ESCHATOS MINISTRIES

Eschatos Ministries is dedicated to teaching biblical prophecy from a futurist, premillennial, prewrath perspective.

  • Become an Eschatos Partner by Giving Monthly

Hermeneutics

Israel, the Church, and the Middle East: A Biblical Response to the Current Conflict (Book Notice)

by

Israel, the Church, and the Middle East: A biblical response to the current conflict by Darrell L. Bock (Editor), Mitch Glaser (Editor), Joel C. Rosenberg (Foreword)

 

 

The relationship between the church and Israel has been the source of passionate debate among Christians throughout much of church history. In recent years the traditional pro-Israel stance of evangelicals has come under fire by those who support the Palestinian cause, calling for a new perspective and more nuanced approach by Christians who believe that the land of Israel belongs to the Jewish people by virtue of God’s covenants and promises.

Israel, the Church, and the Middle East challenges the supersessionist drift of the modern church, showing that God retains a plan and purpose for the Jewish people while also addressing a number of the divisive issues raised by authors critical both of Israel and of those who affirm Israel’s right to the land. The book explores the hermeneutics and wider effects of the conflict, such as the growing antipathy within the church toward the evangelization of the Jewish people. It provides readers with an objective and interdisciplinary treatment, which is irenic and respectful in tone. The book is directed toward pastors, global Christian leaders, theological students, and well-read lay Christians who are actively seeking guidance and resources regarding the Middle East conflict. The contributors represent a broad evangelical spectrum.

Contributors

Richard E. Averbeck (Contributor), Mark L. Bailey (Contributor), Craig Blaising (Contributor), Mike Brown (Contributor), Tom Doyle (Contributor), Jr Walter C. Kaiser (Contributor), Craig Parshall (Contributor), Michael Rydelnik (Contributor), Erez Soref (Contributor), Michael J. Vlach (Contributor), Mark Yarbrough (Contributor)

A Review

“Israel, the Church, and the Middle East” is a compilation of articles written by several scholars about the relationship between the three areas mentioned in the title. Around 270 pages, the book covers many topics, including:

1. The Messianic Jewish movement in modern Israel.
2. The rise and danger of supersessionism (belief that because of rejecting Christ at His first coming, the Jewish people no longer play a role in God’s plan).
3. Relationship between Israel and the Bible.
4. Modern Palestinian church in Israel.
5. Reconciliation between the Jews and Arabs.
6. Reasons why, despite their past history, the Jews should have their own nation and territory.
7. Viewpoints over dividing the land of Israel.

While written by many scholars, the book is very readable, well-documented, smoothly transitions from topic to topic, and contains a helpful bibliography for further reading. I will definitely use this as a helpful future reference and will read more deeply in the near future. Recommended. I was given a review copy by Kregel Publications in exchange for a fair review.

 

 

See also The Messianic Hope

 

Is the Meaning of Harpagēsometha in 1 Thess 4:17 ‘Rapture’ or ‘Plunder’? Part 4 – Ep. 117

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

This episode I responded to Chris Steinle on his root fallacy of the Greek word harpagēsometha in the rapture passage 1 Thess 4:17. I explained the phonological dynamics behind the lexical form of the Greek word harpazō and its form harpagēsometha. When certain letters interact with each other you get a variety of changes. Lexicographers recognize this. But you do not discern a word’s meaning based on its root. Meaning is based on usage. Is the Meaning of Harpagēsometha in 1 Thess 4:17 ‘Rapture’ or ‘Plunder’? Part 4 – Ep. 117

“For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a shout of command, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive, who are left, will be suddenly caught up [harpagēsometha] together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord.” (1 Thess 4:16-17)

 

LINKS MENTIONED IN THE PROGRAM:

Recommended New Testament Greek Grammars

Recommended Greek New Testament Dictionaries/Lexicons

Is the Meaning of Harpagēsometha in 1 Thess 4:17 ‘Rapture’ or ‘Plunder’? Part 1 – Ep. 114

Is the Meaning of Harpagēsometha in 1 Thess 4:17 ‘Rapture’ or ‘Plunder’? Part 2 – Ep. 115

Is the Meaning of Harpagēsometha in 1 Thess 4:17 ‘Rapture’ or ‘Plunder’? Part 3 – Ep. 116

 

 

 

 

 

God has worked with Israel and the church at the same time in the past in AD 70

by

Here is a follow up to my article yesterday critiquing the pretribulation interpretation on Daniel’s 70 weeks’ prophecy.

