Comments on: How to read the Old Testament: Wisdom from an old dude http://aldenswan.com/2007/08/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/ free speech, critical thinking, and really good coffee Fri, 03 Feb 2012 10:05:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: aldenswan.com » Blog Archive » The rhetorical Word of God http://aldenswan.com/2007/08/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/comment-page-1/#comment-463 aldenswan.com » Blog Archive » The rhetorical Word of God Sat, 06 Oct 2007 19:07:12 +0000 http://www.aldenswan.com/2007/08/30/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/#comment-463 [...] A few weeks ago I posted concerning Ben Witherington’s article about John Chrysostom and how to read the Old Testament. Today I’ll highlight yesterday’s post from Witherington entitled SACRED TEXTS IN AN ORAL CULTURE—How Did They Function? [...] [...] A few weeks ago I posted concerning Ben Witherington’s article about John Chrysostom and how to read the Old Testament. Today I’ll highlight yesterday’s post from Witherington entitled SACRED TEXTS IN AN ORAL CULTURE—How Did They Function? [...]

]]> By: Quixote http://aldenswan.com/2007/08/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/comment-page-1/#comment-462 Quixote Wed, 05 Sep 2007 19:33:53 +0000 http://www.aldenswan.com/2007/08/30/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/#comment-462 What's logic got to do with it? What's logic but a second-hand commotion? What’s logic got to do with it? What’s logic but a second-hand commotion?

]]> By: me http://aldenswan.com/2007/08/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/comment-page-1/#comment-461 me Wed, 05 Sep 2007 03:53:59 +0000 http://www.aldenswan.com/2007/08/30/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/#comment-461 I'm not following your logic, and perhaps it's just a matter of semantics. That "lack of understanding" is precisely what I've been talking about. We may be saying more or less the same thing, but I'm not sure. Your initial comment drew a distinction between the written New Testament and the Revelation of Jesus; all I'm saying is that for the purposes of the point I'm making, they're non-distinguishable. I’m not following your logic, and perhaps it’s just a matter of semantics. That “lack of understanding” is precisely what I’ve been talking about. We may be saying more or less the same thing, but I’m not sure.

Your initial comment drew a distinction between the written New Testament and the Revelation of Jesus; all I’m saying is that for the purposes of the point I’m making, they’re non-distinguishable.

]]> By: Quixote http://aldenswan.com/2007/08/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/comment-page-1/#comment-460 Quixote Wed, 05 Sep 2007 02:54:56 +0000 http://www.aldenswan.com/2007/08/30/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/#comment-460 Those who sought to enforce the Old Covenant upon the church revealed their lack of understanding about the Old Testament. Remember what Jesus told a similar group: "You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me,yet you refuse to come to me to have life." The Old Testament points to Christ. It doesn't "need" the New Testament to do that. Any who employ its testimony otherwise do not understand it at all. Those who sought to enforce the Old Covenant upon the church revealed their lack of understanding about the Old Testament. Remember what Jesus told a similar group: “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me,yet you refuse to come to me to have life.”

The Old Testament points to Christ. It doesn’t “need” the New Testament to do that. Any who employ its testimony otherwise do not understand it at all.

]]> By: me http://aldenswan.com/2007/08/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/comment-page-1/#comment-459 me Tue, 04 Sep 2007 19:45:40 +0000 http://www.aldenswan.com/2007/08/30/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/#comment-459 My initial post was not necessarily limited to the Bible literature, but for us, today, that happens to be what we have. In the 1st Century, oral teaching also was seen as authoritative; in fact, the written word (Paul's letters, for example) may have been seen as perhaps less authoritative than Paul's teaching in person. References to the Word of God and the Gospel in the NT seem to apply to an oral teaching that was considered authoritative, prior to the letters and Gospels being "published." That being said, Paul gets quite riled up in Galatians when some teachers from Jerusalem apparently continue to try to enforce Old Covenant concepts without viewing things through the fuller revelation of the Gospel. I believe that for us today, the NT and OT together form a cohesive unit, and we run into problems when we try to view one without the added perspective of the other. My initial post was not necessarily limited to the Bible literature, but for us, today, that happens to be what we have. In the 1st Century, oral teaching also was seen as authoritative; in fact, the written word (Paul’s letters, for example) may have been seen as perhaps less authoritative than Paul’s teaching in person. References to the Word of God and the Gospel in the NT seem to apply to an oral teaching that was considered authoritative, prior to the letters and Gospels being “published.”

