The word Scripture simply means writings. Of course the only writings that are fully the words of God are those found in the Torah, Prophets and Writings of the Old and New Testaments. But the word Scripture only tells us they are writings. The more I study the structure of Scripture the more I realize that the shape of the book is an apologetic for the importance of the book. In fact, the third section of the canon in the Old Testament is called the Writings. Actually, we might as well call them the Scriptures. Thus just as the Torah (Deuteronomy) is a name we apply to the first section, so the Writings is a name we apply to all the Bible.

The shape of Scripture is an apologetic for the importance of Scripture study. You can see this clearly at the seams of the three sections: Deut 34, Josh 1, Malachi 4, and Psalm 1. It is the reason we are so passionate about The Book.

In any case, the Writings are in conversation (though not in an oral but written form) with the rest of Scripture. The Prophets interpret Torah for a new generation. The Writings are reflections on the Torah and Prophets. Likewise in the New Testament, the New Testament writings are interpreting the significance of the death and resurrection of Christ (Gospels, NT Torah) and the giving of the Spirit on Pentecost (Acts, NT Prophets).

And the Writings are in conversation with each other. The first three: Psalms, Job, and Proverbs are all accented as poetry for chanting in Hebrew. The next five were chanted at festivals during the year: Ruth, Song of Songs, Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes), Lamentations, and Esther. And then the last three are Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles. The ones chanted at festivals form a chiasm -- Ruth the heroine, Song of Songs is erotic poetry, Ecclesiastes in the middle, Lamentations is sad poetry, and Esther the heroine. Thus with three before and three after these five the whole of the Writings makes a chiasm.

The sections within the Writings are stitched together when we realize that Proverbs ends with the poem about the ideal wife (Prov 31:10) and Boaz says that everyone knows Ruth would be the ideal wife (Ruth 3:11). In Hebrew the phrase is identical. Song of Songs gives us another example of the ideal wife, as does Esther parallel to Ruth. Also Esther in many ways is a female Daniel, which bridges those two books together. But already you should be able to see that the Writings are in conversation with one another.

One common literary form in the Writings is the alphabetic acrostic poem. One reason that you would do an alphabetic acrostic is to speak comprehensively. Thus the alphabetic acrostic par excellence is Psalm 119, with eight lines for each letter of the Hebrew alphabet (making it also the longest chapter in the Scriptures). The book of Lamentations consists of six alphabetic acrostics. The poem about the ideal wife in Prov 31:10ff is another example. It is a comprehensive description of the ideal wife from A to Z (for the English alphabetic equivalent). This is in conversation, as Longman notes in his Proverbs commentary on the ideal wife poem, with Psalm 112. Psalm 112:1-10 is an alphabetic acrostic about the ideal husband. The fear of YHWH, like at the end of Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes 12:13) is the preeminent trait of both the wife (Prov 31:30) and husband (Psalm 112:1). The point of Ecclesiastes is to explain the limits of wisdom and this seems to be a favorite feature of this conversation. Job makes a similar point. The limit on wisdom is that we should fear God and keep His Torah.

Thus the Writings make the point about Writings, "My son, beware of anything beyond these. Of making many books there is no end, and much study is a weariness of the flesh" (Ecclesiastes 12:12). We must keep this in conversation with how the delight of the blessed is in the written Torah of YHWH and on this Torah he meditates day and night (Psalm 1:2). Thus we should study (even toil until we are weary) the word of God. But this ending to the central book of the chiasm of the Writings is fitting. It is similar to ending the New Testament with the Book of Revelation given how Revelation ends warning about adding or subtracting from it. The effect of Ecclesiastes 12:12 is to say, the Writings are now complete until prophecy resumes, beware of adding to or subtracting from them.

