Principle #4
Jesus said to him, “You have said it yourself; nevertheless I tell you, hereafter you shall see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER and COMING ON THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN. Matthew 26:64
Two Into One – Binyan av mishnaic ketuvim (“building a teaching principle based on two verses”) is reasoning from two verses to a larger principle. It happens all the time in the New Testament. In this verse, Yeshua takes part of a verse in Psalm 110:1 and inserts it into a verse from Daniel 7:13. Here are the two verses:
“The Lord says to my Lord: ‘Sit at My right hand until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet.’” Psalm 110:1
“I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of heaven, one like a Son of Man was coming. And He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him.” Daniel 7:13
Notice the changes Yeshua makes. He alters the verse in the Psalms so that it reads “sitting at my right hand.” Then He combines it with Daniel’s vision so there is no doubt His application of Psalm 110 to Himself implies He is the Son of Man who is presented victoriously to the Ancient of Days. But the implication goes further. Yeshua suggests that He is the one “coming on the clouds,” a role ascribed to the Messiah alone. In this use of principle #4, Yeshua combines two verses to reach a larger conclusion. What is that conclusion? He is the chosen Messiah. Did you notice that he omits “one like” in “one like the Son of Man”? In His version, He isn’t like the Son of Man. He is the Son of Man (and to understand what that means we have to take a look at 1 Enoch too).
Read the story again. Did you notice no one shouted, “That’s terrible exegesis!”? No one questioned His scholarship. They all knew exactly what He was doing, and it was proper procedure. It wasn’t the hermeneutics that made them furious. It was the conclusion.
Yeshua was a rabbi too. If we read His words from the perspective of a rabbi, we see more clearly how He handles Scripture, how He interprets the Word and what techniques He employs to draw out its meaning. Perhaps we need a course in rabbinic thought before we run around proclaiming the teachings of Jesus. Our approach is like using the dialogue from West Side Story as if it were the words of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet.
What do we learn today? We learn to be careful. Maybe all that Yeshua says isn’t quite as obvious as the translations make it seem. Maybe we need to pay a lot more attention to the culture before we start drawing conclusions about contemporary applications. Maybe there’s room for dialogue rather than dogma.
Topical Index: principle #4, Binyan av mishnaic ketuvim, Psalm 110:1, Daniel 7:13, Matthew 26:64, hermeneutics, interpretation
“Our approach is like using the dialogue from West Side Story as if it were the words of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet.”
Hi Skip,
I think we are supposed to read Jesus (new) as if He were a rabbi (old) and watch West Side Story (new) as if it were Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet (old).
In any case, West Side Story (1961) and Franco Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet (1968) sure made a big impression on me in my “formative” years 🙂
one more thing about this “rabbi”.. He wrote the book.
But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. John 14.26
Search the scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life and they are they which testify of me”
John 5.39
Yes, the Bible is our “Him-book”.
And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.
Revelation 19.16
And now brother Carl …. the can of worms gets opened up!
For the sake of argument let us presume for a moment that: “the discarding of the Hebraic context would NOT necessarily equate into the inability to understand and apply The Word properly because of guidance by Ruach HaKodesh” …. please humor me for a moment and presume this to be correct. (As Skip points out …. if Adonai can enable a donkey to talk then He can provide us with His truth no matter what our mental capacity or knowledge base may be)
We now have a very, very difficult issue facing us. Given the wrong doctrinal outputs generated, adopted and embedded within all branches of Christianity …. can we say that these generators of doctrine were led by Ruach HaKodesh incorrectly?
Can we say that these generators of doctrine ignored the truth revealed by Ruach HaKodesh?
Can we say that these generators of doctrine were even indwelled by Ruach HaKodesh?
Can we say the Greek mind-set created a false output or interfered with the discernment of revealed truth? (Is the Greek mind-set the snare set by hasatan? Or …
Can we say that it is not possible to discern the truth of The Word without a firm understanding of our Hebraic Roots?
