Dan,

I admire your Christian spirit and love. But a word of advice: do not rely on Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort only for your arguments. Those two do make an occasional good point, but any respectable scholar and theologian will tell you that they are incorrect in a lot of their blind assumptions.

I used to be totally into what they were doing, but i have taken a step back, and a step up…and it is quite obvious that they are promoting a very limited Jesus and Christianity.

Again, they make good points here and there, but I would strongly encourage you to broaden your theological horizons.

-Justin

My response is a question: “Where in scripture has there been a prophecy that was seen to be fulfilled as it happened?”

What I’m saying with being interpreted ‘after the fact’ is that — well, take the Isaiah 7, with the virgin birth. Up until Christianity had the virgin birth, that wasn’t seen as a prophecy speaking towards that. Rather, it was to Azaz, in that the sign was a young woman was with child, bear the son and by the time the child learns to reject evil and choose good, desolation will come to the land and so forth. That was never part of any Messianic prophecy. And then Christianity has the virgin birth, and that’s considered part of the prophecies foretelling Jesus. That’s what I mean by ‘after the fact.’ The event occured, and then elements in the OT were used to support that event. I mean, if you simply read the Isaiah prophecy as translated in Hebrew, there is no sense that it applies to anything outside of Azaz, or an impregnanted virgin.

Also, remember that Paul was a Pharisee, and of the most legalistic sect of Judaism.

But again — this scholar was saying that, outside of the traditional Christian scholarship, Judaism isn’t shown as earning salvation through works. It had nothing to do with Paul’s sense of legalism, but how Judaism was interpreted through Paul’s statements in later generations, such as by Luther. I may not have been clear on that, but Christianity does give the impression that Jews operate as though they can earn salvation by obeying the law or doing good works. Rather, Jews follow the law, or perform good works out of gratitude for the covenant that God has made between him and the Jews. I think they hold that election/salvation are dependent upon God, not upon their actions.

Did legalism creep in, and was it demonstrated by some? I’m sure it did/was, just as it’s demonstrated in certain Christians as well (note: I’m not saying that you are legalistic. But I’m sure you’ve met a CHristian or two who was legalistc).

I don’t expect Jews to simply throw out their tradition or interpretation of Torah. I am saying that just because they believe it does not make it correct. Just as Christianity is, Judaism is a subjective viewing of objective truth. I do claim that Christianity is far more correct, but specifically in regards to the Messiah.

“(because I don’t think there were that many Christ-prophecies that were considered prophecies until after the fact)”

My response is a question: “Where in scripture has there been a prophecy that was seen to be fulfilled as it happened?” Furthermore, prophets have been known to be killed because the people did not like what they had to say (Zechariah, for instance). Is it any wonder that fulfillment of messianic prophecy was not so well received by some?

“You might already be familiar with this, actually, because I think N.T. Wright showcases this in his New Perspective on Paul idea?”

Yes and no. He does showcase it somewhat in his commentary on Romans. It is interesting, to be sure, and helps shed a lot of light on his hebrew heritage. However, his analysis of Paul (and I’m echoing a similar vein as John Piper and Greg Perry) does not incorporate his Roman/Hellenistic background, or that of his audience (that, or if it does, Wright puts an overemphasis on Paul’s Jewish background over Paul’s understanding of his gentile audience).

Also, remember that Paul was a Pharisee, and of the most legalistic sect of Judaism. If his portrayal seems legalistic at times, it is because of his experience within it. The Pharisees at the time of his involvement, were advocating that their strict adherence to the law (and additional restrictions they placed on themselves) be “enforced” on all of Israel (Witherington, “Community and Conflict in Corinth”).

As such, I can very much see how Christian authors and commentators can mistakenly assign that role to all of Judaism, which is where Wright is writing from. However, we cannot take an extreme reaction to that, and deny that legalism had NO place, or that it was not a major aspect of, 2nd Temple Judaism.

However, “warping” has far more negative connotation, and does not reflect the truthfulness of the “reinterpretation” that shows Christ as Messiah.

What it would come down to is one person’s warping is another person’s reinterpretation. Because warping is precisely how they see it, and so they aren’t going to modify their statements to reflect what Christianity perceives as true. Even to use the phrase of a mostly correct interpretation — in a lot of ways, I think they’d disagree with that, given the different prophecies in both religions (because I don’t think there were that many Christ-prophecies that were considered prophecies until after the fact), and the differences highlighted earlier — a divine Messiah, God as man, original sin, the purpose of the Messiah, the concept of heaven/hell, and even the portrayel of Judaism. One scholar I’ve read said that the idea of Paul showing that Judaism was a legalistic religion and one earning salvation/righteousness under the law is not an accurate description of Judaism, which is recognized by scholars outside “traditional” Christianity (in that obedience to the Torah is a response to being given the Torah, but salvation wasn’t earned through that obedience). You might already be familiar with this, actually, because I think N.T. Wright showcases this in his New Perspective on Paul idea?

Reinterpretation seems a lot closer, imo.

“Christianity’s interpretations of the Tanakh are horrendous distortions in the eyes of Jews no matter what century we live in. Of course you are not going to call it “warping,” you call it “fulfillment” or “reinterpretation.””

I do not argue that they are not distortions in the eyes of the Jews. I very much agree and concede that it seems that Christianity hijacked the Jewish faith. However, “warping” has far more negative connotation, and does not reflect the truthfulness of the “reinterpretation” that shows Christ as Messiah. It is not so much a reinterpretation as it is a correction of a mostly correct interpretation. This however, is mincing words, as I suspect we will still disagree.

“My biggest disappointment concerning the former was that we always had to start with a conclusion and then try and work the evidence into it. Marks were based more on how convincing you could make the same end result that your classmates were working towards.”

Brother, you should have come to Covenant! I have been amazed at the humility of the professors here, and have not once encountered a situation like you describe. I do not deny that it is common place among other seminaries, though. I have been incredibly blessed.

And in Re: to Schaefer, I am aware of some of the philosophies he critiques. His struggle was greatly reactionary toward the modernist “drive by tracting” and truth without love or relationship that many of his contemporaries preached. He was probably far more post-modern than many of us today. I appreciate his perspective, and adopt much of his style of apologetics because it is an incarnational theology (that is, it embodies the truth of scripture in deed as well as word) that reaches the postmodern mindset and restores Christianity from it’s hypocritical reputation.

I am aware of his critique of Kierkegaard, but what else are you referring to?

but I believe the literal meaning of Messiah is “messenger”

“Messiah” is the Hebrew word for “the Anointed One”. It was attributed to all the kings of Israel until Babylonian captivity, when it became a word used for their next future king.