Four Branches – January 2025

Jump to:


Exegetical Theology: The CBGM and Debated Changes

As noted in my first article, the application of the CBGM has resulted in 33 changes to the main text of the Catholic Epistles in NA28/USB5. Logos uses the SBL Greek NT, which adopts the readings from NA28. Pastors with Logos have these readings in their computers, whether they know it or not.[1] The changes have mostly minor significance in terms of translation or interpretation.

But there are a limited number of instances where changes should not be ignored. I’ve already written about the change at 1 Peter 4:16 where the well-attested noun ὀνόματι (“name”) is replaced with μέρει (“part, portion”).[2] Another difficult variation appears in Jude 5, where the text now reads that it was Ἰησοῦς “Jesus” who saved God’s people from Egypt, instead of “the Lord” ὁ κύριος. This change in Jude 5 may be a change from NA27/UBS4, but it is well-attested and provides an example of the Christological unity of Scripture. Bruce Metzer’s commentary on UBS4 calls it “difficult to the point of impossible” despite “the weighty attestation supporting” it as original.[3]

A final passage involving a significant change is 2 Peter 3:10 where the NA28/UBS5 prints a reading that is not found in any known Greek manuscript.[4] This is called a “conjectural emendation” in which editors had to create the Greek text, translating backwards so to speak. The previous edition (NA27) had the reading that in the last days the earth and all that is in it “will be found” (εὑρεθήσεται), and some translations try to finagle this into “will be exposed” (ESV) or “will be disclosed” (CSB). But this meaning for the verb is rare. Another well-attested variant that fits with the context would be “will be burned up” (κατακαήσεται).[5] The Greek text now reads something different from these options: the earth and all that is in it “will not be found” (οὐχ εὑρεθήσεται). This simply involves the addition of the negative to the well-attested verb. This reading is the conjectural emendation and fits easily with the surrounding context, but it is only attested in the Sahidic (Coptic) version and one manuscript of the Harclean Syriac version. The use of the CBGM in this verse resulted in what Gerd Mink, creator of the CBGM, called an “almost unavoidable conjecture.”[6] The CSB includes the new NA28/USB5 reading in a footnote. As you can see, no variant presents any doctrinal problems.[7] The practice of conjectural emendation, however, is not something that Lutheran pastors should practice or overlook, especially when the manuscript tradition provides viable options.

A complex method like the CBGM is not something you’ll be explaining in your basic Christianity class for new members. Even the best scholars in the field have struggled to understand or use it. But pastors will have to face the fruits of this method in the newest editions of the Greek NT and in Bible translations. Tools like the CBGM may be helpful but must still be used with caution… and their results scrutinized. Jesus’s words apply: “Be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves” (Matt 10:16).

For further study…

See the article by Pastor Matthew Moldstad, “How to Teach Our Members Regarding Variant Readings,” in Lutheran Synod Quarterly, Vol. 57, no. 4 (December 2017), pages 329-368.


Rev. Benjamin P. Schaefer serves as pastor of Mount Calvary in Redding and Anderson, CA


[1] The Society of Biblical Literature Greek NT is available for free download at https://sblgnt.com/ and pastors can study the changes for themselves.

[2] See the second article in this series from November 2024. N.B. that the SBLGNT does not follow the NA28 edition in changing these nouns in 1 Pet 4:16. Instead the SBLGNT follows NA27/UBS4. I was unable to find a reason for this.

[3] Bruce Metzger, ed. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd edition, (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2002), 657.

[4] The SBLGNT of Logos does not include this emendation in the text itself. I have no idea why. The only other conjectural emendation in NA28 is Acts 16:12, as far as I could determine in my study. More emendations will likely come as they complete the NT. Other editors of the NT, such as those of the Tyndale House edition, reject all conjectures on principle.

[5] The EHV Study Bible includes a good explanation of the issues here, except for any discussion of the conjectural emendation. This is the reading adopted by the EHV.

