Explain what this means: "A text, without a context, is a pretext".
- Thread starter tantalon
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
not sure something can be called "too much" without a context.
some contexts allow for, and even require, infinity.
Well I read up on where the quote came from a Dr. Carlson, though would be nice if the OP would provide some of the stuff instead of having to hunt it down.
When stated in a way that is intended to be associated with the Bible, it basically means that - an interpretation of a verse or passage of scripture that is made without regard to (or, leaving out) the context of that verse or passage - may as well be considered to be a contrived deception to hide the real meaning or proper interpretation of it.
It is simply a fancy way of saying that you cannot properly interpret scripture without including the context in the basis of the interpretation.
The "specific subject" (as you put it) is the 'subject' (or, 'topic') of the text. All of the 'details' that are associated with it - as they relate to it in the text - are the context.
It simply means that one cannot randomly pull Bible verses from here and there and make up a doctrine. It includes *rightly dividing* or correctly interpreting Scripture (where it needs to be interpreted). Most of the Bible is plain and clear, but unless the Holy Spirit reveals the truth behind the words, it leads to confusion.
Biblical interpretation must begin with a study of the text within the context in which it is written. Then from that study of the text one is able to gain spiritual truths to live by.
The opposite approach is taking a set of doctrines that one believes as the starting point. Then that person will go back to Scripture verses to find that doctrine and impose the doctrine on the text.
Never accept or believe any doctrine that does not have clear Scripture verses that teach that doctrine within the context in which they are written.
The opposite approach is taking a set of doctrines that one believes as the starting point. Then that person will go back to Scripture verses to find that doctrine and impose the doctrine on the text.
Never accept or believe any doctrine that does not have clear Scripture verses that teach that doctrine within the context in which they are written.
Don't know about him but I do it because the person posting such information FAILS to give proper credit to the person who ACTUALLY came up with the comment.
That's called Plagiarism, and that's ILLEGAL
In this case, let's limit it to two, too or to (not 2) and let the context determine which one (1) you should lean-to.
R
