What’s Wrong with the World

The men signed of the cross of Christ go gaily in the dark.

About

What’s Wrong with the World is dedicated to the defense of what remains of Christendom, the civilization made by the men of the Cross of Christ. Athwart two hostile Powers we stand: the Jihad and Liberalism...read more

Recent Comments

On minimalism, the resurrection, and more: Response to Dr. Craig's podcast

Comment posted by gary on Jun 23, 23:41:

The majority of Bible scholars do not believe that eyewitnesses or the associates of eyewitnesses wrote the Gospels. The only people who still believe that they were are evangelicals and fundamentalist Protestants. If the Gospels are not eyewitness testimony, then the stories within them are nothing but hearsay. Is that really sufficient evidence to believe that a first century brain-dead corpse came back to life, exited its sealed tomb, and later flew off into the clouds? https://lutherwasnotbornagain ... [More]

Elizabeth Goudge's novels

Comment posted by l. l. on Jun 22, 05:37:

The "Unlikely" plot of Green Dolphin Country ( Street in the USA) was based on a real event in her Guernsey mother's family history. Nobody here has mentioned her Autobiography The Joy of he Snow which explains that and so much else. I find it much the best Goudge read of all nowadays. And of course there is a Goudge fan website. Google it. ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Ben on Jun 21, 07:43:

I've noticed that those who go on and on about the "deeper meaning of the text" that is "more true than mere facts" almost never give what that meaning is. The ones I meet who do usually have ideas so far out there as to be considered insane. Like that God was a fire breathing dragon, or Jesus was really an alien. Well, I do remember one alternative that wasn't insane, but it wasn't a "deeper meaning", it was just vague and unhelpful. Like saying Genesis 1 only teaches that God created everything and noth ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Tony on Jun 20, 17:36:

All I am saying is that we must learn to read as an ancient. To read as they wrote, in their style. To major in their majors as the foundational concept of the original voice-original audience appears to be either unknown, abused or entirely rejected here. There are so many errors, omissions, mistakes, and inadequate underlying assumptions here that it is impossible to know exactly where to start. Still... First: there isn't one specific class of writing that can be called "the ancients" here. The ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by The Masked Chicken on Jun 20, 11:00:

With regards to the Gospel of John, John is a mystic and writes like a mystic. In that sense, the text is best interpreted using the techniques of mystical theology. The thing is, many Protestant denominations do not have a well-developed mystical theology, so they substitute other methods, which might hot, actually, get at the mind of either the author or God's intentions. As far as we know, mysticism does not change over time, so again, the Gospel of John must be read with at least the understanding th ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by The Masked Chicken on Jun 20, 10:01:

“All I am saying is that we must learn to read as an ancient. To read as they wrote, in their style.” Why? This is the classic mistake of the modern historic-critical method. In fact, one cannot read as an ancient. In fact, that can’t be the correct way to read Scripture. It is a silly part of the Modernist stance to consider Scripture as merely another ancient text to do with as we please, such as evidenced by the two streams of Modernist Scripture scholarship : 1) the idea that text must be re-interp ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Ben on Jun 20, 09:30:

And yes, there is no point in any further discussion as the foundational concept of the original voice-original audience appears to be either unknown, abused or entirely rejected here. Seems you've topped yourself when it comes to strawmen Steve. Bravo, bravo! ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 20, 08:36:

Indeed, quite the good sport attempting to flay my attempts to address Lydia's misportrayals of me. All I am saying is that we must learn to read as an ancient. To read as they wrote, in their style. To major in their majors focusing on their superlative literary structures -- for they arranged their writings thematically within the overall historical context -- (subtle but major difference from we moderns yes. Stuff you can have good sport with no doubt.) to make their great statements. One after the ne ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Callum on Jun 20, 04:25:

Steve certainly sounds like an "ancient" to me. I haven't the faintest what he is literally going on about! I wonder how the earliest church fathers like Polycarp understood the gospels. Higher truths like Jesus was God incarnate and rode into Jerusalem on a beast of peace rather than a stallion of war. So, Polycarp's flock may ask, what animal, exactly, did Jesus ride in on? Ahh, he may respond, what a meaningless question! Let's not stand on ten decimal precision here! All that matters is that Jesus was t ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 19, 17:49:

Speaking for myself, I really don't know for sure whether Steve thinks John changed the day of the Last Supper or any of the other things discussed in the main post. I assume, given his hearty indignation on behalf of the scholars I'm disagreeing with on this point and his saying that I'm "trashing" them, that he agrees with them on these points, but it's difficult to know for sure. Nor can I muster a whole lot of interest in where he's coming from on that. But the surface truth certainly isn't a given for ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Tony on Jun 19, 17:00:

For others: Steve is apparently engaged in a different endeavor than Lydia. For Steve, the issue of how much of John is simple reporting of what the apostles saw and heard is irrelevant, because he is not doing what Lydia is doing. He is pursuing the layers of teachings in John beyond the surface layer. In such an endeavor, the validity of the surface layer is a given, because you don't get deeper layers without the surface layer. For this purpose, whether Christianity is true, and whether the gospels a ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 19, 15:41:

Which doesn't answer anything I have said nor any of the arguments I have made concerning the points at issue between me and literary device theorists nor show me to be wrong in any respect whatsoever. Please, I need to ask you to stop now. You are filling the thread with material that is not advancing the conversation. I have asked before. ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 19, 15:18:

Lydia, not sure why you are always desiring to put words in my mouth. It comes across that you have soundbites in which you desire to destroy others arguments you desire they would make for you. Quite distasteful as I've said nothing to these effects. I'm sure as you well know, in good literature, let alone great literature, it must be studied. Wrestled with. At great length. That we are all works in process as long as we avail ourselves to the study of their ways. After a few decades of study, what I ten ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 19, 14:41:

Actually, both those I am disagreeing with and I agree that JOhn is indicating a day for the Last Supper and the crucifixion. We just disagree about whether he changed it. Neither of us is saying that he is just vague because he's trying to make a theological point. Indeed, it would be impossible for him to make a theological point as they envisage by being vague. He's supposedly making it *by* being precise--precisely changing the facts. Indeed, Dr. Licona states that John "goes out of his way" to make it ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Tony on Jun 19, 14:11:

Steve, I repeat: do you read ancient Hebrew with conversational fluency, so that you understand the language without having to mentally translate it to a language more known to you? And the same with first century Koine Greek? These are simple questions. Please answer. in understanding the original voice the ultimate point in view is that Christ lived, was crucified and rose again. What John wants you to know above all else (hence his lack of explicit timing details) in this is that Christ is the ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 19, 13:23:

Why do you vehemently make up and argue everything I do not say? I merely point out that while you seem to be only too often hung up on battling out the precise timing to modern standards(at times forgoing the ways of the ancients), in understanding the original voice the ultimate point in view is that Christ lived, was crucified and rose again. What John wants you to know above all else (hence his lack of explicit timing details) in this is that Christ is the Passover Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 19, 11:52:

Yes, you've been forced. Because obviously the "very basics of language interpretation" are what tell us that John changed the day of the Last Supper. Funny thing, though: You haven't shown that to be the case. And in fact, I've provided detailed argument elsewhere, and so has my husband, and so has Craig Blomberg (for that matter) that the details of language interpretation and the customs surrounding the Passover (such as the way that the word translated "preparation" was used and the facts surrounding ri ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 19, 11:28:

One last comment. Since people might believe the misrepresentations you post, one of the more critical ones needs addressing. You state, "b) you are not providing any arguments and c) you are being rather ridiculously patronizing and high-handed *despite* providing no arguments" Now certainly you are accustomed to posting on your terms, feeling you negate any and all differing points, in this case that I provide "no arguments." Stated thematically -- twice! Sounds authoritative. Sounds convincing. So no ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 19, 10:47:

More contentless rhetoric, I'm afraid. Please stop doing that. ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 19, 10:37:

Lydia writes, "a) I know a lot more about your interactions from other contexts" Interesting, I have had very little interaction elsewhere. How we discuss things is incredibly important for a number of reasons. To do so in good faith and more is essential. Yes, absolutely, well said, we are to absolutely move away from post-modernism into the language and culture of the writings. Breaking through to understanding the ancient's thematically arranged writing and the truth conveyed verses our modern chrono ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 19, 09:53:

Steve, if I "come across as belligerent" it is because a) I know a lot more about your interactions from other contexts and b) you are not providing any arguments and c) you are being rather ridiculously patronizing and high-handed *despite* providing no arguments but rather assertions and *despite* not showing that you have actually grappled with the extensive arguments I've provided on these topics. You simply aren't in a position to patronize as you are doing. It's kind of amusing, actually, though unint ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 19, 08:48:

You are using false either/or (and straw man) arguments Lydia. Let alone you are coming across as belligerent. However, what is most sad is that you have not educated your "flock." Apparently they are not aware of and/or do not value the ground zero language/communication 101A most basic concept of the original voice. No one desires to be misconstrued, not you, not Tony, no one. We do not desire to play the telephone game and have our message at the end of the circle be a mess. We desire to know what a pe ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Tony on Jun 18, 20:03:

"Ancient peoples" is not a magical incantation that establishes Licona or anyone else as right in those cases. No, no, you forgot "superlative". Oh, and "great", as in the "great concepts". The evangelists were so high minded and superlative that food did not turn into sh*t in their intestinal tract. It would not become men who thought such great concepts. When you use "ancient peoples" in connection with "superlative" and "great concepts" it is equivalent to "abracadabra" and you get to assert any dam ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Ben on Jun 18, 19:15:

That is to say, I've responded *in detail* to the supposed arguments for these changes and for these "devices." "Ancient peoples" is not a magical incantation that establishes Licona or anyone else as right in those cases. Unfortunately it seems like many today think that it is indeed some kind of magic incantation. Said people tend to also think that one must have a Ph.D in Greek and Hebrew to even hope to understand their views. If you don't have such training then you can just trust them because they ar ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 18, 16:24:

Steve, I know of your interactions with others on Facebook and have little hope of communicating in any profitable way with you. Nor am I obligated to type all over again, just personally for you, the many words I have written elsewhere on precisely these topics concerning (e.g.) chronology. I can't even tell if you know what I mean by dyschronological narration--e.g., actually changing a day. Your statement To be a sequel, does not imply total dyschronological disorder at all. is well known to me alrea ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Joe Lightfoot on Jun 18, 16:04:

But what Lydia fails to understand is that she is not on a mere history campaign, but a historicity crusade insisting upon modern levels of ultra-preciseness. She perceives that what concerns her modern mind, concerned them, for she demands the ancients write as do we moderns today. But they didn’t. She and her husband would do well to learn the style in which the ancients wrote, so as to better understand the rich nuance of the sacred text’s message, let alone she could begin to relax her unwarranted perva ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by John DePoe on Jun 18, 15:59:

Steve, What I think you are missing is the way that these NT scholars are using literary devices to claim that many of the events in the Gospels are not even intending to convey actual events in Jesus's life. It looks like you haven't actually read anything Lydia has written on this subject. Here is a good place to start. Do you believe, for instance, that John 19:28 intends to report that Jesus said something like, "I thirst" from the cross? Or, do you think it does no damage to the historical value of ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 18, 15:52:

Tony reveals to us the entire problem. The issue is we need to realize the sacred text must be read in its original voice as understood in the original language and audience. Not ours. Let alone makes statements arguing against and ridiculing matters of which he does not know. How sad. Because the thematic constructs are anything but fiction. But rather than teach him how to read the ancient Hebrew. . . let alone it was God-breathed through the apostles after-the-fact -- not in any state of confusion. To t ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Tony on Jun 18, 15:11:

the ancients understood the beautiful superlative truths being conveyed through the thematic constructs and so the message was received as "Truth." Indeed, to the original authors, the original voice, and to us, the historicity of Christ Jesus is a given. But the authors/Author had additional concepts they consider incredibly important to convey in addition to conveying his long awaited presence. Sacred concepts. A short list includes: Who was Jesus? I mean, who really was he? What was he really about? ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 18, 12:57:

