Pattern Paradigms
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Mark 1:1 NASB
Son of God – “What the sages have done with Scripture then becomes clear. They have taken its narrative and discerned a pattern within it, and this pattern then has guided them in thinking about the present. Whatever happens finds its place within the paradigm, or the model, that they have formed of Scripture’s narrative.”[1] Neusner notes that this is the basis of rabbinic exegesis. It is not exegesis based on cultural-historical-linguistic analysis as we find in contemporary Christianity. It is exegesis based on repetition of patterns in Scripture, patterns that may have no apparent historical or linguistic connection. Unless we realize that this is what guides the authors of the New Testament, that they are the product of rabbinic Judaism, we will attempt to make their statements conform to our view of proper exegesis and in the process torture their efforts to communicate hidden patterns.
We can clearly see the influence of this rabbinic background in the genealogy of Matthew. Matthew pays some attention to historical personages, but he deliberately manipulates the sequence and the names in his genealogy in order to produce a particular gematria – a pattern of three sets of fourteen generations. Why does he alter the history to fit this pattern? Because the pattern is more important than the actual historical record. The name “David” has the numerical value in Hebrew of 14, and Matthew’s Hebrew gospel uses this numerical value in the construction of his artificial genealogy in order to demonstrate that Yeshua is the promised Davidic ruler.
If Matthew uses pattern paradigms in his writing, what makes us think that the other New Testament authors don’t do the same thing? Daniel Boyarin, a contemporary Jewish rabbinic scholar, argues that the term “Son of God” is part of a pattern paradigm. Drawing on Daniel 7, Boyarin demonstrates that Judaism already contained the concept of a second divine person called the Son of God in its pattern view of prophecy. According to Boyarin, the term “Son of God” was already part of the idea of the Davidic Messiah as king of Israel. “The Messiah-Christ existed as a Jewish idea long before the baby Jesus was born in Nazareth. That is, the idea of a second God as viceroy to God the Father is one of the oldest of theological ideas in Israel.”[2]
Forget the mistake about the birthplace and the name of the infant and notice what Boyarin, a completely orthodox Jew, is saying. He is saying that the authors of the gospels were pattern-conscious Jews who wrote within the cultural context of theological thinking of their day. They recognized patterns from the Tanakh that fit (with some help) events they were experiencing in the present. They did not write new theology. They wrote stories that emphasized and elaborated these patterns because they believed that the ancient patterns were repeating and that the key to understanding the world was found in the examination of these repetitions. Imagine for a moment what impact this has on our view of interpreting the Bible. We see Scripture as a collection of historical sequence, cultural information, legislation, ritual and cultus. But if the actual authors don’t view Scripture that way, that means that the way they use Scripture will be entirely different than our examination procedure. How then are we supposed to understand what they meant if we bring the wrong interpretive scheme to the text? It’s like bringing a shovel to the garage to take apart a carburetor. Wrong tool for the job.
The interpretation of Scripture within Judaism is built on the idea that “events form patterns, and patterns govern what is going to happen in the future.”[3] If we don’t look for the intentional pattern elaboration in the New Testament authors, are we really reading what they have to say? If Neusner and Boyarin are right (and they are, after all, Jewish), then what have we been doing all these years by trying to force the Jewish view of Scripture into the Western box of analysis?
Topical Index: exegesis, paradigm, Son of God, Mark 1:1, gematria
According to Boyarin, the term “Son of God” was already part of the idea of the Davidic Messiah as king of Israel. “The Messiah-Christ existed as a Jewish idea long before the baby Jesus was born in Nazareth.
Hmmm
That brings back good memories of living in Del Mar on the beach in the 70’s
And sacrificing a lot of surf time one summer in order to read the Bible from end to end
So I could teach it in the UCSD Humanities program in the Fall
Having never actually read any of the Bible at that point in my life
I was very surprised to find so much discussion regarding the Son of God and the Son of Man
In the Old Testament
And then the way in which Matthew deliberately connected David and Jesus with these concepts
And in the Fall when we taught the Jews and the Greeks to undergraduates
I read many secondary texts trying to understand the Hebrew and Greek history and worldviews
But it was far to complicated for me to put the “puzzle” together on my own
I had to wait until the year 2000 or shortly thereafter, when while working at Cisco Systems
I was somehow connected to Skip Moen, who could explain it in One Minute Manager format
For my simple mind 🙂
WELL AREN’T YOU THANKFUL THAT YOU MET SKIP – SUPPOSE THAT WAS A GOD MEETING 4 SURE – HOW DID YOU MEET HIM/SKIP – I AM CURIOS TO KNOW… ♥
JAN
“HOW DID YOU MEET HIM/SKIP”
Hi Jan,
Well actually I have never met Skip in person, but he has called me on a couple occasions
As I recall, we met online when I went to work at VeriSign and the website changed
But I first came across The Daily Word when I was working at Cisco (1999 – 2004)
I received this strange email, which was written very well in a sort of Shakespearean style
Describing how life could seem so punishing and unjust, even when we are doing our best
The metaphor Skip used, as I recall, was an anvil and hammer
A feeling of being pounded to death
But Skip’s point was that God was not really punishing us for our sins in this process
But rather that God was forming us into the person he wants us to be
And that this process requires some pain
It was a very powerful piece of writing, so I connected to the website (Our Daily Bread ?)
