Quoting big names out of context

I found this review of a book that seems like pure science fiction instead of reality. The book is called “Exo-Vaticana: Petrus Romanus, Project L.U.C.I.F.E.R., and the Vatican’s Astonishing Plan for the Arrival of an Alien Savior.” Apparently a MUST-READ! I love sci-fi and always have. And this book seems to fit right in there with the best of them: Star Trek, Star Wars, Star Gate, etc. You can find out more about the book here.

The only difference between this book and the rest, is that it claims to be meticulously researched truth! It sounds more like a hashed-up conspiracy theory, and we all know how these conspiracy theories are laced together to build an alternate truth!

Of course, they can “conspiracize” as much as they like to. The problem I have with them is that they quote Francis Schaeffer as backup for their cause. Maybe Schaeffer did write something that showed that he believed like they do? The problem is that they quote Schaeffer out of context as if he does agree with them. The point is that Schaeffer didn’t!

They quote the following from Schaeffer in his book, “Genesis in Space and Time,”

“More and more we are finding that mythology in general, though greatly contorted, very often has some historical base.  And the interesting thing is that one myth that one finds over and over again in many parts of the world is that somewhere a long time ago supernatural beings had sexual intercourse with natural women and produced a special breed of people.” (p125-126)

I have “The Complete Works of Francis A. Schaeffer” in 5 volumes. So, I decided to check it out. So, what did Schaeffer actually say?

The context in which Schaeffer made the quoted statement is within an explanation of two possible interpretations of Gen 6:1-2:

“(1)  Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them,  (2)  that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose.”

Schaeffer, in the context of the quote pointed out two different options for interpreting these verses of which the quote was part of option 1. In this option he explained the belief by some that angels came to earth, mated with these beautiful women and produced the Nephilim, hybrid creatures made of angelic and human DNA.

After this part, Schaeffer continued:

“The other reading—that verse 2 denotes that there were those in the godly line [of these genealogies] who intermarried with others in the ungodly line to the destruction of the godly line—fits into the whole of Scripture, for there is a constant prohibition throughout the Old and New Testaments against the people of God marrying those who re not of the people of God. The Old Testament says repeatedly: if you marry those who are not God’s people, and if you give your sons and daughters to them, the godly line will be destroyed. The New Testament contains the same command: ‘Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?’ (2 Cor. 6:14). This passage has to do with those links which are central to men’s lives, and no link is more central than marriage. This point is made explicit in the great marriage passage in 1 Corinthians 7:”39. Paul instructs the church that ‘the wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.’ The principle is clear: God’s people are to marry God’s people. It is therefore possible to interpret Genesis 6:2 as indicating the intermarriage between the godly line and the ungodly line.” (The Complete Works of Francis A. Schaeffer, Volume Two, Crossway Books, Wheaton, Illinois, 1982, p89)

Right after this passage in Schaeffer’s book he continues to speak of the godly line, and how the genealogies lead up to Noah as the last in the godly line.

So, Schaeffer is in no way underscoring the beliefs of the writers of “Exo-Vaticana!”

Biblical Words and Their Meaning (by Moises Silva)

One of the most difficult books that I have read in recent years is that of Moises Silva, “Biblical Words and Their Meaning: An Introduction to Lexical Semantics.” I read the Kindle edition, so instead of page references, you will find location references.

When reading this book, it is important to keep your wits about you. Even though Silva wrote this as an introduction to lexical semantics, if this is not your field of study, you will have to concentrate hard.

However, I really enjoyed reading this book. There were some things that I already knew, but even then, Silva explained those things very well with some different ideas and examples. Then there were some other things that I didn’t know, and he opened my eyes to new things.

For instance, something that I already knew:

“Theologians have been particularly concerned with pointing out the differences between Greek and Hebrew thought. [I was taught this.] The former, we are told, is static, contemplative, abstract, intellectualized, divisive; the latter is dynamic, active, concrete, imaginative, stressing the totality of man and his religion. Whatever we may think of this contrast, Barr claims that the linguistic arguments used to support it are ‘unsystematic and haphazard.’ Evidence of the kind adduced by these theologians is valid only when the Biblical languages are rigorously examined and hen the method is integrated with general linguistic science. Modern theology fails on both scores.” (location 221/p18?)

Something that I did not consider before:

“In some cases, a derivative [a word derived from another] that has not undergone phonetic changes may nevertheless undergo semantic changes and become unrelated to the original word. English regard was a derivative from guard, but the meanings of these words have drifted so far from each other that the speaker is not aware of their connection (as is reflected by the difference in spelling).” (location 664)

Having read the above piece in the book, I wondered how I could have missed this, it is so logical!

