Exegesis vs Eisegesis

[kenod]

and do you love intellectually?

What I'm really talking about are "ways" of knowing. How do you know when you meet your wife that she is the one for you? You just know!

There are truths in the Bible that I cannot prove to anyone else's satisfaction intellectually, but they are very real to me. One example is when God took from the side of Adam a rib to make his bride, Eve. This foreshadows when on Calvary Jesus' was pierced in His side by a spear so His "bride" (the Church) could be formed. We are "bone of His bones, and flesh of His flesh". Intellectually, that understanding may not meet the rigorous criteria of exegetical analysis, nevertheless it resonates so deeply within my soul that I know it is true, with or without examining it closely with my mental faculties.

Edited June 1, 2007 by kenod

[EricH]

Are you speaking of Sensus Plenior? Or are you speaking of figurative language?

It depends on your POV - many regard the "fig tree" in Mat 24:32 as figurative/metaphoric language for Israel ... others say it is indulging in "sensus plenior" (finding a hidden meaning).

I don't think POV has much to do with interpreting figurative language. Something is either a figure, or it is not. Sensus Plenior does not deal with those issues. Sensus Plenior holds that even texts that have no figurative language can have a "fuller meaning" than even the original author intended for the text. So which are you talking about?

[kenod]

Are you speaking of Sensus Plenior? Or are you speaking of figurative language?

It depends on your POV - many regard the "fig tree" in Mat 24:32 as figurative/metaphoric language for Israel ... others say it is indulging in "sensus plenior" (finding a hidden meaning).

I don't think POV has much to do with interpreting figurative language. Something is either a figure, or it is not. Sensus Plenior does not deal with those issues. Sensus Plenior holds that even texts that have no figurative language can have a "fuller meaning" than even the original author intended for the text. So which are you talking about?

Try a few examples so I know where you are coming from.

Is this the sort of thing you mean:

Psa 118:22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

Edited June 1, 2007 by kenod

[EricH]

Are you speaking of Sensus Plenior? Or are you speaking of figurative language?

It depends on your POV - many regard the "fig tree" in Mat 24:32 as figurative/metaphoric language for Israel ... others say it is indulging in "sensus plenior" (finding a hidden meaning).

I don't think POV has much to do with interpreting figurative language. Something is either a figure, or it is not. Sensus Plenior does not deal with those issues. Sensus Plenior holds that even texts that have no figurative language can have a "fuller meaning" than even the original author intended for the text. So which are you talking about?

Try a few examples so I know where you are coming from.

Is this the sort of thing you mean:

Psa 118:22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

That would be an example of a figure of speech, not Sensus Plenior

[kenod]

Are you speaking of Sensus Plenior? Or are you speaking of figurative language?

It depends on your POV - many regard the "fig tree" in Mat 24:32 as figurative/metaphoric language for Israel ... others say it is indulging in "sensus plenior" (finding a hidden meaning).

I don't think POV has much to do with interpreting figurative language. Something is either a figure, or it is not. Sensus Plenior does not deal with those issues. Sensus Plenior holds that even texts that have no figurative language can have a "fuller meaning" than even the original author intended for the text. So which are you talking about?

Try a few examples so I know where you are coming from.

Is this the sort of thing you mean:

Psa 118:22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.

That would be an example of a figure of speech, not Sensus Plenior

Hey, it must be your turn now - I've tried twice and failed both times it seems!

BTW is the 'budding fig tree', when read as the restoration of modern Israel, a figure or SP?

Do you think the author of Ps 118:22 understood the "fuller meaning"?

Edited June 1, 2007 by kenod

[EricH]

Hey, it must be your turn now - I've tried twice and failed both times it seems!

Don't know to what you are referring to here. But if you are hving problems making yourself understood to multiple people, that might tell you something

BTW is the 'budding fig tree', when read as the restoration of modern Israel, a figure or SP?

In which passage? In some it is a figure of Israel, in some it is not. Even when used of Israel it is a figure. Israel was not literally a fig tree. They were like a fig tree.

Do you think the author of Ps 118:22 understood the "fuller meaning"?

If you are asking me if the writher knew that this would be a reference to the specific person Jesus of Nazareth, probably not. But I think he knew it was a reference to messiah. There is no reason to think he did not.

[apothanein kerdos]

What I'm really talking about are "ways" of knowing. How do you know when you meet your wife that she is the one for you? You just know!

A marriage that has not been established with some form of the intellect is a marriage that will end.

People love their spouse, not because "they just know," but for other good reasons (when you probe them). Love requires that we use both our emotions and intellect - emotions and feelings are subject to change, the intellect will remain stable in times of trouble, to remind you that you have made a commitment to this person.

If you abandon the intellect, you destroy the spirit of man. If you dichotomize the intellect, you destroy the spirit of man.

There are truths in the Bible that I cannot prove to anyone else's satisfaction intellectually, but they are very real to me.

Then they are worthless. If you can't prove them, or give evidence, then they mean nothing to the outside world, and ergo are worthless.

One example is when God took from the side of Adam a rib to make his bride, Eve. This foreshadows when on Calvary Jesus' was pierced in His side by a spear so His "bride" (the Church) could be formed. We are "bone of His bones, and flesh of His flesh". Intellectually, that understanding may not meet the rigorous criteria of exegetical analysis, nevertheless it resonates so deeply within my soul that I know it is true, with or without examining it closely with my mental faculties.

