The Hypocrisy of Exegesis

[Muskokaman]

After some recent debates in forums lately I have come to a conclusion on Exegesis of the scriptures.

1 Jesus never used Exegesis as a tool for teaching the word. If you can produce 1 piece of evidence to support this please bring it forward.
2Exegesis is the language of the mind and word used to dissect the scriptures into understandable parables or definitions of meaning of phrases found in the bible.
3One has to ask oneself of how many exegesis's do we read today in our modern bibles vs the books of the early church fathers and their original writings.
4the problem with this is if one person makes a mistake in interpretation anywhere in the historical line of the writings of the bible yet through strength of character admits his own thoughts upon the teachings and propounds them as doctrine itself it is not hard to see how denominational fracturing takes place in the centuries to follow.
5When and if the heresies of these doctrines is brought to light however because of their longevity in use with the scriptures they become as indistinguishable among the words and meanings of phrases they were first used to expound on.

Conclusion: Do not use exegesis as a form of understanding the nuances of the bible rather repeated use of the Scripture Alone and a good understanding of the Language in which it is being delivered.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

After some recent debates in forums lately I have come to a conclusion on Exegesis of the scriptures.

1 Jesus never used Exegesis as a tool for teaching the word. If you can produce 1 piece of evidence to support this please bring it forward.
2Exegesis is the language of the mind and word used to dissect the scriptures into understandable parables or definitions of meaning of phrases found in the bible.
3One has to ask oneself of how many exegesis's do we read today in our modern bibles vs the books of the early church fathers and their original writings.
4the problem with this is if one person makes a mistake in interpretation anywhere in the historical line of the writings of the bible yet through strength of character admits his own thoughts upon the teachings and propounds them as doctrine itself it is not hard to see how denominational fracturing takes place in the centuries to follow.
5When and if the heresies of these doctrines is brought to light however because of their longevity in use with the scriptures they become as indistinguishable among the words and meanings of phrases they were first used to expound on.

Conclusion: Do not use exegesis as a form of understanding the nuances of the bible rather repeated use of the Scripture Alone and a good understanding of the Language in which it is being delivered.

Actually, apologetics and hermeneutics, etc. began very early with the likes of Justin Martyr and others defending the faith against attacks from Gnosticism and other opposition. Your hero, Arius, was an apologist and exegete.

ALL doctrine (teaching) comes from exegesis. Some is just general perusal of native-tongue translation terminology instead of actual stewardship of study and revelation by the Spirit.

Hypocrisy is adamantly holding a position based on perception and opinion rather than yielding to the inspired text led by the Spirit.

 

[Muskokaman]

Actually, apologetics and hermeneutics, etc. began very early with the likes of Justin Martyr and others defending the faith against attacks from Gnosticism and other opposition. Your hero, Arius, was an apologist and exegete.

ALL doctrine (teaching) comes from exegesis. Some is just general perusal of native-tongue translation terminology instead of actual stewardship of study and revelation by the Spirit.

Hypocrisy is adamantly holding a position based on perception and opinion rather than yielding to the inspired text led by the Spirit.

YOU ARE FULL OF **** Mr. 161 IQ you use words like the old worm himself!

You are also wrong. Arius was never an Apologist thats what your EOC's lying doctrine has put forth!

Your definition of Hypocrisy is wrong as well check out a dictionary once in a while!

Only False doctrine comes from exegesis

 

[Strangelove]

So...Musky....your saying just read the words and....thats it? Don't try and explain to yourself what they mean or analyze them?

Your starting to sound like these prophet dudes.

What would be better to partake in contemplative prayer of the texts?

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

YOU ARE FULL OF **** Mr. 161 IQ you use words like the old worm himself!

You are also wrong. Arius was never an Apologist thats what your EOC's lying doctrine has put forth!

Your definition of Hypocrisy is wrong as well check out a dictionary once in a while!

Only False doctrine comes from exegesis

Is that what your two whole days of reading about Arius has wrought?

The EOC thing is very humorous, BTW. It's baffling, though, since they would consider me anathema.

And false doctrine CAN come from incorrect exegesis, but much more from eisegesis like yours.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Hey, Musky... You're in great company. The JOHOs hold a form of Arianism, too.

 

[Muskokaman]

So...Musky....your saying just read the words and....thats it? Don't try and explain to yourself what they mean or analyze them?

Your starting to sound like these prophet dudes.

What would be better to partake in contemplative prayer of the texts?

Look it Doc. the message of truth is still very much in the Bible.(how do you think I found what I put before you)

I will never claim to be a prophet!

I do claim to be a man of understanding though and the scripture quoted by me you have yet to refute by any other scripture.

