> General Discussions
Was "the rich man in hell"
Steve Crook:
--- Quote ---Do you know what exegesis is? If you ignore or even downplay context as well as the delving into Scripture to uncover its meaning then you have no right to speak on Scripture whatsoever.
This is why authorities do not post on forums such as these. They find it a waste of time for the very reason that you posted above.
Brandon
--- End quote ---
Guess not? Does it take a seminary school for that? Or is that a cemetery school? I'm so stupid I can't tell the difference. Actually scirpture EXPLAINS scripture, and the LETTER OF THE LAW KILLS; whereas, the SPIRIT brings LIFE.
Here, I wonder if this silly little man can find out what exegesis is? Simple Google search: exegesis
Exegesis (from the Greek ἐξηγεῖσθαι 'to lead out') involves an extensive and critical interpretation of a text, especially of a holy scripture, such as of the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, the Talmud, the Midrash, the Qur'an, etc. An exegete is a practitioner of this science, and the adjectival form is exegetic.
The word exegesis means "to draw the meaning out of" a given text. Exegesis may be contrasted with eisegesis, which means to read one's own interpretation into a given text. In general, exegesis presumes an attempt to view the text objectively, while eisegesis implies more subjectivity.
Traditional exegesis requires the following: analysis of significant words in the text in regard to translation; examination of the general historical and cultural context, confirmation of the limits of the passage, and lastly, examination of the context within the text. [1]
Although the most widely-known exegeses concern themselves with Christian, Jewish and Islamic books, analyses also exist of books of other religions.
Main article: Biblical hermeneutics
According to some forms of Christianity, two different forms of exegesis exist: revealed and rational.
Revealed exegesis considers that the Holy Ghost inspired the authors of the scriptural texts, and so the words of those texts convey a divine revelation
Rational exegesis bases its operation on the idea that the authors have their own inspiration, so their works result from human intelligence
----------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of argue with carnal minded men about carnal minded things, I'd rather just let the Lord speak for me instead: Thus sayeth the Lord:
(1Co 2:14) But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
(1Co 3:19) For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
Is that a good enough definition?
broken:
--- Quote from: Steve Crook ---
--- Quote ---Do you know what exegesis is? If you ignore or even downplay context as well as the delving into Scripture to uncover its meaning then you have no right to speak on Scripture whatsoever.
This is why authorities do not post on forums such as these. They find it a waste of time for the very reason that you posted above.
Brandon
--- End quote ---
Guess not? Does it take a seminary school for that? Or is that a cemetery school? I'm so stupid I can't tell the difference. Actually scirpture EXPLAINS scripture, and the LETTER OF THE LAW KILLS; whereas, the SPIRIT brings LIFE.
Here, I wonder if this silly little man can find out what exegesis is? Simple Google search: exegesis
Exegesis (from the Greek ?????????? 'to lead out') involves an extensive and critical interpretation of a text, especially of a holy scripture, such as of the Old and New Testaments of the Bible, the Talmud, the Midrash, the Qur'an, etc. An exegete is a practitioner of this science, and the adjectival form is exegetic.
The word exegesis means "to draw the meaning out of" a given text. Exegesis may be contrasted with eisegesis, which means to read one's own interpretation into a given text. In general, exegesis presumes an attempt to view the text objectively, while eisegesis implies more subjectivity.
Traditional exegesis requires the following: analysis of significant words in the text in regard to translation; examination of the general historical and cultural context, confirmation of the limits of the passage, and lastly, examination of the context within the text. [1]
Although the most widely-known exegeses concern themselves with Christian, Jewish and Islamic books, analyses also exist of books of other religions.
Main article: Biblical hermeneutics
According to some forms of Christianity, two different forms of exegesis exist: revealed and rational.
Revealed exegesis considers that the Holy Ghost inspired the authors of the scriptural texts, and so the words of those texts convey a divine revelation
Rational exegesis bases its operation on the idea that the authors have their own inspiration, so their works result from human intelligence
----------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of argue with carnal minded men about carnal minded things, I'd rather just let the Lord speak for me instead: Thus sayeth the Lord:
(1Co 2:14) But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
(1Co 3:19) For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
Is that a good enough definition?
--- End quote ---
Way to google it up there, bud.
Yeah, you got a fine definition of exegesis, but how you can call it carnal I still do not understand. Biblical interpretation is about understanding the text, the words used, what they meant to those who heard them and what they mean in light of other Scripture. Without those elements, our interpretations are seriously flawed. The Bible was written to a people in a time; if we ignore that, then we downplay the timing of God and wisdom of God in delivering His word at the time He saw fit. What about, "study to show yourself approved." How about loving God with all of your mind as well as everything else.
I guess I just really don't understand your rationale. It seems to me that you are claiming that those who engage in true exegesis are guilty of using their mind too much and not relying on the Spirit enough. However, pure exegesis is about looking at the whole of Scripture and understanding it in its historical and social contexts, pairing those understandings to find the deeper, universal meaning, and then applying that to our lives. It seems that if we are dealing with something as powerful and true as God's Word, we would want to understand it as deeply as possible.
Brandon
P.S. - When you look up a word in a lexicon or quote someone who has published some paper on a subject on which you speak, are you not advocating at least some form of scholarship - especially with regards to lexicons? It seems you have a double standard.
P.S.S. - Wherever you got your definition of "revealed" verses "rational" exegesis, they are wrong. Rational exegesis does not assume that the authors were under their own interpretation and therefore not inspired by the Spirit. Rather, rational exegesis is philosophically thinking through the words of Scripture and taking the claims and assertations to their logical end.
broken:
--- Quote from: Mickyd ---
--- Quote from: broken ---May I ask how exegesis is a carnal thing?
Brandon
--- End quote ---
When you seak a critical interpretation or an explanation of a Bible verse in the "Letter" of interpretation, in what other way can it be other than carnal?
--- End quote ---
1. What do you mean by "Letter?"
2. How do you define "carnal?"
Brandon
Steve Crook:
I googled it and the first link was from wikipedia when I typed exegesis.
broken:
--- Quote from: Steve Crook ---I googled it and the first link was from wikipedia when I typed exegesis.
--- End quote ---
I must apologize. I have seemed really harsh in the past few posts. I don't mean to come off that way; that's the inconvenience and shortcoming of this form of communication. I just really want to understand where you are coming from.
Wikipedia tends to be a pretty good source for general information. Perhaps there is a branch of "rational exegesis" that believes what you read on Wikipedia, but the more conservative branches tend to use "rational exegesis" in the manner I described; at least that has been my experience.
Brandon
P.S. - Be careful "googling" for information; the internet is full of shoddy workmanship and interpretation, as well as shoddy scholarship.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version