Though I admit that this is the way the Old
Testament text reads on the surface, I think that when we read these texts in light of Jesus (and especially Jesus on the cross) and whole new picture emerges of what God is really like.
Not exact matches
In other words, the Church's determination to
read the Old and New
Testaments together, to consider them a sequential set of
texts with theological integrity, led to, or at least made itself deeply at home with, a widespread use of a single codex for the unified Christian Bible.
What is less clear to me is why complementarians like Keller insist that that 1 Timothy 2:12 is a part of biblical womanhood, but Acts 2 is not; why the presence of twelve male disciples implies restrictions on female leadership, but the presence of the apostle Junia is inconsequential; why the Greco - Roman household codes represent God's ideal familial structure for husbands and wives, but not for slaves and masters; why the apostle Paul's instructions to Timothy about Ephesian women teaching in the church are universally applicable, but his instructions to Corinthian women regarding head coverings are culturally conditioned (even though Paul uses the same line of argumentation — appealing the creation narrative — to support both); why the poetry of Proverbs 31 is often applied prescriptively and other poetry is not; why Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent the supremecy of male leadership while Deborah and Huldah and Miriam are mere exceptions to the rule; why «wives submit to your husbands» carries more weight than «submit one to another»; why the laws of the Old
Testament are treated as irrelevant in one moment, but important enough to display in public courthouses and schools the next; why a feminist
reading of the
text represents a capitulation to culture but a
reading that turns an ancient Near Eastern
text into an apologetic for the post-Industrial Revolution nuclear family is not; why the curse of Genesis 3 has the final word on gender relationships rather than the new creation that began at the resurrection.
If, therefore, the God of the Old
Testament looks nothing like Jesus in the gospel, we need to question how we are
reading and understanding those
texts in the Old
Testament.
It merely superimposes a traditional Augustinian
reading of Paul's language regarding grace and works of the law (one that competent New
Testament scholars know to be erroneous) upon a
text clearly irreconcilable with its premises.
A straightforward
reading of the Old
Testament text seems to indicate that as violent as humanity can be, God outdoes us all; God is more bloody and violent than all humanity combined.
Right now, all my
reading time is consumed with trying to understand the other violent
texts of the Old
Testament.
These examples show that, just as the creation account of Genesis 1 should be
read in light of other Ancient Near Eastern creation
texts, so the New
Testament writers should be
read in light of Second Temple
texts.
In the only clear case of a specifically Christian
reading being given to an Old
Testament text, the first chapter of Genesis features Paul's words about the glory of a transformed creation from 2 Corinthians in the margin.
To be sure, a critical Greek
text of the New
Testament is the work of a committee of scholars, and when we
read it, it has probably been translated by yet another committee.
That's been hard to grasp for a very long time, as we learn from another New
Testament text that repays
reading during Lent, St. Paul's Letter to the Romans.
@jf well your information about the New
Testament is about as accurate as your Old Testament knowledge, The prophecies of the Old testament concerning Christ could not have been written after the fact because we now have the Dead Sea Scrolls, with an almost complete Old Testament dated 100 - 200 years before the birth of Christ, Your interpretation of God at His worst shows a complete lack of understanding as to what was being communicated.We don't know what the original texts of the New Testament were written in as to date there are no original copies available.Greek was the common language of the day.Most of the gospels were reported written somewhere in the 30 year after Christs resurrection time frame, not the unspecified «long after «you reference and three of the authors knew Jesus personally in His earthly ministry, the other Knew Jesus as his savior and was in the company of many who also knew Jesus.You keep referencing changes, «gazillion «was the word used but you never referenced one change, so it is assumed we are to take your word for it.What may we ask are your credentials?Try reading Job your own self, particularly the section were Job says «My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ash
Testament is about as accurate as your Old
Testament knowledge, The prophecies of the Old testament concerning Christ could not have been written after the fact because we now have the Dead Sea Scrolls, with an almost complete Old Testament dated 100 - 200 years before the birth of Christ, Your interpretation of God at His worst shows a complete lack of understanding as to what was being communicated.We don't know what the original texts of the New Testament were written in as to date there are no original copies available.Greek was the common language of the day.Most of the gospels were reported written somewhere in the 30 year after Christs resurrection time frame, not the unspecified «long after «you reference and three of the authors knew Jesus personally in His earthly ministry, the other Knew Jesus as his savior and was in the company of many who also knew Jesus.You keep referencing changes, «gazillion «was the word used but you never referenced one change, so it is assumed we are to take your word for it.What may we ask are your credentials?Try reading Job your own self, particularly the section were Job says «My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ash
Testament knowledge, The prophecies of the Old
