Faith Life Commentaries?
Comments
-
Richard DeRuiter said:NB.Mick said:
we have seen the editors of FSB are open to suggestions and may change or expand their notes in updates to the FSB.
Quite true. For example, I made a suggestion related to the treatment of Genesis 6 from merely one perspective, and the article was trimmed back quite a bit and the alternative included as an alternative, but fairly represented
We may see an example of this in this thread. the discussion of John 1 now reads: This first section of the prologue (vv. 1–5) functions as an interpretation of Gen 1:1–5 read through the framework of Prov 8:22–31 (see note on Prov 8:22). This exegetical technique resembles a method of Jewish exegesis called midrash. A midrashic interpretation typically begins with a text from the Pentateuch and explains it through allusions to a text from the Prophets or the Writings. John begins with a quotation that invokes the context of Gen 1:1–5 with its imagery of creation by divine word and opposition between light and darkness. His interpretation centers on the Word as Creator and bearer of divine light. Genesis 1:1 and Proverbs 8:22 both use the Hebrew word reshith (usually translated “beginning”), and the larger context of both passages is God’s creation of the universe.
The "resembles" is reworded from a passage the OP bolded to focus his critique. The last sentence has been added for clarification. We see that the "interpretation read through the framework" sentence, which probably carries a lot of the idea of the whole 2nd level explanation here has not been changed. The whole interpretation is on the second level, but on first level we'll see a link to "Jesus as Wisdom" - this thematic article by Michael Heiser explicitly discusses the John 1 and Prov 8 controversy with the Arians at the Nicean Council.
Have joy in the Lord!
0 -
Gary, thanks for your comments. We’ll look at the note you’ve brought to our attention. I encourage you to send any additional feedback you may have to editor [at] logos [dot] com.
Richard and NB.Mick, thank you both for your comments as well. Gary, my hope is that the examples they’ve cited demonstrate our efforts as editors to continue enhancing and improving the FSB note content based on user feedback. We look forward to hearing from you.
0 -
And Richard, yes, we have received your email on the note at Genesis 9:22. We didn't have time to address your feedback prior to the release of last week's update, but we certainly will for the next one.
For those wanting more information, you can read about the recent update to FSB here.
0 -
There are numerous things that have come up in this thread that warrant comment...I will focus on just a couple. First, and briefly (I spoke to this in a post from about a year ago), "midrash" is a Hebrew word that has a meaning of its own--essentially it means "to study".That word, like many concepts in Judaism, has been hi-jacked by rabbinical use (which can easily be called misuse). Judaism, which is NOT the religion of the OT, has a specific thing in mind when the word is used, and it is far more limited than the word's simple dictionary definition. To summarize, rabbinic midrash is a rigid methodology for developing commentary...commentary which can unearth occasional gems and produce many stink-bombs.
I find it humorous...and sad...that the OPer keeps referring to "Evangelical" as though the word itself is sacrosanct. When I encounter comments such as, "I don't think that perspective is Evangelical", my initial reaction is to say, "Maybe it isn't, and perhaps that's because it's TRUE!"
In a similar vein is the "is it Arminian or is it Reformed" argument. Again, if it's TRUE, the answer is probably "neither". I don't know if Logos gave FSB as much thought on the so-called "negative" side as was warranted...but I certainly hope they did. They have unquestionably opened up a massive can of worms. Frankly, I think that might be a good thing, and for one 900-pound-gorilla of a reason: the Bible is a book that suffers fools poorly.
If you can't face up to and deal squarely with the Himalayan difficulties of Scripture on the one hand and the absurdly fanciful reptilian-Jesus-from-Mars conspiracy theories on the other (not to mention the Jesus Seminars, Coptic scraps, archaeological "proofs", and scientific "evidences"), YHWH has no interest in you. Not so different is running from a different perspective of Scripture than the one you've coddled in blissful seclusion. In His sight, that is akin to Saul staying in his tent while Goliath taunted outside. The Bible is HARD and DIFFICULT for a REASON! It is written in prophetic code to cull the half-hearted and those who want to dodge the struggle this whole recipe called life is designed to provide. That mentality results in "rapture" theology...the desire to be told smooth things...and avoid tribulation. It results in Bart Ehrmans...who managed to make it to post-graduate adulthood without having to come face-to-face with "bible contradictions" and "serious textual controversies"...and as a result lost his faith.
If a person is chased away from Truth by a lie...YHWH says the one telling the lie AND the one told the lie will die. That means something--YHWH HOLDS THOSE WHO DON'T FIND TRUTH GUILTY EVEN IF THEY WERE MISLED. Isa. 9:16-17 So guess what...allowing ANYTHING to push you off the path of truth and righteousness is YOUR fault...whoever "you" happens to be.
But wait!!! Scripture says there's "simplicity in Christ"!!! Yes, and simpletons will interpret that however they see fit...but they ought to keep Prov. 1:32 in the forefront of their mind. Also, if the Bible is so simple even a child can understand it, why is there such dispute about its contents? The truth is, YHWH spoke His will CLEARLY...then said He was going to send false prophets that teach lies to see if people really do love Him. The man of lawlessness and the "strong delusion" are the prime fulfillment of that promise. Absurdities like "once saved, always saved" are the result. It allows people who have no clue what happened on the cross to say "what you say doesn't change what happened on the cross". The people to whom Yeishuu`a replies "I NEVER KNEW YOU" call themselves Christians...and they think they are. Some own Logos software, and some will never read a Bible...because they don't have to--they've been told they have eternal security.
My point here is that one person's Evangelical Truth is another person's rank heresy. In the end the only opinion that matters is YHWH's. That means that rather than run from "different opinions" about what the Bible says, we boldly engage and destroy what is false. Midrash is one extremely useful tool in that endeavor. If you don't know that, it isn't midrash's fault. FSB will force people to come to terms with the unfamiliar. Plenty will be rabbinic (or protestant or catholic or adventist or mormon) mush. On rare occasion that unfamiliar thing that you've never heard before in your creed-coddled life...may be Truth.
1 Cor. 14:29 "...let folks speak, THEN JUDGE."
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
David Paul said:
rabbinic midrash is a rigid methodology for developing commentary
I suggest that individuals read
- Shai Cherry's The Torah Through Time http://www.logos.com/product/9073/the-torah-through-time
- or the "fundamentalist" Between the Lines of the Bible, Exodus: A Study From the New School of Orthodox Torah Commentary by Yitzchak Etshalom
- or
The Seventy Faces of Torah: The Jewish Way of Reading the Sacred Scriptures by Stephen M. Wylen - or History of Biblical Interpretation, Vol. 1: From the Old Testament to Origen by Henning Graf Reventlow and Leo G. Perdue
for a more realistic evaluation of midrash methodology.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Steven Langella said:
But I am also very protective over those I am trying to influence and want to make sure they are not led down some wrong trails that could cause confusion and doubt that God's Word is actually GOD"S WORD and not flawed man's words.
At some point you've also got to entrust those you are "trying to influence" to God and let him lead them by his Spirit to truth, using you and whoever else these friends of yours encounter along the way in their spiritual journey, including authors they encounter through reading. You might at times be mistaken on one point or another, so taking a protective paternal role over these people might actually be shielding them from finding out something which you might, at this stage in your growth, find troubling, but which God wants to lead them into. So hold on loosely. Teach and explain and encourage them to love God above all, but then also trust the Spirit of Truth to guide them into all truth. And be open to learning yourself along the way as you accompany these learners.
0 -
MJ. Smith said:David Paul said:
rabbinic midrash is a rigid methodology for developing commentary
I suggest that individuals read
- Shai Cherry's The Torah Through Time http://www.logos.com/product/9073/the-torah-through-time
- or the "fundamentalist" Between the Lines of the Bible, Exodus: A Study From the New School of Orthodox Torah Commentary by Yitzchak Etshalom
- or The Seventy Faces of Torah: The Jewish Way of Reading the Sacred Scriptures by Stephen M. Wylen
- or History of Biblical Interpretation, Vol. 1: From the Old Testament to Origen by Henning Graf Reventlow and Leo G. Perdue
for a more realistic evaluation of midrash methodology.
By all means, read the resources MJ mentions...but don't be too mollified by her "realistic" assessment.
The following is from Wikipedia:
The original purpose of midrash was to resolve problems in the interpretation of difficult passages of the text of the Hebrew Bible, using Rabbinic principles of hermeneutics & philology to align them with the religious & ethical values of religious teachers. This method of interpretation was eventually expanded 'to provide scriptural pretexts to justify oral tradition.'
The Wikipedia quote above is taken from the website below.
http://virtualreligion.net/iho/midrash.html
Using Tanakh (and the Apostolic writings, for that matter) to elucidate Tanakh is good midrash. Justifying oral tradition is BAD midrash
There is good midrash and there is bad midrash. You don't have to be Jewish to engage in the practice and being Jewish doesn't make you better at it...nor does being a rabbi. For rather obvious reasons, being a rabbi may hinder the value of the midrash. That said, some rabbinic midrash is quite insightful. (There tends to be an all or nothing perspective that Christians take toward things Jewish, i.e. regarding Judaism. They either dismiss everything as worthless or believe they have almost divine insight. Neither is true. Judaism, like Christianity, is a manmade religion and subject to the foibles and frailties of man.) As I summarized in my post above, midrash as a tool and a method is extremely valuable to Biblical understanding...if it is GOOD midrash.
Btw, I fellowship at a congregation called Beit Midrash (House of Study).
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Rosie Perera said:Steven Langella said:
But I am also very protective over those I am trying to influence and want to make sure they are not led down some wrong trails that could cause confusion and doubt that God's Word is actually GOD"S WORD and not flawed man's words.
At some point you've also got to entrust those you are "trying to influence" to God and let him lead them by his Spirit to truth, using you and whoever else these friends of yours encounter along the way in their spiritual journey, including authors they encounter through reading. You might at times be mistaken on one point or another, so taking a protective paternal role over these people might actually be shielding them from finding out something which you might, at this stage in your growth, find troubling, but which God wants to lead them into. So hold on loosely. Teach and explain and encourage them to love God above all, but then also trust the Spirit of Truth to guide them into all truth. And be open to learning yourself along the way as you accompany these learners.
Well said.
Does this sound almost daunting? Good...get used to it...because this is the kind of mindset needed to find truth.
ASUS ProArt x570s Creator, AMD R9 5950x, HyperX 64gb 3600 RAM, ASUS Strix RTX 2080 ti
"The Unbelievable Work...believe it or not." Little children...Biblical prophecy is not Christianity's friend.
0 -
Andrew Mckenzie said:
FSB editors are not going to be able to make everyone happy, but this is a new venture and I think their openness to feedback is the right approach.
I share some of the OP's concerns. FSB is great for me, where I am at in my maturity in Christ and being able to deal with more liberal commentary, but I wouldn't recommended ti to a lot of Christians I know, this material wouldn't be helpful to them if they choose to unlock some of these resources - curiosity always makes you want to find out whats in the wrapped box (and I think there is some marketing strategy behind this to get people to unlock more books; its not just about provided links to dig deeper; call my cynical if you like, maybe I am a little.) I even think the LBD is a little bit to academically or scholarly inclined at times for me to recommended it to the average person sitting in the church pew - its great for me, but I don't see how some of the material in LBD is going to be beneficial for them. So unless I know a person is inclined to dig deeper into the scriptures, really knows how so sort the chaff from the wheat when it comes to the liberal stuff , I wouldn't recommend FSB and LBD to them.
That's exactly my view.
This is my personal Faithlife account. On 1 March 2022, I started working for Faithlife, and have a new 'official' user account. Posts on this account shouldn't be taken as official Faithlife views!
0
