Since Bob posted a notice to Logos' newsgroups (at news://news.logos.com/general, if you're interested) I figured I'd pop a notice here too.

Logos Jobs Page

There are some cool job openings at Logos that some folks out there in biblioblogdom (bloggers, readers, whomever) may be interested in or may be able to point out to friends and colleagues. All jobs require relocation to Bellingham, WA (70 degrees and clear today, BTW ... it's so nice I rode the motorcycle in to the office). Familiarity with Logos Bible Software is, of course, a plus.

Caspar Olevianus, A Firm Foundation, Question 132 (translated by Lyle D. Bierma [more info])

Q. What do you believe when you confess, "I believe a holy catholic church"?

A. I believe that the Son of God, out of the entire human race, which is mired in sin and eternal death, gathers unto Himself from Adam to the end of the world a people chosen for eternal life by grace and not by merit, whom He through the preaching of the Word and power of the Holy Spirit here in this life regenerates from eternal death through faith in Him. As He Himself testifies in Jn 5.25: "Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live." See also Eph 2.

He also makes an eternal covenant with and betrothes Himself to this people as if they were a bride (Hos 2, Isa 54), that they might be His body in true faith through the testimony of the Holy gospel and covenant sign of Holy Baptism. He promises his church that he will remember her sins no more (Jer 31.34) because he has given Himself for her, will sanctify her daily, until He finally presents her to Himself holy, pure, and spotless in body and soul, and she lives and reigns with Him forever. All of this He does out of grace, because He loved her and gave Himself for her (Eph 5.25).

I believe that I am and always will be a member of this church or people of God (Jn 10.28-29), since I believe in Christ, have been baptized into His name, and trust the promise, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mk 16.16). I believe and am baptized; therefore I shall be saved. That is the only way, for Christ promised it.

[Question & answer Copyright 1995 Lyle D. Bierma]

First, many protestant-types get all afluster when they read this article of the creed due simply to the word "catholic". Even though they intellectually understand that this article does not refer specifically to the Roman Catholic Church, it's a stumbling block. More important is to notice Olevianus' phrasing "I believe a holy catholic church" instead of what some folks must actually think/read (and what is most definitely not meant), "I believe in the Holy Catholic church". See the difference? The creed has the indefinite article "a", not the definite article "the". Olevianus discusses this in question 133, which I won't reproduce here.

Some folks like to replace "catholic" with words like "universal" or even "Christian". But the word in the received Greek and Latin forms of the creed is obvious:

Latin: sanctam ecclesiam catholicam
Greek: ἀγίαν καθολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν

This word was used to describe the church "at large" long before it was used to describe a particular (albeit large) body with a particular doctrinal stance. So I like to keep it in the creed when I recite it, even though it may confuse some. But I'm more of a traditionalist and a bit of a stickler when it comes to using the proper word in the proper situation despite the perception of the word's meaning by the masses.

Second (though primarily) this is an awesome description of the church. Olevianus says that the church (that is, Christians in the world) are provided for by God, who has gathered His church together throughout all time. He provides for the primary need of His chosen through the provision of salvation in Jesus Christ, our Lord, Savior and Mediator. He provides not only the faith for belief; but also the daily needs, encouragement and comfort for his chosen through the provision of the Holy Spirit. Amazingly, Jesus Christ is bound to the church in a manner similar to the way a husband is bound to his wife. He ministers to us, and we follow His leadership. All in all, it reminds me of Titus 2.11-15:

¹¹ For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people, ¹² training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age, ¹³ waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, ¹⁴ who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works. (ESV)

Even though Olevianus hasn't quoted this passage, this is basically what he is saying. Through the sacrifice and resurrection of Jesus Christ, God has acted to provide salvation for His people. This salvation and the grace upon which it is founded is transforming. It brings His people closer to Him in prayer, worship and obedience. It also brings people closer to Him through renouncement and repentance of vices and vanities. This transformed (and transforming) people eagerly await the triumphant return of Jesus Christ, our redeemer. This expectant group -- those who by the grace of God and who through the work of the Holy Spirit have claimed Jesus Christ as their Lord, Savior and Redeemer -- lives according to His will. Through the continual work of the Holy Spirit this group is in the process of being sanctified, being brought closer to Him and being cultivated to live lives of worship in praise and thankfulness to the One who has provided salvation.

