This is a repost from my Facebook profile.
EXEGESIS–the careful investigation of the original meaning of a text in its historical and literary contexts; the word comes from a Greek verb meaning “to lead out of” (Greek “ex” = “out”; “ago” = “to lead/go/draw”)
EISEGESIS–Reading into a text what isn’t there. Interpreting it by different rules than a consistent understanding from the Bible. Using a presupposition to arrive at the meaning, by ignoring the language and culture it was used in.
Okay, many preachers and Bible readers perform eisegesis and I’m asking you try exegesis. Eisegesis is when I read a text and seven objects appear, or Joshua and Israelites walked around the wall seven times and I say that “seven is the number of completion.” There’s no where in the text that explicitly states that, we as Christians just like the motif of seven in the Scripture text. Just because the writers of the various books like to use the number seven doesnt mean anything—they just like the number seven, and then it provides continuity in the text, because all we know the redactors could have changed those numbers in order to have a nice neat story.
Exegesis is when I do a word study on a particular adjective or noun or verb in the particular unit (for HB) or pericope (for NT) and I check to see where else in the scripture does that adjective, noun or verb appear and compare and contrast the context in which that word is being used. Then one can ask the question why or why not the narrator chose to use that particular word in that particular context.
And a simple exegesis is to just read the text in the unit or pericope in its entirety, not just one isolated verse pulled out of its context. And to DEAL ONLY WITH WHAT IS WRITTEN IN THE TEXT! Christians love to put their own feelings and issues and opinions into the text and that really aint the writer of the text meant!!
Also–here’s a note for preachers and other readers of the Bible–JESUS AINT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT!!! Christian tradition would tell us that the major prophets in the Protestant canon (that means Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel et.al.) foreshadowed Christ’s coming because its convenient to our faith story–but puh-leez understand PARTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT WAS WRITTEN MORE THAN 500 YEARS BEFORE JESUS WAS BORN!
Now it is the great charasmatic preaching tradition to create a hermeneutical bridge that puts Jesus in the OT and its usually done in the last 5-10-25 mins of the sermon depending if your Baptist, regular crazy Pentecostal- or COGIC and it goes something like this (borrowed from a Rudolph McKissick sermon)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) when Cain killed Abel (deep breath)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) when Moses killed the Egyptian (deep breath)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) when David lusted after Bathsheeba (deep breath and random Hammond B3 Music)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) when the Jews went to Babylonian captivity (deep breath and more random drum playing)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) when they killed John the Baptist (deep breath and random piano tinkling)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) when the Pharisees accused Jesus (deep breath and more random noises from the Leslie)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) when the Jews accused him (deep breath)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) when they hung him on the cross (deep breath)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) when he diiiiiiii(big whole step swoop)iiiied on Friday (deep breath and the organist starts doing random stuff now)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) on Friday (deep breath)
Satan thought he could laugh (growl) on Saturday
Awww shucks, y’all know where i’m going with this, but
EARRRRRRRRRLLLLLYYYYYYYYYY (and the organ just screaming as loud as the preacher) on SUN-dey morning (growl) He got up (growl) with all power (growl) in His hands (growl) won’t He do it….
and you can figure out the rest.
I wrote all that to show that a “hermeneutical bridge” was built that “took Jesus through the forty and two generations” and then and only then can one preach an OT text and end up at the end of the sermon talking about Jesus because JESUS IS NOT IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.
So if you got any questions, hit me up.
But I’m sick and damn tired of all these damn people that get up talkin all this nonsense, hell take some time and do your homework with the text you gotta preach. And for those of us who like to do Bible study on our own, just try and look at the text in a different way. Actually, here’s a suggestion–try and read a passage of scripture as if you were an atheist or a non-Christian–so that means all of your prescribed notions and ideologies don’t exist–and you gotta discount that “All things work for the good of them…”
That’s the note for the day…
8 thoughts on “Jesus Aint In The Old Testament!!!!!”
I disagree with you Jesus is found it the old testament many times. Oh yeah by the way theres four hundred years between old and new testaments and not five hundred years as you wrote in your post.
Granted I was almost a year younger and a year angrier and more fired up than I am now (I wouldn’t write an article quite this inflammatory on such a subject), however, I still stand by claim about Jesus not being in the Old Testament. There are allusions to the Messiah, but the name Jesus does not appear in the Old Testament. Furthermore, the allusions to a Messiah or the Christ, were just that–allusions. No detailed specifics are found in the OT.
As to the issue of 400 to 500 years between the two is left up to scholars who debate many things for many years. Since I wasn’t there at the time, I really don’t know how long it was.
This is a terrible post, I don’t know what you believe, but there are claims for the Jews to have a messiah in the OT, they just thought he would be like David a conquering King who would give them victory over all there enemies on earth, there are all sorts of prophecies to how the Messiah would be recognized, i.e there is prophecy that said he would be born via virgin birth, that he would die in the way he did with taking our sins, and being pierced and beaten, and there was even more about how he would die on the cross in the old testament for another example it mentions they would not break his bones, and Jesus was odd in that they did not break his legs but rather stuck him with a spear, and as Jesus’ shirt was of one piece the prophecy about them casting lots for his clothes were fulfilled. He was also prophecied to come and be born in Bethlehem the hometown of David, and would free the captives, which Jesus did throughout his ministry, and these are only a few of his claims not to mention many others, and not to mention all the other logical evidence such as that this did not happen in a closet as the Dead Sea scrolls account for not to mention all of the other Archaeological evidence, so in closing, He is your King, whether you like it or not, for you can either accept him and receive his awesome love which leads to completeness, or reject him like the Jews and face destruction; I hope you make the right choice friend, he is mighty, and merciful and loving, to name a few of his awe inspiring characteristics, those of which can be experienced by turning to him in repentance and acceptance of his name as Lord.
