tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post2775837060162683053..comments2024-03-15T20:15:34.428+13:00Comments on ξενος: Christian Preaching from the Old Testament #3Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-63123258722912300352010-10-22T21:30:02.171+13:002010-10-22T21:30:02.171+13:00"he argues that the OT is Christian, the forc..."he argues that the OT is Christian, the force of his argument is actually that Christianity is of the OT" but, unless his argument is smarter than you make it sound (a) the OT is not Christian and never was and (b) of course "Christianity is in the OT" (at least as an embryo that is "fulfilled" in Jesus) but that does not establish at all the previous dubious point!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-1183589414939390332010-10-14T17:44:37.518+13:002010-10-14T17:44:37.518+13:00Thanks - I will continue to consider the issues - ...Thanks - I will continue to consider the issues - as you say, the question raises many, but our reading of TNK is critical to faith - not just a rubber stamp. I am on holiday in Israel for the next two weeks - so will limit further interaction on this important topic till later.Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-49803125412912708272010-10-14T15:44:34.698+13:002010-10-14T15:44:34.698+13:00Thanks Bob, Thought I'd move this conversation...Thanks Bob, Thought I'd move this conversation to a new post!<br /><br />http://xenos-theology.blogspot.com/2010/10/christ-but-not-jesus.htmlJonathan Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18295840754661890186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-77376943364565135732010-10-14T09:39:25.622+13:002010-10-14T09:39:25.622+13:00The texts that immediately come to mind are those ...The texts that immediately come to mind are those where Paul uses Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus, Christ alone, and Jesus alone - yet sometimes I expect he is just writing quickly. I do not diminish the work of Creation and Redemption which is worked and completed in the man Jesus - declared Lord and Christ by his resurrection from the dead through the glory of the Father. - E.g. here's a text to consider - I make up what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ - what do you make of Col 1:24?<br /><br />But I do with this recognition of a wider scope for 'Anointing' emphasize that we must really hear and follow just as the psalmist does.Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-63389786453569762482010-10-13T12:57:15.299+13:002010-10-13T12:57:15.299+13:00Some fascinating thoughts there Bob, thankyou, I t...Some fascinating thoughts there Bob, thankyou, I think it might take me a while to get my head round them, i guess regarding the NT's use of Christ i'd want to think about specific texts that you feel lend themsleves to that.Jonathan Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18295840754661890186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-49717426165694099962010-10-12T09:12:17.653+13:002010-10-12T09:12:17.653+13:00I am going to suggest a thought that opens up furt...I am going to suggest a thought that opens up further possibilities - what if the Christ in the NT is not meant to mean exclusively Jesus? What if the anointing of say Psalm 23 points to a knowledge of God that is every bit the same as the knowledge and anointing in the Holy Spirit that is written of in the NT? What if we recognize the ambiguity of words like Messiah, servant, etc and apply them in preaching - to Israel, the the king of Israel, to the individual who fears God, to the New Testament believer, to Jesus as having this Spirit without measure?<br /><br />There is analytical work to do (and I am thinking about it) - but I have to say as one to whom our Lord has been kind, that the kindness I find in the Psalms is completely the same as the end of kindness that is pointed to in the NT and is the substance of the Mercy Seat. <br /><br />Sure 'Christ' is in the OT - but not just as a pointer to the completeness that is in Jesus, also as a recognition of the work of the referee implied in Job, and the anointed king / Israel in the Psalms (e.g. 89) and also as a recognition of the work of the Spirit (hidden in the OT but still there) that moves and trains the individual as one of those under the mercy in hearing, obedience, love, and the confidence of completeness that we find in the individual psalms, whether this anticipates the completeness in Jesus, or acts on behalf of the people, or the individual.<br /><br />That last sentence is based on my observation that the individual in Psalm 1 has become the multiplicity of the chasidim in psalm 149. It is the role of the Chasid to bind their kings in chains - the very thing that the Anointed of Psalm 2 is tasked to do - but also that the willing people of psalm 110 do on behalf of the king.Bob MacDonaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11335631079939764763noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-50756878438256885902010-10-09T13:50:19.735+13:002010-10-09T13:50:19.735+13:00This is good stuff though, because it is these kin...This is good stuff though, because it is these kind of confusions that I need to get better at being clear about. the two arguments have similarities but they are not the same issue, if I was writing a critical hebrew commentary (unlikely, but if i did) it would be totally rooted in the "what it meant", but if I were to write a devotional book on an OT book I would be compelled to try and explicate "what it means (for us)in the light of Christ."<br /><br />Thanks Steve :-)Jonathan Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18295840754661890186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-23406455210002821712010-10-09T10:26:29.381+13:002010-10-09T10:26:29.381+13:00...not for the purpose of giving a one time author...<i>...not for the purpose of giving a one time authoritative explanation of the passage, but for the purpose of a moment in time meeting of God's people with Christ in his word.</i><br /><br />The possibility that this was your target occurred to me after writing this comment. There is certainly a difference in saying that the biblical text <i>means</i> whatever we pull out of it and saying that we can glean things beyond what it <i>means</i>; I may not be saying this clearly. Bottom line, I am definitely open to being instructed here!Stevehttp://undeception.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-72118582007145179072010-10-09T09:26:43.572+13:002010-10-09T09:26:43.572+13:00I do, I hope this series helps explain why such re...I do, I hope this series helps explain why such readings don't have to be Bible-code-ish, but I agree it is an ever present temptation. It does also demand that the interpretive process involves more than just a technique, if it was only that it really would be a code, but it requires an imagination and a spirit emersed in the biblical story and amazed by the reality of Christ. It is also worth bearing in mind that this is interpretation for preaching, not for the purpose of giving a one time authoritative explanation of the passage, but for the purpose of a moment in time meeting of God's people with Christ in his word.Jonathan Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18295840754661890186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6689838439428844486.post-65200157458494974052010-10-09T00:59:40.475+13:002010-10-09T00:59:40.475+13:00IMHO, Jonathan, I must admit that I consider the h...IMHO, Jonathan, I must admit that I consider the hermeneutic of Greidanus and Goldsworthy to be about three clicks this side of the Bible Code. Sure, Christ can be "read into" anything in the OT (or for that matter <i>any story</i> with a decent hero), but the Christians of the NT were much more restrained than those guys sound. It seems that if we really want to take Christianity's Jewish heritage seriously, we will not retroactively preempt their Scriptures any more than we should discard them. I'm sure they wouldn't think of it as overpowering but recognizing an always present strand of meaning, but that's when things start getting Bible Code-ish for me. :-)<br /><br />I definitely find the Heilsgeschichte, trajectory reading more compelling. The NT writers saw Jesus as the culmination and satisfaction of many OT expectations and hopes, leading them to talk of OT texts as "about" Jesus, when properly speaking, Jesus was "about" them in the sense that he at times consciously stood up and took up the responsibility of meeting Israel's hopes (as in Luke 4.18-21).<br /><br />But I guess you probably already knew my views on this, didn't you? :-DStevehttp://undeception.comnoreply@blogger.com