How does Hendriksen view group mentality in Baker NTC?

I have a long standing brainchild for reflecting on "Group mentality" really since as long as I can remember.

If anyone has used Baker's New Testament Commentary (HK) extensively or for a long time and remembers how the author discusses this, I'd be thrilled to hear!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Unix

bump! (As there have been a lot of other discussions continued or started today I have to bump this.)

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/533138#Comment_533138

I very much doubt that he would consider this directly, or if he has I have never identified it as such. The closest you would probably find would be a discussion of the impact of original sin.

I would not expect a Reformed commentary to discuss such a concept directly as to do so would arguably approach matters through a human rather than a theistic lens.

David Paul

I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you refer to "group mentality"--are you referring to national (as opposed to individual) redemption? Or the political cronyism of the Sadducees and Pharisees? Or the Gentile delusion that it was about them all along? Or something else?

Unix

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/533153#Comment_533153

Those...:

are you referring to national (as opposed to individual) redemption? Or the political cronyism of the Sadducees and Pharisees?

... and all of the below questions:

What should Ethics be based on: on how most people react or on something more or different? For example: if the New Testament "says" (I don't think it says) that it's OK to eat pork but the Old Testament says it's not OK, do the authors of the New Testament (other than the sayings of Jesus and the statements of Paul in the genuine epistles except parts of Ro) rule out the Old Testament?
Does the Bible work like this: "the newest standard is the one to follow"? - if applied consistently books like Apocalypse and 2 Peter should rule out the rest of the Bible, right, being written after 130 C.E.? Apocalypse has some words of Jesus, right? Can't say much about 2 Pt as I don't remember much of it and don't read it anymore, but if it asserts something and which contradicts a "weak" statement earlier on in some other book of the New Testament?
Does the (scholarly or theological) popularity (or the popular beliefs of the people) of/regarding (New Testament) Bible passages rule out every less popular contradicting passage?
Do authorities decide everything? Occasionally, although I have neither a liberal or traditional view (although I'm only a bit patriarchal in very few areas) I think they don't.

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/535624#Comment_535624

Unix,

Check out this book that addresses many of your questions - https://www.logos.com/product/17262/introduction-to-biblical-hermeneutics

Unix

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/535630#Comment_535630

David, it's tiresome to read some book separately about those questions. I would prefer to know how Baker's NT Commentary (HK) deals with the questions.

KJ Niblett

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/536051#Comment_536051

David, it's tiresome to read some book separately about those questions. I would prefer to know how Baker's NT Commentary (HK) deals with the questions.

Unix I have mentioned this before, find your own 'theological voice' and these issues and questions are moot points, as you can then critically engage and dialogue with what you are reading.

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/536058#Comment_536058

Unix I have mentioned this before, find your own 'theological voice' and these issues and questions are moot points, as you can then critically engage and dialogue with what you are reading.

[Y][Y] One's Hermeneutic is foundational to understanding all other theological writings. Having a cohesive frame through which new ideas can be framed and filtered leads to increased confidence and understanding.

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/536099#Comment_536099

LPP

Unix I have mentioned this before, find your own 'theological voice' and these issues and questions are moot points, as you can then critically engage and dialogue with what you are reading.

One's Hermeneutic is foundational to understanding all other theological writings. Having a cohesive frame through which new ideas can be framed and filtered leads to increased confidence and understanding.

And it is important that this framework is itself self consciously Christian if you are to avoid incoherence

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/536051#Comment_536051

I would prefer to know how Baker's NT Commentary (HK) deals with the questions.

Part of what the others are rightly saying is that Baker's NT Commentary doesn't deal with those questions at all - it's a commentary, not a theological textbook. You have already said that you have a copy of this commentary, and a quick glance at even a few pages of that commentary will tell you enough to know the answers to those questions (or whether they're the wrong questions). And I'm afraid that they are the wrong questions to ask of this author, because those questions assume a theological framework that he does not have. In particular he views all of Scripture as being fully authoritative and having a complete theological unity — both of which are implicitly denied in your questions.

Mike Pettit

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/536269#Comment_536269

I would prefer to know how Baker's NT Commentary (HK) deals with the questions.

Part of what the others are rightly saying is that Baker's NT Commentary doesn't deal with those questions at all - it's a commentary, not a theological textbook. You have already said that you have a copy of this commentary, and a quick glance at even a few pages of that commentary will tell you enough to know the answers to those questions (or whether they're the wrong questions). And I'm afraid that they are the wrong questions to ask of this author, because those questions assume a theological framework that he does not have. In particular he views all of Scripture as being fully authoritative and having a complete theological unity — both of which are implicitly denied in your questions.

[Y]

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/536275#Comment_536275

I think Unix's question is a good one, though maybe not for Baker's. It commonly comes up in Bible class.