Saturday, September 20, 2025

The Orthodox Study Bible: Zeal: Here is no heathen fanaticism

The Orthodox Study Bible: Zeal: Here is no heathen fanaticism

Preface

Originally published 20200514, significantly revised on Blogger for an article on academia.edu 20250920. My review of this academic study bible continues from my Reformed tradition, as I comment on Orthodoxy from the outside.

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee. 

The Orthodox Study Bible: Zeal

Glossary

Reverend John W. Morris, Ph.D

Zeal

The definition here is 'devotion, enthusiastic obedience to God' (810). The Apostle Paul warns against a misguided zeal not based in knowledge, such as in Romans 10: 2-3. (810).

The Apostle Paul wrote in regards to the religious Jews...

Romans 10:2-3 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 2 For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3 For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God.

Bible Hub: Romans 10: 2

αὐτοῖς ὅτι ζῆλον θεοῦ ἔχουσιν

(to them)  (that)  (a zeal)  (of God)

to them that have a zeal of/for God.

ζῆλον is a noun, accusative, masculine, singular in Romans 10: 2.

Bible Hub: Root word and New Testament examples

Original Word: ζῆλος, ου, ὁ

In the context of Romans 10: 2, Jon Courson states that 'To this day, the Jews are zealous for God'. (958). But, theologically and respectfully to Judaism, this is works righteousness based on keeping the law, and not the imputed righteousness of Jesus Christ to the chosen (Romans 8-9, Ephesians 1), by grace through faith (Romans, Galatians 2, Ephesians 1-2).

I will admit that there is faith in Judaism of course, but works righteousness still exists. There are many religious faiths and non-religious worldviews with good morality and ethics. Within my classically, biblically inspired, Reformed theology, this divine righteousness (Romans, Galatians as textual examples) is imputed and applied to believers as legal and theological, justification, within the atonement.

In regards to Paul's comments concerning the religiously zealous Jews, Cranfield writes: 'Here is no heathen fanaticism' (251). The Jews have the 'right object' (251) that being their Hebrew Bible concept of God, in mind. In Romans 10: 2, both the terms for 'zeal' and 'God' are important. (251). The zeal here is seeking attention for something which is worthy of glory. (251). That in context, being God. 'Zeal for the one true God'. (251). This is not zeal for one of the 'false gods of a corrupt society' (251). But the Apostle Paul here explains that the Jews lacked knowledge (v2), that being knowledge of the gospel (251). Cranfield opines here that there is a 'disastrous flaw' with the zeal of the Jews, according to Paul. It seems to me Paul is stating here the the religious Jews knew about God, but as they did not know and accept the triune God of the gospel and therefore their religious zeal was disastrously in error. 

This divine zeal, unlike human zeal, when gospel focused, has God's righteousness in Jesus Christ, states the Orthodox Study Bible at Romans 10: 3. (362). '3 For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God.' The religious righteousness of the Hebrew religion did not suffice for membership into the Kingdom of God, that could only occur through regeneration (John 3, Titus 3, 1 Peter 1) and being justified in the righteousness of Jesus Christ through his applied atoning work for believers, which also led to the culminated resurrection of believers. Cranfield is correct that the Jews did not have a sufficient righteousness of their own, which they were trying to establish religiously. At the same time, they would not submit to the applied righteousness of God incarnate, Jesus Christ within gospel salvation. (252).

Mounce explains that in regards to Romans 10, the Jews sought righteousness by 'personal merit rather than by faith.' (206). In agreement with the comments of Cranfield, Mounce opines that the text has Paul explaining that the religious Jews zeal was not guided by knowledge (Romans 10: 2) (207). They wanted righteousness of their own, within their own religion, as opposed to the righteousness of Jesus Christ, within the gospel.

Romans 10: 4 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 4 For Christ is the [a]end of the Law for righteousness to everyone who believes.  Footnotes: Romans 10: 4 Or goal

Christ is the end of the law (207). Cranfield writes the end here could be interpreted in three ways .1 fulfillment 2. termination 3. goal (252). Regardless, teleologically, justification within salvation and entrance into the Kingdom of God, was not to be pursued or found through the Hebrew Biblical, Mosaic law, or any Hebrew covenant. But through the applied atoning and resurrection of Jesus Christ.