[6] Quoted in Tommy Wasserman & Peter J. Gurry, A New Approach to Textual Criticism: An Introduction to the Coherence Based Genealogical Method, (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2017), p.76. It’s interesting that Wasserman/Gurry’s examination of this passage in their book found identical genealogical coherence between the two readings “will be burned up” and “will not be found.”
[7] We readily admit that there are rare instances where the exact text of the Greek NT is uncertain. True variant readings effect only 1-2 percent of passages. Yet, we must also emphasize that no doctrine of Scripture is impacted by these passages. 


Systematic Theology: Ancient and Modern Gnosticism

Gnosticism arose in the late first century AD. Central to Gnosticism is the dualistic belief that the divine and the material are irreconcilably opposed. This dualism shaped the Gnostic understanding of two key accounts in the Biblical narrative: the account of creation and the account of Jesus’s life.

According to the Gnostics, the true God (who is not the God of the book of Genesis) had no interest in creating anything. Rather, a malevolent being called the demiurge (which Gnostics equated with the God of Genesis) created this material world in his evil image. He imprisoned sparks of the divine in the bodies of human beings, rendering them subject to his wicked rule. Thus, humanity’s problem was not sin brought about by the fall of Adam and Eve. Their problem was that they were trapped within evil material bodies.

This reinterpretation of the creation account led to a reinterpretation of the life of Jesus. According to Gnosticism, “Christ, the son of the true God, came to earth to liberate the sparks of divinity trapped within the clutches of the demiurge… He took over the body of a man named Jesus and went around teaching people how to achieve gnosis, the awareness of who and what they really were… When the earthly rulers…crucified the man Jesus, the divine being Christ who had inhabited him miraculously survived, thereby proving the immortality of the spirit and its invulnerability to the flesh.”[1]

Salvation, according to Gnosticism, meant doing what Christ had done: freeing oneself from the prison of the physical body and awakening the spark of divinity that lay within each person. In Gnosticism, the physical body had no value. The only thing that mattered was the divine spark trapped within the physical body.

Gnosticism is not just an ancient heresy. Unfortunately, Gnosticism survives today, albeit under other names. Perhaps the most obvious form of modern Gnosticism is transgender ideology. According to that philosophy, a person’s physical body is not important. What matters is their internal idea of who they should be. It doesn’t matter if a person’s body is male. If that person sees himself as female, he’s female. He has every right to do whatever he wants with his body (either medically or surgically) to make his body conform to his inner concept of who he is, thereby freeing his true self from the confines of his physical body.

Many modern scholars view Gnosticism as an alternate form of ancient Christianity. Biblical Christianity, however, wants nothing to do with such a divine/material dualism. The spiritual and the material aren’t incompatible. God specifically and purposely created us to be both spiritual and physical beings. Our bodies are not husks that we are seeking to shed. Our bodies are an integral part of who we are. In the next few months as we contemplate our creation and our God-given identity, we will see the importance of our physical bodies, not just for this life but also for eternity.

Rev. Steven Lange serves as pastor at Hope in Louisville, KY

[1] https://gnosticismexplained.org. 


Historical Theology: The Nicene Creed

In 2025 we are celebrating the 175th anniversary of WELS. But that is not the only—or even the biggest—anniversary you’ll want to mark this year. 2025 is also the 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea. (And let’s face it, your odds of still being around for the 200th anniversary of the synod are a lot higher than your odds of still being around for the 2000th anniversary of Nicaea.)

The Council of Nicaea is where we got the Nicene Creed, one of the three ecumenical creeds. Historically, the Christian Church has considered these three ecumenical creeds to be its definition of the Christian faith, as opposed to heretical groups which would not accept these creeds. Of these three ecumenical creeds, the Nicene Creed is the most ecumenical, because the Apostles’ and Athanasian Creeds have never had the same level of use in the East as in the West.

Over the next three months we’ll take a closer look at the Nicene Creed and the controversy that prompted it. But for this month we’ll have a quick reminder of where each of the three ecumenical creeds comes from. Because all three of these creeds have potentially misleading names.

