Messianic Exegesis
While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your name which You have given Me; and I guarded them and not one of them perished but the son of perdition, so that the Scripture would be fulfilled. John 17:12 NASB
Would be fulfilled– Yeshua claims that the betrayal of Judas (son of perdition) is the fulfillment of Scripture. But where? Clearly he has some text is mind, but examination of the Tanakh doesn’t make anything obvious.
Various Old Testament origins have been suggested for “that the scripture might be fulfilled.” These traditionally include Psalm 41:9, “Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me.”Also Psalm 109:8, “Let his days be few; and let another take his office.” which is interpreted by Peter in Acts 1:16-20 as having been prophetic of Judas.[1]
Peter’s interpretation is not helpful here, unless John writes the words into Yeshua’s mouth after the development of other gospels and the influence of the early assemblies. If the statement by Yeshua is genuine, then what does he have in mind? Psalm 41 seems to fit. It’s a declaration of YHVH’s help in a time of great distress. It mentions the destructive intention of the wicked. It might even suggest resurrection, although in this case it is more likely a return to health. But verse 9, applied to Judas, is awkward. “Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted up his heel against me.” Was Judas a close friend? Actually the Hebrew is a bit more difficult. ‘ish shelomi—man of peace. Or perhaps man of prosperity, wholeness, success. But is that what we know about Judas? And what about “whom I trusted”? Did Yeshua consider Judas a close friend that he trusted? Perhaps. The gospels don’t paint him that way, but what is written isn’t all of the story. Or maybe there’s another explanation.
Exegesis in the first century is much more like art than science. Today we follow protocols when we unearth the meaning of the text. We look at the culture, the language, the grammar, the historical period, the sitz im leben and other factors. But that’s because we are thousands of years removed from the actual conversations and events. Those conversations and events aren’t really part of us. So we use a scientific approach, a linguistic/cultural dissection, to extrapolate the meaning. But that isn’t true for those who are present to the actual conversation. Exegesis of the Tanakh among those who were native speakers and present in the events of Yeshua’s life takes a different approach. It’s art—the connection of thoughts and ideas that can be used to enhance or justify another way to read the text. All of the apostolic writers do this. They squeeze, reshape, extrapolate, bend or alter the actual text so that it fits what they want to say, so that they can say, “according to Scripture.” But most of the time, the actual words of the Tanakh don’t say what these linguistic artists tell us. The art of exegesis is creating new pathways with old texts. Perhaps that’s what Yeshua is doing here. I wouldn’t be surprised.
Topical Index: exegesis, son of perdition, Judas, John 17:12, Psalm 41:9
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Son_of_perdition
BOOK NOTE: For those who wanted a copy of Jo Steenkamp’s book but were too late to get the few I had, it is available on Amazon Books (at a bit more money). If you purchase, please use Amazon Smile so At God’s Table will receive some small donation. Thanks.
All of the apostolic writers do this. They squeeze, reshape, extrapolate, bend or alter the actual text so that it fits what they want to say, so that they can say, “according to Scripture.”
THIS IS WHAT TRIPS ME UP! What part is twisted and what part is simply bent or sideways? How do I know if I am horrible at puzzles!?!
You just keep reading and thinking and asking and dialoguing. And in the process you find a puzzle maker
Lesli, as Skip says, …you’ll find a puzzle maker. However you need not be afraid, nor be put off because you are horrible at puzzles. The Puzzle Maker does not twist, nor bend sideways – that comes from a devious heart.
The Apostolic writers were tutored by Him and were also subsequently anointed by the same Spirit of their Tutor. Now the catch? We must ensure WE are going to the writings with/in the right spirit, not to twist or bend to suit our agenda (we are all agenda-prone ?), and lo and behold we WILL come out with truth. We know because it brings clarity to our understanding and gives life to our spirit.
I’ll pass on something I learnt relatively recently from one of my Torah teachers:
‘Scripture is like a diamond with 70 faces’.
It means therefore that Scripture is not subject to the Greek difinitive approach. But it yields truth to the heart of the one seeking for truth. I would like to add that we who seek to understand Scripture must never forget we also have the advantage of knowing Him Who says He is Truth. I hope this helps. Blessing to you.
Thank you for writing. I don’t believe I have an overly devious heart. I’m human, so there’s that. I think we are not seeing the same thing about “the spirit” and probably the messiah, too. If we are all seeking His Face, learning as we go, asking for “the truth” and why are we all at completely different places of belief?
Lesli, I felt the need to respond to your statement:
“All of the apostolic writers do this. They squeeze, reshape, extrapolate, bend or alter the actual text so that it fits what they want to say, so that they can say, “according to Scripture.”
