D & R Revisited

[Gregory Matthews]

https://spectrummagazine.org/sabbath-school/2019/timeout-daniel-revelation

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings Greg,

 

I was interested in the article that you referenced, and especially the first part looking at Daniel 2. I wanted to determine if the writer gave a new insight into Daniel 2, either as an add-on to my present understanding, or whether I would need to change my perspective. I have a happy memory of an SDA Seminar on Daniel 2 where the SDA Minister or Pastor drew our attention to the personal application of Daniel 2 when he quoted and explained Matthew 21:44.

 

I may be a bit dull, slow and stubborn, but I find the article a bit difficult, and so far I do not accept what he states. My first impression is that he likes the word “epistemology”, and he uses it or cognate words a number of times. He uses the word in the following way: “the epistemological issue, the epistemological predicament, Epistemology fans out to become theology, the new epistemic horizon”. I had to look up a dictionary to try to understand the meaning, and then watched two short videos explaining this concept. I am not sure if I have grasped the full meaning of this word.

 

The following is where I question his logic:

These verses stress how the stone was not cut out. It is justified to say, as most translations do: “a stone was cut out, not by human hands.” And yet the “hands” in question are not specified as human or divine (Daniel 2:34, 45), and “hand” is a Semitic metaphor for “power.” We compromise the text if we only stress the contrast between divine and human agency. Another contrast — and one that is even more important, focuses on method.

Let the distinctive action now read: “a stone was cut out — but not by power” (Daniel 2:34, 45).

 

Kind regards

Trevor

I cannot accept the simple substitution of “power” for “hands” here, as I believe that hands here represent human agency. There are other aspects that help to define this, firstly the mountains, the fact that the stone was cut out, and the fulfilment that the stone is Jesus. There is also an allusion to the instructions concerning the building an altar of unhewn stones. Jesus as the stone, also the chief corner stone, is very much the result of God’s hand, God’s wisdom and power.

[Gregory Matthews]

I posted the reference to the article because it is one voice on a general subject of interest to SDAs today.  My posting does not suggest either agreement or disagreement with the author.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Greg,

15 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

I posted the reference to the article because it is one voice on a general subject of interest to SDAs today.  My posting does not suggest either agreement or disagreement with the author.

I accept that you were not endorsing or fully endorsing the article, but I suggest that the article should not be recommended . I have yet to closely consider the other parts of the article, “John’s Tears” and “P.S. (Answering the Mail)”.

I certainly like the policy by some magazines to allow a range of views, and then invite discussion. This allows some progress and clarification of ideas. At the same time I suggest that editors and magazine committees should to some extent be careful in what they publish. The first part of the article reminded me of my contact with a group who claimed what they were advocating was “New Scholarship”. They had two major new themes, and also as a taster they presented on a forum approximately 10 items, stating that these were contrary to the normal view, but they were correct based on their scholarship, including their language skills or word studies. At the time I challenged a few of these items, and one of their major themes.

I do not know whether there is a wide range of SDA magazines, and whether the article you reference is typical of many of these. My experience is that say out of 6 magazines that I am familiar with in my fellowship, only one or two allow a few articles out of the normal acceptance, and then allow correspondence and answers to these articles. I recently wrote to an editor that I was disappointed with an article in his magazine, and he encouraged me to answer and he published this reply.

Getting back to the concept of the stone cut of the mountains without hands, the following verses teach me that the Stone that strikes the Image is the result of God the Father preparing this Stone, which is also the Chief Corner Stone:

Matthew 21:42–44 (KJV): 42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? 43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. 44 And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.

There is much Scripture that could be quoted that speaks of the special preparation of Jesus, the Stone that will destroy the Image, and the Chief Corner Stone. The following are a few:

Psalm 8:4–6 (KJV): 4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? 5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. 6 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:

Psalm 80:17 (KJV): Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, upon the son of man whom thou madest strong for thyself.

Luke 1:34–35 (KJV): 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? ³⁵ And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

John 1:14 (KJV): And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Kind regards Trevor