The Apostles’ Creed was not composed directly by the apostles, but it is a concise summary of their teaching. It speaks in the singular (“I believe”) because it originated as a way for catechumens being baptized to declare their faith. The roots of this Latin creed go back at least as far as the second century, and the creed had solidified in largely the same form as we have it by at least the fourth century, as attested by a 341 AD letter of Marcellus of Ancyra to Pope Julius I. The reference to Jesus’s descent into hell was a later addition to the creed (but that’s a story for another series).

The Nicene Creed, as we say it in worship today, is not the creed composed at the Council of Nicaea in 325 but the creed as modified by the Council of Constantinople in 381. Responding to changing debates, the Council of Constantinople considerably fleshed out the third article and dropped the anathemas from what had been adopted at Nicaea, but historically the creed is still often called not the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, but simply the Nicene Creed, in recognition of the foundational status of what was accomplished at the Council of Nicaea (modern-day Iznik, Turkey). This Greek creed speaks in the plural (“we believe”) because it was composed as a formal confessional statement in response to several heretical movements, especially Arianism.

The Athanasian Creed was not composed by Athanasius, the fourth-century, Greek-speaking Egyptian defender of the Trinity, but was a Latin creed likely composed in France in the fifth or sixth century. Postdating the Christological controversies of the patristic era, it presents a thorough Trinitarian confession, possibly intended for liturgical use.

Rev. Dr. Aaron Jensen serves as pastor of St. Peter’s in Monticello, MN. 


Practical Theology: Congregational Merging as Ice-nine

Readers of Kurt Vonnegut’s novel Cat’s Cradle may recall the fictional substance of Ice-nine—the lethal catalyst that “restacks” the world’s entire water supply, turning it solid.[1] In the book, the molecular effect of Ice-nine is compared to restacking cannonballs: it can take a triangular stack resting on the ground and “restructure” it, so the “point” of the triangle rests in the dirt.

This is a pure (albeit fictional) example of resource reshaping: restructuring, re-organizing, and restacking what you already have. It could be argued that, from a purely material resource standpoint, this is all church merging is: take the cannonballs you have and restack them into a different shape, then hope it doesn’t collapse.

Three WELS Congregations in West Allis, Wisconsin decided there were good, cogent, and compelling Gospel reasons to ice-nine ourselves. So we did.

For the sake of transparency, here’s what we ice-nined: three worship spaces,[2] two school buildings, two childcares, five pastors; over twenty-five teachers, teachers’ aides, and childcare workers; five secretaries, over 1200 members, and roughly 8-12 copies of the “Road to Emmaus” painting.

Most of the above has been restructured, restacked, and rebirthed as Living Hope Lutheran Church.

To be fair, I am not an expert in Church merging—my experience is limited to exactly one of them, and parts of it still baffle me. But I know I was present in the delivery room, and I lost plenty of sleep. In the following three articles I’d like to simply give our observations about congregational merging, at least as it happened at Living Hope. These are merely observations—feel free to disagree with them or discard them at the drop of a hat. Differences in context and setting will undoubtedly render them of varying value to others flirting with or engaging in the same situation. But the reality is that Church merging is ice-nine: you collapse what was there and re-stack it, hoping it doesn’t collapse again.

But at the same time, there is also the biblical reality—the promises of strength and success that God gives his people. And God’s promises always actualize into reality. Thankfully, that part of the last three years is very clear to me.

My first observation is probably too general to be useful, but I include it as it’s true nonetheless. Pastoral ministry entails sharp psychological divides, and merging your congregation intensifies this to a certain extent. On the one hand, things become brutally concrete, as though you had stitched yourself onto a landscape of daily brush fires. On the other hand, you’re continually forced to abstract your mind back to Jesus and His blood dripping down your hands and your plans. For me this caused even more whiplash than normal. I am very, very thankful for my associates.

Next time: the case for merged worship in one space. Maybe don’t just ice-nine your finances.

Rev. Josh Zarling serves as pastor at Living Hope in West Allis, WI


[1] Ominously, this causes a catastrophic loss of life in the book and accidentally ushers in the end of the world.

[2] The three legacy congregations involved in the merger were: Good Shepherd’s, Jordan, and Woodlawn.


Previous
Next