Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘inspiration’

My soul waits for the Lord

More than watchmen for the morning

More than watchmen for the morning.

Psalm 130:6 (ESV)

While this post has nothing to do with the stated purpose of this blog ( I posted it on my other blog) I wanted to place it here, because I hope it’s message will resonate with some of my readers who do not subscribe to my other blog.

For many years I felt I possessed an insight into this verse that a lot of people could not appreciate. Whenever I read this verse, invariably an image would come to mind of experiences I had in Vietnam. I remember being on guard in Vietnam, staring out into the darkness, praying that I would see nothing throughout a long and fearful night. Most of the time, the night would pass uneventfully, although it was not always to be so. But it’s that image of staring out into a darkness so black that it seems to envelop you that I most remember. Can you imagine the relief when daylight finally arrives and most of the danger is over? And that’s how it must have felt to watchmen on the city walls in the ancient world; fear turning to relief with the promise of one more day.

As I try to deal with a diagnosis of terminal lung cancer I feel some of that same anxiety. I see before me a darkness that threatens to swallow me up with no promise of daylight at the end. You see, I understand that life is too uncertain and our fears too real for them to be explained away simply by quoting an inspirational verse. You can quote this verse (and hundreds of others) to me, but the darkness is still there and the struggles ongoing.

So, what should we do with verses like this? First of all, be careful before you post an inspirational verse on social media. Can you understand that I now have two perspectives on this verse that many of you cannot identify with (Vietnam and cancer)? Posting a verse such as this provides little encouragement to me, unless it is put into a context that recognizes the full reality of my situation. I would even suggest that until you have experienced real hardship in life, perhaps you may not be the best one to provide encouragement. Better to leave that to those who have some battle scars and have experienced struggle firsthand.

So how can this and similar verses encourage us? Certainly not by some “health and wealth” platitude that everything is going to work out fine. From a material perspective, it may not. Yes, I can and do look forward in faith to a time when the darkness is over and an eternal morning dawns. I believe that, but I still have to deal everyday with pain and struggles that are so real I am reluctant to describe them. I have to watch my wife step in and do so many things that should be my responsibility. And although she does so magnificently and without a word of complaining, it is hard for me to accept.

So, just in case you missed it, here is the lesson with which I would leave you. Please recognize that life is real and struggle is part of it. For many of us the darkness is always there, ready to engulf us. Simply posting an inspirational verse or quotation by itself is not enough. Do something to acknowledge that you recognize the reality behind it. The last thing someone struggling with a serious problem needs is for someone to post something that just adds to their guilt, because they do not have a blind faith that takes away all of the fear. And as much as I long for the morning, today the darkness is still there. So, leave me with encouragement as I struggle with that darkness, rather than guilt because I am still struggling.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Originally I did not intend to comment about my ongoing battle with lung cancer, but I feel the need to share a short summary of what I am doing and how I am responding.

As I anticipated, it has been almost impossible to maintain the physical and mental discipline necessary to post further entries. I still hope to be able to do that sometimes, but that will depend on my response to treatment.

In the meantime, for those who are interested, I am responding to chemo as well as could be expected. After three rounds of chemo, my oncologist ordered a CT scan which shows that the chemo has been somewhat effective at reducing the cancer. She ordered three more rounds of chemo. At that time, they will do another CT scan and decide what if any treatment would be appropriate going forward. I am dealing with chemo induced anemia, but there is a shot I take that helps raise the red blood count.

Overall, I believe I am responding to treatment as well as could be expected.  Generally, I am upbeat, and I am certainly not sitting at home waiting to die. While that may come at some point, I would like to use my situation to encourage others who are facing trials that may appear insurmountable.

I have had much time to think about how I would like to be remembered.  I hope that this blog has provided (and may still continue to provide) factual and interesting information about the history of the Bible. More than that, I would like to use my condition to touch other peoples’ lives. If my experience can provide strength for someone who feels hopelessly entangled in depression, guilt, or despair that would be the greatest blessing I could receive.  And if something I wrote caused another person to pick themselves up and try again, I would be thrilled. If you have not checked the page in this blog that has a link to my other blog, Faith and Inspiration, you might wish to do that. I am using that blog now to post updates as well as inspirational posts.