And the danger with what you're saying is I can come back and say, when the Jews said, "Let His blood be on our head," this was a justification for the Holocaust. I can't prove it intellectually, but it resonates so deeply within my soul that I know it's true.

People can come up with beautiful interpretations when they abandon the intellect, but it doesn't make them accurate. You can say that this is true to you, but if there is no intellectual basis behind your interpretation, you have to accept the extremist positions as well.

This is why exegesis is handy - when done properly, it's nearly impossible to thrust bias into the text. Even if people do come to a disagreement, after legitimately looking at all sides of the issue, it usually occurs on a non-important doctrine (such as pre-trib vs post-trib, or predestination vs free-will). When it is done improperly, we can point out where it was done incorrectly and seek to correct that portion. If we accept your view and go with, "But when I turn of my intellect, I still have meaning from these scriptures that resonates within my soul!", then we also have to accept dangerous interpretations. There is no way to arbitrarily accept that which is beautiful but deny that which is ugly - there is no way to determine which is which if we remove the intellect. Once the intellect is removed, everything because experiential or existential, thus subjective and not absolute.

[methinkshe]

What I'm really talking about are "ways" of knowing. How do you know when you meet your wife that she is the one for you? You just know!

A marriage that has not been established with some form of the intellect is a marriage that will end.

People love their spouse, not because "they just know," but for other good reasons (when you probe them). Love requires that we use both our emotions and intellect - emotions and feelings are subject to change, the intellect will remain stable in times of trouble, to remind you that you have made a commitment to this person.

If you abandon the intellect, you destroy the spirit of man. If you dichotomize the intellect, you destroy the spirit of man.

There are truths in the Bible that I cannot prove to anyone else's satisfaction intellectually, but they are very real to me.

Then they are worthless. If you can't prove them, or give evidence, then they mean nothing to the outside world, and ergo are worthless.

One example is when God took from the side of Adam a rib to make his bride, Eve. This foreshadows when on Calvary Jesus' was pierced in His side by a spear so His "bride" (the Church) could be formed. We are "bone of His bones, and flesh of His flesh". Intellectually, that understanding may not meet the rigorous criteria of exegetical analysis, nevertheless it resonates so deeply within my soul that I know it is true, with or without examining it closely with my mental faculties.

And the danger with what you're saying is I can come back and say, when the Jews said, "Let His blood be on our head," this was a justification for the Holocaust. I can't prove it intellectually, but it resonates so deeply within my soul that I know it's true.

People can come up with beautiful interpretations when they abandon the intellect, but it doesn't make them accurate. You can say that this is true to you, but if there is no intellectual basis behind your interpretation, you have to accept the extremist positions as well.

This is why exegesis is handy - when done properly, it's nearly impossible to thrust bias into the text. Even if people do come to a disagreement, after legitimately looking at all sides of the issue, it usually occurs on a non-important doctrine (such as pre-trib vs post-trib, or predestination vs free-will). When it is done improperly, we can point out where it was done incorrectly and seek to correct that portion. If we accept your view and go with, "But when I turn of my intellect, I still have meaning from these scriptures that resonates within my soul!", then we also have to accept dangerous interpretations. There is no way to arbitrarily accept that which is beautiful but deny that which is ugly - there is no way to determine which is which if we remove the intellect. Once the intellect is removed, everything because experiential or existential, thus subjective and not absolute.

Well said. I totally agree. "Leave your mind at the church door" is one of the most dangerous invitations that has ever confronted the church and I grieve that so many are falling for this temptation of Satan.

Ruth

Ruth

[firehill]

and do you love intellectually?

What I'm really talking about are "ways" of knowing. How do you know when you meet your wife that she is the one for you? You just know!

There are truths in the Bible that I cannot prove to anyone else's satisfaction intellectually, but they are very real to me. One example is when God took from the side of Adam a rib to make his bride, Eve. This foreshadows when on Calvary Jesus' was pierced in His side by a spear so His "bride" (the Church) could be formed. We are "bone of His bones, and flesh of His flesh". Intellectually, that understanding may not meet the rigorous criteria of exegetical analysis, nevertheless it resonates so deeply within my soul that I know it is true, with or without examining it closely with my mental faculties.

Way to go! This especialy brings to mind Eph5 wherein being members as individuals of his body is brought up after Paul speaks of the church being Christ's body. At the closing of the chapter Paul ties this in with the creation of woman having come from man (his side, bone and flesh) by his quoting Genesis 2:24, for this reason a man shall leave his father and mother etc and the two shall become one. Is it a mystery? Not to all.

[Guest shiloh357]

One thing that needs to be borne out is that when a figure of speech is used, the Bible tells us. The Bible is obvious in its employment of figurative devices. Determining the plain truth behind the figure is what hermeneutics is for. We use it every day in regular life, and we need it when we read the Scriptures.

Hidden meanings are something I personally have little to no use for, because they are usually subjective and agenda-driven.

If there is something hidden, then it is not in the Bible. God, I do not believe, works in hidden meanings. If there is something God does not want us to know, He would not tempt us by putting it in the Bible. There is spiritual illumination/truth in the Bible that appears to be "hidden" only because we have either not dug it up or not at the place spiritually that we are able to understand or perceive it.

The truth of Scripture is not elusive, nor does it hide in dark corners.

The Lord may minister a passage to you that meets a certain need in your life, and that is fine. As long as people don't go treating these things as "interpretations" there is no problem.