I find it perplexing that we have held on to the same hermeneutic for 2000+ years. Was it Albert Einstein that reasoned that the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? I think it was. Now I ask, why you would use the hermeneutic arrived at in the Old Covenant to understand and translate the New Covenant? Yet, that is precisely what has happened. The fact is that historically, church doctrine concerning the scripture has not varied that much from the scripture doctrine of the Pharisees…..Hmnnn.
I began this blog in 2009 to chronicle my paradigm shift. It came about because I was concerned with the way that current evangelical dogma caused such bondage and fear. I had grown tired of people manipulating others for power, prestige, and to perpetuate a system that was very likely incorrect, and had been developed after the first century to keep people under control. I dedicate this to those who have been victims of spiritual abuse, and for those who have not yet realized they are.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
In shifting the paradigm why not shift the hermeneutic?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Six Reasons Why Bishop Carlton Pearson Was Right About Hell: A Biblical and Historical Perspective
The story of Bishop Carlton Pearson’s transformation from a prominent Pentecostal preacher to a vocal proponent of what he calls the “Gospel...
-
The introductory post explains the purposes, goals and scope of this blog. If you have not read it, I suggest you start there and then, l...
-
Mat 24:15 "So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader...
-
Isaiah 55:1-4 "Come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and he who has no money, come, buy and eat! Come, buy wine and milk ...
You have to believe in Jesus and believe that He is the Son of God to grasp what you are saying. Those who are following the Old Testament, the old covenant solely, will have a rude awakening when Jesus comes to get His church.
ReplyDeleteWe know that Messiah is is the one "greater than Moses". We know that he has established the New Covenenant, namely the giving of the Holy Spirit as an indwelling reality to both Jew and Gentile who believe.
ReplyDeleteBut I am not sure that I can agree that we now take a top down approach. The Torah was always seen as redemptive by the Jews. Just read psalm 119. It was the Holy Spirit who wrote the Torah. The New Covenant reality of the indwelling Holy Spirit changes the heart and "causes" the indwelt to obey God's commands. Therefore the Torah is still foundational. The difference in the two covenants is that the old was "external"... the new is internal...(Jerimiah 31:31-34/Ezekiel 36:26) but the specific commands for Jews and Gentiles don't change. (Acts 15/Acts 21)
The only credibility the New Testament writings have are grounded on Torah. Think about all of the believers in the first century who did not have the writings of the book of Hebrews, the gospels or Paul's letters. What was their foundation? The Torah and the Prophets.
Hi Anonymous,
DeleteWhile it is true that the Torah was always seen redemptively, The Jews still missed the Messiah, and they based it on their reading of the Torah (John 7:49.) So then, the reading of Torah must be more than messiah centric... It must be Jesus of Nazareth centric and that takes a top down reading. Another aspect is the fact that Jesus and his followers redefined the phrase word of God from Torah to gospel. This gives scripture a completely redemptive focus also.
Joe
Hi Joe,
DeleteWhile it is true that John 7:49 demonstrates that some of the Pharisees (not "the Jews" by the way) missed the Messiah in the Torah. Jesus states in John 5:46-47 that Moses wrote of Him and since they did'nt believe Moses they don't believe Him. This was because, as Paul puts it in 2 Corinthians 3:16, "a veil covers their hearts." In other words, it is not the Torah that was the problem and according to Jesus the Torah, ie "Moses", speaks of Himself. Paul "reasoned with them from the scriptures." (Acts 17:2) What scriptures?... the Torah and Tanach. Also, I am not sure why you think the followers of Jesus replaced "Torah" as the word of God with "gospel". There both the word of God and in fact can not be separated. The gospel is the proclamation of the fulfillment of the new covenant promise. This "new covenant" is the "Torah" written on our hearts by the Spirit of God. There is no separation between the two. I think the central issue here is the difference between the old and new covenants, not Torah vs. Gospel. The old covenant which included the Torah was redemptive as long as the sacrifical system was in place. The promised new covenant, which includes the Torah written on our hearts, came right before the destruction of the second temple. It is now the only source of redemption because it has the only (and superior) sacrifice.
Hi anonymous,
DeleteAll you have to do is click on the categories link for scripture. There are 33 posts in this blog that forcefully show with a preponderance of evidence that Jesus and his followers replaced the definition of the word of God from torah to gospel.