Obviously, the focus of my life must now change, but I hope that in whatever format it may be, I may continue to influence others for good. I see all the negativity on social media, and it saddens me beyond measure. It’s not how I wish to be remembered.

So, I’m still here, feeling fairly well, even as I continue to deal with effects of chemo. I have a future before me, whether it is months or a couple of years doesn’t really matter. What matters is how I can help other people. That is what I want to do now, and that is how I would like to be remembered.

Read Full Post »

This post is to let my readers know that the nature of this blog may change in ways that cannot be predicted at this time. On April 15, 2014, I was diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer. Further tests are being run to determine the best course of treatment, but the oncologist made it clear that the goal of treatment is not to cure the disease, but to prolong my life.

I have never been a smoker, and we have no history of lung cancer (actually of much cancer at all) in our family. The oncologist agrees that if there is a single cause, it is most likely due to exposure to Agent Orange in Vietnam. In the next day or two I will be contacting the Veterans Administration to apply for service related disability.

Obviously, this development will impact what happens to this blog going forward. Right now I intend to continue making posts, although they may be shorter and more infrequent. How that changes in the future is in God’s hands.

If anyone is interested, I have set up a CaringBridge site, which you can visit to get updates on my condition. You can also sign up there to be notified of new entries as I or my wife make them. The web address is:

http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/garycottrell

Since this is a Christian blog, I feel open about requesting prayers from believers who feel inclined to do so. I am most concerned about how this will impact my family, especially with a mentally disabled son living with us.

This is all I intend to say about this on my blog unless conditions change to the point that further information needs to be given.

Read Full Post »

A large number of the posts in this blog have dealt with textual variations in one form or another, especially in the text of the New Testament. I have concentrated so much on this topic, because opponents of the Bible frequently charge that the variations among the manuscripts demonstrates that the text of the Bible has become so hopelessly corrupted that we cannot know whether it reflects the documents as originally written. I have attempted to face the issues as honestly as possible.

Most recently I concluded a series of posts, concentrating on the most serious textual problems we find in the New Testament. I thought about doing one or two more, but I feel the point has been made. Some of my readers questioned my interpretation of the evidence for some of these passages, and with good reason. While a huge proportion of the variations can be determined with virtual certainty, there are passages for which the evidence is more subjective and which do make a real difference in how we read certain books. That is precisely why I chose these passages to examine. I wanted to bring out into the open the most serious textual problems we find.

I have attempted to demonstrate that the most significant textual problems we find have more to do with favorite stories than with real doctrinal or theological issues. Let me mention three that reflect what I have been trying to say.

The story of the woman taken in adultery in John 8 has no doctrinal or theological significance. Removing this story from the text may take away a favorite story (and it is one of my favorites), but it does no damage to anything taught in the New Testament.

The baptismal confession in Acts 8 describes a doctrinal practice within the heritage in which I was raised, but once again, only reflects a simple ritual that very few people would see as significant in any real sense.

Finally, the heavenly witnesses found in 1 John 5 provides a specific reference to what came to be known as the Trinity. At the same time, there are a number of other passages that teach essentially the same thing about which there is no question textually. So, once again, no theological teaching is in question.

And these passages are truly representative of the most serious kinds of textual problems we find in the New Testament. Those who suggest that the text of the Bible has become so corrupted that we cannot have any confidence in what it teaches have the burden of proof to back up such assertions. From my study there is simply no substantial evidence to support such charges. On the contrary, with over 5,800 Greek manuscripts dating back to the second and third centuries, we have a wealth of evidence that should cause us to feel confident that when we read the Bible, we are reading what the authors originally wrote. I remain convinced that is where the evidence should lead us.

Read Full Post »

I have said that there are no textual variants that affect doctrine or theology. Actually, the one I wish to discuss today does have doctrinal implications, but primarily in the religious tradition of which I am a part. My heritage practices adult baptism by immersion and almost exclusively asks the person being baptized, “Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” Most people today would be hard pressed to state where that confession comes from. The reality is that it comes from Acts 8:37 which is routinely footnoted in most translations except the King James. The question today is why do most modern translations not include verse 37 in the body of the text?

