Ho w to Re a d the Bib le fo r All I ts Wo rth Cha pte r 5 T - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Ho w to Re a d the Bib le fo r All I ts Wo rth Cha pte r 5 T he Old T e sta me nt Na rra tive s: T he ir Pro pe r Use Jo shua Smith T his Pho to b y Unkno wn Autho r is lic e nse d und e r CC BY-NC-ND

T he Ne e d fo r Guida nc e On why we sho uld b e c o nc e rne d a b o ut Old T e sta me nt na rra tive

T he Ne e d fo r Guida nc e  T he Old T e sta me nt (he nc e fo rth, OT ) c o mprise s o ve r ¾ o f the Bib le . Ove r 40% o f the OT is na rra tive .  So me Christia ns ha ve ha d a n unhe a lthy re la tio nship with the OT in g e ne ra l a nd OT na rra tive in pa rtic ula r.  E xa mple s:  “Po lyg a my is pre se nt in the OT the re fo re it is g o o d to pra c tic e .”  “Go d c o mma nds Mo se s a nd Jo shua to drive o ut a nd kill fo re ig ne rs a nd so sho uld I .”  “E lija h’ s b a ttle with the prie sts o f Ba a l o n Mt. Ca rme l is a b o ut Je sus triumph o ve r e vil spirits” (96).* *Unle ss o the rwise no te d, pa re ne tic a ls re fe r to Ho w to Re ad the Bib le .

T wo E q ua l a nd Oppo site E rro rs On two e rro ne o us a ppro a c he s to the Old T e sta me nt na rra tive s

T wo E q ua l a nd Oppo site Attitude s T o wa rd the OT 1. E rro r o f Dismissa l: “We a re pa rt o f the Ne w Co ve na nt in Christ. T he o ld ha s pa sse d a wa y a nd the ne w is he re . T he re fo re , we a re to o nly re a d the Ne w T e sta me nt.” 1. T he OT is o ur spiritua l histo ry. E thnic I sra e l is no t the g e nuine re c ipie nts o f the pro mise s o f Ab ra ha m b ut tho se who trust in the pro mise s o f Go d to Ab ra ha m (Ga l. 3:6-9). 2. E rro r o f Pe rso na liza tio n: “T he Old T e sta me nt c o nta ins me ssa g e s, e ve n se c re t me ssa g e s to me . T he OT is to b e re a d a s a dire c t pre sc riptio n fo r my da ily life .” 1. T he OT wa s writte n to a spe c ific pe o ple in a spe c ific time . Be fo re we c a n e ve r a sk wha t it me a ns fo r us , we must first kno w what it me ant . Only the n c a n we se e wha t Go d is no w c o mmunic a ting to o ur pre se nt time .

ROUND T ABL E DI SCUSSI ON  T e ll yo ur na me a nd why yo u live in Ho usto n.  Do yo u find yo urse lf with a ny fe a rs o r a ve rsio ns to re a ding the OT ?  Do yo u find yo urse lf o r o the rs fa lling into o ne o f the e rro rs me ntio ne d?  E rro r o f Dismissa l  E rro r o f Pe rso na liza tio n

Wha t Plo ts a nd Na rra tive s a re On wha t c o nstitute s a plo t a nd ho w to unde rsta nd na rra tive s

T he Plo t Mo unta in  All na rra tive s ha ve the e le me nts o f sto rie s tha t we a re fa milia r with.  T he re a re pro ta g o nists a nd a nta g o nists.

Me ta -wha t? Me ta , Co mmuna l, a nd I ndividua l Na rra tive s Me ta na rra tive : Cre a tio n>F a ll>Re de mptio n>Re ne wa l Ab ra ha mic line a g e g ypt sra e l in Ba b ylo n xo dus fro m E Co mmuna l Na rra tive I E Na rra tive I ndividua l Ab ra ha m Mo se s Da nie l a nd Sa ra h

Wha t Na rra tive s a re No t 1. Alle g o rie s 1. Alle g o ry is pre se nt within the Bib le . Ho we ve r, its use is limite d a nd we c a nno t use this me tho d o f inte rpre ta tio n to de c iphe r OT na rra tive s fo r it c o mple te ly dismisse s wha t the na rra tive wo uld ha ve me a nt to the o rig ina l he a re rs. 2. Mo ra l le sso ns 1. Go d’ s mo ra l la w is pre se nt in the Bib le . Ho we ve r, simply b e c a use the Bib le de sc rib e s so me thing do e s no t me a n it pre sc rib e s it fo r mo ra l pra c tic e .

Na rra tive s a s Spo ke n a nd He a rd, No t Re a d Priva te ly  We c a n ha rdly a ppre c ia te this no w in o ur a b unda ntly te xt a nd visua l b a se d c ulture .  T he o rig ina l a udie nc e we re he are rs no t re ade rs. T his is why the re is muc h re pe titio n a nd why the na rra tive s c a n b e q uite diffic ult to re a d.

Cha ra c te ristic s o f He b re w Na rra tive Aspe c ts to lo o k o ut fo r whe n re a ding Old T e sta me nt na rra tive s

Cha ra c te ristic s o f He b re w Na rra tive : T he Na rra to r  T he na rra to r is func tio na lly a ll-kno wing  T he na rra to r do e s no t disc lo se a ll tha t he kno ws (he le ts us fig ure it o ut a nd a llo ws the sto ry to unfo ld o n its o wn).  T he na rra to r is re spo nsib le fo r the po int o f vie w o f the sto ry.

