Kabowd Posted May 28, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 112 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,489 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 13 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2007 Pure literary analysis will not produce different results for different people. When applied by fallible people, "pure literary analysis" is never pure, and never can be ... that's why there are different results for different people. The Bible is infallible - the rules of hermeneutics are not. btw, your repeated use of the word "nonsense" is becoming a little tedious ... do you mind dropping it, please. It is more clear to me now that you are approaching epistemology from a post-modern mindset. Do you read Tillich, McLaren, Rollins, Bell, Barth or Miller? Whether you have or not, you have clearly been influenced by the post-modern belief that absolute truth is unknowable. Within this paradigm is the belief that there is a dichotomy between faith and reason. Once you embrace this dichotomy, you can never arrive at any truth. "Who is right?" or "It may be true for you, but it isn't true for me". "Truth" becomes relative, but it is not true truth. This neo-orthodox existential theology does not believe the Bible contains verifiable truth. Some even question that the Bible contains truth at all. But even if they accept that the Bible contains truth, they deny that the truth can be known with any certainty. It's at this point that faith, Christianity, Scripture, or God become pointless. If we can't trust the Scriptures and/or we cannot trust our ability to interpret the Scriptures, then the Judeo-Christian God is no different than the Eastern concepts of "god" or "gods" who are transcendant and unknowable. If truth cannot be accurately discerned, then the Bible and God are cruel because He demands things of us (such as pursuing wisdom and understanding), that we are incapable of accomplishing. If the Bible is an unreliable source for truth (whether by lacking it, or our inability to discover it), then it is the worst waste of paper in human history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted May 28, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.10 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2007 So what do you do when your intellectual analysis disagrees with someone else's intellectual analysis? One tip I've picked up is just label the other guy's interpretation "eisegesis" ... seems to work for some Good point. Yes, good point indeed! That's the perfect response to 'intellectuals' who belittle other's opinions or suggest they can't understand the word of God because they are 'degree challenged'. We need to remember to whom the glory should be given when reading and interpreting the Bible.....and it's not any of US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarletprayers Posted May 28, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 135 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 7,537 Content Per Day: 1.08 Reputation: 157 Days Won: 2 Joined: 04/06/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/29/1956 Share Posted May 28, 2007 (edited) So what do you do when your intellectual analysis disagrees with someone else's intellectual analysis? One tip I've picked up is just label the other guy's interpretation "eisegesis" ... seems to work for some Good point. Yes, good point indeed! That's the perfect response to 'intellectuals' who belittle other's opinions or suggest they can't understand the word of God because they are 'degree challenged'. We need to remember to whom the glory should be given when reading and interpreting the Bible.....and it's not any of US. So whats the response to all of these "Holy Spirit" only that have different interpretations? Its also not true, but it is usually the response of those actually challenged to use their minds also. Edited May 28, 2007 by Silentprayer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kabowd Posted May 28, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 112 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,489 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 13 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2007 So what do you do when your intellectual analysis disagrees with someone else's intellectual analysis? One tip I've picked up is just label the other guy's interpretation "eisegesis" ... seems to work for some Good point. Yes, good point indeed! That's the perfect response to 'intellectuals' who belittle other's opinions or suggest they can't understand the word of God because they are 'degree challenged'. We need to remember to whom the glory should be given when reading and interpreting the Bible.....and it's not any of US. It's not a good point. It's post-modern relativism which denies absolute truth. I'm not sure you're even aware what bandwagon you're jumping on here. Who are the "intellectuals" you are referring to? Where has anyone been "belittled" for their opinions? I think most of the time people cannot separate the difference between someone disagreeing with their argument versus someone attacking them personally. Regardless of the inability to discern the two, this does nothing to prove the case that proper exegesis and hermenuetics should be pursued for God's glory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 So what do you do when your intellectual analysis disagrees with someone else's intellectual analysis? One tip I've picked up is just label the other guy's interpretation "eisegesis" ... seems to work for some Good point. Yes, good point indeed! That's the perfect response to 'intellectuals' who belittle other's opinions or suggest they can't understand the word of God because they are 'degree challenged'. We need to remember to whom the glory should be given when reading and interpreting the Bible.....and it's not any of US. It is not the perfect response. The question demonstrates a lack of understanding behind the design and purpose of hermeneutics. No one here has been belittled as "degree challenged." I certainly