No kings… and no temple

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

‘I have a dream’ said the man in August 1963; ‘I saw a new heaven and a new earth… I saw no temple in the city’ so said the Seer some 65 years after his Master had died (well not 100% sure of the date). We await the fulfilment of the dream and of the sight that was declared. When will they be fulfilled? Not a clue, and I don’t need a clue, for both are to provoke us in the present. I am reading in 1 Samuel at the moment and of course in there is the painful dialogue of ‘give us a king’. Samuel gets upset but God points out the rejection is not of Samuel but of God. They were never supposed to have a king… and how they loved to recount in later generations how amazing David was as king and that one day a king from that royal line will come and rule over them.

Listen to the voice of the people in all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected me from being king over them (1 Sam. 8:7).

Yet God anoints the king… God’s blessing does not indicate God’s ‘approval’ of our choices.

Later the people realise they have gone in a wrong direction (1 Sam. 10) but Samuel responds with a perspective that further indicates God will work with whatever we present:

See, here is the king whom you have chosen, for whom you have asked; see, the Lord has set a king over you. If you will fear the Lord and serve him and heed his voice and not rebel against the commandment of the Lord, and if both you and the king who reigns over you will follow the Lord your God, it will be well (1 Sam. 12:13, 14)

The temple – centralised, controlled worship – once a path is entered on there is a direction that is hard to reverse. Did God want a temple?

You shall not build me a house to live in. For I have not lived in a house since the day I brought out Israel to this very day, but I have lived in a tent and a tabernacle. Wherever I have moved about among all Israel, did I ever speak a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd my people, saying, ‘Why have you not built me a house of cedar?’ (1 Chron. 17:4-6).

The tabernacle – a tent, not so impressive as the grandiose temples of the surrounding nations. We so want people to be impressed by God we know we are the ones born to help God out. When Jesus appeared and ‘moved into the neighbourhood’ John uses the verb ‘tabernacled’ among us. Moving here and there, never giving undeniable proof, but to those of humble heart his glory (truth within the grace container) was there to be seen.

And then John who had many times made the journey to Jerusalem, that temple that had a city around it (20% of the land was temple and temple buildings). It was way beyond being a city with a temple (like Canterbury – a city with a cathedral) – it was a temple-city; the astounding vision he has is the city had no temple when describing the new Jerusalem. The contrast is enormous.

A tent!

Put it up, put it down. Move it from here to there. Mobility.

Never get discouraged when something comes that is the most amazing manifestation of God’s presence… and then it goes. Mobility. There will always be a ‘God is here’ shout. Meanwhile it is necessary to continue to hold a dream. ‘I saw no impressive people who were ‘head and shoulders’ above the rest of us; but I saw unimpressive people and God was moving here and there among them and through them’.

I am NOT post-millennialist (mainly because I am not millennialist) and have no idea of what will be. But I continue with a dream. And while on such subjects as the ‘end-times’ the way we are headed there will be an antiChrist (or many more to join the ones already here… but not because the Bible says so (I don’t think it makes such a prediction!)… there will be because that is the outcome of where we are pushing. God’s people hold the key and the more we continue to believe in ‘we need a king’ and promote platforms the more we are sowing into the realisation of an anitChrist. Look at the trajectory from 1 Sam. 8 to the crucifixion – the inevitable outcome is ‘we have no king other than Caesar’!!!

I would rather be off the wall with my (lack of) end-time beliefs and hold on to a dream of ‘one day no king and no temple’ than have a set of beliefs that stop the dream.

Many others have carried a dream – but again I give thanks for MLK and that Seer on Patmos.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

A summary of ‘all Israel’

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Theology

From time to time I write an ‘extended article’ where it is to explore a theological topic. As part of the ever-so-slow to write on various aspects of eschatology but also as feeding into issues surrounding soteriology (salvation – what does that entail) this latest piece on Israel seemed to be what came next. The full article can be read /downloaded:

All Israel will be saved

It is a bit of a read so now that it is completed here is a summary of the key points.

‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’ are not used synonymously

Consistently from the Exile (597BC) and even from the Assyrian conquest (722BC) the term ‘Israel’ and the term ‘Jew’ were not used synonymously. Jew being the term for the people of the southern kingdom (of the tribe of Judah and Benjamin); Israel never returning to the land (northern 10 tribes) – though Samaritans claimed to be Israelites. This Samaritan claim was debated but never was it debated that they were Jews. Consistently in what is termed Second Temple Judaism the term ‘Israel’ was only applied to the whole nation (or the ‘lost’ tribes), to the people when referring to them in history past, or when expressing a hope in the future of their restoration (hence the question to Jesus by the disciples).

  • All Israel will be saved is not referring to the Jews of Paul’s day, but is expressing the hope that has been carried for centuries, such as is expressed in the New Covenant promise of Jer. 31 – a covenant made with both houses (north and south) thus with ‘Israel’.

Paul does not use a temporal phrase such as ‘and then’

The phrase he uses is ‘and in this way’ all Israel will be saved. This is the normal way the phrase is used and the consistent way he uses the phrase in his writings. He could / would have used a totally different phrase should he have wished to convey something that will suddenly occur at the eschaton.

He has been arguing from the opening Romans 9 concerning how God has been and continues to be faithful to his/her promises. He is not outlining a timetable nor even seeking to explain why so many Jews had not welcomed their Messiah.

  • God is faithful and Paul argues that there is a process going on that will lead to all Israel being saved. That process is already taking place – and the process involves the Gospel going to the nations (the Gentiles – ta ethne).
  • Israel (as in the northern tribes) are among the nations (Josephus goes to great lengths to explain this) so for them to come in the Gospel has to go to them, even though the majority of them have been ‘Gentilised’, such is the faithfulness of God.

Those Gentiles who respond to Jesus are incorporated into Israel

Converted Gentiles do not become Jews but the terms used of Israel are applied to them. Israel’s ancestors are their ancestors; Paul describes converts as ‘when you were Gentiles’ and as ‘chiidren of Abraham’.

  • Thus a second strand of ‘all Israel’ is that of Gentiles being incorporated in – or as described in Rom. 11 – grated into the (one) Olive tree.

‘All Israel’ never meant ‘all Jews’ and it also never meant all physical descendants of Abraham, for not all ‘children / offspring of Abraham’ were the ‘seed of Abraham’. Faith meant that those who were of Abraham was (both) smaller than those who were physically descended from Abraham and also that it was bigger than those who were physically descended from Abraham.

  • Salvation then is a process that is ongoing as the good news of Jesus comes to the whole world, and in this way the promises will be fulfilled by the faithful God.

Of course there is much more in what I have written in the article and I acknowledge the recent research and writings of Jason Staples (such as ‘Paul and the Resurrection of Israel’).

A return to the land was always predicated on repentance; nowhere in the New Testament is there indicated that there are two paths to salvation (an using that word we should not reduce it to the binary understanding of ‘heaven’ or ‘hell’).

I do suggest in the article that there is a particular focus on the land we call Israel as a place where reconciliation of differences should be manifested; I do not look to the land as somehow carrying a ‘promise’ in the way that Christian Zionism does – I think Paul gives that hope to the world (kosmos).

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Istanbul – May

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Updates

We have tickets booked for Istanbul for a few days toward the end of May. Istanbul with a history back into antiquity, and Istanbul that came into focus during our days in Sicily (seems a long time ago!). So here comes a rambling post.

I am amazed with the diversity of what people give themselves to in life, and as far as having a focus for the advancement of the gospel is concerned I am very uncritical of whatever people give themselves to – other than being very cautious where people are motivated by ego, or to help God out! Those aspects can be ever so subtle. I have vested interest in being uncritical as it then becomes easier to justify whatever I feel to give myself to!

