The Psalms are the word of Christ

[aron]

Originally Posted by OBW

The post-Christian. If that means that there are no more Christians, then we have a problem. But the term generally means something like the visible testimony of Christianity changes sufficiently that it no longer resembles the thing that is currently called Christianity. We may have the best doctrines (collectively) and think we are on the path. But we are going nowhere except on a journey being rapidly expelled from the mouth of God. (Not pointing fingers. I see myself going on that same journey as well.)

I think we've clearly established the NT reception of Psalms. They're part and parcel of God's speaking to fallen man, "concerning His Son, Jesus Christ" (Romans 1:3). And nowhere does the NT invite us to dismiss them, even in part, as the concepts of fallen men.

But they're poetry; they're ecstatic utterances. It becomes problematic, attempting to go beyond the strict usage of the NT; even to do a kind of quasi-systematic, "thematic" attempt. Because of the subjective and personal nature of the writings they're like Rorschach tests: we see what we want to see. The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews saw the verse, "Your throne, O God, is forever" and said, "This is Jesus". Wow - I bet that rattled some skulls. But if I go see angels and demons whizzing around in the text it's probably a distraction at best. Who's helped by my visions? I really don't want to start a new church or new church movement.

So how to (subjectively) interpret these highly poetic texts? Or, why even try? Well, they invite us, for one. "Man doesn't live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." The word itself is a lamp unto our feet - it guides us home. So we peer, and ponder, and wonder as shapes dimly emerge from the text. "We see, darkly" indeed. What I was faintly seeing, emerging from the text was the suggestive idea that they're so personal, and therefore so universal, that there is a kind of recursive "folding-over" in the text and I was publicly wondering where it stopped, if at all? Who's speaking here - the psalmist, or the Holy Spirit, or the Christ, or the "richly indwelling word" in the New Testament believer? If it is arguably all of them, then why stop at the edges of Christianity? Why not keep going on, forever?

"I come to do Your will, O God" was uttered by the prophet in oracular ecstasy, and pointed to the fulfillment by God's Christ. But anyone doing God's will can partake of this word. I'm bound by the history of my journey: I'm a Protestant and son of Protestants, a card-carrying American evangelical. But I'm becoming less limited by the creeds of my forebears and more freed by the images emerging from the text. Why presuppose the notion that "anyone who does God's will" is bound by Protestant creeds and theology as I am?

"When did we do your will?" ask the astonished guests. "Whenever you did it to the least of these my brothers" is the answer. If you give a cup of water to a prophet you get a prophet's reward. It doesn't say that only Protestants who give a cup of cold water will be blessed.

God is bigger than we are, and He's arguably bigger than our ideas. So the words of faith, trust, hope, and obedience, while pointing to God's Christ the Christian "NT believer" of WL's Psalms footnotes, are not dependent upon NT theology for substance. They certainly aren't framed by our understanding! At best they invite us to participate. "Be filled in Spirit by singing" as Paul wrote to the Ephesians. And as these "words of Christ" begin to dwell in us richly, they whisper to us of realities beyond, and we begin to gaze in wonderment; our eyes leave the earth, and look up. The text is inviting us to join God.

Yet, when Jesus said, "You will see the heavens open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man", what did He expect us to see? "The (LC) church", said WL; "which is the house of God". Angels ascending and descending are passed off by WL as "much traffic". The open heavens themselves are essentially ignored. Perhaps I (subjectively) want to run shouting after the text, "My Father, my Father, the horses and chariots of Israel!!" When the heavens open before me, I see what I want to see, not what WL wanted me to see. But at the same time I admit that a) it is subjective, b) it is provisional, and c) it ultimately awaits the proving of God.

