tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post8012110698336898144..comments2024-03-28T09:52:15.415-04:00Comments on Common Denominator: God in the Old TestamentKen Schenckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-65454291754983659072010-03-02T00:14:00.286-05:002010-03-02T00:14:00.286-05:00Dan,
As an insider, I can have a high view of scr...Dan,<br /><br />As an insider, I can have a high view of scripture. I understand how theologians have generally put the puzzle together. However, put yourself in the position of an outsider. Would you accept these explanations if applied to the Koran? <br /><br />For instance, you could say that the verses in Matthew simply indicate that Jesus believed that His earthly work didn't invalidate God's interaction with the Hebrew people through the Law (not necessarily the whole OT). However, this raises the issue of who gave Paul the right to decide that part of the Law was no longer required (most Orthodox Jews wouldn't buy into the purity vs. ritual time-bounded argument). Does Paul contradict Jesus? As far as the John 10 reference, it appears that the writer of Psalms 82:6 indicates that the Hebrews should view themselves as gods or children of God. Is Christ declaring His divinity or declaring that He is a mediator god and reminding his listeners that they are also gods/children of gods. Remember Christ's statement that "the kingdom is already within you."<br />Perhaps, Emerson was right and Jesus was preaching New Age spirituality. <br /><br />I would prefer to assert that Christ comes from God because He addresses mankind's existential dilemma than defending all the loose-ends within scripture.timnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-79838314973135015762010-03-01T00:30:56.557-05:002010-03-01T00:30:56.557-05:00Tim, if we accept that we know nothing of God exce...Tim, if we accept that we know nothing of God except through Christ's incarnation (or God's incarnation in Christ), then we can still ask ourselves, "How did God's incarnation of himself view the Hebrew Scriptures?" Jesus treated the Hebrew Scriptures with care and referred to them as an everlasting message from God (Mt 5:17-20; 15:1-9) and unbreakable (Jn 10:35). So, it seems to me that Jesus upheld the Hebrew Scriptures as valuable and containing some sort of communication from/of God. Therefore, the Hebrews had some knowledge of God before Christ's incarnation. Whether or not it was perfect knowledge is another topic.Dannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-9720803288866078732010-02-27T18:46:57.564-05:002010-02-27T18:46:57.564-05:00Despite this creative "sleight of hand",...Despite this creative "sleight of hand", the difference in "moral" categories across time is still problematic, imho. The OT records multiple instances of a God behaving in contradiction to Christ's incarnation. Do you see an issue with Jehovah being in council with Bacchus? 747 and chariot are different categories, but did the Holy Spirit inspire OT writers to affirm false moral categories? Or did man attribute false categories to God w/o Christ's revelation?<br /><br />I believe God interacted with Hebrews and Greeks, despite pre-Christ limitations. However, the fulchrum is that we really know nothing about God aside from Christ's incarnation. NT writers are only more clear about God b/c they are closer to Christ's incarnation. The concept that the Bible is "incarnate" or "infallible" seems a dead-end to me. I agree the Holy Spirit gave encouragement/strength to Biblical writers to record God encounters/general history. However, at the end of the day, the Bible is man's fallible analysis/observations of God's movements, which are ineffable. If man was perfect, then we would see a seamless continuum from OT to NT.<br /><br />I guess I would just prefer to be intellectually honest then toe the Evangelical party line.timnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-44750438475662694482010-02-27T12:22:38.569-05:002010-02-27T12:22:38.569-05:00Well, I would like to comment in another direction...Well, I would like to comment in another direction, in effort to fulfill the thought of God and war. This coming from and awfully undergraduate mindset I know...would it be right to say that Christ came to change the way we (humans) relation with God, not to send signals of a changed character of God? God does not change inter-testamentally, rather, upon the life of Christ it was solely the reconciliation of our relationship with God and covered the cost of our sin. I purpose that the changes we see as God's "character" changing is simply the evolution of human society and there being less need for God to “micro-manage” His command of justice. It is fair to say that in the eyes secular history, the Roman Empire is most recognized for their development of the Justice system – that indeed followed all the expansion of the new world. Through Christ, there is a new ability for people to have relationship with God and therefore no excuse for rulers (gentile or not) to make decision unaware of God's will. If they do, this ignorance of God’s will in their decisions is on their shoulders. Not to say that God is no longer involved in the functions of this world but rather, works with humans as they advance in thought and socially. No change of God’s personhood, same God in the Old and New Testament, He simply works justice through human rulers and “their” decisions verses direct commands to conquer. <br />Is this a dangerous thought? Is it heretical? <br />Great post Doc, a much needed and thought of topic these days.