Cha ra c te ristic s o f He b re w Na rra tive : T he Na rra to r  T e st Ca se : Jo se ph  T he sto ry is fro m the po int o f vie w o f Jo se ph, a s it sta te s a t the e nd o f Ge n. “yo u inte nde d to ha rm me , b ut Go d inte nde d it fo r g o o d…”

Cha ra c te ristic s o f He b re w Na rra tive : Sc e ne s  T he pre do mina nt kind o f na rra tio n is sc e nic . T he na rra to r se ldo m “e nte rs into ” the sto ry. Ra the r, he a rra ng e s va rio us sc e ne s into a unifie d who le .

Cha ra c te ristic s o f He b re w Na rra tive : Sc e ne s  T e st Ca se : Jo se ph  We a re pre se nte d with fa vo re d Jo se ph in his a rro g a nc e “ta ttle -te lling ” o n his b ro the rs.  Jo se ph re info rc e s this a rro g a nc e b y de sc rib ing dre a ms tha t he will rule o ve r his o lde r b ro the rs a nd fa the r.  Jo se ph is so ld into sla ve ry b y his b ro the rs.  T he po int is, the na rra tive g o e s fro m sc e ne to sc e ne to te ll a sto ry. Jo se ph’ s na rra tive is so o rg a nize d a s to c o mmunic a te tha t the e ve nts a re divine ly o rda ine d.

Cha ra c te ristic s o f He b re w Na rra tive : Cha ra c te rs  Cha ra c te rs a re the ma in c o mpo ne nt o f the He b re w na rra tive sc e ne s.  T he na rra tive pro g re sse s thro ug h the c ha ra c te r’ s wo rds a nd a c tio ns, no t the na rra to r’ s c o mme nts o n the c ha ra c te rs.

Cha ra c te ristic s o f He b re w Na rra tive : Cha ra c te rs  T e st Ca se : Jo se ph  At the b e g inning o f the na rra tive , Jo se ph is a b ra t a nd a rro g a nt. By the e nd o f the sto ry, he ha s de ve lo pe d to a ma ture a nd fa ithful se rva nt o f Ya hwe h. T his is e spe c ia lly illustra te d b y his c o nfro nta tio n with Po tipha r’ s wife .

Cha ra c te ristic s o f He b re w Na rra tive : Dia lo g ue  T he first po int o f dia lo g ue se ts the to ne fo r the re st o f the na rra tive .  T he na rra to r will e mpha size c ruc ia l pa rts o f the sto ry with a c ha ra c te r re pe a ting the na rra tive in a spe e c h.  T e st Ca se : Jo se ph. T he spe e c he s o f the b ro the rs a nd Juda h illustra te this po int (Ge n. 42:30-34; 44:18- 34).

Princ iple s fo r Dig e sting the Na rra tive s Ac tio n pla n fo r b e g inning yo ur e ng a g e me nt with Old T e sta me nt na rra tive s

Princ iple s fo r E ng a g e me nt: I nitia lly He a ring a nd no t Ana lyzing  Yo u must a llo w yo urse lf to sit with the sto ry b e fo re yo u b e g in to a na lyze it a nd de c iphe r it.  A g o o d rule o f thumb is to re a d the na rra tive thro ug h c o mple te ly twic e b e fo re yo u b e g in dig g ing fo r me a ning .

Princ iple s fo r Re a ding : Disc o ve r the Pre suppo sitio ns o f the Na rra to r  T he na rra to r a ssume s tha t yo u sha re his pre suppo sitio ns sinc e the o rig ina l he a re rs wo uld ha ve . Yo u will like ly ha ve to do so me te xtua l a na lysis a nd c o mme nta ry inve stig a tio n.  T he mo st o fte n a ppe a le d to pre suppo sitio ns within the He b re w Na rra tive s de a l with the fo llo wing :  T he c o ve na nt with Ab ra ha m  T he L a w o f Mo se s  T he E xo dus fro m E g ypt

Princ iple s fo r Re a ding : F ind I mplic it Me a ning s  Be c a use the na rra to r a ssume s yo u sha re his pre suppo sitio ns, he do e s no t spe ll o ut a ll the implic a tio ns fro m the sc e ne s he pre se nts. So we ha ve to do a little wo rk he re .  T e st Ca se : Ruth  I n the b o o k o f Ruth, the re a de r a ssume s tha t we will b e fa milia r with the L e vitic a l la w whe n he de sc rib e s the rig hte o usne ss o f Bo a z a nd the trust tha t Ruth ha s in Ya hwe h.  Also , if we lo o k c lo se ly a t the g e ne a lo g ie s within Ruth, we disc o ve r tha t she is in the line a g e o f K ing Da vid a nd b y implic a tio n, Je sus o f Na ze re th. T his sug g e sts tha t the sto ry is no t o nly a b o ut Ruth b ut a lso a b o ut the me ta na rra tive o f re de mptio n.

Princ iple s fo r Reading: Implicit ≠ Se c re t  Simply b e c a use the re a re implic it po ints in the na rra tive do e s no t me a n tho se po ints a re se c re t o r hidde n . T he re must b e a c o nne c tio n b e twe e n e xe g e sis a nd a pplic a tio n. Othe rwise , we c a n ma ke the te xt sa y wha te ve r we wish.

Ho me wo rk  Re a d Ruth a lo ud to yo urse lf o r to so me o ne e lse a nd a tte mpt to a pply the se princ iple s we ’ ve disc usse d to da y.