This is the "holy catholic church". When we recite the creed, we are not simply professing belief that a body of some sort exists, we are professing that a specific body exists for a specific purpose, and that God acts to gather and assemble this group, as He has promised, and that His wishes and desires for this group will come to pass.

Sometime today (Saturday), if trends hold, ricoblog will receive its 10,000th vistor.

The sitemeter stats indicate each visitor hits an average of 1.9 pages, so that means ricoblog has served up close to 20,000 pages since it went live in mid-August 2004.

Here's the first non-test post, which was posted on Friday, August 13 2004.

Thanks to all who visit regularly, those who read via aggregator, and to those who happen to find things via search engines (typically Google).

And especially thanks to those who link to ricoblog and mention it on their own blogs. Y'all are awesome.

Here's hoping for another 10,000!

Update: We're over the mark. At 1:28 AM PDT (Sunday morning) someone, most likely from Sweden, accessed ricoblog via google while searching for "greek language structure programming computer". Now that's a google hit I'm proud of. Anyway, here's the current view of ricoblog hit history via sitemeter:

It was such a nice evening, I took off for a motorcycle ride. I packed my camera along thinking I'd find a cool sunset picture. Instead of heading south, I decided to head north up Marine Drive and into the Lummi Indian reservation.

I was on Lummi Shore drive, twisting along the coastline when I realized I'd be too late for a sunset. So I stopped, thinking the light was good in the area. Then I saw what was behind me: Mount Baker and some surrounding mountains, a full moon, and lots of water. If you click the photo, you'll get a little larger version (800x600)

Needless to say, I stopped and took a gob of photos. I only took one with the moon in it, and I think it turned out the best. Other photos available on my photo pages.

Update: Responding to my Mom's comment, the black items are rocks. You can see some plants too. I wasn't super-excited about them being in the shot, but I wanted the moon in the upper-right corner and the horizon with the mountains in the middle of the vertical frame.

Some folks might think that today is "Earth Day", but folks who work at Logos know that today is Curry Day. That's right, today (April 22, 2005) is the fifth-annual Logos Curry Cook-off!

This means that all sorts of folks bring curry to the office, other folks bring rice cookers, and everybody brings an appetite. By the end of lunchtime, a new Curry Champion has been crowned!

Curry Day is one of my favorite days of the year. This year (as of this writing, anyway) we have FIFTEEN curries to sample! And we may have more by the time lunchtime rolls around.

I'll post pictures later tonight (it's easier to transfer photos from my archaic camera using my laptop at home) but if you can't wait, here are some photos from last year's Curry Cookoff.

For those keeping score: Eli Evans and Bob Pritchett tied and have been co-champions for the past year, so this year is a bit of a grudge match for them. I was in the spot I affectionately refer to as first place loser — you know, the best of the losers but still a loser (aka "second place").

Update: Curry Day was awesome! The results were:

First Place: Dale Pritchett
Second Place: Eli Evans
Third Place: Vincent Setterholm

Bob Pritchett (who made some stellar curry as well) video blogs the Logos Curry Cookoff. Pretty cool, check it out.

Lastly, my curry didn't fare so well (watch Bob's video, you'll see my thoughts on the matter). But I leave you with some curry poetry:

Thy savoriness, O curry, delighteth my palate
Thy spice o'erwhelms my tongue
Thy sweetness, O curry, eraseth my hunger
O'er rice thou art the one.

Update II: Uploaded the curry photos. You can find them on my photo pages.

Update III: Eli Evans finally posts a link to his recipe (the winner in my book — sorry, Dale).

Update IV: Here's my curry placard. (Like the number in Cooper Black?) I won't post my recipe, but I will tell you I based it on this one. If I were to do it again, I'd do basically the same thing only add some chopped apples (I'd planned on doing that, but forgot to buy apples) or applesauce along with some chutney for some extra flavor.