I think it is quite likely that the Apostolic writers were falling over themselves at the way they could now see how much Tanach Scriptures was pointing to Messiah and the New Age (pun intended) He had inaugurated!
Suddenly Scripture was speaking loud and clear and they were the heralds of this new reality! They neither had to squeeze, reshape, bend…. They were blown away and could not help ‘seeing’ now, that which they could not see before, all over the Scriptures! This was by no means mere academic. They died for it (except for John I think)! Not only Messiah’s words but also the words they (the Apostles) wrote continue to give life to humanity even to this day!
Just an observation.
Thank you
“they could now see”…… “they were blown away”…. I like that Arnella, it gives me a perspective on the NT in the vernacular that I hadnt considered or maybe appreciated before. Thanks. Well said.
Agree, for at least three years the apostols walked, discussed, ate, sleept and prayed with Yashua ; still for three days they were distraught because He died… They did not remember what “was written”
Skip ,thanks a vital nerve you opened here .Perhaps a good idea to check ALL those references to the tanakh, especially those “according to Scripture.” if you are brave enough , a big surprise will be discovered! No wonder Judiasm don’t accept the brit chadasha
Hi Daniel Not 100 % sure if this is on the right tac with your reply. It it isn’t , sorry.
“according to scripture” is broad but if you are thinking it is like chapter and verse I hope the following may assist.
The bravery is on the Rabbinic Jews part,for being open enough to NOT allow for the Septuagint text to stand as part of authoritative textual family even for comparison of the Hebrew Scriptures shortly after this “New Way” of interpreting the Hebrew Scriptures came to a head through Messiah Yeshua and those who followed His teachings.
The Septuagint does contain some of the ‘quotations’ in form.
The Masoretic text which is the standard text of Judaism now, is mixture of texts that was ‘developed’ (read changed)over a period of time, to lose authentically with alternate renderings some specific quoted references. The Dead Sea Scrolls (Hebrew) show up some of the changes performed in the Masoretic to create scriptures that remove intentionally the prior scriptural traditions.
The Masoretic text being determined as superior seems to oppose willingly that which was written prior using access to the 2nd Temple documentation made available to the 70 Jewish Torah Scholars in Alexandria who did the translation work from the Hebrew to the Greek prior to Christ’s birth by some centuries.
The Septuagint was used to spread the message of God to the Greek speaking world of Jews and converts (proselytes to Judaism) & was universally accepted as Scripture by Temple Judaism prior to Jesus’ interpretations of halacha not co-inciding with the version current by the ruling authorities of his day.
Only after the Jesus movement did that change. The real question is why would that happen….
The Masoretic text of the Hebrew scriptures has been given the stamp of authoritative and as such attempts to shut up the Jewish Jesus movement in key points being used to prove the quotes do not exist.
Immanuel Tov, perhaps the top (Ancient Hebrew) scholar and a Jew who was invited to be the major contributor to the translation of the dead sea scrolls has also has put out an authoritative work of textual criticism regarding the Masoretic text Hebrew Bible. It ain’t pretty ……….
Unfortunately the Masoretic Text was used as the source for Christian translations of the Tanach ( Hebrew Bible ) into most languages because it was thought to be the superior text simply because it was Hebrew language; even though it has severe inconsistencies when textual criticism techniques are applied. These inconsistencies have historically been used to substantiate that the Brit Chadesha is only a fanciful fabrication when the inverse is more supported by the earlier Greek translation of the Septuagint.
I would not like to be those people who chose to do incorporate those changes myself..
I believe this is an accurate understanding and if I have said anything wrong about this, would someone correct me, please.
I earnestly hope this helps you on your journey in sifting through light and dark to find your Source.
Blessings Daniel
Shavua Tov and Chodesh Tov
FJ
Paul’s address to the Jews at Antioch surely is case in point about this. He quotes a whole lot of scripture, but also adds (vs. 27-29) “For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him. And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain. And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.” I think this begs the question of just who is prophecy (not to mention the rest of scripture) written FOR; which is to say, who really understands it? Daniel didn’t even understand what he wrote: apparently most of his target audience (for the messianic portions, anyway), didn’t either, according to both Yeshua and Paul. Do we really only have to go back to the ‘original audience’ to understand scripture the way they did? If so, we could be really sunk!
What is the ‘real meaning’ (um, truth?) of scripture? Who can tell us? The majority of the “original audiences” “slew the prophets” (including Yeshua). Do we depend upon them to somehow disseminate those words to us today? Do we use divination to crawl into their heads? I really appreciate sound exegesis: we must do it with all the very best tools we have, but are the mere tools enough? What about audiences who never have access to those tools (for example, most of those who live in restricted nations)? Are they doomed?
