Quote:
Originally Posted by ABrotherinFaith
Could you elaborate on this Aaron. The footnotes at the beginning of Psalms are one of the things that really got me started looking into what exactly I was being told.
|
My point was this: when I came into the recovery church, the allegories would make your head swim. Christ was "the reality of all positive things" in the text. Christ wasn't just "the good land; no, Christ was the "iron stones" in the good land. We would make up songs about all the detailed points. Christ was the badger skins covering the ark of the testimony: furry on the outside & soft on the inside.
Okay, fair enough. Why not? Then all of a sudden, we come to the Psalms, and there is the tree, growing by the river, bearing its fruit in season, whose leaf never withers (1:3), and I think, Hey - positive imagery! Looks like the tree at the end of the bible in the NJ (Rev 22:2).
But WL is like, Nah- that's vanity. His mouthpiece here, Mr E, says that is "adding to the word of God".
So I'm asking, Why the exegetical about-face? Why have all the visions of Christ suddenly dried up?
I see Psalm 40:8, and it says "I [Christ] come to do thy [God's] will", per the interpretation of the NT (Heb 10:9). Yet other, similar expressions in the Psalms are panned by WL because they were written by sinners who disobeyed God. Yet that same sinner wrote Psalm 40! If you look at Psalm 18, for example, it has similar language; see vv 16 - 24 for example. "He [God] delighted in me [Christ" (19) and "He rewarded me because of my righteousness" (20). WL says, God didn't delight in David. But what about Jesus? "This is my beloved Son, in whom I delight. Hear him."