Roy B. Blizzard's Blog, page 2

But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law, he meditates day and night...

[image error]

Understanding the Default Mode Network: What Your Brain Does When You’re Not Paying Attention

You might think your brain takes a break when you're daydreaming, relaxing, or sitting quietly without focusing on anything specific. However, even during these times, your brain is incredibly active, thanks to something called the Default Mode Network (DMN). Let’s explore what the DMN is, how it was discovered, and how activities like meditation or unplugging from electronic devices can benefit this network and your mental health.

What is the Default Mode Network?

The Default Mode Network (DMN) is a group of brain regions that become active when you’re not focused on a particular task. This network is engaged when you’re daydreaming, thinking about yourself, recalling past experiences, or planning for the future. Far from being idle, the brain is busy processing thoughts and emotions internally, making the DMN a crucial part of how we understand ourselves and the world around us.

How Was the DMN Discovered?

The discovery of the DMN was largely accidental. In the 1990s, neurologist Marcus Raichle and his team were conducting brain imaging studies to understand which parts of the brain were activated during specific tasks like reading or solving problems. They noticed that certain brain areas showed consistent activity when participants were at rest—not focusing on any external task. This observation was surprising because it was previously believed that the brain was relatively inactive during rest.

Raichle noticed that these brain regions, including the medial prefrontal cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, and angular gyrus, were more active when people were not concentrating on external tasks. He coined the term "Default Mode Network" to describe this pattern of brain activity, suggesting that the brain has a default mode of operation when it’s at rest, involved in self-referential and introspective thinking.

The Role of the DMN in Mental Health

The DMN plays several important roles in our mental processes, such as:

Memory: The DMN helps us recall past experiences and imagine future scenarios, making it essential for both memory and planning.
Self-Reflection: It is active when we think about ourselves, our place in the world, and our personal goals.
Social Cognition: The DMN helps us understand others' thoughts and feelings, which is crucial for social interactions.
Mind-Wandering and Creativity: When we let our minds wander, the DMN supports creative thinking and problem-solving by allowing us to explore different ideas and scenarios.

However, when the DMN becomes overactive, it can contribute to mental health issues like depression and anxiety. In these conditions, people often get stuck in loops of negative thinking, focusing excessively on self-referential thoughts. Disruptions in the DMN are also linked to conditions like schizophrenia and Alzheimer's disease, where the normal balance of brain activity is altered.

Benefits of Letting the Brain Rest

Engaging in activities like meditation or reducing screen time can have significant benefits for the DMN and overall brain health:

Reduces Overactivity: Meditation can help quiet the mind, reducing excessive DMN activity that often leads to negative thinking and mental distress.
Promotes Neuroplasticity: Taking breaks from constant electronic stimulation allows the brain to reorganize itself, forming new, healthier neural connections that improve cognitive flexibility and emotional regulation.
Improves Focus and Attention: Reducing electronic use helps the brain maintain a better balance between the DMN and networks responsible for focused attention, enhancing concentration and reducing mental fatigue.
Encourages Emotional Balance: Activities like meditation help clear mental clutter, allowing the DMN to process emotions healthily and reducing stress and anxiety.
Supports Better Sleep: Less screen time, especially before bed, helps maintain a natural sleep cycle, which is crucial for the brain’s repair and memory consolidation processes.

Conclusion

The discovery of the Default Mode Network has reshaped our understanding of the brain’s “resting state.” Far from being inactive, the DMN is actively involved in introspective thought processes, memory, and social cognition. Allowing the brain to rest through meditation and reducing electronic stimuli can promote a healthier DMN, which is crucial for maintaining mental well-being and cognitive function. As research continues, we may discover even more ways to support this vital network and improve our mental health.

The Spiritual Perspective: Meditation and the DMN

The concept of meditation is not just a modern practice; it has deep roots in spiritual traditions around the world. For example, the Bible speaks about the importance of meditation in Psalm 1:2, which states: "But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night." This verse emphasizes the value of continuous reflection on God’s teachings as a source of guidance, wisdom, and strength.

While the biblical context focuses on meditating on scripture, the underlying principle aligns with what we understand about the Default Mode Network (DMN) today. Just as biblical meditation involves a focused and reflective state of mind, modern meditation practices encourage a similar internal focus. Engaging in meditation on spiritual teachings or practicing mindfulness—can help regulate the DMN's activity.

In both spiritual and scientific contexts, meditation serves a valuable purpose. It allows individuals to turn inward, reflect deeply, and find clarity, whether that clarity comes from a connection to faith or from enhancing mental and emotional well-being. This alignment between ancient wisdom and modern neuroscience highlights the universal importance of meditation for maintaining a balanced and healthy mind.

Faith

 

The concept of faith in ancient Jewish or Hebrew tradition is deeply rooted in the idea of trust and loyalty, particularly in the context of a relationship with God. The Hebrew word often translated as "faith" is emunah (אֱמוּנָה), which comes from a root word meaning "support" or "firmness." This gives us a clue about how the ancient Hebrews understood faith—not as mere belief or intellectual assent, but as something more active and relational.

Emunah implies a steadfastness and reliability, both on the part of God and the individual. To have emunah is to trust in God’s promises and to remain loyal to Him, even in the face of uncertainty or adversity. It’s less about believing in specific doctrines and more about a lived commitment to the covenant with God, expressed through actions, obedience, and a way of life that reflects that trust.

Now, when you look at the Christian concept of faith, especially as it developed in the New Testament, there are similarities but also significant differences. The Greek word pistis (πίστις) is used in the New Testament to describe faith, and while it does carry the idea of trust, it also takes on a more pronounced meaning of belief, particularly belief in Jesus as the Christ.

[image error]

In Christianity, faith becomes closely tied to believing in the truths of the gospel—that Jesus is the Son of God, that He died and rose again, and that salvation is through Him. While there’s still an element of trust and relational loyalty (you might think of how Christians are called to trust in God’s grace and love), there’s also a strong emphasis on faith as belief in these specific doctrines.

So, while both the ancient Jewish and Christian concepts of faith share the idea of trust and loyalty, the focus shifts in Christianity to include a more explicit emphasis on belief in particular tenets of faith. This doesn’t mean that Jewish faith lacks belief, or that Christian faith lacks trust, but rather that the two traditions place different emphases on what it means to have faith.

In essence, ancient Jewish faith is about steadfast trust and living in a way that honors that trust, while Christian faith builds on that foundation but adds a particular focus on belief in the person and work of Jesus. Both are deeply relational and communal, but the ways they are expressed and understood have evolved over time.

Articles to assist in the discussion of faith: https://www.biblescholars.org/2013/05/mishnah-and-the-words-of-jesus.html#more

https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5982-faith

Other sources:

Bejarano Gutierrez, Juan Marcos. An Introduction to Jewish Theology: Biblical and Rabbinic Concepts on God, the Torah, Life After Death, and More. Yaron Publishing. 
 

Wilson, Marvin R.. Exploring Our Hebraic Heritage: A Christian Theology of Roots and Renewal. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.. 
 

McDonald, William V.. A Hebrew Text in Greek Dress: A Comparison and Contrast Between Jewish and Hellenistic Thought. New Life Teaching Center, New Life Ministries, Inc.. 


 

Donin, Hayim. To Be a Jew: A Guide to Jewish Observance in Contemporary Life. Basic Books. 
 

Hazony, Yoram. The Philosophy of Hebrew Scripture. Cambridge University Press. 

 

Purim and Passover

Two Jewish holidays celebrated within one month of each other--both focus upon the same theme: REDEMPTION. Historically, Passover, the redemption of the children of Israel from slavery in Egypt, took place before Purim, the redemption of the children of Israel from Haman's decree of death. However, in the Jewish calendar, Purim is celebrated first.

A cursory glance at both holidays would show few similarities and numerous differences between them. This is true on the level of ritual observances. However, when the deep religious significance of the two is properly understood, it is easy to see why the Rabbis have always linked them together.

The children of Israel were slaves in Egypt, and they were slaves in Persia. In Egypt, their bodies were in bondage, but their souls were free. In Persia, their bodies were free, but their souls were enslaved.

In Egypt, they were persecuted because they were foreigners and there were very many of them. But the physical persecutions they endured did not infringe upon their right to worship as they chose. In this, their souls were free.

In Persia, the Jews enjoyed physical freedom, but they were becoming highly assimilated and had largely abandoned the ways of their ancestors. Their souls were enslaved by an alien culture.

Their redemption from Egypt marked the birth of the Jewish people as a nation among the nations. Having received a direct revelation from G-d, they became living witnesses to G-d's Presence in the world and carried the message that a final redemption was coming. But the Jews in Persia were descendants of the exiles who had seen the destruction of the Holy Temple. Their sovereignty had vanished, and redemption was still far away. However, the causeless hatred manifested by Haman was enough to reunite the Jews and make them realize that, assimilated or not, anti-Semites never differentiated between Jews. But here, instead of overt Divine action, they had to rely upon themselves. The results were the same, and following their escape from Haman's decree, the Jews reaffirmed and rededicated themselves to G-d's covenant.

Both Purim and Passover end with the children of Israel being redeemed, the overthrow of the tyrants, and the acceptance of the covenant of Israel with her G-d the commitment to live a special life as a chosen people. Lessons can be learned from both events and the sufferings and salvation each represents.

One of the most important lessons that both holidays teach is that people must play a critical role in their own redemption. In Egypt, the process of resistance began with two heroic women-the midwives Shifra and Puah-who defied Pharaoh's order to kill all newborn male children. Moses' parents also resisted sending him to his death and, as a result, he was saved and raised up at Pharaoh's court. But Moses did not choose to live a life of pampered luxury at the court. Instead, he went out among his brethren and saw their suffering. He saw an Egyptian taskmaster beating a Hebrew slave. Moses took on the responsibility of stopping an injustice and struck down the Egyptian. If Moses had remained silent, there would not have been an Exodus; if he had forgotten his people, there would have been no liberation. Only after these human actions did G-d intervene and commission Moses to go forth and bring the children of Israel out of bondage.

In Persia, when Mordechai learned of Haman's decree of death against the Jews, he suddenly realized that Esther's ascent to the queenship was providential and that without her, the Jews could not be saved. Realizing the need for Divine help, she asked that all her people join her in three days of prayer and Fasting. All the Jews, even those who had become fully assimilated into the Persian society, repented of their abandonment of G-d and asked for His mercy. And so, once again the Jewish people were redeemed and once again, they renewed the covenant with G-d that they had first received at Sinai.

While these events took place many centuries ago, the lessons they have for us today are just as relevant as in the days when they actually occurred.

Many times, throughout history, nations have sought to enslave the Jews, and tyrants have sought their destruction. Within our own century, both of these events took place during the time of the Holocaust.

The slavery (Egypt) and genocide (Haman) of the Holocaust culminated in the redemption of the reborn State of Israel and, through her of Jewish people everywhere. It was not by accident, that the most famous ship carrying Jewish concentration camp survivors from the DP camps of Europe to the then British-mandated Palestine was called Exodus '47.

In every generation, the Passover Haggadah says, you are to regard yourself as having been liberated from Egypt. When Jews sit down the night in April to commemorate the Passover by having a Seder (prayer service and ritual meal), they are reenacting the Exodus as if it had happened to them. Passover is more than just a commemoration of a 3500-year-old event; to the pious Jew, it is taking place today. For those people who are in slavery or bondage to the problems of life or other elements which are destructive in their existence, Passover comes as an affirmation that with G-d's help, such slavery can be overcome. On Passover, our chains are set free; with G-d's help and our faith, we can be redeemed from all the ills that beset us.

Purim is the message of hope. The Book of Esther is the only biblical scroll in which G-d's name is not mentioned. But even though His Presence. is hidden, G-d works through the actions of Esther and Mordechai. Purim confirms that the road to redemption continues even though in our world, the mighty and manifest acts of G-d which permeate much of the Bible, no longer are overtly manifest.

Rachel Levine had an extensive background in both religious and archaeological studies. She had a B.A. degree from the University of Miami and an M. Ed. from Florida Atlantic University. She did post-graduate work with the Biblical Archaeology Society and was a member of the American Academy of Religion and the Society for Biblical Literature.

The Psychological Effects of Memory Schemas on Biblical Interpretation

[image error]

Earlier articles covered topics such as the Shannon-Weaver Communication Model, the psychology of Biblical interpretation, critical thinking, and the Kingdom of Heaven. This article is a follow up and a continuation of these psychological explanations useful for a correction of our Biblical interpretations and exegetics. Schema theory says that we have established organized bodies of knowledge by which to draw upon from memory to make sense of incoming information.

Schemas and Culture

Schemas provide the framework for understanding our world.  Try and figure out the meaning of the following paragraph that is grammatically correct, simple in vocabulary, yet is difficult to activate a pertinent schema to allow interpretation or retainment in memory:

The procedure is actually quite simple. First arrange things into different bundles depending on make-up. Don’t do too much at once. In the short run this may not seem important, however, complications easily arise. A mistake can be costly. Next, find facilities. Some people must go elsewhere for them. Manipulation of appropriate mechanisms should be self-explanatory. Remember to include all other necessary supplies. Initially the routine will overwhelm you, but soon it will become just another facet of life. Finally, rearrange everything into their initial groups. Return these to their usual places. Eventually they will be used again. Then the whole cycle will have to be repeated.

After reading the preceding paragraph, try and remember as much as possible. You’ll find it very difficult. But, if it is revealed that the paragraph is describing washing clothes, suddenly insight occurs, and memory for more of the paragraph becomes much easier.

Sir Frederic Barlett

Sir Frederic Bartlett was a pioneering figure in the study of memory. His theories and experiments significantly advanced our understanding of how humans remember and interpret information. Here’s a detailed explanation of his concept of memory schemas, his notable experiment, and how the "telephone game" metaphorically relates to his theories.

Concept of Memory Schema

Sir Frederic Bartlett introduced the concept of a "schema" to explain how our knowledge of the world influences our memory. He defined a schema as a cognitive framework or structure held in memory that helps organize and interpret information. Schemas allow individuals to take in new information, connect it with existing knowledge, and make sense of it.

Influence of Schemas on Memory Retrieval and Interpretation

Schemas play a crucial role in how memories are retrieved and interpreted. According to Bartlett, memories are not static; they are dynamic constructs influenced by our mental frameworks. When recalling an event, people reconstruct the memory based on both the actual past event and their existing schemas. This process can alter the recalled memory, sometimes leading to distortions or inaccuracies. Schemas fill in gaps in remembered details by incorporating broader knowledge and expectations about the world.

Outline of Bartlett's Experiments

Methodology of "War of the Ghosts" Study

Bartlett's most famous experiment involved a story from Native American folklore titled "The War of the Ghosts." He asked participants from England to read the story, which was filled with unfamiliar names and concepts. After a period ranging from minutes to days or months, he then asked them to recall the story as accurately as possible. This procedure was repeated several times with the same subjects over extended periods.

Results and Conclusions from the Experiment

The findings of the "War of the Ghosts" experiment were enlightening. Bartlett observed that when participants recalled the story, they often altered details to make the story more congruent with their own cultural expectations and schemas. The retellings tended to be shorter, more coherent, and more conventional than the original story. This led Bartlett to conclude that memory is reconstructive and heavily influenced by personal and cultural schemas. The experiment highlighted how memory distortions occur due to the influence of existing schemas on recall processes.

The Telephone Game

How the Telephone Game is Played

The telephone game is a popular group activity where one person whispers a message to the next person in line, and so forth, until the last person announces the message to the entire group. Typically, the final version of the message significantly differs from the original. This originated as a psychological experiment but was appropriated for demonstrations and even party events.

