'Q!nurnr~tu (lJqrnlngiral :!Inut41y Continuing LEHRE UND WEHRE MAGAZIN FUER Ev.-LuTH. HOMILETIK THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY-THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY Vol. III January, ,1.932 No.1 CONTENTS ARNDT, W.: Foreword Page 1 LAETSCH, TH.: Die Schriftlehre von del' Verstockung. . . . 'I MUELLER, J. T.: Introduction to Sacred Theology....... 12 KRETZ MANN, P. E.: _I\..postelamt, Predigtamt, Pfarramt, Synodalamt ................... '" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 LAETSCH, TH.: Studies in Hosea 1-3................... 33 Dispositionen ueber die zweite von der Synodalkonferenz angenommene Evangelienreihe ........................ 45 Miscellanea. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Theological Observer. - Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches. . . . . . 57 Book Review. - Literatur ................. , .... '" ...... .. 72 Ein Prediger muss nicht aHein weiden, also dass er die Schafe unterweise, wie sle reehte Christen Bollen sein, sonde'll aueh daneben den Woelfen wehren, daBS sie die Sehafe nieht angreifen nnd mit falseher Lehre verfnebren und Irrtum ein· fnehren. - Luther. Es ist kein Ding, das die Lente mehr bei der Kirche behaelt denn die gute Predigt. - Ap%gie, Art. 24. If the trumpet give an uncertain Bound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? 1 Oor.14, 8. Published for the Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other 'States CONCORDIA. PUBLISHING HOUSE, St. Louis, Mo. Miscellanea. 55 ~uf biefet ~aljtljeit tulj± bie ganae ~itffamfeit bet Sl!itdje. ®o±± aIlein fann ®iinben betgeoen; ift Grljtiftu§: waljtet ®ott, fo ift, lB. 19, bie ~tebigt be§: (fbangenum~, bie ~tebigt bon bet lBetgeoung bet ®iin" ben, hiiftig. ~uf bief et ~aljtljeit ruljt bet Sl!itdje ~offnung fut bie 2ufunft. lB.18b; »tom. 8,31. lB. 16 ift unfer j8efenn±ni§: bon Grljtif±o. Eaffen wit un§: nidjt aum ~ofaIl oewegen, webet einaeIn nodj aI§: Sl!itdje 1 5t'. ~. Miscellanea. Exegetica Est Regina. @§: witb bet Iutljerijdjen Sl!itdje oft borgewotfen, unb untet Umftiinben mit meljt aI5 einem @?djein be§: S'tedji5, bat fie gIeidjfam aI§: motto gefe~t ljabe: Dogmatica est regina. SDie fdjeinbate S'tidjiigfeit biefe§: UdeH§: Witb mandjmaI beftiitigt burdj Me metonung, Me luir mit S'tedjt auf bie SDogmatif aI5 EeljrflJftem Iegen. ~aljt ift audj, baB einaeIne SDogmatifet mibeIfj:ltiidje au§: iljtem 2ufammenljang ljetau§:geriffen ljaben, um fie aI§: meluei§:fteUen anaufliIjren bei loci, luo fie nidjt ljingeljoten. @?o finbet man mitumer 2 Sl!ot. 3, 5 aI5 meluei~fj:ltudj bei bet Eeljte bon bet mefeljtung unb 1 Sl!Ot. 2,9 aI~ mewei§:fj:lrudj flit bie EeIjte bom eluigen Eeben. ~bet fdjIieBIidj finb bw bodj nut einaeIne iSiiUe, unb Me Iutljetifdje SDogmatH ljat fidj, befonbet~ in bet ~nfang~aeit, nidjt mit foIdjen @eluartftteidjen abgegeben. SDie SDog" matU ift nidjt ein ~tofrufte§:bett, in bw man @?djtiffteUen aUf @runb botgefaBtet meinungen awingt, fonbern eine flJftematifdje SDatIegung ber @?djtiftIeljte. SDie befte ~eife be~ tljeoIogifdjen @?tuMum~ ift biefe, baB man bon bet @6egefe au~geljt, fobann hie Eeljten in bet iSotm bet bibIifdjen 5t'ljeologie aUfammenttiigt unb enDIidj Me fo gefunbenen ~aljtljeiten in fl)fte- matifdjet ~eife aUfammenfteIIt. Eutljet~ iSaffung bet S'tegel Exegetica est regina finbet fidj in feinem ,,@toBen mefenntni~ bom ~benbmaljI Grljtifti" unb Iaute! fo: "man foU in bet @?djtift bie ~ode Iaffen gerten, lua~ fie Iauten nadj iljtet ~d, unb feine anbete SDeutung geben, e~ atvinge benn ein offentridjet ~rtifeI be~ @Iauben~." (XX, 1003.) mgL feine ~orte au @en. 41, 40, § 151. (II,1380.) man beadjte audj, luie fein D.ll5iej:let in feinet "Grljtiftridjen SDogmatU" biefe ~eife befoIgt ljat. K. Americanizing the Bible. There have been men who have criticized us for