Many people here misquote scripture to defend their positions in an argument over said scripture and get their backs up ...............RIDICULOUS.............
I am using scripture at face value nothing more. old Martin Luther was right about one thing.
SOLA SCRIPTURA is an excellent way of determining authenticity. It's too bad many people are so daft that they do not even understand their own native Language.

 

[Strangelove]

Look it Doc. the message of truth is still very much in the Bible.(how do you think I found what I put before you)

I will never claim to be a prophet!

I do claim to be a man of understanding though and the scripture quoted by me you have yet to refute by any other scripture.

Many people here misquote scripture to defend their positions in an argument over said scripture and get their backs up ...............RIDICULOUS.............
I am using scripture at face value nothing more. old Martin Luther was right about one thing.
SOLA SCRIPTURA is an excellent way of determining authenticity. It's too bad many people are so daft that they do not even understand their own native Language.

What scripture?

Theres no scripture in this thread?

 

[Muskokaman]

What scripture?

Theres no scripture in this thread?

Look up Doc way up

There ya go back in the thread a ways

 

[AnandaHya]

ex·e·ge·sis (ks-jss)
n. pl. ex·e·ge·ses (-sz)
Critical explanation or analysis, especially of a text.

hy·poc·ri·sy (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.

hypocrisy - definition of hypocrisy by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

EXEGESIS, or more precisely, Biblical Exegesis, is a theological term used to describe an approach to interpreting a passage in the Bible by critical analysis. In contemporary usage Exegesis can mean a critical explanation of any text, whether in the Bible or not.

Proper exegesis includes using the context around the passage, comparing it with other parts of the Bible, and applying an understanding of the language and customs of the time of the writing, in an attempt to understand clearly what the original writer intended to convey. In other words, it is trying to "pull out" of the passage the meaning inherent in it. The opposite of exegesis is eisegesis, which is a person's particular interpretation of scriptures that are not evident in the text itself.

At least two different forms of Biblical exegesis exist. They are called Revealed and Rational exegesis. Revealed exegesis believes the Holy Spirit inspired the Biblical authors of the texts and therefore the words in the Bible convey God's divine revelation to man. Rational exegesis believes that the original writers of the Bible's books used their own creativity and inspiration (apart from God) to write what they did. In short, some study the Bible believing that God himself directly inspired its writers while others approach the Bible as a collection of stories, fables, myths, etc. brought to life through the creativity and imagination of man.

Definition of Christian Terms: EXEGESIS

mmmm playing loosely with words.....

 

[AnandaHya]

After some recent debates in forums lately I have come to a conclusion on Exegesis of the scriptures.

1 Jesus never used Exegesis as a tool for teaching the word. If you can produce 1 piece of evidence to support this please bring it forward. when he told the Saducees about the resurrection. that was an example of Exegesis

2Exegesis is the language of the mind and word used to dissect the scriptures into understandable parables or definitions of meaning of phrases found in the bible. no see definitions above


3One has to ask oneself of how many exegesis's do we read today in our modern bibles vs the books of the early church fathers and their original writings. ??? that statement doesn't make any sense


4the problem with this is if one person makes a mistake in interpretation anywhere in the historical line of the writings of the bible yet through strength of character admits his own thoughts upon the teachings and propounds them as doctrine itself it is not hard to see how denominational fracturing takes place in the centuries to follow. mmm point?


5When and if the heresies of these doctrines is brought to light however because of their longevity in use with the scriptures they become as indistinguishable among the words and meanings of phrases they were first used to expound on.

Conclusion: Do not use exegesis as a form of understanding the nuances of the bible rather repeated use of the Scripture Alone and a good understanding of the Language in which it is being delivered.

false dicotomy.

mmmm....scripture?

getting a little emotional? maybe take a couple deep breathes , say a prayer?

 

[jonathanbchristian]

I have seen alot of bad exegesis myself. It's wrong to change the Bible or try to explain it away using history studies and bad exegesis. Most of what I have seen is an attempt to say that the Scriptures are not for us but for someone else. This is wrong. 2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" This verse is exactly what people with bad exegesis are against. They are usually not willing to be corrected by the Scriptures but use exegesis to explain the Scriptures do not apply to them.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Exegesis is the process of seeking to understand what a text means or communicates on its own. It's not hypocritical unless the one doing the exegesis engages in hypocritical exegesis.

Interestingly, Eisegesis (a different word) is generally a derogatory term used to designate the practice of imposing a preconceived or foreign meaning onto a text, even if that meaning could not have been originally intended at the time of its writing and so would probably have been the word the author of this thread should have chosen, in my opinion, to make their point instead of exegesis which is not inherently hypocritical in and of itself.