Telephone Game as a Metaphor for Bartlett's Findings

The telephone game serves as a practical metaphor for Bartlett's findings on memory reconstruction. Each person in the game might slightly alter the message based on their own understanding or inability to hear clearly, similar to how individuals reconstruct memories based on their schemas. The gradual distortion of the message mirrors how memories can change when recalled and retold, influenced by the individual's cognitive frameworks. The game illustrates Bartlett's theory that remembering is an active process of reconstruction, not a mere replaying of events.

Through these discussions, we can see how Bartlett’s theories on memory schemas and the process of reconstructive memory have significantly shaped our understanding of cognitive psychology. The "telephone game" vividly demonstrates these concepts, showing how easily information can be reshaped by each individual's interpretative frameworks.

Examples of the Schema Effects on Hebraic Concepts

Saved and lost are two very popular words that are used today in the religious community but what do they really mean? What does it mean to be saved? What does it mean to be lost? Saved from what? Saved for what? From most people’s theological perspective today, saved means getting to go to heaven and lost means going to hell. Unfortunately, we have little or no understanding on what the biblical perspective on these two subjects actually is. Before we can delve very deeply into either subject or both, we need to understand something very important about the way the rabbis of Jesus’ day studied.

Their methods of study usually followed one of four basic rules that formed the acrostic pardes (פ ר ד ס). Each letter of the word stood for a method of interpretation and/or a way of understanding. The word pardes itself means an orchard from which one plucks the sweet and nourishing fruit. Each letter stood for a principal, method, or way of interpreting. P stood for pshat which means the simplest of the interpretations. The second letter R or resh, stood for remez which meant to hint back at something that had already been said; the word or passage to which the speaker was hinting would shed light on the real meaning of the subject. The third letter was D or derash which was a homiletical exegesis or exposition on that particular topic. The final letter, S or sod meant hidden or secret and was more of a mystical understanding of the passage or text. This was reserved for the more spiritually enlightened or aware. By utilizing one of the four principal methods for interpretation, the rabbis of the first century communicated their message.

It is imperative that one keep these four methods of interpretation in mind to understand the message of the speaker. This is especially true when it comes to the message of Jesus. He is a master of remez. He is always hinting back at something that has already been written or said, and if you know the passage to which Jesus is hinting (schema), you can understand very clearly what he is teaching. Then, and only then, does the full meaning of his message come to light.

Formation of Memory Schemas in Jesus ’ s Day

Once you understand this fact, you can ask yourself the question as you hear Jesus teach, where did He get that? If you are aware of the passage to which he is hinting, the meaning will become clear. This is all the more apparent when one realizes the individual in Jesus’ day had the entire biblical text committed to memory (a multitude of schema formations in Mishnaic Hebrew in the 1st century). As a matter of fact, the young child started learning to memorize the biblical text from the age of five and there are all kinds of exercises mentioned in the Mishnah and the Talmud that facilitate memorization. (He used to say [Judah ben Tema], At five years of age one is ready for [the study of] the Scripture, at ten [years] of age is fit] for [the study of] the Mishnah, at the age of thirteen for [the fulfilment of] the commandments, the age of fifteen for [the study of] the Talmud… Mishnah Tractate Avot 5:21) Once we recognize this important fact, we can begin to understand something of the words or the message to which Jesus is relating.

Schema Activation

In order to fully grasp the two words before us, we must ask ourselves the question, “Why did He come?” Luke 19:10 says “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save those that are lost.” We can make sense of this only when we realize that this is a remez or a hint back to Ezekiel 34. It would do you well in your study to read the whole text of Ezekiel 34, but in order to highlight the main idea of this article, I simply want to point out several verses. Verse 11: “for thus says the lord God, behold I Myself will search for My sheep. I will seek them out as a shepherd seeks out his sheep so will I seek out My sheep and I will rescue them out of all places where they have been scattered.” Verse 16: “I will seek out that which is lost. I will bring back that which has strayed. I will bandage the hurt and the crippled and will strengthen the weak and the sick.” Verse 20: “Therefore thus says the Lord God to them, I, Myself, will judge between fat sheep and impoverished sheep.” Verse 24: “And I the Lord will be their God and My servant David, a prince among them I, the Lord, have spoken it.”

Moving forward to Matthew chapter 9, we can see how Jesus is carrying out Ezekiel 34:16 by what he is doing. After a few examples, in verse 19, it says “Yeshua arose and followed him, and so did his disciples.” Before we continue, let’s note that the Hebrew root for Jesus is ysha or yud shin ayin (Brown Driver Briggs Concordance 3467, 3468, and 3444.) As a feminine noun, Yeshua means salvation, prosperity, deliverance and victory. As a verb, it means delivered or saved and is frequently used of God who saves his people from external evils. In the context of the way it is used in the biblical text, it is something that happens today.

The point we are trying to make can be illustrated by looking carefully at Matthew 9:20, “a woman that was diseased with an issue of blood for twelve years came up behind Him and touched the tzitzit of His garment.” This little lady with the issue of blood was lost in a way to which we cannot relate. First, one must understand that as a menstruant, she would have no contact with her family. They couldn’t sit on the same bench on which she sat, nor come into any kind of contact with her lest they become unclean. She had borne this burden of being an outcast from society and her family for twelve years. Because she had the biblical text committed to memory and was able to tie different passages of scripture together, she said

within herself “if I can just touch the hem of his garment, ivashea , I can be whole (healed). Notice in Hebrew that Yeshua and ivashea contain the same root of ysha. Then we are told Yeshua turned and said to her “Daughter, your faith has hoshea’d you” and from that moment she was tivasha completely whole or in other words saved. And the question is, how did she know all this? One can look at this in English and actually understand very little.

Until applying remez to this account in the original language of Hebrew, the dramatic meaning is lost.

By looking back to Numbers Chapter 15, verses 3741, it is written that the Lord told Moses to instruct the Israelites to make a tassel, known as a tzitzit, and attach it to the corners of their garment and then they should look upon it, remember, and keep all of the commandments of the Lord. This tassel, or tzitzit, is still a major part of the prayer shawl worn today by religious Jews and not only has great significance but is rich in meaning. The tassel consists of eight cords with five knots that together equal thirteen. When converted to its numerical equivalent using gematria, the word tzitzit equals 600. The Torah’s 613 laws are represented by adding the two together. The first two sets of windings between the knots are seven and eight which together equal fifteen and stand for the Yud heh . The following set of windings are eleven which stands for Vav heh and the last set of windings are thirteen which stand for the word

Echad so that together they mean that God is one. Therefore, the tzitzit is the representation of

the 613 commandments and the fact that God is one.

But now an interesting question, why would this little woman go to so much trouble to reach out and grasp the tzitzit of Jesus’ garment? Notice from Numbers 15, Moses instructs the people to secure the tzitzit on the corner of the garment, but in Hebrew, the word corner is canaf which actually means wing as in a wing of a bird. In Malachi, Chapter 4:2, it states: “But unto you who fear My name shall the

sun of righteousness arise with healing in His wings (canaf).” Because she knew the biblical text, she was able to tie all of these passages together: Ezekiel 34, Numbers 15, and Malachi 4. She understood that Yeshua as the sun of righteousness had healing in His wings. In realizing the power of the one that stood before her, she reached out and laid hold of the tzitzit, the wing of Jesus’ garment and when she did, she was yeshua’d or made completely whole. In other words, she was saved! Notice that salvation is something for today (Refer to the previous article by Robert Lindsey on the Three Dispensations of Jesus).

The Telephone Game-Cultural Syncretism

If the Hebrew word for saved means something for today, how did a belief in a literal heaven and a literal hell develop among the Jews in the first place, especially in spite of the fact that the Tanach (Old Testament) makes no direct reference to either? The Tanach does not mention either heaven or hell as a place where people go after death. Hebrew Cosmology was very simple. There was shamayim (the upper realm), and aretz (dry land), and below sometimes called Sheol (Isa. 7: 11, 17:. 9; Ezek. 31:. 14; Ps. 86: 13) Job 3:11 states that all that die, good or evil, rich and poor, etc. sleep in the dark and deep pit. Even the later Hebrew heroes of the faith, Abraham, Moses, and David were to be gathered to their ancestors (Genesis 25:7-8; Deut, 32: 48-50; I Kings 2:10). It was not until the time of the Babylonian Captivity (586 BCE) and influence of Zoroastrianism during that same time period as hinted in Psalms 49:13-15 where the concept of an existence being possible past the grave appears. Then (especially during the Christian age) the concept of a literal heaven or a literal hell came into being. During the early Talmudic Period, or the time of Roman rule, the concept of a heaven or hell as a place where people go after death began to be a subject for discussion.

Schema Mismatch

In Hebrew, Gan Ayden means a garden of luxury and became a metaphor for heaven (Garden of Eden is an English transliteration) and was translated into Greek as paradosis which is first mentioned in Genesis 2:8. The righteous would go to Gan Ayden and the unrighteous would go to Gehinnom (Greek transliteration of Gehenna). Gehenna was the valley of the son of Hinnom which is located south of Jerusalem and in Jesus’ day, it was used as a garbage dump. Prior to that, it was a place where children were sacrificed to the god, Moloch. As a result, the valley was deemed accursed, and the word Gehenna became a figurative expression for all that is evil and sinful. Hel (Hell), the Old Norse goddess of the underworld, was later associated with Gehinnom and over time became synonymous with the word hell which is first mentioned in Matthew 5:22. (The Second Jewish Book of Why Kolatch)

In Matthew 4:23, we are told that Jesus went all about Galilee teaching in their synagogues and preaching the gospel of the kingdom and healing all manner of sickness and disease among the people. (This is the first time the term gospel of the kingdom is mentioned.) Remember again from Luke 19:10, Jesus’ statement and start this time with verse 9 “Jesus said unto him ‘This day is salvation come to this house, for so much as he, also, is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man is come to seek and to save the lost.’” Again, we note how these words hint back at Ezekiel 34. When we look at the Hebrew, we see that Jesus (Yeshua) said unto him “this day is salvation (teshuah which has the same root) come to this house. Then the statement, once again of his purpose, “that the Son of Man is come to seek and to save (lehoshiah).”

Notice further in Matthew 10:68 that Jesus says to go to the lost sheep of Israel “And as you go, preach saying the kingdom of heaven has drawn near (had arrived). Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out demons (symptoms of being “lost”). Freely you have received, freely give” (deliver “salvation”).

By understanding the original meaning of saved and lost in the schema of Jesus and his followers in his day we see that those who are a part of the kingdom have the commission of making others who are lost, whole as Jesus did. When Jesus said, “the Son of Man is come to seek and save those that are lost”, lost was a state or a condition in which people were living in the present. The task or the responsibility of those who are a part of God’s kingdom is to endeavor to alleviate whatever conditions might exist that might prevent one from being whole or saved today.

The Psychology of the Kingdom of Heaven and Motivation Types

 

 

[image error]

Introduction

 The Kingdom of Heaven (מלכות השמים), a pivotal concept in Jewish Hebraic thought, has been a subject of extensive study among scholars who seek to understand its intricacies and implications. Notably, the works of Robert L. Lindsey and Joseph Frankovic have shed light on its nuanced meaning within the Jewish context. On the other side of the intellectual spectrum, the Self-Determination Theory (SDT) formulated by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan, provides a psychological framework that emphasizes the role of intrinsic motivation in human behavior and development. This article aims to explore the correlations between the Kingdom of Heaven, as understood in Jewish Hebraic scholarship, and the principles of Self-Determination Theory, to uncover the intersections of spirituality and psychology.

The Kingdom of Heaven in Jewish Hebraic Thought

In Jewish Hebraic tradition, the Kingdom of Heaven ((Malkhut HaShamayim (מלכות השמים)) is not merely a future realm to aspire to but is deeply embedded in the present life and spiritual practice of the individual and the community. Scholars like Robert L. Lindsey and Joseph Frankovic have argued that this concept is central to understanding Jesus' teachings within their original Jewish context. It signifies a divine rule that is both a present reality and a future hope, emphasizing God's sovereignty, justice, and mercy. This Kingdom is manifested through the observance of God's commandments and the pursuit of righteousness (which Hebraically means many things such as almsgiving, redemption, etc.), highlighting a collective responsibility towards societal and personal ethical living.

Self-Determination Theory (SDT): Developed by Deci and Ryan, Self-Determination Theory explores the motivation behind choices that are made without external influence. SDT identifies three innate psychological needs—competence, autonomy, and relatedness—that fuel motivation, engagement, and psychological growth. Competence involves seeking to control the outcome and experience mastery. Autonomy refers to the desire to be causal agents of one's own life and act in harmony with one's integrated self. Relatedness is the need to feel connected to others, to love and care, and to be loved and cared for.

Correlations Between the Kingdom of Heaven and Self-Determination Theory

The concept of the Kingdom of Heaven and SDT share underlying themes of autonomy and intrinsic motivation. In the pursuit of the Kingdom of Heaven, individuals are motivated by an intrinsic desire to align their lives with divine will, emphasizing autonomy in their spiritual journey. This mirrors SDT's principle of autonomy, where the motivation for actions comes from within, driven by the satisfaction of psychological needs.

Moreover, the Kingdom of Heaven's emphasis on ethical living and communal responsibility reflects SDT's concept of relatedness. Both frameworks underscore the importance of connections to others and the broader community, advocating for a sense of belonging and mutual care. In this way, the pursuit of the Kingdom of Heaven can be seen as fulfilling the need for relatedness, providing a spiritual framework that nurtures connections and community engagement.

The principle of competence in SDT can also be paralleled with the Jewish Hebraic understanding of the Kingdom of Heaven, where the mastery over one's actions and choices in accordance with divine commandments reflects a spiritual form of competence. The fulfillment of commandments and ethical living contributes to a sense of mastery and effectiveness in one's spiritual life, akin to the psychological satisfaction derived from competence in SDT.

Conclusion: The exploration of the Kingdom of Heaven from a Jewish Hebraic perspective and its correlations with the Self-Determination Theory of Deci and Ryan unveils a fascinating intersection between spirituality and psychology. Both realms emphasize the importance of intrinsic motivation, autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the pursuit of fulfillment, whether it be spiritual or psychological. This comparative analysis not only enriches our understanding of these concepts but also highlights the universal human quest for meaning, connection, and self-determination.

Correlation Between Organismic Integration Theory (OIT) of SDT and Motivation in the Kingdom of Heaven Movement

The Organismic Integration Theory (OIT), a sub-theory of Self-Determination Theory (SDT), delves into the different types of extrinsic motivation and the continuum of internalization that explains how and why individuals transition from external to internal motivation. This framework is particularly illuminative when analyzing how individuals engage with the concept of the Kingdom of Heaven, especially in the context of their spiritual motivation and development. By examining the range from amotivation to various forms of regulation, we can gain insights into how an individual's motivation type regarding participation in the Kingdom of Heaven movement influences their spiritual outcomes.

From Amotivation to Internal Motivation

 

Amotivation represents a state of lacking intention to act, stemming from not valuing the activity, not feeling competent, or not believing that the activity will yield desired outcomes. In the context of the Kingdom of Heaven, an amotivated individual may struggle to engage with spiritual practices or community participation due to a lack of connection or belief in its value.

External Motivation is characterized by behavior driven by external rewards or pressures. Within the Kingdom of Heaven movement, this might manifest as participating in religious activities for social acceptance, rewards, or to avoid guilt. Here, the regulatory style is external regulation.

Introjected Regulation reflects a partially internalized motivation that still relies heavily on external validation. Individuals might engage in Kingdom of Heaven activities to avoid guilt or anxiety or to enhance ego. Though closer to internal motivation, actions are still not self-determined.

Identified Regulation represents a more autonomous form of motivation, where individuals recognize and accept the personal value of a behavior. For someone involved in the Kingdom of Heaven movement, this could mean participating in its practices because they genuinely value its principles and the sense of belonging it provides.

