Do You Believe This Book?!
The author of the the article asks the same question to some Rabbis. Their responses are pretty interesting. None of them affirm anything like verbal inspiration, even though some of them seem to hold to Mosiac authorship of the Torah. They clearly have a ‘tiered’ canon, with the Torah forming the center, the other books forming a commentary on the Torah, but all of it suppored by an indispensible and authoritative history of interpretation.
I recently read The Mediation of Christ by Thomas Torrance, in which he argues that Christians desperately need to communicate with and understand our Jewish brothers and sisters in order to (among other things) properly understand God’s covenental relationship with humanity and better understand our own faith. After reading this article I’m wondering now if they might have something to teach us about the study and use of Scripture too.
Intersting point you make dog. I am always a little hesitant of linking too eagerly with the Jewish culture, mainly because I went to stay as far from dispensationalism as possible, I also think that Christians are far too easily involved in fads. But I do think you make a good point. For me Christianity is desperately in need of a new reformation in which we being to ask new questions and take new stock of alot of the ideas and methods we have used as an interprative ethos for the rest of the world. Things need to be reinterpreted and people need to start thinking in new ways.
I don’t necessarily think we should be boning up on the Talmud, but there’s something to how they read Scripture and how they view its authority that I think is instructive. Any interaction with Jewish scholarship could not be a cheap borrowing of Jewish interpretations or clumsily appropriating some part of their tradition; it would have to involve a careful study of how they understand the authority and interpretation of Scripture and understand how it might apply to our own tradition. I think that could prove fruitful.
Yah I figured you werent going to author the new famous book the Mishnah Driven Life. I understood that you were tryin to get at that point. I agree with you. The Jewish traditions are largely dark an mysterious, but I think are certainly worth understanding in some measure as every single person who wrote the Bible was Jewish or a God fearer at the very least and (I am just throwing this out) it probably came out in their writing. And since none of us have been Jewish since then we are liable to probably miss a number of hermenutical boats, up to and including their idea of canon
Good thoughts Jesse. Here’s a question for you sharp Bible scholars: do you think Christianity is inherently “supercessionist”? Does Christian Theology require the notion that the church has replaced Israel as God’s people? Does a high doctrine of revelation and Christology require such a move?
(I suspect that G is going to follow N.T. Wright on this one and say a hearty “YES!”).
My own “yes” is not hearty, and I’m always interested in other models. The key NT passages suggest that a more sophisticated approach is possible, even if they are not popularized. There’s no denying that the Jewish people get a bad rap in the gospels. Any sophisticated “no” will probably be Pauline at heart, I think. Covenant theology of the reformed church can be classified as such.
I think that Israelite religion struggled with the idea of election based on ethnicity, ever since the 8th-7th cents. BC prophets critiqued its resultant ethical complacency. The resultant shift toward other bases for election/salvation can be seen to culminate in the early Jewish sectarianism, of which Christianity is part.
Of course, Christianity broke the mold when it actually went all the way with this concept, completely discarding ethnic-based election with the evangelistic campaigns of ca. 48 CE onward. But how completely? Rom. 9-11 suggests there is still an ethnic-based election in effect… but election to what? I haven’t gotten any further than this, at present, so someone will have to carry the flag from here.
BTW, Jesse: Glad to hear you’re starting to warm to the tiered canon concept
Verbal inspiration doesn’t really do justice to what is going on here — too modern, too magical, too stoic.
I think what it comes down here for me is that I would like to think and I can see the evidence/value for the salvation of the Jewish people to a certain degree. At the end of the day however, I could only see glimpses (such a tartski’s points) of such a theology at work within the scripture. When faced with the notion of a special election for the Jews one might even ask the question then why not Islam? I wouldnt necessarily say its the same thing, but I think you could argue that God made a covenant with Hagar and that there is certainly a destiny for the Islamic people. Thats more a thought than actual rhetoric. Truthfully I dont think there is much room in Christian dogma for a supra church salvation model. One could argue for a dynamic model of redemption (something with more universalist flair), but I think you run the risk of minimzing many other things and I have neitehr the wisdom nor the education available to navigate such a difficult chasim successfully.
I tend to think that God is still doing things in and among the Jewish people: he doesn’t shun those who seek him.
I’m not sure I see the same type of covenental bond with Islam (which isn’t to say God has nothing to do with Muslims). I’m not sure we need to buy into the sons of Ishmael narrative.
-JM
Your articles develop my mind. That is great!!