The Divine Lamp

St Martha’s Catholic Church in Kingwood Texas has a large collection of audio material available online, including an eight part introduction to the Old Testament done by Jeff Crandall. I’ve not listened to the audio yet, I have however listened to other talks Mister Crandall has given on Scripture. Regarding certain non-essential subjects pertaining to background matters (e.g., dating of texts, redactions, ect.) his views are a little too liberal for my liking. From a doctrinal/moral perspective I find these talks very useful. I’ve provided a link to the first talk below. You can go HERE for the rest of the talks on the OT, and HERE for other talks on Scripture.

This is, of course, the Year of St Paul, established by the Holy Father with the intention that Catholics would re-devote themselves not only to the writings of St Paul, but to the Scripture as a whole. Do check the site out, and keep in mind that I offer some notes on the Scripture here. My notes on Amos are complete. My (ongoing) notes on Hosea will take you into chapter 8 of that book. My notes on St Paul’s First Letter to the Thessalonians will soon be complete. I’ll start on Second Thessalonians after its completion. I have some ongoing notes posted on Isaiah, the Psalms, and First Corinthians as well. All of these can be easily accessed in the list of links under this blogs header. In addition, you can find numerous links to print and audio resources on the Bible in my sidebars.
Introduction to the Old Testament Part 1

Update:

Mister Crandall has left a comment on this post thanking me for recommending his Introduction to the Old Testament audio lectures. He also has asked in what way I found him “a little too liberal for my liking.” Before I begin to answer that question I should note that “my liking” is a matter of my subjective opinions alone.  “Liberal” is not the best term to use, for it, like its opposite, has been so broadly used that they can now mean almost anything.  As used by me in this post, it simply means his views on certain issues are more mainstream than mine.   I would also note that the general nature of my comment is open too misunderstanding, consequently, I have amended it. The original stated: They are a little too liberal for my liking but I do think they can be very useful. The amended passage reads: Regarding certain non-essential subjects pertaining to background matters (e.g., dating of texts, authorship, redactions, ect.) his views are a little too liberal for my liking. From a doctrinal/moral perspective I find these talks solid and very useful.

Questions such as authorship and dating of biblical texts interests me a great deal, though, of course, in these matters I am a dilettante. I do consider myself very well read in matters pertaining to the style and structure of biblical narrative. If I remember correctly, mister Crandall seems to accept the common scholarly view that John 21 is not original to the work but was added by a redactor. My study of biblical literary structures and devices leads me to reject this opinion (see below). Biblical books which to modern readers may look disjointed, (e.g., 1 Thess.; Phil.; John) are in fact finely structured texts. They are, however, structured according to a format we might not be familiar with.

It has often been stated by commentators on John’s Gospel that Jesus’ Last Supper Discourse has been rearranged by an “ecclesiastical redactor.” They come to this conclusion on the basis of the fact that the discourse appear to be disjointed. “one minute He’s talking about His hour, his love, and the mission of the apostles; but then He begins to talk about His going to the Father and His gift of peace. Then He talks about himself as the vine and about the world’s hatred. Then he once again talks about His going to the Father and His gift of peace. Finally, He again talks about His hour, His love, and the mission of the Apostles. What kind of idiot writes in this fashion? “

J.L. Houlden once quipped regarding how scholars dealt with the Pastoral Letters: “they approach the text as if they themselves could have written it better.” This is, I think, the cardinal sin of the discipline, and Houlden’s critique could be applied to how some scholars approach any book of the Bible. What might appear at first sight to be a disparate and haphazard collection of statement by our Lord is in reality a finely structured discourse. John presents the farewell discourse in five parts. The first (A1) and the fifth (A2) parallel one another, as do the second(B1) and fourth (B2).

A1. (13:1-32) The footwashing and Judas the traitor. Jesus speaks about the arrival of his hour, about love unto the end, about the mission of the apostles, and about his glorification.

B1. (13:33-14:31) Jesus speaks about his going away, the Counselor, his love commandment, dwelling places in heaven, asking in his name, and his gift of peace.

C. 15:1-25) The true vine and the false vine. During the time of the gap, the disciples must remain in Jesus as the branch remains in the vine. Despite the hatred and persecution of the world, the disciples will produce much fruit as long as the remain in Jesus.

B2. (15:26-16:33) Jesus speaks about his going away, the Counselor, asking in his name, and his gift of peace.

A2. (17:1-26) Jesus prays for his church. he speaks about the arrival of his hour, his glorification, the mission of the apostles, and the love that he prays may be in those who believe in him.

Concerning the above, see THE GENIUS OF JOHN by Peter F. Ellis, page 210.

The above outline of John 13:1-17:26 represents one subsection to the final part of the Gospel (12:12-21:25). It too has the same parallel format.

A1. (12:12-50) The COMING of Jesus to Jerusalem. The Jews SEE but do not BELIEVE. REASON FOR THE SIGNS. SALVATION OF THE WORLD.
B1. (ch. 13-17) Jesus, speaking to his DISCIPLES about his coming ABSENCE, followed by his coming PRESENCE.
C. (ch. 18-19) Jesus suffers, dies, and is buried.
B2. (20:1-18) Mary and DISCIPLES at the tomb. Jesus is ABSENT, then PRESENT.
A2. (20:19-21:25) Blessed are those who do not SEE but who BELIEVE. The REASON FOR THE SIGNS. SALVATION OF THE WORLD. Second COMING. (see Ellis, page 195)

Trackback URI | Comments RSS