New Panarion

The second edition, revised and expanded, of Frank Williams’ translation of Book I of The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis is now available. My copy arrived today. The library binding was a bit of a surprise (it doesn’t match my copy of the volume containing Books II and III, which is the usual olive-green cloth with gold stamping of the other Nag Hammadi & Manichean Studies volumes), but it’s otherwise another fine example of bookmaking, a standard of Brill. As I have a copy of the original edition of 1987 (there was also a corrected reprinting of 1997) checked out from the library, I thought it would be fun to compare.

The introduction has grown from 27 pages (including a bibliography of five items) to 34 pages of introduction and a now separate 5 pages of “Editions and Works Consulted.” The subject index has grown from seven to ten pages. New to the 2009 edition are a half page list of Corrected Passages (in which Williams lists the emendations to the Greek text of Holl which he’s followed), and a twelve page Index of References, including all references in the text, footnotes, etc, in three parts: “Nag Hammadi Codices,” “Other Gnostic Sources,” and “Patristic Sources.” Surprisingly, there is no Scriptural index. The translations included in the volume (The Letter of Acacius and Paul, and Book I of the Panarion proper) have grown from 352 to 380 pages, only two of which belong to the Letter. A very interesting and helpful difference between the two volumes lies in the page headers. In the original edition, the page headers were only Section I, Section II, or Section III, reflecting the Anacephaleosis in which each sect was found. In the new edition, the Section is noted in the header of the left-facing page (verso) and a short title for the sect is given in the header of the right-facing page (recto), e.g., Valentinians, Secundians, Ptolemaeans, etc. Rather than the Section/Anacephaleosis number, however, it would have been more useful to have the chapter number, as it is the standard used in referring to the various sects/chapters of the Panarion. My trusty pencil will take up the noble task of effecting this in my own copy.

Flipping through and comparing the two translations, it becomes apparent that this new edition is not simply a slight reworking of the old, but rather qualifies as a new translation altogether. Identical renderings between the two editions are not widespread. Following are Williams’ renderings of 30,1,1-3, the beginning of the Sect (Epiphanius’ usage is to call each chapter a Sect) on the Ebionites (notes and editorial markings are removed):

1987 edition:
Following these and holding the same views, Ebion, the Ebionites’ founder, emerged in his turn–a monstrosity with many shapes, who practically formed the snake-like shape of the mythical many-headed hydra in himself. He was of the Nazoraeans’ school, but preached and taught differently from them. For it was as though a person were to collect a set of jewelry from various precious stones, and a garment from clothing of many colors, and dress up to be consipcuous. Ebion, in reverse, took any item of preaching from every sect if it was dreadful, lethal and disgusting, if it was ugly and unconvincing, if it was full of contention, and patterned himself after them all. For he has the Samaritans’ repulsiveness but the Jews’ name, the viewpoint of the Ossaeans, Nazoraeans and Nasaraeans, the nature of the Cerinthians, and the badness of the Carpocratians. And he has the Christians’ name alone–most certainly not their behaviour, viewpoint and knowledge, and the Gospels’ and apostles’ agreement as to faith!

2009 edition:
Following these and holding views like theirs, Ebion, the founder of the Ebionites, arose in the world in his turn as a monstrosity with many forms, and practically represented in himself the snake-like form of the mythical many-headed hydra. He was of the Nazoraeans’ school, but preached and taught other things than they. For it was as though someone were to collect a set of jewelry from various precious stones and an outfit of varicolored clothing and tog himself up conspicuously. Ebion, in reverse, took any and every doctrine which was dreadful, lethal, disgusting, ugly and unconvincing, thoroughly contentious, from every sect, and patterned himself after them all. For he has the Samaritans’ unpleasantness but the Jews’ name, the opinion of the Ossaeans, Nazoraeans and Nasaraeans, the form of the Cerinthians, and the perversity of the Carpocratians. And he wants to have just the Chrisians’ title–most certainly not their behavior, opinion and knowledge, and the consensus as to faith of the Gospels and Apostles!