Actually, the “prophecy” of a woman giving birth to a “messiah” comes from Isaiah 7:14, and there is no mention of parthenogenesis or virgin birth in that account. And in fact, the traits described of this “messiah” are actually those attributed to John the Baptist in verse 15 which talks of him eating honey and curds–very much John the Baptist by NT accounts.
Secondly, there is no explicit mention of Jesus in the Old Testament–I’m quite sure of that. If he is, find me chapter and verse.
Those of us in the Christian church (and if you read more of my posts you’d see that I am Christian and not dare to call my salvation into question as though YOU are the author and finisher of my faith) infer Jesus into the Old Testament readings because of our faith.
Ultimately, it all rests with how one interprets the Bible. Clearly you and I have different interpretations and I would suggest that for the furthering of Reigndom of God that it would not profit either one of us or the Christian community of faith to further this discussion.
Note I hope all the links work for you 😀
And apologize for gramtical errors in advance as it is nearly one where I am and have just finished writing this and am getting ready for bed.
If you only read one thing on this page I found the link second from the bottom most in depth and interesting.
Well for one you have to think logically, which if the word is true and God the Father is true then he has obviously preserved this word for all these years, if you look around there are proofs that the bible events really happened, there is a mountain top in Saudi arabia which is unexplainably charred, the remains of chariots have been found in the red sea, and there is even a 5000 year old wood fossil on the top of mount Ararat which coincides with the ark to name a few, now if you take that into account which believe me is not a total acknowledgement of all the great ways God has reproven his word, but also there is fact that the scritures are chronologically true and that these were a countries history books, so if I came up to you tomorrow and said hey yesterday we walked through Lake michigan and it magically parted you would probable laugh at me, but the thing is people actually saw God on top of that mountain, they actually walked through the red sea, and they actually acknowledged a Righteous God who they rightfully feared on how to be redeemed the thing is they never accepted that, although if you look at there ancient culture and the promises, God did promise redemption through Davids line and they had yet to have that by the law, by the seperation of the holy from the most holy which they were not to enter except in the pre determined way which God had ordained, so there was an non finality of the current relationship with God. Also there was mention in the Old Testament that the Son would come as God in flesh, if you look at the prophecy by David about the Messiah he say
“And The Lord said to my Lord come sit here at my right side till I make your enemies your footstool”
For He was talking about the Messiah, and also the Messiah was to be his offspring, so how could his offspring be called his Lord? Paul quotes this right in the new testament, Jesus is and always has been the Son of God or otherwise stated Lord.
I know the prophecy you are talking about in Isaiah but did you think that as they were both fairly linked that God wanted to include John as closely in the Old Testament as He did in the New Testament, and So as with many other Prophecies it did not refer entirely to just Jesus; it also says though that the locusts would be ate until the child knows right from wrong, and I don’t know much about Jesus child hood but I don’t believe he ever did wrong, and secondly John was the forebearer of Jesus message of repentance, he also did not start his ministry till after committing himself to the same ordinances of recognizing the need for water batism which is a physical representation of dying to sin and being resurrected to glory which is an act of repentance (repentance being by very nature the disowning of bad and acknowledgment of a way for good), and whether Jesus ate locusts I don’t know, but that verse does talk about both of them and that was long before it actually happened not to mention they both were born of miraculous birth and could be why they are mentioned together in the prophecy, and also not to mention Isaiah 53 cleary talks about Jesus and the crucifixion as mentioned below
Gen 22:1 through Gen 22:18 is a direct promise by God to send his Son, look at the last verse I referenced in it he promises to bless ALL the nations of the world not just the Jews, and when Jesus Came one of the things he did was go to the Jews, the Samaritans and even the Romans and healed (which takes faith (Keyword), For without faith none shall be saved) and taught them.
I also found a page with all the prophecies about Jesus in the Old Testament and explaining how we see them in relation to Jesus, I wanted to talk to you about them myself but I have already been at this for a good hour or so and need to sleep as I work tomorrow, hope this helps friend. It is actually probably much more thorough then I could have been 😛
I also added a link to review of a book which gives a rather simple but effective of the magnetude of what God has allowed in Jesus (And he shall make the weak things to embarrass the great things)
another good website which does an eposition on the Old testament Jesus, I tried to post like 5 links for the site but it wouldn’t let me.
The good website I mentioned is the Wikipedia one, third from the bottom, sorry for the confusion, there was a posting error.
I was not commenting on your Faith I was commenting that to seeming cast Jesus out of the Old testament would be equivalent to casting Salvation out of the events of the Garden of Eden, as if God had not meant to save us there would be no world, I also did not say you were not a christian I said “I don’t know what you believe, but that I did not like your post” sorry for not respecting your hope that I would not continue this conversation any further, I tend to do things on the go and had finished and posted everything above before I got to the end of your last post, I do agree that Jesus name is not mentioned in the old testament but definitly do believe he is talked about and the wikipedia post I left is awesome in that manner, I did also write the post from a perspective of how I would first logically assume God would work in his Sovereignty.
I do pray though that there be peace between us as brothers in Christ.