Question on the LXX (Septuagint/Greek) Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter jaybird88
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dovekin said:
Today WE have no problems saying Rev is by a different John.
Click to expand...
Speaking in the first-person singular is a good thing…

Because the Ancient Orthodox Faith has BAGS of problems with saying John of Patmos did not write Revelation…

geo
 
Well, it depends on who you think John of Patmos is. I would say JofP wrote Revelation, but question whether he wrote the fourth gospel or the letters of St John. The tradition is that here have always been questions about these things

The point I was making is that we will respect Revelation as part of the canon, even if we think it was not written by an apostle. That was not a viable position in some eras, it may not be viable in some places today, but mostly the question of canon is settled even if identity is not.
 
George720 said:
Because the Ancient Orthodox Faith has BAGS of problems with saying John of Patmos did not write Revelation…
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church teaches that the same John is the author of all five books (Gospel, Epistles, and Revelation). The Church of England, I believe, teaches explicitly that they are by different authors. In some Anglican Bibles, the author of Revelation is named as “St. John the Divine,” precisely to distinguish him from St. John the Apostle. I don’t think I have ever seen, until now, the expression “St. John of Patmos”, but that may just be me – I had no reason to pay particular attention to the names. But you have aroused my curiosity. Can you state in a few words why it is such an important issue? Why would it cause “bags of problems”?
 
Hey! Since you mentioned the Dead Sea Scrolls, are you familiar with John Bergsma? He has done all kinds of excellent work in this area, and has some videos on YouTube if you’d like to found out what he has done. He is Catholic, but a convert from Dutch Reformed.
 
BartholomewB said:
In some Anglican Bibles, the author of Revelation is named as “St. John the Divine,”
Click to expand...
The ‘divine’ title has been used since the Patristic period to describe the Apostle John: it’s an Anglicanisation of the Latin divus which was the historical translation of the Greek θεολόγος theologos (‘theologian’).
BartholomewB said:
Can you state in a few words why it is such an important issue? Why would it cause “bags of problems”?
Click to expand...
Two words: Apostolic authorship.

Many, many words: Revelation’s canonical status was doubted amongst the Eastern churches for quite a long period for a variety of reasons. There were difficulties regarding the textual style and content (they being uncharacteristic of Greek), and the book also featured as a major point of contention in an eschatological heresy: Montanists profusely cited Revelation for the claim that Montanus was the promised Advocate. Both concerns fed into doubts about Revelation’s provenance. The essential issue, then, was whether the book was of of apostolic authorship.

A significant contributor to Revelation’s acceptance was Andrew of Caesarea (6th century bishop) and his commentary on Revelation. In it, he drums home apostolic authorship through his own exegesis and citation of Patristic authorities. Many Slavic churches accepted Revelation as apostolic quite readily, but doubts persisted amongst Greek-speaking Orthodox until the 15th century. The fall of Constantinople lead to a reappraisal of the eschatological dimensions of Revelation, and Andrew’s commentary was translated and printed heavily.

From an Orthodox perspective, doubting the unified authorship of the Johannine texts is essentially revisiting a millennia-old dispute that was resolved nearly five centuries ago. Because its resolution largely depended on the confidence placed in patristic authorities being effective communicators of apostolic traditions, to doubt Revelation’s authorship is also viewed by many as doubting Orthodoxy being orthodox.
 
BartholomewB said:
Why would it cause “bags of problems”?
Click to expand...
He is our Saint… Our Church has known him for 2000 years… The whole Johanine Tradition comes from him… He was a teenager who forsook all and followed Christ, and received the Theotokos as his Mother, and took care of her until She died… He wrote the last Gospel, and the Catholic Epistles… He is known to us and always has been… To deny what one knows always causes bags of problems…

geo
 
That is one way of understanding the tradition.