Greek text (Holl’s text, which Williams used, as found in TLG): Ἐβίων, ἀφ’ οὗπερ Ἐβιωναῖοι, καθεξῆς ἀκολουθῶν καὶ τὰ ὅμοια τούτοις φρονήσας, πολύμορφον τεράστιον καὶ ὡς εἰπεῖν τῆς μυθευομένης πολυκεφάλου ὕδρας ὀφιώδη μορφὴν ἐν ἑαυτῷ ἀνατυπωσάμενος, πάλιν ἐπανέστη τῷ βίῳ, ἐκ τῆς τούτων μὲν σχολῆς ὑπάρχων, ἕτερα δὲ παρὰ τούτους κηρύττων καὶ ὑφηγούμενος. ὡς γὰρ εἴ τις συνάξειεν ἑαυτῷ ἐκ διαφόρων λίθων τιμίων κόσμον καὶ ποικίλης ἐσθῆτος ἔνδυμα καὶ διαφανῶς ἑαυτὸν κοσμήσῃ, οὕτω καὶ οὗτος τὸ ἀνάπαλιν πᾶν ὁτιοῦν δεινὸν καὶ ὀλετήριον καὶ βδελυκτὸν κήρυγμα, ἄμορφόν τε καὶ ἀπίθανον, ἀ<ντι>ζηλίας ἔμπλεον παρ’ ἑκάστης αἱρέσεως λαβὼν ἑαυτὸν ἀνετύπωσεν εἰς ἁπάσας. Σαμαρειτῶν μὲν γὰρ ἔχει τὸ βδελυρόν, Ἰουδαίων δὲ τὸ ὄνομα, Ὀσσαίων καὶ Ναζωραίων καὶ Νασαραίων τὴν γνώμην, Κηρινθιανῶν τὸ εἶδος, Καρποκρατιανῶν τὴν κακοτροπίαν, καὶ Χριστιανῶν βούλεται ἔχειν τὸ ἐπώνυμον μόνον (οὐ γὰρ δήπουθεν τήν τε πρᾶξιν καὶ τὴν γνώμην καὶ τὴν γνῶσιν καὶ τὴν τῶν εὐαγγελίων καὶ ἀποστόλων περὶ πίστεως συγκατάθεσιν)·

It seems that Williams has spent the last decades well, familiarizing himself ever more with the text in order to produce a much smoother, more readable, and more immediately satisfying translation. The awkward renderings in the older version are gone, and the new translation certainly shows itself to be a fine representation of the accessible and colloquial style found in Epiphanius’ original, which is also touched on in Williams’ introduction. The new translation is certainly lively, moreso than the somewhat stilted older edition, particularly in the colorful language that Epiphanius is given to use in reference to the ideas of the various heresies!

This translation of the full Panarion by Frank Williams is the only one currently available in any modern language. There are editions with excerpts, most notably Philip Amidon’s The Panarios of St. Epiphanius of Salamis, Selected Passages (Oxford, 1990), but no other full translations of the complete Panarion. Perhaps a more affordable paperback edition of the two volumes of Williams’ translation will appear in the future, the better to make accessible this truly amazing work.

Neusner’s Theology of the Oral Torah, Chapter 13

Please forgive my tardiness in posting this installment of my notes on Jacob Neusner’s The Theology of the Oral Torah: Revealing the Justice of God (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1999). Over the past two weeks, various distractions made it difficult for me to find the time and effect the concentration necessary to continue properly, but continue we now do, with, Part IV, Restoring World Order, Chapter 13, Restoring Private Lives: Resurrection. The former installments are: Introduction and Chapter 1, Chapters 2 and 3, Chapters 4 and 5, Chapter 6, Chapter 7, Chapter 8, Chapter 9, Chapter 10, Chapter 11, and Chapter 12. After this installment, there are still two chapters left.

Neusner begins:

Throughout the Oral Torah the main point of the theological eschatology–the theory of last things–registers both negatively and affirmatively. Death does not mark the end of the individual human life, nor exile the last stop in the journey of holy Israel. Israelites will live in the age or the world to come, all Israel in the Land of Israel; and Israel will comprehend all who know the one true God. The restoration of world order that completes the demonstration of God’s justice encompasses both private life and the domain of all Israel. For both, restorationist theology provides eternal life; to be Israel means to live. So far as the individual is concerned, beyond the grave, at a determinate moment, man rises from the grave in resurrection, is judged, and enjoys the world to come. For the entirety of Israel, congruently: all Israel participates in the resurrection, which takes place in the Land of Israel, and enters the world to come. (p. 554)

When Neusner says “the main point . . . registers both negatively and affirmatively,” he describes the eschatology of the Oral Torah as found in the complexity of the documents themselves, which describe both a temporary and disordered present world (“…negatively…”) and an eternal, changeless, ordered world to come (“…affirmatively…”). Like the commandments themselves, negative and positive, which together describe a way of life for Israel, so the congerie of negative and affirmative expositions of the Oral Torah’s theological eschatology presents a coherent whole.

