|
Post by placid-void on May 19, 2015 19:46:15 GMT -5
Do Christians engage Jewish traditions or Jewish scholarship in their analysis and interpretation of the Old Testament? Are there good examples of Christian/Jewish collaboration on interpretation of Biblical passages? If not, does anyone know why?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 19:59:27 GMT -5
Do Christians engage Jewish traditions or Jewish scholarship in their analysis and interpretation of the Old Testament? Are there good examples of Christian/Jewish collaboration on interpretation of Biblical passages? If not, does anyone know why? 2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on May 19, 2015 20:20:28 GMT -5
Impressive response time.
Unfortunately, I am too blind to see.
Are elaborations permitted?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 20:59:49 GMT -5
Do Christians engage Jewish traditions or Jewish scholarship in their analysis and interpretation of the Old Testament? Are there good examples of Christian/Jewish collaboration on interpretation of Biblical passages? If not, does anyone know why? yes there are some Christians that study jewish traditions/scholarship when studying the bible...most don't though...some that I know about are perry stone and zola levitt(passed away)...
|
|
|
Post by bubbles on May 20, 2015 5:40:00 GMT -5
Yknot Some teachers do one I knew of was Derek Prince. He lived in Israel. A lot of christians while not practicing Jews have studied the OT Pentitute and Patriarchs the Temple holy of holies the layout the laws etc There was a saying. The NT revealed the OT concealed. Or something like that. Jesus was a practicing Jew who knew the law. I did wonder when we encountered a community of jews through work whether christians should have known the law as well as the Jews. The dispensation of grace with Christ fulfilled the law.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on May 20, 2015 8:43:50 GMT -5
yes there are some Christians that study jewish traditions/scholarship when studying the bible...most don't though...some that I know about are perry stone and zola levitt(passed away)... Good morning Wally, thanks for the two names: Perry Stone and Zola Levitt. I have looked them up here on -line and quickly glanced through their web-sites. Both ministries seem a little "fringey" for my tastes so I did not delve into their work in great depth. I am not all that sure what it is that I am looking for (which makes it difficult for anyone else to respond, I realize). I have always had a fascination for the Jewish culture and traditions. Here is a social structure that has survived and continued to evolve for millennia despite some pretty horrific challenges. They have a mythology (word used in the best possible context) that grounds and guides their culture to this day. As a culture they display an odd but interesting combination of fractiousness and cohesiveness. What I find odd is that the ancient texts of the Jewish tradition is claimed with equal reverence by Christianity, but I am unaware of a wellspring of shared inspirational beliefs shared by the two religions. I understand the schism that would have occurred as a consequence of one groups' belief in a Messiah, but they still share a common history and belief structure prior to that point. The specific point that interests me is how Jewish scholars embrace their ancient texts including the creation story and are still able to adapt to and absorb new scientific findings as they emerge, seemingly without spiritual conflict. This stands in stark contrast to some fundamentalist Christian sects that seem to balk at the implications of new science. My interest in this thread is not to rehash the creation story but rather to discuss the apparent barrier that blocks the exchange of meaningful dialog between thoughtful Christian and Jewish practitioners on the spiritual significance of the Old Testament.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 20, 2015 9:51:02 GMT -5
Yknot, this is somewhat tangential, but you might (or might not, of course) find this website of interest, especially the videos of individual Jews telling their story. www.oneforisrael.org/
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 20, 2015 12:34:48 GMT -5
From my experience, a lot of Christians dismiss the OT except for a few verses that they can use to justify prejudices or bias. I was told growing up in the Truth that the OT was 'types and shadows' of what was to come. I never quite understood what that meant exactly, but I did get the feeling that the OT was dismissed as not being entirely relevant as anything more than a history lesson of the Jewish people. Jews and Christians do seem to interpret the OT differently and as was already pointed out here by a Christian, the Jews sometimes misinterpret what their scripture actually means. I took that to mean that Christians know what it means better than Jews who have studied it for centuries and it's 'their book'. Seems somewhat unbelievable that Christians have the right interpretation and the Jews don't know what their book means but whatever.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 20, 2015 12:48:51 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2015 16:47:08 GMT -5