That being said, Paul gets quite riled up in Galatians when some teachers from Jerusalem apparently continue to try to enforce Old Covenant concepts without viewing things through the fuller revelation of the Gospel.

I believe that for us today, the NT and OT together form a cohesive unit, and we run into problems when we try to view one without the added perspective of the other.

]]> By: Quixote http://aldenswan.com/2007/08/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/comment-page-1/#comment-458 Quixote Fri, 31 Aug 2007 15:14:28 +0000 http://www.aldenswan.com/2007/08/30/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/#comment-458 The revelation of Jesus is granted. Your initial post was about the written literature to which my remarks are addressed. Again, both Jesus and the Apostles defined this very revelation of Jesus on the exclusive terms of the OT literature. Even the revelatory experience at Pentecost was contextualized by Peter exclusively through OT references. My point (if there is one) is that the OT does indeed stand on its own as inspired literature, and for a significant period of time was their only textual authority for the fledgling church. The revelation of Jesus is granted. Your initial post was about the written literature to which my remarks are addressed.

Again, both Jesus and the Apostles defined this very revelation of Jesus on the exclusive terms of the OT literature. Even the revelatory experience at Pentecost was contextualized by Peter exclusively through OT references.

My point (if there is one) is that the OT does indeed stand on its own as inspired literature, and for a significant period of time was their only textual authority for the fledgling church.

]]> By: me http://aldenswan.com/2007/08/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/comment-page-1/#comment-457 me Fri, 31 Aug 2007 05:50:10 +0000 http://www.aldenswan.com/2007/08/30/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/#comment-457 <blockquote>You say “Much weirdness comes from reading the Old Testament separate from the New,” and yet that’s precisely how the early church did read it; the New was written and understood on the exclusive basis of the Old.</blockquote> Not on the exclusive basis at all, but on the revelation of Jesus: "<em>In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son...</em>" Hebrews 1:1,2 The OT may be "complete" in a sense (at least historically speaking), but I don't think you could say that it is the complete revelation of God or of His plan for salvation. The OT begs for the "color" that came in the revelation of Jesus and the Gospel of the Kingdom.

You say “Much weirdness comes from reading the Old Testament separate from the New,” and yet that’s precisely how the early church did read it; the New was written and understood on the exclusive basis of the Old.

Not on the exclusive basis at all, but on the revelation of Jesus:

“In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son…” Hebrews 1:1,2

The OT may be “complete” in a sense (at least historically speaking), but I don’t think you could say that it is the complete revelation of God or of His plan for salvation. The OT begs for the “color” that came in the revelation of Jesus and the Gospel of the Kingdom.

]]> By: Quixote http://aldenswan.com/2007/08/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/comment-page-1/#comment-456 Quixote Fri, 31 Aug 2007 05:16:30 +0000 http://www.aldenswan.com/2007/08/30/how-to-read-the-old-testament-wisdom-from-an-old-dude/#comment-456 You say "Much weirdness comes from reading the Old Testament separate from the New," and yet that's precisely how the early church did read it; the New was written and understood on the exclusive basis of the Old. Both the Apostles and Jesus himself relied on the Old to make sense of their ministries. The OT is not an incomplete document(s) but requires just as much (if not more) spiritual discernment than does the New. You want weirdness? The NT book of Hebrews has the strangest, most inexplicable explications of OT passages out there. In fact, had it not already been included in the canon, I'd be inclined to say that the writer should have been required to take a basic course in exegesis before attempting an inspired work of literature. Just goes to show you, if it's not one thing it's another. You say “Much weirdness comes from reading the Old Testament separate from the New,” and yet that’s precisely how the early church did read it; the New was written and understood on the exclusive basis of the Old. Both the Apostles and Jesus himself relied on the Old to make sense of their ministries. The OT is not an incomplete document(s) but requires just as much (if not more) spiritual discernment than does the New.

You want weirdness? The NT book of Hebrews has the strangest, most inexplicable explications of OT passages out there. In fact, had it not already been included in the canon, I’d be inclined to say that the writer should have been required to take a basic course in exegesis before attempting an inspired work of literature. Just goes to show you, if it’s not one thing it’s another.

]]>