Sunday, November 1, 2009
Reason Enough To Post
John has left a new comment on your post "Two Study Bibles, Almost Identical Titles":
Rev. Jackson,
I am not a learned person.
I am drawn to many of your posts, especially those on Justification. You back most posts up with thoughtful references that a reader can checkout for himself.
You speak of Justification in exactly the same terms as I was taught it in my youth.
You are, however totally missing the mark regarding THE LUTHERAN STUDY BIBLE.
Your posts on TLSB are simply digs at both the LCMS and the ELCA, and show that you have not cracked the cover of either The Lutheran Study Bible or Lutheran Study Bible.
The blog is, of course yours. You are free to post anything on it that you like and anyone who doesn't agree can take a hike. I get it.
What I am saying is that I respect your posts because you indicate your research and experience in most of them. That equals credibility.
Your comments on the two different Lutheran study Bibles, however show a total lack of any research into either of the books and give no insight to your readers who may be wondering about them.
We Lutherans have had to put up with reformed study Bibles forever, depending on our pastors to sort out the drek (sic - Dreck). Two 'Lutheran' study Bibles come out in the same year. I, for one was hoping for your usual, studied, informed comments. We get only sarcasm directed at ELCA and LCMS.
Again, this is your blog and you are certainly free to print anything you wish. In this instance, though I shall seek the counsel of one who has actually researched these two Bibles and is able to speak from that perspective.
I pray that you will bring your assessment of these two books up to the same level as your assessment of subjects such as Justfiication (sic).
God bless!!
Jack
***
GJ - I do not need to do any research on ELCA publications, especially Biblical ones. ELCA has a consistent Unitarian perspective on everything, so there is no need to do research there. They owned a number of copyrights they were glad to get rid of - Lenski, Sasse. The scholarly publications of Fortress used to make a big impact on the academic world, because they were well done (Barth, Tillich biographies) but that was decades ago. If John/Jack wants to buy the ELCA version and mail it to me, I will look it over and use it later for kindling.
I find the constant promotion of the Translation Du Jour wearisome. The English language does not change every week, so we hardly need 500 translations of the same Bible. How does anyone sort out the differences in text and language?
I linked a review to the CPH effort a few weeks ago. Paul McCain has not sent me my free review copy, so I have not seen his version. The blogger who had his own copy said the pages were so thin the print showed through - not good planning for someone "abolutely" crazy about fonts, etc (McCain).
I brought up Missouri and ELCA working together because the issue is serious, not something to be overlooked by jaded moderns. I am afraid that Missouri now wants to be the LCA of the past - ordination of women, open communion, anything goes doctrine, and welcoming Masons if they can find one under the age of 80, but none of that crazy stuff. Twenty years ago, the son of a pro-life LMCS activist was told never to bring up the abortion issue when he was a Missouri vicar. John Johnson, Otten's old pal at Our Lady of Sorrows, St. Louis, told vicars never to mention open communion, women leading worship, Pentecostalism, etc. Paul McCain did not want to hear that ELCA women seminarians were consecrating Holy Communion and baptizing babies at LCMS congregations. (How do I know? I stumbled upon the annual vicar boasts at Trinity Seminary, Columbus.)
In 1912, the captain of the Titanic wanted to earn a name for himself by crossing the Atlantic in record time, his last trip before retiring. He ignored all the warnings and ran full speed into an iceberg. Some think by reversing engines at the last minute he made matters worse. He did make a name for himself. People still talk about "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic." That is precisely what most Lutheran leaders are doing at the moment.
Nils A. Dahl studied under Bultmann and defended his dissertation in Norway under Nazi occupation.
I had a great opportunity to study Biblical literature under Nils Dahl, Abraham Malherbe, and Robert Wilson at Yale. All three men emphasized the text of the Bible rather than the sterile Historical-Critical Method theories that still drive ELCA exegesis. HCM is a relic of the 19th century.
I would have more respect for CPH if Missouri had not published an NIV commentary where one of the editors (Hoerber) was not only anti-Lutheran but also HCM. I read his letters to Otten where he said, "Now that I am retired from the seminary, I can say anything I want." Another seminary professor, still active, told me when Johnson was the president, "Now we can teach anything we want."
Instead of demanding that I write a blog their way, some readers should start their own and use their real names. Ichabod is not required reading for anyone, but I hear it is read everywhere.