yes there are some Christians that study jewish traditions/scholarship when studying the bible...most don't though...some that I know about are perry stone and zola levitt(passed away)... Good morning Wally, thanks for the two names: Perry Stone and Zola Levitt. I have looked them up here on -line and quickly glanced through their web-sites. Both ministries seem a little "fringey" for my tastes so I did not delve into their work in great depth. I am not all that sure what it is that I am looking for (which makes it difficult for anyone else to respond, I realize). I have always had a fascination for the Jewish culture and traditions. Here is a social structure that has survived and continued to evolve for millennia despite some pretty horrific challenges. They have a mythology (word used in the best possible context) that grounds and guides their culture to this day. As a culture they display an odd but interesting combination of fractiousness and cohesiveness. What I find odd is that the ancient texts of the Jewish tradition is claimed with equal reverence by Christianity, but I am unaware of a wellspring of shared inspirational beliefs shared by the two religions. I understand the schism that would have occurred as a consequence of one groups' belief in a Messiah, but they still share a common history and belief structure prior to that point. The specific point that interests me is how Jewish scholars embrace their ancient texts including the creation story and are still able to adapt to and absorb new scientific findings as they emerge, seemingly without spiritual conflict. This stands in stark contrast to some fundamentalist Christian sects that seem to balk at the implications of new science. My interest in this thread is not to rehash the creation story but rather to discuss the apparent barrier that blocks the exchange of meaningful dialog between thoughtful Christian and Jewish practitioners on the spiritual significance of the Old Testament. zola levitt is the better example he is a jew himself I believe that converted to Christianity...
there are also two twin brothers that were muslims that know Judaism like the back of their hand they are now christians...if I remember their names I will tell you...
the jewish people have always been open to other gods(ideas) since Egypt I think that's why they accept new information easily whereas christians don't want to make them same mistakes and strongly oppose any new ideas that stray from the original sources.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on May 20, 2015 18:37:42 GMT -5
Yknot, this is somewhat tangential, but you might (or might not, of course) find this website of interest, especially the videos of individual Jews telling their story. www.oneforisrael.org/Hberry, thanks for the links. I have started listening to one of the links but these approaches are not quite the type of thing I am looking for at the moment. My gracious, I am coming across as ill-mannered and truculent am I not, I am sorry for being so persnickety. My interest at the moment is less about evangelical activities and more about sharing insights gleaned from a common heritage.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on May 20, 2015 18:57:15 GMT -5
From my experience, a lot of Christians dismiss the OT except for a few verses that they can use to justify prejudices or bias. I was told growing up in the Truth that the OT was 'types and shadows' of what was to come. I never quite understood what that meant exactly, but I did get the feeling that the OT was dismissed as not being entirely relevant as anything more than a history lesson of the Jewish people. Jews and Christians do seem to interpret the OT differently and as was already pointed out here by a Christian, the Jews sometimes misinterpret what their scripture actually means. I took that to mean that Christians know what it means better than Jews who have studied it for centuries and it's 'their book'. Seems somewhat unbelievable that Christians have the right interpretation and the Jews don't know what their book means but whatever. Your experience is very interesting, snow. My experiences were actually quite different from yours. In the home where I grew up and the community where I went to meeting, I would say that the OT was treated with essentially the same reverence as the NT. I have never actually run the experiment but my guess is that I remember more "stories" from the OT than parables from the NT. I recall the OT being the basis for many testimonies on Sunday morning and the theme of many sermons from the platform at Special Meetings and Conventions. Perhaps it was a regional thing, huh? Since starting this thread and thinking about my own experiences, it has seemed to me that I recall the stories of the OT as being about common, ordinary people like myself. They often messed up and they often strayed, but somehow they always struck me as real. People who struggled, rejoiced, fought, succeeded, failed and tried again. I will have to think about this a lot more, but I almost feel that much of my belief that there is "something greater than self" is grounded more in the OT than in the NT. For me, the OT stories suggest more about "what" whereas the "NT" stories suggest more about "how". I will have to think about this some more. Thanks for the nudge to reconsider my own experiences.
