(how to tell the biblical story in a way that makes a difference)

Recent comments

Is Jesus called “God” in Titus 2:13?

Jaco Thanks for a good article. Of course I agree with you. I tend to go with the third option where Jesus is God’s glory. Interestingly enough, Jimmy Dunn does too in his “Did the First Christians... (Mon, 23/01/2017 - 04:34)
Marc Taylor Interesting article - thank you. Have you seen this short piece by J. Christopher Edwards?http://www.tyndalehouse.com/Bulletin/62=2011/07_Edwards8.pdf (Sun, 22/01/2017 - 02:16)

A conversation with Emi about salvation and mission

Emi replied to Philip Ledgerwood Hi Phil, I really like this. Some questions popped up in my mind as I read the last paragraphs. What do you believe God’s communities’ purpose is? I feel like the mission of enticing as many people... (Mon, 23/01/2017 - 03:59)
Emi Hi Andrew, I waited to comment anything again, trusting your usual habit of not replying until you surprise me by commenting with a link to an entire article haha. Perhaps I was right in waiting for... (Sun, 22/01/2017 - 23:29)

The narrative-historical reading of the New Testament: what’s in it for me? Part 1

Travis Finley AP, May I read your articles as episodes for my podcast? We think alike. (Sun, 22/01/2017 - 13:17)

The narrative-historical method—an outline

Travis Finley AP, When I talked with a friend of mine about my hermeneutic, he asked me if I had read you. I hadn’t. But he felt your NH method and my “Olivetianism” were close enough to associate. (Sun, 22/01/2017 - 13:10)

Was the garden of Eden an “archetypal sanctuary”?

Travis Finley replied to Travis Finley “…Genesis 5 just shy of 1000.” (Sun, 22/01/2017 - 12:07)
Travis Finley replied to Andrew AP, I think they key to seeing that the opening chapters in Genesis are allegory is Day7. Well, we can’t really call it a day can we since it is not like the former days. It has no merism: dusk to... (Sun, 22/01/2017 - 11:51)
Andrew replied to Travis Finley I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one, Travis. Our ways of reading scripture are miles apart. But thanks for engaging. (Fri, 20/01/2017 - 16:51)
Travis Finley replied to Andrew AP, I don’t believe I’m confused (wrong, maybe, but not confused). Yes, that is the correct question and I believe the answer is, Yes. There is good reason to believe the account is allegorical: that... (Fri, 20/01/2017 - 16:46)
Andrew replied to Travis Finley Travis, to me this looks like the standard confusion of allegory and allegorical interpretation. It’s easy enough to allegorise the passage to make it a story about Israel as a priestly nation. The... (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 12:48)
Travis Finley Hi, AP, I’m still working through these ideas, so bear with me. There can be no doubt that “serve and guard” are intended as markers to associate later in Numbers 3. The difficulty you have, istm, in... (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 12:29)
Andrew replied to Casey Casey, I don’t have the books you mention, but Beale has quite a lengthy defence of the Eden-temple argument in his New Testament Biblical Theology (617-22). He gives nine reasons for holding to the... (Wed, 18/01/2017 - 17:22)

16 reasons for thinking that the conversion of the empire was at the heart of New Testament eschatology

peter wilkinson replied to Andrew Also, I agree with your 2nd point, but find it hard to see how that could be a judgment, in the OT sense, and in the sense of Romans 1:18. Does Revelation 18 (v. 21 especially) describe defeat by... (Fri, 20/01/2017 - 20:21)
peter wilkinson replied to Andrew I’m not sure he does. He drives out those who are abusing the temple: John 2:14-16. (Fri, 20/01/2017 - 18:25)
Andrew replied to peter wilkinson On the point of “violent retribution”: 1) doesn’t Jesus enact a “violent” judgment against the temple in anticipation of AD 70, citing Jeremiah 7:11—not to mention other statements in the Gospels... (Fri, 20/01/2017 - 17:00)
peter wilkinson Usually by the time I have thought of something sensible to say about these or any items posted for consideration on Postost, the item has been superseded by the next. So probably more for my own... (Fri, 20/01/2017 - 14:42)
Andrew replied to Peter I’m not sure what evidence we have for the first question. Dating is always a bit problematic anyway. But I suspect that first century Jews would have been less interested in the historical reading... (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 23:14)
Peter replied to Andrew So I have a few more questions for you: Do you think first-century Jewish followers of Christ recognized Daniel’s 4th beast as the Greeks and the horn as Antiochus? Do you think most first-century... (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 21:00)
Andrew replied to Peter Yes, probably something like that. In historical terms prophecy is not an exact science, but it seems to me that the clash with pagan empire from the Babylonian period onwards generated a growing... (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 18:12)
Peter replied to Andrew Just to be clear, are you saying the prophesies of restoration and exaltation after captivity (an age of peace, prosperity, and importance) that we read about in places like Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc.... (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 17:06)
Andrew replied to Peter It’s a good question about Alexander the Great. What I think happened was that the apocalyptic vision of YHWH’s take-over of the pagan empire was first formulated in response to Hellenism and then... (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 12:30)
Peter It seems the OT predicted a return from exile and then a golden age when other nations would look up to Israel. But can we fast forward to Constantine and say, “See, here’s the fulfillment”? What... (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 02:13)

Talking Jesus: how does the Trinity fit in?

Andrew replied to JT John Tancock My argument is supported by pretty much every book in the New Testament. The consistent witness of the New Testament writers is that God raised his Son from the dead, exalted him to his right hand,... (Fri, 20/01/2017 - 16:37)
JT John Tancock replied to Andrew anti mainstream texts. Your choice of texts to support your emphasis and more importantly to rule out an EHC (early high christology view which is mainstream histpric understanding of the... (Fri, 20/01/2017 - 16:07)
Andrew replied to JT John tancock You appear not to have understood, or not to have wanted to understand, what I was saying. What on earth do you mean by “anti mainstream texts”? (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 16:03)
JT John tancock replied to Andrew I’m very aware of the texts concerned re Jesus being called ‘God’, suffice it to say that the preferred ‘in the text’ translation of all the major versions is pro the historic view. John 1v1 and... (Wed, 18/01/2017 - 22:02)
Andrew replied to JT John tancock The and/or approach refers to the fact that Jesus being given the status of ‘God’ is IN the New Testament not later than it.Let me clarify. Systematic Trinitarian doctrine came later. As I said in... (Wed, 18/01/2017 - 18:05)
JT John tancock replied to Andrew I don’t think you are actually reading what I am saying. The and/or approach refers to the fact that Jesus being given the status of ‘God’ is IN the New Testament not later than it. Therefore it... (Wed, 18/01/2017 - 17:33)

Is that third horizon just a mirage?

Travis Finley AP, You say’d I agree with Wright and others who argue that resurrection is a ‘new creation’ event It’s not “an” event. It is the event. Resurrection, new creation, regeneration, kingdom, marriage,... (Thu, 19/01/2017 - 12:07)