hope you are not leveling that charage at anyone in this thread, and if you are, you need to copy paste where this has happened, or withdraw the allegation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 So what do you do when your intellectual analysis disagrees with someone else's intellectual analysis? One tip I've picked up is just label the other guy's interpretation "eisegesis" ... seems to work for some Good point. Yes, good point indeed! That's the perfect response to 'intellectuals' who belittle other's opinions or suggest they can't understand the word of God because they are 'degree challenged'. We need to remember to whom the glory should be given when reading and interpreting the Bible.....and it's not any of US. So whats the response to all of these "Holy Spirit" only that have different interpretations? Precisely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kabowd Posted May 28, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 112 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,489 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 13 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted May 28, 2007 So what do you do when your intellectual analysis disagrees with someone else's intellectual analysis? One tip I've picked up is just label the other guy's interpretation "eisegesis" ... seems to work for some Good point. Yes, good point indeed! That's the perfect response to 'intellectuals' who belittle other's opinions or suggest they can't understand the word of God because they are 'degree challenged'. We need to remember to whom the glory should be given when reading and interpreting the Bible.....and it's not any of US. So whats the response to all of these "Holy Spirit" only that have different interpretations? Exactly. There is none. If we follow this mindset truth is pointless and uknowable. Thus, anyone can claim and believe anything they want because it cannot be verified as true or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apothanein kerdos Posted May 28, 2007 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 331 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 8,713 Content Per Day: 1.21 Reputation: 21 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Author Share Posted May 28, 2007 When we have countless Bible scholars all arguing for their own theological perspective, what should we do? Pick the one with the highest qualifications; pick the one that most closely agrees with our church's doctrine; pick the one we think lives the most Christ-like life; .... Most of us would fall back on our denominational bias: Catholic; Protestant-liberal; Protestant-evangelical; Pentecostal-charismatic; etc Again, just because it is abused doesn't mean it's wrong. You're arguing that our presuppositions defeat the purpose of exegesis, but I dealt with this in the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OopsMartin Posted May 28, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 829 Content Per Day: 0.13 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/26/1943 Share Posted May 28, 2007 I'm having a hard time understanding why there's an argument here. Are we actually arguing about wanting to find out as much about the word of God as we are able? Do you have to know the historical background of the text, and fully comprehend the literary place in which certain Scripture falls in order to be saved? No. But why wouldn't you want to? Why wouldn't you want to get as much as possible out of the Words of our God? I agree with your comments ... even though you seem to think I'm disagreeing. The argument being presented in the OP is that there is one correct interpretation of Scripture, and this interpretation can be discovered by correctly applying exegetical principles. I disagree with that conclusion, although I am not against that approach to Bible study. Obviously there are many highly trained theologians in the world supporting a wide range of different interpretations. Why is your understanding of a passage of Scripture superior to someone else's who has sincerely and studiously applied exegetical analysis to studying the same passage? Ultimately, the question is: Why do you believe what you believe? The question of the Rapture is a prime example of exegesis gone mad: pre-, mid-, post-tribulation theories abound, along with a few other variations. Theologians (and others) will make your head spin with their different views, each claiming to have correctly exegeted the relevant passages. I strongly believe in the power of the Holy Spirit to reveal the truth of Scripture to the individual, even the ignorant and unlearned. Bible study is beneficial, but in arriving at what God wants you to know, I believe prayer is more important than reading the detailed textual analyses of numerous theologians. Well said. We need to be like the Bereans intellectually, and spiritually allow the Holy Spirit to guide our heart and intentions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OopsMartin Posted May 28, 2007 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 829 Content Per Day: 0.13 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/25/2006 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/26/1943 Share Posted May 28, 2007 When we have countless Bible scholars all arguing for their own theological perspective, what should we do? Pick the one with the highest qualifications; pick the one that most closely agrees with our church's doctrine; pick the one we think lives the most Christ-like life; .... Most of us would fall back on our denominational bias: Catholic; Protestant-liberal; Protestant-evangelical; Pentecostal-charismatic; etc Again, just because it is abused doesn't mean it's wrong. You're arguing that our presuppositions defeat the purpose of exegesis, but I dealt with this in the article. Actually, I did not get the gist that the article was recommending we all consider only what Bible scholars say. Rather we should all do our best to follow studious principles when researching Scripture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts