This week for our New Testament class we had the opportunity to visit ones of the world’s foremost printing museums. For me it was a great experience to see how the press was invented. The replica Gutenberg press is the best replica in the world, even better than the one located in Meinze, Germany, and is an impressive site.
What was far more impressive was to see the divine hand that certainly played a role in establishing the press. It was because of this press that the Bible could be taken to the masses, literacy could be developed and the Dark Ages could be brought to an end. Because of this press the few words that we have recorded of the savior’s mortal life while here on Earth are now available to anybody who wishes to read them.
It is interesting to think the far-ranging scope that the printing press and the publication of the bible really had. Because of the publication the enlightenment was really able to get underway, which sparked the voyages of Columbus and the discovery of the new world. The Reformation could also take place, now as the Bible could be read by all and its doctrines discussed by any common person, the Catholic Church would lose it's total control over Europe, which would spark the religious dissent that would ultimately lead to various protestant sects to seek sanctuary in the new world, seeking religious freedom. Because of the press the publication of various documents was enabled in the 13 colonies to unite under a cause and declare independence from Great Britain. On this notes, the Crandall Museum that we visited, not only has a replica press like that used at the time of the Declaration's signing, but they have the movable type that was used to print the first copies that were distributed to the people.
Lastly, it is interesting to see that it was this very technology invented by Gutenberg that would aid in the Restoration of Christ' Gospel once again on this earth. It was the very same techniques that printed the first bible on this earth that would also print the Book of Mormon. It is easy to see why so many of the tour guides at the museum feel that the movement that brought about the restoration was not just the great awakening, in the Burned Out District of New York, but that in reality it had started several hundred years before that, when the son of a jeweler sat down and started to think of a way in which to speed up the process of replicating books.
I personally thought that the whole experience was impressive, it helped me to really connect to the history, of which results, I have been a liberal partaker of. It made me appreciate far more the process that it took to get the bible into my hands. I guess to think that the book that, I am afraid to say, often sits unnoticed in a corner of my bedroom went through so many sacrifices and processes that maybe I should pay a little more heed to what it contains.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
The Birth Narratives
As our class has moved into the birth narratives as given by Matthew and Luke, we can see some interesting things about the story. From the two different stories we can see the emphasis that each of the authors had. Matthew spends a significant amount of space establishing the royal liniage that Christ has, tracing his genealogy back to Abraham, thus showing the fulfillment of the prophecies given to Abraham, about how all the nations of the Earth shall be blessed because of his seed. For this reason I think Matthew includes the story of Magi, they are bringing kingly gifts and the story reinforces the idea, to the Jewish audience, of Christ' royal right to the throne was it was being validated by those outside of Israel.
Matthew also show many other fulfillment events, often sighting scripture from the old testament and showing how it was fulfilled in Christ. Matthew also wants to draw our attention to the fact that the story of Moses was a type and shadow for the life of Christ. We see this in the several places, Christ is a promised Deliverer, male infants were slain by a the ruling monarch, the child had to be hidden, in both of the cases, in Egypt; for Moses in the house of Pharaoh, and Christ to escape the jurisdiction of Herod.
Luke on the other, who is writing to Gentiles who have little to no knowledge of Jewish prophecy, focuses on the miraculous events that happened during Christ' birth. He shares two stories of miraculous conception, first with Elisabeth, who was barren and then conceived after an angelic pronouncement, the second is the virgin conception of Christ. Here you can tell that this is a marvel to Luke who was a medical doctor, and was fascinated by these events. Luke would also discuss the humble circumstance in which the Lord entered into the world, and the angelic choruses that announced his arrival to the shepherds in the field. I think that Luke, focused on this story for two reasons, first, the heavenly manifestation of angels would be something that Gentiles, who were accustomed to the idea of God making is presence known in grandiose ways, and could understand that more readily than fulfillment of old Jewish prophecy. Second Luke's use of the shepherds is his version of drawing a parallel, who better to greet the Shepherd of our souls then those of the humble profession who are a type and shadow to His great work. I feel that while these two witnesses tell two very different kinds of birth narratives, both of these accounts are important to us. They show us the many facets of what Christ can mean to different people, how he, like many of the parable that he taught, can have many levels of meaning to those that believe in Him.
Matthew also show many other fulfillment events, often sighting scripture from the old testament and showing how it was fulfilled in Christ. Matthew also wants to draw our attention to the fact that the story of Moses was a type and shadow for the life of Christ. We see this in the several places, Christ is a promised Deliverer, male infants were slain by a the ruling monarch, the child had to be hidden, in both of the cases, in Egypt; for Moses in the house of Pharaoh, and Christ to escape the jurisdiction of Herod.
