http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/20/the-failure-of-exile-and-theological-interpretation-2/ Telling the story of the story-bound God Sat, 11 Feb 2012 03:08:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/20/the-failure-of-exile-and-theological-interpretation-2/#comment-822 Adam Nigh Sun, 21 Feb 2010 08:54:54 +0000 http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=272#comment-822 I certainly think they way you've expressed the ark of changing expectations across the exile is right. But read as Christian Scripture, which must mean read as a sign of Jesus Christ as the Revelation of God in his covenant faithfulness to Israel, including faithfulness to his promise to bless all nations through the children of Abraham, I don't see why categories like inerrancy necessarily get in your way. God's promises to Israel on both sides of the exile and during it are all fulfilled in Christ as he takes up their struggle with God into himself and accomplishes the faithfulness and obedience to God their history was always intending and leading toward, and to which their prophetic literature was always pointing, even if that can only be known on this side of Christ. Of course we see the story taking all kinds of unexpected turns as it unfolds on the horizontal level (I'm reading Levering at the moment), but it seems like we lose way too much in our understanding of God and the mystery of Christ previously hidden in the ages past (Rom 16:25-26) if we don't understand those turns according to the plan of God and his unchanging plan on the vertical level. The story is thus held together in Christ, the horizontal fully fused to the vertical and the fluctuating story given an unchanging dimension in which Scripture can faithfully be understood as inerrant in its participation and sanctification in Christ. I'm not really getting what you're worried about regarding theological interpretation of Scripture. I certainly think they way you’ve expressed the ark of changing expectations across the exile is right. But read as Christian Scripture, which must mean read as a sign of Jesus Christ as the Revelation of God in his covenant faithfulness to Israel, including faithfulness to his promise to bless all nations through the children of Abraham, I don’t see why categories like inerrancy necessarily get in your way. God’s promises to Israel on both sides of the exile and during it are all fulfilled in Christ as he takes up their struggle with God into himself and accomplishes the faithfulness and obedience to God their history was always intending and leading toward, and to which their prophetic literature was always pointing, even if that can only be known on this side of Christ. Of course we see the story taking all kinds of unexpected turns as it unfolds on the horizontal level (I’m reading Levering at the moment), but it seems like we lose way too much in our understanding of God and the mystery of Christ previously hidden in the ages past (Rom 16:25-26) if we don’t understand those turns according to the plan of God and his unchanging plan on the vertical level. The story is thus held together in Christ, the horizontal fully fused to the vertical and the fluctuating story given an unchanging dimension in which Scripture can faithfully be understood as inerrant in its participation and sanctification in Christ. I’m not really getting what you’re worried about regarding theological interpretation of Scripture.

]]> http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/20/the-failure-of-exile-and-theological-interpretation-2/#comment-812 Ian Packer Sun, 21 Feb 2010 03:16:31 +0000 http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=272#comment-812 Terrific post, Daniel... I'm still 'digesting' Terrific post, Daniel… I’m still ‘digesting’

]]> http://www.jrdkirk.com/2010/02/20/the-failure-of-exile-and-theological-interpretation-2/#comment-798 Sage the Fool Sat, 20 Feb 2010 21:56:53 +0000 http://www.jrdkirk.com/?p=272#comment-798 It occurs to me that your thought also offer an explanation of why the compilers stitched together the three Isaiah's in the order they did. Each one is having to adapt what came before to changing (and disappointing) circumstances. It occurs to me that your thought also offer an explanation of why the compilers stitched together the three Isaiah’s in the order they did. Each one is having to adapt what came before to changing (and disappointing) circumstances.

]]>