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 20, 2015 19:07:46 GMT -5
From my experience, a lot of Christians dismiss the OT except for a few verses that they can use to justify prejudices or bias. I was told growing up in the Truth that the OT was 'types and shadows' of what was to come. I never quite understood what that meant exactly, but I did get the feeling that the OT was dismissed as not being entirely relevant as anything more than a history lesson of the Jewish people. Jews and Christians do seem to interpret the OT differently and as was already pointed out here by a Christian, the Jews sometimes misinterpret what their scripture actually means. I took that to mean that Christians know what it means better than Jews who have studied it for centuries and it's 'their book'. Seems somewhat unbelievable that Christians have the right interpretation and the Jews don't know what their book means but whatever. Your experience is very interesting, snow. My experiences were actually quite different from yours. In the home where I grew up and the community where I went to meeting, I would say that the OT was treated with essentially the same reverence as the NT. I have never actually run the experiment but my guess is that I remember more "stories" from the OT than parables from the NT. I recall the OT being the basis for many testimonies on Sunday morning and the theme of many sermons from the platform at Special Meetings and Conventions. Perhaps it was a regional thing, huh? Since starting this thread and thinking about my own experiences, it has seemed to me that I recall the stories of the OT as being about common, ordinary people like myself. They often messed up and they often strayed, but somehow they always struck me as real. People who struggled, rejoiced, fought, succeeded, failed and tried again. I will have to think about this a lot more, but I almost feel that much of my belief that there is "something greater than self" is grounded more in the OT than in the NT. For me, the OT stories suggest more about "what" whereas the "NT" stories suggest more about "how". I will have to think about this some more. Thanks for the nudge to reconsider my own experiences. Yes, you have the Creation story, the banishment story, the Abel and Cain story, you have the Tower of Babel Story, the Flood story, the exodus story and others. Yes I did hear them too growing up. But have you never heard the phrase 'types and shadows' when asking about the OT. I find that interesting. It was usually in response to asking why the rules had changed regarding Jewish rules like kosher eating, not mixing materials in garments. In other words why don't we follow the OT? That's when you usually hear that Jesus came and changed all that and the NT is 'what we do now'. The OT was types and shadows of what was to come. Another example of different experiences within the same church, which I find interesting. Now I'm wondering if anyone else ever heard the OT referred to as 'types and shadows'.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 20, 2015 19:28:02 GMT -5
Yknot, this is somewhat tangential, but you might (or might not, of course) find this website of interest, especially the videos of individual Jews telling their story. www.oneforisrael.org/Hberry, thanks for the links. I have started listening to one of the links but these approaches are not quite the type of thing I am looking for at the moment. My gracious, I am coming across as ill-mannered and truculent am I not, I am sorry for being so persnickety. My interest at the moment is less about evangelical activities and more about sharing insights gleaned from a common heritage. I know you aren't interested in evangelical activities, but I thought perhaps what several of them said about the OT coming alive to them after their conversion might indicate why the rabbinical/Christian study groups aren't common. But the point would be subtle. I have a condensed version of the Jewish Talmud; you might find that interesting to read yourself. It might answer the why for you.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on May 20, 2015 19:28:11 GMT -5
zola levitt is the better example he is a jew himself I believe that converted to Christianity...
there are also two twin brothers that were muslims that know Judaism like the back of their hand they are now christians...if I remember their names I will tell you...
the jewish people have always been open to other gods(ideas) since Egypt I think that's why they accept new information easily whereas christians don't want to make them same mistakes and strongly oppose any new ideas that stray from the original sources.
