Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxjobox
Aron, sorry to disrupt your excellent post with my comment about WL. I have been enjoying your writings.
|
I agree with your point. WL couldn't get the Psalms to deliver value to his "Processed God" metric so he essentially dismissed them. He's not the first Protestant or post-Protestant to do so, but the grounds are weak.
~David was a sinner. Why then did Peter cite David's declaration in Psalm 16 in speaking on Christ's resurrection? Or why cite, "I come to do Your will, Oh God" etc? ~Heb 10:7; cf Psa 40:8. If all are sinners, and nobody can do God's will, why does the NT cite the verse? Answer: it was about Jesus. Duh.
~Violence and antagonism. In Ephesians Paul said, "We fight, just not against flesh and blood." Jesus conquered sin and death and Hades, and we celebrate his victory. David had nothing on Jesus. Demons cried out in fear when he walked in. "Oh! Jesus! Nazarene! What do we have to do with you! Have you come to destroy us?!"
Of course a new era came with Jesus. He was indeed the new Moses, the new Law-giver. But the pictures and types that support this Jesus are there, including his suffering the indignity of death on our behalf, and his being raised to glory. His obedience led directly to the Father's intervention and rescue - the pangs of death could not hold him. To me this is the central narrative in the Psalms. Everything else hinges on this one thing.
But WL had his "we're being processed to be baby gods" thing. And by being so self-focused, he missed a lot of Christ that is portrayed there.