glfredrick
New Member
Yes we all know that if a Calvinist does not agree with a non cal on the interpretation of a particular passage then it just goes to prove that the non call is only proof texting rather than honestly exegeting scripture.
For some, perhaps. But to generalize this just makes you come off as snarky and having an ax to grind.
Overall, I have failed to see anywhere as much scriptural exegesis among those who hold an alternate doctrine as I have in those who hold to the Doctrines of Grace. I would LOVE to be proven wrong, but so far (and I can do another poll of threads) I belive I am on the right track on this issue.
Proper exegesis, including a proper hermeneutic "in context" rarely allows the passages that are often cited in favor of a more anthopocentric point of view to really infer what they are supposed to infer. That comes from any number of reasons, one of which is that the actual sentence in the original language may not even be the same structure or punctuation as it is in the English in order to make it readable. Pericope may cross sentence lines, passage lines, even chapter lines in the original text which gives a different emphasis to the verse at hand once understood in accordance with what was written.
An example of this is fresh at mind for me as I preach through 1 Peter. In chapter 1, the original Greek has ONE sentence that starts in 1:2 and extends to 1:12. ONE SENTENCE with ONE main subject and ONE main verb. Yet, in English, that passage is divided up into multiple sentences, each with a subject and a verb. If one read that in a "proof text" (as in, "See, the Bible says...") sort of way one could very easily miss the main point of that pericope and arrive at a false sense of what Peter wrote. Only through careful exegesis and diagram of the original text can one truly understand what was written and inspired by God rather than what one sees because of the translation (and all the translations have sentenceS).
But, the argument goes, "I have no capacity in Greek." "You are saying that I must have Greek in order to read my Bible and follow Jesus!" To that I say hogwash. Any decent commentary opened alongside an English Bible of choice will point this out from some scholar who devoted his life to learning what others either cannot or will not learn, and the more one disavows the use of these tools to assist with the understanding of the Text in its original language the more that same one actually desires to make the Word say whatever he or she wishes, for it SAYS ONE THING and it is our task, no -- commandment -- to "rightly divide the Word of Truth." In other words, to KNOW what the text says -- period. Once there, we can then "infer" some position or another depending on what is written, but ONE THING is in fact written. Therein lies the error of SO many who believe themselves to actually be students of the Word.
