|
Post by emy on May 21, 2015 22:36:43 GMT -5
I too, have heard of types and shadows, especially types.
|
|
|
Post by withlove on May 21, 2015 23:01:45 GMT -5
This is a great thread!
In my very brief study of Judaism I was struck by how different interpretations of scripture are valued and considered, rather than one rabbi taking a section of followers and creating his own group (at least, it seems like this is much less common than within Christianity). It especially stands out to someone who has professed because usually there is only one interpretation of scripture taught (usually, not always).
I also heard of types and shadows.
The Jewish holy days seem really special to me...they continue to remember what God did for their ancestors. I think even Gentiles would be helped by participating in that without taking anything away from their remembrances of Jesus.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2015 3:28:22 GMT -5
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? Well I guess it's true to a point. The new testament, and particularly the words of Jesus, are the most important things to focus on.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on May 22, 2015 7:38:27 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? 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 . . . In I and Thou, Buber stresses that the God of Judaism is a relational God, as distinguished from various mystic traditions, which have various manners of arriving at complete “oneness” and lack of relationship. He speaks of letting God and other humans become a “You” to us, or whether we attempt to “possess” them as an “It.” The “It” mode is increasingly our common manner of relating to God and others, much more so now even than in Buber’s day, as we increasingly objectify our world, seeking to quantify and define everything, including our fellow human and God. I believe it is crucial to read the New Testament in this light, and Buber does point this out in the gospels, particularly in John, which can be read as a “oneness” teaching if only certain segments are considered. Other writers also stress the vital importance of interpreting the NT through the lens of the OT and Jewish thought, rather than through Greek philosophy, which has introduced metaphysical, substantive ideas, which were foreign to Jewish thought. John’s gospel does use Greek terminology – such as logos – but it goes on to use it in a very Hebrew manner, with the word coming into and confronting the world, and the world “receiving it not.” Relationship! Another important point in Jewish thought is that “blessing” is not a “pie-in-the-sky” heaven, but blessing in an earthly life. Jesus of course spoke of the “Kingdom of Heaven,” but he also taught resurrection – an embodied, relational existence. I cannot conceive of attempting to receive the NT without relating it to the OT. Yahweh was not a god of place, as Pagan gods were, but a God of promise and fulfillment, with Jesus as the center of all promises and fulfillment. The promise was repeatedly expanded to include other peoples and to reach more deeply into hearts, a history that would be entirely absent if the NT were presented alone. In fact, the “sermons” we have recorded in the book of Acts repeatedly went through this history of promise and fulfillment, bringing it right up to confront the listeners – “this Jesus, whom ye have crucified.” Confrontation and decision, judgment and grace, establishing a relationship.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on May 22, 2015 8:21:49 GMT -5
I am also enjoying the contributions to this thread, withlove.
I will be busy much of the weekend but hope to stay plugged in.
Can't I get anyone to comment on the Adam I/Adam II imagery? I am so taken by that imagery, would love to hear other's thoughts.
I enjoyed whathat's reference to the books by Everett Fox and Alan's references to Buber, I think this is the type of thing I was looking for. The intent of my queries places less emphasis on the "story of Jesus" (since I do grasp the importance of Jesus to Christians) but more on the relational foundation of the Old Testament.
For me, the Old Testament is so much less "scary" when thought of in the context of members of a society sitting around a campfire talking about their heroes, their beliefs and their culture. Then the OT becomes a narrative among regular people (like you and me) about their struggles, how they face the joys and crisis in their lives and so forth. Thought of through this lens the imagery becomes much more inviting. Perhaps most important for me, however, is the sense of something greater than self to which the individuals are bound.