Rambling post about to begin! Global issues are huge and not about to become less complex anytime soon and the expression of the gospel is very diverse in different parts of the world. My focus is Europe and (broad sweep) it was the cradle of the gospel within a short period of time after the initial apostolic era with a huge part of the NT focused on the expansion of the locale where the good news of Jesus was proclaimed. Challenges – and changes – took place slowly over that period. A Hellenisation of the message began, I am sure in great measure to connect culturally, but that Hellenisation brought a shift over centuries from a very earthy message (how could it not be earthy when the resurrection of a body was central?) to a ‘going to heaven’ and ‘avoiding hell’ becoming central and when those two become central there is a short path to drawing very firm lines of ‘in / out’ and of exercising huge control over people. Add to this the Constantinian move of ‘by this sign you will conquer’ and there is quite a shift from the original message. How big a shift? Well Jesus invited / instructed followers to carry a cross (figuratively), not to crucify others but it certainly made it easier for others to crucify them – the instrument was already available. [Gayle and I were once with a well-known couple whose books are on many book shelves and we were instructed to get ourselves guns as at that time there were various threats on Spain from certain Islamic quarters… I thought this was a joke and waited for the punch line. There was no punch line.] I am not to judge whether Constantine had a conversion but certainly cannot endorse the message that we conquer by the cross on our swords.

Subtly, and maybe not so slowly, a message has gone from that cradle of the gospel (Europe) to many parts of the earth. Honourable people have taken it and the power of the gospel is evident with the changes that have taken place, but at some level the ‘clothing’ for the gospel has been one of colonisation of cultures and progress is measured by the christianisation of a nation.The gospel does bring about a cultural change but must never dominate at any level of control: the kingdom of God is not the ‘control’ of God but the invitation to be transformed and as a result to be part of a transforming movement – a movement that is focused relationally through a message of reconciliation and with a central focus on the marginalised.

So Istanbul… or Constantinople as was. Founded in 330AD as the ‘new Rome’ it was a major ‘Christian’ hub with a mega push through the construction of the Hagia Sophia (not quite the ‘holy’ or ‘wisdom’ that we find in the NT!!). Fast forward and… OK here come personal perspectives.

Today there are three monotheistic faiths that all claim Abraham as their father. Those three take diverse shapes. But at the extreme end all three have an expression of militancy over others with a divine mandate to use force to control (and even justifing genocide). Is there a difference between the three or are the extreme version of each simply a version of one another? I suggest the latter is the case, and that the ‘god’ they claim to be in subservience to is the same ‘god’. A three-fold cord is not easily broken.

[This is where I see the unique significance of Jerusalem / land of Israel. In conflict and perpetuating conflict it excels, but if there is one place on the earth that potentially can reveal reconciliation that is the place… We can discover what God is doing by seeing the perversion of it – God works in the opposite.]

So off we will head to Istanbul. A small group who are far from being smart and knowing what to do.But with a focus on the now-mosque (Hagia Sophia) for historically there was an increase of the spread pf Islam once they were able to inhabit the previous house (originally an impressive cathedral) that manifested Christendom. Maybe we can help cut the tie between Islam/ Sharia law and the ‘Christian’ expression of it as manifested through christendom? I have long maintained that whatever followers of Christ exhibit is what can change (for better for worse) the wider society, along the lines of ‘you have heard it said… but I say to you…’

Christendom and Europe. Europe is essentially post-christendom. Seen as a demise of values by some (and there are some ‘losses’) but I consider it totally necessary and with a leverage to see the possibility of a more earthy-related faith in Jesus prosper – the sort of faith that was exhibited in the oikoumene of the Roman Empire. And ever so telling that it was that oikoumene (ready made shape and structure) that was offered to Jesus in the wilderness… and turned down.

Beyond the focus on christendom there is an east/west gateway in Istanbul. At this time there is an ongoing shift from west to east. So prayer for something so indigenous and expressing a gospel without the encumbrances of the clothing that has for centuries shaped our understanding of the gospel.