Luke on the other, who is writing to Gentiles who have little to no knowledge of Jewish prophecy, focuses on the miraculous events that happened during Christ' birth. He shares two stories of miraculous conception, first with Elisabeth, who was barren and then conceived after an angelic pronouncement, the second is the virgin conception of Christ. Here you can tell that this is a marvel to Luke who was a medical doctor, and was fascinated by these events. Luke would also discuss the humble circumstance in which the Lord entered into the world, and the angelic choruses that announced his arrival to the shepherds in the field. I think that Luke, focused on this story for two reasons, first, the heavenly manifestation of angels would be something that Gentiles, who were accustomed to the idea of God making is presence known in grandiose ways, and could understand that more readily than fulfillment of old Jewish prophecy. Second Luke's use of the shepherds is his version of drawing a parallel, who better to greet the Shepherd of our souls then those of the humble profession who are a type and shadow to His great work. I feel that while these two witnesses tell two very different kinds of birth narratives, both of these accounts are important to us. They show us the many facets of what Christ can mean to different people, how he, like many of the parable that he taught, can have many levels of meaning to those that believe in Him.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Who was Luke?
So we received the assignment to talk about the Luke this week in class, the challenge will be not using any outside sources, only what we can find in the Bible, so here we go.
Historically speaking Luke first appears in the books of Acts in the city of Alexandra Troas. It was here that he joined Paul on some of his journeys. We know that he was probably a convert from the area and would spend at least a period of two years in Judea when he was not with Paul.
Luke was really the first of the Gospel writers that was really a historian piecing together the story as a commissioned work for a man named Theophilus. I say this because Mark was really jus trying to preserve the memoirs of Peter, and Mathew was trying to prove to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ; Luke was trying to share a complete and whole story to the Gentiles, a group from whom he himself was a convert. Although much of what is contained in the Gospel of Luke comes directly from the Gospel of Mark there is some unique Lukeian material. It was during his time in Judea that he would have collected much of that material from the eye witnesses and the church leaders in the area. We learn this in chapter 1:2.
Luke was a doctor, and it is interesting to note that of the stories that Luke focuses on he puts a strong emphasis on the healing nature of Christ, and the miracles that occurred with the human body. Here are a few examples: During the healing of the women who has the hemorrhaging issue, we see Luke saving face for his profession a little bit, for when he is quoting Mark verbatim, he leaves out the line about how the doctors who had visited the woman had left her worse off then before they came. Luke is also the only gospel writer to mention the bloody sweat of Christ in the garden.
Luke also had a fascination with the role that gender played in Christ' life. He almost always pairs his stories to show both a man and a woman. I think he was amazed, that in a world where women were treated so very poorly, that Christ would teach women and deem them as equals in his kingdom> Often showing how women are more receptive to the things of God, even about that and beyond that of men who should know better. The story of Zacharias and the announcement of the Christ Child by the angel Gabriel is a good example of this. Zacharias fails to believe the words of the angel, and he a priest that should know better, juxtaposed to the young maiden who readily and humbly accepted that which was told to her by an angel.
While Luke never saw the Lord while he was on the earth in mortality, nevertheless, he had an interesting title which I assume was bestowed upon him by the leadership of the church at the time, and this title can only be found in the JST version of the first verse. It states that he is “a messenger of Jesus Christ". A title that I feel was not given lightly to Luke, but rather I think he knew his special calling that he would have as a Gospel writer and that his gospel would be one of the few that would survive the millennia.
Historically speaking Luke first appears in the books of Acts in the city of Alexandra Troas. It was here that he joined Paul on some of his journeys. We know that he was probably a convert from the area and would spend at least a period of two years in Judea when he was not with Paul.
Luke was really the first of the Gospel writers that was really a historian piecing together the story as a commissioned work for a man named Theophilus. I say this because Mark was really jus trying to preserve the memoirs of Peter, and Mathew was trying to prove to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ; Luke was trying to share a complete and whole story to the Gentiles, a group from whom he himself was a convert. Although much of what is contained in the Gospel of Luke comes directly from the Gospel of Mark there is some unique Lukeian material. It was during his time in Judea that he would have collected much of that material from the eye witnesses and the church leaders in the area. We learn this in chapter 1:2.
Luke was a doctor, and it is interesting to note that of the stories that Luke focuses on he puts a strong emphasis on the healing nature of Christ, and the miracles that occurred with the human body. Here are a few examples: During the healing of the women who has the hemorrhaging issue, we see Luke saving face for his profession a little bit, for when he is quoting Mark verbatim, he leaves out the line about how the doctors who had visited the woman had left her worse off then before they came. Luke is also the only gospel writer to mention the bloody sweat of Christ in the garden.
