I (ttnutnrbttt (!Jl1rnlugtrul lInut41y Continuing LEHRE U_ 0 VVEHRE M.'\GAZIN FUER Ev -L TH. HOMILETIK THEOLOlJICAL QUARTERL Y -THEOLOGICAL MONTIIL Y Vol. III March, 1932 No.3 CONTENTS r MUELLER, J. T.: Lux Vent.,t 161 KRETZMANN, P E . Zwd pr,lktische Fr.\gen betretfs der hE:.ligen T .. L . . . • .. . . . . . . .. .. . 107 1 AIER. W. A.: Vag. ries o� TeJldential Exogesib as Illus- ., .d by the Interpretation of Is. 1, 18..... 175 SIHLER, E. G.: A Note on the First Christian Congrega- tion at Rome.. . 180 KRETZMANN, P. E.: Die HAuptschriften Luthers in chro- nologi::cher Reihenfol"e 185 LAETSCH, TH.: Studie tIl Hosea 1-3 . ... . . . . 187 KRETZM NN, P. E .. Th Fu:;nlH 1 .l! actor in Preaching 196 Dispositionen ueber dlf' :..welte VOll der Synodalkonferenz angenommene EV'n,,'elienreih ' . . .. .. . 202 Mi cellnn"" 213 Theologico1 0 "�rver. - KiI'chllch-Zp.itgeschichtlichE's . .. 216 Book ne"l � . - LiLt 1 �tur 233 E Pred\g(r muss nicht alletn WMdtn, n' 0 er die Schafe unterwciae, w ie ale re<:hte Chri ten 801len eeln, .. ,,,de:n Jch d. � b � den Wocfen wehren dasa 1.. I t .. � -• .lJUI t J die hr .. I der Kuche Lehaelt t! n d. gute l'redlgt. - - ApoloU!:, Arl.24. lie d' I3chafc nieht angreifeu uad mit If fhe 'rumpct rr\ve an unctrtaln sound. fais.:ber I,e!lle �·.;fuehrcn und lrrtum e1n. who " pr"Pare �Imsc'f to the battle' f'Jehren. - LulMr. 1 Cor. �. 8. I Published for the I Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other states t CONCORDIA PUllLISHING HOUSE, St- Laut • Xo. Miscellanea. 213 3. IDcaria 1)at ben 2tuferftanbenen edannt, Q5. 16. @:)ie tuiII bor i1)m nieberfaIIen, i1)n an:di1)ren. ;DoCfj lUe1)rt er i1)r bai3, Q5.17. ){lei ben anbern ~eibcrn, j))(att1). 28, 9, unb bei ~1)omai3 erIaubte er ei3, :;S01). 20, 27. ~r mU13 fetnen ®runb ge1)abt 1)aben, lUarum er ei3 fjier berbo±. ~ir ge1)en gelUi13 niCfj± feljr, lUenn lUit fagen, baf3 ein ®runb ber gcl1Jefen fein lUitb, bal3 fie mein±c, ber aIte, bertrau±e, fiCfj±bare Q5er~ Ieljr lUurbe nun tuiebcr aUfgenommen lUerben. CSr ljart i1)r bor, bai3 ci3 nun anbcri3 lUerb en f oIL We aria raf3± iiCfj beleljren unb riii3± fiCfj in ifjrer Df±erfreube niCfj± baburCfj f±oren, baf3 fie :;SCSfum niCfjt anriiljren barf. ~ir faffen un~ oft baburCfj baran ljinbern, un~ ber reCfj±en Dfter~ freube fjinsugeben, bai3 lUir i1)n aUd) gerne f e1)en unb fiifjlen miiCfjicn. (2tui3fiiljren J) ~ir bergeffen, bai3 eben in biefem Beben uni3 bai3 niCfj± bergonnt ift, baB erft broben bie fefige Beit Tommen lUirb, ba lUir iljn fCfjauen lUnben, 1 '-!Setr. 1, 8. Ballen luir uni3 baburCfj niCfjt bon unferer Dfterfreube ab1)arten, f onbern gIaulJen lUir gel1)i13, IDCattlj. 28, 20; !j3f. 91, 15. ®eljen lUir in biefer IJreube ljin unb bedunbigen auCfj anbern, iuai3 er an uni3 gefan lja±. ;:Dann lUirb je ranger, je meljr ~rauer unb 9liebcrgcfCfjragenfjeit fCfjirinbcn unb feIige Df±erfreube unfer ~ers erfiiUen. ~. ,2. Miscellanea. "Um her @ngef willen. 1I :Die @:)telle 1 ~or. 11, 10 gefjort ocfanntriCfj 5u ben in±ereffan±efien cruces interpretum im 9leuen ~ef±ament, unb man !jat fonbediCfj barfroer bid flJefuHert, 00 e£l fiCfj fjier um gu±e ober um oofe ~ngeI !janbert. flo je dne allfeitig oefriebigenbe Eofung ber @SCfj!llierigieit gefunben tDerben t:oirb, ift fCfjtDer 3u fagen; aoer in ~ef± 2 ber ,,3eitfCfjrif± filr bie neu±ef±amen±~ riCfje jilliffenfCfjaf±", 1931, oidet Lie. jill. g:orfter ~ lmfrnfter dne intereffan±e !j3arallele crui3 bem ,&abL)IonifCfjen ~armub, beren c:r;egetifCfje lmogIiCfjfciten er aoer niCfjt lUeHer bii3futier±. ~ie oetreffenbe @Stelle Iautet fo: "l1nb auCfj au~ [einem ~reigni£l mit] m. llCafjman o. ~iCfjaq ift SU eninefj111en, bat ~graer bem ®fiic'f~ftern niCfjt unterIiege. :Die ~fjarbiier flJraCfjen niimric'fj iJur lmuHer be£l m. 9lafjman o. ~iCfjaq: ::Ilein @:)ofjn 11lirb ein :Dieo fein. ~a liet fie iljn niCfjt oatfjaulJt gefjen, inbem