So tickets booked… and if we make a little contribution to the future that will be wonderful. Little acts and prayers – all we ever have to offer.

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

Hardened… but look!

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Personal Perspectives

I have been in Rom. 9-11 for a little while (I am currently in Hebrews with its distinct theology of atonement that does not seem to finish at the cross – but that is for another day!) and I have been taken with the hardening that had come on part of Israel with the result that salvation came to the Gentiles. [The hardening uses a different verb to the hardening of Pharaoh… that hardening is perhaps likened to the effect of the sun on material – softening butter but hardening clay; on part of Israel the hardening is a ‘I don’t get that’ a kind of hardening – a statement of fact.]

I wonder if at the current time we could consider that ‘a hardening / I just don’t get it has come on part of the church’ and then we have to look at what is happening alongside / in spite of that? The ultra-nationalism of parts of the church maybe is not too different to the ethnic pride that ensnared a large part of Israel. ‘God is with us’ is always a challenging statement to make – exhibited in the parable of the ‘good’ Samaritan! There was no ‘good’ Samaritan for the Jew. Yet Jesus makes the point; priests, Levites walk the other way – justified in doing so as they have to keep themselves ‘clean'(????), the Samaritan is not restricted by any such conviction and proves to be a neighbour – the path to perfection that Jesus says we have to exhibit (Sermon on Mount where divine perfection is based on treating all others as human, something all forms of religion cannot do).

I think our question should be ‘in the light of some not getting it, we should not be surprised, but should look to what is happening by way of contrast’. How about for us protestants to look no further than the Vatican and listen to a pope who occupies a seat that should not exist? How about us prophesying charismatics take time to look at the comedians who can prophetically quote Jesus so that a wide audience can hear the difference between the voice of Jesus and the voice of politicians who lean on what they think is the support of Scripture?

I am seeking not to be disappointed in the support of Christians for a particular political line; and not to be disappointed by the abuse of the prophetic that is being exposed… and I am seeking to look for where maybe there is something happening where it ‘should’ not be happening. That is the way with God. I like God to work in my space… I suspect s/he would encourage me to look to other spaces.

Days of surprises. They are here!

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

A link to Jason Staples

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Updates

Thanks to the big crowd who came last night for ‘All Israel will be saved’. I decided not to run with 3 breakout rooms – for obvious reasons!!! – as although I do talk to myself putting my three guests into breakout rooms might have provoked them to the same practice!!! Of course for all of you who did not make it I simply wonder how will you ever get up to speed with what God is doing in the earth today? I ponder…

As I put in the pdf I am indebted to the fresh approach in the work of Jason Staples and the book(s) are readable but have to be read! An easier way in (and cheaper) would be to look up YouTube and find an interview with him. I think I pulled the salient points (and statistics) from what he wrote but an interview is a good way to get a grasp of what he has researched. Here is an example with James Tabor (a more than interesting character in his own right!!!).

SHARE ON:
Post PermaLink

April 16th: ‘All Israel…’

Posted on
by Martin Scott
Posted in Updates

Thursday night: for those joining here is the Zoom link for the evening (19:30 UK time):

Open Zoom Link

ID: 572 803 9267
Passcode: 5GkMTA

Prior to coming please either read (and probably make notes) from the ‘extended article’ on ‘All Israel will be saved’. It is found here: All Israel will be saved. If you prefer there is a shortish video that gives more of a summary:

I plan that we will have 90 minutes together (sufficient time to decipher everything Paul ever wrote or thought!!!???).

  • I will begin with a summary of the key points in the article I wrote.
  • This will be followed by questions for clarification.
  • Then will be time for push back or ‘not satisfied with’ / alternative views responses etc. (Either formed in the main session or in breakout rooms if there are too many of us to handle it in the main session… if in groups then there will be feedback when we are all together.)
  • And finally some open discussion on what would constitute a healthy response to ‘Israel’ of today.

