Difference between revisions of "In the beginning"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The Gospels capture the teaching of the apostles over time. Mark wrote first when the study of the mystery was still new. At that point, the apostles were teaching that the story of Christ began with the preaching of John the Baptist. That was in the forefront of their memories; some of them having been disciples of John. | The Gospels capture the teaching of the apostles over time. Mark wrote first when the study of the mystery was still new. At that point, the apostles were teaching that the story of Christ began with the preaching of John the Baptist. That was in the forefront of their memories; some of them having been disciples of John. | ||
| − | When Matthew wrote 10 or 15 years later, their ability to understand the mystery had progressed. We should not assume that the authors wrote in isolation. Apart from those who disappeared into the far reaches, like Thomas who went to India, most were in communication with each other such that a council could be called in Jerusalem. Matthew was able to push the story of Christ back to Abraham. We can identify the hermeneutical tools that Matthew had learned that Mark did not have available from the differences in the way they handle Old Testament scriptures or | + | When Matthew wrote 10 or 15 years later, their ability to understand the mystery had progressed. We should not assume that the authors wrote in isolation. Apart from those who disappeared into the far reaches, like Thomas who went to India, most were in communication with each other such that a council could be called in Jerusalem. Matthew was able to push the story of Christ back to Abraham. We can identify the hermeneutical tools that Matthew had learned that Mark did not have available from the differences in the way they handle Old Testament scriptures or added material from their memory about things Jesus did. |
Luke had even more tools available and another 10-15 years of study, to push the beginning of the story back to Adam. | Luke had even more tools available and another 10-15 years of study, to push the beginning of the story back to Adam. | ||
Revision as of 19:20, 2 August 2019
The Gospels capture the teaching of the apostles over time. Mark wrote first when the study of the mystery was still new. At that point, the apostles were teaching that the story of Christ began with the preaching of John the Baptist. That was in the forefront of their memories; some of them having been disciples of John.
When Matthew wrote 10 or 15 years later, their ability to understand the mystery had progressed. We should not assume that the authors wrote in isolation. Apart from those who disappeared into the far reaches, like Thomas who went to India, most were in communication with each other such that a council could be called in Jerusalem. Matthew was able to push the story of Christ back to Abraham. We can identify the hermeneutical tools that Matthew had learned that Mark did not have available from the differences in the way they handle Old Testament scriptures or added material from their memory about things Jesus did.
Luke had even more tools available and another 10-15 years of study, to push the beginning of the story back to Adam.
John was the master of the mystery. Though there are many speculations where he got the idea of the Logos, now that the mystery can be read, it is plain that he got it from Genesis 1:1 and from the Hebrew words themselves. Some of the tools he used to exegete his doctrine are still used by rabbis today, though they twist them to hide Christ. Our chapter on the dietary law instructed us that they do not make good teachers. Some will turn to them because of curiosity, or scholarly research to validate claims made here. Do so with care. Do not apply any method that they teach which you do not find practiced by the New Testament authors. They have perverted the teaching. I will give an example:
Rabbi Benjamin Blech [1] examines the name Israel ישראל. He says it is an anagram for the names of the three patriarchs and four matriarchs of the nation of Israel. The yod יis for Jacob and Isaak. The shin is for Sarah. The rosh ר is for Rebekah and Rachel. The aleph א is for Abraham. And the lamed ל is for Leah.
So far this type of Anagram is not found in the New Testament. And it really is a bad anagram. Five letters represent seven people. What is there to constrain it to seven, can we add more people to make it twelve? They are not in any kind of order. Men and women are mixed; Sarah comes before Abraham. This has all the red flags of a free for all.
Blech notices that Israel start with the smallest letter and ends in the largest letter signifying the humble beginnings a glorious destiny for the nation of Israel. Jesus said that all the scriptures spoke of him. Blech has the wrong focus.
Blech calls out that the word for 'honesty' is yashar ישר , using the first three letters of Israel. Now he is doing it right. Words derive their meaning from the meaning of the roots, gates and letters within. A root is a three letter combination which gets it's meaning from the gates and letters. A gate is a two letter combination which gets it's meaning from the letters. Israel is the 'integrity of God'; yashar-el. We don't rely solely upon the meaning derived this way. It is validated in other scripture.
Moses made the appeal to God's integrity before the Egyptians, when God was about to destroy Israel for worshiping the golden calf. [2] Though Israel deserved to be destroyed, God had made a promise to Abraham. The reality of the situation is that God could have fulfilled (and did fulfill) his promise without the nation of Israel. But he honored Moses appeal because Moses was concerned about what it would look like to the Egyptians of his day who would not see the ultimate fulfillment.
The most egregious violation Blech makes is by scrambling the letters to לי ראש meaning 'I have a head'. This is pure nonsense. The order of letters is important when the meaning is combined to form a word. In the two-letter gate, if the order is reversed, there is a reversal in the sense of the meaning. Ab אב for father means 'After he created the heavens and the earth א he revealed himself to man ב.' God took the initiative to introduce himself. If the letters are reversed to form ba בא it means 'come'. Now it is an invitation. The sense has been reversed. Blech violates the very principle of Hebrew word formation.
Following the teaching of the rabbis, who refuse to acknowledge Christ, will only lead to confusion. Only use those tools demonstrated by the New Testament authors.