Wally, I really like your comment "the jewish people have always been open to other gods (ideas) since Egypt I think that's why they accept new information easily". I had never equated "other gods" with "ideas". That is a neat idea, I want to think about that some more. For better or worse, I have really been enjoying this book that I have been hawking all over TMB by David Brooks called "The Road to Character". Brooks starts out with a reference to a Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik who interprets the 1st and 2nd chapter of Genesis as two different accounts of Adam. He refers to them as Adam I and Adam II. In Soloveitchik's analysis, the two Adams are two different competing aspects of human nature. Throughout my long awareness of Christianity, I had never encountered the "two aspects of Adam" before. The concept intrigues me (understatement of the day). This thread is intended to elicit other examples of this nature - of instances where Jewish perspectives might inform and nurture a deeper understanding by others of faith. Begging forgiveness for the space taken I would like to transcribe a couple of wiki paragraphs about Adam I and Adam II: In the first chapter, Adam I is created together with Eve and they are given the mandate to subdue nature, master the cosmos, and transform the world "into a domain for their power and sovereignty." Adam I is majestic man who approaches the world and relationships—even with the divine—in functional, pragmatic terms. Adam I, created in the image of God, fulfills this apparently "secular" mandate by conquering the universe, imposing his knowledge, technology, and cultural institutions upon the world. The human capacity for relationship, as depicted in Genesis 1, is utilitarian, following both God's mandate and our own worldly need to develop the world for ourselves and our continuing existence.
Soloveitchik identifies the second image of Adam in chapter two of Genesis. Whereas Adam I was mandated to subdue the garden, Adam II is the "covenantal man," the keeper of the garden who tills and preserves it. This image is introduced by the words, "It is not good for man to be alone" - and through God's intervention and Adam's sacrifice (of a metaphoric rib) he gains companionship and the relief of his existential loneliness - unlike Adam I, this covenantal community requires the participation of the Divine. In the second chapter of God's creation, it is not enough for man to simply be created in his image and given a fiefdom. Adam II is "the lonely man of faith," the "redemptive Adam," bringing a "redemptive interpretation to the meaning of existence".
Soloveitchik does not declare one image of Adam to be the right one, but rather identifies the struggle we must undergo as human beings in this existence, given by God, that is both spiritual and material, mystical and scientific, redemptive yet empowered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2015 4:32:07 GMT -5
Yes, you have the Creation story, the banishment story, the Abel and Cain story, you have the Tower of Babel Story, the Flood story, the exodus story and others. Yes I did hear them too growing up. But have you never heard the phrase 'types and shadows' when asking about the OT. I find that interesting. It was usually in response to asking why the rules had changed regarding Jewish rules like kosher eating, not mixing materials in garments. In other words why don't we follow the OT? That's when you usually hear that Jesus came and changed all that and the NT is 'what we do now'. The OT was types and shadows of what was to come. Another example of different experiences within the same church, which I find interesting. Now I'm wondering if anyone else ever heard the OT referred to as 'types and shadows'. Yes, I've heard the OT referred to as types and shadows of what was to come.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on May 21, 2015 6:35:05 GMT -5
Yes, I've heard the OT referred to as types and shadows of what was to come. Fascinating, I have no recollection of ever hearing the expression until snow mentioned it a few posts back. Interesting.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on May 21, 2015 6:51:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on May 21, 2015 7:10:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on May 21, 2015 7:27:09 GMT -5
Yes, I've heard the OT referred to as types and shadows of what was to come. Fascinating, I have no recollection of ever hearing the expression until snow mentioned it a few posts back. Interesting. 'Types and shadows' I think is similar to the idea of 'four fold exegesis', which you can Google. Judaism would eschew any Christological interpretation of the OT, naturally. A more reasonable approach to the issue of foreshadowing of Christ in the OT, is to read the NT as being told in terms of Jewish Messianic prophecy and narrative. The scholar Spong has written a book or two on this including "Liberating the Gospels: Reading the Bible with Jewish Eyes". There are not many commentators who attempt to synthesize Jewish and Christian views, and the result makes Spong fairly controversial.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on May 21, 2015 9:15:34 GMT -5
