Biblical Hebrew Forum

[Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>]

On 16/03/2006 17:22, Karl Randolph wrote:
> Peter:
>
> You're right for jumping all over me for a poor 
> choice of words. What I meant was not "important", 
> but "relevant".
>
> Further, I used the New Testament only as an 
> illustration that it follows the same pattern as 
> Tanakh, namely not to dwell on the afterlife.
>
> After all, eating and drinking are important, but 
> not relevant in a discussion of Hebrew philology. 
> Likewise a discussion of the details of the 
> afterlife is not relevant to a discussion of how to 
> live to be worthy in the present life. That's why 
> neither Tanakh nor the New Testament have much to 
> say on the afterlife.
>
>   
Thank you, Karl. What you say now is certainly an improvement. But you 
still seem to assume that the NT is "a discussion of how to live to be 
worthy in the present life". While that is not wrong, it is only a 
partial picture giving a distorted emphasis. Even the Sermon on the 
Mount, the passage most focused on ethics, is full of promises of the 
Kingdom of God. Better, for the NT if not the Tanakh, would be 
"guidelines on how to live in the present life to be counted worthy in 
the future life", which explains why the NT has a lot to say about 
attaining the future life although little about its details.

--
Peter Kirk
peter AT qaya.org (personal)
peterkirk AT qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/