I posted the following last year, demonstrating that God has worked with both the nation of Israel and the church at the same time.

God has worked with Israel and the church at the same time in the past…

 

 

A Critique of the Pretribulation Interpretation on Daniel’s 70 Weeks’ Prophecy

by

Most pretribulationists make the deep-seated assumption that God does not work with Israel and the church at the same time throughout redemptive history. They believe that God has “postponed his dealings” with Israel during the church age and will resume them once again after the church is raptured. This theological framework impinges directly on their interpretation of the Olivet Discourse, because they cannot allow for God to be working with both Israel and the church at the same time period of the Olivet Discourse. This point fundamentally impacts their interpretation of imminence. I will contend that God has relatively postponed his dealings with Israel during this church age, not absolutely. While Israel is promised national and territorial restoration in the future when Jesus returns, God, nevertheless, is presently working with Israel during the church age. During Christ’s first coming, God extended his salvific program to the Gentiles, while continuing to work with Israel. In this article, I will give a critique of the pretribulation interpretation on Daniel’s 70 weeks’ prophecy. I will explain why pretribulationists believe God does not work with Israel and the church at the same time based on their interpretation of Daniel’s key passage of the 70 weeks of Daniel. Finally, I will critique this interpretation showing its inconsistencies.

Pretribulationism on Daniel’s 70 Weeks’ Prophecy

Why does pretribulationism deny that God works with Israel and the church at the same time? To answer this question, we must turn to one of the most important and fundamental prophecies recorded in the Bible, the book of Daniel:

Seventy weeks have been determined concerning your people and your holy city to put an end to rebellion, to bring sin to completion, to atone for iniquity, to bring in perpetual righteousness, to seal up the prophetic vision, and to anoint a most holy place. So know and understand: From the issuing of the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed one, a prince arrives, there will be a period of seven weeks and sixty-two weeks. It will again be built, with plaza and moat, but in distressful times. Now after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one will be cut off and have nothing. As for the city and the sanctuary, the people of the coming prince will destroy them. But his end will come speedily like a flood. Until the end of the war that has been decreed there will be destruction. He will confirm a covenant with many for one week. But in the middle of that week he will bring sacrifices and offerings to a halt. On the wing of abominations will come one who destroys, until the decreed end is poured out on the one who destroys. (Dan 9:24–27)

The prophet Daniel anguished over the sins of rebellious Israel praying to God and confessing on behalf of his nation and asking for mercy, forgiveness, and repentance. While Daniel was praying, God sent a prophetic word through the angel Gabriel. Daniel was told that God would take a block of 490 years out from history: “Seventy weeks [i.e. 490 years] have been determined concerning your people and your holy city to put an end to rebellion, to bring sin to completion, to atone for iniquity, to bring in perpetual righteousness, to seal up the prophetic vision, and to anoint a most holy place” (Dan 9:24). In the generations ensuing Daniel, the first 483 years of the 490 were fulfilled by the time of the first century; however, the last seven years remain to be fulfilled. When those last seven years are fulfilled in the future completing the 490 year prophecy, the prophecy of Israel’s salvation will be accomplished. I want to make a couple of comments on this temporal framework. A very important verse is Dan 9:27:

He [the Antichrist] will confirm a covenant with many [Israel] for one week [i.e. seven years]. But in the middle of that week he will bring sacrifices and offerings to a halt. On the wing of abominations will come one who destroys, until the decreed end is poured out on the one who destroys. (cf. Dan 12:11)

This verse states “he” will confirm a covenant with many for “one week” (šābûa), which in this Hebrew context denotes seven years. The New English Translation rendering “confirm” may not capture the force of the underlying Hebrew verb gābar. The English Standard Version renders it “make a strong covenant,” which better captures the sense (cf. Ps 12:4); but the sense behind the Hebrew may better indicate oppressing, imposing, or coercing, suggesting that the other party to the covenant may not have much say in the matter. The “he” is an antichrist figure. The covenant may be for protection or permission to reinstitute the sacrificial system in return for some other service or action. It is implied that the Antichrist will break the covenant by stopping the sacrifices and offerings, causing abominations. This will occur in the middle of that week (i.e. the midpoint of the seven-year period). Accordingly, the “many” refers to Israel since the covenant relates to the stopping of the sacrifices and offerings associated with the Jewish temple. However, the “many” could also suggest that most of Israel will support the covenant, but a remnant will dissent.