Labels: acrostic, alphabetic acrostic, chronicles, daniel, ecclesiastes, esther, ezra-nehemiah, job, lamentations, proverbs 31, psalms, qoheleth, ruth, scripture, song of songs, writings

Meredith G. Kline's God, Heaven, and Har Magedon: A Covenantal Tale of Cosmos and Telos is a fun book for the biblical scholar. Kline is still providing volumes of insight within a single sentence, but this time with much fewer hyphenated words. There was one paragraph with "altar-throne-temple-city" and the customary coined Klinisms like Glory-Spirit still show up from time to time. But, by and large, the sentences are a little more readable.

The book accomplishes its goal (telos). Tracing from the beginning of the cosmos to the telos of the theme of the Mount of Gathering from the Genesis Garden of Eden to Revelation's resurrected Har Magedon. The biblical story is much more fascinating, as related by Kline, than all of the fictional tales out there on "Armaggedon."

Like Alleluia should be Hallelu-yah (Hebrew for Praise Yah--the nickname of Israel's God: Yahweh), this really should be transliterated as Har Magedon not Armaggedon. In both cases, the Greek has a rough breathing mark that corresponds to the guttural "h" sound but the English translators ignore. Har is Hebrew for hill or mountain, the latter being preferable here since this would the top of the world - figuratively speaking the highest mountain. And Magedon, Kline explains, is really Moed in Hebrew. Moed is Hebrew for assembly or gathering or congregation. The -on ending is common for Hebrew nouns. And the "g" sound is trying to transliterate a soft guttural letter 'ayin that we usually do not pronounce at all. Moreover, John always explains transliterated words by giving a translation into Greek. Here that is found in the sentence too: "he gathered them to the place called in Hebrew har magedon." Thus Har Magedon means Mount of Gathering. Kline also makes other points to solidify the argument, including where the phrase is the cosmic polar opposite to Hades or the pit. Thus the Heights of Zaphon on the one hand, and the depths of the pit on the other. The pit in Revelation is the Hebrew term Abbadon, the angel of the Abyss or Hades or Sheol, and often a synonym. It is found where we would expect the opposite of Har Magedon to be in Revelation.

Kline traces this motif from the mountain of Eden through Ararat through Sinai-Horeb through Jerusalem-Zion to the new Jerusalem. In the end, he provides a stellar explanation of the 3 and 1/2 times interval in Daniel and Revelation. And he avoids the errors of pre and postmillennialism and provides positive development of the so-called amillennial view, which really believes that the millennium is the period between AD 70 and Christ's return. The 1000 years is time from the heavenly perspective, total and complete. But the time is 3 and 1/2 years and not FOUR from the perspective of the saints suffering persecution and martyrdom. Four is the wisdom number for complete. Thus, from the perspective of the saints, HOW LONG? will not be too long. We will not be utterly destroyed and consumed. Throughout this discussion, Kline remains Christocentric or better yet Christotelic in explaining the victory belongs to Jesus Christ on the Mount of Gathering at the end of the present world order.

For those of us who are living in the symbolic "3 and 1/2 years" that have taken from AD 70 into the present and possibly beyond, not knowing when Christ will return on the clouds, this book removes much of the confusion that others would frighten us with. May all the glory go to God. May He gather us to Har Magedon soon. Amen.

Labels: amillennialism, armaggedon, daniel, eschatology, kline, mountain of God, protology, revelation, telos

OT Canonical Order assumed in the NT: Jesus said,

"everything written about me in the Law of Moses [Torah] and the Prophets and the Psalms [Writings] must be fulfilled" (Luke 24:44).

The Psalms, the first and largest book of the writings section, is often used to refer to all of the writings. And Jesus said to the scribes and Pharisees,

"on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sancturary and the altar" (Matt 23:35).

Jesus is refering to the first book Genesis (where Abel is the first death) and the last book of the Hebrew canon Chronicles (where this Zechariah is the last death). Thus he is using this as shorthand for all of the righteous saints who died in the Old Testament Scriptures. Jesus assumed the OT canonical order stated below.

