Study of the Word of God comes with an incredible responsibility to be
true to that Word. One cannot
merely “come up” with “new ideas” and then attempt to find Scriptural passages
that seem to substantiate or validate those ideas. One must conduct an exegetical study of the Word and intentionally
avoid eisegesis.
These are two opposing means of studying the Scripture. Exegesis is the exposition or
explanation of a text based on a careful, objective analysis, which would
include context, word study, and looking at the Scripture in light of other
Scripture. Conclusions are arrived
at by a thorough examination of the Biblical text. The opposite approach to studying the Word is eisegesis, in which
the interpretation of a passage is based on a subjective, non-analytical
reading. The word eisegesis means, “the interpretation of a text (as of the Bible)
by reading into it one's own ideas”[1]
which means the interpreter inserts his own ideas into the text, making it mean
whatever he wants it to mean.
Andrew Farley seems to have done just that—he has come
up with ideas that sound really good at first blush, but when compared with the
Word, they fail. When he refers to
Scripture to “back up” his ideas, there is an obvious disconnect in the
majority of instances. Rather than
conduct an exegetical study of the text, Farley has conducted an eisegetical
study—forcing the Scripture to fit his personal preconceived biases and
notions.
NEXT: Farley Part III: The Gospel
No comments:
Post a Comment