Integrated Regulation, the closest to intrinsic motivation among extrinsic types, occurs when identified motivations are fully assimilated with one's self-concept. Here, engagement in the Kingdom of Heaven is not just valued but becomes integral to one's identity and life philosophy.

Intrinsic Motivation involves engaging in an activity for the inherent satisfaction it provides. In the spiritual context of the Kingdom of Heaven, intrinsic motivation would drive an individual to participate out of pure joy, fulfillment, and a deep-seated desire to embody the principles of the Kingdom.

Outcomes Influenced by Motivation Type

The progression from extrinsic to intrinsic motivation in an individual's engagement with the Kingdom of Heaven movement significantly impacts their spiritual outcomes and overall well-being. Those operating under external regulation may adhere to religious practices without internalizing their values, potentially leading to a shallow or performative engagement. As individuals transition towards more internalized forms of motivation, their participation becomes more meaningful, fulfilling, and transformative. Such engagement promotes a deeper understanding and integration of the Kingdom's values into one's life, fostering spiritual growth, community connection, and psychological well-being.

For individuals deeply motivated by intrinsic values or integrated regulation, their participation in the Kingdom of Heaven movement is likely to be characterized by genuine commitment, resilience in the face of challenges, and a profound sense of fulfillment. This aligns with the psychological needs outlined in SDT—competence, autonomy, and relatedness—facilitating not only spiritual growth but also contributing to overall well-being.

In conclusion, understanding the correlation between the Organismic Integration Theory of SDT and the motivations driving participation in the Kingdom of Heaven movement offers valuable insights into the spiritual journeys of individuals. It highlights the importance of fostering environments that support the internalization of spiritual values and practices, ultimately leading to more meaningful and self-determined engagement in the spiritual community.

Top of Form

Sources:

Lindsey, Robert L., "The Kingdom of God: God’s Power Among Believers," on JerusalemPerspective.com.
Frankovic, Joseph, "Kingdom of Heaven." on JerusalemPerspective.com.
Deci, Edward L., & Ryan, Richard M., "Self-Determination Theory: An Approach to Human Motivation and Personality."
Ryan, Richard M., & Deci, Edward L., "Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being."

This analysis draws on established scholarly work and theories to propose a novel comparison that may inspire further research and dialogue across disciplines.

Motivation is Self-Determined

Susan Fowler's "Why Motivating People Doesn't Work...and What Does" introduces a compelling approach to intrinsic motivation through the concept of MVPs—Mindfulness, Values, and Purpose. This framework can be adeptly applied to fostering intrinsic motivation within the spiritual context of the Kingdom of Heaven, utilizing Ellen Langer's mindfulness model to enhance understanding and engagement.

Mindfulness

Mindfulness, as defined by Ellen Langer, emphasizes an open, curious, and flexible state of mind. It involves a conscious awareness of our present experience, thoughts, and feelings without judgment. In the context of the Kingdom of Heaven, mindfulness can serve as a foundation for deeper spiritual engagement by encouraging individuals to be fully present and attentive to their spiritual practices, teachings, and community interactions. By adopting a mindful approach, individuals can cultivate a deeper understanding of the principles of the Kingdom of Heaven, recognizing its relevance and application in their daily lives. This heightened awareness can lead to a profound appreciation of the moment-to-moment opportunities to live out the values of the Kingdom, thus fostering a genuine intrinsic motivation to participate in its movement.

Values

Values serve as a compass that guides our actions and decisions. Intrinsic motivation flourishes when individuals align their actions with their core values. For someone seeking to deepen their engagement with the Kingdom of Heaven, it involves identifying and connecting with the spiritual and ethical values that the Kingdom represents, such as love, justice, mercy, and community. By reflecting on how these values resonate with their personal beliefs and aspirations, individuals can find a powerful motivator in their pursuit of spiritual growth and community involvement. This alignment between personal values and the principles of the Kingdom of Heaven creates a natural drive to participate and contribute to the movement, not out of obligation or external pressures, but because it fulfills a deeply held set of values.

Purpose

Purpose provides a sense of direction and meaning in our lives. It answers the "why" behind our actions. In the spiritual journey towards the Kingdom of Heaven, understanding and embracing one's purpose in the context of this spiritual movement can significantly enhance intrinsic motivation. This involves contemplation and discernment to uncover how one's personal purpose aligns with the broader mission of the Kingdom of Heaven—such as advancing peace, fostering community, and embodying divine principles in the world. When individuals perceive their participation in the Kingdom of Heaven as an expression of their life's purpose, their engagement becomes self-sustaining and deeply fulfilling.

Integrating MVPs to Foster Intrinsic Motivation

To become intrinsically motivated in relation to the purpose of the Kingdom of Heaven, individuals can integrate the MVPs approach as follows:

Practicing Mindfulness: Cultivate a mindful approach to spiritual practices and daily life, remaining open and attentive to the teachings and experiences that relate to the Kingdom of Heaven. What new thing can I learn? This awareness enriches understanding and appreciation, laying the groundwork for intrinsic motivation.
Aligning with Values: Identify and reflect on personal values that resonate with the Kingdom of Heaven. Intentionally seek ways to live out these values, reinforcing the connection between personal beliefs and the spiritual pursuit.
Embracing Purpose: Engage in thoughtful consideration of how personal purpose aligns with the goals of the Kingdom of Heaven. Viewing participation as an expression of one's purpose can imbue actions with meaning and motivation.

By mindfully aligning one's values and purpose with the principles of the Kingdom of Heaven, individuals can cultivate a deeply rooted, intrinsic motivation to engage with its teachings and community. This approach not only enriches the individual's spiritual journey but also contributes to the collective embodiment of the Kingdom's ideals in the world.

Fowler, Susan. Why Motivating People Doesn't Work . . . and What Does: The New Science of Leading, Energizing, and Engaging. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Langer, Ellen J.. Mindfulness (25th anniversary edition) (A Merloyd Lawrence Book). Hachette Books.

 

Practical Commitment to the Kingdom of Heaven:

The emphasis on committing oneself to the Kingdom of Heaven before observing God's commandments reflects a prioritization of internal, value-driven motivation over mere mechanical compliance. This approach aligns with the core principles of SDT, particularly the importance of autonomy and relatedness. Autonomy is expressed in the individual's personal commitment to the Kingdom, making a conscious decision to align with divine will. Relatedness is seen in the communal and relational aspects of living out this commitment, where the observance of commandments fosters connections within the community and with the divine.

Everyday Acts as Entry to the Kingdom:

The notion that every good deed or observance of God's will is an act of entering the Kingdom of Heaven suggests that spiritual fulfillment and motivation are not reserved for a distant future or extraordinary moments but are accessible in everyday actions. This mirrors the SDT emphasis on competence, where individuals feel effective in their environment. In the spiritual context, each act of observance or good deed reinforces the individual's sense of purpose and efficacy in living according to the values of the Kingdom of Heaven.

Rabban Gamaliel's Story

A bridegroom is exempt From reciting the Shema on the first night of his marriage....When Rabban Gamaliel married he recited the Shem on the first night. His disciples said to him: "Master, didn't you teach us that a bridegroom is exempt from reciting the Shema on the first night?" "I will not listen to you, he replied, "so as to cast off from myself the Kingdom of Heaven even for a moment (Mishnah, Berachot. 2:5).

 

Regarding mindfulness, the story of Rabban Gamaliel, who refuses to set aside the Kingdom of Heaven even for a moment right after marriage, illustrates an exemplary level of integrated regulation, the most autonomous form of extrinsic motivation close to intrinsic motivation. Gamaliel's refusal to forego reciting the Shema, despite the permissible exemption, highlights a deep internalization of spiritual values, where adherence to the principles of the Kingdom of Heaven has become an inseparable part of his identity. This story exemplifies how the commitment to spiritual values can become fully integrated into one's self-concept, reflecting the highest form of motivation in SDT.

Integration with SDT:

Integrating these insights with SDT, we see that the Kingdom of Heaven concept encourages a form of motivation that is highly autonomous, deeply value-driven, and integrated into the individual's sense of self and community and purpose. The emphasis on practical, everyday commitment to divine will and the importance of personal choice and value alignment in this commitment closely parallel the SDT focus on autonomy, competence, and relatedness as essential for intrinsic motivation.

In conclusion, the detailed exploration of the Kingdom of Heaven within the Jewish rabbinic tradition offers a rich framework for understanding intrinsic motivation in a spiritual context. It underscores the significance of autonomy, the fulfillment derived from competence in living according to divine will, and the sense of relatedness fostered through communal observance of the commandments. This analysis not only deepens the correlation between the Kingdom of Heaven and SDT but also illustrates the profound psychological insights inherent in ancient spiritual teachings.

The Three Dispensations of Jesus

[image error]

THE THREE DISPENSATIONS OF JESUS

Dr. Robert L. Lindsey

Many of us have learned from such sources as the famous Schofield Reference Bible that God has governed the world through somewhat different means and methods in various special periods or ages. It is said that there are seven of these and that the last will be a period of 1,000 years-the Millennium-still in the future.

It is further said that the sixth age or dispensation is the one we live in now on earth, usually denominated the "Dispensation of Grace."  As evidence for this suggestion, the Schofield Notes take notice of the fact that Jesus described his Messianic role in Luke 14:18,19 by quoting from Isaiah 61:1,2, in which the Messiah is "...to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord but apparently deliberately leaves out the second phrase found in--Isaiah: "and the day of vengeance of our God."

This idea seems to be in every way sound, for in his quotation of Isaiah 61 :1,2, Jesus also left out any call to "bind up the brokenhearted'' and inserted a phrase from Isaiah 58:6: "set at liberty those that are oppressed." It was the habit of many teachers in the day of Jesus to make quotations of Scripture with deliberate changes, taken often from other contexts, in order to emphasize some point, and as the hearers knew Bible passages by heart, any change made them pick up their ears.

In Luke Ch. 4 it is clear that Jesus was explaining his activity in healing arid casting out evil spirits, an activity which the people of Nazareth obviously had heard about. Jesus indeed brought good news to

the people in the villages of Galilee for, as Peter said to Cornelius, "God anointed (made Jesus Messiah) ...with the Holy Spirit and with power'' and ''he went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil" (Acts 10:38).

The question I raise here, however, is whether the Dispensation of Grace is not the same age as

THE DISPENSATION OF THE KINGDOM

It is clear Jesus taught that his healing activities were a part of his role as Israel's expected Messiah and that this was truly "good news" to people oppressed by Satan. Before he would fulfill the role of judge, there would be a period of salvation for the world, deliverance and blessing. He would go about healing and freeing human beings from the Enemy. Those who accepted his would call him Lord and would themselves be given the power to heal and deliver.

What we often fail to realize however, is that the people given this power were the people who formed what Jesus called the Kingdom of Heaven (מלכות שמים), that is, the Kingdom of God. When John the Baptist sent messengers to Jesus (Matthew 11 :1ff), they said that John wanted to know if Jesus. was the "one to expect or not." From what we know of John's preaching, he expected the Messiah to baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire (''fire" meaning judgment). He did not hear that Jesus was pouring out the Holy Spirit or bringing on the judgment of the great prophets which he had preached. He believed that Jesus was the Messiah, but if so, why was he not getting on with the job? When Jesus sent John's messengers back, he told them to tell John what they had seen:

The blind receive their sight

and the lame are walking

Lepers are cleansed

and the deaf are hearing.

The dead are raised up

and the poor have the good news preached to them.

Jesus also warned John that whoever was not put off by what he was doing would be blessed. What Jesus was doing was answering John's worry by reminding him that first there must be a period of blessing and help for a lost world. As in Isaiah Ch. 35; the picture of the messianic age included the -restoration of the hearing of the deaf and seeing of the blind. The lame would walk. ln Isaiah 26:19 we read: Thy dead shall live; their bodies shall rise. John knew these Scriptures. Jesus was saying, “John you have forgotten something in your zeal to see me become the Judge of the whole nation and world. Your view of the future-your eschatology-is all right, but you must remember the need for a great period of deliverance for this earth. It must come first."

OUR DISPENSATIONAL ESCHATOLOGY

What deeply concerns me is that evangelicals and other Christians tend to be too much like John: they

are anxious that the Lord get on with the job of bringing judgment on this world, and they fill their messages and sermons with lurid pictures of the awful things yet to come on the world in an effort to bring more into God’s Kingdom. There is truth in what they say, but the emphasis is all wrong.

For instance, even modern Charismatic and Pentecostal Christians have kept much of this emphasis on the judgment yet to come (and signs that Jesus’ coming is near), even while holding that God is still healing and doing great miracles today. They have forgotten how the lurid details described by earlier dispensationalists came into being and were used to delay the coming of the Kingdom in Jesus.

You will find in the notes of the Schofield Bible that we now live in the Age of Grace and that Jesus offered himself as King and his Kingdom of God to the Jews of the first century but, on being rejected by

the Jews (a questionable way to put it if we are not careful to remember that all the first believers in  Jesus were Jews), he put the Kingdom of God on the shelf until the yet future day when Israel, through personal manifestation of Jesus; would as a whole accept Jesus' offer of the Kingdom.

There is not a word of Jesus in the Scripture that describes this kind of offer, for Jesus did not describe his Kingdom of God as a political entity but as (1) the rule of God that made it possible to cast out a demon by the finger of God and (2) the body of his believers who were given the same power he manifested on earth.

We have been taught that although Jesus is even today 'Lord and King, his Kingdom of God and its universal inauguration on Earth has been delayed or postponed until he can return with sword in hand and literally slay his earthly enemies. At that time, he will set up his throne in Jerusalem in the restored Temple and begin again the ancient sacrificial system and rule the earth as the greatest King ever known. Some of his subjects, it is said, will be saved and living in resurrected bodies while others will simply obey as ordinary human beings afraid to go against Jesus' divine Government.

The same people that taught us these things, taught us that the age we live in now is only a period allowing us a chance to decide for Jesus before the great and imposed Kingdom Jesus will bring when he

comes, but that this age is not an age of miracles and personal deliverance from the devil as it was in the

apostolic age: "When," they say, ''the Bible was closed, the age of miracles was over; we today have the greatest miracle and it is the Bible, and we need no other miracle." What evangelicals have said in all this is that even if it is not completely true that God no longer does miracles, we actually live in a dying age that must pass away so Jesus can set up his political and spiritual kingdom on Earth and start the real Kingdom of God.   

JESUS TALKED OF THREE DISPENSATIONS

In the same story in Matthew Ch. 11 in which John questioned Jesus' emphasis and Jesus pointed to his role as healer and its importance as the first task of the Messiah, Jesus said of John that there has been no greater man born to woman than John but that the "smallest in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than John.”

The Kingdom of God is Jesus' Movement, as this verse makes clear, He was saying that John had not joined the Kingdom of God simply because he had not followed Jesus but had his own movement.

He was also saying that to follow him in the Kingdom Movement is the most important thing in the world.

Then he explained: John was of the dispensation of the law and the Prophets: ''the law and the prophets are until John."

That is Jesus' first dispensation.

The next of his dispensations we see poorly because of the translation of Matthew 11:11: "From the days of John...until now the 'kingdom of heaven has suffered violence...."

As my good friend and colleague, Professor David Flusser, discovered, what Jesus was actually doing was hinting at a famous Messianic passage in the Old Testament, Micah 2:13. In that passage, God says he

looks upon the people of Israel as a large flock of sheep. The shepherd puts them behind a rough, low drywall in front of the sheltering rock for the night. In the morning, he comes to the wall and tears open a hole in it and all the sheep go running out pell-mell in their happiness to get to their grazing:

The breaker will go up before them and they will break through and pass the gate, going out by it. Their king will pass on before them, the Lord at their head.