testament concerning Christ could not have been written after the fact because we now have the Dead Sea Scrolls, with an almost complete Old Testament dated 100 - 200 years before the birth of Christ, Your interpretation of God at His worst shows a complete lack of understanding as to what was being communicated.We don't know what the original texts of the New Testament were written in as to date there are no original copies available.Greek was the common language of the day.Most of the gospels were reported written somewhere in the 30 year after Christs resurrection time frame, not the unspecified «long after «you reference and three of the authors knew Jesus personally in His earthly ministry, the other Knew Jesus as his savior and was in the company of many who also knew Jesus.You keep referencing changes, «gazillion «was the word used but you never referenced one change, so it is assumed we are to take your word for it.What may we ask are your credentials?Try reading Job your own self, particularly the section were Job says «My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ash
testament concerning Christ could not have been written after the fact because we now have the Dead Sea Scrolls, with an almost complete Old
Testament dated 100 - 200 years before the birth of Christ, Your interpretation of God at His worst shows a complete lack of understanding as to what was being communicated.We don't know what the original texts of the New Testament were written in as to date there are no original copies available.Greek was the common language of the day.Most of the gospels were reported written somewhere in the 30 year after Christs resurrection time frame, not the unspecified «long after «you reference and three of the authors knew Jesus personally in His earthly ministry, the other Knew Jesus as his savior and was in the company of many who also knew Jesus.You keep referencing changes, «gazillion «was the word used but you never referenced one change, so it is assumed we are to take your word for it.What may we ask are your credentials?Try reading Job your own self, particularly the section were Job says «My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ash
Testament dated 100 - 200 years before the birth of Christ, Your interpretation of God at His worst shows a complete lack of understanding as to what was being communicated.We don't know what the original
texts of the New
Testament were written in as to date there are no original copies available.Greek was the common language of the day.Most of the gospels were reported written somewhere in the 30 year after Christs resurrection time frame, not the unspecified «long after «you reference and three of the authors knew Jesus personally in His earthly ministry, the other Knew Jesus as his savior and was in the company of many who also knew Jesus.You keep referencing changes, «gazillion «was the word used but you never referenced one change, so it is assumed we are to take your word for it.What may we ask are your credentials?Try reading Job your own self, particularly the section were Job says «My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ash
Testament were written in as to date there are no original copies available.Greek was the common language of the day.Most of the gospels were reported written somewhere in the 30 year after Christs resurrection time frame, not the unspecified «long after «you reference and three of the authors knew Jesus personally in His earthly ministry, the other Knew Jesus as his savior and was in the company of many who also knew Jesus.You keep referencing changes, «gazillion «was the word used but you never referenced one change, so it is assumed we are to take your word for it.What may we ask are your credentials?Try
reading Job your own self, particularly the section were Job says «My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you.Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes»
They are
reading the Bible with renewed eyes and are seeing that the violence of the Old
Testament text is actually this genocidal, murderous, scapegoating violence.
It is in this light that we can
read the Old
Testament texts.
But often these passages in the Old
Testament will state that the instructions were given by God, and if we
read these
texts in the light of Jesus, then we understand that although God was not telling them to do such things, He nevertheless inspired them to write what they did so that He could take the blame for their sinful actions.
In this
text, Jesus provides a summary of how He
reads and understands the Old
Testament.
How do we
read the enemy - forgiving Jesus back into the violence of the Old
Testament texts?
«The passage is clearly a very slanted view of how to
read the
texts of the Old
Testament.
These beliefs are reinforced by parallel
texts in the New
Testament, including the Advent lectionary
readings.
Packed with fascinating essays and notes, it provides Jewish perspectives on the New
Testament that have really enlightened my
reading of the
text.
So how do you
read the Old
Testament violent
texts?
He was
reading with a raging excitement Erasmus's Novum Instrumentum, with its new
text of the New
Testament, while preparing for his next lecture course on the Letter to the Galatians, due to start at the end of October; and he was preparing sermons to be preached in St Mary's.
With Melancthon's encouragement he determined to translate the whole of the New
Testament, the whole of the prime
text of the Christian Gospel, the New
Testament, into contemporary German and publish it in an edition which would be available for anyone who could
read.
Again when the
text of the New
Testament itself was intoned, in
readings from the New
Testament, from John, from Paul and other writers, he began to sense the bite of the original and more intellectual Greek, standing behind the fourth - century Latin
text of Jerome's translation (the Vulgate), Latin which was now part of Luther's natural and normal way of expressing himself.
Across England and Scotland were secret groups of Lollards, a network of people who for a century now had nurtured among themselves a tradition of
reading translations of the
text of the Bible in manuscript excerpts from various popular sections of the Old and New
Testaments, and occasionally from the complete edition of Wycliffe's (or Purvey's) fourteenth - century translation, rare though it was, the only English translation in existence.
Read what Anne Carr, professor of theology at the University of Chicago, no less, says about it: «The
text reads smoothly and beautifully, betraying no other agenda than a faithful rendition of the New
Testament.»
Usually when I am
reading in the New
Testament I not only keep a Greek / English (English / Greek) dictionary beside me but I have the Greek
texts well within reach as well.