Another way is to look at the questions raised by Papias, Eusebius of Caesarea, etc. Those questions about whether the Apostle wrote the book used to determine if the book is canonical. Now we can discuss whether the author was an apostle without raising the issue of canon.
 
George720 said:
Theotokos as his Mother, and took care of her until She died
Click to expand...
She did not die - she fell asleep. Death is the punishment for original sin and since the Theotokos never had original sin therefore She did not die.

When Pope Pius XII was preparing to define the dogma of the Assumption, he was going to include the word “died”. The Theotokos Herself appeared to a boy and told him to tell the Holy Father that She did not die. Pope Pius XII was told and he revised his text before he promulgated it. That’s why it says:
  1. For which reason, after we have poured forth prayers of supplication again and again to God, and have invoked the light of the Spirit of Truth, for the glory of Almighty God who has lavished his special affection upon the Virgin Mary, for the honor of her Son, the immortal King of the Ages and the Victor over sin and death, for the increase of the glory of that same august Mother, and for the joy and exultation of the entire Church; by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.
  2. Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.
  3. In order that this, our definition of the bodily Assumption of the Virgin Mary into heaven may be brought to the attention of the universal Church, we desire that this, our Apostolic Letter, should stand for perpetual remembrance, commanding that written copies of it, or even printed copies, signed by the hand of any public notary and bearing the seal of a person constituted in ecclesiastical dignity, should be accorded by all men the same reception they would give to this present letter, were it tendered or shown.
  4. It is forbidden to any man to change this, our declaration, pronouncement, and definition or, by rash attempt, to oppose and counter it. If any man should presume to make such an attempt, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
  5. Given at Rome, at St. Peter’s, in the year of the great Jubilee, 1950, on the first day of the month of November, on the Feast of All Saints, in the twelfth year of our pontificate.
 
Margaret_Ann said:
She did not die - she fell asleep.
Click to expand...
Lazarus fell asleep too - As Christ said, “Lazarus is dead.”

In the Orthodox Catholic Church, if She did not die, then Christ did not have Death to overcome, because He received His human nature, and ours, from Her, and if she did not die, then He did not received man’s fallen human nature from her to heal by overcoming the powers of hades after He Himself died - That He should overcome Death…

We will have to let the Church Fathers figure this one out, my dear friend…

And HAPPY Mother’s Day!!!

geo
 
Last edited:
Christ received a perfect human nature from His Immaculate Ever-Virgin Mother. He is the New Adam, She is the New Eve.

God created Adam & Eve perfectly in Gen. 1 & 2. They did not sin until Gen. 3. Since God created them perfectly, WHY would He do anything less for the Woman who would crush the head of the serpent by giving birth to His Only-Begotten Son?

Re Mother’s Day: It’s not very happy this year. Today is my first Mother’s Day without Mom. However, I still have my Heavenly Mother. (Jn. 19: 25-27)
 
Last edited:
I believe that Augustin(e) of Hippo stated: “Of those who tread this earth, no one knows more about scripture than Jerome.”

Some say the Vulgate is idiosyncratic. I say our Lord is also a good example. I find Jerome’s translations to be more warm and genuinely human than others.
 
Margaret_Ann said:
Today is my first Mother’s Day without Mom.
Click to expand...
Bless your saddened heart! It is my 24th…

So I bought a “Prairie Fire” crab-apple tree and planted it here at the Church in her name today… My other Mom, and yours, still looks after me too… The tree is beautiful, and she did raise me on the prairie…

geo
 
Margaret_Ann said:
Wow. 24 years…
Click to expand...
Her last words were: “I’m very tired…”

I am very blessed by her…

She died at 75, and I am 75…

Her 3rd cancer got into her liver…

Said she never knew life until she got cancer…

15 years of it at the end…

Her name is Dorothy…

Please pray for her…

geo
 
My mother Helen will be gone 6 months on the 17th, yet it feels like 6 years. Yesterday was my first Mother’s Day without her and later this week would have been her 87th birthday…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top