fie au ifjm flJraCfj: g)ebecfe bein ~aulJ±, bamit bu @otte§furCfj± fjaoeft, unb ffefje um ~roatmen. ~r lUutte aoer nic'fjt, irei3fjalli fie i1)m bic~ fagc. ~inlt fat er unter dner ~a±ter~ lJarme ltnb ftubierte, unb af§ ifjm ba£l 5tuCfj bum ~aUlJ±e gItH, ed)oo er bie ~ugen ltnb oemerfte bie IJ5almej ba oemaCfjiigtc fiCfj leiner bcr bofe ~rieo, unb cr ITeHcrte fjinauf unb oit cine ~rauoe mit ben 3iifjnen ao." ~ijrfter edliit± bann ireiter: "lman mut fiCfj, um bie borIicgenbe IJ5arar~ IeIita± gana 3u oegreifen, bor ~ugen fjaIten, baB ber ,oole ~rieo' unter manCfjcn anbern @eilanfengangen cruCfj berfclliftiinbig± h1irD unb mit @Sam~ mae! (= @:latan) greiCfjgefeJJt h1irb. Lltll 7:01;e; ayyeAovc; tDfrrbe bann auf bie merfuCfjIiCfjfeit burCfj ,lmaCfj±e' im aUgemeinen anflJieIen, niCfjt aUf Q5er~ 214 Miscellanea. fiiljntng burclj riif±erne ;!liimonen. U 5Beim macljIefen nlier biefen \1Sun'ft fier un~ auclj ein ~t±ifel im Amet'ican Journal of Aroheology (1931, ~r. 4) in bie Sjiinbe, ber unter bem )titer "Veiled Ladies" bie £lanse ~rage bet )8erfdjleierung ber ~rauen nidjt nut im femen :Orient, fonbem anclj gerabe in @tiedjenIanb lieljanbelt. ;!lie 5Beljauptung be~ [5erfaffer~ ift: "When married women appeared in public, their faces were veiled up to their eyes." @r ftntt fetne 5Beljanp±ung niclj± nur aUf ~u£iH1!adjen in berfdjie~ benen griedjifcljen @5djriftf±elIem, fonbem ljaup±fiidjHclj aUf ardjiiologifdje ITunbe, bie in @5tatuen unb fonftigen ;!larf±elIungen bie gellJiiljnlidje ~rauen~ ±radjt priif entieren. ~utbe fein liefonberer @5djfeier nber rein liefnnbere£i S1!opftuclj getragen, fo lirandj±e bie eljrliare IDca±rone ben olierften )teil iljre~ IDCan±el~. ~lier e~ galt in @riecljenfanb llJie im :Orien±: ber iiffentridje ~nf±anb betlangte liei allen eljrliaren berljeitateten ~rauen 5Bebecfung be£i Sjaupte~ unb be~ (untcrcn) @eficlj±e£i, llJngegen bie iiffentIidjen ;!limen nljne folclje 5Bebecfung erfdJeinen mltj3ten. "The hierodule who is married to a man is to be veiled in the street; the one who is not married to a man is to have her head uncovered in the street and is not to veil herself. The harlot is not to veil herself; her head is to be uncovered." K. Baptize - Wash. Among the supposedly strongest arguments of the various immer- sionists is the assertion that the verb {JandCw' invariably and under all circumstances means "to immerse" and that for this reason alone, if for no other, the Sacrament of Holy Baptism must be administered by im- mersion, It is evident from the outset that the reference of the sec- tarians to the various baptismal commands and to passages relating to the Sacrament in which either the verb or the noun is an argumentum in oiTmtlo. To find out the meaning of the verb {JandCElY, we must con- sult passages in which there is some explanation of the act in its cus- tomary usage. Such a passage is Mark 7, 2 if., where not only the entire context (of the washing of the sofas and larger utensils) militates against the full submersion of such pieces of furniture before each meal, but the use of synonyms, real or implied, indicates that immersing, or submerging, is not meant. V.4 has {JandaWVw.l, but the previous verse has ,','!'wvTal, and while baptismoi is used of the washing of the various utensils, etc., the word for "defiled" hands is given in a synonym as aniptoi, showing that baptizein and niptein are used indiscriminately. Further evidence against the immersionists is furnishecl in Matt. 15, 2 if., where the same custom is referred to as in Mark 7, but the verb niptein only is used, also in v.20. On the other hand, Luke 11, 38, speaking of the same ceremony, uses the verb baptizein. The fact that bapt;izein is a synonym for "wash- ing" is further substantiated by the use of the verb in the papyri. Moulton and Milligan (Vocabulary of the Greek Testament, II, 102) quote two of these, one in which baptizein is used of the washing of feet and one in which it is synonymous with louein. The compilers therefore suggest for Luke 11, 38: "its use to express ceremonial ablution." If one adds to these linguistic considerations the fact that even the Didaohe, at the beginning of the second century, speaks of the administration of Holy Baptism by pouring, the principal argument of the immersionists is found inadequate. K. Miscellanea. 