Cited

Romans 10:4 N-NNS 
GRK: τέλος γὰρ νόμου 
NAS: For Christ is the end of the law 
KJV: For Christ [is] the end of the law for INT: [the] end indeed of law


Cited

Original Word: τέλος 
Lexical Summary telos: End, purpose, goal, completion, fulfillment 
Original Word: τέλος
---

Related

According to Nelson's, Zealotes/Zealot (s) in the historical context was defined as a 'zealous one'. (807). These were a party of Jews violently opposed to the Roman Empire and its occupation of Israel. (807). Noted to be from the 1st Century, in context.

To be zealous is to be full of zeal. (Oxford: 1629). In modern times, and to this day, a zealot (zealots) can be considered someone that is 'an uncompromising or extreme partisan; a fanatic.' (1629). Often used in political contexts for those that are very pro-Israel. I will opine here that false zeal, need not be just religious, but could be political as well. Placing too much hope in the political process at the neglect of trusting in the one and true God. I am not, at all, rejecting the political process, but I am stating that the zeal for politics, in the biblical Christian, should not equate in importance to zeal for the gospel and the triune God.
---

BRUCE, F.F., (1963)(1996) Romans, Grand Rapids, IVP/Eerdmans. 

COAD, F. ROY (1986) ‘Galatians’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.

COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville.

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press.

HARPUR, GEORGE (1986) Ephesians in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

NELSON'S THREE-IN-ONE BIBLE REFERENCE COMPANION, 'Zealous' (1982), Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers. 

THE CONCISE OXFORD DICTIONARY (1995) ‘Sceptical’, Della Thompson (ed.), Oxford, Clarendon Press.

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

Saturday, September 13, 2025

Vladimir Lenin & the use of organized terror

Vladimir Lenin & the use of organized terror

Preface

USSR flag from Wikipedia

On 20281110, I had recently viewed a World War I documentary on British Columbia's, Knowledge Network. I published this article on Blogger. This article significantly updated 20250813 on Blogger for a posting on academia.edu.

Below is a link to a related Blogger article where I also discussed this Lenin section, that has previously been placed on academia.edu. This article will have some different material.


Vladimir Lenin & the use of organized terror

I believe that on the documentary, a form of the second quote below was stated from Vladimir Lenin, the first leader of the Soviet Union. His views on the use of terror.

Word Future Fund

Cited

'From the 1 September 1918 edition of the Bolshevik newspaper, Krasnaya Gazeta:'

'“We will turn our hearts into steel, which we will temper in the fire of suffering and the blood of fighters for freedom. We will make our hearts cruel, hard, and immovable, so that no mercy will enter them, and so that they will not quiver at the sight of a sea of enemy blood. We will let loose the floodgates of that sea. Without mercy, without sparing, we will kill our enemies in scores of hundreds. Let them be thousands; let them drown themselves in their own blood. For the blood of Lenin and Uritsky, Zinovief and Volodarski, let there be floods of the blood of the bourgeois - more blood, as much as possible.”'

'Excerpt from an interview with Felix Dzerzhinsky published in Novaia Zhizn on 14 July 1918.'

'We stand for organized terror - this should be frankly admitted. Terror is an absolute necessity during times of revolution. Our aim is to fight against the enemies of the Soviet Government and of the new order of life. We judge quickly. In most cases only a day passes between the apprehension of the criminal and his sentence. When confronted with evidence criminals in almost every case confess; and what argument can have greater weight than a criminal's own confession.”'

'Excerpts from V.I. Lenin, “The Lessons of the Moscow Uprising” (1906) Keeping in mind the failure of the 1905 revolution, Lenin argued that it was imperative for an even more ruthless application of force in the pursuit of overthrowing the Tsar’s regime.'