Now that I think of it, my partner at Cisco at that time was named Jay Hammer
A very funny guy who had been a grad student in physics and looked like the comedian Albert Brooks
BTW Albert Brooks is in a great new movie called Drive, where he plays a Jewish mafioso
In this movie the “true hero” is played by Ryan Gosling, a Scorpio
Who beats his criminal adversaries to death with a Hammer
In the final scene the true Hero and his adversary, the Jewish mafioso, do battle
It is the best movie I’ve seen in a fcouple ofof years
It takes place a little east of LA not too far from my home town (Berdoo 🙂
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Mark 1:1 NASB
~ and beginning at Moses and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning Himself ~ (Luke 24.27)
There is no doubt, in this man’s mind, the “hero”- the central figure of our Bible is the LORD Jesus (who is the) Christ. Today we visit the gospel (good news) according to John Mark. The beginning of the gospel.. (the good news). It’s always a good thing to start at the beginning, whether it be a book, a movie, a story, a project or a life. (Let all things be done decently and in order!). In the beginning, – God. (Fast forward several millenia..)- a new character is introduced. His name? The “good news” of who? Who is this man? Isn’t this the carpenter’s son?
“Mark records more miracles of Christ than any of the other Gospels. Jesus proves his divinity in Mark by the demonstration of miracles. There are more miracles than messages in this Gospel. This man demonstrates that He means what He says and He is who He says.
In Mark we see Jesus, the Messiah, coming as a servant. He reveals who He is through what He does. (He is walking the talk!) He explains His mission and message through His actions. John Mark captures Jesus on the move. He skips the birth of Jesus and dives quickly into presenting His public ministry.
The overriding theme of the Gospel of Mark is to show that Jesus came to serve. He gave His life in service to mankind. He lived out His message through service, therefore, we can follow His actions and learn by His example. The ultimate purpose of the book is to reveal Jesus’ call to personal fellowship with Him through daily discipleship.”
God became a man. And humbled Himself. The Creator became the creature. The King of kings and LORD of lords, the Lion became the Lamb and humbled himself. The Creator of all life, wilingly laid down His own for our sakes and paid the penalty (death) in full for our transgressions. God did provide Himself the Lamb and was slain not coincidentally but providentially and intentionally during Passover.
Looking for patterns in the Bible? I agree- wholeheartedly. Let’s. Let’s look for a scarlet thread that starts in Paradise, shows up during Passover where blood was shed and applied to the doorway of the house and ends with the Paschal Lamb Himself. The gospel (the good news) of The Messiah is found within every page and every story of the book God wrote.
From Genesis to Revelation, (to maps!) this, is His-story. So, who was He? No friend, not who was He?,- Who is He? ~ Who is this (risen and reigning!) King of glory? ~
(Israel also is a picture and a pattern!)
“There is no doubt, in this man’s mind, the “hero”- the central figure of our Bible is the LORD Jesus (who is the) Christ.”
“(to maps!)”
Hi Carl,
Very interesting point above, but not sure what you mean by “maps”
To the point above, I would just add a caveat that the “Bible” is not necessarily designed to be read from end to end
We can say that “every grain of sand contains the cosmos,” so we can always find whatever we need wherever we go (multiple interpretations”
But for me the Bible is a lot of different books with different authors and different characters
There are also different literary genres: comedy, tragedy, romance, and satire
And I’ve always been attracted to the concept of the Hero with a 1000 Faces
And Jesus as the tragic archetype, which will bring me back to Jan’s question
Regarding how I met Skip
After I walk my dog Max 🙂
Well Skip, You started to scratch an itch I hope you finish. After reading Heschel “A Passion for Truth”, there is much more said than my common paradigm has been ready to observe. The patterns found in scripture make sense. The change I am going through seeks answers I believe Yaw will answer. Please explain more of pattern paradigms.
Thanks, Bob
Just ordered Boyarin’s The Jewish Gospels.
Robin – I’ve been reading it for a week or so. I expected (given the size of the book) that it would be an easy read, but to my surprise it isn’t. I ordered it with the idea of giving it to a local church leader to read but, about 1/3rd of the way through, I thought better of that idea.
