The Reformed Olive Press

                                             Polytheism/Henotheism of the Bible In some critical readings of the Hebrew Bible, the text is understood as preserving traces of an older polytheistic or “divine council” worldview, in which multiple divine or semi-divine beings are present under a high god. On this view, later translators and interpretive traditions often smooth over that background by rendering key terms in different ways depending on context—such as “judges” or “rulers” in legal settings (Exodus 22:8), “angels” or “heavenly beings” in celestial court imagery (Psalm 8:5), and “mighty ones” when emphasizing status or power rather than divinity (Psalm 29:1). Critics of traditional translation approaches argue that these choices can reduce or obscure the more explicitly plural or divine-council dimensions of the original language, effectively reshaping how modern ...

  The Sermon on the Mount should be Aramaic  The Sermon on the Mount as we read it in Matthew is often treated as a verbatim transcript of Jesus’ exact words, but that is unlikely. Jesus spoke in Aramaic, the common language of first-century Judea and Galilee, while the Gospel of Matthew has come down to us in Greek. That alone should make us cautious about assuming we are reading the precise syllables Jesus spoke on the hillside. Oral teaching in the ancient world depended heavily on rhythm, repetition, alliteration, and memorable wordplay. A teacher wanted people to remember what they heard, because most people were not carrying around notebooks. Jesus taught like a rabbi, using short sayings, contrasts, and poetic structure that could stay in the mind. It would have been similar to how we remember phrases like, “She sells seashells by the seashore.” The meaning matters, but the sound is what makes it stick. Once you translate that phrase into another language, the alliterat...

Internal Evidence: Theology, Language, and Church Development in the Pastorals A closer look at the internal content of the Pastoral Epistles reveals significant theological and conceptual shifts when compared with Paul’s undisputed letters. These differences are not minor—they suggest a later stage of Christian development. 1. “The Faith” vs. Relational Faith (Pistis) In the undisputed letters, Paul consistently uses pistis (faith) in a relational sense—trust, allegiance, and participation in Christ. This is evident in Romans 3:27–28, Galatians 2:16, and Philippians 2:9, where faith is dynamic and tied to Christ’s faithfulness. By contrast, the Pastorals repeatedly speak of “the faith” as a fixed body of doctrine: 1 Timothy 4:1–2 1 Timothy 6:9–10 2 Timothy 4:7 Titus 1:13–14 Here, “the faith” is something one can depart from, guard, or preserve—indicating a shift from relational trust to doctrinal system. This aligns closely with later patristic thought. Irenaeus of Lyons explicitly de...