Difference between revisions of "DTDL Introduction"
From Sensus Plenior
(Created page with "'''Introduction''' The basis for this study is a first century hermeneutic demonstrated by the New Testament authors as they used Old Testament referenc...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''[[DTDL Introduction|Introduction]]''' | '''[[DTDL Introduction|Introduction]]''' | ||
| − | The basis for this study is a first century hermeneutic demonstrated by the New Testament authors as they used Old Testament references, and an observable property of the Hebrew language called 'notarikon'. <ref>Modern Jewish | + | The basis for this study is a first century hermeneutic demonstrated by the New Testament authors as they used Old Testament references, and an observable property of the Hebrew language called 'notarikon'. <ref>Modern Jewish teachings concerning notarikon can not be trusted since it can be demonstrated that they are intentionally scrambled to hide references to Christ.</ref> |
John demonstrates a fluency in notarikon which is missed when the Septuagint is used instead of the original Hebrew texts. It can be demonstrated that John 1:1-4 is derived using these tools from the first three words of Genesis 1:1. | John demonstrates a fluency in notarikon which is missed when the Septuagint is used instead of the original Hebrew texts. It can be demonstrated that John 1:1-4 is derived using these tools from the first three words of Genesis 1:1. | ||
The hermeneutic and use of notarikon eliminate the need to search for a mystical Q document to explain the so-called 'Synoptic Problem'. <ref>The Synoptic Problem observes that Mark, Matthew and Luke refer to similar events but treat them differently. The differences help define the methods they used to unpack "the mystery hidden from the beginning" as the apostles became more proficient in applying the hermeneutic that Jesus taught.</ref> | The hermeneutic and use of notarikon eliminate the need to search for a mystical Q document to explain the so-called 'Synoptic Problem'. <ref>The Synoptic Problem observes that Mark, Matthew and Luke refer to similar events but treat them differently. The differences help define the methods they used to unpack "the mystery hidden from the beginning" as the apostles became more proficient in applying the hermeneutic that Jesus taught.</ref> | ||
Revision as of 12:58, 16 April 2022
Introduction
The basis for this study is a first century hermeneutic demonstrated by the New Testament authors as they used Old Testament references, and an observable property of the Hebrew language called 'notarikon'. [1]
John demonstrates a fluency in notarikon which is missed when the Septuagint is used instead of the original Hebrew texts. It can be demonstrated that John 1:1-4 is derived using these tools from the first three words of Genesis 1:1.
The hermeneutic and use of notarikon eliminate the need to search for a mystical Q document to explain the so-called 'Synoptic Problem'. [2]- ↑ Modern Jewish teachings concerning notarikon can not be trusted since it can be demonstrated that they are intentionally scrambled to hide references to Christ.
- ↑ The Synoptic Problem observes that Mark, Matthew and Luke refer to similar events but treat them differently. The differences help define the methods they used to unpack "the mystery hidden from the beginning" as the apostles became more proficient in applying the hermeneutic that Jesus taught.