Jesus was hinting at this passage. The word (Greek, βιάζεται, biazetai) obvious is a translation of the Micah Hebrew word פורץ “poretz,” which means the "breaker."   We must translate Matthew 11:12 as follows: "From the days of John until now the Kingdom of Heaven is breaking out...."

Jesus was talking about his Movement, the Kingdom of God. It was expanding and growing and bursting forth at the end of the preaching of John. John's dispensation of the Law and the Prophets had ended with him. Now, with Jesus, had come the healing, organizing Lord and his Kingdom. His was the

DISPENSATION OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD

 Almost certainly Jesus then told two of his famous parables. The first tells of how the Kingdom of God is "like a grain of mustard seed which is the smallest of all seeds but when it has grown...becomes a tree...."  The second tell of how the Kingdom of God is like "leaven which a woman took and hid in three 'measures of meal until it was all leavened."  In other words, his Kingdom Movement with the healing, delivering power of God was growing by leaps and bounds and nothing would stop it!

Actually, this is one of our Lord's greatest prophecies. It tells precisely what he saw happening both now and in the future. This is why Jesus trained the Twelve and sent them out healing and casting out demons and telling everyone that the Kingdom of God had come.

Where was this Kingdom of God? Where Jesus was; and later where the Holy Spirit was empowering Jesus' disciples. The Kingdom was only where Jesus was Lord, of course. Neither Europe nor America, nor any other country or area is the Kingdom of God, as some have supposed. Only where Jesus is King-where men call him Lord-is to be found God's Kingdom. Later Jesus was to call his Movement the Church, for this would be his עדה Edah, or witnessing body after he returned to heaven.

But, of course, there is what I call ''fall-out" from the Kingdom.  The world in many parts is much better because of Jesus' followers. The age we live in may very well be the Golden Age of the Prophets! Their hope for a better world was not for a perfect earthly world-the child in that age would die at a hundred years of age (Isaiah 65:20). It would seem that the Age of Grace is indeed the Age of the Kingdom of God.

JESUS' THIRD DISPENSATION

In Matthew Ch. 11 Jesus mentioned only (1) the Dispensation of the Law and the Prophets and (2) the Dispensation of the Kingdom of God. We have to go to Luke 18:18-30, to the story 0f the Rich Man, to find Jesus going beyond the Dispensation of the Kingdom of God to his final age. We need only remember that when Peter reminded Jesus that he and the others had left their homes to follow him, Jesus joyfully replied and said:

There is no one who has left home for (2) the sake of the Kingdom of God who will not receive much more now in this time, and in (3) the Age to Come eternal life (Luke 18:29,30). Jews of Jesus' day of course spoke often of העולם הבא haolam haba, the world to come (or Age to come) and this is clearly our Lord's designation of

THE NEXT AGE OR DISPENSATION-THE WORLD TO COME

 But Jesus also mentioned in this passage the Present Age or Dispensation of the Kingdom of God. Thus, Jesus in Matthew. Ch. 11 mentioned dispensations (1) and (2) and in Luke Ch. 18 dispensations (2) and (3). There are of course large differences between each of these ages. In the first period of the Law and the Prophets, it was the age of the training of a very earthly people through selected and limited leaders. In the second period, God had visited his people in his own Son and had introduced a period of earth's history which was half-earthly and half-heavenly, or supernatural.

In the third period Jesus envisaged and taught that it would be a totally supernatural period he would inaugurate when he is seen by all of earth's inhabitants at the day of the Lord. If you are on a roof; in a bed, in a room, or wherever; you go straight into God's supernatural.  This is the World to Come, or Heaven. Obviously, it is not the age of earth or an age of earth. So far as I can see from these words of Jesus, there are no other dispensations.

Dr. Robert Lindsey's (1917-1995) preparation for biblical research began when his local pastor in Norman, Oklahoma, encouraged him to study Greek and Hebrew for a deeper understanding of Scripture. Dr. Lindsey pursued his studies at the University of Oklahoma, where he earned a B.A. degree in Classical Greek. He continued to concentrate in classical languages and biblical studies during his graduate career at Southern Baptist Theological Seminar and Princeton School of Divinity.

  He first came to Israel in 1939, spending fifteen months acquainting himself with the country and people and refining his knowledge of the Hebrew language. This initial exposure to the Hebrew Scriptures in their natural setting marked the beginning of a long and remarkable career in biblical research. He returned to serve as pastor of the Narkis Street Baptist Congregation in West Jerusalem from 1945-52. After completing his doctorate in the United States in 1954, he resumed his work in the church in Israel; eventually returning to the Baptist Congregation in Jerusalem where he continued to serve until the 1980’s.

 In addition to his work as pastor, Dr. Lindsey distinguished himself in New Testament scholarship; focusing particularly on the Gospels and working closely with leading Israeli Jewish scholars in the field. His years of carefully studying the Greek texts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke have revealed their profoundly Hebraic character, and led Dr. Lindsey to conclude that it is possible to form a far more reliable picture of the person and life of Jesus than is commonly held by scholars today.

  A number of other Christian and Jewish biblical scholars in Jerusalem joined Dr. Lindsey in forming the Jerusalem School for the Study of the Synoptic Gospels, which is dedicated to tracing Christianity back to its original Hebraic roots.

The Psychology of Biblical Interpretation (Pt. 3)

[image error]

The Psychology of Biblical Interpretation (Pt. 3)

Since by logic, the receiver of a communication process involving the Bible cannot supply feedback to the sender of the texts, therefore, the more that the receiver can approximate the field of experience of the sender, the greater the probability of a successful communication occurring. The definition of a successful communication experience occurs when the receiver decodes the message just as the sender encoded it. This will involve the receiver learning as much as possible about the language, the culture, the history, and the geography of the sender.

Understanding the language, culture, history, and geography of the Bible writers is of paramount importance for the receiver (modern reader) to minimize communication errors in interpreting the Biblical texts. This necessity stems from the inherent challenges posed by the temporal, cultural, and linguistic distances that separate contemporary readers from the ancient authors. Each of these aspects plays a crucial role in accurately decoding the intended message of the Biblical texts:

Language

The original texts of the Bible were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Each of these languages has its own nuances, idioms, and grammatical structures that can significantly affect the meaning of a text. Modern translations strive to convey these original meanings accurately, but nuances can be lost or altered in translation. A deeper understanding of the original languages can help the receiver grasp the subtleties and depth of the original message, reducing the risk of misinterpretation.

Culture

The cultural contexts in which the Biblical texts were written are vastly different from the contemporary world. Social norms, legal systems, religious practices, and daily life in ancient times influence the content and the form of the Biblical narratives, laws, prophecies, and teachings. Without an understanding of these cultural backgrounds, modern readers may misinterpret the significance or meaning of certain passages, applying contemporary cultural norms to situations where they do not fit.

History

The historical context of the Bible encompasses the rise and fall of empires, the migration of peoples, and the evolution of religious and political systems. These historical factors are not only backdrops to the narratives but are often integral to understanding the motivations, actions, and messages of the Biblical texts. Knowledge of historical context enables the receiver to place the Biblical message within its proper timeframe, enhancing comprehension and reducing anachronistic interpretations.

Geography

The geography of the Bible, including the layout of the ancient Near East, the topography of Israel and surrounding regions, and the significance of specific locations, plays a critical role in the narrative and theological content of the Bible. Geographic awareness helps the receiver understand the physical and symbolic significance of places mentioned in the Bible, from wilderness wanderings to urban settings of prophecy and teaching.

More on the Primacy of Language

The Biblical text is written mainly in Hebrew with some Aramaic. The Christian New Testament has survived in Greek.

Prior to the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls a method of biblical interpretation, called higher biblical criticism, had reigned for 250 years. It was started back in 1751 with a French physician by the name of Jean Austruck and it reached its culmination in the 19th century, about 1856, and then 1876, with a man by the name of Groff and another by the name of Wellhausen in Germany that proposed a hypothesis that is known as the documentary hypothesis that said that all of the books of the O.T. were based on one of four different sources.  The Jehovah source, the Elohim source, the Deuteronomy source or the Priestly source none of which dated any earlier than 850 B.C. which of course immediately eliminates any possibility of Mosaic authorship or divine inspiration.  From the basis of these various sources, one was able to go to the Bible and divide the passages in the O.T. into a patchwork of JEP or D based upon the usage of divine names on parallel or duplicate accounts or on the variation in diction and style that one found in the Hebrew in the Masoretic texts of the O.T.  Until we found the Dead Sea Scrolls, and then just like someone took the rug and yanked it out from under their feet, the whole of the documentary hypothesis came tumbling down.  Not only the documentary hypothesis but the whole German school of theology that had also been telling us, and there are very few people that are aware of this fact, that this idea came to us from the same German school that gave us the documentary hypothesis.  The N.T. was written in Greek and that Jesus spoke Aramaic.  We know today, on the basis of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and all of the other of our archaeological findings, and textual studies as a result of what we found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, that both of those statement are false.  

The following is a summary of how traditional New Testament scholars believe the transmission of the Synoptic Gospels occurred: “Which brings us to the gospels, written later, and not by those whose names they bear (these were added in the 2nd and 3rd centuries). The gospel of Mark, which borrows from Paul, came first and set the template for the gospels that followed (Matthew draws from 600 of Mark’s 661 verses, while 65 per cent of Luke is drawn from Mark and Matthew.) The first version of Mark is dated between 53 CE and around 70 CE, when the Second Temple was destroyed, an event it mentions. The last gospel, John, which has a different theology and stories that contradict those of the three ‘synoptic’ gospels, is dated at around 100 CE. All four gospels include sections written in the 2nd century (among them, two different virgin birth narratives in Matthew and Luke), and some scholars place the final 12 verses of Mark in the 3rd century. Several historians assume that Matthew and Luke had an earlier source they call Q. However, Q has never been found and there are no references to it elsewhere.” Evans, Gavin. There Was No Jesus. Aeon. February 15, 2024.

A word of advice: rely on scholars in Israel. Dr. Robert Lindsey's perspective on the Gospels, particularly the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), posits that they originated from an earlier Hebrew source. Lindsey, an American biblical scholar who spent much of his career in Israel, developed a theory that significantly impacts the understanding of the textual origins and transmission of the New Testament narratives.

Lindsey argued that the Synoptic Gospels were not originally written in Greek, as traditionally believed, but were translated from Hebrew texts. This hypothesis is grounded in linguistic and textual analyses, noting that certain features of the Greek text of the Synoptics, especially in Mark, appear to be translations from a Semitic language, likely Hebrew. These features include Semitic syntax, idioms, and certain peculiarities that do not naturally belong to the Greek language but make sense when retroverted to Hebrew.

One of the core elements of Lindsey's theory is the priority of the Gospel of Mark, which he believed was a Greek translation of an earlier Hebrew life of Jesus. This stands in contrast to the widely accepted Markan Priority hypothesis, which suggests that Mark was the first written Gospel and served as a source for Matthew and Luke. Lindsey suggested that while Mark was indeed an early Gospel, it was a translation or adaptation of a prior Hebrew source that more directly captured the teachings and actions of Jesus.

Lindsey also proposed that Luke's Gospel was closer to the original Hebrew source than Mark's Gospel in terms of the order of events and teachings of Jesus. According to Lindsey, Luke preserved a more accurate sequence of the original narrative, while Mark's Gospel presented a rearranged account, possibly due to the translator's interpretative efforts or theological motivations.

Furthermore, Lindsey's research led him to believe in the existence of a common Hebrew source, which he thought might have been used by both Matthew and Luke. This hypothetical document, which he saw as different from the hypothetical "Q" source proposed by other scholars, would have contained sayings and teachings of Jesus in Hebrew.

Dr. Robert Lindsey's contributions to biblical scholarship, particularly his hypothesis of a Hebrew source for the Synoptic Gospels, have prompted further research and debate among scholars. His work underscores the complexity of the textual history of the New Testament and the potential multilingual background of its composition.

The bottom line, learn Hebrew! There are study materials which can assist in the study of the Bible in its original languages.

Jewish Exegesis

Their methods of study usually followed one of four basic rules that formed the acrostic PRDS   פַּרדֵס or Paradise. Each letter of the word stood for a method of interpretation and/or a way of understanding. The word pardes itself means an orchard from which one plucks the sweet and nourishing fruit. Each letter stood for a principal, method, or way of interpreting. P stood for peshat (פשט) which means the simplest of the interpretations. The second letter R or resh, stood for remez (רמז) which meant to hint back at something that had already been said; the word or passage to which the speaker was hinting would shed light on the real meaning of the subject. The third letter was D or derash (דרש) which was a homiletical exegesis or exposition on that particular topic. The final letter, S or sod (סוד) meant hidden or secret and was more of a mystical understanding of the passage or text. This was reserved for the more spiritually enlightened or aware. By utilizing one of the four principal methods for interpretation, the rabbis of the first century communicated their message. It is imperative that one keep these four methods of interpretation in mind to understand the message of the speaker.

Lexicons and Language Tools: For those interested in original language studies, lexicons for Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek are indispensable. Key resources include:

The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (BDB)
The Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG)
Liddel and Scott Greek-English Lexicon (includes the Septuagint references)
Interlinear Bibles and Parallel Bibles: These texts allow readers to compare translations or view the original languages alongside translations. The Interlinear Bible: Hebrew-Greek-English by Jay P. Green is a useful tool.
Gospel Parallels: A Synopsis of the First Three Gospels, With Alternative Readings From the Manuscripts and Noncanonical Parallels-Throckmartin
Delitzch’s Hebrew New Testament
David Bivin; Roy Blizzard Jr.. Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From a Hebrew Perspective.
Lindsey, Robert. A Hebrew Translation of the Gospel of Mark (highly technical)
Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics (4 vols.) / January 09, 2012. Pub. Koninklijke Brill NV
The Complete Parallel Bible with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books: New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible. Oxford University Press.
Zeba Crook, Parallel Gospels: A Synopsis of Early Christian Writing (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).
Early Jewish Literature: An Anthology (Embry et al.). Wm. B. Eerdmans.
Everyman’s Talmud-Abraham Cohen
Mishnayoth: Pointed Hebrew Text, English translation, Introductions, notes, supplement, Appendix, Addenda, Corrigenda (6 Volume Set) (English and Hebrew Edition) 2nd Edition Hebrew Edition by Philip Blackman
The New Testament and the Mishnah: A Cross-Reference Index, 1983 by Charles R. Gianotti.

Theological Dictionaries: These explore theological concepts within the Bible, offering deep insights into the religious and philosophical implications of biblical texts. Consider:

Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Holger Gzella (Editor), Mark E. Biddle (Translator).
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Complete Set of 10 volumes) January 1, 1986. Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich.

Academic Journals: Journals such as the Journal of Biblical Literature and the ASOR provide scholarly articles on the latest research in biblical studies.

History

Schürer, Emil. A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ . Capella Press.
Bejarano Gutierrez, Juan Marcos. Ancient Israelite Identity: Religion, Ethnicity, and the Land of Israel. Yaron Publishing.
Schaff’s Church Fathers and Church History. Schaff, Phillip. Hendrickson Publishers.
Church Fathers — The Ante-Nicene Fathers.  A. Cleveland Coxe (Compiler), Alexander Roberts (Editor), James Donaldson (Editor), Philip Schaff (Editor), Henry Wace (Editor). Hendrickson Publishers.
Dead Sea Scrolls Biblical Manuscripts-various publishers
Nazarene Jewish Christianity: From the End of the New Testament Period Until Its Disappearance in the Fourth Century. Ray A. Pritz (Author)
The Heart of Hebrew History: A Study of the Old Testament by H. I. Hester (Author)
The Heart of the New Testament by H. I. Hester (Author)
Judaism and the Origins of Christianity by David Flusser
Judaism of the Second Temple Period, Volumes 1&2 by David Flusser

Culture

The Jewish People in the First Century: Historical Geography, Political History, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Institutions. 2 vol. editors S. Safrai, M. Stern.

