Do We Need the New Testament? Quotes

“The imprecatory psalms are for us to pray, who are not victims. Indeed, if we do not want to pray them, it raises questions about the shallowness of our own spirituality, theology and ethics. Do we not want to see wrongdoers put down and punished? One”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“the Torah itself sets obedience in the context of trust.”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“At the beginning of its treatment of the Ten Commandments, a rabbinic commentary on Exodus, the Mekilta of Rabbi Ishmael, raises the question why the Ten Commandments did not appear at the beginning of the Torah but appear only in the setting of the introductory words that describe Yahweh as the one who brought the people out of Egypt. To what may the matter be compared? To one who came to a province. He said to the people, “May I reign over you?” They said to him, “You have done nothing good for us that we should accept your reign.” What did he do? He built them a wall. He brought them water. He fought battles for them. Then he said to them, “May I reign over you?” They responded, “Yes! Yes!” Thus it was with God. He redeemed Israel from Egypt. He parted the sea for them. He brought them manna. He provided them a well. He sent them quail. He fought the battles of Amalek for them. Then he said to them, “May I reign over you?” They replied, “Yes! Yes!”5 The Mekilta’s theology is closer to that of Paul and of Genesis in implying that it was not the people’s obedience that opened up the possibility of a relationship with Yahweh. Its obedience was a response to Yahweh’s acts.”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“Our relationship with God is not contractual, so that we could fulfill the right conditions and it would have the desired results, as if our relationship with God resembled putting coins in a vending machine. It is a personal relationship, and such relationships involve freedom on both sides. Joel”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“The prophets’ task is to tell their own people what God intends to do with them, not to think about what people in hundreds of years’ time may need to hear, though the preserving of their prophecies implies the conviction that they have ongoing significance. Further,”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“(Whereas we are inclined to equate the reality and the sense of the reality, these are different things—there can be a reality of God’s presence and activity whether we feel it or not, and we can have a sense of God’s reality and activity but the sense may be false.)”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“the New Testament does not talk about human beings furthering or spreading or building up or working for God’s reign. Human efforts to achieve social justice are not destined to be successful. “Our responsibility is not to save the world. We are not required to transform This Age.”13 The problem about human society is too deep. As human beings living in God’s world, our vocation is to do what we can to restrain disorder in society, in light of what the Scriptures tell us about God’s creation purpose, but not to be overly optimistic about what we can do to bring in the kingdom.14”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“the First Testament is under no illusion about whether implementing the Torah has the potential to achieve God’s purpose for Israel’s life. There is no direct link between seeking to restrain injustice in society and the implementing of God’s reign. Implementing God’s reign is fortunately God’s business.”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“the society in which the people of God will seek to implement this justice is one that remains sinful. It is in fact fortunate that, as Jesus puts it, the Torah is written for people who have stubborn wills. The Torah seeks to pull people toward God’s creation intent, but it makes realistic allowance for their stubbornness (e.g., Mt 19:1-12). The empire and every other society remains a mixed entity, which makes the First Testament distinctively useful in this connection. Further,”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“What is distinctive and engaging about Jesus is not the novel things he says but the way he says things. He is creative not so much because he says things that are completely new but because he speaks with such authority.”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“In none of the Gospels does Jesus tell his disciples to extend the kingdom, work for the kingdom, build up the kingdom, or further the kingdom.”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“Jesus does put radical demands before people, but so did Isaiah and so does Proverbs. The New Testament is new in the same way that Isaiah was new or that Genesis was new over against Exodus.21 While there are statements Jesus makes that no prophet or wise teacher could have made, these are statements such as the “I am” declarations in John’s Gospel; they relate to his being the incarnate one and the Savior.”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“The nature of the praise and prayer in the Psalms indicates how memory is key to praise and prayer.”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“Memory relates to ethics as well as to spirituality (the distinction between ethics and spirituality is a Western one and does more harm than good). Memory places obligations upon you. The Israelites were to remember their experience of servitude in Egypt, and treat their servants accordingly.”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“Although the First Testament talks about slavery, Middle Eastern slavery was not an inherently oppressive institution like the European slavery accepted under the Roman Empire and then accepted by Britain and the United States. It would be better to call Middle Eastern slavery “servitude,” a servitude that could provide people who become impoverished with an economic safety net. The Torah accepts such servitude but places constraints on it, such as limiting its length to seven years and requiring that a servant be treated as a member of the family.”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself

“Jesus’ disciples are not people lacking resources, but they are poor because they belong to this people under the oppressive and demoralizing dominion of a foreign power (e.g., Lk 6:20). They are indeed thus poor in spirit (Mt 5:3). Jesus does not focus on a concern for the poor in the sense of people who lacked resources. In”
― John E. Goldingay, Do We Need the New Testament?: Letting the Old Testament Speak for Itself