I ask … not to rebuke the church (or to push any particular answer) but to challenge the outputs of religion! It would seem that we would have way less problems if people just focused upon our individual and communal relationships with Yeshua instead of religion!
But the questions still stand …. if we believe Ruach HaKodesh can and does impart truth and only truth … what does this tell us about the “esteemed theologians of the past and their relationship with Ruach HaKodesh?” I think it is not an unfair question … any thoughts … ideas out there?
And please if anyone does want to respond let us keep this discussion somewhat abstracted and not cast any judgments upon those from the past. The issue is more one of how Ruach HaKodesh works within us and reveals the wisdom of ELOHIM!
Thank you, Drew, for expressing these thoughts and questions. I’ve had them, too.
Hi Drew,
Great questions! I have a few o’pinions for you 🙂
[Drew] Can we say that these generators of doctrine ignored the truth revealed by Ruach HaKodesh?
[Mike] I think some did ignore the truth, but others simply saw things differently.
[Drew] Can we say that these generators of doctrine were even indwelled by Ruach HaKodesh?
[Mike] I don’t think we can know if others are indwelled by Ruach HaKodesh.
[Drew] Can we say the Greek mind-set created a false output or interfered with the discernment of revealed truth?
[Mike] If they ask us what we think, we can say that their interpretation appears incorrect to us.
[Drew] Can we say that it is not possible to discern the truth of The Word without a firm understanding of our Hebraic Roots?
[Mike] I think that depends on who we are addressing and where we are. That is what I believe, but then I also believe that Ricoeur’s work is much more meaningful than that of Mr. Derrida.
Some further replies.
It’s quite generous to suggest that the radical shift in perspective that results from ignoring the Hebraic background is simply “seeing things differently.” Of course it is seeing things differently, but are we interested in how many different ways there are of seeing things, or are we interested in what the text actually says? While many Christian commentators systematically suppose a replacement theology, the best still derive much of their interpretation from the Hebrew influence. Insofar as they do, I find them insightful and illuminating. But when they step into the “Judaism has no meaning for Christians”, I find so many anomalies and outright contradictions with the text that I am only able to say, “This is wrong,” not “Oh, well, they just see things differently.”
Newton didn’t just see things differently. He was wrong. His theory is based on an object at rest in Euclidian space. But now we know that there are NO objects at rest and space is not Euclidian. His approach is still used by every contractor and every surveyor on earth (because we don’t build by taking into account the curvature of the earth), but that doesn’t mean Newton is correct. It just mean the math is easier. Replacement theology – the anti-Hebraic view – might be easier to deal with since it eliminates thousands of years of understanding the world from a radically different framework, but that doesn’t make it a true description of reality, does it?
As for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, I am back to Balam’s donkey. God uses all that we allow Him to use. The bigger the pipe (obedience), the more He can pour through us. But even a soda straw can transport some water. I don’t think it’s a matter of dwelling vs. indwelling. I think it’s a matter of the degree of obedience. Luther was right about the things he revealed when he was speaking from obedience, but he was terribly wrong when he taught from a perspective that denied the necessity of obedience. His anti-Semitism is a clear example of disturbingly dysfunctional and distorted theology.
Finally, while the contemporary epistemology of conventionalism (there is no absolute truth – all is relative to the presupposed interpretative frame) allows the statement, “They just see thing differently,” the underlying assumption is that truth is perspective-dependent. So, the Catholic dogma about the Immaculate Conception is “true” from their perspective, Jihad is “true” from their perspective and biblically-endorsed slavery is “true” from another perspective. Women should shut up and cower under the dominance of their husbands according to one “perspective” of the Genesis 3:16 curse. Another “perspective” views is differently. I don’t think any rational person can be pushed this direction without some cognitive discomfort. God is a God of truth. We are the ones in error. So, we have to keep plowing the ground until we can connect ALL the dots, until it ALL fits together, not until we are satisfied with something the “works for me.”