It is the order found in Jewish Bibles. Thus, the Hebrew Scriptures are often called the Tanakh (in Hebrew, T is for Torah, N for Prophets, K for Writings). Here the Westminster Confession of Faith could use some reformation as it lists the Old Testament books in a different order reflected also in English language translations of the Bible. Notice that the New Testament follows the same God-given pattern...

Torah: In the beginning (Genesis); Exodus; Leviticus; In the wilderness (Numbers); and These are the words (Deuteronomy). The phrases are the Hebrew titles (the first word in the Hebrew text).

Prophets: Joshua; Judges; Samuel; Kings; Isaiah; Jeremiah; Ezekiel; The Book of the Twelve (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi).

Writings: Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Song of Songs, Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes), Lamentations, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, Chronicles.

New Testament Torah: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John

New Testament Prophets: Acts

New Testament Writings: Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, Revelation.

Eugene Peterson suggests that Acts is partially Torah and partially Prophets, making the fifth book of NT Torah. Then he makes most of the epistles Prophets while James and Revelation are writings. Sometimes I am persuaded by this argument.

Early comments: As you might guess, you can compare the Books of Moses to the gospels and Joshua to Acts. And putting them this way helps you see why Daniel and Revelation have so much in common -- they are both apocalyptic (genre) writings (section). Nevertheless, do not flatten the Bible and ignore the historical nature of special revelation.

First observation: Old Testament books that have been divided in the English Bible into two should be read as one book. For example, 1 Kings and 2 Kings is one book as is 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles. One you might not realize is that Ezra-Nehemiah is also one book. And it is very important to read the so-called minor prophets instead of as separate books as The Book of the Twelve. They have been edited together to be read as a single book. It would also be appropriate, though divided in the order of the New Testament, to read Luke and Acts as one book. The reason that the gospel of John divides them in our canon is that John is assuming that you already know the stories we can find in Matthew, Mark & Luke. Thus he writes a book that reflects much more theologically on the life of Christ.

It is worth noting, unlike in the OT the 1 Letter, 2 Letter, 3 Letter designations in the NT are indeed separate letters and should be read as such but putting them next to one another also encourages you to see the connections between them. In this order the authors of the epistles are separated: Romans through Philemon are by Paul, Hebrews is by an unknown author, James, Peter, John, and Jude are as the names suggest.

Second observation: You should read Scripture according to these divisions (Torah, Prophets, Writings, Old and New). How you read the OT Torah is different than how you read the OT Writings.

To build on this observation: Each book needs a unique reading strategy and knowing where they fall in the canoncial order helps. One thing that is necessary for interpretation is to identify the kind of writing (the genre) that you are reading. You read a grocery list differently than a love letter and a fable different than a history textbook. And so you should read Matthew differently than Revelation and Psalms differently than Isaiah. Not every scholar will agree on the genre of a text. For example, one person might say that you should read Deuteronomy like you would read the gospels. It contains his speeches but it also includes information that is likely told by someone telling us the story. Another will mention that the book resembles an ancient treaty formula. Actually both of these observations are helpful for Deuteronomy, especially the former given our discussion. Knowing which section of the canon a book falls into will help you to identify the genre. For another example, Daniel is a wisdom book (found in the writings alongside other wisdom books) and not one of the prophetic books. This does not mean that Daniel does not include prophecy but it does mean that you should read it differently than one of the prophetic books. It is a failure to recognize this truth that has led to all sorts of interpretive mistakes.

Third Observation: And when we read the books in order we should also interpret them in order, thus Ruth and the woman in Song of Songs are examples of the virtuous woman of Proverbs 31 (in the Hebrew order it is Proverbs, Ruth, Song of Songs).

May you read Scripture afresh. Amen.

Labels: bible, book of the twelve, canon, daniel, deuteronomy, ezra-nehemiah, hebrew scriptures, prophets, proverbs 31, psalms, ruth, scripture, song of songs, Tanakh, torah, writings