Great video. I have deeply appreciated McGrew's work on both the resurrection and the historicity of the Gospels, but am equally frustrated by the extreme dismissal of symbolic interpretations of the text. In part, I think it's attributable to the fact that the people with whom she is intellectually engaged in her writing (e.g. "Mirror and the Mask") are themselves very artless in their "literary" interpretations of the Gospels and are doing something very different than a genuine theological reading of the text. This issue has come up repeatedly in her writing on her blog concerning John's 153 fish. One does not just need to explain how John knew that he had 153 fish (the background of the author of the Gospel as a fisherman for whom counting the catch is second nature) but also why he thought it important to actually *include* that detail. McGrew seems to think that the Evangelists simply wrote things down as they occurred to them, which is not just untrue to the evidence of the text, but inconsistent with how books were generally produced in antiquity.
Indeed. McGrew's work is very helpful in many respects, but very disappointing here. Her argument from 'explaining away', her primary interlocutors, and her huge concern for defending the historicity of the gospels help me to understand why she holds her position. If you acknowledge symbolism, it definitely makes the argument for historicity more challenging in certain respects. It greatly complicates the typical framing of arguments and of broader debates as it would highlight that McGrew's hermeneutical approach-like that of many evangelicals-is rather modern and novel in many regards.
I have seen the most marvelous thing in all of the world and all of scripture. Please how can i speak to you. This is scary. God has shamed the wisdom of the wise indeeed. He has hidden in gems confounding the whole world in darkness. Please I need to tell someone this who can bear it.
Was watching the Luke commentary video on your channel. You have forgotten that Jesus deceives the serpent like the woman does in final victory over the serpent and crushes him in the healing of the ear. Remember the theme you and James Jordan rightly figured out in that there are several examples of the woman deceiving the serpent figure and in doing that defeats him in an ironical way - that is the weak defeats the strong through their own ways - recalling how the serpent defeated the man through deceiving the woman. Also it communicates the God showing his strength in weakness (the woman being the weaker vessel hiding the man - the hidden man of 1 peter 3 vs 4) even as Ehud delivers Israel being lefthanded/weakness, and David feigning being despicable/mad to defeat Achish, and 300 men of Gideon even the ones who lap like dogs and behave despicable like dog defeats the sand of the sea, God using the base things of the world in overthrowing the old world and resurrecting the new world. All these being a type of the cross victory, Jesus in himself triumphing over principalities and powers. Now in Luke 22 vs35-38, i wonder why no one saw Jesus deceiving the soldiers so they bring their ruin upon themselves, he made sure the disciples carry swords, to appear like transgressors, deceiving the soldiers or reinforcing the soldiers in wise sweet deceit, feigning mad and vile, being like a dog, so that he would be seen as a transgressor and then crucified with them,hence he says "are ye come as against a thief who has swords", he wanted them to see him as a thief, and so they crucified him as so. He wanted to feed his enemies so that coals of fire falls on them even as the father did so in his justification - Psalm 18 coals of fire. He feigned mad, feeding his enemies, so they, crucify him - that is so they commit suicide. Even as the woman deceives the serpent so he is crushed by his own ways, by his own sword and then the righteous is justified like a man coming out of the destruction of the worlds, of the flesh. So you missed the whole thing when you said in your commentary that they were asked to carry sword because now their mission would change. Naa, this is the deceit of Christ showing the wisdom of God. They fell into their own trap through Jesus feeding them, hiding in thick darkness while triumphing even as God said he would defeat the flesh in thick darkness - Psalm 18, the darkness of feigning madness but hiding victory. So it is no surprising some people are perplexed with psalm 34 talking about David feigning madness in a different light - a deliverance light which wouldn't seem correlated to the natural mind. Use the KJV alone for this review if interested. There is more to be said, as I see more of this through out scriptures, hidden smartly by God, showing his glorious wisdom - the teaching of the fingers of his saints to war, in glorious victory over the flesh, and them standing in the judgment - even Solomon's judgment of the two babies, because soul has being separated from spirit and the spirit can now feign madness to damn the soulish natural aspect, so the body is raised a spiritual body of flesh and bones. Amen. I wish i can discuss this with you in person as you are one of those i'm sure wouldn't be weirded out by this clever wisdom of God in type and thick darkness. There is more to be said.
I think the thick darkness was at the Cross of Calvary and Paul specifically states that Christ crucified is the wisdom and power of God. That moment was a literally dark and spiritually dark. Only a few got the revelation like the thief on the cross and the Roman Centurion.
@@chrismeyers9341 Yes it all connects to the wisdom of deceit - the hidden man, The weakness was God's victory hence "thick darkness". The type of the cross repeats everywhere. It's Gods strange work.
Deeply important video, especially in current discussions surrounding Genesis 1-11.
