 |
 |
New member Robert I. Bradshaw, Tyndale Associate. I am interested in the influence patristic exegesis has had on the interpretation of Scripture. In particular and am looking for specific examples of cases where the Reformers rejected the conclusions of the earlky church fathers. The following example has come to my attention: John Oswalt writes in his commentary on Isaiah chapters 1-39: "In [Isaiah 14] vv.12-15 the scene shifts from the underworld to heaven and illuminates the pretense of human pride. That pride refuses to brook any rival, even God himself, insisting that all his perogatives will be its own. Some of the church fathers, linking this passage to Luke 10:18 and Rev. 12:8,9 took it to refer to the fall of Satan described in those places. However, the great expositors of the Reformation unanimously in arguing that the context here does not support such an interpretation." John N. Oswalt, "Isaiah Chapters 1-39," New International Commentary on the Old Testament, 1986. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991repint, p.320. Although Oslwalt doesn't footnote this statement, his bibliography does include the commentaries of John Calvin and Martin Luther. Did any of the other Reformers comment on this passage (or the related passage in Ezekiel 28) and, if so, what view did they take? I look forward to hearing from you. Robert I. Bradshaw [log in to unmask] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%