Has the author of Hebrews been found?

In this blog post, Aimee Byrd tells us that she finds David Allen's arguments for Luke being the author of Hebrews to be quite persuasive.

So do I. We don't know for sure, but I think there is a lot going for this suggestion. It is much more likely that it is Luke, than any other New Testament writer.

It is well worth chewing over Allen's book, Lukan Authorship of Hebrews

David Alan Black's The Authorship of Hebrews: the case for Paul is also interesting, but not nearly as convincing.

Hebrews has more in common with Luke and Acts than it does with Paul's letters, I think.

Fundamentalism is not the real problem

It's not how strongly you believe, but what you believe, argues Clint Roberts.

IS and Israel in Joshua's time: similar or different?

Andrew Shead, of Moore Theological College, Sydney shares some thoughts on how today's Islamic State's actions might relate to Israel's in the time of Joshua, in the Old Testament.

NIVAC commentaries ebook sale

NIVAC ebooks sale gives you all of the NIV Application Commentaries available at about $5 each, and at last, properly hyperlinked with a decent Table of Contents.

Ebooks with a decent table of contents are not much good! Especially the ones you wouldn't normally read from cover to cover, or need to refer to particular sections thereof.

Can't promise the sale will continue, but the current price is reasonable.

The problem of evil revisited

Dan Phillips has an interesting article on the famous syllogism about God and evil.

You know the one:

1. If God is all-powerful, He can prevent evil.
2. If God is good, He would want to prevent evil.
3. Evil exists.
4. Therefore, there is no God. (Or: God is either not all-powerful, or He is not good.)

Dan says:

But it's a loaded syllogism — well, both loaded and unloaded, if you follow my meaning. It snips a couple of Biblical truths, but holds them in isolation from everything else the Bible teaches.

A more honest version would be:

1. If God can do anything He wishes, He could prevent evil if He wished.
2. If God is good... I can't think of a reason why he would not prevent evil.
3. Evil exists.
4. Therefore... um, I don't know why God might choose to permit evil.

That's a lot more truthful, and it leaves the problem where it belongs: not on God, but on the arguer. Here's another:

1. If God can do anything He wishes, He could prevent evil.
2. If God is good, He would want to prevent evil.
3. But I don't believe in God anyway, so I can't have an opinion on what "evil" is or whether it exists.
4. Therefore, what's for dinner?

Or this:

1. If God can do anything He wishes, He could prevent evil if He wished.
2. If God is good, He would want to prevent evil.
3. I have the vague feeling that the Bible says more about God than that He's almighty and good, but I just really haven't cared enough to study it out for myself.
4. Therefore... well, nothing about the God of the Bible. But the God I made up might have issues.

Here's the best of the lot:

1. If God can do anything He wishes, He could prevent evil if He wished.
2. If God is good, He will not allow evil to go unpunished or reign forever.
3. Evil exists, will be punished, and it both has been and will be dealt with permanently.
4. Therefore, repent and believe in the Lord Jesus, or be part of that evil that will be judged and dealt with.

A Cripplegate Post for Reformation Day

How Christians will know when they can join hands with Rome is a hard-hitting but honest article written to be published today, Reformation Day, 31st October, to remind us that there was a point to the Reformation and there are still huge differences between the Roman Catholic Church and those who want to be faithful to the Bible's teaching.

Cherished memory smashed

One of my treasured memories is of the teenage boys next door coming into our little flat in Charlestown in 1974, and playing us a fun arrangement for piano duet, clarinet and euphonium of Danny Boy, in honour of our newly-born, very first child Daniel. It had been written for them by the well-loved Newcastle parish priest and musician, Father Peter Brock.

 

So you can imagine the shock we felt when we heard that Peter Brock's name had come up in the course of the investigation into Newcastle priests abusing children. Surely this was a mistake? How could such a prominent conductor, composer and Newcastle identity, loved by so many, be included?

 

A couple of years down the track, we heard he had been exonerated, and were greatly relieved. Then a little later we  attended a performance of Bach's St John's Passion by Newcastle University Choir, which he conducted, and we had almost forgotten that his name had come up in this unsavoury saga.

It was the last concert we attended with Joan's mother, and was professionally and beautifully performed.

 

But today I read the disturbing news that one of those boys living next door to our first home was the person who contacted the police and blew the whistle that resulted in Strikeforce Georgiana and the royal commission. He came forward and spoke publicly yesterday, following the death of Peter Brock last week.

 

We are so bewildered to read that a trusted family friend and priest would make our neighbours endure sexual abuse as children, resulting in severe breakdowns as adults and the need for ongoing treatment and support for the rest of their lives.

 

It seems so unjust that this priest was able to escape punishment for his actions, and could be given an Order of Australia and other honours, without anyone knowing what he did, while his victims endured years and years of suffering.

 

And our beloved Danny Boy memory is now a pain in The Derry Air.