'“We should have taken to arms more resolutely, energetically and aggressively; we should have explained to the masses that it was impossible to confine things to a peaceful strike and that a fearless and relentless armed fight was necessary. And now we must at last openly and publicly admit that political strikes are inadequate; we must carry on the widest agitation among the masses in favour of an armed uprising and make no attempt to obscure this question by talk about "preliminary stages", or to befog it in any way. We would be deceiving both ourselves and the people if we concealed from the masses the necessity of a desperate, bloody war of extermination, as the immediate task of the coming revolutionary action.'
---
Vancouver 20181110
It is a good thing to see the founding leader of the Soviet Union actually, historically, exposed within this documentary. This to counter views, sometimes expressed within the Western World, that Soviet thuggery and terror only evolved from original more peaceful intentions.

No, historically, the USSR used thuggery and terror from its beginning. It really lacked significant reason behind it, when facing opposing views, and resorted to terror. A related informal fallacy...

Baculum, Argumentum Ad/Appeal to Force 

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London.

'When reason fails you, appeal to the rod.' (46). Pirie lists Soviet leader, Joseph Stalin as a classic adherent. (47). This fallacious approach uses force as means of persuasion as the argument would be lost without it. (46). Stalin followed Lenin...

As a worldview, the communism of the USSR and other worldviews as examples, have used (or use if present context is valid) terror to varying degrees. Non-exhaustively, I offer up:

Church State Christianity: Notably, Medieval State-Church Christianity

Radical Islam

Fascism: Notably, Nazism

Communism
---

Does New Testament Christianity promote the use of terror on its citizen and non-citizens?

Admittedly, the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament featured the Kingdom of Israel and a kingdom within this temporal realm will use violence and force. Terror can be an aspect of violence and force, of course, whether it is officially sanctified or/or used by some its officials. Biblical Christianity, however, reasonably and accurately interpreted, within its biblical interpretation, promotes progressive revelation which progressed from the Hebrew Bible theocracy and theonomy, which had its warlike aspects.

Progressive revelation is defined as the understanding that God's self-disclosure is in progression from the Old Testament to the New Testament. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 96). Therefore the New Testament offers a more complete revelation. The Old Testament is to be understood in light of the fuller teaching of the New Testament. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 96). At Columbia Bible College (Mennonite) and Canadian Baptist Seminary, I was taught that the Bible is not flat, as there is progressive revelation which ended in the apostolic age. This teaching, even now, as I am firmly Reformed theologically, still fits within my Christian worldview.

Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant. (Hebrews 12: 24). The law in particular was only a shadow of good things to come. (Hebrews 10). The law cannot save as in Romans 4, but persons are saved through righteousness of faith fulfilled in Christ. Galatians 2 mentions the folly of following the law as we now have Christ. In the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 4-6, Jesus explains the deeper spiritual meanings of the law. The Old Testament/Hebrew Bible is as valid as the New Testament, but it is often stated that we must interpret the Old Testament through the New Testament. Well, I can understand this since there is progressive revelation, but the Old Testament must be read in context, or else one risks reading the New Testament into the Old Testament. Christianity explains that the New Testament revelation of Christ/apostles does not contradict the previous revelation and instead adds to it explaining the plan of God. If my concentration academically in a particular article was on the Hebrew Bible, I would have no problem with studying Hebrew scholars for the original context, but I reason the New Testament can shed light on many of the older teachings. 

The Hebrew Bible/Old Testament must be read in context, and the New Testament should not be read into the Old Testament. The Hebrew Bible should be studied for original context. But, I conclude that Biblically a flat Bible hermeneutical approach which does not properly interpret old covenant teaching through a new covenant amplification, should be academically rejected for one that takes a progressive revelation approach, in order for one to posses the fullness of God’s Scriptural revelation and the gospel message. 