Great video. I have deeply appreciated McGrew's work on both the resurrection and the historicity of the Gospels, but am equally frustrated by the extreme dismissal of symbolic interpretations of the text. In part, I think it's attributable to the fact that the people with whom she is intellectually engaged in her writing (e.g. "Mirror and the Mask") are themselves very artless in their "literary" interpretations of the Gospels and are doing something very different than a genuine theological reading of the text. This issue has come up repeatedly in her writing on her blog concerning John's 153 fish. One does not just need to explain how John knew that he had 153 fish (the background of the author of the Gospel as a fisherman for whom counting the catch is second nature) but also why he thought it important to actually *include* that detail. McGrew seems to think that the Evangelists simply wrote things down as they occurred to them, which is not just untrue to the evidence of the text, but inconsistent with how books were generally produced in antiquity.
Indeed. McGrew's work is very helpful in many respects, but very disappointing here. Her argument from 'explaining away', her primary interlocutors, and her huge concern for defending the historicity of the gospels help me to understand why she holds her position. If you acknowledge symbolism, it definitely makes the argument for historicity more challenging in certain respects. It greatly complicates the typical framing of arguments and of broader debates as it would highlight that McGrew's hermeneutical approach-like that of many evangelicals-is rather modern and novel in many regards.
I have seen the most marvelous thing in all of the world and all of scripture. Please how can i speak to you. This is scary. God has shamed the wisdom of the wise indeeed. He has hidden in gems confounding the whole world in darkness. Please I need to tell someone this who can bear it.
Was watching the Luke commentary video on your channel. You have forgotten that Jesus deceives the serpent like the woman does in final victory over the serpent and crushes him in the healing of the ear. Remember the theme you and James Jordan rightly figured out in that there are several examples of the woman deceiving the serpent figure and in doing that defeats him in an ironical way - that is the weak defeats the strong through their own ways - recalling how the serpent defeated the man through deceiving the woman. Also it communicates the God showing his strength in weakness (the woman being the weaker vessel hiding the man - the hidden man of 1 peter 3 vs 4) even as Ehud delivers Israel being lefthanded/weakness, and David feigning being despicable/mad to defeat Achish, and 300 men of Gideon even the ones who lap like dogs and behave despicable like dog defeats the sand of the sea, God using the base things of the world in overthrowing the old world and resurrecting the new world. All these being a type of the cross victory, Jesus in himself triumphing over principalities and powers.
Now in Luke 22 vs35-38, i wonder why no one saw Jesus deceiving the soldiers so they bring their ruin upon themselves, he made sure the disciples carry swords, to appear like transgressors, deceiving the soldiers or reinforcing the soldiers in wise sweet deceit, feigning mad and vile, being like a dog, so that he would be seen as a transgressor and then crucified with them,hence he says "are ye come as against a thief who has swords", he wanted them to see him as a thief, and so they crucified him as so. He wanted to feed his enemies so that coals of fire falls on them even as the father did so in his justification - Psalm 18 coals of fire. He feigned mad, feeding his enemies, so they, crucify him - that is so they commit suicide. Even as the woman deceives the serpent so he is crushed by his own ways, by his own sword and then the righteous is justified like a man coming out of the destruction of the worlds, of the flesh.
So you missed the whole thing when you said in your commentary that they were asked to carry sword because now their mission would change. Naa, this is the deceit of Christ showing the wisdom of God. They fell into their own trap through Jesus feeding them, hiding in thick darkness while triumphing even as God said he would defeat the flesh in thick darkness - Psalm 18, the darkness of feigning madness but hiding victory. So it is no surprising some people are perplexed with psalm 34 talking about David feigning madness in a different light - a deliverance light which wouldn't seem correlated to the natural mind. Use the KJV alone for this review if interested.
There is more to be said, as I see more of this through out scriptures, hidden smartly by God, showing his glorious wisdom - the teaching of the fingers of his saints to war, in glorious victory over the flesh, and them standing in the judgment - even Solomon's judgment of the two babies, because soul has being separated from spirit and the spirit can now feign madness to damn the soulish natural aspect, so the body is raised a spiritual body of flesh and bones. Amen. I wish i can discuss this with you in person as you are one of those i'm sure wouldn't be weirded out by this clever wisdom of God in type and thick darkness. There is more to be said.
I think the thick darkness was at the Cross of Calvary and Paul specifically states that Christ crucified is the wisdom and power of God. That moment was a literally dark and spiritually dark. Only a few got the revelation like the thief on the cross and the Roman Centurion.
@@chrismeyers9341 Yes it all connects to the wisdom of deceit - the hidden man, The weakness was God's victory hence "thick darkness". The type of the cross repeats everywhere. It's Gods strange work.
Hi Alastair, see my other comment. Is there a way to speak to you? zoom? skype etc