Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Method for building Doctrinal Base

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Method for building Doctrinal Base

    The gold standard for interpreting Scripture has been the grammatical historical method. But it's not what the early church used. For example, Matthew uses Isaiah 7.14 to mean that it was a prophecy of Christ's birth. But it is a clear case of eisegesis. There's no relevance to the birth of Christ in the text.

    Quote
    The Example of Matthew 1:22,23

    Compare Matthew’s quotation of Isaiah 7:14 and the extended quote from Isaiah which follows:

    Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel,” which translated means, “God with us.” (Matthew 1:22,23)

    Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel. He will eat curds and honey at the time He knows enough to refuse evil and choose good. For before the boy will know enough to refuse evil and choose good, the land whose two kings you dread will be forsaken. The LORD will bring on you, on your people, and on your father’s house such days as have never come since the day that Ephraim separated from Judah, the king of Assyria. In that day the LORD will whistle for the fly that is in the remotest part of the rivers of Egypt and for the bee that is in the land of Assyria. (Isaiah 7:14-18)

    Isaiah’s prophecy really outlines a timetable for the destruction of two troublesome foreign kings named Rezin and Pekah. Isaiah says to Judah’s king Ahaz, in effect, that by the time a particular maiden1 marries, has a son, and sees him through his “Bar Mitzvah”, these two kings will be gone. Some commentators try to say that Isaiah is not speaking to Ahaz, but to the whole “House of David.” They take this mental handle and try to stretch the meaning to make it fit the true virgin birth to come. But verse 16 ties the prophecy to the two kings and verse 18 calls upon Egypt and Assyria to be the instruments of their destruction. What have Egypt and Assyria to do with the conception and birth of Jesus?2

    Note how the New English Translation phrases Isaiah 7:14:

    For this reason the sovereign master himself will give you a confirming sign. Look, the young lady over there is about to conceive and will give birth to a son. You, young lady, will name him Immanuel3. (Isaiah 7:14)

    The NET Bible completely captures Isaiah’s original sense. So what was Matthew thinking when he so boldly proclaimed the fulfillment of Isaiah 7:14?

    The Example of Matthew 2:15

    Now compare Matthew 2:15 and Hosea 11:1

    He remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.” (Matthew 2:15)

    When Israel was a youth I loved him, And out of Egypt I called My son. (Hosea 11:1)

    Hosea’s prophecy specifically refers to the nation of Israel and the Exodus from Egypt. Whereas, Isaiah 7:14 has some interesting handles to grab and stretch, Hosea 11:1 just doesn’t! His words are what they are and cannot possibly be said to predict that a future Messiah would spend any time in Egypt. Why would Matthew say that Hosea’s words were fulfilled?


    https://bible.org/article/hints-alle...ent-quotes-old


    We shall return to Matthew's method, what it involved, shortly. However let's take an example of a common interpretation held by scholars that seems to be free of metaphors and allegories, to see if our modern method, grammatical historical interpretation, is less arbitrary.

    Modern churches lack revelation, because they are not in the Kingdom. They depend on the grammatical historical form of hermeneutics to arrive at interpretation of the text, which is a problem, because of the wide semantic range of words. The latter results in multiple conclusions, whilst sod and drash have a self authenticating mechanism built it. One feature is continuity, and the other is reinforcement.

    For example, we think receiving the Holy Spirit through belief, as stated in Gal 3.2, describes a visceral experience. In other words, people who receive the Holy Spirit receive a personal physical experience of an impetus from God the Holy Spirit, with varying degrees. Some experience glossalia, tongues. Others are physically teleported to different locations, like Jesus being led into the desert, or Philip beamed to and fro from the location of the Ethiopian eunuch.

    It isn't. It describes an offer of a challenge to be overcome by faith, a cross to be picked up.

    Abraham was offered an opportunity to escape from Pharaoh by trusting God. He flubbed, failed. When offered a challenge again, to trust God for his son's life, he succeeded in trusting God. He had learned from the experience of suffering and deliverance given by God.