We are told to “search the scriptures”, but how are we supposed to “prove” them? Or ARE we? What are we told to prove? YHVH tells us to prove HIM (Mal. 3:10). What is the difference?
I think it may come down to the question of do words make the truth, or does (T)ruth make the words? If it is the former, then I think we are sunk, but if it is the latter, then perhaps would our time be more productively spent “proving YHVH”? Would we “know of the doctrine” then? Wait: that is what we were told! Perhaps I would understand that verse just about the time I do what it (Truth) tells me to!
I know we are taught to act after we understand, but what if we only understand after we act (obey)? Would that perhaps change how we paid attention to people who claim to ‘understand’ but weren’t DOING what they were ‘understanding’? Whoops: that would be all those hypocrites! On a similar subject: if I claim to be trusting (“faith”), but am not actually trusting (action) am I really a believer (truster)? I think I better quit “understanding” and start obeying right now!
I liked what you said, Laurita, in a number of places this morning. Like “ what about those audiences that never have access to these tools“. I know that you were talking about restricted nations but what about churches that supposedly teach the “full gospel”? Whatever happened to the “full gospel” anyhow? Besides, who determines what that is? We were taught to just accept what we were told. We were actually called “the full Gospel Church“. It was dangerous to question. Two passages of scripture that have me and keep me motivated are “they that hunger and thirst after righteousness, shall be filled “. Also, “and you will seek me and you will find me when you search for me with your whole heart“”. Promises to the hungry. Isn’t this what the “ midweek Bible study” was supposed to be about? For people who were seeking for more or a deeper understanding of the word. Christians who were willing to poke and prod….
In my seeking, I’m finding I have to “ set my face like a flint “ so to speak . My feelings can be all over the place but God‘s word remains the same. He never changes. He promised never to leave us or forsake us. He promised to complete that work that he started. He said that he was able to present us faultless before the father with exceeding joy. He said that it was he who is working in us, both to will and to do of his good pleasure. This is our foundation. In my “growing up”process I have had to reinstate the old saying “fact, faith and feeling”. Feelings are wonderful but not essential. They don’t determine what is true. This is and has been a difficult lesson for one who has tended to be ruled by his senses, due to deep and prolonged trauma.
Your last paragraph, Laurita, seems to be a continual theme in Skip’s writing. It intrigues me, it pulls me in, and does remind me of Abraham. Abraham went out not knowing where he was going! Even in regards to sacrificing Issac, he said, “God will provide“. That is a man who believed that what God said, he was also able to perform. Do I like it? No, the flesh resists it! I want to “know before I go” and God doesn’t seem to operate that way!
Bewildered, Bothered & Bumfuddled
John 5:39-47 Amplified Bible (AMP)
The Testimony of the Scripture
39 [a]You search and keep on searching and examining the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and yet it is those [very Scriptures] that testify about Me; 40 and [amazingly*]still you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.
What. Where. Why. Who. When. and How? We have answers. They are “in the Book.” The Book God wrote. [Remember?]
2 Timothy 3:16-17 Amplified Bible (AMP)
16 ~ All Scripture is God-breathed [given by divine inspiration] and is profitable for instruction, for conviction [of sin], for correction [of error and restoration to obedience], for training in righteousness [learning to live in conformity to God’s will, both publicly and privately—behaving honorably with personal integrity and moral courage]; 17 so that the [a]man of God may be complete and proficient, outfitted and thoroughly equipped for every good work. ~
Now. May we consider the (how many is it?) scriptures that testify of the Christ? ‘Tis the Season? [lol!!] “What Child is this, who laid to rest on Mary’s lap is sleeping?” And the answer [according to the scriptures] is? This. This is Christ the King, This, this is Christ the King,whom shepherds guard and Angels sing!! And our response to this should be?
Haste, haste, to bring Him laud, -The Babe, the Son of Mary.
So bring Him incense, gold and myrrh,
Come Peasant, [or] King to own Him
The King of Kings salvation brings,
Let loving hearts enthrone Him.
I am agin( it seems to happen about this table more than elswhere) reminded of a concept advanced by , yes Art Katz; repeated herin more than once….that to truly understand and correctly interpret scripture we must be in the same spirit as those who pend it. While I agree context, current cultural understanding are vital these are intelectual persuits. It is the from the heart that flow the issues of life. It is through the heart that the Spirit moves us to understand the mysteries and vageries of the scriptures. Our heart perceives and then our minds are illuminated it is not the other way around…
Think that’s a good reminder Mark. Thanks
`Mark, I always appreciate your responses. I am unsure about the “through the heart” that the spirit moves us… maybe it’s my season, my age, my paradigm, or what but I’m growing increasingly further from what I used to “KNOW deep in my “heart”. It was lies and manipulated scripture.