Pretribulational theologians call this seven-year period the tribulation period. This expression implies that this entire period is characterized by God’s wrath. It is misleading because it is vague and it neglects the biblical distinction between the Antichrist’s great tribulation and the day of the Lord’s wrath. I prefer to use the more neutral biblical terms Daniel’s 70th week or seven-year period. Incidentally, prewrath eschatology views the seven-year period as unfolding in three phases. The first half characterized by the “beginning of birth pangs,” where the pre-revealed Antichrist will position himself politically. The midpoint begins the second phase where the Antichrist is revealed ensued by his great tribulation against the people of God. The third phase occurs when Jesus returns at some unknown point during the second half of the seven year period cutting short the great tribulation and then pouring out his day of the Lord’s wrath upon the wicked and the Antichrist’s kingdom.

Pretribulational theology is part of a larger theological system called Traditional (or Classical) Dispensationalism. It teaches a sharp separation between the church and Israel to the point that not only are there two distinct entities—which I agree— but going as far as to claim that God does not work with them at the same time in history; that is, in the past, present or the future (Contemporary or Progressive Dispensationalism does not make this temporal sharp separation, which is why there are many who are prewrath). Classical Dispensationalism basically claims that when the church was inaugurated at Pentecost, God postponed his activity with Israel and will pick up his program with Israel again only after the rapture of the church, concluding then that God will work only with Israel, and not the church, during the future seven-year period.

Pretrib Inconsistencies

How do pretribs draw this conclusion from Daniel’s prophecy? In order to maintain this interpretation they must make assumptions. They must claim that since the church did not exist during the first sixty-nine “weeks” (i.e. 483 years), it cannot be there during the last seven years. This is fallacious for several reasons:

(1) It is logically wrong-headed, a non-sequitur. The church does exist now.

(2) It is an argument from silence. The passage is addressing Israel. Pretrib teachers are making Daniel’s prophecy say more than it intends. Daniel’s prophecy is not making claims of excluding the church. That assumption is being read into the prophecy. The prophecy is a positive statement for Israel, not a negative statement for the church.

(3) Pretrib theology typically calls Daniel’s 70th week a “Jewish” week. But more accurately it should be called a Gentile week because Daniel’s prophecy states that all seventy weeks (including the last week of seven years) will be characterized by Gentile domination. Only after this block of 490 years is complete, Daniel says, will Israel be redemptively restored. To be sure, God will be working with Israel during that period, but it will be characterized by Gentile domination against Israel until she finds salvation in their messiah.

Daniel’s prophecy to Israel is not replaced by the church. But God extends his redemptive program to the Gentiles, while keeping his promises to Israel.

 

Eternal Israel: Biblical, Theological, and Historical Studies that Uphold the Eternal, Distinctive Destiny of Israel (Book Notice)

by

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Eternal Israel: Biblical, Theological, and Historical Studies that Uphold the Eternal, Distinctive Destiny of Israel by Barry Horner

In Eternal Israel author Barry Horner presents a variety of biblical, theological, and historical studies that argue for the distinctive, eternal destiny of Israel. Like Horner’s 2004 work Future Israel, Eternal Israel pushes back against replacement and supersessionist theology and adds further historical, exegetical, biblical and theological weight to the fundamental proposal that God has a glorious eternal destiny for Israel. Addressing such helpful topics as Jewish evangelism, eschatology, and Islamic views of Israel, Horner presents a wealth of information that compels readers to remember that Israel holds a key role in God’s plan for eternity.