What matters to me is what the text says, not how I see the text differently. Granted, we all come with an interpretive scheme. We are all culturally, temporally and linguistically conditioned. But we are not “trapped” in that scheme. We can keep asking, pushing, resisting, demanding, exploring until we find the fit. And even them, we are always open to our possibility of error. We aren’t God, so there is a very big chance we have some of it wrong. But we can certainly identify positions that deny what the text says, and those are flat-out error, not simply a different point of view.
Skip … thanks for the enlightening response.
I agree with you on the issue of relative perspectives of truth being unacceptable. ELOHIM is perfect in all ways … forever unchanging. Although His revelation is dispensed to human kind over time, which enables better/deeper understanding over time …. there should be no variations of truth …. only variable levels of understanding.
I posed these questions herein for a number of reasons.
1) Personal experiences – I have been on both ends of the spectrum … trained and entrenched in Catholic orthodoxy and praise Adonai re-educated through Ruach HaKodesh. On one hand my perspectives were shaped for me … dogmatic indoctrination …. while in the case of the later I pretty much had given myself up to the mercy of the supreme court and Judge begging for “eyes to see” and “ears to hear!”
Ultimately I now understand what it feels like, and what affects there are that come with having a relationship with the living ELOHIM. As this pertains to discerning the truth I will admit that I will forever be seeking the mystery and majesty of ELOHIM within The Word …. my human brain can only handle and process so much …. however I will also declare that discerning truth is no longer a philosophical or mental exercise for me.
2) We all know that the term “bias” is most often used with a negative context … yet this is not proper when it comes to understanding The Word. I think we need not dwell on this since we know that Biblically speaking we were presented by ELOHIM with an Hebraic bias. So the feedback I was hoping to receive dealt with the issue of the Greek bias …. its origins and its influences …. its generator.
You see mishpocha …. my suspicion of the “Greek Thinking” is premised upon the differences in mainstream Christian doctrine (what I was taught) versus what I spiritually know to be truth. Hence all the questions … were the errors, omissions and fabrications a function of temporal cultural influences, innocent mistakes …. etc? Its not just enough for me to seek the truth … I need to know why untruth came in and why it is not challenged!
I think it is time to really look at the Greek method and understand that it represents the face of the old and dying creation. It is the subtle snare laid down by hasatan that calls for liberty, freedom, human achievement, self determination, etc.! (For way more insight please READ SKIP’S BOOK on the matter)
Skip comments in his reply that we are not trapped in this scheme … but I think a better declaration is that we are not “destined for this scheme” …. we can break out but I personally believe this breaking out comes by power of Ruach HaKodesh through personal submission. I am not sure we can break out on our own accord (I tried and tried but I could simply never think my way out of the mess I was in) … we need rescuing … I needed rescuing!
In the end hasatan is all too happy that we have religion … as long as the religion keeps us away from a true relationship with Yeshua! From a satanic perspective religion is good if it DOES NOT: promote righteous purpose; strengthen Yeshua’s kingdom; foster personal obedience or lead to our restoration. Can we look at institutional Christianity objectively and see restoration within the body? Just as Paul declared …. his own people to be “partially blind” … I believe the Christian church is also “partially blind”!
I apologize for rambling on and on … yet the paradigm shift is dramatic, traumatic and I know others that have experienced this shift … it is not something that can be kept bottled up! 🙂
I use this principle in intercession as I listen for the Holy Spirit to quicken scriptures that are appropriate for the moment. To God be the glory for His Word that is life and peace to us!
Just a suggestion. The book The God of Israel and Christian Theology by R. Kendall Soulen goes a long way to looking at the PARADIGM level dysfunctional orientation that found its way into Christian thinking about 200-300 AD. You might find it very helpful.