<br /> -Evan HEvan Hoythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16285145867552777202noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-8496086482416144552010-02-27T06:30:53.538-05:002010-02-27T06:30:53.538-05:00Paul, in my old age my vision's going. I kept...Paul, in my old age my vision's going. I kept thinking it said "N" squared and I was trying to figure out who it was :-)Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-7847222547375889992010-02-27T06:30:00.990-05:002010-02-27T06:30:00.990-05:00Joel, it must be a real privilege to sit outside m...Joel, it must be a real privilege to sit outside my office just to catch the gems of knowledge chancing out of my door from time to time. :-) Karen's back in the office Monday so we'll have to clean up the party hats tomorrow.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-66559155262478652932010-02-26T22:05:47.134-05:002010-02-26T22:05:47.134-05:00Ken, you're so smart!Ken, you're so smart!Joel Liechtyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09614622760901898636noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-69568111819412319272010-02-26T16:58:11.795-05:002010-02-26T16:58:11.795-05:00I can site this for my IP, right?I can site this for my IP, right?Paul Tillmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13828799256501318603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-36762196025409564992010-02-26T13:59:37.715-05:002010-02-26T13:59:37.715-05:00This is the Sunday School that I desire. Thanks fo...This is the Sunday School that I desire. Thanks for the concise, precise, simple yet still stretching Biblical insights.::athada::https://www.blogger.com/profile/09046982982270546995noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-38002019068387008232010-02-26T13:18:39.567-05:002010-02-26T13:18:39.567-05:00Caleb, I always have mixed feelings on these sorts...Caleb, I always have mixed feelings on these sorts of things. I always approve of the kinds of theological readings of which you speak. I also generally suspect that they involve not a little Christianization of these texts from their original connotations. I am always open to being shown wrong.<br /><br />Ben, the fulchrum I have found most stable is the consensus of Christendom, which is far more stable than scholarly consensus on the original meaning of individual passages let alone their varied theological interpretations. The regula fidei and the law of love.Ken Schenckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09745548537303356655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-43280541624011982582010-02-26T12:56:50.345-05:002010-02-26T12:56:50.345-05:00I'm intrigued by this part of your post: In th...I'm intrigued by this part of your post: In the end, the biblical images of God must be integrated with each other and organized from a theological fulchrum point outside the text just as all other biblical teaching. I'm currently a Wesleyan student at Vanderbilt Divinity School, and last semester I took a seminar on Semiotics and Biblical Studies with Daniel Patte. He seemed to use this type of hermeneutic, and used the golden rule or greatest commandment as his 'fulchrum point.' He seemed to emphasis the loving one's neighbor bit more, by emphasizes the effect biblical interpretations have on people. But this often led to some interpretations of scripture that were way out of bounds for me as a Wesleyan. What fulchrum point(s) would you propose for reading scripture in the twentieth century? A Christological one, ethical one? Thanks again for thought provoking posts.Ben Garrisonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09103177893819978021noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8355052.post-7071058900536865702010-02-26T12:28:23.559-05:002010-02-26T12:28:23.559-05:00It seems to me that our understanding of the "...It seems to me that our understanding of the "God of the Old Testement" sometimes is way to surface or first read oriented. I have even found a merciful God in the book of Nehum. I think if we actually try more often to get to the theological points (what does it say about God as you said) we will see the same God in both the OT and NT.Caleb Landishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11608367744066179731noreply@blogger.com