Probably the most common exegesis is Canonical exegesis which endeavors to determine what a given passage means not only in the immediate context of its date, authorship and setting but in the wider context of the canon in which it was ultimately incorporated. This is a valid quest, but it does presuppose the completion of the canonizing process.

 

[Muskokaman]

ex·e·ge·sis (ks-jss)
n. pl. ex·e·ge·ses (-sz)
Critical explanation or analysis, especially of a text.

hy·poc·ri·sy (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.

hypocrisy - definition of hypocrisy by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

EXEGESIS, or more precisely, Biblical Exegesis, is a theological term used to describe an approach to interpreting a passage in the Bible by critical analysis. In contemporary usage Exegesis can mean a critical explanation of any text, whether in the Bible or not.

Proper exegesis includes using the context around the passage, comparing it with other parts of the Bible, and applying an understanding of the language and customs of the time of the writing, in an attempt to understand clearly what the original writer intended to convey. In other words, it is trying to "pull out" of the passage the meaning inherent in it. The opposite of exegesis is eisegesis, which is a person's particular interpretation of scriptures that are not evident in the text itself.

At least two different forms of Biblical exegesis exist. They are called Revealed and Rational exegesis. Revealed exegesis believes the Holy Spirit inspired the Biblical authors of the texts and therefore the words in the Bible convey God's divine revelation to man. Rational exegesis believes that the original writers of the Bible's books used their own creativity and inspiration (apart from God) to write what they did. In short, some study the Bible believing that God himself directly inspired its writers while others approach the Bible as a collection of stories, fables, myths, etc. brought to life through the creativity and imagination of man.

Definition of Christian Terms: EXEGESIS

mmmm playing loosely with words.....

Ask yourself who defined the terms?

I chose my words carefully and have prayed much over this especially lately Ananda and every time I pray another passage comes to me in some form or other (or so it would seem) my arguments are as much to help me learn the truth of scripture as they are focused on The Way The Truth And the Light!
What is Gods first creation in Genesis1?

What did Jesus say?"I am the way the truth and the Light none shall come unto the father but by me"

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Exegesis is the process of seeking to understand what a text means or communicates on its own. It's not hypocritical unless the one doing the exegesis engages in hypocritical exegesis.

Interestingly, Eisegesis (a different word) is generally a derogatory term used to designate the practice of imposing a preconceived or foreign meaning onto a text, even if that meaning could not have been originally intended at the time of its writing and so would probably have been the word the author of this thread should have chosen, in my opinion, to make their point instead of exegesis which is not inherently hypocritical in and of itself.

Probably the most common exegesis is Canonical exegesis which endeavors to determine what a given passage means not only in the immediate context of its date, authorship and setting but in the wider context of the canon in which it was ultimately incorporated. This is a valid quest, but it does presuppose the completion of the canonizing process.

Exactly. A part of my earlier point.

Exegesis is "critical" analysis of the text, not a superfluous understanding. Original language texts are not only appropriate, but preferable.

 

[Muskokaman]

Exegesis is the process of seeking to understand what a text means or communicates on its own. It's not hypocritical unless the one doing the exegesis engages in hypocritical exegesis.

Interestingly, Eisegesis (a different word) is generally a derogatory term used to designate the practice of imposing a preconceived or foreign meaning onto a text, even if that meaning could not have been originally intended at the time of its writing and so would probably have been the word the author of this thread should have chosen, in my opinion, to make their point instead of exegesis which is not inherently hypocritical in and of itself.

Probably the most common exegesis is Canonical exegesis which endeavors to determine what a given passage means not only in the immediate context of its date, authorship and setting but in the wider context of the canon in which it was ultimately incorporated. This is a valid quest, but it does presuppose the completion of the canonizing process.

Thank you AOK you are absolutely correct I should have used Eisegesis little late for the eraser though on the thread title I will try to be more accurate in the future

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

Thank you AOK you are absolutely correct I should have used Eisegesis little late for the eraser though on the thread title I will try to be more accurate in the future

Ummm... Ya think?!

Huge difference in exegesis in eisegesis, since they're essentially opposites.

Massive credibility loss...

(Normal for a JOHO.)

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Ah I see now. Thanks for the correction guys. Makes sense when you say it like that .

 

[Muskokaman]

Ummm... Ya think?!

Huge difference in exegesis in eisegesis, since they're essentially opposites.

Massive credibility loss...

(Normal for a JOHO.)

And the worm speaks again!

I ain't going for popularity here could care less about that Just the truth and I do not see it in you sorry!

 

[AnandaHya]

Ah I see now. Thanks for the correction guys. Makes sense when you say it like that .

yep now back to your regularly scheduled mud slinging....