All in all, I really enjoyed this book. While it was challenging, I found it very rewarding. Even if you do not understand Greek or Hebrew, the principles that are taught in this book could help you from falling into the trap of misusing Biblical words like so many Christians do.

There are some publication problems that I have with my edition (Kindle: ePub edition, March 2010, ISBN: 978-0-310-87151-4), and perhaps even with the paper edition. Unfortunately, I do not have the paper edition.

I am a stickler for spelling, and to find a spelling mistake right on the copyright page in the subtitle of the book is simply ridiculous. Ever heard of SEMNTICS? According to the Amazon “Look Inside” page for this book, that mistake is in the paper edition too!

Then there are a couple of misprints.

At location 2917 (somewhere on pp204-205), it is written:

"When προσκυνεω is used in this sense of entreaty, it is properly synonymous with another verb found in the New Testament, προσκυνεω, which also means  to entreat..."

Here, the 2nd προσκυνεω should be another word.I tried to use the Amazon “Look Inside” feature here, but that page is unavailable. The 2nd προσκυνεω is a misprint!

At location 2981:

"ευσεβεω is another New Testament verb for worship from the same root..."

You see, ευσεβεω had just been dealt with, so how could ευσεβεω be another word for worship? Using, once again, the “Look Inside” feature of Amazon, here I found that my Kindle edition had the wrong words! Instead of ευσεβεω, the paper edition has σεβομαι (this can be seen on pp208-209). Yet another misprint!

Surely, the process of editing the Kindle book is the same as the paper edition? The same original files should have been used for both. I have made my own Kindle book, so it cannot be that difficult for the publishers and editors to have ensured that these misprints were not in the Kindle edition! Unless, of course, a pre-publication transcript, which still contained errors was used for the Kindle edition! That will be unconscionable!

Funny thing is, I contacted Zondervan about this and I was told that the Kindle ebook does not yet support  a Greek font. However, I have my Kindle edition in front of me as I write this, and it is using a Greek font! Apart from this, Zondervan did confirm that σεβομαι must replace ευσεβεω and that my reasoning was correct concerning the wording at location 2917. The 2nd προσκυνεω must be replaced with γονυπετεω!

I find things like this very annoying, making me wonder if editors even care about their jobs anymore. And it is not just this book. It is almost every book that I read that has spelling mistakes in, or duplicate words.

But, besides all this, I will still recommend this book!

God’s Lavish Grace (by Terry Virgo)

I just finished Terry Virgo’s book “God’s Lavish Grace.”

What I like about the book is that it sites many passages from the Bible. Grace is something many Christians battle with, thinking that in order to remain accepted by God, we need to follow certain laws or do certain things to be accepted. Virgo writes:

“You reign in life by receiving abundant grace, not by putting yourself under laws. It is because of your standing that you reign in life. It is because you have obtained grace, not because you have achieved or accomplished merit. It is by your position, not by your performance! The imposition of law upon your life will never cause you to reign in life. It will never cause you to enjoy fellowship with Jesus and the grace-filled life that is so necessary for you to bear fruit for God.” (p15-16)

Virgo’s main point, at least as I see it, is that the law cannot make us better. In fact, adding “the law to [the utterly sinful man] does not improve him but strangely makes him even worse.” (p24) It is the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ that brings freedom and we have died to the law and are now married to a new husband. It is He who will sanctify us by His Word.

I definitely will recommend this book to others and I think it accomplishes what it sets out to do, point us to the grace of Christ!

I have but one thing to complain about, and I find this with many charismatics (as Virgo is), even if they are reformed. Of course, I do not say that this is the case with all charismatics, and even less that this is how it is with all reformed charismatics.

In his sixth chapter, “A conscience cleansed from dead works,” Virgo does make Scripture say what it doesn’t say. It is the subject of “dead works” as mentioned in Hebrews 9:14, “how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” Concerning these "dead works, Virgo writes that they are:

1. Something with no life in it, done without faith, like church programs. Things done by routine.
2. Things done presumptuously. Things we think are good.
3. Things that God did not personally tell you to do.

When we look at the passage that Hebrews 9:14 comes from, it is clear that the writer of Hebrews did not have any of the three points in mind that Virgo proclaimed to be dead works. The context is clear as to what dead works are, regulations concerning food and drink, and of various washings, sacrifices of bulls and goats. It is attempting to be accepted by God through the law and rituals. The book of Galatians is very clear on this subject! It is not the law and rituals (dead works) that will cleanse our consciences, but “ the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without blemish to God, [will] cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”

It is always important to read the Scriptures in context, and not to tag our own ideas onto what we read!