With Neusner’s writing, “…to be Israel means to live…,” we are reminded of the Two Ways, the way of life and the way of death (Deuteronomy 30.15,19; Jeremiah 21.8; Didache 1.1). The difference between the two is as stark as can be. A life lived full of live-giving acts in God’s mercy leads only to eternal life. A life of idolatry, the rejection of God and His life-giving ways and His mercy, leads only to eternal death. Israel lives because God has given Israel the secret to life: Torah.

Continue reading “Neusner’s Theology of the Oral Torah, Chapter 13”

On Keats

A garden in a garden : a green spot
        Where all is green : most fitting slumber-place
        For the strong man grown weary of a race
Soon over. Unto him a goodly lot
Hath fallen in fertile ground ; there thorns are not,
        But his own daisies ; silence, full of grace,
        Surely hath shed a quiet on his face ;
His earth is but sweet leaves that fall and rot.
What was his record of himself, ere he
        Went from us? ‘Here lies one whose name was writ
        In water.’ While the chilly shadows flit
        Of sweet St. Agnes’ Eve, while basil springs–
        His name, in every humble heart that sings,
Shall be a fountain of love, verily.

Christina Georgina Rossetti. 18 January 1849 (Eve of St. Agnes)

The Secret Rose

Far-off, most secret, and inviolate Rose,
Enfold me in my hour of hours; where those
Who sought thee in the Holy Sepulchre,
Or in the wine-vat, dwell beyond the stir
And tumult of defeated dreams; and deep
Among pale eyelids, heavy with the sleep
Men have named beauty. Thy great leaves enfold
The ancient beards, the helms of ruby and gold
Of the crowned Magi; and the king whose eyes
Saw the Pierced Hands and Rood of elder rise
In Druid vapour and make the torches dim;
Till vain frenzy awoke and he died; and him
Who met Fand walking among flaming dew
By a grey shore where the wind never blew,
And lost the world and Emer for a kiss;
And him who drove the gods out of their liss,
And till a hundred morns had flowered red
Feasted, and wept the barrows of the dead;
And the proud dreaming king who flung the crown
And sorrow away, and calling bard and clown
Dwelt among wine-stained wanderers in deep woods;
And him who sold tillage, and house, and goods,
And sought through lands and islands numberless years,
Until he found, with laughter and with tears,
A woman of so shining loveliness
That men threshed corn at midnight by a tress,
A little stolen tress. I, too, await
The hour of thy great wind of love and hate.
When shall the stars be blown about the sky,
Like the sparks blown out of a smithy, and die?
Surely thine hour has come, thy great wind blows,
Far-off, most secret, and inviolate Rose?

William Butler Yeats. 1899.

Neusner’s Theology of the Oral Torah, chapter 12

At long last (forgive my recent distractions), the following are my notes on Jacob Neusner’s The Theology of the Oral Torah: Revealing the Justice of God (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1999), Part IV, Restoring World Order, Chapter 12, Repentance. The former installments, by chapter, are: Introduction and Chapter 1, Chapters 2 and 3, Chapters 4 and 5, Chapter 6, Chapter 7, Chapter 8, Chapter 9, Chapter 10, and Chapter 11. After this installment, there are three chapters left.

Neusner begins this chapter (p. 511):

The logic of repentance is simple and familiar. It is a logic that appeals to the balance and proportion of all things. If sin is what introduces rebellion and change, and the will of man is what constitutes the variable in disrupting creation, then the theology of the Oral Torah makes provision for restoration through the free exercise of man’s will. That requires an attitude of remorse, a resolve not to repeat the act of rebellion, and a good-faith effort at reparation, in all, transformation from rebellion against to obedience to God’s will. So with repentance we come once more to an exact application of the principle of measure for measure, here, will for will, each comparable to, corresponding with, the other. World order, disrupted by an act of will, regains perfection through an act of will that complements and corresponds to the initial, rebellious one. That is realized in an act of wilful repentance (Hebrew: teshubah).