I am aware this is a highly controversial / debated subject, so a quick reminder – do not come on board assuming I have now settled all discussions and am ‘right’… and neither come to the Zoom assuming that you are right!! we are not seeking to make a point but as the title to the series makes plain these are ‘explorations in theology and practice’. I do not anticipate that we will all be agreed at the end of the evening!

As I wrote in earlier posts the part that is ‘new’ follows the work of Jason Staples who has gone to great lengths to show that ‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’ are not synonymous terms (others have hinted at that – eg James Dunn – but it has not been developed as far as I know prior to Staples). An article by Staples that can be easily accessed is here.

To read the details of Staples’ approach the book ‘Paul and the Resurrection of Israel’ is set to become a classic.

    I look forward to seeing you soon.

    SHARE ON:
    Post PermaLink

    Not the smartest

    Posted on
    by Martin Scott
    Posted in Prophetic Perspectives

    The title is reflective of my understanding of global events… though seems to be an appropriate strap-line for many of us and for many of those in the political scene. Have they not read anything on how empires collapse. I’ve read a little but have also read the book that either they have not read or they think helps them ‘hasten the day of the Lord’s coming’ through initiating Armageddon (a place that does not even exist!). Read it politically and it does not take long to realise that there are contrasts of enormous proportions: the lion (such a favourite image for us Christian lot) is actually a lamb (and actually a diminutive – a ‘little lamb’: no more mentions of ‘lion’ in that book for the ‘lion’ we have heard about was always a lamb slain from the foundation of the world); beasts full of visible power… Life poured out or centralised power that takes life (Rev. 18:13 – last of the 28 ‘cargoes’ (7×4 = fullness of the world) is that of human lives). Imperial power – the few at the centre promising benefits to all who comply but the benefits flow back to the few at the top… and when looking for increased authority will claim (or be attributed) to act with divine authority. At that stage the writing is on the wall for all to read.

    Last night a huge night in Hungary… and so a huge night in Europe. Last night quite big here too. Dreaming with discussions with regard to Orban, meeting (probably) the strongest theologian in Europe currently – a first for me. It kind of put last night’s elections into a theological space.

    People choose right or left (or supposed centre) for many reasons but Scripture puts humanity at the centre – not economy, nor even foreign policy. I am in Deuteronomy at the moment and have just read a couple of days ago Deut. 15 that commands the relief of poverty as a major priority (the passage that Jesus quotes ‘the poor you will always have with you’ – it is a rebuke NOT an endorsement of the system…). This is why the economy is a top political aspect – if we pray ‘let your kingdom come’ – though not as put forth by the majority of politicians!

    Immigration that knows no boundaries is indeed an issue, but the dehumanisation and demonising of the ‘stranger’ is a kingdom issue.

    Some two years back Gayle had the most significant dream of her life (I reckon she has 3-4 every month that are clearly and specifically from God). In it the weight of responsibility came on Europe and how Europe responded to Palestine would prove vital. In the dream ultra-Zionist Christians went in one direction and believers (not anti-Semitic but anti-genocide) and humanists came together. At the same time one of the people cleanest with regard to power.abuse / hierarchy was present with a mushroom on his nose (culture that we are blind to in spite of being as obvious as the nose on our face). We ALL have blind areas – there is so much more of the emptying out of power to come.

    If Europe could find a new way forward then the next element would be that of the economic system (and all we need do is read the current stats if we need convincing – one of the supposed strongest economies is so in debt that if spread out among the entire population would mean each individual owes over 100,000 (and add here whatever currency you wish: £, €, $). Unsustainable.

    Deuteronomy 15.

    Time will tell if the election result in Hungary is a move forward, but one aspect I have noticed in almost every area is when change comes there is often a rocking back and forth until something gives way.

    Christendom – the claim to have God’s authority to vindicate our actions that are anti-humanitarian and in the process to centralise our (in our image) form of Christianity is over… however these past days I have been focused on an instructive verse in Revelation:

    One of its [the beast rising out of the sea] heads seemed to have received a death blow, but its fatal wound had been healed. In amazement the whole earth followed the beast (Rev. 13:3).