See also his Future Israel: Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must Be Challenged

Review

About the Author

A Striking Way How Pretribbers Reason Like Flat Earthers

by

The following is a snippet from my forthcoming book critiquing pretribulation imminence theology. I am citing pretrib teacher Wayne A. Brindle’s four criteria of interpretation determining if a passage contains imminence teaching. I cite here his second criteria and then I comment on it:

“2. The passage speaks of Christ’s return as ‘near,’ without stating any signs that must precede His coming” (Brindle, “Biblical Evidence,” 139).

Similarly, just like the first criterion, this second one is flawed. Brindle is selective in his evidence by not allowing a passage that contains signs or events to be considered a rapture passage: “without stating any signs that must precede His coming.” He is basically reasoning, “The rapture is signless, because I have selectively chosen passages that are signless.” He uses his conclusion to argue for his conclusion. If he allowed passages that mention Christ’s return as both near and having signs preceding his return, his belief in imminence would collapse. For example, the following passage speaks of Christ’s return as near but mentions signs that must precede his coming. “Learn this parable from the fig tree: Whenever its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. So also you, when you see these things happening, know that he is near, right at the door” (Mark 13:28–29). Jesus clearly prophesies that the intervening events of branches becoming “tender” and putting out “leaves” must happen before summer arrives. This text is from the Olivet Discourse, but since it mentions signs, pretribulational presuppositions forces them to selectively exclude it as evidence. It is automatically excluded as a rapture passage because it contains signs. Their interpretive method begins with a stacked deck—so as to not allow their theory to be falsified. Whether you are talking about, for example, physics, philosophy, or theology, if your theory does not allow the possibility of being falsifiable with counter evidence, then that is indicative that one’s theory is invalid. In other words, it is theoretically impossible for there ever to be any evidence against one’s theory. One of the most common red flags of an unfalsifiable theory is circular reasoning, exactly what we see with these criteria of imminence.

[1] This type of pretrib flawed reasoning reminds me of how flat earthers argue. They set up their theory in such a way as to not allow the possibility of counter evidence to their theory. To be clear, I am not suggesting that pretribs function as flat earthers in every respect; they do not. However, in this specific respect they do the same thing as flat earthers by not allowing their theory to be theoretically falsifiable.

 

 

A BIG Difficulty in the Plot Line within the Amillennial Narrative in the Book of Revelation

by

Robert W. Wall writes:

W. Hendricksen locates Satan’s imprisonment between the two advents of Christ, when the church is able to evangelize the nations with complete freedom (Conquerors, pp. 185–90). This interpretation draws upon elements of Revelation 12–13, where Satan is unable to destroy the church. Further, it corresponds well to the subsequent vision of those of the “first resurrection” who will reign with Christ.[…] However, nowhere does it portray the church as evangelistic, and the nations are eventually destroyed rather than converted.

Thus, Caird argues that the nations of 20:3 are not those of 19:15; and the battle of 19:20 can not be the end of the human race because we find nations in 20:3. The nations of 20:3 must be the survivors of that eschatological battle, whose political power is now broken at the second coming, and whose status has been reversed so that they are now in subjection to the once powerless church for a millennium (cf. 20:4). Revelation (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991), 242.

Wall does not actually endorse Caird’s position, since he does not think there is a sequential indicator in the millennial text. Of course I completely disagree. But this is besides the point, because I am interested in his quotation of Caird’s response to Hendrickson.

Caird’s argument brings to mind a similar, and even more problematic, point in amillennial interpretation where they have an illogical plot line in their narrative: If Satan is bound during the church age so as not to deceive the nations, as Amillennialists claim, then how can the nations become deceived in Rev 19:15? It is then meaningless to claim that Satan’s so-called present-age binding is preventing the nations from being deceived.

Amillennialists are fond of asserting that Satan is bound in this present age only in the sense of preventing nations from being deceived from accepting the Gospel. Satan, we are told, is not bound to prevent individuals from being deceived, only nations (as if nations are not made up of individuals!).

A glaring flaw in this thinking is the obvious fact that the Gospel-hating nations are in fact deceived and receive judgment in Rev 19 . So the amillennial trope that the depiction of Satan being bound in Revelation 20:1–3 refers to the present age preventing nations of being deceived is devoid of any meaningful consequence. What is the point of Satan being bound to prevent the nations of being deceived since they end up being deceived in Rev 19?