Notice here something that has been occurring consistently throughout Neusner’s book: each chapter requires the previous chapters, and builds upon them. Neusner’s experience in working with the systematized documents of the Oral Torah finds expression in this exceedingly skillful organization of his presentation.

Repentance is not just apology, but also an act of intention, involving a change in one’s will, a determination to make a return (teshubah) from disobedience to obedience, from arrogance to humility. This, in conjunction with atonement, brings about reconciliation with God. In this changed attitude, repentance is then expressed by not repeating a sin when again confronted by the opportunity (pp 511-512).

As seen earlier, God’s mercy vastly outweighs His justice. A sin is punished measure for measure, but repentance is rewarded out of all proportion. Partly, this is because the act of will involved in repentance affects an unlimited number of sins that will no longer be committed; while each sin is a single act of rebellion, repenting of so much potential rebellion is rewarded. But it is God’s mercy that rewards the humble out of all proportion even in regards to that. As Neusner says, “[R]epentance makes sense, in its remarkable power, only in the context of God’s mercy” (p. 514). Man’s will is to be shaped by God’s own attitude of mercy, having benefitted from it. It is when we show mercy toward one another that God shows mercy toward us (pp 514-515).

Continue reading “Neusner’s Theology of the Oral Torah, chapter 12”

A prayer of the ♥

O lorde Jhesu Cryste I commende my
to thy love that ytt may enter into thy
by love and spirituall delectacyon
and I beseche the good lorde to inflame
myn ardently with thy love and so
to kyndle myn with the blessyd
love of the good lorde that never
hereafter I fele inordynately
any ly joye or carnall
delectacyon.

For each read “heart,” of course. From Robert Brygandyne’s prayer book, reign of Henry VIII. See Eamon Duffy, Marking the Hours: English People and their Prayers 1240-1570 Yale University Press, 2006), plate 105 and pages 161-162. This is a beautiful book, illustrated with and full of discussion of English prayer books, mostly late pre-Reformation ones.

Eastern Orthodoxy in the ESV Study Bible

My copy of the ESV Study Bible arrived this week. It is a confection of modern publishing technology, I must say. The color printing of maps and charts throughout is impressive. The color is crisp, as is all the text, even in the smallest type. The paper is exceedingly thin, yet strong and opaque. There is no bleeding of ink. The binding is perhaps too tightly sewn, but it should loosen up in time and lead to less crinkling in the gutter. I’m not a fan of the super-limp calfskin cover, though. A more substantial lining is in order, I think, but that’s a personal preference. I found only two problems: the top corners of two leaves (one in Isaiah and the other in the concordance) were folded down when the text block was cut. It was a matter of a only few moments to trim them, though. Otherwise, it’s an examplary piece of binding.

Flipping through, I noticed an article on “The Bible in Christianity” (pp 2613-2622) including sections on Roman Catholicism (pp 2613-2615), Eastern Orthodoxy (pp 2615-2617), Liberal Protestantism (pp 2618-2619), Evangelical Protestantism (pp 2620-2622), and Evangelical Protestantism and Global Christianity (pp 2622). Knowing a little something of Eastern Orthodoxy, I decided to read through this section as my first taste of the ESV Study Bible.

Somewhat surprisingly, Eastern Orthodoxy receives a treatment equivalent in length to that of Evangelical Protestantism, which is the section describing the target audience of the ESV Study Bible. These are the lengthiest sections of the article, at two and one quarter pages each.

This Eastern Orthodoxy section of the article was written by Robert Letham of Wales Evangelical School of Theology. It is likely that he was chosen to author this piece as, among other books, Letham is the author of Through Western Eyes–Eastern Orthodoxy: A Reformed Perspective (Mentor/Christian Focus Publications, 2007), in which he introduces the Eastern Orthodox Church to a Reformed Christian audience. Letham is also a minister in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church. Thus his perspective is one that can only be considered perfectly amenable to the ESV editors and their target audience, which is that of Reformed Evangelicals.

It is always tricky to write, particularly in summary, about another religious tradition than one’s own. A sympathetic eye is necessary in evaluating such writing, as there are many aspects of any tradition that escape the notice of outsiders, and nuances thereof which are not apprehended. This is not surprisingly the case in this instance. While the majority of the article is very well done, I think in several places, some too severe editing must have shortened some originally more robust passages that formerly made more coherent points. I’ll comment only on those statements in the article which need correction. It is to be understood that I find the rest of the article quite sympathetic and informed. We begin.

