Bill wrote: > ... Hence both groups are in effect stationed very > much in the now, having not the theological framework > to sustain an optimistic outlook upon future -- and this > even though their theologies vary quite distinctively one > from the other. More to the point, this, it seems to me, > is all quite unrelated to the deliberately "Hebrew mindset" > of my interpretive hermeneutic.
You seem to be using a rather broad brush. You offered an example of a Jew you met who does not believe in the resurrection, and you use that anecdote to characterize the Jewish mindset. I was trying to point out that this is not a representative view in Judaism. I was trying to be kind here, but now feel compelled to put the concept forth a little stronger. [Where is Slade when we need him? :-)] One of the thirteen articles of faith of Maimonides is the resurrection of the dead. He taught this based upon the book of Daniel and claimed that no Jew could interpret this other than literally. He taught that there was no Jewish faith nor attachment to Jewish faith without the belief in the resurrection of the dead. In addition, other articles of the Jewish faith that he outlined include the belief in divine judgment (reward and retribution), and the belief in the arrival of Messiah which precipitates the resurrection of the dead. There is a plethora of Jewish writing that concerns an optimistic outlook on the future, but because the outcome of that judgment is viewed to be dependent upon what we do in the here and now, Judaism takes a more practical approach than much of modern Christianity does. Modern Christianity tends to emphasize grace to such an extreme that most theological frameworks seem to focus more on rhetoric concerning an optimism of the future than on how we should now live. Historical Christianity is another matter. Your interpretive hermeneutic that invokes the "Hebrew mindset" appears to me to be something called upon to bat down ideas that come from Hellenistic Judaism or Greek thought. If there is something more than this to your interpretations of Scripture, please explain it to me. I tend to consider this hermeneutic principle to be faulty in the way that it has been used by Tom Wright and others in this forum. Peace be with you. David Miller. ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