    Every beast that receives a mortal wound looks for a resurrection, a resurrection that prolongs the life. This is what we are seeing currently with regard to Christendom. But the wound is mortal, so it is time to state that in the key places… the key of all places of course as always is one’s own heart.

    If we can do that, then the final part of the dream Gayle had can begin. Let the economy play with the children in the grass. Currently economies (primarily Western) sacrifice the future or present blessing – and see how that is biblicaly critiqued.

    I consider that last night was big… big in the sense of a small step within Europe. Not at the level of a party that has demonised others as losing power they held for 16 years, but at the theological level of humanising:

    Since there will never cease to be some in need on the earth, I therefore command you, ‘Open your hand to the poor and needy neighbor in your land.’

    ‘And who is my neighbour?’

    SHARE ON:
    Post PermaLink

    Open Zoom: All Israel will be saved

    Posted on
    by Martin Scott
    Posted in Updates

    Here is the Zoom link for the evening (Thursday 16th April):

    Open Zoom Link

    ID: 572 803 9267
    Passcode: 5GkMTA

    A reminder: the article can be found by accessing the menu labelled ‘Journals’ and it is Volume 8. It can be downloaded or read online.

    I suggest if you read it that you make notes particularly for any questions that need clarification. Not a short ‘breezy’ read.

    There is also a short(-ish) video that gives a summary of what I have written.

    I am aware this is a highly controversial / debated subject, so a quick reminder – do not come on board assuming I have now settled all discussions and am ‘right’… and neither come to the Zoom assuming that you are right!! we are not seeking to make a point but as the title to the series makes plain these are ‘explorations in theology and practice’.

    The part that is ‘new’ follows the work of Jason Staples who has gone to great lengths to show that ‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’ are not synonymous. An article by Staples that can be easily accessed is here. In it there is a short explanation of how since the influential publication of Kittel’s Dictionary there has been a common assumption that Jew and Israel are simply synonymous… I put an extended explanation below (material from Staples)…

    [In addition to lecturing on Rabbinic Judaism while wearing a Nazi paramilitary uniform in the 1930s, Kuhn (1906-1976) was, together with his mentor Gerhard Kittel, one of fifteen appointees to the “Institute for the Study of the Jewish Problem” established in 1936. He contributed several scholarly articles on the so-called “Jewish Problem” in the service of the institute, putting forth anti-Semitic scholarship with remarkable subtlety and scholarly sophistication.

    But Kuhn is also the author of the entry in Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament on the terms Israel, Ioudaios (Jew/Judaean), and Hebrew in early Jewish literature, an entry that established the paradigm for how these terms and their relationships to each other have been understood for nearly a century—a paradigm now so dominant as to be regularly assumed without argument or citation across a broad range of scholarly literature.

    Like most modern scholars, Kuhn presumed that the terms “Israelite,” “Jew,” and “Hebrew” were essentially synonymous or coextensive in early Jewish literature, with all three terms referring to the same group of people. Nevertheless, these terms are not evenly distributed across early Jewish literature like one would expect if they were completely synonymous. As a result, Kuhn proposed that Israel/Israelite is the preferred “insider” terminology, while “Jew” is a term typically used by outsiders and sometimes carries a nuance of disrespect or contempt, and was used by Israelites themselves as an accommodation when communicating in an outsider or diaspora context. As for “Hebrew,” Kuhn explains that this term serves as another “more dignified” alternative to the “deprecatory element that clings so easily to [Jew].”]