our conservative stand concerning the Authorized Version. In fact, some attempts have been made to introduce the Revised Version or the American Standard Version into our congregations. But it is one thing to acknowledge certain lin- guistic corrections in a later translation, and it is quite another thing to have our people use a version which shows clear concessions to the modern spirit of unbelief, the denial of many Messianic prophecies, es- pecially Job 19, 25-27, and much of the supernatural element in the New Testament. And as for the most recent translation of the Old Testament by Dr. J. M. Powis Smith, following the new translation of the New Tes- 56 Miscellanea. tament by Dr. Edgar J. Goodspeed, even our newspapers are skeptical, as the Literary Digest of October 24 reports. Says the Oamden Oourier-Post: "Perhaps it will be an advance upon the King James Version, and perhaps it will prove one more effort to gild the lily." This from the Boston Herald: "A rewriting of the Bible is about as difficult a task as a re- phrasing of Shakespeare or a modernization of Lincoln's Gettysburg Ad- dress or his letter to Mrs. Bixby. . .. The world has known and loved the King James Version so long that there will be a passive resistance every- where to a text which differs from the original mainly in its greater measure of erudition." The Ohicago Sunday Tribune of October 11 gives a few samples of the new translation of the Old Testament, quoting from Ps. 23: "He gives me new life, He guides me in safe paths for His fame's sake"; from Is. 1, 18: "If your sins be like scarlet, can they be as white as snow? If they be red like crimson, can they become as wool?" and from Eccl. 12: "And the caperberry becomes ineffectual, because man goes to his final home. . .. Futility of futilities, says Koheleth, all is futility." It surely seems to be if that is intended to be an improvement upon the King James Version. The entire situation with regard to modern re- visions of the Bible caused the St. Louis Globe-Democrat to remark edi- torially on October 4: "Those who can remember the profound impression made by the Revised New Testament in 1881 probably never imagined that the fiftieth year of its use would pass in virtual public indifference, with only occasional mention of its origin and history. . .. Curiously enough, as the London Times remarks, the faults of the Revised Edition were largely due to the translators' imperfect knowledge, not of Greek, but of English! . .. They lacked the ear and feeling for the delicate structure of great English. With no sense of guilt, but rather of piety, they sac- rificed noble diction on the altar of theories about the Greek aorist." We have graver charges against the Revised Version, as we have them against other late translations, than those of language alone, as has been intimated above. A very careful comparison made a number of years ago, using the Greek text of the New Testament, the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, and the Rheims-Douai Version, showed that in at least 80 per cent. of the cases the Authorized Version was prefer- able and that in no case was there evidence of influence in favor of liberal views. We still cling to the Authorized Version for all purposes but that of study; for it is far easier to substitute an occasional modern word than to explain passages where mistranslations have been introduced in the interest of Modernism. K. stinkier - ~ede. @:ine ~rage ift eingeIaufen oetreff~ llRattlj. 11, 19, bergHdjen mit Euf. 7, 35. Eutljer ljat an oeiben ®tellen froerfe~t: ,,~ie jillei~ljeit mufj fidj redjtfertigen faffen bon i lj r e n ~ i n b ern", unb bie engHfdje Author- ized Version fe~t gIeidjfalIS an oeiben ®telIen: "Wisdom is justified of her children", tDaljrenb bie engHfdje Revised Version im :ite;t;te ljat: "of her works" (llRattlj. 