The Prophets

Chapter 10 Notes from How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth

Confusion revolving the books of the prophets often stems from the inaccurate definition of the word "prophet." It's typically linked with "prophecy", which is then linked to mean some sort of future prediction or foretelling of what is to come. However, to have this view of the prophet books is to miss their primary function, which was to speak for God to their own contemporaries.

Four things to emphasize their role and function:

1) The prophets were covenant enforcement mediators
2) The prophet's message was not their own, but God's
3) The prophets were God's direct representatives
4) The prophet's message is unoriginal

To understand the books of the prophets, one must often seek out external sources to learn more about the context as to the current circumstances.

The Law

Chapter 9 Notes from How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth + Class Discussion

Arguably probably my favorite, yet also most confusing, topic: How do present-day Christians handle the Law? (The "law" meaning those 600+ specific stipulations, or even more broadly those books of the Old Testament relating to the law. )

What do we know:

We must start with what do we know about the Old Testament law. Here are a couple snippets:

- Jesus summarized the entire law in vertical and horizontal love; loving God and loving others (Matthew 22)
- Jesus doesn't want to throw law out? (Matthew 15)
- Paul states that all Scripture is beneficial (2 Timothy 3:16)... given that the New Testament was yet to be assembled at this point, he was directly referring to the Old Testament


Present Day Viewpoints:

Traditional - Portions of the law can be divided up into moral, civic, and ceremonial laws. We are no longer bound to civic and ceremonial laws, but God's moral law remains intact.
Problems -
1) No Hebrew would have distinguished these, because everything is significant to God.
2) Scripture doesn't explicitly categorize these laws into those sects, so who determines which goes in what category?
3) 2 Timothy 3:16 - Paul said ALL Scripture is beneficial, not just parts.

Antinomian - Throw the law out, because it has no implications for us.
Problems -
1) Argued that you cannot read the New Testament without the Old Testament.
2) 2 Timothy 3:16 again, ALL is beneficial.

Reconstructionist - Attempt to reconstruct the law in today's terms.
Problems -
1) Typically people who hold to this view believe America to be the new "Israel", so push for a more theocratic government (God-run) than democratic, versus seeing the church as being the new "Israel" in a people sense.
2) The Old Testament stipulations were for a separate covenant that we are currently not bound to.


Conclusion

Different covenant, so assume none of the stipulations are bound to us unless explicitly renewed in new covenant. However, it is still FOR us if not written TO us. What matters is how much we can learn from this law about God, his demands for fairness, his ideals for society, and his relationship to his people.

Other Points when Reading Old Testament Law:

- Nowhere is it suggested that anyone is saved by keeping the Law (in fact, in Leviticus 4 there is no atoning sacrifice for intentional sins (only for unintentional), so it's assumed that people were only forgiven by God's grace).
- The law is paradigmatic, meaning it sets a standard by an example rather than by mentioning every possible circumstance.

Parables

Chapter 8 Notes from How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth

A good place to start with parable is to determine what their primary purpose is. Contrary to many individual's belief, parables do not function primarily for theology. Their primary function, instead, is to call forth a response from the hearer.

Parables are stories. They are not allegories, in which every element has some direct symbolism. The point of the story is can be found in the intended response.

The difficulty? Ever been around someone who had to explain a joke to you? Sure, you understand it, and can even say "Wow, that would have been funny," but it looses the original punch had you heard it and understood it simultaneously. Thus is our dilemma. As we search for the intended meaning of a parable, it can be much like someone explaining a joke to us. We can understand, but can find it harder to relate to that same original punch. Thus it takes that much more effort to place ourselves in the shoes of the original audience.

Let's use the classic example of the Prodigal Son. Most people read it and immediately identify with the prodigal, extracting God's mercy and love. Though that may be true, that wasn't the primary force of the original parable, as it was more focused to "sting" or "catch" those who were self-righteous and judging the love shown by Christ to others.

Continuous effort is needed to place ourselves in the original audience, as well as to hermeneutically translate the same point into our own context.

The Gospels

Chapter 7 Notes from How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth

The gospels are books written about Jesus, not written by Jesus. They are unlike other books because they contain elements of both narratives and teachings.

So, the captain obvious questions remain... why four? Wouldn't one be good enough? Well, in a certain sense, the gospels function as hermeneutical models for us, as each was designed for a particular audience.

Matthew - Focuses on the Messianic nature of Christ, fulfilling the Old Testament, for Greek Jews
Mark - Focuses on martyrdom, action, and defends the universal call to discipleship for Rome
Luke - Focuses for instruction and handling the attacks of nonbelievers
John - Focuses on believing in Christ and knowing Him to have eternal life

All of these, believed, to be orchestrated by the Holy Spirit.

It's important also to keep in mind to take the teacher for what he means, not necessarily what he says. Context is of continual importance with interpreting well. However, the difficulty arises when teachings are transmitted without their contexts.

Book of Acts

Chapter 6 Notes from How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth

Though rules from the previous chapter apply, most Christians don't read Acts the same way they read Judges or 2 Samuel, even if they are not fully aware of it. The underlying question that needs to get answered to provide clear hermeneutical precision is "What is Acts trying to teach?" The interest that brings people to Acts (whether historical, devotional, etc.) typically develops a great deal of selectivity to take place in what's studied.

A few observations about Luke's possible purposes with Acts:
- Interest in showing the movement of the gospel, starting from a Jerusalem-based, Judiasm-orientated beginning to a Holy Spirit led worldwide phenomenon.
- Interesting in what he doesn't tell us, including biographical information of individual lives, little to no interest in church organization and polity, and other gospel expansion beyond a direct line from Jerusalem to Rome.
- Fails to standardize or bring things into uniformity
- Shows to be a model, but a model of the overall picture rather than specifics

The large discussion arises between people asking "should we do this?" as described in Acts, or "can we do this?"

A generally shared rule is that: Unless Scripture explicitly tells us we must do something, what is only narrated or described does not function in a normative (i.e. obligatory) way - unless it can be demonstrated on other grounds that the author intended it to function in this way.

Do we have to follow what Acts states? Maybe not... but one must ask that if such a procedure makes good sense, why anyone would fight it.

Need to Dream

"When your memories begin to outweigh your dreams, you know the end is near."
- Unknown

Nuff said...