For me this is just as important from a secular perspective (if not more so) as it is from a religious perspective. Sure we can spend much time discussing (arguing) about whether or not god is just a paranormal artifact of ancient cultures. But beyond that essentially fruitless debate, there is the knowledge that others have experienced love, compassion, fear, hate, joy, anxiety and all the other felt emotions and they have struggled with these emotions alone in the night. But they have also come together and shared these experiences with each other and it has been through that sharing that something greater than themselves has been formed. It is through that sharing, those stories, that a society has been knit that transcends any of the individuals.
In the end, doesn't this somehow relate to "The Point"?
In my mind, it doesn't really matter whether your believe in a religious tradition or not, it is whether or not you can get far enough outside of yourself to love another and be willing to share both your compassion and sorrows with another. The OT is just one compilation of how some folks have chosen to do that. There are other ways, for sure, but for my heritage, the OT compilation ain't so bad!
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 22, 2015 10:36:05 GMT -5
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 . . . In I and Thou, Buber stresses that the God of Judaism is a relational God, as distinguished from various mystic traditions, which have various manners of arriving at complete “oneness” and lack of relationship. He speaks of letting God and other humans become a “You” to us, or whether we attempt to “possess” them as an “It.” The “It” mode is increasingly our common manner of relating to God and others, much more so now even than in Buber’s day, as we increasingly objectify our world, seeking to quantify and define everything, including our fellow human and God. I believe it is crucial to read the New Testament in this light, and Buber does point this out in the gospels, particularly in John, which can be read as a “oneness” teaching if only certain segments are considered. Other writers also stress the vital importance of interpreting the NT through the lens of the OT and Jewish thought, rather than through Greek philosophy, which has introduced metaphysical, substantive ideas, which were foreign to Jewish thought. John’s gospel does use Greek terminology – such as logos – but it goes on to use it in a very Hebrew manner, with the word coming into and confronting the world, and the world “receiving it not.” Relationship! Another important point in Jewish thought is that “blessing” is not a “pie-in-the-sky” heaven, but blessing in an earthly life. Jesus of course spoke of the “Kingdom of Heaven,” but he also taught resurrection – an embodied, relational existence. I cannot conceive of attempting to receive the NT without relating it to the OT. Yahweh was not a god of place, as Pagan gods were, but a God of promise and fulfillment, with Jesus as the center of all promises and fulfillment. The promise was repeatedly expanded to include other peoples and to reach more deeply into hearts, a history that would be entirely absent if the NT were presented alone. In fact, the “sermons” we have recorded in the book of Acts repeatedly went through this history of promise and fulfillment, bringing it right up to confront the listeners – “this Jesus, whom ye have crucified.” Confrontation and decision, judgment and grace, establishing a relationship. I agree with your assessment and it looks like I have another book to read! I was listening to a rabbi speaking on loving your neighbor, and his teaching is that we need to consider others as yourself--as part of yourself, not as separate from self. That hit home for me. I'm currently reading "The Essential Commandment" (Greg Ogden), partially because the book begins with 'Would Jesus ask something of us that couldn't be done?" He then goes on to talk about the tension in Christian experience between what we are and what we can become as Jesus lives his life out in us. He likens it to the Hasidic saying that advices us to go around with a piece of paper in each pocket, one reading "I am dust and ashes" and the other reading "For me the world was created."
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 22, 2015 10:49:59 GMT -5
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? Well I guess it's true to a point. The new testament, and particularly the words of Jesus, are the most important things to focus on. Yes, I think this was my parents view on the bible too. Thanks for your responses.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 22, 2015 11:34:46 GMT -5
Well I guess it's true to a point. The new testament, and particularly the words of Jesus, are the most important things to focus on. Yes, I think this was my parents view on the bible too. Thanks for your responses. I liked Alan's statement: Other writers also stress the vital importance of interpreting the NT through the lens of the OT and Jewish thought, rather than through Greek philosophy, which has introduced metaphysical, substantive ideas, which were foreign to Jewish thought. ...