Encyclopedia Judaica. 2nd ed. Thomson-Gale.

Jewish Encyclopedia-1901 Singer ed.

Seasons of Our Joy: A Modern Guide to the Jewish Holidays Paperback –2012 by Rabbi Arthur O. Waskow

Festivals of the Jewish Year: A Modern Interpretation and Guide Paperback– 1953 by Theodor H. Gaster

Geography

Anson F Rainey, R Steven Notley. The Sacred Bridge: Carta's Atlas of the Biblical World. Carta Jerusalem.

The Oxford Bible Atlas.

Hillel, Daniel. The Natural History of the Bible: An Environmental Exploration of the Hebrew Scriptures. Columbia University Press.

Example of Textual Misunderstandings Explained Linguistically (Hebraically)

MATTHEW 5:3: "Blessed are the poor in spirit; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

‏”אַשְׁרֵי עֲנִיֵּי הָרוּחַ, כִּי לָהֶם מַלְכוּת הַשָּׁמַיִם.

In the opening beatitude Jesus couples "poor in spirit" with "kingdom of heaven." "Poor in spirit" is an abbreviation of "poor and crippled in spirit" in Isaiah 66:2. The Kingdom of Heaven is what Jesus calls the body of his followers, his movement. In Hebrew, "kingdom" can mean "rule" or "those who are ruled," but it is never a territorial designation. "Heaven" is an evasive synonym for "God." "Theirs" is a classic mistranslation translation, still preserved in all modern English versions. The Greek word translated "theirs" should be translated "of these" or "of such as these." We cannot possess the Kingdom. It does not belong to us; rather, Jesus is describing in these beatitudes the kind of people who make up the Kingdom. It is the "poor in spirit," the spiritually "down and outers" who have no righteousness of their own; "the mourners," the brokenhearted who have reached the end of their strength and cry out to God in despair and hopelessness; "the meek," those who have thrown away their pride. It is people such as these who get into the Kingdom and find salvation.

David Bivin; Roy Blizzard Jr.. Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From a Hebrew Perspective (Kindle Locations 630-636). Kindle Edition.

Happy are those that have repented for they are those that are in the Jesus movement is the most faithful translation.

Season 2 Episode 7 “The Tong” in the 1972 Kung Fu television show, the main theme is that “without returning violence for violence, Caine ends the tyranny of a "Chinese Mafia" and liberates a boy slave.” A young Chinese Boy is a slave toa Chinese Tong member and he runs away to seek refuge from a white Christian lady. She discusses the boy’s problem with Kwai Chang Caine when Caine suggests that she not meet or have anything to do with Chen, the Tong member. The Christian woman proclaims that now he is quoting her Bible of which he had no knowledge of. She quotes Matthew 5: 39 “Resist not evil, but whosoever smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” Caine tells her that his sage Lao-Tzu had written: “A wise man does not contend, therefore, no one can contend against him. Yield and overcome.” Now Lao-Tzu may have meant to shy away from confrontation, but the quote from Matthew says nothing of the kind.

Matthew 5:38   Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:  39 but I say unto you, Resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man would go to law with thee, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go one mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Matthew 5:38‏ ”שְׁמַעְתֶּם כִּי נֶאֱמַר 1’עַיִן תַּחַת עַיִן, שֵׁן תַּחַת שֵׁן‘. ‎39‏ וַאֲנִי אוֹמֵר לָכֶם 1שֶׁלֹּא לְהִתְקוֹמֵם עַל עוֹשֵׂה הָרַע. אַדְּרַבָּא, הַסּוֹטֵר לְךָ עַל הַלְּחִי הַיְמָנִית, הַפְנֵה אֵלָיו גַּם אֶת הָאַחֶרֶת. ‎40‏ מִי שֶׁרוֹצֶה לִתְבֹּעַ אוֹתְךָ לְדִין כְּדֵי לָקַחַת אֶת כֻּתָּנְתְּךָ, 1הַנַּח לוֹ גַּם אֶת מְעִילְךָ. ‎41‏ וּמִי שֶׁמְּאַלֵּץ אוֹתְךָ לָלֶכֶת אִתּוֹ מֶרְחָק שֶׁל מִיל אֶחָד, לֵךְ אִתּוֹ שְׁנַיִם. ‎42‏ 1תֵּן לַמְבַקֵּשׁ מִמְּךָ וְאַל תִּפְנֶה מִן הָרוֹצֶה לִלְווֹת מִמְּךָ.“

In Matthew 5:43, this whole passage, beginning with verse 33, has to do with an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and the concept of not resisting evil. Whoever hits you on one cheek, turn to him the other. If somebody takes your coat, give him your cloak also, etc. This is tough stuff for us because this is not our nature. If someone comes along and hits us on one side, we want to turn around and hit him. However, notice this, this is the catch here in verse 43, “You’ve heard it that it hath been said, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy’ but I say unto you love your enemies. Bless them that curse you. Do good to them that hate you. Pray for them that despite fully use you and persecute you that you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven.” We all have to be honest and admit that it’s not easy to love our enemies. It is especially difficult to turn the cheek when someone comes up and wants to hit you on one of them. When you look at this word in the Greek, its ekthros, no. 2190. We are going to Thayer and look up ekthros. It says, “…hate, someone that hates you.” The only thing that you are going to do in reading Thayer is to find out that it is someone that hates you; however, if you go to the classical dictionary of Liddell and Scott and look up ekthros, you’ll find something really interesting. It says, “…hates, hateful person, someone hating, hostile, an ekthros is one who has been a theolos (brother) but is alienated. A polemois means one who is at war with you (that’s a completely different word). A dusmenis is one who has long been alienated and refuses to be reconciled.” (p. 748) Comment: ekthros means all three of those? No, ekthros means a brother who has been alienated. A polemois means somebody is at war with you, and a dusmenis is someone who has long been alienated from you and refuses to be reconciled. Therefore, when Jesus comes along and says, “Love your enemies,” he’s not talking about someone who is at war with you. He is not talking about somebody who is out to get you. He is not talking about someone who has been long alienated from you and refuses to be reconciled. He is talking about a brother who has some hostility between you and him, and it needs to be taken care of. How do we know that? In Jewish law, it says that if somebody is going to kill you, you are to anticipate it and kill them first. It does not say to turn the other cheek. It says that if you know that someone is going to kill you, be quick and kill them first. It is called justifiable homicide. Under Jewish law, a man is under an obligation to protect his own person, that of his family, and property. Anyone who refuses to do so is worse than a pagan.

Blizzard, Dr. Roy. A New Testament Survey: The Romans, The Jews, and the Christians (pp. 22-24). Stratton Press. Kindle Edition.

The key to this section of the Sermon on the Mount is to be found in the Mishnah (“from the second”), or the oral tradition of Rabbinical interpretations of the Torah. The Mishnah Baba Kamma 8 is concerned with legal liability and compensation for damages inflicted on people or property.

One who injures another is liable to pay compensation for that injury due to five types of indemnity: He must pay for damage, for pain, for medical costs, for loss of livelihood, and for humiliation. How is payment for damage assessed? If one blinded another’s eye, severed his hand, broke his leg, or caused any other injury, the court views the injured party as though he were a slave being sold in the slave market, and the court appraises how much he was worth before the injury and how much he is worth after the injury. The difference between these two sums is the amount that one must pay for causing damage.

An “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” amounts to legal guidelines for monetary compensation. Better yet, one is to show legal restraint if possible. If one slaps you on one cheek, let him slap the other cheek. Verse 40 of Matthew gives it away: If one sues you for a coat, give him two. The main message is to restore relationships with alienated friends, and by all means, show judicial restraint, avoid the court system if at all possible.

Example of Textual Misunderstandings Explained Culturally (Jewish Calendar and Festivals)

Matthew 3:1   And in those days cometh John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, saying, 2 Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. 3 For this is he that was spoken of through Isaiah the prophet, saying,

               1The voice of one crying,

                In the wilderness

               Make ye ready the way of the Lord,

               Make his paths straight.

Which days? Why preach repentance? It seems that Matthew has laid out a story that is tied to the Jewish calendar(s). The Jewish Days of Awe, also known as the Yamim Noraim ( ימים נוראים), span the ten days starting with Rosh Hashanah (the Jewish New Year) and ending with Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement). The Days of Awe are a spiritually intense period, emphasizing the themes of judgment, repentance, forgiveness, and the fragility of life. They underscore the relationship between individuals and the community, the importance of personal responsibility, and the belief in the possibility of renewal and change.

Matthew 3:4   Now John himself had his raiment of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his food was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then went out unto him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about the Jordan; 6 and they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. 7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said unto them, Ye offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of repentance: 9 and think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. 10 And even now the axe lieth at the root of the trees: every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire. 11 I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire: 12 whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly cleanse his threshing-floor; and he will gather his wheat into the garner, but the chaff he will burn up with unquenchable fire.

Matthew 3:13   Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John would have hindered him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 But Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffereth him. 16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway from the water: and lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him; 17 and lo, a voice out of the heavens, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

It was possibly the 9th day with the 10th day being Yom Kippur and this baptism must be performed to stay in accordance with the Torah.

Matthew 4:1   Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. 2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he afterward hungered.

The next festival 5 days after Yom Kippur is Sukkot. Sukkot commemorates the 40 years of the children of Israel wandering in the wilderness and they dwelt in huts called a sukka.

3 And the tempter came and said unto him, If thou art the Son of God, command that these stones become 1bread. 4 But he answered and said, It is written, 2Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.  

The temptations mirrored wilderness challenges. The first is food. In Numbers 11:4-9 the wanderers complain about the manna and demand something else. Jesus remains faithful to the word of God.

5 Then the devil taketh him into the holy city; and he set him on the 3pinnacle of the temple, 6 and saith unto him, If thou art the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written,

               4He shall give his angels charge concerning thee:

               and,

               On their hands they shall bear thee up,

               Lest haply thou dash thy foot against a stone.

This temptation mirrors the children of Israel demanding a sign. “Is the Lord among us or not? In Exodus 17-1-7. Here Jesus demonstrates faith, no need for a sign.

Matthew 4:7   Jesus said unto him, Again it is written, 5Thou shalt not make trial of the Lord thy God.  

8 Again, the devil taketh him unto an exceeding high mountain, and showeth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; 9 and he said unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and 6worship me. 10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, 7Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.  11 Then the devil leaveth him; and behold, angels came and ministered unto him.

In this the final temptation, Jesus is offered a chance to renounce God for a substitute. While Moses was on the mountain receiving the tablets with the 10 words, the children of Israel had substituted a golden calf to be worshipped. But Jesus refused this temptation and the previous ones and remained faithful to God.

Matthew 4:12   Now when he heard that John was delivered up, he withdrew into Galilee; 13 and leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the borders of Zebulun and Naphtali: 14 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the prophet, saying,

Matthew 4:15    The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali,

               Toward the sea, beyond the Jordan,

               Galilee of the Gentiles,

Matthew 4:16    The people that sat in darkness

               Saw a great light,

               And to them that sat in the region and shadow of death,

               To them did light spring up.

Matthew 4:17   From that time began Jesus to preach, and to say, Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Simchat Torah follows which is a joyous festival. Simchat Torah, translating to "Rejoicing of the Torah," is a joyous Jewish holiday that marks the conclusion of the annual cycle of Torah readings and the beginning of a new cycle. Simchat Torah stands out for its exceptionally joyous and celebratory atmosphere, in contrast to the solemnity of the High Holy Days that precede it. The day emphasizes the joy of Jewish learning, the community's connection to its sacred texts, and the cyclical nature of the Torah reading cycle.

The holiday not only celebrates the completion of the Torah reading cycle but also affirms the ongoing, never-ending relationship between the Jewish people and their sacred texts. Through Simchat Torah, the annual cycle of Torah readings is both an end and a beginning, reflecting the perpetual journey of Jewish learning and living.

Jesus begins his ministry and announces that the Kingdom of Heaven מַלְכוּת הַשָּׁמַיִם (his movement based on the rule and reign of God) has arrived.

Critical Thinking Template for Explication of the Logic of Biblical Texts

“Critical Thinking is a deliberate meta-cognitive (thinking about thinking) and cognitive (thinking) act whereby a person reflects on the quality of the reasoning process simultaneously while reasoning to a conclusion. The thinker has two equally important goals: coming to a solution and improving the way she or he reasons.” [Moore, Critical Thinking and Intelligence Analysis Occasional Paper Number Fourteen 2006, italics in original]

Hence, critical thinking means much more than “Logic.” Metacognition is vital to this definition. “Meta” means above or beyond; hence, metacognition means “thinking that looks back on itself.”  

Critical thinking is the process of analyzing and assessing thinking with a view to improving it. Critical thinking presupposes knowledge of the most basic structures in thinking (the elements of thought) and the most basic intellectual standards for thinking (universal intellectual standards). The key to the creative side of critical thinking (the actual improving of thought) is in restructuring thinking as a result of analyzing and effectively assessing it.

The Elements of Thought to be Analyzed (Paul-Elder Model of Critical Thinking)

The main purpose of this Biblical book is…

(Here you are trying to state, as accurately as possible, the author's purpose in writing the material. What was the author trying to accomplish?)

The key question(s) at the heart of the Biblical book is/are …

(Your goal is to figure out the main question that was in the mind of the author when he wrote the Biblical book. What was the key question or questions he addresses?)

The most important information in this Biblical book is …

(You want to identify the key information the author is using in the Biblical book to support his main arguments. Look for facts, experiences, and/or data the author is using to support his conclusions.)

The key concept(s) we need to understand in this Biblical book is (are)…
By these concepts the author means …

(Look for the most important ideas at the heart of the author’s reasoning. These might be concepts like “faith” or “sin” or “poverty” or “holiness.”)

The main inferences in this Biblical book are…

(Figure out the most important conclusions the author comes to as answers to the main questions and is presented in the Biblical book.)

The main assumption(s) underlying the author’s thinking is (are)…

(Ask yourself: What is the author taking for granted in this Biblical book [that might be questioned]? The assumptions are beliefs the author does not think he has to defend. Assumptions are usually not stated and therefore can be hard to figure out but are in general in nature).

The main point(s) of view presented in this article is (are)_____________________. (The main question you are trying to answer here is: What is the author looking at, and how is he seeing it?

8a. If people take seriously what this author is saying, some important implications are…

(What consequences are likely to follow if people take the author’s ideas seriously?)

8b. If we fail to accept what the author is saying, some important implications are…

(What consequences are likely to follow if people ignore the author’s thinking in this Biblical book?)

The Intellectual Standards to Apply to One’s Analysis

STANDARDS CHECK

 Students: Print these pages. Check (✓) each relevant box.

CLEAR

Is my reasoning clear?

❑Do I understand this clearly?

❑Do I know the implications?

❑Can I state it in a clear sentence?

❑Have I elaborated enough?

❑Have I found good examples? Contrasting examples?

❑Have I given an illuminating illustration (analogy, metaphor, simile . . . ?)

❑Is my presentation of my reasoning clear?

❑Have I said clearly what I meant?

ACCURATE

❑Is my reasoning accurate? Is this in accord with:

❑the best knowledge I have?

❑the findings of the discipline?

❑reliable sources?

❑Do I need to check this out?

Check: Could this be based on:

❑wishful thinking?

❑unexamined background stories?

❑hearsay or questionable sources?

Does my presentation display accuracy? Have I supported the accuracy of my claims

❑With reasons?

❑With good reasons?