If Amillennialists object by saying that there are other ways for nations to become deceived other than the agency of Satan, then the obvious question must be asked: What then was the point in the first place for binding Satan? Scripture states that he was bound to prevent him from deceiving the nations. But again, Rev 19 shows that they end up being deceived!   

This is a big difficulty in the plot line within the Amillennial narrative. I have never received a satisfactorily answer.

It is much more coherent to view the binding of Satan as the result of the eschatological battle-victory in Revelation 19 within Jesus’s second coming, rather than being influenced by an artificial chapter break at Rev 20:1 or by pre-commitments to the Tyconius-Augustine theological tradition. There is no basis to break up the unified, coherent discourse between Rev 19 and 20 by retrojecting the activity of the binding of Satan back into a first century context.

 

Recommended New Testament Greek Grammars

by

The following are New Testament Greek grammars that I recommend. This includes both beginning and intermediate biblical Greek grammars. See also here my list of recommend Greek New Testament lexicons/dictionaries.

 

*Links are to Amazon

New Testament Greek Grammars

 

Reading Koine Greek: An Introduction and Integrated Workbook by Rodney J. Decker

 

Intermediate Greek Grammar: Syntax for Students of the New Testament by David L. Mathewson and Elodie Ballantine Emig

 

Fundamentals of New Testament Greek by Stanley E. Porter, Jeffrey Reed, and Matthew Brook O’Donnel

 

Fundamentals of New Testament Greek: Workbook by Stanley E. Porter and Jeffrey T. Reed

 

Idioms of the Greek New Testament by Stanley E. Porter

 

 

*The following descriptions are of the recommended New Testament Greek grammars noted above:

Reading Koine Greek: An Introduction and Integrated Workbook by Rodney J. Decker

“This in-depth yet student-friendly introduction to Koine Greek provides a full grounding in Greek grammar, while starting to build skill in the use of exegetical tools. The approach, informed by twenty-five years of classroom teaching, emphasizes reading Greek for comprehension as opposed to merely translating it. The workbook is integrated into the textbook, with exercises appearing within each chapter rather than pushed to the end or located in a separate book. This enables students to practice concepts as they encounter them in the chapter–ideal for distance learning or studying beyond the traditional classroom. The book covers not only New Testament Greek but also the wider range of Bible-related Greek (LXX and other Koine texts). It introduces students to reference tools for biblical Greek, includes tips on learning, and is supplemented by robust web-based resources through Baker Academic’s Textbook eSources. Resources for students include flash cards and audio files. Resources for professors include a test bank and an instructor’s manual.”

 

Intermediate Greek Grammar: Syntax for Students of the New Testament by David L. Mathewson and Elodie Ballantine Emig

“This intermediate grammar for students of New Testament Greek incorporates the advances of recent linguistic research in an accessible and understandable way. Drawing on years of teaching experience at a leading seminary, the authors help students extend their grasp of Greek for reading and interpreting the New Testament and related writings. They make extensive use of New Testament texts to illustrate each grammatical category. Long enough to provide substantial help yet concise enough for frequent practical use, this book is ideal for intermediate Greek and Greek exegesis classes. It is also a valuable resource for preachers and others.”

 

Fundamentals of New Testament Greek by Stanley E. Porter, Jeffrey Reed, and Matthew Brook O’Donnel

Fundamentals of New Testament Greek: Workbook by Stanley E. Porter and Jeffrey T. Reed

“This extremely useful volume is a comprehensive introduction to the grammar and vocabulary of the Greek of the New Testament, with extensive paradigms, examples, and explanations. / Porter, Reed, and O’Donnell’s Fundamentals of New Testament Greek makes use of pedagogically sound and linguistically informed language-instruction techniques to provide the most effective textbook possible. The book introduces the individual elements of the Greek language according to their frequency of use in the New Testament so as to reinforce in students the elements that they will most often encounter. Every grammatical element is explained in sufficient detail ― including illustrative examples ― and is accompanied by useful information to describe its composition and analysis. The authors also include complete paradigms with plenty of examples, and significant vocabulary is introduced throughout the course of the volume. / Students who complete this text can engage in serious reading, translation, and understanding of the Greek New Testament, moving directly into Greek exegesis courses and more advanced Greek-language courses. Fundamentals of New Testament Greek: First Year will prove invaluable for gaining a thorough foundational understanding of New Testament Greek. It is bound to be a standard text for years to come.”