    Here are the key points I raise:

    • Israel – defined ethnically or by faith. Not all ‘of Israel’ (ethnicity) are ‘Israel’ – a point Paul makes that would not have been controversial.
    • ‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’ are not synonymous so we cannot make ‘All Israel’ to mean ‘All Jews’.
    • Paul is seeking to defend God’s faithfulness to the promises in Rom. 9-11; those promises being made to Abraham and his ‘seed’. In Galatians Paul somewhat ‘cheekily’ holds that ‘seed’ is singular therefore it is a reference to ‘Jesus’. (Neither in Greek nor English does the point hold grammatically.) In Romans he is much more nuanced.
    • More nuanced but the promises are not made to Abraham’s descendants who are ‘Jews’ (tribe of Judah and Benjamin) but who are ‘of Israel’ (all tribes).
    • The Gentile mission is not the abandonment of ‘Israel’ (think ‘faith Israel) but is the very means that ‘all Israel’ will be saved. This is not a temporal statement but a modal one: ‘in this way all Israel will be saved’.
    • Leaning into other NT texts – those who come to faith from a Gentile background do not become Jews but are adopted into Israel. This also cuts through the divide on Acts 1:6 are you going to restore the kingdom to Israel at this time. The reply (leaning heavily on Isaianic texts) is neither a denial nor an affirmation (as understood classically) but again a modal answer.

    I look forward to seeing you soon.

    The YouTube (summary) video is:

    SHARE ON:
    Post PermaLink

    Some Resources

    Posted on
    by Martin Scott
    Posted in Personal Perspectives

    I left behind something like 3000 books when Gayle and I moved to Spain… a good move as I am not a great reader and have a fairly low vocabulary. When I get into a subject I like to dig fairly deep but there are huge gaps in what I grasp. Since the days of living in the UK though resources have increased enormously on the internet.

    I first studied theology some 50 years ago; back then so much of evangelical theology was defensive. I remember the lectures of Dr. Donald Guthrie on the New Testament. Each book had to be shown to ‘apostolic’ and I always thought there was quite a bit of manoeuvring going on to prove this. Behind it was something bigger going on – a doctrine of Scripture. (Same motivation with Wayne Grudem and his (loved by charismatics) the Old Testament prophets and the New Testament apostles spoke the inspired words of God… falls down some when looking at clearly unfulfilled OT prophecies – but the motivation is a predetermined view of Scripture). I liked what FF Bruce said when asking the rhetorical question as to why we have to add more than the simple statements such as ‘truth’ or ‘authority’ of Scripture. For some my doctrine of Scripture might be a little shaky, but I seek to live under the authority of what I read.

    Anyway enough of that. Coming under the authority of (the story) of Scripture does not mean we cannot question what is there. What do I make of the ‘God-ordained’ genocide commands? Firstly I wish they were not there or at least there was a footnote explaining them. But there they are… just glad that the 66 books I read don’t end there… and that the infallible word of God was incarnated in Jesus. Loads I don’t get.

    So to resources.

    The bible project is an amazing resource, and free. Tim Mackie and Jon Collins are the two main people behind this who work with a team. Tim has a (more than) genuine PhD and is well versed in scholarship. He communicates in an amazingly down to earth way. Animated videos are available on every book of the Bible (plus a whole lot more). A great introduction to a book before reading it.

    Try this one on Amos: https://bibleproject.com/videos/amos.

    Want something a little provocative? Peter Enns got booted from his former position for his book on the Bible where he used the incarnation (human and divine) as the model. He (with his mate, Jared) interview a wide variety of scholars (simple language is used). Try the regular podcast:
    https://thebiblefornormalpeople.com/podcast.

    Greek… always be suspicious when the smart guy says but the Greek actually says… then they kinda go to the ‘root word’ or to Strong’s concordance. Might get something 1% of the time, but that is not how language works. The Greek text though is available and maybe the best resource is the Step Bible. The Greek text that can be accessed there is bang up to date. Maybe a bit of hard work but for example I give my preferred translation (NRSV updated edition) a bit of a slap for the translation of Rom. 9:6 in the latest ‘extended article’ on All Israel will be saved (did I mention that an Open Zoom is coming up on this?)