IMPORTANT, RELEVANT

 In my reasoning, have I focused on what is most important, given

❑my purpose?

❑the question at issue?

❑the context?

❑Do I have an overview?

❑Can I outline my reasoning?

❑Can I summarize it?

❑Have I presented my reasoning in a way that displays what is important?

SUFFICIENT

❑Have I reasoned this through enough, given:

❑my purpose?

❑the question at issue?

❑the context?

❑Have I left out crucial steps?

❑Have I jumped to conclusions?

❑Are there other essential issues to consider?

In my presentation

❑Have I said enough to show my audience that it is reasonable to come to my conclusions?

DEEP AND BROAD

In my reasoning, have I looked beneath the surface?

❑at underlying explanations, theories?

❑at complexities of the issue?

❑Have I taken account of other relevant perspectives?

In my presentation, have I presented my reasoning in a way that displays its

❑depth and

❑breadth?

PRECISE

Is my reasoning precise enough, specific enough?

❑Do I need more details?

❑Do I need more exactness?

❑Have I stated the degree of exactness my audience needs?

REASONABLE OVERALL

❑Is my reasoning reasonable overall?

❑Have I presented a reasonable overall case?

Nosich, Gerald M.. Learning to Think Things Through: A Guide to Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum (4th Edition) (Page 159). Pearson HE, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

The Psychology of Biblical Interpretation (Pt. 3)Since...

[image error]

The Psychology of Biblical Interpretation (Pt. 3)

Since by logic, the receiver of a communication process involving the Bible cannot supply feedback to the sender of the texts, therefore, the more that the receiver can approximate the field of experience of the sender, the greater the probability of a successful communication occurring. The definition of a successful communication experience occurs when the receiver decodes the message just as the sender encoded it. This will involve the receiver learning as much as possible about the language, the culture, the history, and the geography of the sender.

Understanding the language, culture, history, and geography of the Bible writers is of paramount importance for the receiver (modern reader) to minimize communication errors in interpreting the Biblical texts. This necessity stems from the inherent challenges posed by the temporal, cultural, and linguistic distances that separate contemporary readers from the ancient authors. Each of these aspects plays a crucial role in accurately decoding the intended message of the Biblical texts:

Language

The original texts of the Bible were written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Each of these languages has its own nuances, idioms, and grammatical structures that can significantly affect the meaning of a text. Modern translations strive to convey these original meanings accurately, but nuances can be lost or altered in translation. A deeper understanding of the original languages can help the receiver grasp the subtleties and depth of the original message, reducing the risk of misinterpretation.

Culture

The cultural contexts in which the Biblical texts were written are vastly different from the contemporary world. Social norms, legal systems, religious practices, and daily life in ancient times influence the content and the form of the Biblical narratives, laws, prophecies, and teachings. Without an understanding of these cultural backgrounds, modern readers may misinterpret the significance or meaning of certain passages, applying contemporary cultural norms to situations where they do not fit.

History

The historical context of the Bible encompasses the rise and fall of empires, the migration of peoples, and the evolution of religious and political systems. These historical factors are not only backdrops to the narratives but are often integral to understanding the motivations, actions, and messages of the Biblical texts. Knowledge of historical context enables the receiver to place the Biblical message within its proper timeframe, enhancing comprehension and reducing anachronistic interpretations.

Geography

The geography of the Bible, including the layout of the ancient Near East, the topography of Israel and surrounding regions, and the significance of specific locations, plays a critical role in the narrative and theological content of the Bible. Geographic awareness helps the receiver understand the physical and symbolic significance of places mentioned in the Bible, from wilderness wanderings to urban settings of prophecy and teaching.

More on the Primacy of Language

The Biblical text is written mainly in Hebrew with some Aramaic. The Christian New Testament has survived in Greek.

Prior to the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls a method of biblical interpretation, called higher biblical criticism, had reigned for 250 years. It was started back in 1751 with a French physician by the name of Jean Austruck and it reached its culmination in the 19th century, about 1856, and then 1876, with a man by the name of Groff and another by the name of Wellhausen in Germany that proposed a hypothesis that is known as the documentary hypothesis that said that all of the books of the O.T. were based on one of four different sources.  The Jehovah source, the Elohim source, the Deuteronomy source or the Priestly source none of which dated any earlier than 850 B.C. which of course immediately eliminates any possibility of Mosaic authorship or divine inspiration.  From the basis of these various sources, one was able to go to the Bible and divide the passages in the O.T. into a patchwork of JEP or D based upon the usage of divine names on parallel or duplicate accounts or on the variation in diction and style that one found in the Hebrew in the Masoretic texts of the O.T.  Until we found the Dead Sea Scrolls, and then just like someone took the rug and yanked it out from under their feet, the whole of the documentary hypothesis came tumbling down.  Not only the documentary hypothesis but the whole German school of theology that had also been telling us, and there are very few people that are aware of this fact, that this idea came to us from the same German school that gave us the documentary hypothesis.  The N.T. was written in Greek and that Jesus spoke Aramaic.  We know today, on the basis of the Dead Sea Scrolls, and all of the other of our archaeological findings, and textual studies as a result of what we found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, that both of those statement are false.  

The following is a summary of how traditional New Testament scholars believe the transmission of the Synoptic Gospels occurred: “Which brings us to the gospels, written later, and not by those whose names they bear (these were added in the 2nd and 3rd centuries). The gospel of Mark, which borrows from Paul, came first and set the template for the gospels that followed (Matthew draws from 600 of Mark’s 661 verses, while 65 per cent of Luke is drawn from Mark and Matthew.) The first version of Mark is dated between 53 CE and around 70 CE, when the Second Temple was destroyed, an event it mentions. The last gospel, John, which has a different theology and stories that contradict those of the three ‘synoptic’ gospels, is dated at around 100 CE. All four gospels include sections written in the 2nd century (among them, two different virgin birth narratives in Matthew and Luke), and some scholars place the final 12 verses of Mark in the 3rd century. Several historians assume that Matthew and Luke had an earlier source they call Q. However, Q has never been found and there are no references to it elsewhere.” Evans, Gavin. There Was No Jesus. Aeon. February 15, 2024.

A word of advice: rely on scholars in Israel. Dr. Robert Lindsey's perspective on the Gospels, particularly the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), posits that they originated from an earlier Hebrew source. Lindsey, an American biblical scholar who spent much of his career in Israel, developed a theory that significantly impacts the understanding of the textual origins and transmission of the New Testament narratives.

Lindsey argued that the Synoptic Gospels were not originally written in Greek, as traditionally believed, but were translated from Hebrew texts. This hypothesis is grounded in linguistic and textual analyses, noting that certain features of the Greek text of the Synoptics, especially in Mark, appear to be translations from a Semitic language, likely Hebrew. These features include Semitic syntax, idioms, and certain peculiarities that do not naturally belong to the Greek language but make sense when retroverted to Hebrew.

One of the core elements of Lindsey's theory is the priority of the Gospel of Mark, which he believed was a Greek translation of an earlier Hebrew life of Jesus. This stands in contrast to the widely accepted Markan Priority hypothesis, which suggests that Mark was the first written Gospel and served as a source for Matthew and Luke. Lindsey suggested that while Mark was indeed an early Gospel, it was a translation or adaptation of a prior Hebrew source that more directly captured the teachings and actions of Jesus.

Lindsey also proposed that Luke's Gospel was closer to the original Hebrew source than Mark's Gospel in terms of the order of events and teachings of Jesus. According to Lindsey, Luke preserved a more accurate sequence of the original narrative, while Mark's Gospel presented a rearranged account, possibly due to the translator's interpretative efforts or theological motivations.

Furthermore, Lindsey's research led him to believe in the existence of a common Hebrew source, which he thought might have been used by both Matthew and Luke. This hypothetical document, which he saw as different from the hypothetical "Q" source proposed by other scholars, would have contained sayings and teachings of Jesus in Hebrew.

Dr. Robert Lindsey's contributions to biblical scholarship, particularly his hypothesis of a Hebrew source for the Synoptic Gospels, have prompted further research and debate among scholars. His work underscores the complexity of the textual history of the New Testament and the potential multilingual background of its composition.

The bottom line, learn Hebrew! There are study materials which can assist in the study of the Bible in its original languages.

Jewish Exegesis

Their methods of study usually followed one of four basic rules that formed the acrostic PRDS   פַּרדֵס or Paradise. Each letter of the word stood for a method of interpretation and/or a way of understanding. The word pardes itself means an orchard from which one plucks the sweet and nourishing fruit. Each letter stood for a principal, method, or way of interpreting. P stood for peshat (פשט) which means the simplest of the interpretations. The second letter R or resh, stood for remez (רמז) which meant to hint back at something that had already been said; the word or passage to which the speaker was hinting would shed light on the real meaning of the subject. The third letter was D or derash (דרש) which was a homiletical exegesis or exposition on that particular topic. The final letter, S or sod (סוד) meant hidden or secret and was more of a mystical understanding of the passage or text. This was reserved for the more spiritually enlightened or aware. By utilizing one of the four principal methods for interpretation, the rabbis of the first century communicated their message. It is imperative that one keep these four methods of interpretation in mind to understand the message of the speaker.

Lexicons and Language Tools: For those interested in original language studies, lexicons for Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek are indispensable. Key resources include:

The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (BDB)
The Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG)
Liddel and Scott Greek-English Lexicon (includes the Septuagint references)
Interlinear Bibles and Parallel Bibles: These texts allow readers to compare translations or view the original languages alongside translations. The Interlinear Bible: Hebrew-Greek-English by Jay P. Green is a useful tool.
Gospel Parallels: A Synopsis of the First Three Gospels, With Alternative Readings From the Manuscripts and Noncanonical Parallels-Throckmartin
Delitzch’s Hebrew New Testament
David Bivin; Roy Blizzard Jr.. Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From a Hebrew Perspective.
Lindsey, Robert. A Hebrew Translation of the Gospel of Mark (highly technical)
Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics (4 vols.) / January 09, 2012. Pub. Koninklijke Brill NV
The Complete Parallel Bible with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books: New Revised Standard Version, Revised English Bible, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible. Oxford University Press.
Zeba Crook, Parallel Gospels: A Synopsis of Early Christian Writing (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).
Early Jewish Literature: An Anthology (Embry et al.). Wm. B. Eerdmans.
Everyman’s Talmud-Abraham Cohen
Mishnayoth: Pointed Hebrew Text, English translation, Introductions, notes, supplement, Appendix, Addenda, Corrigenda (6 Volume Set) (English and Hebrew Edition) 2nd Edition Hebrew Edition by Philip Blackman
The New Testament and the Mishnah: A Cross-Reference Index, 1983 by Charles R. Gianotti.

Theological Dictionaries: These explore theological concepts within the Bible, offering deep insights into the religious and philosophical implications of biblical texts. Consider:

Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Holger Gzella (Editor), Mark E. Biddle (Translator).
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Complete Set of 10 volumes) January 1, 1986. Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich.

Academic Journals: Journals such as the Journal of Biblical Literature and the ASOR provide scholarly articles on the latest research in biblical studies.

History

Schürer, Emil. A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ . Capella Press.
Bejarano Gutierrez, Juan Marcos. Ancient Israelite Identity: Religion, Ethnicity, and the Land of Israel. Yaron Publishing.
Schaff’s Church Fathers and Church History. Schaff, Phillip. Hendrickson Publishers.
Church Fathers — The Ante-Nicene Fathers.  A. Cleveland Coxe (Compiler), Alexander Roberts (Editor), James Donaldson (Editor), Philip Schaff (Editor), Henry Wace (Editor). Hendrickson Publishers.
Dead Sea Scrolls Biblical Manuscripts-various publishers
Nazarene Jewish Christianity: From the End of the New Testament Period Until Its Disappearance in the Fourth Century. Ray A. Pritz (Author)
The Heart of Hebrew History: A Study of the Old Testament by H. I. Hester (Author)
The Heart of the New Testament by H. I. Hester (Author)
Judaism and the Origins of Christianity by David Flusser
Judaism of the Second Temple Period, Volumes 1&2 by David Flusser

Culture

The Jewish People in the First Century: Historical Geography, Political History, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Institutions. 2 vol. editors S. Safrai, M. Stern.

Encyclopedia Judaica. 2nd ed. Thomson-Gale.

Jewish Encyclopedia-1901 Singer ed.

Seasons of Our Joy: A Modern Guide to the Jewish Holidays Paperback –2012 by Rabbi Arthur O. Waskow

Festivals of the Jewish Year: A Modern Interpretation and Guide Paperback– 1953 by Theodor H. Gaster

Geography

Anson F Rainey, R Steven Notley. The Sacred Bridge: Carta's Atlas of the Biblical World. Carta Jerusalem.

The Oxford Bible Atlas.

Hillel, Daniel. The Natural History of the Bible: An Environmental Exploration of the Hebrew Scriptures. Columbia University Press.

Example of Textual Misunderstandings Explained Linguistically (Hebraically)

MATTHEW 5:3: "Blessed are the poor in spirit; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven."

‏”אַשְׁרֵי עֲנִיֵּי הָרוּחַ, כִּי לָהֶם מַלְכוּת הַשָּׁמַיִם.

In the opening beatitude Jesus couples "poor in spirit" with "kingdom of heaven." "Poor in spirit" is an abbreviation of "poor and crippled in spirit" in Isaiah 66:2. The Kingdom of Heaven is what Jesus calls the body of his followers, his movement. In Hebrew, "kingdom" can mean "rule" or "those who are ruled," but it is never a territorial designation. "Heaven" is an evasive synonym for "God." "Theirs" is a classic mistranslation translation, still preserved in all modern English versions. The Greek word translated "theirs" should be translated "of these" or "of such as these." We cannot possess the Kingdom. It does not belong to us; rather, Jesus is describing in these beatitudes the kind of people who make up the Kingdom. It is the "poor in spirit," the spiritually "down and outers" who have no righteousness of their own; "the mourners," the brokenhearted who have reached the end of their strength and cry out to God in despair and hopelessness; "the meek," those who have thrown away their pride. It is people such as these who get into the Kingdom and find salvation.

David Bivin; Roy Blizzard Jr.. Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus: New Insights From a Hebrew Perspective (Kindle Locations 630-636). Kindle Edition.

Happy are those that have repented for they are those that are in the Jesus movement is the most faithful translation.

Season 2 Episode 7 “The Tong” in the 1972 Kung Fu television show, the main theme is that “without returning violence for violence, Caine ends the tyranny of a "Chinese Mafia" and liberates a boy slave.” A young Chinese Boy is a slave toa Chinese Tong member and he runs away to seek refuge from a white Christian lady. She discusses the boy’s problem with Kwai Chang Caine when Caine suggests that she not meet or have anything to do with Chen, the Tong member. The Christian woman proclaims that now he is quoting her Bible of which he had no knowledge of. She quotes Matthew 5: 39 “Resist not evil, but whosoever smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” Caine tells her that his sage Lao-Tzu had written: “A wise man does not contend, therefore, no one can contend against him. Yield and overcome.” Now Lao-Tzu may have meant to shy away from confrontation, but the quote from Matthew says nothing of the kind.

