Monday, April 25, 2022

Jots & Tittles, Episode 1: Does 2 Kings 22-23 justify modern textual reconstruction?


I have started a new short form podcast titled Jots & Tittles. Here is the first episode.



R. L. Vaughn said...

I like the "Jots & Tittles" format. The long and the short of it can both prove beneficial!

In addition, I was glad to get your thoughts on "the lost Bible" in 2 Kings. Very helpful. I have seen and heard this historical incident used to push back against the idea of public access or accessibility to the Scriptures. That is, this incident (they say) proves public access is not a necessary component of preservation. My initial strike against line (which might not be as well received in Covenant Theology as New Covenant Theology) was that what is true of the relationship of Israel and the Old Testament is not necessarily a herald of what must be historically true of the New Testament and its churches. Israel was formed not only by the law, but their covenant existence included a visible nation of the progeny of Jacob, and further was ordered by a succession of priests from Aaron (and, later, a succession of kings). On the other hand, the church is a spiritual creature of the word, built on the revelation of Jesus Christ and kept by it. I never had anyone engage me on that defense, so I am not sure how well it might hold up in debate!

Thanks for this. I am going to listen to your arguments once again tomorrow.

Jeffrey T. Riddle said...

Thanks RLV, you make a good point which I sort of got at also. Namely, at this point the canon was not complete and so a distinction must be drawn between what happened prior to that completion and what happened afterwards.

R. L. Vaughn said...

Amen. I agree.