Luke also had a fascination with the role that gender played in Christ' life. He almost always pairs his stories to show both a man and a woman. I think he was amazed, that in a world where women were treated so very poorly, that Christ would teach women and deem them as equals in his kingdom> Often showing how women are more receptive to the things of God, even about that and beyond that of men who should know better. The story of Zacharias and the announcement of the Christ Child by the angel Gabriel is a good example of this. Zacharias fails to believe the words of the angel, and he a priest that should know better, juxtaposed to the young maiden who readily and humbly accepted that which was told to her by an angel.
While Luke never saw the Lord while he was on the earth in mortality, nevertheless, he had an interesting title which I assume was bestowed upon him by the leadership of the church at the time, and this title can only be found in the JST version of the first verse. It states that he is “a messenger of Jesus Christ". A title that I feel was not given lightly to Luke, but rather I think he knew his special calling that he would have as a Gospel writer and that his gospel would be one of the few that would survive the millennia.
Monday, October 5, 2009
The first of the Passions
As I have read my way through the Gospel of Mark, I have reached the first passion story. Christ has reached the end of his earthly ministry and moves on to fulfill the last task that his Father has set before him to do while in this earthly state. It is the day before Passover and Christ seeks to share one last supper with his disciples while in his mortal state. The story progresses as everyone knows, first to the Garden where Christ will begin his expiating act. The wording Mark chooses as they approach the garden is strong here as it is else where. Mark describes Jesus as being sore amazed, a word similar to his use of astonish. As the sins and sufferings of the cosmos started to coalesce around him, Christ himself was surprised. I share my opinion with that of James E. Talmage who thought that while Christ knew cognitively what was about to happen I don't think that there was any preparation possible that could have prepared him emotionally for what was about to happen.
After his time in the Garden Christ would be taken to the sham trail and brought before Pilate, where he will be condemned. It is on Christ' slow march to Golgotha that we see more evidence that Mark was writing a true and biographical account of Christ' life, for why else would Mark mention the name of Simon the Cyrenian and his two sons; if not that it was person with whom the story could be confirmed. Again we see 1st century examples of eye witness reporting.
On to the crucifixion. To be crucified was not only a slow and painful death but it was also humiliating to a Jew. We must understand that the Jews of the first century did not have the same kind of mind set about cause and effect that so dominates our modern way of thinking. To the Jew all things were in God's hands and all events were caused and permitted by God. We read in Deut. 21:22 that to the Jews to be crucified and to die that way meant that you were cursed and hated of God, for if you were truly innocent then God would provide a means of escape. It would have been a contradiction for there the chosen messiah of God to be crucified.
This idea is particularly interesting in light of the mocking comments that the high priests shout to Jesus as he is dying on the Cross. They say that if would come down and rescue himself then they would believe. I think that while they were mocking him they were also trying to assuage their consciences, for they were in part giving him the benefit of the doubt. If he really was the Christ then God would not let him die in such a humiliating way and then they could say that they were merely looking to provide a proof that he was chosen of God and were merely facilitating him.
Never the less the Jews did not understand prophetic utterances made by the prophets of old and Christ completed his mission and died that all might live again by Him and in Him.
After his time in the Garden Christ would be taken to the sham trail and brought before Pilate, where he will be condemned. It is on Christ' slow march to Golgotha that we see more evidence that Mark was writing a true and biographical account of Christ' life, for why else would Mark mention the name of Simon the Cyrenian and his two sons; if not that it was person with whom the story could be confirmed. Again we see 1st century examples of eye witness reporting.
On to the crucifixion. To be crucified was not only a slow and painful death but it was also humiliating to a Jew. We must understand that the Jews of the first century did not have the same kind of mind set about cause and effect that so dominates our modern way of thinking. To the Jew all things were in God's hands and all events were caused and permitted by God. We read in Deut. 21:22 that to the Jews to be crucified and to die that way meant that you were cursed and hated of God, for if you were truly innocent then God would provide a means of escape. It would have been a contradiction for there the chosen messiah of God to be crucified.
This idea is particularly interesting in light of the mocking comments that the high priests shout to Jesus as he is dying on the Cross. They say that if would come down and rescue himself then they would believe. I think that while they were mocking him they were also trying to assuage their consciences, for they were in part giving him the benefit of the doubt. If he really was the Christ then God would not let him die in such a humiliating way and then they could say that they were merely looking to provide a proof that he was chosen of God and were merely facilitating him.
Never the less the Jews did not understand prophetic utterances made by the prophets of old and Christ completed his mission and died that all might live again by Him and in Him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)