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 22, 2015 11:56:51 GMT -5
Yes, I think this was my parents view on the bible too. Thanks for your responses. I liked Alan's statement: Other writers also stress the vital importance of interpreting the NT through the lens of the OT and Jewish thought, rather than through Greek philosophy, which has introduced metaphysical, substantive ideas, which were foreign to Jewish thought. ...It has always seemed to me that the OT should not be translated through a Christian understanding. It was written by the Hebrew people and they would know better why things are worded the way they are than someone going back with a Christian belief system. Rabbis have studied their books for centuries and some of the understanding has likely been passed down through the generations by oral as well as written interpretation. But because Jesus is seen as changing things Christians often say Jews don't really know what their book meant and interpret it wrong. I think that is pretty amusing actually but it's no different from the Catholics defending the pagan content of a rising dying Godman in earlier religions as just the devil trying to negate Christianity by having these other religions use similar beliefs etc. It wasn't Christianity duplicating Pagan belief, but Pagans that the devil convinced to have these stories to negate Christianity. Doesn't matter that the beliefs came before Christianity.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on May 22, 2015 15:49:59 GMT -5
I agree with your assessment and it looks like I have another book to read! I was listening to a rabbi speaking on loving your neighbor, and his teaching is that we need to consider others as yourself--as part of yourself, not as separate from self. That hit home for me. I'm currently reading "The Essential Commandment" (Greg Ogden), partially because the book begins with 'Would Jesus ask something of us that couldn't be done?" He then goes on to talk about the tension in Christian experience between what we are and what we can become as Jesus lives his life out in us. He likens it to the Hasidic saying that advices us to go around with a piece of paper in each pocket, one reading "I am dust and ashes" and the other reading "For me the world was created." Here is a link to a pdf version of I and Thou, if you're interested: I and ThouUse the small, blue "Download (pdf, 7.64 MB)" button. The large buttons are ads, taking you to another site to sell you some software. The page I have linked to also contains a very good description of the book. I have downloaded several books from this site, including several from each of three of my favorite authors: Martin Buber, Jacques Ellul and Soren Kierkegaard. They're free, and no one "out there" is keeping track of which segments I highlight! This is a different translation (from German) than the hard copy I read (purchased before I stumbled on this site); I would like to read it someday to see if I can note any differences.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 22, 2015 16:06:40 GMT -5
I agree with your assessment and it looks like I have another book to read! I was listening to a rabbi speaking on loving your neighbor, and his teaching is that we need to consider others as yourself--as part of yourself, not as separate from self. That hit home for me. I'm currently reading "The Essential Commandment" (Greg Ogden), partially because the book begins with 'Would Jesus ask something of us that couldn't be done?" He then goes on to talk about the tension in Christian experience between what we are and what we can become as Jesus lives his life out in us. He likens it to the Hasidic saying that advices us to go around with a piece of paper in each pocket, one reading "I am dust and ashes" and the other reading "For me the world was created." Here is a link to a pdf version of I and Thou, if you're interested: I and ThouUse the small, blue "Download (pdf, 7.64 MB)" button. The large buttons are ads, taking you to another site to sell you some software. The page I have linked to also contains a very good description of the book. I have downloaded several books from this site, including several from each of three of my favorite authors: Martin Buber, Jacques Ellul and Soren Kierkegaard. They're free, and no one "out there" is keeping track of which segments I highlight! This is a different translation (from German) than the hard copy I read (purchased before I stumbled on this site); I would like to read it someday to see if I can note any differences. thank you!
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on May 22, 2015 16:41:53 GMT -5
This is a different translation (from German) than the hard copy I read (purchased before I stumbled on this site); I would like to read it someday to see if I can note any differences. thank you! Here is a link to the translation I purchased: I and Thou; trans. by Walter KaufmannIn reading a few segments in each, and the "blurb" here on Amazon, I do believe the newer translation by Kaufmann may be the better. And there are several used copies available for $0.01, plus $3.99 shipping . . .