WOW
Good morning Skip, Drew, et al. A lot of points to deal with this morning 🙂
First let me respond to Skip’s statement:
“It’s quite generous to suggest that the radical shift in perspective that results from ignoring the Hebraic background is simply “seeing things differently.””
My assumption is that there is an ethical and legal difference between “ignorance” (as in being unaware of some factual information) and the “intentional act of ignoring” the facts, to the detriment of other people.
In my view, the vast majority of “Christians” (let alone non-Christians) have never read the Bible from end to end, and those who have would be very surprised and enlightened if they were ever to listen to Rabbi Gorelik speak about the Hebraic background in the Bible (in simple terms).
Now I don’t know much about Marcion, but my impression is that he knew full well about the Hebraic background in the Bible, but to serve his own religious/political agenda he misled his followers and and perpetrated a substantial amount of evil onto the history of the world.
Politics as usual.
But in my experience a fair number of people, who seem to be kind and intelligent, are utterly dumbfounded when I say that Jesus thought of Himself as the Jewish Messiah and that He was talking to Jews in Synagogues.
In my view, they see things differently 🙂
End of Part 1
Yes, indeed. End of part 1. You are absolutely right, most people, including the vast majority of Christians, are simply dumbfounded. Marcion was clearly the devil’s henchman in this little escapade. And just like me, we were all trained to think Greek, never imagining that the world of Scripture was anything else – and living with the anomalies in order to maintain the paradigm.
So, we all grow and learn.
Nevertheless, there is a crucial issue here about perspective and different ways of seeing things. You are right that we all have perspective. So did Yeshua. That’s the heart of the argument. But there are not different perspectives of truth. Once we make that clear, we are on the same page and the same quest. Then we go to work on consistency, comprehensiveness and coherency – see my lecture on epistemology.
Thanks for the great and stimulating discussion here.
My pleasure 🙂
Just to be clear, I was thinking in terms of what I consider to be communication issues.
Not epistemological issues; I can’t imaging what I would disagree with you on there.
Michael writes – “In my view, the vast majority of “Christians” (let alone non-Christians) have never read the Bible from end to end, and those who have would be very surprised and enlightened if they were ever to listen to Rabbi Gorelik speak about the Hebraic background in the Bible”
Skip writes – “You (Michael) are absolutely right, most people, including the vast majority of Christians, are simply dumbfounded.”
Brothers … it is against this back-drop that I challenge religion(s). How is it that Christianity (a generalization) and its body does not have nor apparently promote a relationship with The Word?
How is it that Christianity and its body does not have nor apparently promote an active relationship with Yeshua?
Is it the body or is it the leadership or is it the institution itself?
In fact the declarations you both made is why I am dumbfounded! And frankly dumbfounded is probably what Yeshua had in mind in Matthew: 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Mishpocha … does not everyone share the fear, distress and panic over the fate of the dumbfounded? These are the masses of purported believers that have eyes but can’t see and ears but can’t hear.
Romans: And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.
The other day I cried for Yeshua to come and take His throne … today I cry for Yeshua to wait still longer so that mercy can blanket more children. His will be done and who will send His message to the sleepers?
What do the rabbis pray? Lord, may your mercy outweigh your wrath. May you delay your coming until all have come to You.
Yeah, I know you were, but it gave me an excuse to talk about the rapidly deteriorating culture of epistemological relativism.
I almost forgot.
One time I shared my view with a coworker who looked me in the eyes and said “I understand.”
So I lent her my copy of the The Essential Jesus.
Of course you did!
BTW I don’t know how many times I have almost asked the following rhetorical question:
If the Jews and the Greeks are so fundamental to understanding Western Civilization, why don’t they start teaching it in grammar schools?
Well low and behold, I went to meet my son Sean’s 6th grade teacher last night, with other parents, and was very impressed with her.
And guess what… she said they were going to study the Jews and the Greeks 🙂
I am so grateful to God that Sean has a good teacher!!!
Me too. Now get her a copy of “Living the Biblical Worldview”.
Skip