BibleExposition.net exists to share ideas related to the exposition of God's Word and explore topics related to the Bible in general, theology (both biblical and systematic), archaeology, ministry, and life.
I posted a link to William Varner's thoughts on Psalm 22 the other day. Varner now follows that post with a post on Psalm 23. I was struck by the following comment on this well-known psalm.
"Although Psalm 23 is often read at funerals, its message applies to the days of your life right now (v. 6). The Savior who died for you also lives for you and cares for you, the way a shepherd cares for the sheep (John 10:1-18). If you can say, “The LORD is my Shepherd,” you can also say, “'I shall not want:'”
See this post by Larry Hurtado on Jesus' so-called "Cry of Dereliction": “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matt 27:46; Mark 13:34). But this is not exactly new. See this post.
Typology is a helpful way of acknowledging divinely-intended revelatory patterns in Scripture. Typology is also a legitimate way to read the Old Testament in light of the New. However, sometimes Christian interpreters can become so focused on a New Testament antitype that the meaning of the Old Testament passage on which the type is based is ignored or neglected. This is a fundamental error. Indeed, one could argue that in the progress of revelation, the contextual meaning of an Old Testament passage would have been recognized prior to its significance as a type. Furthermore, failure to interpret the Old Testament type in its original context will likely mean that the full significance of the New Testament antitype will be missed as well. As John Feinberg notes,
“The matter of typology can be summarized as follows: (1) a type must have meaning in its own context; (2) the meaning of the type in its own context is essential for a type/antitype relationship (otherwise we have an example of a parable or perhaps an allegory, but not an example of typology); and (3) ignoring items 1 and 2 threatens the very integrity of the Old Testament.”
John S. Feinberg, “Salvation in the Old Testament,” in Tradition and Testament: Essays in Honor of Charles Lee Feinberg (Chicago: Moody, 1981), 47.
"The first task for the interpreter of 1 Corinthians 13 is to rescue the text from the quagmire of romantic sentimentality in which popular piety has embedded it. The common use of this text in weddings has linked it in the minds of many with flowers and kisses and frilly wedding dresses. Such images are far removed from Paul's original concerns. He did not write about agape in order to rhapsodize about marriage; he was writing about the need for mutual concern and consideration within the community of the church, with special reference to the use of spiritual gifts in worship. It may be legitimate to appropriate his words in another context to speak of the love that binds man and woman in marriage, but only if we are clear about the hermeneutical transfer that we are performing when we do that. Most members of our congregations will find their thoughts about love challenged and sharpened if they are invited to reflect in a sustained way about the connection between 1 Corinthians 13 and its original historical context. The passage is originally an impassioned vision of the ‘more excellent way’ in which members of the Corinthian church should treat one another."
Richard B. Hays, First Corinthians, Interpretation (Louisville: John Knox, 1997), 231.