I accept that. The day awaits.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

So how to (subjectively) interpret these highly poetic texts? .... What I was faintly seeing, emerging from the text was the suggestive idea that they're so personal, and therefore so universal, that there is a kind of recursive "folding-over" in the text and I was publicly wondering where it stopped, if at all? Who's speaking here - the psalmist, or the Holy Spirit, or the Christ, or the "richly indwelling word" in the New Testament believer? If it is arguably all of them, then why stop at the edges of Christianity? Why not keep going on, forever?

The problem with this statement today is that it doesn't capture my experience at all. Secondly, what is someone else to make of it, who didn't have my own experience of "enjoying God in His word"? There's an open-ended nature to poetry, and an invitation to go beyond the borders of the rational, but when you try to rationalize your experience, what have you done except place new boundaries and borders? Put another way: I began this thread because I resented WL circumscribing the Psalms with his interpretations. How then do I begin to circumscribe it with my own descriptions of what is and is not?

So I don't disavow the previous post but it's probably of little utility. The word itself is before us, beckoning us into God, but any issue of the "going in" will probably found only in transformed living, and not in our verbiage. We have Paul's words before us, and others', and the gospel testimonies, but these words indicate sufficiently transformed and transformative behavior to merit attention. Of themselves I suspect that mine can't and don't.

We were so fooled by WL that we thought fixation on his verbiage would propel us into God's kingdom. Why think that my own ruminations, however heartfelt, might be exempt? So by all means ignore my words if you will, and likewise those of WL, but fixate yourself unyieldingly upon the words of God, as pertaining to His Christ in glory. And I suspect that this includes the Psalms as well, far more than WL let on. It's "the mind of Christ" that now dwells within us, allowing us to see the Father's house as Christ, though yet on earth, saw it. Because the prophetic words were written by men under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and Jesus indicated repeatedly that they were concerning Him.

So forget my hypothetical "recursive, post-Christian world", forget WL's templates and interpretive schemes, and let the Holy Spirit guide you in. The holy word is the vehicle for the Holy Spirit to reveal God's Son in us.

[aron]

Psalm 119:60 says, "I will not delay to obey your commands." WL would tell us that nobody could keep that word. To which I respond, "In whom, then, should we believe?" If nobody could keep the commands of God, where then is our hope?

No; the hope of the Christian believer is in Jesus Christ, born of a woman, born under law, who though in the flesh of sin, did not hesitate to obey the Father's will, all the way up to and including the death of the cross. This is our faith, our hope.

I don't know what gospel WL preached if he ignored the incarnated Word to that degree. Maybe he was, ironically, pushing a gospel of self-reliance: first he showed us the OT prophet unable to fulfill the word, then he declared that the "NT believer" could do it, according to "God's New Testament economy". In the middle of the narrative, however, was a gaping hole, where Jesus Christ was supposed to be seen. For all the talk about incarnation, and about the "humanity of Jesus", when given the opportunity to see a very human Jesus portrayed in the OT text, WL passed.

[aron]

Like Goliath underestimating the young lad David standing before him, so I think that WL did with the prophetic word of God he was considering. He felt "I will obey your will" was low, and natural. But what if Jesus inhabited this word? We know that Jesus' neighbors disrespected Him when He returned home, and we know that His brothers mocked Him.

Likewise WL thought these OT words common and unimpressive. But what is the height, the depth, the breadth and length if Jesus inhabits a word?

Goliath laughed with disdain, and cursed at the "stripling" that faced him. It was the last thing he said. Likewise Satan underestimated the man Jesus, until it was too late. We should never consider the word of God as low or natural, or of little or no account.

"Don't be like a horse or mule, that has no understanding at all. But their mouths must be held by the bridle or bit, or they won't come near to You." Psalm 32:9

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

Like Goliath underestimating the young lad David standing before him, so I think that WL did with the prophetic word of God he was considering. He felt "I will obey your will" was low, and natural. But what if Jesus inhabited this word? We know that Jesus' neighbors disrespected Him when He returned home, and we know that His brothers mocked Him.