Continue reading “Eastern Orthodoxy in the ESV Study Bible”

Sursum Corda

‘Lift up your hearts’ ‘We lift them up.’ Ah me!
I cannot, Lord, lift up my heart to Thee :
Stoop, lift it up, that where Thou art
          I too may be.

‘Give Me thy heart.’ I would not say Thee nay,
But have no power to keep or give away
My heart : stoop, Lord, and take it
          to Thyself to-day.

Stoop, Lord, as once before, now once anew ;
Stoop, Lord, and hearken, hearken, Lord, and do,
And take my will, and take my heart,
          and take me too.

Christina Georgina Rossetti. Before 1886.

Neusner’s Theology of the Oral Torah, chapter 11

Following are my notes for Chapter 11, Sin, of Part III, Sources of World Disorder, of Jacob Neusner’s The Theology of the Oral Torah: Revealing the Justice of God (McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1999). The former installments, by chapter, are: Introduction and Chapter 1, Chapters 2 and 3, Chapters 4 and 5, Chapter 6, Chapter 7, Chapter 8, Chapter 9, and Chapter 10.

I’ll begin with Neusner’s own words:

That the theology of the Oral Torah spins out a simple but encompassing logic makes the character of its treatment of sin entirely predictable. First, the system must account for imperfection in the world order of justice; sin supplies the reason. Second, it must explain how God remains omnipotent even in the face of imperfection. The cause of sin, man’s free will corresponding to God’s, tells why. Third, it must allow for systemic remission. Sin is so defined as to accomodate the possibility of regeneration and restoration. And, finally, sin must be so presented as to fit into the story of the creation of the perfect world. It is.

Defined in the model of the first sin, the one committed by man in Eden, sin is an act of rebellion against God. Rebellion takes two forms. As a gesture of omission, sin embodies the failure to carry out one’s obligation to God set forth in the Torah. As one of commission, it constitutes an act of defiance. In both cases sin comes about by reason of man’s intentionality to reject the will of God, set forth in the Torah. However accomplished, whether through omission or commission, an act becomes sinful because of the attitude that accompanies it. That is why man is responsible for sin, answerable to God in particular, who may be said to take the matter personally, just as it is meant. The consequence of sin is death for the individual, exile and estrangement for holy Israel, and disruption for the world. That is why sin accounts for much of the flaw of creation. (pp 457-458)

With sin being an act of rebellion against God, a public sin is seen as blaspheming God’s name (Bavli Qiddushin 1:10 I.10/40a). In sin, God and man meet, and the order of the world is affected. Through sin, man’s will upsets God’s plan for creation. This imperfection, itself a result of sin through man’s expression of his free will, which latter is part of the image of God in man, is thus an expression of God’s justice. That is, the presence of free will itself expresses, even in wrong choices and their results, the love and justice of the Creator who endowed man with that image of Himself. And, like the use of free will resulting in the earlier-described zekhut, free will can also choose repentance, and thereby benefit from God’s mercy. (pp 458-459).

Continue reading “Neusner’s Theology of the Oral Torah, chapter 11”

New Orthodox Study Bible Review

Chris Orr brought to my attention an extremely useful review of the new full Orthodox Study Bible, written by R. Grant Jones: Notes on the Orthodox Study Bible (2008 Edition) [defunct link]. He focuses on the quality of the translation as representative of the underlying Greek, providing an excellent chart presenting the differences. It’s a topic I’ve touched on in my own review (Two Septuagints), but not in such substantial depth and detail as Mr Jones has done. His review is only beginning, but a point that has been clearly demonstrated in his detailed examination is that the OSB Old Testament relies too heavily on the NKJV as its base text, to the extent that it cannot honestly be called a translation of the Septuagint. For this reason, when I’ve been asked for a good, contemporary, complete English Septuagint translation, I can only recommend the New English Translation of the Septuagint (NETS). Various ongoing translation projects are nearing completion, so there will be more options soon. A very important point advocating for accuracy in translation is one that Mr Jones expresses very well in his notes: important patristic theological discussions were based on particular readings of the Septuagint text which are not present in the Hebrew. By opting for the latter’s readings, important didactic opportunities are missed with direct connections to patristic commentary, something that should have been the motivating goal of the annotations.

I look forward to the continuation of Mr Jones’ review.