How to Negotiate With Scripture  ## Metadata - Author: [[Dan McClellan]] - Full Title: How to Negotiate With Scripture - Category: #articles - Document Note: --- tags: [Bible, Hermeneutics, Theology] author: [MISSING] source: YouTube reference: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ] date created: {{date:YYYY-MM-DD}} {{time:HH:mm}} --- # 🏷️ Title: How to negotiate with scripture ## 🧰 Action Inbox - [H1] Draft note on Matthew 5:18 temporal clauses — context/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=323 #articleseed - [H2] Add glossary entry: “univocality” vs. “polyphony” — context/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=555 #xref - [H3] Collect Matthew-only law passages for continuity — context/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=269 #articleseed - [H4] Build teaching aid on “least commandments” and status — context/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=293 #articleseed - [H5] Prepare slide on righteousness exceeding Pharisees — context/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=312 #share - [H6] Compare Luke 24 fulfillment with Matt 5:18 scope — context/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=80 #xref - [H7] The WPCC: publish citation norms for scripture debates — context/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ #addendum - [H8] Map intertext citation risks for study groups — context/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=405 #bmf - [H9] Write FAQ: “Does Matthew require temple practices?” — context/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=331 #articleseed ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ### 🔗 References - Include links cited in or relevant to the article. ## 📝 Summary - The video critiques an interpretation of Matthew 5:18. It argues for law continuity within Matthew’s frame. [YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) - The host claims Matthew binds both temporal clauses together. He places fulfillment at the eschaton. [03:01–03:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=181) - He warns against importing Paul, Hebrews, or Luke to override Matthew. He names this “presupposing univocality.” [05:47–06:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=347) - He reads Matthew as escalating strictness, not abolishing commands. He cites 5:19–20 examples. [04:57–05:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=297) - Bottom line: Interpret Matthew on Matthew’s terms first. Compare later with care. ## 📖 Main Content - The central claim ties two “until” clauses together in 5:18. The law endures until heaven and earth pass. [03:01–03:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=181) - The method insists on intra-text priority. Keep Matthew’s narrative voice primary. [05:47–06:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=347) - The host highlights 5:19–20. He frames stricter righteousness as reinforcement, not repeal. [04:57–05:20](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=297) - He contrasts Luke 24’s fulfillment theme with Matthew’s horizon. He urges caution with synthesis. [01:56–02:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=116) - He labels cross-book flattening as an assumption of one voice. He urges readers to test that assumption. [06:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=409) - Uncertainties remain. Scholars dispute grammar, redaction, and dating. The video states a strong view, not consensus. ### 🗒️ Notes #### ⏱️ [00:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=5) Scope of “all” in 5:18 ### [H1] Matthew prioritizes internal context before synthesis > [!quote] [How to negotiate with scripture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) by an unnamed author via [[YouTube]]. Published [MISSING]. Accessed {{date:YYYY-MM-DD}}. > “Not an iota, not a dot will pass from the law until all is accomplished.” This frames the scope question. Define “all” within Matthew first. [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=5) #xref #articleseed ID:rw_[MISSING] #### ⏱️ [00:59](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=59) Fulfillment claims from other books ### [H2] Cross-book readings risk overruling Matthew’s stance > [!quote] [How to negotiate with scripture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) > “These things… were fulfilled in Christ.” Note the method contrast. The host resists importing external frameworks first. [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=80) #xref ID:rw_[MISSING] #### ⏱️ [01:56](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=116) Matthew vs. synthesized canon ### [H3] Matthew’s horizon extends to the eschaton > [!quote] [How to negotiate with scripture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) > “the law of Moses will continue to be in force… until the second coming” This asserts Matthew’s long view. It challenges early-fulfillment claims. [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=181) #articleseed ID:rw_[MISSING] #### ⏱️ [03:01](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=181) Twin temporal clauses ### [H4] “Until” clauses read contemporaneously in 5:18 > [!quote] [How to negotiate with scripture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) > “until heaven and earth pass away… until all is accomplished.” The reading binds both clauses. Fulfillment aligns with cosmic transition. [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=195) #xref ID:rw_[MISSING] #### ⏱️ [03:54](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=234) Continuity in practice ### [H5] Matthew depicts ongoing law observance for followers > [!quote] [How to negotiate with scripture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) > “Keep paying your tithing… keep obeying the Sabbath.” This supports continuity claims. It situates practice within Matthew’s world. [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=234) #xref ID:rw_[MISSING] #### ⏱️ [04:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=297) Teaching and status ### [H6] Commandment-breaking reduces status in the kingdom > [!quote] [How to negotiate with scripture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) > “whoever does them and teaches them will be called great” Matthew ties teaching to status. The passage incentivizes observance. [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=300) #articleseed ID:rw_[MISSING] #### ⏱️ [05:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=313) Escalated righteousness ### [H7] Righteousness must exceed Pharisees in Matthew > [!quote] [How to negotiate with scripture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) > “unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees” Matthew raises the bar. This undercuts repeal narratives. [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=312) #xref ID:rw_[MISSING] #### ⏱️ [05:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=347) Hermeneutic warning ### [H8] Presupposed univocality flattens distinct authorial aims > [!quote] [How to negotiate with scripture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) > “the presupposition of univocality… allows us to… overrule” The host urges methodological humility. Start with local intent. [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=405) #articleseed ID:rw_[MISSING] #### ⏱️ [06:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ&t=409) Authorial disagreement ### [H9] Matthew may disagree with other New Testament voices > [!quote] [How to negotiate with scripture](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ) > “The author of the Gospel of Matthew was disagreeing with all those other texts” This claims intra-canon diversity. It challenges simplistic harmonization. [view highlight](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ - Summary: #maklelan2952 - URL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9oXlk77FAQ So in Matthew 5:18, Jesus says, "Not aniota, not a dot will pass from the lawuntil all is accomplished." And thequestion is this: What did Jesus meanwhen he said all? All right, let's seeit. Because he doesn't explain the scopeof his comment. What does he mean by allbeing accomplished? Was he referring toevery last thing that has ever beenprophesied, including his second coming?Well, the New Testament reveals thatthat can't be what he meant. Why? Well,because there are so many examples ofold covenant commands that have passedfrom the law. For example, Hebrews10:18, there is no longer any offering for sin. Now, the Sinai law absolutelyrequired offerings for sin. So, there'sa change that's much bigger than a dotor iota. And Colossians 2 says that theold covenant feasts and food laws andSabbaths are no longer required. Hebrews7:8 says the priesthood is no longerrequired. Galatians 5 says circumcisionis no longer required. And in John 4,Jesus himself prophesied that worship atthe temple would no longer be required.These things didn't just pass away; theywere fulfilled in Christ. They reachedtheir God-ordained goal. When Jesus says, "Until all has beenaccomplished" in Matthew 5:18, he'sspecifically talking about everythingthe Son of Man was sent to accomplishduring his earthly ministry. I mean, theresurrected Jesus says this to hisdisciples in Luke 24. These are my wordsthat I spoke to you while I was stillwith you, that everything written aboutme in the law of Moses and the prophetsand the psalms must be fulfilled. Youare witnesses of these things. Hisdisciples witnessed the fulfilling thatJesus foretold in Matthew 5:18. The allthat Jesus referred to was accomplishedthrough his death and resurrection,which fulfilled the scriptures andinaugurated the new covenant. So, if you paid close attention to all thescriptures that this content creatorbrought up in an effort to try tocontextualizewhat the author of Matthew was havingJesus say in Matthew 5. You'll note thatthey never brought up another passagefrom Matthew. All of the scriptures theybrought up were from the letter to theHebrews or from Paul or from Pseudo Paulor from Luke or from some other author.And there's a very good reason for this. And the reason is that the Gospel ofMatthew consistentlyrepresents Jesus as saying the law ofMoses will continue to be in force andauthoritative until the second coming,until the eschaton. This creatorignores the immediatecontext of the statement that they’rehighlighting because that providesadditional support for the conclusionthat the author of the Gospel of Matthewhas Jesus saying the law of Moses willcontinue to be authoritative until theend of the world, until the secondcoming. They even skipped over thebeginning of the sentence that they’re highlighting. So let’s take a look atthe passage. Now, they were looking atverse 18, but they were looking at thesecond half of it. Not one letter, notone stroke of a letter will pass fromthe law until all is accomplished. So,we have a temporal clause at the end ofthat. But the sentence begins with atemporal clause. For truly, I tell you,until heaven and earth pass away, notone letter, not one stroke of a letterwill pass from the law until all isaccomplished. And grammatically,according to the majority of scholars. Who have commented on this question, theuse of two temporal clauses hereindicates that these are understood tobe contemporaneous. In other words, allbeing fulfilled is contemporaneous withthe heavens and the earth passing away.And we can see this as well in Matthew2434-36where we have Jesus talking about allthese things being fulfilledonce the heavens and the earth passaway. So if you are keeping the scope ofyour contextualizing campaign on theGospel of Matthew, which ought to beyour priority, even if you go beyond itafterwards, your priority is what theauthor of the Gospel of Matthew haswritten. You can see that the law ofMoses remains in effect. You have Jesustelling other people elsewhere in theGospel of Matthew, "Keep paying yourtithing. Keep bringing your offerings tothe temple. Keep obeying the Sabbath. Keep doing all these things. The onlychanges that Jesus introduces to the laware escalations of the severity of thelaw, as we see in this very passage. Cuzlet's go on verse 19. Therefore, whoeverbreaks one of the least of theseCommandments and teaches others to dothe same will be called least in thekingdom of heaven. But whoever does themand teaches them will be called great inthe kingdom of heaven. Jesus is tellinghis followers, "Don't teach people tostop following the law of Moses." Infact, let's look at verse 20. For I tellyou, unless your righteousness exceedsthat of the scribes and Pharisees, youwill never enter the kingdom of heaven. The Gospel of Matthew presents thescribes and the Pharisees as ferociousfollowers of the law. And Jesus issaying, "You must be even more carefulfollowers of the law." And that's whenwe get into the Sermon on the Mount.You have heard Moses said, "Don't dothis." Well, I'm ratcheting it up. Don'teven do this. Don't even think about it.So Jesus is escalating parts of the lawand asserting the continued authorityand relevance of the rest of the lawthroughout the Gospel of Matthew. Why doyou have to go appeal to outside textsin order to try to recontextualize this?Because you're presupposing univocality.And the only way to make Matthew saywhat you allow Matthew to say is byappealing to other passages to overrule. What the author was trying to get at.This is what the presupposition ofunivocality does. It allows us to saythis is all fungible. This is all partof the same single unified consistentvoice and message. Therefore, we cantake the puzzle pieces from all over orbetter, the Lego bricks from all over toconstruct what we want to construct, andwe can put it on top of the passage wedon't like to overrule it, to silence it,to make Matthew say something other thanwhat the author of the Gospel of Matthewwas trying to say. The author of theGospel of Matthew was disagreeing withall those other texts that this contentcreator quoted because the author of theGospel of Matthew wants the law of Mosesto continue to be authoritative and wants Jesus's followers to continue to followthe law of Moses. That's not what thiscontent creator wants. So, this contentcreator must leverage other passagesfrom elsewhere along with thepresupposition of univocality in orderto overrulewhat the Gospel of Matthew has to say.So if you actually want to understandwhat the author of the Gospel of Matthewwas trying to say in Matthew chapter 5,It was that the law of Moses continuesto be in effect, continues to beauthoritative, continues to be anexpectation for the followers of Jesusuntil the end of the world. And the fitfor this video has been master ofpuppets., How to Negotiate With Scripture, Dan McClellan, 01k81fstr2dxzy6t46tbdvj1x1.