...Thank you, Michael. Yes, this last part answers my points very well. I have no objection to this approach to the HB. I do object to the approach advocated by some Christians of harmonising the understanding and translation of the HB to NT interpretations of it, and particularly to inserting references to Jesus Christ where there was none in the original Hebrew - for example, using a capital letter for "Son" in Psalm 2, and rendering "virgin" rather than "young woman" in Isaiah 7:14 because that is how Matthew quoted the passage. That approach is of course particularly inappropriate for a list on which there are many Jews as well as Christians and others.
But NT renditions/interpretations of HB passages
should be given some weight by those looking for
semantic domain of
words/phrases/expressions/titles--particularly if NT
renditions/interpretations are among a few other
converging lines of ancient evidence. That’s what I
meant.
I think the NT can sometimes shed philological light
on words/phrases/expressions/titles in the HB. And we
can all take advantage of that. In particular, we who
are Christians should be able to do so on this list
and elsewhere without apology.
Hope my answer suffices for Peter Kirk’s inquiry as
well.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.