Matthew 5:38   Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:  39 but I say unto you, Resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man would go to law with thee, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. 41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go one mile, go with him two. 42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Matthew 5:38‏ ”שְׁמַעְתֶּם כִּי נֶאֱמַר 1’עַיִן תַּחַת עַיִן, שֵׁן תַּחַת שֵׁן‘. ‎39‏ וַאֲנִי אוֹמֵר לָכֶם 1שֶׁלֹּא לְהִתְקוֹמֵם עַל עוֹשֵׂה הָרַע. אַדְּרַבָּא, הַסּוֹטֵר לְךָ עַל הַלְּחִי הַיְמָנִית, הַפְנֵה אֵלָיו גַּם אֶת הָאַחֶרֶת. ‎40‏ מִי שֶׁרוֹצֶה לִתְבֹּעַ אוֹתְךָ לְדִין כְּדֵי לָקַחַת אֶת כֻּתָּנְתְּךָ, 1הַנַּח לוֹ גַּם אֶת מְעִילְךָ. ‎41‏ וּמִי שֶׁמְּאַלֵּץ אוֹתְךָ לָלֶכֶת אִתּוֹ מֶרְחָק שֶׁל מִיל אֶחָד, לֵךְ אִתּוֹ שְׁנַיִם. ‎42‏ 1תֵּן לַמְבַקֵּשׁ מִמְּךָ וְאַל תִּפְנֶה מִן הָרוֹצֶה לִלְווֹת מִמְּךָ.“

In Matthew 5:43, this whole passage, beginning with verse 33, has to do with an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and the concept of not resisting evil. Whoever hits you on one cheek, turn to him the other. If somebody takes your coat, give him your cloak also, etc. This is tough stuff for us because this is not our nature. If someone comes along and hits us on one side, we want to turn around and hit him. However, notice this, this is the catch here in verse 43, “You’ve heard it that it hath been said, ‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy’ but I say unto you love your enemies. Bless them that curse you. Do good to them that hate you. Pray for them that despite fully use you and persecute you that you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven.” We all have to be honest and admit that it’s not easy to love our enemies. It is especially difficult to turn the cheek when someone comes up and wants to hit you on one of them. When you look at this word in the Greek, its ekthros, no. 2190. We are going to Thayer and look up ekthros. It says, “…hate, someone that hates you.” The only thing that you are going to do in reading Thayer is to find out that it is someone that hates you; however, if you go to the classical dictionary of Liddell and Scott and look up ekthros, you’ll find something really interesting. It says, “…hates, hateful person, someone hating, hostile, an ekthros is one who has been a theolos (brother) but is alienated. A polemois means one who is at war with you (that’s a completely different word). A dusmenis is one who has long been alienated and refuses to be reconciled.” (p. 748) Comment: ekthros means all three of those? No, ekthros means a brother who has been alienated. A polemois means somebody is at war with you, and a dusmenis is someone who has long been alienated from you and refuses to be reconciled. Therefore, when Jesus comes along and says, “Love your enemies,” he’s not talking about someone who is at war with you. He is not talking about somebody who is out to get you. He is not talking about someone who has been long alienated from you and refuses to be reconciled. He is talking about a brother who has some hostility between you and him, and it needs to be taken care of. How do we know that? In Jewish law, it says that if somebody is going to kill you, you are to anticipate it and kill them first. It does not say to turn the other cheek. It says that if you know that someone is going to kill you, be quick and kill them first. It is called justifiable homicide. Under Jewish law, a man is under an obligation to protect his own person, that of his family, and property. Anyone who refuses to do so is worse than a pagan.

Blizzard, Dr. Roy. A New Testament Survey: The Romans, The Jews, and the Christians (pp. 22-24). Stratton Press. Kindle Edition.

The key to this section of the Sermon on the Mount is to be found in the Mishnah (“from the second”), or the oral tradition of Rabbinical interpretations of the Torah. The Mishnah Baba Kamma 8 is concerned with legal liability and compensation for damages inflicted on people or property.

One who injures another is liable to pay compensation for that injury due to five types of indemnity: He must pay for damage, for pain, for medical costs, for loss of livelihood, and for humiliation. How is payment for damage assessed? If one blinded another’s eye, severed his hand, broke his leg, or caused any other injury, the court views the injured party as though he were a slave being sold in the slave market, and the court appraises how much he was worth before the injury and how much he is worth after the injury. The difference between these two sums is the amount that one must pay for causing damage.

An “eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” amounts to legal guidelines for monetary compensation. Better yet, one is to show legal restraint if possible. If one slaps you on one cheek, let him slap the other cheek. Verse 40 of Matthew gives it away: If one sues you for a coat, give him two. The main message is to restore relationships with alienated friends, and by all means, show judicial restraint, avoid the court system if at all possible.

Example of Textual Misunderstandings Explained Culturally (Jewish Calendar and Festivals)

Matthew 3:1   And in those days cometh John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, saying, 2 Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. 3 For this is he that was spoken of through Isaiah the prophet, saying,

               1The voice of one crying,

                In the wilderness

               Make ye ready the way of the Lord,

               Make his paths straight.

Which days? Why preach repentance? It seems that Matthew has laid out a story that is tied to the Jewish calendar(s). The Jewish Days of Awe, also known as the Yamim Noraim ( ימים נוראים), span the ten days starting with Rosh Hashanah (the Jewish New Year) and ending with Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement). The Days of Awe are a spiritually intense period, emphasizing the themes of judgment, repentance, forgiveness, and the fragility of life. They underscore the relationship between individuals and the community, the importance of personal responsibility, and the belief in the possibility of renewal and change.

Matthew 3:4   Now John himself had his raiment of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his food was locusts and wild honey. 5 Then went out unto him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about the Jordan; 6 and they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. 7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said unto them, Ye offspring of vipers, who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? 8 Bring forth therefore fruit worthy of repentance: 9 and think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. 10 And even now the axe lieth at the root of the trees: every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire. 11 I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire: 12 whose fan is in his hand, and he will thoroughly cleanse his threshing-floor; and he will gather his wheat into the garner, but the chaff he will burn up with unquenchable fire.

Matthew 3:13   Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John would have hindered him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 But Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffereth him. 16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway from the water: and lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon him; 17 and lo, a voice out of the heavens, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

It was possibly the 9th day with the 10th day being Yom Kippur and this baptism must be performed to stay in accordance with the Torah.

Matthew 4:1   Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. 2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he afterward hungered.

The next festival 5 days after Yom Kippur is Sukkot. Sukkot commemorates the 40 years of the children of Israel wandering in the wilderness and they dwelt in huts called a sukka.

3 And the tempter came and said unto him, If thou art the Son of God, command that these stones become 1bread. 4 But he answered and said, It is written, 2Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.  

The temptations mirrored wilderness challenges. The first is food. In Numbers 11:4-9 the wanderers complain about the manna and demand something else. Jesus remains faithful to the word of God.

5 Then the devil taketh him into the holy city; and he set him on the 3pinnacle of the temple, 6 and saith unto him, If thou art the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written,

               4He shall give his angels charge concerning thee:

               and,

               On their hands they shall bear thee up,

               Lest haply thou dash thy foot against a stone.

This temptation mirrors the children of Israel demanding a sign. “Is the Lord among us or not? In Exodus 17-1-7. Here Jesus demonstrates faith, no need for a sign.

Matthew 4:7   Jesus said unto him, Again it is written, 5Thou shalt not make trial of the Lord thy God.  

8 Again, the devil taketh him unto an exceeding high mountain, and showeth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; 9 and he said unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and 6worship me. 10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, 7Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.  11 Then the devil leaveth him; and behold, angels came and ministered unto him.

In this the final temptation, Jesus is offered a chance to renounce God for a substitute. While Moses was on the mountain receiving the tablets with the 10 words, the children of Israel had substituted a golden calf to be worshipped. But Jesus refused this temptation and the previous ones and remained faithful to God.

Matthew 4:12   Now when he heard that John was delivered up, he withdrew into Galilee; 13 and leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the borders of Zebulun and Naphtali: 14 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the prophet, saying,

Matthew 4:15    The land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali,

               Toward the sea, beyond the Jordan,

               Galilee of the Gentiles,

Matthew 4:16    The people that sat in darkness

               Saw a great light,

               And to them that sat in the region and shadow of death,

               To them did light spring up.

Matthew 4:17   From that time began Jesus to preach, and to say, Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Simchat Torah follows which is a joyous festival. Simchat Torah, translating to "Rejoicing of the Torah," is a joyous Jewish holiday that marks the conclusion of the annual cycle of Torah readings and the beginning of a new cycle. Simchat Torah stands out for its exceptionally joyous and celebratory atmosphere, in contrast to the solemnity of the High Holy Days that precede it. The day emphasizes the joy of Jewish learning, the community's connection to its sacred texts, and the cyclical nature of the Torah reading cycle.

The holiday not only celebrates the completion of the Torah reading cycle but also affirms the ongoing, never-ending relationship between the Jewish people and their sacred texts. Through Simchat Torah, the annual cycle of Torah readings is both an end and a beginning, reflecting the perpetual journey of Jewish learning and living.

Jesus begins his ministry and announces that the Kingdom of Heaven מַלְכוּת הַשָּׁמַיִם (his movement based on the rule and reign of God) has arrived.

Critical Thinking Template for Explication of the Logic of Biblical Texts

“Critical Thinking is a deliberate meta-cognitive (thinking about thinking) and cognitive (thinking) act whereby a person reflects on the quality of the reasoning process simultaneously while reasoning to a conclusion. The thinker has two equally important goals: coming to a solution and improving the way she or he reasons.” [Moore, Critical Thinking and Intelligence Analysis Occasional Paper Number Fourteen 2006, italics in original]

Hence, critical thinking means much more than “Logic.” Metacognition is vital to this definition. “Meta” means above or beyond; hence, metacognition means “thinking that looks back on itself.”  

Critical thinking is the process of analyzing and assessing thinking with a view to improving it. Critical thinking presupposes knowledge of the most basic structures in thinking (the elements of thought) and the most basic intellectual standards for thinking (universal intellectual standards). The key to the creative side of critical thinking (the actual improving of thought) is in restructuring thinking as a result of analyzing and effectively assessing it.

The Elements of Thought to be Analyzed (Paul-Elder Model of Critical Thinking)

The main purpose of this Biblical book is…

(Here you are trying to state, as accurately as possible, the author's purpose in writing the material. What was the author trying to accomplish?)

The key question(s) at the heart of the Biblical book is/are …

(Your goal is to figure out the main question that was in the mind of the author when he wrote the Biblical book. What was the key question or questions he addresses?)

The most important information in this Biblical book is …

(You want to identify the key information the author is using in the Biblical book to support his main arguments. Look for facts, experiences, and/or data the author is using to support his conclusions.)

The key concept(s) we need to understand in this Biblical book is (are)…
By these concepts the author means …

(Look for the most important ideas at the heart of the author’s reasoning. These might be concepts like “faith” or “sin” or “poverty” or “holiness.”)

The main inferences in this Biblical book are…

(Figure out the most important conclusions the author comes to as answers to the main questions and is presented in the Biblical book.)

The main assumption(s) underlying the author’s thinking is (are)…

(Ask yourself: What is the author taking for granted in this Biblical book [that might be questioned]? The assumptions are beliefs the author does not think he has to defend. Assumptions are usually not stated and therefore can be hard to figure out but are in general in nature).

The main point(s) of view presented in this article is (are)_____________________. (The main question you are trying to answer here is: What is the author looking at, and how is he seeing it?

8a. If people take seriously what this author is saying, some important implications are…

(What consequences are likely to follow if people take the author’s ideas seriously?)

8b. If we fail to accept what the author is saying, some important implications are…

(What consequences are likely to follow if people ignore the author’s thinking in this Biblical book?)

The Intellectual Standards to Apply to One’s Analysis

STANDARDS CHECK

 Students: Print these pages. Check (✓) each relevant box.

CLEAR

Is my reasoning clear?

❑Do I understand this clearly?

❑Do I know the implications?

❑Can I state it in a clear sentence?

❑Have I elaborated enough?

❑Have I found good examples? Contrasting examples?

❑Have I given an illuminating illustration (analogy, metaphor, simile . . . ?)

❑Is my presentation of my reasoning clear?

❑Have I said clearly what I meant?

ACCURATE

❑Is my reasoning accurate? Is this in accord with:

❑the best knowledge I have?

❑the findings of the discipline?

❑reliable sources?

❑Do I need to check this out?

Check: Could this be based on:

❑wishful thinking?

❑unexamined background stories?

❑hearsay or questionable sources?

Does my presentation display accuracy? Have I supported the accuracy of my claims

❑With reasons?

❑With good reasons?

IMPORTANT, RELEVANT

 In my reasoning, have I focused on what is most important, given

❑my purpose?

❑the question at issue?

❑the context?

❑Do I have an overview?

❑Can I outline my reasoning?

❑Can I summarize it?

❑Have I presented my reasoning in a way that displays what is important?

SUFFICIENT

❑Have I reasoned this through enough, given:

❑my purpose?

❑the question at issue?

❑the context?

❑Have I left out crucial steps?

❑Have I jumped to conclusions?

❑Are there other essential issues to consider?

In my presentation

❑Have I said enough to show my audience that it is reasonable to come to my conclusions?

DEEP AND BROAD

In my reasoning, have I looked beneath the surface?

❑at underlying explanations, theories?

❑at complexities of the issue?

❑Have I taken account of other relevant perspectives?

In my presentation, have I presented my reasoning in a way that displays its

❑depth and

❑breadth?

PRECISE

Is my reasoning precise enough, specific enough?

❑Do I need more details?

❑Do I need more exactness?

❑Have I stated the degree of exactness my audience needs?

REASONABLE OVERALL

❑Is my reasoning reasonable overall?

❑Have I presented a reasonable overall case?

Nosich, Gerald M.. Learning to Think Things Through: A Guide to Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum (4th Edition) (Page 159). Pearson HE, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

The Cross as An Event

[image error]

The Cross as An Event

Prof. David Flusser

Let me say as I begin this talk that when I speak to you about the meaning of the Cross, I am not speaking as a Jew whom Christians have invited in to hear his opinion, but as a scholar who only wishes to help his friends to come to a better understanding of the Cross as a historical event. Not that in so doing I am saying that the Cross is only a historical event. On the contrary, I consider it much more than such words seem to indicate.

Let us begin with the question: Is there a difference between the execution of Socrates and the crucifixion of Jesus? Indeed, very early; Christians noted the similarity between these two tragic events. But there is an enormous, decisive difference. Had the Greek philosopher not been executed by the authorities of Athens, the development of Greek philosophy would not have changed an iota. But had Jesus not been crucified, there would have been no Christianity at all as we know it. This is true even if followers of the forlorn figure on the Cross had risen to keep alive his example and teaching.

I do not want to speak about the manifold development of so-called Christology in historical Christian

thought. I am sure you are all aware of the various motifs in theologies of the Cross. Some of these theologies have been of great comfort to believers and most of them seek to interpret what really happened. However today, when so much of the Faith has grown weak in many minds, these interpretations miss the point. This is mainly due to their detachment from the event of the Cross itself.

Judaism and Christianity are faiths built on facts. Modern views of faith, recognizing that faith is the vital element in religion, tend to abandon facts because they seem less certain than the need for faith. This is the reason we hear so much about demythologization. In reality, however, to demythologize is to dehistorize religion. Demythology, at least for many of those who would like to abandon the search for a true historical picture of Jesus and the earliest faith of Jewish Christianity, is simply dehistorization.

Let me give an obvious illustration. The exodus of the Hebrews from Egypt not only became 'in time the classic symbol of liberation from slavery- but was itself an event of history which had very concrete historical consequences. Through it the children of Israel were led to the desert where the Law was propounded and accepted. Through it the commandment of the Law about being kind to "strangers and sojourners" picked up its most powerful fillip: one's attitude to the stranger is to be dictated by the memory of the way one felt as a stranger in Egypt.