The gospel plan of the New Testament is God’s final Scriptural revelation for humanity. There is therefore no other means of salvation (John 14: 6, Acts 4: 12). Theologically, as examples, Islam is rejected for reasons such as the denial of key doctrines about Christ, including his deity, and the Latter-Day Saints theology is rejected for reasons such as holding to polytheism and henotheism (belief in more than one God, or the belief that more than one God in existence is possible, although only one is worshipped) which are against Scriptural teaching. (Isaiah 43, 44, 45). Christ as the Alpha and Omega, as the beginning and the end (Revelation 1: 8, 21: 6, 22: 13) demonstrates theologically his nature as the one and only Almighty God. There is only one God in existence and only one God that should be worshipped. Mounce states that this title of Christ in Revelation sets Christ beyond the created order and Christ is also unlimited as The Son and has the same divine nature as the Father (and I would add the Holy Spirit). Mounce (1990: 393). 

The religious philosophy of worldview progressed to New Testament dogma which teaches the Church to love believers and non-believers alike with truth and witness. God's ultimate and everlasting punishment for those outside of Jesus Christ in Revelation 20 and the likely largely figurative literal, lake of fire, is sanctioned and issued from an infinite, eternal God that is of infinite love and infinite justice.

The present temporal, or the future everlasting, Christian Church and Christian Community is not sanctioned to use any means of terror in order to culminate its existence. New Testament theology and dogma does not sanction force or coercion into the eventually, fully culminated Kingdom of God. 

The unregenerate are not chosen by God and with significant human freedom and moral accountability, the unregenerate reject the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ. Post-mortem the unregenerate face everlasting justice and the consequences of sin and death. Hell is described in somewhat metaphorical terms, but the spirit resides in Hades (Luke 16, example) then likely the resurrection body and spirit in the lake of fire (Revelation 20).

The regenerate, chosen by God and with significant human freedom and moral accountability, embrace the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ. Post-mortem the regenerate, through grace through faith, alone, face everlasting life within the Kingdom of God. Human works righteousness does not suffice for justification, sanctification or any aspect of salvation. A believer in Christ should do works within salvation, but cannot do works for salvation.

For New Testament Christianity, the terror is not within the culminated Kingdom of God, but remains a possibility post-mortem, for those outside of it...

Revelation 22: 14-15: New American Standard Bible (NASB)

14 Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they will have the right to the tree of life, and may enter the city by the gates. 15 Outside are the dogs, the sorcerers, the sexually immoral persons, the murderers, the idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices lying.


Cited: 

κύνες kynes dogs 

'2965 kýōn – literally, a dog, scavenging canine; (figuratively) a spiritual predator who feeds off others. [A loose dog was disdained in ancient times – viewed as a "mooch pooch" that ran about as a scavenger.]'


Cited

Pulpit Commentary 

'"The dogs" are those who are described in ver. 11 as "the filthy;" the term is proverbial amongst Eastern nations as an expression for what is most degraded.' 

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 

'The dog, moreover, was an unclean animal; dogs, therefore, are represented as outside the city, because nothing unclean is allowed to enter.'

Bauer states Revelation 22: 15 uses 'dogs' 'Original Word: κύων', non-literally. It means the unbaptized and impure, he opines (461). In other words, those outside of the Church.
---

Revelation 22 is not prohibiting the regenerate from having a resurrected dog etcetera within the culminated of God. Non-exhaustively, this could be understood as prohibiting spiritual predators from Kingdom membership and as well it could be understood as a prohibition against the spiritually unclean. The second option may be the superior one in context.
---

BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

COAD, F. ROY (1986) ‘Galatians’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI AND CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press. 

HOEHNER, HAROLD, ThD, PhD (1985) The Epistle To The Romans, Institute of Theological Studies.

HOPFE, LEWIS M. (1991) Religions of the World, New York, Macmillan Publishing Company.

HUGHES, PHILIP, EDGCUMBE (1990) A Commentary On The Epistle To The Hebrews, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

NIGOSIAN, S.A. (1994) World Faiths, New York, St. Martin’s Press. 

PIRIE, MADSEN (2006)(2015) How To Win Every Argument, Bloomsbury, London. 

ROBINSON, N.H.G. AND SHAW D.W.D. (1999) ‘Theonomy’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd. 

WALLACE TOM Jr. (2015) Refuting Islam, The Christian Patriots Guide to Exposing the Evils of Islam, Bellingham, Fundamental Publishers.

Vancouver: 20181110