215 Nabonidus - Belshazzar. For decades after Higher Criticism in its worst form had undertaken to pluck the Old Testament to pieces, the attacks of many of its chief proponents centered with special eagerness on the Book of Daniel. The chapter which seemed to provoke criticism more than any other was chap· tel' 5, especially vv. 16 and 29, concerning Daniel's being made the third in the kingdom. It was denied that Belshazzar was king or had the power of king, that he was the son or grandson of Nebuchadrezzar, that he was in charge of Babylon at the time of its capture by the troops of Gobryas under King Cyrus, etc. In answer to these criticisms Dr. Robert Dick Wilson, in 1917, published his Studies in the Book of Daniel, in which he offers evidence: 1. that there was a Bel-shar-usur; 2. that he was the son of Nabunaid; 3. that he was "the first-born son" of Nabunaid, the "son of the king" par excellence. N abunaid expressly calls Belshazzar his first-born son, just as N ebuchadnezzar calls himself the maru 1-eshtu of Nabopolassar; 4. that he commanded the armies of the king of Babylon in the province of Accad (Akkad), certainly from the seventh to the twelfth year of Nabunaid and, for all that we know to the contrary, during the whole reign of Nabunaid; and that in certain kingly func- tions he is associated with his father as early as the twelfth year of the reign of Nabunaid; 5. that between the sixteenth day of the fourth month of the seventeenth year of Nabunaid and the eleventh day of the eighth month the son of the king was in command of the Babylonians in the citadel of Babylon and was the de-facto king of Babylon, inasmuch as Nabunaid had been captured; 6. that, if we accept the most probable rendering of the signs in the Nebunaid-Cyrus Ohronicle, II, 23, this son of the king was killed in the night when the citadel of Babylon was takcn by the troops of Cyrus under Gobryas. Dr. v\Tilson's study was made from an avowedly sympathetic standpoint, although strictly objective in character throughout. It is all the more remarkable therefore that in a very recent study covering a part of the same field, Nabonidus and Belshazza1", by Raymond Philip Dougherty of Yale University, the same objective conclusions are arrived at from an independent study of the original documents and apparently without any reference to the work of Wilsall. The author offers evidence to show that, while Amel-Marduk (Evil-Merodach) was the son of Nebuchadrezzar, Neriglissar as well as Nabonidus were sons-in-law of the second king of the dynasty and that Belshazzar was the son of Nabonidus. It is further shown that Naboni- dus spent the greater part of his reign outside of Babylon, mainly at Tema, a city in an oasis of Arabia, which he had captured. During this absence from Babylon he entrusted the kingship to his son Belshazzar, and the latter acted as a coregent until the end of the Neo-Babylonian empire. The author, who clearly holds no brief for the a-p1'iori truth of the in- spiration, nevertheless states: "The fifth chapter of Daniel is in remark- able harmony with such a state of affairs. It describes a situation in which a man meriting royal favor could be rewarded by being made the third ruler in the kingdom." (P. 196.) Every step in the further study of contemporaneous evidence brings further corroboration of the truth of Scriptures. K.