 

Idioms of the Greek New Testament by Stanley E. Porter

“The Greek grammar, newly revised and reset for the second edition, which is also available in paperback, can be used as an instructive handbook, as an intermediate level textbook and as a basic reference work to New Testament Greek. The major topics of Greek grammar are treated in a useful pedagodical sequence. Among the innovative treatments are those on tense and aspect, Mood and Attitude, conditional clauses, word order and clause structure, and discourse analysis. The grammar takes account both of the traditional categories of Greek grammar and of recent discussions on structural linguistics.”

 

 

Is the Meaning of Harpagēsometha in 1 Thess 4:17 ‘Rapture’ or ‘Plunder’? Part 1 – Ep. 114

by

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

On Doug Hamp’s the Awakening Report, Chris Steinle claimed that the Greek word harpagēsometha behind the English “suddenly caught [up]” in 1 Thess 4:17 is not derived from the Greek harpazo and consequently does not actually refer to a rapture. It refers to another word (which we will address in another episode) that fits with a resurrection meaning. I responded to him in this first part of a short series with my first criticism in this first part as he erroneously relies on the wrong Greek resource.

“Then we who are alive, who are left, will be suddenly caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will always be with the Lord.” (1 Thess 4:17)

 

A Response to Chris Steinle and His Denial of a ‘Catching Up’ in 1 Thess 4:17

Recommended Greek New Testament Dictionaries/Lexicons

 

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL HERE!

 

Is Jesus Currently on David’s Throne?

by

Michael J. Vlach writes:

The purpose of this blog post is to examine Peter’s use of Psalm 132:11 in Acts 2:30 with a view toward grasping Peter’s understanding of the throne of David concept.

Acts 2 describes the baptizing and filling ministry of the Holy Spirit after Jesus’ ascension. This is all related to Jesus, the resurrected Messiah, who currently is at the right hand of the Father. Jesus is the One who has poured forth the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:33). The culmination of Peter’s argument in Acts 2 is found in his declaration that God has made the resurrected Jesus “both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36).

Three quotations from the Psalms are found in Acts 2:29-36— Psalms 16, 132, and 110. The focus of this blog post, though, is on Peter’s use of Psalm 132:11 in Acts 2:30 and how this relates to the throne of David issue. Peter declared:

And so, because he [David] was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath to seat one of his descendants on his throne (Acts 2:30).

Much debate exists on the implications of this verse, mostly concerning whether it implies that Jesus is currently sitting upon David’s throne today in heaven. Does Peter’s quotation of Psalm 132:11 indicate a change or advancement concerning the concept of David’s throne from a physical-earthly reality to a spiritual one. This topic involves both how Peter uses Psalm 132:11 and what this means for understanding the throne of David.

To understand Peter’s uses of Psalm 132:11 I will present both the context of the Old Testament passage and the New Testament situation in which Psalm 132:11 is quoted.  I will argue that Peter quotes Psalm 132:11 contextually, and he is not transcending or changing the meaning of the throne of David from its normal meaning of an earthly throne. Thus, Acts 2:30 is an example of a New Testament person quoting an Old Testament prophetic text contextually with the expectation that this Old Testament text will be fulfilled literally in the future. READ MORE….

 

 

 

Paper Notice: East Region Meeting ETS in Lancaster, PA, April 7–8

by

I will be delivering a paper at the 2018 Evangelical Theological Society East Region Meeting in Lancaster, PA, April 7–8.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:

The Theological Word-Concept Fallacy: James Barr’s Linguistic Critique Then and Now

James Barr’s groundbreaking The Semantics of Biblical Language brought modern linguistic principles to the consciousness of theological and biblical studies. This paper discusses (1) Barr’s criticism of “lexical theology,” in particular Kittle’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament; (2) The different forms of the “theological word-concept” fallacy and specific examples; (3) Reasons why this interpretive fallacy stubbornly persists today in exegetical studies, including recommendations as a way forward.

 

 

Copyright © 2018 by Alan Kurschner.