PART FOUR In starting this installment let me be clear about the purpose of this series. It is not to deny that the NT writers cite the OT, or that they augment OT revelation. The issue here is about whether NT writers interpret OT passages as types and shadows of Jesus and the Church. It’s about whether they believed most of the OT covenants and prophecies were fulfilled at the first coming in some spiritualized way, and if so, where …
Category: Hermeneutics
PART THREE Those who tell us that we must interpret the OT by the NT point us to NT texts which they insist prove their position. I want to take a look at these texts and ask whether they are being interpreted accurately. Because if they are not being interpreted correctly the whole procedure will start to appear like a question-begging exercise for the purpose of protecting a preferred view of the Bible’s teaching. Romans 15:4: For whatever things were …
PART TWO The doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture is probably the most abused of all the doctrines of Biblical Christianity. As the Word of God, the only Word from outside the human realm, it ought to be cherished, adhered to and followed. But even within the borders of so-called “Christendom” the Bible is hardly allowed a position of absolute authority. Seldom is it permitted the power of veto, particularly when, in our narcissitistic society, its truths and precepts go …
PART ONE Early Christians Could Not Interpret The OT with the NT Because They Did Not Possess A Full NT It is all very well sitting back in our plush chairs with our laptops or tablets resting against our knees while sipping a latte and carelessly typing out the line, “the OT must be understood through the NT.” It’s easy to do. But a reality check is in order here. In our 21st Century world, where so many things are …
“Only Our Interpretations of the NT are Permitted” Among those who like to criticize Dispensational Premillennialism one encounters a popular mantra: It is that the OT needs to be interpreted by the NT. The logic appears straightforward enough. Since the NT introduces Jesus Christ, and the Apostolic writings unpack the doctrine of Christ, one must go back to the OT with the NT teaching in hand so as to unlock God’s meaning. This reasoning seems so self-eveident to its promoters …
My attention has been drawn to a comment made about my interpretation of “the circumcision made without hands” of Philippians 3:3. Here is the verse with verse 2 giving context: Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation! For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh… – Philippians 3:2-3. The following is a comment from a listener of Dr Peter Goeman’s excellent Bible …
This is an old post in which I respond to comments left for me in the combox at this post about Sam Storms’s views on eschatology. I am responding mainly to this: Thanks for the post. I am not sure the last section really represents Sam’s view. He would say that Paul and Peter leave no room for a milennium since Paul has the last enemy death defeated at the parousia in 1Cor 15:24ff, 50 therefore death will not exist after Jesus …
Many Christian interpreters of the Bible will readily call you anti-intellectual, obscurantist, and other nice epithets if you dare to believe the Bible really means what it says. You will be decried as a naive “wooden literalist.” Well, here’s a little something for you to meditate upon before you succumb to the hermeneutical sophisticates who look down their noses at you. The Book of Jeremiah is a good place to go for those seeking to establish a plain-sense biblical hermeneutic. …
I’m going to repost a group of articles I wrote years ago about the God of Supersessionism. I have been having fun lately on ‘X’ with people who want to correct me on my view of the covenants with the usual fodder of ‘the NT reinterprets the OT.’ One of these individuals informed me the “the Covenant” in Genesis 1-3 was plainly in view. When I asked him (repeatedly) to show me this “covenant” he implied I needed to receive …
This is something I wrote about ten years ago. I thought it could do with a rerun. It is a common feature of discussions with some fellow believers to hear them say that the New Testament interprets the Old. This maxim, which is almost a cliché in some circles, is seldom explained. It is usually taken for granted. “Surely,” we are told, “you understand how the NT throws light on passages in the OT?” “Surely you see how NT authors …