In comments to my post on Beza's Greek New Testament, Stephen C. Carlson (Hypotyposeis) writes regarding the bibles.org.uk site:

That web site is very interesting, but there's some important 19th cen. editions of the GNT are not there (e.g. Westcott-Hort, Lachmann, Griesbach, etc.). Do you happen to know of any sites that has scans of any of those editions?

I don't know of other sites offhand apart from the TC Ebind Index. (I'm guessing the bibles.org.uk dude lifted stuff like Tischendorf, von Soden, Sinaiticus, etc. from that site.) 

I've got a print copy of Westcott-Hort, so that's not a problem for me. But the others would be nice to see. If anyone has info on any PDF facsimile editions (that is, scans of the actual documents, not transcriptions and re-typeset editions) I'd love to know about them. I'd also like to see early Nestle editions (I have a 1912 Nestle, which is the ninth edition if my Latin guessing skills are any good), Tregelles, or just about anything else out there you might know about.

The same goes for critical editions of any of the early versions (Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, Latin, etc.). I'd love to see 'em if you know where they can be found.

It's true. You can catch me in one o' them new-fangled movin' pictures over on Bob Pritchett's blog. Bob's Video Tour of Logos covers Logos Bible Software's Design & Editorial department. That's the department I'm in. It's where all of the cool people hang out, playing around with new data sets and figuring out how to implement them in the Libronix Digital Library System.

Update: My D&E colleague Eli chimes in on Bob's video.

I'd planned to blog about a Stephanus version prior to Beza's edition, but then I realized that my edition of Stephanus' 1550 is actually Scrivener's edition of Stephanus, and since I'm primarily interested in format and typography of the originals, this wouldn't do (yet ... wait 'till I work my way into the 1800's!).

So, I'm hopping to Beza. I'll come back to the 1550 (and 1546) Stephanus versions after I download 'em from Bibles.org.uk.

On to Beza. First, check out the device on the title page. An anchor, water, a snake, and some arms. Complete with date in roman numerals. Typical for the period. Again, all of these images are clickable.

The facsimile I downloaded is pretty gritty, so the detail isn't the best. It's a shame, I'd really love to see how the start of each book looks in its full glory. Here you can see the beginning of the epistle to Titus. Once again, Beza's edition isn't simply a reproduction of the Greek text, it is his Greek text, his Latin translation, and the "Vetus" Latin, which I'd guess would be Jerome's Vulgate (but that's purely unconfirmed speculation). There are also marginal notes and scads of translation notes (in Latin, of course) that you can't see on this shot.

Of interest, we see the text is actually versified. I'm guessing that Beza is following Stephanus' innovation here — I think I recall that Stephanus was one of the first to present the text versified in a manner like we're familiar with today, though I could be wrong. So the verses line up. The first block is what we'd call Titus 1.1, and you can see the verse number in the gutter between columns. Same for verse 2, and so on.

On a purely cosmetic note, the marginal note throws the page out of balance. It looks lopsided due to the massiveness of the title device. It's tough for me to look at. It's not nearly as bad on other pages. Also interesting is the use of a smaller italic font for the "Vetus" Latin. He's obviously de-emphasized the older Latin in favor of his own translation.

So, what about Beza's version of 1Ti 2.3-6? Here it is. Beza has so many notes, these four verses span two pages of his edition:

In the above (though you probably can't read it) Beza cites the reading of the Complutensian Polyglot. Anyway, here's the actual content of the verses; you might even be able to read it:

Once again, we see some serious typography going on. Can you imagine hand-setting the type for these plates? That, and this is the third edition of a 1500's-era Greek New Testament we've seen, and they all have a "modern" translation (that is, the Latin) along with them. Yet today, most of those who study Greek seriously would rather not see any modern language translation at all in the version. It makes me wonder how come these early editions viewed such an addition as almost natural?

Of course, Stephanus' 1550 edition doesn't (as I recall, at least it doesn't on the front page of Mark that we have here at the Logos offices) have a Latin translation. So maybe Erasmus, Beza and the Complutensian are the outliers.

Next time: Stephanus' 1550 (and 1546) editions, assuming I download them successfully.