Eisegesis question

[DennyGabriel]

Recently, I overheard a conversation in which a preacher was being gently rebuked by a friend for what he considered to be a "mishandling the Word of God." This preacher used a portion of a verse to support a position relative to the political arena. His preacher friend quickly pointed out that the verse had nothing to do with politicians but rather with false teachers.

I understand that each passage has but one literal "interpretation," but can have many different "applications." My question that I pose for discussion is simply this, "Does using an application of a verse instead of the literal interpretation constitute mishandling of the Word of God?"

 

[Crabtownboy]

Recently, I overheard a conversation in which a preacher was being gently rebuked by a friend for what he considered to be a "mishandling the Word of God." This preacher used a portion of a verse to support a position relative to the political arena. His preacher friend quickly pointed out that the verse had nothing to do with politicians but rather with false teachers.

I understand that each passage has but one literal "interpretation," but can have many different "applications." My question that I pose for discussion is simply this, "Does using an application of a verse instead of the literal interpretation constitute mishandling of the Word of God?"

By selective half-quoting and quoting out of context you can prove anything you want to prove ... so, yes, it is mishandling the Word of God IMHO.

 

[Old Union Brother]

By selective half-quoting and quoting out of context you can prove anything you want to prove ... so, yes, it is mishandling the Word of God IMHO.

I agree. A verse of scripture should be taken in its complete form. Leaving one or two words out can change the entire meaning of the scripture.

 

[kyredneck]

Recently, I overheard a conversation in which a preacher was being gently rebuked by a friend for what he considered to be a "mishandling the Word of God." This preacher used a portion of a verse to support a position relative to the political arena. His preacher friend quickly pointed out that the verse had nothing to do with politicians but rather with false teachers.

I understand that each passage has but one literal "interpretation," but can have many different "applications." My question that I pose for discussion is simply this, "Does using an application of a verse instead of the literal interpretation constitute mishandling of the Word of God?"

This thread is deja vu to me. It seems there was one identical to this posted a while back.

[edit] Ah, here it is:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=68145

So, what's up?

 

[David Lamb]

I agree. A verse of scripture should be taken in its complete form. Leaving one or two words out can change the entire meaning of the scripture.

And even quoting a complete verse can result in quoting out of context. As I understand it, verses and chapters were added to the bible many years after the completion of the Scriptures. If I remember correctly, chapters were added in the 13th century, and chapters in the 16th.

 

[HankD]

Here is an example of a passage when taken out of context is easily misunderstood/misapplied.

James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

Context:
Faith causes works as illustrated by the actions of Abraham and Rahab who first believed God and then acted upon that belief.

HankD

 

[ktn4eg]

I agree. A verse of scripture should be taken in its complete form. Leaving one or two words out can change the entire meaning of the scripture.

Good example: "There is no God." A direct quote from Psalm 53:1!

(Of course I left off the first part of that verse and the following sentence.)

 

[MNJacob]

And the same is repeated in Psalm 14: "A fool says in his heart, "No God.""

 

[kyredneck]

Methinks this thread has been plagiarized (entertainment for a troll?):

Recently, I overheard a conversation in which a preacher was being gently rebuked by a friend for what he considered to be a "mishandling the Word of God." This preacher used a portion of a verse to support a position relative to the political arena. His preacher friend quickly pointed out that the verse had nothing to do with politicians but rather with false teachers.

I understand that each passage has but one literal "interpretation," but can have many different "applications." My question that I pose for discussion is simply this, "Does using an application of a verse instead of the literal interpretation constitute mishandling of the Word of God?"

Recently, I overheard a conversation in which a preacher was being gently rebuked by a friend for what he considered to be a "mishandling the Word of God." This preacher used a portion of a verse to support a position relative to the political arena. His preacher friend quickly pointed out that the verse had nothing to do with politicians but rather with false teachers.

I understand that each passage has but one literal "interpretation," but can have many different "applications." My question that I pose for discussion is simply this, "Does using an application of a verse instead of the literal interpretation constitute mishandling of the Word of God?"

Pastor_Bob would be the originator at:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=68145

 

[Old Union Brother]

kyredneck, me thinks you are right

 

[webdog]

Denny, why would you quote Pastor Bob's entire post word for word and not mention it was already asked on another thread?

 

[kyredneck]

IMO, if you all were having a good discussion here, go on with it. I seriously doubt the troll will return. It's a shame it's not on Pastor_Bob's OP though.