Humm, Skip might chime in at some point on this point. Our ideas of our person the distinctions between mind , will and emotions (the classic Christian differenciations ) are nebulious. The Hebrew uses Nephesh the whole person and perhaps does not distinguish or apportion it oUT into elements; heart, soul, mind will emotions etc.. But my experiance is of facets of myself and they can be at odds. Recognizing the still small voice and where it comes from verses the other voices, thoughts, feelings, motivations etc. Is one of the greater chalenges of presence. I define my heart as an internal place a sort of reciever while my mind is a processor. So deception is an issue of discernment to me. I’m curious Skip could you direct us to some of your work on this topic ?
My direct personal experience with God centers on
His trust in me to have trust in Him.
He’s offered me Himself.
He’s given me His Word.
He’s sent me His Spirit.
It’s all I need. I love experiencing His love. And I’ve learned
to love experiencing His corrections. (Many “ouches” along the way.)
Thus, it’s been my experience to trust Him more and more
through the ups and downs of every day He’s given me.
I suspect His surprises will never end!
Amen to that brother..Walking in the realms of wonder tends to be by braille not sight. ..
Couldn’t the Scripture fulfillment be Gen 3:15? Judas blasphemed the Spirit when he betrayed the Author of creation. The Word states it is understood, or known, through the Spirit not through science. Doesn’t YHVH Himself put His teachings within us so we can know HIm? Doesn’t He make the bitter water of corrupted teaching sweet again with the clean, pure water of Torah? He is the Source who offers living water made sweet by His holy sacrifice on the tree. If our minds are set on the flesh, we will not subject ourselves to, or discern, His teaching. We are not even able to do so even with a gifted teacher. If our minds are set on the Spirit, and we are alive because of righteousness, He will teach us of His ways so we will walk in His path; the Word will be living and active in us. We choose where we set our minds and that choice, I think, determines whether we interpret His Word inaccurately with hostility and idolatry or effectively with reverence and obedience. The art really comes down to whether we love and honor Him or not.
This is the way and the truth….Agin Katz from “The Spirit of Truth pg 37 “While I see truth as essentially consisting of doctrines and theologies, my greatest need is for an objective external Christ to objectively decide for me between truth and error. The same is true of the man who still belives that rightiousness consists of essentially doing the right things…..It is only when my comprehension of of truth is radically broadened and deepend that I begin to agree with Jesus that it is good that He departed. “It is expedient for you that I go away…if I go…the Comforter. ..will come unto you….” (John 16:7 K.J.V) Just look at human history, after the light of the dawn on the feast of first fruits the third day after passover 33CE. and 50 days after passover everything changed. The gift of the Father arrived and all things changed; politicaly, religiously, culturally a total recalibration of ever human experiance and institution began on Mount Zion, in the upper room above the seat of King David! This in fufillment of Torah and the Prophets.
To be astronomically correct & corrilated to the Aviv barley for the year the date would be Sivan 4028 F.C. Shavout, or 13 June 28 C.E. (not 33)
“And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins and it will be spilled, and the skins will be destroyed. But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins.
And no one after drinking old wine desires new, for he says, ‘The old is good.’ ” Luke 5:37-39
I like how the Rabbis interpreted & debated the Torah….apparently there are 4 ways to perceive truth: peshat, remez, drush & sod. That would make for a lively conversation over a meal together…some of my most relevant connections happen over a lively meal.
I think we have to understand the Gospel writer’s use of Jesus’ words here as having a backdrop in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 (Paul’s writings all precede John’s Gospel, according to most scholars). “Son of perdition” (ho huios tēs apōleias), or “he who is destined for perdition” (see F.F. Bruce), is also in the LXX of Proverbs 24:22 (as huios apōleias), and this may be alluded to here. This word “perdition” comes from the same root as “perish”. Quoting Raymond E. Brown:
With all the above in mind, I think it likely that Jesus’ words in 17:12 are a reference to John 13:18 (which, in turn, references Psalm 41:9), 13:2, 27, and 30, plus 6:70. Taken what we have so far, Judas was “a devil” who betrayed Jesus, which slated him for destruction, just like Belial. In the 2 Thess passage, the latter part of v. 3 is ho anthrōpos tēs anomias, ho huios tēs apōleias, “the man of lawlessness, the son of perdition”. The two phrases may be synonymous. According to F. F. Bruce:
Thus, the Scripture reference is a bit convoluted, but essentially it is: Judas was a devil (son of perdition), and his “destruction” by his own hanging is a precursor to his ultimate destruction at the eschaton (as a man of lawlessness/son of Belial/son of perdition).
I don’t think I explained this well, but I think if you, dear reader, got this far, you’ll get my basic drift.
And let me quote George Beasley-Murray (John, WBC, [Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987], p 299) on this:
I haven’t studied this closely but, Perhaps we are over thinking 2Thes 2, thinking it is (only) in the future. There already was an anti-(instead-of)-christ, who was the illegitimate, non Levitical, son of perdition, high priest Caiaphas. And he was in the Temple of the time in his high position acting as if he was god. And he did “enter” the heart of Judas getting him to surrender our Saviour. Perhaps this prophecy has already been fulfilled with the destruction of 70 A.D. and there is no need for a new Temple. Something to consider.
Certainly, eschatological views will affect interpretation. Yet, even so, John 17:12 could be seen as conjoining with Paul’s words in 2 Thess 2 in your interpretation. That is, both Judas (whose death preceded Caiaphas) and Caiaphas (and others) could be in view.
I vaguely remember diagraming sentences as a sophomore in high school, and the teaching of Latin had ceased, where those students did that (as I understood it at that time) repetitively. So my exposure to what phrase connects where is limited.
With that in mind, I have a question that’s gnawing at me right now, the fulfillment of scripture is connected to the perdition phrase clearly, and not to “not one will perish”?
That may seem so elementary and I should already know the answer, but I truly don’t know.
I like your question! It seems to me that, theoretically, it’s possible that both “not one will perish” and “son of perdition” could be intended.
I’ll start from the independent clause (“and not one of them perished”), and add the two subordinate (dependent) clauses:
The last clause is most logically subordinate to the middle clause, but it is certainly possible that this final dependent clause is also related to the independent clause. But elsewhere in John’s Gospel is evidence that this is most likely not so. I only know this as I somewhat recently looked at this particular issue (the verses containing plērōthȩ̄, would be fulfilled).
In John 18:9 and 18:32 are two instances in which the writer states that events occurred ‘so that Jesus’ words would be fulfilled’—as opposed to ‘so that Scripture would be fulfilled. The former (18:9) references “I have not lost one of those you gave me” (see 6:39), which is the same basic verbiage as our independent clause here.
Given all the foregoing, it seems best to construe the final clause as connected to the middle clause only.
I used the Greek above so that astute readers could note the connection between the verb in the independent clause (last word) and the last word of the middle clause (“perdition”). They come from the same root.
Thank you for that. I appreciate the effort.
Reflecting on the history of God’s interaction with others as found in the scriptures I think we need to keep the understanding simple. Basics is the answer. Salvation (Yeshua) is those that choose to live or follow the spirit of light. Destruction, guilt, suicide, death etc. Is the outcome of those that follow the spirit of darkness.
Called into light is deciding to follow that which brings peace joy and righteousness (purpose of spirit of truth). The rest is what separates us from God’s manifestation resulting in the seven deadly sins all a result of self justification. Simon Peter get behind me as you consider the heart of man and not of God. (Sorry that is Satan).
How often have we admired and even idolized people for their so called good qualities just to be disappointed by their dark side. Wait NO how often are we not shocked by our dark thoughts that we need to learn to control in situations where we may be justified to actually act these out.
Scriptures are for us to experience that which draws us closer to God. This may be deemed exegesis by some but is how I understand these examples provided.
Yes everything said and discussed here is intended for personal reflection and adaptation as knowing is not learning until we experience the life changing effect…
All callings into God’s sovereignty can be summarised by Paul’s reminder in Romans that the strong need to carry the burden of the week. Those in the light please help us in the dark find and experience the light so that no one be lost. Not preaching but sharing truth concerning consequences of actions….
Lesli yes let us take from the old to apply in the new so that the true light can manifest.
Skip thank you for the reminder that all scriptures are but paraphrasing the old to find place in the new paradigm.
Craig thank you for clarifying that the choices made result in the outcomes experienced by adapting the way of the light.
Theresa T taking that one step closer to us as the result of this encounter the next chapter in Genesis reveals we must truly rule over the temptations which are there to destroy the one tempted and not the one we act our temptations out on….
May peace joy and righteousness be part of all those studying to show ourselves approved as true gaurdians of God’s words that are a lamp for our feet and light on our choices….