In the same way the Cross is rooted in Christian experience. Not only is faith in the Cross at the root of Christian faith, the event of the Cross is itself at the root. Jesus did not die as a martyr solely--many, many good men have been killed as crudest criminals: The Cross is much more than martyrdom. It is true that Christians can have some understanding of the Cross due to their faith that he was the Son of God, the Messiah. But even the belief in Jesus' Sonship does not explain the historical meaning of the Cross. You may say if you wish that Jesus as the Son of Man, Son of God, and Messiah of necessity suffered a more significant death than that of other martyrs and that therefore the Cross is completely unique. But by saying this you have not really said anything about the Cross itself. You may say that the Father offered his Son as a sacrifice to expiate the sins of those who believe, but it seems to me that by putting the problem that way—without knowing Jesus himself--you are speaking about only a theological or mythological event but not of a historical event in full sense of the word.

I do not think that the so-called "mystery of the Cross" can be understood without the historical Jesus and his teaching and message. The message of the Cross is the crown of his life and teachings.

Through the Cross the faith of Jesus was welded to the faith in Jesus.

This was not always so understood, of course. Too often in the ancient Church and in the Middle Ages, and even in modern Catholicism and Protestantism, what happened before the Crucifixion was unimportant for theologians and common Christians. In contrast to this over-emphasis, liberal Christian theology came to care little for the Cross, Jesus and his teaching becoming their main interest, with the result that the Cross was eclipsed. However, such a thing can happen only if certain important parts of Jesus’ message are glossed over. If the central elements of Jesus'

teaching, such as sin, goodness, and faith in God, are eliminated and the Kingdom of Heaven is understood-as human progress only, Jesus emerges as a liberal teacher of sublime ethics, but the centrality of the Cross is destroyed.

Happily, we can today understand the teaching of Jesus much better than it was once possible to do, particularly by getting a clearer picture of the Judaism of his day. We now know not only many of the links of Jesus' sayings with the Jewish schools of his time, but we can understand better what Jesus demanded. We can see that he expanded the precept of mutual love to include even the enemy. Jesus taught this because he was sure God loved both sinners and righteous men, and it is significant that he taught this without claiming that God loves sinners because they may repent and become righteous!

Jesus did not say that by our love for sinners we would make them better. On the other hand, he had no sympathy for sin itself and insisted that God recompenses good and punishes wickedness. The message of Jesus is both a revolutionary moral teaching and a revolutionary moral approach. Even without the Cross, one can see-that this is a message of Good News.

I have said that the Cross is the crown of Jesus' message about sin and atonement: it is not only an

accidental tragedy, as was the poisoning of Socrates. The righteous one who died as a criminal was also the man who said that he was sent not to the righteous but to the sinner.

It is, therefore, of the greatest importance to know that the Cross is the historical outworking of Jesus' doctrine of sin and righteousness. Historically speaking, the Crucifixion opened the way for sinners, and as it seems, for the Gentiles, but this was possible only because of the teaching of the righteous crucified one.

Having said all this, I must however make it clear that had Jesus desired his death as a tool of atonement for sinners, the whole event would have been meaningless as event. Had this been true, Jesus' death would only have been a sublime theological suicide. Jesus begged his Father for life in his agony in the Garden of Gethsemane--he did not seek death. Death and the Cross came only because he submitted himself to God's will.

Thus, the external and internal events of Jesus' life and death, his teaching, and the Cross form a unity. If one wants to understand the theology of the Cross, he has to begin with Jesus' baptism, he has to listen to his teaching, and he has to see his silent obedience in Gethsemane. Then the horrible and violent death of Jesus will be. an end--and also a beginning.

Professor David Flusser was born in Vienna in 1917. An internationally distinguished biblical Scholar, he is noted for his work on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Essene Christianity, and Judaism at the time of Christ.

Professor Flusser studied classical philology at the University of Prague, lectured there from 1947 to 1950, and received a doctorate from Hebrew University in Jerusalem where he served as professor of

History of Religion. His publications include "The Dead Sea Sect and Prepauline Christianity," Scripta Hieroselymitana 5 (1958), Jesus (German edition 1968, English edition 1970), The Sage From Galilee: Rediscovering the Genius’ of Jesus (2007), Judaism of the Second Temple Period: Qumran and Apocalypticism, vol. 1 (2022), Judaism and the Origins of Christianity (2012), Jewish Sources in Early Christianity (1987), Judaism of the Second Temple Period, Volume 2 (2009).

The Psychology of Biblical Interpretation (Pt. 2)

[image error]

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION (PT.2)

Introduction to Cognitive Biases and Heuristics

Cognitive biases and heuristics are mental shortcuts or rules of thumb that humans use to simplify decision-making processes. Identified by cognitive psychologists, these biases and heuristics arise from our brain's attempt to interpret and process vast amounts of information efficiently. However, they often lead to errors in judgment, as they can cause us to overlook important information, misinterpret data, or jump to conclusions. In essence, while they are adaptive mechanisms that help us make quick decisions, they also have a significant impact on our information processing, leading us to make systematically irrational choices or interpretations.

Cognitive Biases in Interpreting Complex Texts

Several cognitive biases and heuristics can specifically affect the interpretation of complex texts, such as Biblical scriptures:

Confirmation Bias: This bias leads individuals to favor information that confirms their preexisting beliefs or hypotheses. When interpreting Biblical texts, a person might selectively focus on verses or interpretations that align with their existing theological views, while ignoring or rationalizing away passages that conflict with their beliefs.
Anchoring Bias: This occurs when individuals rely too heavily on the first piece of information they encounter. In the context of Biblical interpretation, initial explanations or interpretations encountered by a reader can disproportionately influence their understanding of the rest of the text, potentially leading to a skewed interpretation.
Availability Heuristic: This heuristic involves overestimating the importance of information that is readily available or memorable. It could cause readers to overemphasize more familiar or frequently quoted Biblical passages while neglecting less well-known but equally important texts.
Dunning-Kruger Effect: This is a cognitive bias wherein individuals with limited knowledge overestimate their own ability. In interpreting Biblical scriptures, this might lead to overly simplistic or confident interpretations without a deep understanding of the historical, cultural, or theological complexities of the text.
Framing Effect: People react differently to a particular choice depending on how it is presented. Thus, the way a Biblical passage is framed or the context in which it is presented can significantly affect how it is interpreted, potentially leading to biased or skewed interpretations.
Hindsight Bias: Also known as the "knew-it-all-along" effect, this bias can cause individuals to see Biblical prophetic texts as having been obvious all along, thereby overlooking the complexities and nuances of predictive and apocalyptic literature.
Fundamental Attribution Error: This bias involves attributing others' actions to their character rather than to external factors. When reading Biblical narratives, readers might incorrectly attribute actions or decisions of biblical characters to inherent personality traits, overlooking the situational context or divine intervention described in the scriptures.
Status Quo Bias: This is a preference for the current state of affairs, leading individuals to resist change. In Biblical interpretation, this might manifest as a preference for traditional interpretations or translations, even in the face of new scholarly evidence or alternative interpretations that might provide deeper insights.
Projection Bias: Assuming that others share the same beliefs or will react in the same way we would. When interpreting Biblical texts, individuals might project their own feelings, beliefs, or cultural norms onto the text or its characters, rather than seeking to understand the text within its own historical-cultural context.
In-group Bias: Favoring one’s own group, which can affect how one interprets texts related to group identity or behavior. This bias might lead to interpretations of Biblical texts that overly favor the perspective of one’s own denominational, cultural, or theological group.
Belief Bias: The tendency to evaluate arguments based on the believability of the conclusion. This can lead to accepting interpretations that fit within one's existing system of beliefs while dismissing more credible interpretations that challenge those beliefs.
Narrative Fallacy: Creating a story or pattern from disconnected or complex facts. Interpreters might weave Biblical passages into a coherent narrative that aligns with their own worldviews or theological systems, potentially ignoring the diversity and complexity of the texts.
Illusory Correlation: Perceiving a relationship between variables (typically people, events, or behaviors) even when no such relationship exists. Readers might connect unrelated Biblical passages or concepts, forming interpretations that seem coherent but lack scriptural basis.

Each of these biases and heuristics can significantly shape how individuals interpret Biblical texts, often in ways that confirm their existing beliefs or misunderstandings rather than challenging them to seek a more nuanced, informed, or contextually accurate understanding. Being aware of these biases is a crucial step in approaching Biblical texts (or any complex texts) with an open, analytical, and critical mindset.

Cognitive Feelings of Certainty-Even When We Are Wrong

The human mind is remarkably skilled at fostering a deep sense of knowing, engendering feelings of the self, agency, recognition, causation, comprehension, and certainty that are crucial for understanding cognitive dynamics. This phenomenon is particularly significant when examining the variety of approaches within religious denominations toward interpreting Biblical texts. The landscape of religious thought is diverse, with many denominations each holding a strong conviction in their unique interpretation of scripture, despite these interpretations often being mutually incompatible.

Within the religious sphere, adherents of different denominations demonstrate a profound confidence in the correctness of their scriptural interpretations. This certainty, though pivotal for communal identity and spiritual coherence, may sometimes lead to interpretive errors akin to false pattern recognition, where a group might see divine endorsement in texts that can be ambiguously interpreted. This assuredness in one's interpretative framework can cause followers to overlook the possibility of cognitive biases influencing their understanding, as well as the potential for multiple valid interpretations.

In contrast to the objective-seeking nature of scientific inquiry, religious groups might adopt a skeptical view of interpretations outside their denomination, treating them as misinterpretations or deviations from the 'true' path. This skepticism, however, is also a form of certainty—certainty in the exclusivity and superiority of their interpretation. Such a stance can become as dogmatic as any empirical overconfidence, leading to the dismissal of alternative scriptural insights as invalid, thus potentially missing out on a richer, more nuanced understanding of their faith.

Despite their divergent paths, both religious denominations and scientific communities share the challenge of cognitive bias, particularly the inclination to affirm the certainty of their interpretations or findings. The dialogue among different religious denominations, much like the conversation between religious and scientific thinkers, highlights the need for recognizing and addressing these biases. By doing so, both groups can strive towards a deeper, more inclusive understanding of spiritual texts and, by extension, the broader human experience. This pursuit underlines the complexity of navigating faith and knowledge, urging an ongoing reflection on our beliefs and the cognitive processes that shape them.

Critical Thinking-A Method to Justify Certainty

Critical thinking, particularly as structured by frameworks like the Paul-Elder model, offers a robust solution to these cognitive pitfalls. By prioritizing the analysis, evaluation, and improvement of thought processes, critical thinking encourages individuals to question their assumptions, scrutinize their evidence, and reflect on their reasoning. This reflective practice helps mitigate the likelihood of committing a Type 1 error - the premature acceptance of a conclusion or the overestimation of one's certainty. Critical thinkers are trained to recognize the fallibility of their cognition and to systematically question the validity and reliability of the information they encounter.

Moreover, critical thinking instills a balanced skepticism that is neither naively optimistic like some liberal adherents might be nor dismissively cynical as some fundamentalists can be. It fosters an intellectual humility, acknowledging that while absolute certainty is often unattainable, reasoned judgment based on systematic evaluation is possible and desirable. By continually questioning, revising, and refining their conclusions, critical thinkers maintain a healthy skepticism that guards against the overconfidence often associated with Type 1 errors (unjustified certainty), thus enhancing the accuracy and reliability of their judgments.

In essence, the cultivation of critical thinking skills provides a pathway beyond the limitations of both optimism and skepticism. It offers a methodological approach to knowledge that recognizes the brain's tendencies towards feelings of certainty and actively works to calibrate these inclinations through reasoned inquiry, evidence assessment, and reflective consideration, significantly reducing the vulnerability to cognitive errors that can skew our understanding of the world.Top of Form

 

The Shannon-Weaver Model of Communication

The Shannon-Weaver model, originally designed to improve technical communication, is also highly relevant in understanding human communication. It includes elements such as the information source, transmitter, channel, receiver, and destination. In the context of reading and interpreting the Bible, this model can help illustrate how messages are transmitted (textually), potentially distorted (by noise such as personal bias or historical distance), and received (by the reader or interpreter).

Heuristics and Biases Distort the Communication Process

Cognitive biases and heuristics can significantly distort the communication process outlined in the Shannon-Weaver model, especially in Biblical interpretation. For instance:

Noise: Personal biases (like confirmation bias) can act as noise, distorting the message before it's even received.
Receiver: The interpreter’s own biases and frameworks can influence how the message is decoded and understood, potentially leading to misinterpretation or selective understanding of Biblical texts.

Mitigating Biases with the Paul-Elder Model of Critical Thinking

The Paul-Elder model provides a systematic approach to critical thinking that involves the analysis of thought through its elements (purpose, question, information, interpretation, concepts, assumptions, implications, and point of view) and the application of intellectual standards (clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, significance, and fairness) and intellectual traits (intellectual humility, courage, empathy, integrity, perseverance, faith in reason, and fair-mindedness).

Applying the Models to Biblical Interpretation

Analyzing Each Book Using the Elements of Thought

Purpose

Integration of Historical Context: The purpose of each book may be illuminated by understanding the historical period in which it was written, including political, social, and religious circumstances. For instance, the prophetic books' calls for repentance can be better understood against the backdrop of the Israelites' historical infidelity and their sociopolitical context.

Question

Cultural and Linguistic Nuance: Questions posed by the authors or addressed within the texts often emerge from specific cultural and linguistic contexts. Recognizing these nuances aids in grasping the questions' full implications, such as the covenantal language in the Old Testament, deeply rooted in Ancient Near Eastern treaty forms.

Information

Geographical Influence: The geography of the Biblical lands can shed light on narratives and parables, making the physical setting a critical element of the story. Understanding the geography helps in visualizing the events and the challenges faced by the people involved.

Interpretation and Inference

Original Languages: Knowledge of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek allows for direct engagement with the text, reducing reliance on translations that may carry interpretive biases. This aids in clarifying ambiguous or disputed passages, offering a broader range of plausible interpretations.

Concepts

Historical and Cultural Concepts: Identifying key concepts often requires understanding the cultural practices, legal systems, and religious beliefs of the time. For example, the concept of holiness in Leviticus is deeply tied to Ancient Israelite religious practices and their understanding of purity.

Assumptions

Examination of Authorial and Reader Assumptions: Recognizing the historical and cultural assumptions of the authors and the original audience can highlight potential biases or limitations in our own reading of the text. This involves understanding the worldviews and expectations of ancient societies.

Implications

Application to Contemporary Life: Considering the historical, cultural, and linguistic contexts of the Biblical texts can enrich their application to modern life, allowing for more relevant and meaningful interpretations that respect the original intent.

Point of View

Diverse Historical Perspectives: Acknowledging the variety of perspectives within the Bible itself, influenced by differing historical and cultural contexts, encourages a multifaceted approach to understanding the narrative.

Applying Intellectual Standards and Traits

Engagement with Original Texts and Contexts: Clarity, accuracy, and precision in interpretation are enhanced by direct engagement with the original languages and historical studies. This approach fosters intellectual humility and courage, as it requires confronting the complexity of the Biblical text and its background.
Historical and Cultural Empathy: Developing empathy for the historical and cultural circumstances of the Biblical writers and their audiences encourages a more integrative and respectful approach to interpretation.
Perseverance in Contextual Study: The effort to understand the original languages, cultures, histories, and geographies demands perseverance but is essential for a reasoned and fair-minded engagement with the Biblical text.

Incorporating these dimensions into the critical analysis of the Bible using the Paul-Elder model enhances the depth and breadth of understanding, encouraging a holistic and empathetic approach to studying these ancient texts.

Top of Form

Conclusion

Integrating the Shannon-Weaver model of communication with the Paul-Elder model of critical thinking provides a comprehensive framework for interpreting the Bible. By analyzing each book and chapter through the elements of thought, applying intellectual standards, and embodying intellectual traits, readers can engage with the Biblical texts in a way that is both deeply respectful and intellectually rigorous. This approach not only enriches one's personal understanding of the Bible but also contributes to a more nuanced and thoughtful discourse on its meaning and relevance.