I would like to address a tendency we have to interpret the Gospels in light of the Epistles. We see the Gospels as "story" full of "pre-resurrection" parables and admonitions to the Jews. The Epistles, on the other hand, seem ready-made for building solid doctrine. The Epistles, especially Paul's, are written in an argumentative way which resonates well with our western "rational" thinking. We build doctrinal understanding from the Epistles, then fit the Gospels in where we can.
When we interpret scripture this way, however, we are working backwards. The Gospels, though written down later, happened first. It is the Gospel accounts, including Acts, which are records of the Lord's own words and actions. The life and teachings of Yashua are the foundational source for understanding the transition between OT Judaism and NT Christianity.
It is more appropriate to always interpret the Esistles in light of the Gospels. An example of this approach is as follows.
In the Gospels we understand that Jesus did not come to abolish the law but fulfill them (Matt 5:17).
The context of this teaching nullifies any attempt to define "fulfillment" as "ending", "terminating" or "abolishing". Jesus never fulfills scripture in these ways in the Gospel accounts. Instead he fulfills by bringing out the original meaning, by making the prophetic picture complete or perfect. Jesus brought the law and prophets to life in himself. He did not destroy them or make them obselete.
In the Epistles, we read,"He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross." Col 2:14.
Because this scripture is regularly taken out of context and given authority independent of the Gospel record, many feel that the law was "abolished" on the cross so that it no longer applies to the modern believer. This interpretation, however, is in direct conflict with what Jesus himself taught.
If the Gospels do not make the point, we should be very careful in suggesting that the Epistles are advocating a "new teaching."
|
