Colin Liske - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Papers by Colin Liske

Research paper thumbnail of The Role of the Quote from Psalm 82 in John 10:34-36

analogy sn7porting His right to claim the title of divinity even though He is a human being.3 Amo... more analogy sn7porting His right to claim the title of divinity even though He is a human being.3 Among the modern exegetes interpret the passage in this way, Jungkuntz includes Strachan, Hoskyns and Davey, Bultmann, Barrett, Strathmann, and Richardson.4 He then notes two major objections to this interpretation. The first is that Jesus uses an ad. hominem argument because Jesus does not accept for himself the literalistic exegesis of his opponents. The second objection is that Jesus' reply does not meet the substance of the Jews° accusation, and is therefore irrelevant and deceptive.5 Among those commentators claiming the "traditional" interpretation, Jungkuntz lists Lenski, Calvin, Bengel, Godet, Hengstenberg, Stoeckhardt, Lightfoot, and Tasker. 6 Taking Lenski as his spokesman for this tradition of interpretation, Jungkuntz describe's it in this way: Jesus is in this passage not merely silencing the Pharisees, and not merely repeating His original claim, but He is actually proving by syllogistic argument that He is rightly called God in the highest sense: 7 Having reduced this traditional view to two syllogisms, Jungkuntz correctly objects that this view is logically invalid because a fourth term is always used. He notes that 3Ibid., p. 556. p. 557. 5Ibid., pp. 556-557. 6Ibid., p. 557. 7lbid., p. 558.

Research paper thumbnail of Ephesians 4:8-10- A Reexamination

This investigation will indicate that views which interpret the descent in verses 9 and 10 as a r... more This investigation will indicate that views which interpret the descent in verses 9 and 10 as a reference to Christ\u27s descent to hell or as a reference to the descent of the Holy Spirit are to be rejected. The descent is rather to be taken as the descent of Christ to the earth, that is, in terms of his incarnation. Also to be rejected is J. Cambier\u27s theory that Eph. 4:9-10 is to be interpreted in a functional sense, referring not to historical events. but rather to Christ\u27s universal presence and action

Research paper thumbnail of The Role of the Quote from Psalm 82 in John 10:34-36

analogy sn7porting His right to claim the title of divinity even though He is a human being.3 Amo... more analogy sn7porting His right to claim the title of divinity even though He is a human being.3 Among the modern exegetes interpret the passage in this way, Jungkuntz includes Strachan, Hoskyns and Davey, Bultmann, Barrett, Strathmann, and Richardson.4 He then notes two major objections to this interpretation. The first is that Jesus uses an ad. hominem argument because Jesus does not accept for himself the literalistic exegesis of his opponents. The second objection is that Jesus' reply does not meet the substance of the Jews° accusation, and is therefore irrelevant and deceptive.5 Among those commentators claiming the "traditional" interpretation, Jungkuntz lists Lenski, Calvin, Bengel, Godet, Hengstenberg, Stoeckhardt, Lightfoot, and Tasker. 6 Taking Lenski as his spokesman for this tradition of interpretation, Jungkuntz describe's it in this way: Jesus is in this passage not merely silencing the Pharisees, and not merely repeating His original claim, but He is actually proving by syllogistic argument that He is rightly called God in the highest sense: 7 Having reduced this traditional view to two syllogisms, Jungkuntz correctly objects that this view is logically invalid because a fourth term is always used. He notes that 3Ibid., p. 556. p. 557. 5Ibid., pp. 556-557. 6Ibid., p. 557. 7lbid., p. 558.

Research paper thumbnail of The Role of the Quote from Psalm 82 in John 10:34-36

analogy sn7porting His right to claim the title of divinity even though He is a human being.3 Amo... more analogy sn7porting His right to claim the title of divinity even though He is a human being.3 Among the modern exegetes interpret the passage in this way, Jungkuntz includes Strachan, Hoskyns and Davey, Bultmann, Barrett, Strathmann, and Richardson.4 He then notes two major objections to this interpretation. The first is that Jesus uses an ad. hominem argument because Jesus does not accept for himself the literalistic exegesis of his opponents. The second objection is that Jesus' reply does not meet the substance of the Jews° accusation, and is therefore irrelevant and deceptive.5 Among those commentators claiming the "traditional" interpretation, Jungkuntz lists Lenski, Calvin, Bengel, Godet, Hengstenberg, Stoeckhardt, Lightfoot, and Tasker. 6 Taking Lenski as his spokesman for this tradition of interpretation, Jungkuntz describe's it in this way: Jesus is in this passage not merely silencing the Pharisees, and not merely repeating His original claim, but He is actually proving by syllogistic argument that He is rightly called God in the highest sense: 7 Having reduced this traditional view to two syllogisms, Jungkuntz correctly objects that this view is logically invalid because a fourth term is always used. He notes that 3Ibid., p. 556. p. 557. 5Ibid., pp. 556-557. 6Ibid., p. 557. 7lbid., p. 558.

Research paper thumbnail of Ephesians 4:8-10- A Reexamination

This investigation will indicate that views which interpret the descent in verses 9 and 10 as a r... more This investigation will indicate that views which interpret the descent in verses 9 and 10 as a reference to Christ\u27s descent to hell or as a reference to the descent of the Holy Spirit are to be rejected. The descent is rather to be taken as the descent of Christ to the earth, that is, in terms of his incarnation. Also to be rejected is J. Cambier\u27s theory that Eph. 4:9-10 is to be interpreted in a functional sense, referring not to historical events. but rather to Christ\u27s universal presence and action

Research paper thumbnail of The Role of the Quote from Psalm 82 in John 10:34-36

analogy sn7porting His right to claim the title of divinity even though He is a human being.3 Amo... more analogy sn7porting His right to claim the title of divinity even though He is a human being.3 Among the modern exegetes interpret the passage in this way, Jungkuntz includes Strachan, Hoskyns and Davey, Bultmann, Barrett, Strathmann, and Richardson.4 He then notes two major objections to this interpretation. The first is that Jesus uses an ad. hominem argument because Jesus does not accept for himself the literalistic exegesis of his opponents. The second objection is that Jesus' reply does not meet the substance of the Jews° accusation, and is therefore irrelevant and deceptive.5 Among those commentators claiming the "traditional" interpretation, Jungkuntz lists Lenski, Calvin, Bengel, Godet, Hengstenberg, Stoeckhardt, Lightfoot, and Tasker. 6 Taking Lenski as his spokesman for this tradition of interpretation, Jungkuntz describe's it in this way: Jesus is in this passage not merely silencing the Pharisees, and not merely repeating His original claim, but He is actually proving by syllogistic argument that He is rightly called God in the highest sense: 7 Having reduced this traditional view to two syllogisms, Jungkuntz correctly objects that this view is logically invalid because a fourth term is always used. He notes that 3Ibid., p. 556. p. 557. 5Ibid., pp. 556-557. 6Ibid., p. 557. 7lbid., p. 558.