reformed Youth edition).

Here are some scenes from the weekend: