[testallthings]

I would like to introduce another footnote. This one in on Matthew 3:1
“Now in those days John the Baptist appeared, preaching in the wilderness of Judea” (RcV)

Footnote 1(2) John the Baptist's preaching was the initiation of God's New Testament economy. He did this preaching not in the holy temple within the holy city, where the religious and cultured people worshipped God according to their scriptural ordinances, but in the wilderness, in a 'wild' way, not keeping any old regulations. This indicates that the old way of worshipping God according to the Old Testament had been repudiated and that a new way was about to be brought in. Wilderness here indicates that a new way of God's New Testament economy is contrary to religion and culture. It indicates further that something new was going to be built up.

Before analyzing this statements, I would like to quote from messages W.L. spoke in Taipei during the 1950s. I'll quote from the online version of the book called ON KNOWING THE BIBLE. It is a little book of four chapters. The fourth one is really interesting, and if anyone would read it will probably conclude that W.L. departed many times from the principles of interpretations that he himself presented about 60 years ago.
“The Bible is an extremely great item in the universe. Besides our Lord and God of glory, I believe the greatest item in the universe is the Bible we have before our eyes and in our hands. Since the Bible is so important, we need the proper interpretation before we can study or understand it. This interpretation must be governed by definite rules, laws, and principles. We cannot interpret it in this or that or any way we like.”


Does anyone disagree about these words? I do not.

“The first principle is to interpret and understand the Bible as literally as possible. We have to grasp firmly the fact that when God inspired men to write the Bible, He used words that are fully comprehensible to man. When we attempt to understand the Bible today, we must understand the thought of God strictly and accurately according to the letter of the words. We should not think that since the Bible is inspired by God, it will always transcend human language, and is therefore open for spiritual interpretation. This is a dangerous proposition. We should interpret the Bible according to the literal meaning of the words. No matter how difficult or out of place a literal interpretation appears to us, we have to adhere strictly to the literal meaning.”


Any comment on this point? This is a principle that many students of the Bible would agree on. In most cases, shall we say 99%, a literal interpretation should be preferred over a spiritual interpretation.

“We cannot interpret a sentence, a verse, or a section of the Bible spiritually for the first part and literally for the second part. We should not do that the other way around either. If a passage is to be interpreted spiritually, it should be interpreted spiritually throughout. If a passage is to be interpreted literally, it must be interpreted literally throughout.”

I think many would agree on this point, too. In the same passage, a mixing of spiritual and literal interpretation should be avoided. How much confusion could have been avoided if the person who spoke these thinks had applied these same principles of interpretation.

With this in mind, let's come to the footnote. John the Baptist with his preaching initiated GNTe . He did not preach in the holy temple in the holy city of Jerusalem. Jerusalem was the place of religious and cultured people that worshipped God according to the Bible, as commanded by God Himself. So John, who wanted to start something new, went into the wilderness, “not keeping any old regulation”.

The first question that comes to my mind is which of the prophets in the O.T. preached in the temple. We know that some spoke far away from Israel (Daniel for example). Thus this mean that they started something new? The Lord Jesus taught in temple, or more precisely in the court of the temple, as well some of His apostles. Does this mean that John the Baptist introduced the GNTe and they brought back the GOTe?

The second question is, How could John the Baptist baptize so many people in the temple? By sprinkling them? Joh 3:23 “And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.” He needed much water so he went were he could find it.

The third question is, Was baptism a new regulation? To me, it seems that baptism is a very old regulation. Does anyone need proofs? And by the way, when John was asked about what they shall do (the people) did he said something about a new way of worshipping God?

The fourth question is, If wilderness “ here indicates that a new way of God's New Testament economy is contrary to religion and culture”, can someone, who is an expert in spiritual interpretations, and knows how to mix literal and spiritual interpretations in the same passage, please tell me at least what Judea means (you don't need to explain what John the Baptist means).