Thursday, January 03, 2013

Thurs. Thinking - Interpreting Hebrew Scriptures

A week from tomorrow evening, I'll be getting together with a small group of friends from church who want to talk about Christian perspectives toward the Old Testament. When Christians actually start taking the Bible seriously enough to actually read it, they find themselves full of questions. What does this mean for me? How am I supposed to understand it and interpret it? How do Old Testament Scriptures fit into the lives of Christians? What do all these laws, stories, places, wars, songs, and expectations have to do with Christian faith, life, and mission?

One of the things I hope my friends and I will get to do on Friday evening is read through a helpful article by Peter Enns called, "Hey, Get Away from My Bible!" -- Christian Appropriation of a Jewish Bible. I will also be encouraging them to read Simply Jesus, by N. T. Wright, the selection for my next Pastor's Book Club. This book is helpful for understanding Jesus and Scripture with some awareness of a first century Jewish context.

Below are a few excerpts from the Peter Enns article I mentioned. Enns is currently on the faculty at Eastern University teaching courses in Old and New Testaments. His interests include Old Testament Theology, Biblical Theology, Wisdom Literature (esp. Ecclesiastes), the New Testament's use of the Old Testament, Second Temple literature, and the general issue of how ancient Scripture intersects with modern thought.
The first Christians handled their Bible in a way that helped them make sense of this astounding series of events surrounding the first Easter. This is important to understand. The foundation for what they did with the OT was what happened in Palestine in the opening decades of (what we call) the 1st century. In view of the climactic and incontestable event of Jesus’ death and resurrection, the first Christians were now pouring over their own Bible to understand how this new event could be understood in light of Israel’s ancient text, and, conversely, how Israel’s ancient text is now to be understood in light of Jesus’ death and resurrection. The question of biblical interpretation revolved around the resurrection of Christ. The complex, intricate, sometimes gripping, sometimes puzzling way in which the NT writers handled their Bible is anchored in the fundamental Christian conviction that Jesus is the gracious, amazing conclusion to Israel’s story.
- - - 
The Jews of Jesus’ day were reading their own Scripture in a way that was driven by these changing circumstances. Even though they came back to the land, they were never really free as they were before the exile. They were subject first to the Persians, then Greeks, and then Romans. They were not ruled by the Davidic king, who had a “torah under one arm and a sword in the other,” who would faithfully lead them as God’s pure people. They were in their own land, but they really weren’t—as long as they had foreign rulers telling them what to do in their own land that God had given them.
- - -
By the time we get to Jesus and the NT writers, Jews had already had a pretty long history of asking themselves, “In view of these dramatically changing circumstances, how do we connect to our own ancient texts?” To put the matter more pointedly, “How are we now the people of God, in view of all that has happened? Indeed, are we still the people of God? What does that even mean?”
- - -
The first Christians were also Jews and they were engaged in another attempt at Jewish appropriation—although of a VERY different sort—since now one’s true identity as the people of God is centered not on what had been Israel’s defining markers, such as Torah, land, temple, and king, but in Jesus of Nazareth who claimed to bring all of these things, and more, to their proper focal point.
- - -
The particulars of Jewish handling of their own Bible in view of changing circumstances is a fascinating, enriching, and challenging topic for Christians, but this is not the place to rehearse all of that. What is important here is the general point, that the failure of many Jews of the day to accept the Christian appropriation of the Hebrew Bible is not because they were sticking to the “real meaning” of the Hebrew Bible that the Christians were handling in such a wacky fashion.
A better way to think of is it is that there were two divergent groups of people who claimed to represent the true “next stage” of Israel’s history as God’s chosen people. For Jews, their answer was their continued attempts to articulate what it means to “be a Jew” in a world context that, simply put, their own Bibles left no room for—a people in diaspora, i.e., scattered, without a true homeland, without a fully implemented religious and political structure. For the other group of Jews—who only later came to include Gentiles and be called “Christians”—the final answer was found not in a more clever and competing way of handing their Bibles, but in their belief that now, in Jesus, God was giving a fresh definition to what it meant to be “the people of God.”
CLICK HERE TO READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE
 

No comments:

Post a Comment