I would not give it to just anyone to read. I find much to disagree with in Boyarin’s apparent view of the literal historicity of the OT account of the Exodus, for example. He seems to be of the belief that much of the OT is allegory rather than literal history and that the Israelites were of Canaanite origin rather than actually having been delivered out of Egypt. He doesn’t say so explicitly, but the implication is there. Of course, I may be misreading what he wrote, but that was my understanding.
That is not to say that it is not a valuable book – it is. Just use caution and discernment. “Chew the meat and spit out the bones”.
Hi Michael, and greetings from this corner of the world. What I meant by the words, “from Genesis to maps” is the concept (and reality)- it all belongs to Him! “Every word of God is pure!” We could be discussing the gospel (good news) according to Genesis or gospel according to Revelation or the gospel according to the central book of Psalms- it’s all good and it is all about Him- The Messiah- Yeshua HaMaschiach, Jesus (the) Christ is the son of God and son of man. He is the Chosen ONE, the one sent to this green planet to bring salvation (deliverance) to our fallen humanity.
Adam, chose to sin in the garden and we have been following suit- ever since. A choice to willfully, deliberately even intentionally to disobey God and all of His instructions found within His instruction manual for daily living, our Bible- the word(s) of God.
Jesus also said, (we do pay attention to His words, -right?)- “I have come that you might have life and have it more abundantly”- but for whatever reason no once seems to take Him seriously. The same sad “song and dance”- as took place over two millennia ago. His words “if any man have ears to hear” are every bit as applicable to each of us today as they were when first uttered by the Good Shepherd of the sheep as he taught the crowds that were assembled around Him- way back then.
Not much has changed since then- there are very few who pay any attention at all to His words. It does seem to me- the more things change- the more they remain the same. We still pay little, if not any attention to His words, even knowing as we now do- this is the son of G-d, the rejected Messiah who is speaking here.
~ God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, by whom also He made the worlds; Who being the effulgence of His glory, and the very image of His substance, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become as much better than the angels, as He has inherited a more excellent Name than they ~ Hebrews 1.1-4.
Our Bible is our Him-book. It’s all about Him. He is the Christ, the resurrected, ruling and reigning son of God and son of man, the Lamb of God who gave His life’s blood on Calvary’s tree to take away, to atone for, the sins of the world- including yours and mine.
According to His own words- ~Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away ~ (Matthew 24.35)
How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord,
Is laid for your faith in His excellent Word!
What more can He say than to you He hath said
Who unto the Savior for refuge have fled?
In every condition, — in sickness, in health,
In poverty’s vale, or abounding in wealth,
At home and abroad, on the land, on the sea, —
The Lord, the Almighty, thy strength e’er shall be.
Fear not, I am with thee, oh, be not dismayed,
For I am thy God and will still give thee aid;
I’ll strengthen thee, help thee, and cause thee to stand,
Upheld by My righteous, omnipotent hand.
When through the deep waters I call thee to go,
The rivers of sorrow shall not overflow;
For I will be with thee thy troubles to bless
And sanctify to thee thy deepest distress.
When through fiery trials thy pathway shall lie,
My grace, all-sufficient, shall be thy supply.
The flames shall not hurt thee; I only design
Thy dross to consume and thy gold to refine.
E’en down to old age all My people shall prove
My sovereign, eternal, unchangeable love;
And when hoary hairs shall their temples adorn,
Like lambs they shall still in My bosom be borne.
The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose
I will not, I will not, desert to his foes;
That soul, though all hell should endeavor to shake,
“I’ll never, no never, no never, forsake!”
These words have remained with us (for some odd reason) since 1787. Why? Could it be because they are true- and proven to be true in countless lives, including my own?
“from Genesis to maps” is the concept (and reality)- it all belongs to Him!
Hi Carl,
OK thanks, I see now
From the beginning (Time)
To Maps (Space)
The Hebrew Worldview
Thought provoking. True, we have missed it relating to the Scriptures through a Western mindset, instead of the cyclical Hebraic mindset.
Thank you, Skip.
Great point!
I can relate to this through a story my Mother told me. This happened years ago(50’s) in RURAL NC:
Being Japanese, when she first came to the US and met my Father’s family, they, having the best of intentions, went to the creek behind their house, caught a fish and slapped it on her plate, presenting it to her thinking they had done something really good! Having heard about Japanese liking and eating raw fish, their assumptioion was only partly correct. Their understanding of “raw fish” was, in reality, misunderstood. Those good intentions turned out to be awkward actions due to lack of information and ignorance. Maybe had they studied and gotten some more information about the culture and the “foreign people”, they would have done some things differently.
No, she did not eat it.