The simplest answer to that question is that the most ancient Greek manuscripts do not include it. The manuscripts that do not have verse 37 include—p45 (3rd century), and the big three codices, Vaticanus and Sinaiticus (4th century),and  Alexandrinus (5th century), along with other manuscripts.

Verse 37 is included in Codex E which dates from the 6th century and in many of the later cursive manuscripts. It is also included in the Old Latin. Irenaeus quotes part of it, which shows that the passage was in existence at least in the latter part of the second century, perhaps earlier. Bruce Metzger provides an interesting perspective when he writes in A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, “Although the passage does not appear in the late medieval manuscript on which Erasmus chiefly depended for his edition (ms. 2), it stands in the margin of another (ms. 4), from which he inserted it into his text because he ‘judged that it had been omitted by the carelessness of scribes.’”

All of this is probably more detail than most of my readers care about. The bottom line is that we should be able to see that the passage is certainly questionable. Possibly it was inserted as a possible answer to the Eunuch’s question in verse 36, “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?” (ESV). Certainly the passage retains perhaps the most ancient baptismal confessional handed down to us. I like it because of its simplicity and its emphasis on the primacy of faith in Jesus as the Christ. I can think of nothing with which I would want to replace it.

At the same time, it probably was not originally part of the text of Acts. As I said earlier, this may disturb some people within my religious heritage, but I am first of all interested in truth, not in preserving what I was taught to believe. This is the lesson I would like for my readers to get from this post. We should not come to the Bible seeking to validate what we already believe. Nor should we bring our preconceptions to it. I have always attempted simply to accept what I find there, and I feel comfortable doing so.

Read Full Post »

The ending of Mark is perhaps the most significant textual question in the New Testament. It is important for two reasons. First, there is real doubt as to how the gospel originally ended. Also, it is a significant message. This is the type of issue that troubles people. Let’s look at it.

Most modern translations raise some kind of question about Mark 16:9-20. They may also include what is referred to as the shorter ending, which reads in the NAS Revised Edition, “And they promptly reported all these instructions to Peter and his companions. And after that, Jesus Himself sent out through them from east to west the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.”

So, there are four possibilities:

  1. Mark originally ended with the shorter ending.
  2. Mark originally ended with the longer ending (vv. 9-20).
  3. Mark originally contained another ending which was lost before it could be copied.
  4. Mark originally ended after verse 8.

Let’s eliminate the first possibility immediately. It isn’t natural. It even sounds like something tacked on, because a scribe did not find the ending satisfactory. Greek manuscripts that contain it date from the 7th to the 9th centuries or later, although an Old Latin and other less significant versions (translations) include it. But, overall, this shorter ending has very little to support it.

Could the gospel have ended as we have it with verses 9-20? Yes, that is a possibility, although I have to admit I don’t think it likely, even though there are a very large number of manuscripts and versions that support it.  Several 5th century manuscripts include it, along with virtually all the later manuscripts, as well as the earliest manuscript of the Old Latin, Latin Vulgate, one Old Syriac Version, the Syriac Peshitta, and a number of other versions. Irenaeus, one of the church Fathers, refers to the longer ending, which shows that it existed in the 2nd century and that Mark was believed to be the author. That sounds impressive, so what’s the problem?

In an earlier post, we talked about the three most significant manuscripts we have of the New Testament. Two of these, the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus date from AD 325-350). Whenever these manuscripts agree scholars consider that to be significant. And neither of these manuscripts includes verses 9-20. These verses are also absent from the earliest Old Latin manuscripts, about 100 Armenian manuscripts, the two oldest Georgian manuscripts, as well as other versions.

Among the church fathers, Clement of Alexandria and Origen show no knowledge of the existence of these verses. Eusebius and Jerome acknowledge that it was absent from almost all Greek copies of Mark known to them. Finally, many of the manuscripts that do contain verses 9-20 are marked with notations indicating that it was questionable as to whether the passage should be included.