11, 19), "of her children" (Eu!.7, 35), baoei aoer bodj ilu ber llRattljiiu~ftelIe oemerft: "Many ancient authorities read children." @:~ fdjeint getDifj ilU fein, bafj bie Ee~att ber llRattljau~ftelIe ano l,'WV eerrov ift unb bafj tDir e~ nidjt mit iltDei berfdjiebenen @:reigniffen ilu tun ljaoen. Theological Observer. - .Ritd)!id),.seitgefd)id)tIid)e~. 57 91adj ber ~ermeneutifdjen megef Lectio difficilior praeferenda fomen roir un~ roenigften~ mit ber Eiifung biefer 6djroierigfeit vefaffen. lifine foldje, unb aroar cine redjt anne~moare, oidet IDle~er in fcinem jSudje ",iSliffu IDlutterfpradje", roorin er oefanntridj ben 91adjroci~ fil~rt, baf3 ber SjeiIanb fidj in ber megeI ber aramiiifdjen 6pradje vebient ~aoe. SElemnadj ~iitte er ~ier ben &u~brucf georaudjt: ab'daha, 5tater ber 2Bei~~eit, ober abdaha, sntedjte ber 2Bei~~eit, roorau~ leidjt in ber miinblidjen ftoerIieferung oba- daha ober abidataha roerben fonnte, 2Bede ber 2Bei~~eit. &I~ ber SjeiIige @eift bie lifbangeIien in griedjifdjer 6pradje aufaeidjnen lief3, na~m er veibe 2Benbungen in bie SjeiIige 6djrift auf, unb roir veriictfidjtigen ba~er audj beibe oei ber &~legung ber Sjarmonie be~ Eeoen~ ,iSliffu. K. Theological Observer. - ~irdjndj~geitgefdjidjtltdje~+ I. ,2{,mtrikll. ~u!.l unfenn Seminnr. ;Die burdj D.lJ. ~ieper~ mfdjeiben entftanbene Eiilfe im Ee~rerperfonal be~ 6eminar~ madjt fidj nodj in mandjer Sjinfidjt oemedoar. ~rof. D. E. lJiirvringer, ber adjtunbbreif3ig ,iSa~re lang ber ~orrege be!.l lifntfdjlafenen roar, ift aIS fein 91adjfolger erroii~It roorben unb rourbe am 18. 91obemoer b.,;s. feierIidj in fein &mt eingefii~rt. ;Daburdj, baf3 ~rof. D. lifngelber bie ;Dogmatif in ber aroeiten un b in ber ~anbibaten~ naffe iioernommen ~at, roii~renb ein 5teiI feiner Vi!.l~erigen &rveit auf anbere berteiIt rourbe, ift e~ miigIidj gemadjt roorben, filr biefe~ 6djulja~r bon ber jSefetung ber entftanbenen ~afana &oftanb au ne~men, roa!.l in &noeiradjt ber ovroaItenben iifonomifdjen ~er~iirtniffe audj anne~moar fdjien. &oer bie @riif3e ber maffen ift nodj immer ein unIieofamer Umftanb, befonber~ roenn bie einaelnen Ee~rer nadj 2Bunfdj ber 6~nobe nidjt lebigIidj biftieren ober bortragen, lanbern audj 5te;r,tbiidjer georaudjen unb fdjriftIidje &roeiten in ber 6tunbe unb auf3er~aIO ber 6tunbe anfertigen raffen. 2Benn bie maffen im regefmiif3igen Shtrfu~ vi~ au 80 6tubenten oii~Ien (trot ber ftattgeflinbenen 5teiIung) unb bie in einaeInen 2Ba~lfiidjern oi!.l au 135, bann ift e~ fe~r fdjroer, auf ben einaelnen 6tubenten au adjten unb i~n au feIOftiinbigen Eeiftungen ~eranauaie~en. - SElie mit ber grof3en 6tu~ bentenaa~l berounbenen 6djroierigfeiten, audj ro~ bie jSefiiftigung ber jungen IDliinner anlangt, finb aum 5teiI ge~oven burdj intenfibere &roei± foroie burdj ba!.l 2ufammenbriingen be~ 6djulja~re~, jebodj unter jSei~ ve~artung ber bon ber 6~nobe angeorbneten &naa~I bon 6djurtagen. SElie frii~eren 6djeuertage finb im neuen 6eminar ~ingefarren, unb bie lifin~ tag!.lfonferena finbet, foroeit bie~ tunlidj ift, an lJerientagen ftatt. &udj bie :Ofterferien finb in ben letten ,;sa~ren benninbert roorben aUf @riinbonner~~ tag, ~arfreitag unb :Oftermontag. SElie burdj berartige jSeftimmungen ge~ roonnenen ca. aroei 6djulroodjen fommen ber 6tubentenfdjaft unb ber 6~nobe augute: erfterer, roeiI burdj intenfibere &roeit me~r geleiftet roirb; letterer, roeil, tJJa!.l jSefiiftigung ber 6tubenten unb i~r 2Bo~nen im 6eminar an~ oetrifft, aUf fo bief tJJeniger 5tage oU redjnen ift. ;Die mebaftion!.laroeit ber ~rofefforen an ben bon ber 6~nobe ~erau~gegeoenen 2eitfdjriften ge~t natiirlidj im 2Binter un b i m 60 m mer roeiter, unb e~ erfdjeinen feine SElovvelnummern me~r roie frii~er. - ;Der auf jSefdjluf3 ber (1)nobe ein~ geridjtete ~orrefponbenafurfu~ be!.l 6eminar~ ift, roie e~ fdjeint, nodj nidj!