Likewise WL thought these OT words common and unimpressive. But what is the height, the depth, the breadth and length if Jesus inhabits a word?

I may be overstretching here, and if someone has a RecV handy, or a Life-Study, please feel free to correct me. But I think there's something interesting in the way that Goliath underestimated David, and trusted his own strength, and how WL likewise trusted his "God's economy" template and dismissed scriptures as low, natural, and fallen.

On an outward sense, Goliath was huge and terrifying. Saul told David that he (David) was just a boy, and Goliath was a huge man who had been a warrior for years.

1 Samuel 17:33 Saul replied, "You are not able to go out against this Philistine and fight him; you are only a young man, and he has been a warrior from his youth."

But David had a secret weapon: speed. When Saul began to move, David didn't stand his ground, or run away, but began moving toward Goliath at a rapid rate of speed. The speed which had allowed David to survive close-in fighting with a lion and a bear (see David's reply to Saul in 1 Sam 17:34-36) allowed him to come at Goliath so quickly that Goliath had to slow down to make adjustments. David was moving too fast! So Goliath had to slow down, in anticipation to meet the onrushing boy, and "boom!" by the time the stone flew he was too close, and entirely too slow. Game over.

Now, here's a possible parallel: When the psalmist wrote, "You send your command to the earth; Your word runs swiftly" in Psalm 147, did WL see the connection to Jesus, functioning there on earth, under the Father's authority? Did he see that the moment that Jesus said, "Let it be done", the centurion's servant was healed? (Matt 8:13). The centurion had told Jesus, "I also am a man under authority, and have servants under me, and when I tell one Go, he goes, or Come, he comes, or Do this, and he does it"; did WL also sense how "Thy word runs swiftly" at Jesus' command? Incredible!

Please understand that I'm not reveling in some arcane, subjective assessment of Hebrew poetry, compared to word selection in the Greek NT. Nor am I fixated on bashing WL. But it's probably fair to say that WL was mistaken, to dismiss of the word of God as inadequate to stand up to his hermeneutic. Somebody please show me a RecV cross-reference from Psalm 147 to Matthew 8 and I'll stand down.

If this appraisal has been too caustic or derisive I apologize. Unfortunately I tend to glory in my own thinking, just as WL seemingly fell prey to his. But I assert that there are treasures beyond compare here before us, which to WL were just blank spaces. It was like he was flying over the Gobi Desert at 30,000 feet, and looked down and just saw emptiness. If you don't get what I'm saying, look at the RecV Psalms: page after nearly blank page, with few footnotes or references, interspersed with derogatory comments on its lack of "divine revelation". Compare that to his RecV Ephesians, where one verse might get a page of footnotes! Talk about misaiming, or unbalance... and Paul had even encouraged the Ephesians to sing the Psalms... go figure... I certainly can't.

My time in the LC was part of my "goodly heritage", and it colors my thinking. But when one considers its teachings next to the plain words of scripture, they seem quite inadequate to guide.

[aron]

Unfortunately my presentational skills aren't up to the job, but I wanted to put out an idea: Look at the Psalms as a kind of spiritualization of the historical narrative, which spiritualization was picked up and amplified by the NT writers. A classic example is of Melchizedek. A historical character, briefly inserted into the narrative of events. Then the psalmist gives it a kind of mystical spin: "You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." The NT writer says, "Hey! This is Christ!" and then amplifies it.

We don't know how much of David's original work remains, and how much of it was redacted by later generations. But the psalms as spiritual commentaries were clearly accepted and used by the NT writers, and by Jesus Himself. For example, "You are gods" from Psalm 82, quoted by Jesus to the Jewish antagonists. They were gods, to whom the word of God came (John 10:35), but they died like men, because they disobeyed and corrupted the commands (82:7). They fell like every other corrupt ruler. Jesus' use of scripture turned the charge back against the Jews: they'd claimed Jesus blasphemed, but He said that His works showed that He was one with the Father (John 10:25,37,38). So who were they? Corrupt, and due to fall. "You are gods" was merely a prelude to "you will die like men".