    Similarly, Caleb. Ditto Jesus.

    Heb 5
    8Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered.

    However, Israel forgot God's great works of salvation:


    Ps 106
    21They forgot the God who had saved them,
    who had done great deeds in Egypt,l
    22Amazing deeds in the land of Ham,
    fearsome deeds at the Red Sea.


    Unlike Caleb, who changed from a fearful follower to a courageous leader, they never "meta noia-ed", did not "born again-ed".


    Num 14
    24But as for My servant Caleb, because he has had a different spirit and has followed Me fully, I will bring him into the land which he entered, and his descendants shall take possession of it.


    Heb 6
    7For ground that drinks the rain which often falls on it and produces vegetation useful to those for whose sake it is also tilled, receives a blessing from God;


    Coming back to Matthew's method, it seems that Matthew was shown an idea, among a myriad of ideas, and looked for support from Scripture, finally finding it, even if the support was tenuous, in Is 7.14


    In other words, Matthew looked for guidance, attempted to build up a doctrinal base, from the Holy Spirit, not from Scripture, but confirmed this guidance, by turning TO Scripture.


    1 Cor 14
    26What then shall we say, brothers? When you come together, everyone has a psalm or a teaching, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation. All of these must be done to build up the church.


    1 Cor 3
    10By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one must be careful how he builds. 11For no one can lay a foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.


    12If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, 13his workmanship will be evident, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will prove the quality of each man’s work. 14If what he has built survives, he will receive a reward. 15If it is burned up, he will suffer loss. He himself will be saved, but only as if through the flames.


    In other words, grammatical historical will get us nowhere. Being in the Kingdom, receiving revelation, is how we should build a Temple for the Holy Spirit, establish the pool of knowledge, doctrinal base, in the local chapter of God's People, that is acceptable to God in guiding to spiritual maturity.

  • #2
    That IS a surprise - Someone made a cogent argument against Isaiah 7:14 being a forecast concerning the messiah.

    Of course, the commentary does ignore the argument about whether "almah" meant virgin in context, and goes to more persuasive ground.
    Last edited by tabibito; 02-15-2022, 09:41 PM.
    1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω
    Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
    .
    If Palm Sunday really was a Sunday, Christ was crucified on a Thursday (which could be adduced from the gospels anyway).

    "The synoptic gospels claim that Jesus was crucified on the 15th day of Nisan and buried on the 14th day of Nisan:" Majority Consensus

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by tabibito View Post
      That IS a surprise - Someone made a cogent argument against Isaiah 7:14 being a forecast concerning the messiah.

      Of course, the commentary does ignore the argument about whether "almah" meant virgin in context, and goes to more persuasive ground.
      Jewish debaters say Christians push the 'virgin' translation choice without basis.

      Christian scholars thank the Holy Spirit for guiding the Jewish translators of the Septuagint: they use 'virgin' in the translation of Is 7.14.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by footwasher View Post

        Jewish debaters say Christians push the 'virgin' translation choice without basis.

        Christian scholars thank the Holy Spirit for guiding the Jewish translators of the Septuagint: they use 'virgin' in the translation of Is 7.14.
        The Greek (Παρθενος) translated as "virgin" doesn't have to be a virgin, nor even a young woman (though it seems that the term applied to males does declare virginity) - nor even particularly young, come to that. Only the fact that Mary declares herself a virgin fixes the interpretation. The four daughters of Philip might have been virgins; one or more might have been married (in which case they would probably have been young).

        Isaiah 7:14 - Virgin is supportable on the basis of context - the pregnancy is said to be a sign from God. A pregnancy as a result of swyving is no sign from God.