So why such harsh condescension towards the scholars? Why give them grief over even their uncertainties? Whether 'a' or 'dys' 'different' 'does not have' chronology - seems you (and they) are acknowledging a thematic arrangement to convey great concepts (though most of the articles I have read - and I don't read all as they tend to be quite harsh have you going hard for moment by moment, blow by blow, historicity). And instead of scholars saying this appears to have taken place at a different time, perhaps ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 18, 12:10:

I'm not going to respond to every one of Steve's statements, but I will point out that simply asserting over and over again that But what Lydia fails to understand is that she is not on a mere history campaign, but a historicity crusade insisting upon modern levels of ultra-preciseness. Does not make it so. In point of fact, pace Steve, I have *repeatedly* used the fact that an author is probably *not* narrating a chronology *at all* or indicating the precise amount of time that something took in order t ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 18, 11:48:

Naw, my chiasm reference was merely one example of the ancient's pervasive thematic (not atomic clock) style. Until one studies the ancients, their style being so different from ours, it's rather opaque to the modern Western mind so knowing nothing else we force our ways on the message, often misconstruing it. The ability to be able to toggle back and forth from the modern to the ancient forms is absolutely essential. Ironic that their thematic forms serve to frame/draw forth superlative constructs. That ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Ben on Jun 18, 09:47:

And the Strawman of the Comments Section* award goes to(drum roll please).... Steve! I don't know who you are reading, but it's not Lydia. She's fine with achronological writing, she's fine with chiasm, and other things like telescoping. What's not fine is writing something as if it really happened when it did not. She's also given examples of scholars who are dehistoricizing the Gospel of John. Craig Evans for example demotes John to something like a parable, with only "nuggets" of history. Licona seem ... [More]

The Eeyores are Right on Masterpiece Cake Shop

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 18, 08:59:

Only if the class of wedding cakes includes both heterosexual wedding cakes and homosexual wedding cakes. But, on one level at least, this is arbitrary. Ideally we *should* be able to argue that the baker doesn't acknowledge that homosexual ceremonies are true weddings or something like that. But please understand that that isn't how special class law is shaking out. As I said (please note) Kennedy's opinion *specifically* stated that refusing some *clearly non-expressive* service for a homosexual "weddi ... [More]

Happy Father's Day

Comment posted by Sage McLaughlin on Jun 18, 08:54:

Right, that is Guido Reni's St. Joseph With the Infant Jesus. I've always liked the painting, but I can't speak helpfully on the question of St. Joseph's age either. It would be an interesting thing to explore--maybe a reader knows where to look for some insight. ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Steve on Jun 18, 08:43:

Lydia is on a great crusade as to the historicity of the gospels, in particular John. It all sounds so very good, who would want to oppose that? No one, for we all agree (even the conservative scholars she continues to mis-portray as anti-historical) that the historicity of Christ is a given. But what Lydia fails to understand is that she is not on a mere history campaign, but a historicity crusade insisting upon modern levels of ultra-preciseness. She perceives that what concerns her modern mind, concern ... [More]

The Eeyores are Right on Masterpiece Cake Shop

Comment posted by Mactoul on Jun 18, 00:59:

Lydia wrote: If the business *does* offer the service/product of a wedding cake, discrimination law says the business may not refuse it on the grounds of belonging (or being perceived to belong) to a protected class Only if the class of wedding cakes includes both heterosexual wedding cakes and homosexual wedding cakes. But, on one level at least, this is arbitrary. And I think this point needs to be made again that the baker did not refuse to do business with the one belonging to a protected class. That ... [More]

Happy Father's Day

Comment posted by Tony on Jun 17, 18:43:

Thank you. And to you. I assume that's ST. Joseph? There is one line of tradition that St. Joseph was an older man when he married Mary, but by "older" I suspect maybe they didn't originally mean "in his 70's". A man in his 30's or 40's would have been considered old to be marrying a young bride like Mary. But I don't have any actual definite material to point to on the issue. ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Lydia on Jun 16, 19:17:

Morris, Studies in the Fourth Gospel. The writing is also enjoyable, clear, straightforward, at times humorous. Also, one can always tell what he is saying about historicity. Not a hint of jargon. ... [More]

Does John "narrate theologically"? On the perils of theological theory in history

Comment posted by Cameron on Jun 16, 19:03:

Leon Morris? Commentary on John? ... [More]