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 22, 2015 16:49:06 GMT -5
Here is a link to the translation I purchased: I and Thou; trans. by Walter KaufmannIn reading a few segments in each, and the "blurb" here on Amazon, I do believe the newer translation by Kaufmann may be the better. And there are several used copies available for $0.01, plus $3.99 shipping . . . You're talkin' my budget here!
|
|
|
Post by Gene on May 22, 2015 19:16:50 GMT -5
yknot, with apologies for jumping two steps ahead, have you considered expanding your quest from Jewish/Christian collaboration on interpretation of scripture to Jewish/Christian/Muslim?
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on May 23, 2015 7:32:34 GMT -5
yknot, with apologies for jumping two steps ahead, have you considered expanding your quest from Jewish/Christian collaboration on interpretation of scripture to Jewish/Christian/Muslim? You have identified a short-coming Gene, I have not expanded the discussion to the Muslim faith. The omission is a consequence of my ignorance. Prior to 2001, I was not a student of Muslim theology. Since 2001, I have invested considerable effort reading in an attempt to understand that faith, frustratingly to no avail. I would love it if you could provide a couple of meaningful tie-ins, perhaps that would break the logjam in my mind. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on May 23, 2015 8:26:18 GMT -5
yknot, with apologies for jumping two steps ahead, have you considered expanding your quest from Jewish/Christian collaboration on interpretation of scripture to Jewish/Christian/Muslim? You have identified a short-coming Gene, I have not expanded the discussion to the Muslim faith. The omission is a consequence of my ignorance. Prior to 2001, I was not a student of Muslim theology. Since 2001, I have invested considerable effort reading in an attempt to understand that faith, frustratingly to no avail. I would love it if you could provide a couple of meaningful tie-ins, perhaps that would break the logjam in my mind. Thanks. I'm afraid I'm woefully poorly-read on these topics, yknot. I know the bible backwards and forwards, given my past occupation when I was required to deliver a presentation about it roughly five times a week for 10 years, and twice a week for an additional 12 years! But Judaism and Islam? Not so much. All I can offer is this: Christians, Muslims and Jews all share a common scriptural basis for at least a portion of their beliefs. Perhaps a place to start the collaboration on interpretation of scripture would be the creation story. A few discussion questions for the Christian, Jew and Muslim, just to get the ball rolling: 1. To what degree do you believe the creation story in Genesis 1 to be literal, and to what degree allegorical? 2. Which parts, if any, do you believe to be allegory? 3. If allegory, why? That is, what is the meaning of the allegory? 4. What impact, if any, does your literal or allegorical interpretation of any particular aspect of the creation story have on your thoughts, words and actions? Or if one likes fireworks, maybe this: Describe God's word regarding Abraham, Jacob and Isaac and the promised land, and the present-day manifestation of that promise.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on May 24, 2015 8:56:52 GMT -5
I'm afraid I'm woefully poorly-read on these topics, yknot. I know the bible backwards and forwards, given my past occupation when I was required to deliver a presentation about it roughly five times a week for 10 years, and twice a week for an additional 12 years! But Judaism and Islam? Not so much. All I can offer is this: Christians, Muslims and Jews all share a common scriptural basis for at least a portion of their beliefs. Perhaps a place to start the collaboration on interpretation of scripture would be the creation story. A few discussion questions for the Christian, Jew and Muslim, just to get the ball rolling: 1. To what degree do you believe the creation story in Genesis 1 to be literal, and to what degree allegorical? 2. Which parts, if any, do you believe to be allegory? 3. If allegory, why? That is, what is the meaning of the allegory? 4. What impact, if any, does your literal or allegorical interpretation of any particular aspect of the creation story have on your thoughts, words and actions? Or if one likes fireworks, maybe this: Describe God's word regarding Abraham, Jacob and Isaac and the promised land, and the present-day manifestation of that promise. I enjoy fireworks on the 4th, in conversations, not so much. Interesting set of questions. My interests would lie in the allogorical interpretations.
|
|