        The question arises as to whether "fulfilling prophecy" has the restricted interpretation that is apparent when reading from a modern day perspective: usage patterns indicate that there might be an implicit "the requirements of" between "fulfil" and "prophecy." Nor would prophecy necessarily have the implications of "foretelling." However, I doubt that there would be enough data available to make that a safe conclusion.
        Last edited by tabibito; 02-15-2022, 11:50 PM.
        1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω
        Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
        .
        If Palm Sunday really was a Sunday, Christ was crucified on a Thursday (which could be adduced from the gospels anyway).

        "The synoptic gospels claim that Jesus was crucified on the 15th day of Nisan and buried on the 14th day of Nisan:" Majority Consensus

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by tabibito View Post
          The question arises as to whether "fulfilling prophecy" has the restricted interpretation that is apparent when reading from a modern day perspective: usage patterns indicate that there might be an implicit "the requirements of" between "fulfil" and "prophecy." Nor would prophecy necessarily have the implications of "foretelling." However, I doubt that there would be enough data available to make that a safe conclusion.
          As I mentioned, Matthew was given revelation about Jesus that could be seen as fulfillments of patterns found in the OT text. They may not have been intended to be prophesy, but Jewish interpretation method does not need intent. God hid His signs in the random statements of the OT writers. Sod and drash interpretations operate on that principle.

          The purpose of those signs were to help in the belief that Jesus was really the Messiah. Jesus consciously stepped through the signs to help in this identification, to 'fulfill all righteousness', to the extent of calling for a donkey to be commandeered for the same purpose.

          Of course, prophesy isn't always prediction: Paul uses it also to mean teaching, and the Prophets were as God, His mouths, and most of their words were clarifications about what God wanted done, as noted by Jesus in His parable of the reneging tenants of the Vineyard.

          As for translation choices, this article is quite comprehensive in its information:

          Quote
          Jerome’s Vulgate has as follows: propter hoc dabit Dominus ipse vobis signum ecce virgo concipiet et pariet filium et vocabitis nomen eius Emmanuhel. Jerome represents the conclusion to the debate, since his version was completed by 405 AD. He also brought a new dimension to the debate, since he was the only Christian to argue from the Hebrew text, who concluded that the Hebrew העלמה should be read as virgo, if even in a periphrastic way. Jerome actually believed that the Hebrew העלמה meant abscondita “hidden.” Therefore the girl in Isaiah 7:14 was more than a virgin. She was a cloistered girl, which necessitates virginity.

          The LXX has διὰ τοῦτο δώσει κύριος αὐτὸς ὑμῖν σημεῖον ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Εμμανουηλ. Its reading is found in Matthew 1:21 and it has become the proof text of the virgin birth of Christ for the church.

          https://septuagintstudies.wordpress....n-isaiah-7-14/

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by footwasher View Post

            As I mentioned, Matthew was given revelation about Jesus that could be seen as fulfillments of patterns found in the OT text. They may not have been intended to be prophesy, but Jewish interpretation method does not need intent. God hid His signs in the random statements of the OT writers. Sod and drash interpretations operate on that principle.
            Fulfilment of patterns would be a reasonable term.

            The purpose of those signs were to help in the belief that Jesus was really the Messiah. Jesus consciously stepped through the signs to help in this identification, to 'fulfill all righteousness', to the extent of calling for a donkey to be commandeered for the same purpose.
            That seems to be a reasonably safe assumption.

            Of course, prophesy isn't always prediction: Paul uses it also to mean teaching, and the Prophets were as God, His mouths, and most of their words were clarifications about what God wanted done, as noted by Jesus in His parable of the reneging tenants of the Vineyard.
            Interesting - do you have references showing teaching = prophecy?

            As for translation choices, this article is quite comprehensive in its information:

            Quote
            Jerome’s Vulgate has as follows: propter hoc dabit Dominus ipse vobis signum ecce virgo concipiet et pariet filium et vocabitis nomen eius Emmanuhel. Jerome represents the conclusion to the debate, since his version was completed by 405 AD. He also brought a new dimension to the debate, since he was the only Christian to argue from the Hebrew text, who concluded that the Hebrew העלמה should be read as virgo, if even in a periphrastic way. Jerome actually believed that the Hebrew העלמה meant abscondita “hidden.” Therefore the girl in Isaiah 7:14 was more than a virgin. She was a cloistered girl, which necessitates virginity.