Finally, we must consider the possibility that the original ending of Mark was lost before it could be copied. While that is a real possibility, it is somewhat unlikely. The original was probably written on a scroll, rather than a codex. While the last leaf of a codex could be torn off, the ending of a scroll is harder to lose.

One quick message of reassurance. If we eliminate verses 9-20, we have not lost what is commonly referred to as “the Great Commission.” It is contained in virtually the same words in Matthew 28, and there are no textual issues relating to Matthew’s version at all.

I tend toward believing that Mark ended his gospel with verse 8. While that may seem to be an unusual ending, it has literary value. The rest of the story would likely have been known by most of Mark’s readers, but by ending it abruptly at verse 8, Mark forces us to ask ourselves the question, “How will I write the ending for myself? How will I respond to the events as described? Will I respond with faith or with doubt and confusion? I can’t say whether Mark deliberately set out to pose these questions, but they are there, nonetheless, and I must admit that I am intrigued by the literary value of this ending. Mark leaves us with an empty tomb, but with the disciples afraid and not sure what to do. I can identify with that. Can’t you?

Read Full Post »

Whenever textual problems in the New Testament come up, 1 John 5:7—8 seems to be the one that is discussed first, as if it is the most serious textual problem we have. I am going to discuss it first, although it does not seem to me to be that serious a problem. You be the judge.

Here is the issue. 1 John 5:7—8 reads as follows, first in the King James Version, then in the New American Standard Version, Revised Edition. I have highlighted the phrase in question.

King James — “7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”

New American Standard — “7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood: and the three are in agreement.”

Obviously, the verse divisions are arbitrary, since they were added much later, so that’s not the real concern. Virtually all modern translations follow the New American Standard in omitting the reference to the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and that is the real issue. If the King James Version is correct, we have a clear reference to the Trinity (although the word is not used here or anywhere else in the New Testament). If the modern translations are right, this reference is lacking.

Here is a summary of the textual evidence.

The passage may have derived from the Latin in the 4th century, in a homily which symbolically made the original text refer to the Trinity. It then became incorporated into the Latin Vulgate.

The oldest Greek manuscript that actually contains this phrase within the text dates from the 14th century, and it has slightly different wording from the others. There is a manuscript from the 10th century that includes the passage as a marginal note. Actually, this passage is found in only nine very late manuscripts, and four of them have the passage as a marginal note, not actually part of the text. Also, the passage is not found in any of the writings of the Church Fathers. The earliest such reference comes from 1215 in a Greek translation of the Acts of the Lateran Council, which was originally written in Latin.

Also, we can see how the phrase might have been added later to refer to the Trinity. There would have been no reason to delete it if it were originally in the text, since a clear reference to the Trinity would have been received favorably, but we can understand why a scribe might add it to clarify what he believed the passage was teaching.

The question remains, does omitting this passage destroy traditional church teaching about the Trinity? The simple answer is, “No.” There are other passages in the New Testament that clearly teach the divinity of Jesus and the eternal nature of the Holy Spirit, and there are no textual problems with these passages. Here are a few from the ESV.

Matthew 28:19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

John 20:28 “Thomas answered him, ‘My lord and my God!’”

1 Corinthians 12:4—6 “4Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; 6and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone.”

2 Corinthians 13:14 “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”

Philippians 2:6 (referring to Christ in verse 5) “who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,”

Other passages could be added.

There are two principles here. One is that the passage was almost certainly not in the original, and modern translations have not removed it out of any attempt to water down traditional Christian theology.

Also, removing this phrase from the text does not destroy the basis on which the doctrine of the Trinity came.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Chris Martin Writes

Sowing seeds for the Kingdom

ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ

"be strong in the grace that is ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ (in Christ Jesus)"

Daniel B. Wallace

Executive Director of CSNTM & Senior Professor of NT Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary

bridgesinindia

Musings from a distant land

The Aspirational Agnostic

Searching for a God who's playing hard to get.

According to Sam

What underlines how we say things cannot itself be said

Baraka

Sharing God's Blessings as Children of Abraham

Youthguyerik's Blog

Just another WordPress.com site

Faithful Aesthetics

Experiencing divinity through the arts

The WordPress.com Blog

The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.

%d bloggers like this: