 » Site Navigation | | | |  | 
08-23-2007, 12:39 AM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Casa Grande, AZ
Posts: 441
Thanks: 12
Thanked 8 Times in 3 Posts
| | | Backwards hermenutic?
Quote:
COVENANT SIGN AND SEAL
The Symbolic Significance of Circumcision,
and Its Application to the New Testament Believer
Part 2 of 2
by Rev. Michael Glodo
...Attempting to prove paedobaptism by working back from the New Testament to the Old Testament provides many opportunities for losing one’s way. There are multiple considerations which determine the turns one takes, such as one’s sacramental theology, ecclesiology, and eschatology. Another good reason to avoid this reasoning is that the Bible itself argues from the Old Testament to the New Testament rather than from the New Testament to the Old Testament. This normative Old Testament New Testament hermeneutic is expressed in many ways with respect to the circumcision/baptism question....
| Isn't this backwards? Doesn't the NT interpret the OT?
__________________
Andrew Cunningham
Casa Grande, AZ
Attending:Grace Covenant Church, ARBCA Cross Centered Life |
08-23-2007, 06:23 AM
|  | Administrator | | Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Northern Virgnia
Posts: 11,794
Thanks: 912
Thanked 2,244 Times in 1,059 Posts
| | |
Yes, the NT reveals the OT but it's the same way that reading the end of the Lord of the Rings reveals things that happen in the beginning and the middle of the book. If you haven't read the beginning of the book and just jump to the end you're thinking:
"Who's Frodo? Who's Gandalph? Elves on ships? What are they talking about with these rings?"
What a lot of people do is they spend a bunch of time reading the very end and then they construct the story that preceded assuming: "This must be how they got there." Then when they're confronted with the actual beginning and middle they say: "Well, that can't be right because that doesn't comport with how I saw the story developing. This must mean something different for him."
If you look at Paul in the Book of Romans, recall that the people he's addressing don't have the New Testament Epistles. When Paul taught them the Scriptures he taught them the OT but then shed light on the meaning of them. He's not with us today but we have his Epistles to read but he expects us to read the things he's talking about. That way when we get to Galatians 3 we're not saying:
"Who's Abraham? What Promise? Isaac? Ishmael? Circumcision?"
| |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | |
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:20 AM.