            The LXX has διὰ τοῦτο δώσει κύριος αὐτὸς ὑμῖν σημεῖον ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν καὶ καλέσεις τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Εμμανουηλ. Its reading is found in Matthew 1:21 and it has become the proof text of the virgin birth of Christ for the church.

            https://septuagintstudies.wordpress....n-isaiah-7-14/
            As I said - the context dictates the interpretation. The contexts show that both almah from the Hebrew Isaiah 7:14 and parthenos from the Koine Greek Matthew 1:23 should be interpreted as "virgin." But nothing in the Hebrew suggests "cloistered."
            1Cor 15:34 εκνηψατε δικαιως και μη αμαρτανετε αγνωσιαν γαρ θεου τινες εχουσιν προς εντροπην υμιν λεγω
            Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
            .
            If Palm Sunday really was a Sunday, Christ was crucified on a Thursday (which could be adduced from the gospels anyway).

            "The synoptic gospels claim that Jesus was crucified on the 15th day of Nisan and buried on the 14th day of Nisan:" Majority Consensus

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by tabibito View Post
              .
              Interesting - do you have references showing teaching = prophecy?
              Quote
              In several texts, Paul also ties prophecy to divine revelation (ἀποκάλυψις). For example, 1 Corinthians 14:29–30 says, “Now let two or three prophets speak and let the others distinguish. If [something] is revealed to another while he is sitting, let the first be silent.”67 This text also suggests that the revelation is spontaneous: it is not the direct result of preparation or study.68 The connection between prophecy and revelation is also indicated in 1 Corinthians 14:6, where an abab pattern links revelation with prophecy and knowledge with teaching.69 And despite being hyperbolic, 1 Corinthians 13:2 also suggests that prophecy involves receiving revelation. However, given the dominant characterization of prophecy as communication, it seems safe to conclude that revelation by itself is not prophetic: prophecy always involves the communication of said revelation.

              https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/t...ment-prophecy/


              As I said - the context dictates the interpretation. The contexts show that both almah from the Hebrew Isaiah 7:14 and parthenos from the Koine Greek Matthew 1:23 should be interpreted as "virgin." But nothing in the Hebrew suggests "cloistered."
              ​​​​
              Yes, based on the existing evidence, Jerome seems to be over egging the pud. Not only is the maiden a virgin, she is locked up! However, Jerome is somewhat upstream of the Chinese whisper chain, and we don't know his situation, whether he had access to lexicological material we lack, so I give him the benefit of doubt.

              Comment


              • #8
                Again, then.

                In other words, grammatical historical will get us nowhere. Being in the Kingdom, receiving revelation, is how we should build a Temple for the Holy Spirit, establish the pool of knowledge, doctrinal base, in the local chapter of God's People, that is acceptable to God in guiding to spiritual maturity.

                The markings of correct doctrine are:

                A. They couldn't have been formed unless the formulator had God with him, possible by being in the Kingdom.

                B. The teaching is instantly recognizable, being strongly supported in several places in Scripture, both in the past and the future of the writers.

                Comment

                Related Threads

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by alaskazimm, 11-23-2022, 05:28 PM
                8 responses
                39 views
                0 likes
                Last Post Cow Poke  
                Started by brightfame52, 08-26-2022, 09:08 AM
                65 responses
                257 views
                0 likes
                Last Post brightfame52  
                Started by footwasher, 03-14-2021, 01:55 PM
                278 responses
                1,295 views
                0 likes
                Last Post brightfame52  
                Started by brightfame52, 12-27-2020, 12:50 PM
                480 responses
                1,965 views
                0 likes
                Last Post brightfame52  
                Working...
                X