Yes, you have the Creation story, the banishment story, the Abel and Cain story, you have the Tower of Babel Story, the Flood story, the exodus story and others. Yes I did hear them too growing up. But have you never heard the phrase 'types and shadows' when asking about the OT. I find that interesting. It was usually in response to asking why the rules had changed regarding Jewish rules like kosher eating, not mixing materials in garments. In other words why don't we follow the OT? That's when you usually hear that Jesus came and changed all that and the NT is 'what we do now'. The OT was types and shadows of what was to come. Another example of different experiences within the same church, which I find interesting. Now I'm wondering if anyone else ever heard the OT referred to as 'types and shadows'. Yes, I've heard the OT referred to as types and shadows of what was to come. That's from Hebrews 5-10 or so. "For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect." We heard in a Hebrews study meeting that when a goose flies over we see the shadow - but the shadow is not what's for dinner.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on May 21, 2015 10:24:29 GMT -5
Yes, I've heard the OT referred to as types and shadows of what was to come. That's from Hebrews 5-10 or so. "For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect." We heard in a Hebrews study meeting that when a goose flies over we see the shadow - but the shadow is not what's for dinner. The word 'foreshadowing' is sometimes used for Christological references in the OT, since people think of a shadow as following after. But it doesn't need to be so. The goose is a good analogy since OT shadows can be thought as being cast from a pre-existing Christ. The word 'type' is similar to 'figure' as in 'figure of speech'. Often just means 'metaphor'. For example, the Passover lamb is a metaphor for Christ's sacrifice. We say it is a 'type' of the Christ... means the same thing. Types also include allegories, which are extended metaphors, notably, the Song of Songs in reference to Christ and the church.
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 21, 2015 11:50:29 GMT -5
Yes, you have the Creation story, the banishment story, the Abel and Cain story, you have the Tower of Babel Story, the Flood story, the exodus story and others. Yes I did hear them too growing up. But have you never heard the phrase 'types and shadows' when asking about the OT. I find that interesting. It was usually in response to asking why the rules had changed regarding Jewish rules like kosher eating, not mixing materials in garments. In other words why don't we follow the OT? That's when you usually hear that Jesus came and changed all that and the NT is 'what we do now'. The OT was types and shadows of what was to come. Another example of different experiences within the same church, which I find interesting. Now I'm wondering if anyone else ever heard the OT referred to as 'types and shadows'. Yes, I've heard the OT referred to as types and shadows of what was to come. Oh good, did you also know what it meant? I would love to finally have an explanation for what it means after all these years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2015 14:12:47 GMT -5
Yes, I've heard the OT referred to as types and shadows of what was to come. Oh good, did you also know what it meant? I would love to finally have an explanation for what it means after all these years. The old testament foretells the coming of Jesus, and the old law is a shadow or pattern of the way and sacrifice that was fulfilled and perfected in the life of Jesus.
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 21, 2015 17:34:23 GMT -5
Oh good, did you also know what it meant? I would love to finally have an explanation for what it means after all these years. The old testament foretells the coming of Jesus, and the old law is a shadow or pattern of the way and sacrifice that was fulfilled and perfected in the life of Jesus. Ok thank you felicity. I always got the feeling from my parents though that the OT was not as relevant as the NT. Is that true at all?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on May 21, 2015 17:53:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 21, 2015 17:59:03 GMT -5
Thanks Jesse.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on May 21, 2015 19:19:28 GMT -5
Do Christians engage Jewish traditions or Jewish scholarship in their analysis and interpretation of the Old Testament? Are there good examples of Christian/Jewish collaboration on interpretation of Biblical passages? If not, does anyone know why? I am currently re-reading Jewish scholar Martin Buber's I and Thou. I am not quite sure where he stands regarding Christianity, though I concur with what he has mentioned in this book regarding Jesus and the gospels. I also believe he gives a valuable analysis of how various "mystic" traditions - including modern New Age thinking - stand in relation to one another and to Judaism-Christianity. I love the book, and am amazed at how much more I find in it this second time around. But then that is nearly always the case in re-reading a beloved book after a year or two . . .
|
|