Another example that comes to mind is "Deep calls to deep in the roar of your waterfalls; all your waves and breakers have swept over me." from Psalm 42:7. Compare this to Jonah 2:3 "You hurled me into the depths, into the very heart of the seas, and the currents swirled about me; all your waves and breakers swept over me." Somebody appears to be copying, here. How could David the landlubber psalmist seize upon a sea-faring narrative? Because the enemy coming against him like a "flood", like "waters", is a common poetic metaphor. And this is picked up on in the NT: "Just like Jonah was in the heart of the sea, so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth". To go down into the depths of the sea is a metaphor, a spiritual picture, of the descent into Hades.

Or the commonly cited "rock of my salvation" in the Psalms, "which rock was Christ" according to Paul. One could pick out many examples; I know Augustine of Hippo did in his commentaries. Let's leave it at this: there's nothing in the NT reception of the Psalms that indicates that some of them were "fallen", or "natural", or "concepts". No, rather the NT usage indicates that they were perceived as revelatory. There was an invitation here, to be filled in Spirit with the words of Christ. And needless to say, WL spurned this invitation.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by aron

Unfortunately my presentational skills aren't up to the job, . . .

Maybe for this task. But in general you do a right spiffy job of it.

Originally Posted by aron

. . . but I wanted to put out an idea: Look at the Psalms as a kind of spiritualization of the historical narrative, ...

Well that makes sense. Then it makes sense that the Psalms can at one moment be soaring within those realms of spiritualization, and then be crying to God to slay my enemies, and being happy bashing babies against the rocks.

I understand why Lee couldn't accept all of the Psalms. You point out NT support of the Psalms, which is clearly true. But much of it, okay some of it -- too much of it -- in the Psalms, strikes as being anti-Christ; in that it's not like Christ found in the NT.

The way I see OT support in the NT is: what else did they have to go on? They were far worse off than we are today, with our limited materials and documentation, to go on. And we're bad off.

Originally Posted by aron

which spiritualization was picked up and amplified by the NT writers. A classic example is of Melchizedek. A historical character, briefly inserted into the narrative of events. Then the psalmist gives it a kind of mystical spin: "You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." The NT writer says, "Hey! This is Christ!" and then amplifies it.

Interesting that Melchizedek was the Pagan King Priest of Salem -- "He was priest of God Most High." But he didn't know the right name for God. Did Abram set him straight, chide him, and condemn him to hell so to speak, for calling God El Elyon, and not Yahweh? No! "Abram gave him a tenth of everything."

We should learn by this, to be careful how we judge and treat others, even those that don't believe like us, or at all ... even pagans, or worse, Unitarian Universalists ... Abram, the father of faith, wasn't dogmatic, so maybe we shouldn't be.

Originally Posted by aron

We don't know how much of David's original work remains . . .

As I was saying. We have only what we have. So we're left guessing. And we, and Lee, do and did plenty of that. A'guessing here, a'guessing there, everywhere a'guessing. Even about the Psalms.

Can we really blame Lee for his approach to the Psalms? He was guessing just like the rest of us. The most we can say about Lee, or the worst, is that he was nothing special. In the end he was just like the rest of us ... but with an extraordinary sense of grandiose about himself.

And if we wouldn't have fallen for it Lee would have been just another China man come to America -- which oddly enough he was -- running away from messing in his nest in Taiwan, leaving carnage, if not crimes, in his wake.

[aron]

Originally Posted by aron

... the Psalms as spiritual commentaries were clearly accepted and used by the NT writers, and by Jesus Himself. For example, "You are gods" from Psalm 82, quoted by Jesus to the Jewish antagonists. They were gods, to whom the word of God came (John 10:35), but they died like men, because they disobeyed and corrupted the commands (Psa 82:7). They fell like every other corrupt ruler. Jesus' use of scripture turned the charge back against the Jews: they'd claimed Jesus blasphemed, but He said that His works showed that He was one with the Father (John 10:25,37,38)... "You are gods" was merely a prelude to "you will die like men".

