0

It has been suggested here that these verses prove that Jesus practiced eisegesis simply because his OT source is not familiar.

Is there a plausible source for his teaching which does not require eisegesis when a known hermeneutic is applied?

6
  • 1
    In what way is the OT source not familiar? Deuteronomy 8:3 is well known.
    – curiousdannii
    Jul 28 at 23:01
  • This is not at all clear. It needs more detail and further clarification.
    – Nigel J
    Jul 29 at 7:09
  • Hi Nigel. From a previous question (linked), it was insisted that these verses proved Jesus practiced eisegesis. They were included in the references as if that was sufficient proof. So I asked it here to address it directly. How can I clarify it better for you?
    – Bob Jones
    Jul 29 at 7:13
  • This was his footnote: ¹ See e.g. Matthew 4:4 and Luke 4:4, Matthew 4:7 and Luke 4:12, Matthew 4:10 and Luke 4:8; Matthew 15:1-6 and Mark 7:10; Matthew 19:4–6 and Mark 10:6-8; Matthew 22:31–32, Mark 12:26, 27 and Luke 20:37-38; John 8:12-13, 17-18; Matthew 9:13 and Matthew 12:7; Matthew 13:14–15, Mark 4:11–13 and Luke 8:10, Matthew 21:13, Mark 11:17 and Luke 19:46; Matthew 26:31 and Mark 14:27; Luke 22:37; John 6:45; Matthew 21:16; Matthew 21:42, Mark 12:10-11, Luke 20:17; Matthew 22:43–44, Mark 12:36, Luke 20:42-43; Matthew 23:37–39 and Luke 13:35; Matthew 24:15–16, John 10:34-36; J...
    – Bob Jones
    Jul 29 at 7:18
  • That Bob's answer was based on the mis definition of eisegesis by the Q, which wrongly said that Midrash or any allusion is eisegesis. Eisegesis is biased interpretation that change or violate the original plain sense of a text. Ex. Exod23:2 say, “Follow the majority,” whereas the verse mean, “Don’t follow the majority” in The classic Talmudic discussion is found in Bava Mesia’ 59b; cf. also Targ. Onkelos and Rashi ad loc. realmessiah.org/index.php/en/unequal-weights-and-measures u can apply & allude on any situation and purpose, as long as u don't violate the plain immediate sense.
    – Michael16
    Jul 29 at 12:30
5

Jesus did not practice eisegesis, despite His inherent authority to do so.

Matt 4:4 says this

But Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’

This is a direct quotation from Deut 8 -

3 He humbled you, and in your hunger He gave you manna to eat, which neither you nor your fathers had known, so that you might understand that man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD. 4 Your clothing did not wear out and your feet did not swell during these forty years. 5 So know in your heart that just as a man disciplines his son, so the LORD your God disciplines you.

We observe two important things about both passages:

  1. Jesus quotes the OT accurately
  2. Both deliver the same message - spiritual food is more important that physical food.

Therefore, Jesus did not practice eisegesis.

5
  • Oh doh. I study OT looking for the NT expressions of them, so Ps 105 was in mind. There is a fractal-like pattern where teaching is repeated several times in different layers. I expect to see more. As I went through many of his other 'proofs' of eisegesis made by reference, they too have simple sources. I am not sure if making a question for each is worth the effort.
    – Bob Jones
    Jul 29 at 6:27
  • 1
    @BobJones - I am not sure what you are asking - you never mentioned Ps 105 in the question! I cannot see that it is relevant anyway.
    – Dottard
    Jul 29 at 6:39
  • sorry I wasn't asking. Just commenting as I upvoted your answer as the obvious one. I was focussed on Ps 105 from a previous study, and saw it as one of many sources for Jesus's teaching, having overlooked the obviousl one.
    – Bob Jones
    Jul 29 at 6:56
  • @bob Jones looking at the cff cross ref in your Bible software is enough to find the quotes or rather allusions used in the NT.
    – Michael16
    Jul 29 at 12:39
  • Michael16. Thanks for the reminder. But actually it is not the cross references that interest me. You guys could have answered him doing that. My studies for 20 years and over 20,000 hours have been documenting Hebrew puns and riddles which unpack the SP of scripture. Ps 105 is an example of NT teaching hidden in riddle of the Old. Some here are antagonistic. They represent a block of the real world which has decided the matter without hearing it. 1 Tim 2:14 says the woman was deceived. The xref Gen 3:6 does not say she was deceived. The notarikon does. I think that is interesting
    – Bob Jones
    Jul 29 at 13:40
0

To expand on Dottard's answer, Jesus' temptations were temptations about how he would conduct his ministry.

