Is RP it’s own hermeneutic?

Deep_Strength · 2018-05-20T20:05:52+00:00

He mentioned to me to be careful not to interpret the Bible with an Alpha/Beta hermeneutic that I seem to be forming.

What Alpha/beta hermeneutic? The Scriptures accurately describe human nature too.

For example, take King David.

Bathsheba bathes on the rooftop, (1) while her husband is out to war and (2) in view of the kings palace
David is seduced and brings to her to palace to commit fornication

Nathan confronts David about the sin obviously and we know the end of the story. Bathsheeba also being complicit in the adultery (unlike many Prots who blame only David for the adultery... Bathsheeba could've denied him since her husband Uriah was one of David's mighty men).

Of course, the Scripture mentions the righteous Uriah and omits Bathsheeba in the geneology of Jesus whereas 3 righteous women are included.

Matthew 1:2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, 3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar (1), Perez the father of Hezron, Hezron the father of Ram, 4 Ram the father of Amminadab, Amminadab the father of Nahshon, Nahshon the father of Salmon, 5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab (2), Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth (3), Obed the father of Jesse, 6 and Jesse the father of King David. 6 and Jesse the father of King David. David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,

Bathsheeba was with one of David's mighty men, but she still wanted to trade up to King David.

Hosea is all about the prostitution of Israel to the surrounding gods and nations where his wife was a prostitute. Not uncommon with all of the pre-marital sex, adultery, and remarriages.
Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar warn you about mixed families.
Solomon warns you about too many wives leading you astray
Proverbs warns you about contentious and nagging wives
Proverbs warn men about being seduced by beautiful but loose women

Shall I go on?

The temptations and sins of human nature are all laid out in the Scripture. It would be ignorant to discount the Truth.

Note: It's also interests me that Sirach was struck from the Protestant Bible as it contains a lot of wisdom about male and female nature. Example:

Sirach 9:1 Don't be jealous of the wife you love. You will only be teaching her how to do you harm. 2 Do not surrender your dignity to any woman. 3 Keep away from other men's wives[a] or they will trap you. 4 Don't keep company with female musicians; they will trick you. 5 Don't look too intently at a virgin, or you may find yourself forced to pay a bride price. 6 Don't give yourself to prostitutes, or you may lose everything you own. 7 So don't go looking about in the streets or wandering around in the run-down parts of town. 8 When you see a good-looking woman, look the other way; don't let your mind dwell on the beauty of any woman who is not your wife. Many men have been led astray by a woman's beauty. It kindles passion as if it were fire. 9 Don't sit down to eat with another man's wife or join her for a drink. You may give in to the temptation of her charms and be destroyed by your passion.

Brilliant insight here.

Wiki of the rest of the passages on women in Sirach (9:1–9; 23:22–27; 25:13–26:27; 36:26–31; and 42:9–14).

[deleted] · 2018-05-20T18:54:59+00:00

I’ve been struggling with the “authority” of the RP beliefs too. But, if empirically validated in Christ’s life... then I’m fine with it.

By “empirically valid” I mean tradition and scripture (scripture comes from tradition as it is how we interact with Christ).

Tradition also includes the Church Fathers.

Red-Curious · 2018-05-20T22:49:39+00:00

In a perfect world, we would interpret Scripture in a vacuum - considering only rote facts to ascertain what God intended to communicate through an author. Or more specifically, if the author's intentions in his writings were inspired by God, then we would be able to have an objective stance on how to discern the author's intentions by the words he wrote on the page, illuminated by peripheral knowledge about the historical context, culture, archaeology, etc.

This isn't a perfect world, though. I used to fight this assertion tooth-and-nail, but I have finally given up and readily embrace the fact that we all approach the Bible through our own perceptive lenses.

This isn't a bad thing. God has given us different perspectives for a reason. One who is gifted at healing or prophecy or tongues will need to have an eye for the work of the Spirit in Scripture in order to hone his craft. Another who is gifted at teaching, wisdom, and discernment must have the ability to ascertain from an academic standpoint the finer things of word selection, grammar, cross-referencing and history. One who is gifted at hospitality, mercy, and helping must be able to find in Scripture the things that will make them more gracious and receiving of those in their lives who are in need. These are all different lenses through which we read and interpret Scripture. None of them are wrong; they simply focus and filter what we read to help us find that which is most advantageous and beneficial to our immediate calling by God.

What is very dangerous is when we assume that all other people must view Scripture through the same lens that we do, or otherwise that we deny the validity in other lenses. It is true that there are some very bad and harmful lenses. Interpreting Scripture through an atheist lens, for example, would certainly lead to many false conclusions. However, that does not mean there is no value in understanding how an atheist would read a passage.

To that end, I encourage everyone to read Scripture through an RP lens - but that this not be the only lens through which we read, interpret, and apply Scripture. Rather, meditating on God's Word involves a more complete approach in attempting to view it from every angle. Anyone who specifically rejects a particular lens is closing off a potential source of information that could be helpful.

Whitified · 2018-05-21T07:05:26+00:00

in the movie The Matrix, Neo taking the "Red Pill" actually removed the lens he had been seeing the World from

Title	Is RP it’s own hermeneutic?
Author	stormtrooper10933
Upvotes	7
Comments	8
Date	May 20, 2018 3:23 PM UTC (5 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/RPChristians
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/RPChristians/comments/8kt9e2/is_rp_its_own_hermeneutic/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/RPChristians/is-rp-its-own-hermeneutic.301919 https://theredarchive.com/post/301919