This scene in John chapter 10 is a good example: the writer of the fourth gospel was intimately acquainted with the OT scriptures, as were Jesus and His opposers. So when Jesus quoted Psalm 82, "I said, 'You are gods'", everyone was probably expected to remember the rest of the sentence, which hadn't been quoted: "...but you will die like men." But what happened over millennia, and which amplified with the Great Schism and then the Protestant Reformation and the subsequent Protestant splinterings like British Brethren and Watchman Nee's Little Flock and Witness Lee's Lord's Recovery, is a tendency for the present Christian apologist to fixate upon the so-called New Testament revelation and dismiss, downplay, or ignore the extant scriptures of Jesus' time. The unbalanced RecV Bible, for instance, will have a page of footnotes devoted to a verse in Ephesians or Colossians, and almost nothing, maybe a cross-reference or two, in a page of Psalms.

And when we read a NT passage like the one in John 10 where Jesus was confronted by the religionists, we'll then gloss over His reply because it was from a psalm, which according to today's Paul (WL) was full of fallen men's concepts, and therefore we miss the whole point of the conversation! Why did Jesus' quoted reply point to multiple gods - "I said, 'You are gods'"? Well, it didn't at all: both He and His antagonists knew that there was only one God of Israel. In fact, Jesus taught that it was central to the "greatest commandment" (Matt. 22:36-40). So, then why the quote of "gods"? Perhaps because those "gods (who died like men)" were not "gods", or "God" at all, but had been servants who were disobedient to God's commandments to which they'd been entrusted, as were the Jewish judges facing Him at that very moment. And Jesus furthermore said in the same section that His works clearly showed His obedience to His Father in heaven, just as their refusal of Him showed their disobedience.

But we often missed all this because we were unfamiliar with source text, i.e. the OT. We were Christians, or in Lee's parlance, "New Testament believers", so we focused on the NT, the Christian commentary of the apostle Paul, or today's Paul (WL), the so-called minister of the age, and supposedly God's present oracle. Witness Lee effectively told us not to waste our time with the Psalms; stick with the "high peak truths", he said, and with the "heart of the divine revelation": Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philippians. The result is that we became shallow, ignorant, vain, and puffed up; empty sounding brass, full of teachings but with no love or good works. Just like those who were arguing with Jesus in John chapter 10. They knew neither God nor scripture.

(the above, especially the last paragraph, only pertains to my growing up Protestant and being in the LC for 6 years, and doesn't apply to many balanced and careful Christian teachers out there, and those who follow them. And Lee may have covered "...you will die like men" in his expositions of John 10 and Psalm 82. But my point still remains.)

[VoiceInWilderness]

Originally Posted by aron

Another example that comes to mind is "Deep calls to deep in the roar of your waterfalls; all your waves and breakers have swept over me." from Psalm 42:7. Compare this to Jonah 2:3 "You hurled me into the depths, into the very heart of the seas, and the currents swirled about me; all your waves and breakers swept over me." Somebody appears to be copying, here. How could David the landlubber psalmist seize upon a sea-faring narrative? Because the enemy coming against him like a "flood", like "waters", is a common poetic metaphor. And this is picked up on in the NT: "Just like Jonah was in the heart of the sea, so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth". To go down into the depths of the sea is a metaphor, a spiritual picture, of the descent into Hades.

Thanks Aron! You gave me a new way to look at Ps 42. This psalm could be the Lord's experience praying under extreme pressure in Gethsemane. It could be the psalm that Jesus sang together with His disciples that night. I had never taken it like that before. I updated my comments on this psalm to include the link to the Lord.
http://www.voiceinwilderness.info/psalm_42.htm