    Here is the NRSVue:

    It is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all those descended from Israel are Israelites,

    In the light of what I am pushing for in that article: the importance of Israel, Jew, Israelite not being confused and the ‘seed/ descendant’ word being very key I consider there are confusions set up in the translation that I use (other translations are better on this). Here is what I wrote:

    In reality all those descended from Israel are ‘Israelites’ as he has already indicated. Ethnically they are Israelites. Paul actually writes not all those who are of Israel (ἐξ Ἰσραήλ) are Israel (Ἰσραήλ). Being ‘of / descended from Israel’ means they are Israelites (an ethnic definition), but does not mean they are of Israel (a faith / faithfulness definition).

    Maybe you have to take my word for it… but check out other translations or even try out StepBible:

    No mention of ‘Israelite’ in the verse (though verse 4 has this to make it plain that there Paul is talking ethnically) and no mention of ‘descendant’. In the right hand column of the StepBible program is a dictionary that helps you also find the other uses of the word – highlight it as I have above. This is important – words are not given meaning primarily by their root but by how they are used. (Hence the important distinction between ‘Jew’ and ‘Israel’.)

    YouTube has so many good interviews and videocasts. If you find a ‘scholar’ there do a quick google on them. For example I had someone the other day say how much they appreciated James Tabor. Brilliant insights but Jesus’ extended family inaugurating a royal dynasty???? Probably affects how he reads parts of the New Testament methinks!

    And there are a thousand more down to earth resources.Try the Nomad Podcasts. Try this one from my good mate Roger Mitchell: Pentecost for Progressives.

    Gone are the days when we need to be defensive. Thank God. Truth is centred in one Person alone, and any resources need to be assessed that way, not by how clever anyone thinks they are.

    SHARE ON:
    Post PermaLink

    Other side of the resurrection

    Posted on
    by Martin Scott
    Posted in Biblical Observations

    Easter (this year) is behind us and the historical Easter is behind us. We live in the light of the resurrection. I am not of the ‘sacramental’ background of ‘church’ (Lesslie Newbigin in The Household of God suggested there were three broad strands: Catholic (sacramental), Protestant (word) and Pentecostal (Spirit)) but have been reading of John and of Jesus’ disciples and their practice of baptism so of course am provoked. Beyond that Gayle and I have been thinking about ‘the breaking of bread’. Historically it references a meal where the ‘head of the household’ would literally break the bread so was a term simply referring to a meal. This carries over with the passover meal and what has been termed the agape meal.

    Meals. I eat cos I am hungry, but the culture of the day was deeper than that – it was one of fellowship and openness. And there were special meals, banquets that strengthened the (hierarchical) culture. Who was invited and where they were seated was very important. That part of what went on then determined who invited you back and where you would be seated. Jesus’ instruction was so radical (‘do not invite…’); his behaviour was outrageous – allowing a woman from the street (the ‘doors’ were not closed so people could come in) to wash his feet with her tears and he himself getting up from the table to wash the feet.

    Meals… I have quoted before but it is worth doing so again. Vincent Branick (a Catholic) wrote The House Church in the writings of Paul (1989)

    The prohibition of Laodicea [365AD] completes a critical cycle. The Lord’s Supper had changed from evening meal to stylized (sic) ritual. The assembly had moved from dining room to sacred hall. Leadership had shifted from family members to special clergy. Now the orginal form of church was declared illegal.

    Meals… the take the three aspects that make the content of the meal:

    • Remember Jesus
    • Proclaim his death
    • Until he come

    How about – a response of a biblical recounting of a Jesus story and a personal one. ‘I remember the story about… and when I encountered Jesus…’

    As we eat and drink – we are proclaiming the death of Jesus, the victory over the powers, the carving out of a new path… and we do do ‘until he comes’ for we have entered an era that continues from the empty tomb and will continue until that day.

    The other side of the resurrection – no need to simply home in solemnly on the cross – it is a vital part of the story, but so is the resurrection.

    Meals – Jesus had meals at multiple levels. Maybe we could experiment?

    SHARE ON:
    Post PermaLink
    Perspectives