The symbolic character of the narrative is evident; the temptations and Jesus’ answers define the true character of his Messianic mission. The answer of Jesus to all three questions is taken from Dt (8:3; 6:16, 13). The use of this source shows that the Law itself reveals the true character of messiahship. The three temptations can be summed up as temptations to power. The first temptation is to use miraculous power to provide for ordinary material needs.4. The answer of Jesus (Dt 8:3) does not deny that ordinary needs should be met by ordinary means, but subordinates even basic physical necessities to the revealed word of God. Jesus does not fulfill his mission by providing for basic physical necessities, but by proclaiming the word that is life. -- Brown, R. E., Fitzmyer, J. A., & Murphy, R. E. (1996). The Jerome Biblical commentary (Vol. 2, pp. 68–69). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

John in his gospel, rather than repeat the temptations, expounds on how they continue (John 6).

-3

Here is a cursory look at Ps 105:40,41 to show a plausible source for Jesus's teaching as he used the methods of sensus plenior and pardes to exegete his summary. (addressing the issue of pardes in the referenced post).

Mt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Lu 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Ps 105:40 [The people] asked, and he brought quails, and satisfied them with the bread of heaven. 41 He opened the rock, and the waters gushed out; they ran in the dry places [like] a river.

God provided what they asked for (quail), and what they needed (bread and water). The water represents the Word of God, and the bread is his body given on the cross. Since the history of Israel is a parable (De 28:37), we interpret symbols based on the notarikon of the words.

Quail שלו - peace של of him ו; or flockling שו with teaching ל . Bread, war לחם - teaching ל of Egypt (flesh) חם . The cross was the culmination of the war between heaven and earth and Jesus gave himself there. Water מים - creation י surrounded by the father מ (Spirit) and the Son ם (Truth).

Literally (pashat) they did not live by bread alone.

Reference (remez) Jesus was speaking of teaching and and calling on the verse which has symbols of eating and drinking as learning.

Compare (derash) God first provided for their perceived needs; the things they asked for, and gave them their real needs of peace, teaching and true worship; just as he was doing through the life, death and resurrection of Christ.

Hidden (sod) The Quail, bread and water are all symbols of Jesus. "Man does not live by the cross (bread) alone, but by worship in Spirit and Truth (water). "

4
  • 1
    Please provide references (to ancient sources) for your notarikon meanings. It's the least you can do.
    – curiousdannii
    Jul 28 at 23:04
  • I am sure you have reviewed the Rules for interpreting sensus plenior: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/2060/…... so you know the only source which is acceptable is the Old and New Testaments themselves. Other answers contain specifics. Do you still subscribe to , "Language doesn't work that way?" If so, what answer would you accept? Apparently you have rejected the rabbinic sources I have previously provided you to show that they have been observing notarikon since the earliest times.
    – Bob Jones
    Jul 29 at 6:23
  • 1
    I don't remember reading any of your answers here that give detailed sources for something like "Quail דלו - peace דל of him ו", but I could've missed the answer. (Doesn't דל normally mean weak/poor?) Ideally every word you break down should have ancient sources showing the component meanings. If you have written such a post you can just make a link - I wasn't suggesting it should be copied into every answer.
    – curiousdannii
    Jul 29 at 6:28
  • I once (like ten years ago) had a reference for the alphabet on here. Hmm as I remember, the question did not refer to a scripture, so it was deemed irrelevant to the forum. There are over 200 gates, many of which are listed in Strong's, though he calls them contractions.
    – Bob Jones
    Jul 29 at 7:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.