Why does the Book of Revelation use so much symbolism? Some reasons might perhaps include: to hide its meaning from outsiders, to describe the ineffable, to point out the inner reality of what’s being described, and so on. Are these correct? What other purposes might there be for the symbolism in Revelation? I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.
Today, I talk to James Bejon about the book of Judges. You should follow him on Twitter.
Today I discuss the dangers of poorly calibrated pattern recognition in biblical study.
Could you respond to some of the criticisms raised by this review of Echoes of Exodus?
What does the conception of Issachar have to do with Matthew 2:16-18?
A plug for James Jordan’s Through New Eyes: Developing a Biblical View of the World and some other books for those wanting to read the Bible for all its worth.
Why is Melchizedek so important to the author of Hebrews? What’s the biblical-theological significance of Jesus being a priest after the order of Melchizedek?
Is the task of exegesis limited to discovering the author’s original intention, or can meaning somehow overflow intention? If so, in what way? What guardrails are in place that would enable us to recognize certain readings as off-limits? A common text referenced in these discussions is Matthew 2:15’s usage of Hosea 11:1, so I’d be interested to hear your take on that as well.
In the following video, I discuss a recent article from the Calvinist International by Joe Minich, trying to discern the relevant background for Jesus’s teaching in Matthew 16:13-23. See the rest of my videos (and subscribe) here.
While it is very far from the most articulate or well-ordered treatment of the subject (like the rest of my videos it is done without any notes or preparation, off the top of my head), the following is a brief introduction to the priest-king-prophet paradigm for understanding Scripture. Hopefully some of you will find it helpful.