Dishonest handling of God's Word

[The Biblicist]

There is a reoccuring habit among many of the posters that contributes to simply dishonest handling of the scriptures. I call it ESCAPISM.
It is the habit of FLEEING the immediate context of any given text IF the facts of the immediate context condemn their intepretation. This turns into an endless cycle because when you follow them to where they escape they do the exact same thing again when the immediate context condemns their interpretation of the text they fled to.
Proper exegesis deals and defines a text by its immediate context FIRST and only when the immediate context does not provide SUFFICIENT data to do that, then and only then do we then proceed to a WIDER Biblical context where the same subject matter is discussed.
If this principle is not followed, then what follows is a never ending JUMP and PIT cycle or what I call ESCAPISM so that no context is fairly dealt with.
These same posters practice other eisgetical methods such as pitting scripture against scripture, pitting parables/spiritualizations against precepts and principles. These things are the NORM for a few on this forum and they know who they are.

 

[Iconoclast]

There is a reoccuring habit among many of the posters that contributes to simply dishonest handling of the scriptures. I call it ESCAPISM.
It is the habit of FLEEING the immediate context of any given text IF the facts of the immediate context condemn their intepretation. This turns into an endless cycle because when you follow them to where they escape they do the exact same thing again when the immediate context condemns their interpretation of the text they fled to.
Proper exegesis deals and defines a text by its immediate context FIRST and only when the immediate context does not provide SUFFICIENT data to do that, then and only then do we then proceed to a WIDER Biblical context where the same subject matter is discussed.
If this principle is not followed, then what follows is a never ending JUMP and PIT cycle or what I call ESCAPISM so that no context is fairly dealt with.
These same posters practice other eisgetical methods such as pitting scripture against scripture, pitting parables/spiritualizations against precepts and principles. These things are the NORM for a few on this forum and they know who they are.

Yes....we know who they are also:laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[preacher4truth]

Yes, we know Dr. Obvious! (intended humor) :type: :thumbsup: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[Robert Snow]

[attack snipped]

 

[webdog]

This thread is funny coming from The Eisegesist.

 

[The Biblicist]

This thread is funny coming from The Eisegesist.

An example please?

 

[The Biblicist]

I believe every Calvinist is dishonest in his handling the Word of God. I don't think this is done deliberately, at least by most of them, but this is still the case.

Example where I have done this please?

 

[Rippon]

I believe every Calvinist is dishonest in his handling the Word of God. I don't think this is done deliberately, at least by most of them, but this is still the case.

How can dishonesty not be done deliberately?!

 

[DrJamesAch]

How can dishonesty not be done deliberately?!

You mean a Calvinist can't figure out how something can be dishonest and yet determined at the same time? :smilewinkgrin:

 

[Robert Snow]

How can dishonesty not be done deliberately?!

The doctrine of Calvinism is dishonest when it comes to the Bible, thanks to that gnostic Augustine. Those who fall into it's trap do not do so deliberately. They are usually lured there by well meaning, albeit wrong teachers and preachers.

 

[The Biblicist]

The doctrine of Calvinism is dishonest when it comes to the Bible, thanks to that gnostic Augustine. Those who fall into it's trap do not do so deliberately. They are usually lured there by well meaning, albeit wrong teachers and preachers.

Stay with the OP! Again, an example please where I have violated the rule stated in the OP. You did charge that every single one who holds to Calvinism is guilty of violating this rule - example where I have done this please or recant your universal charge.

 

[Robert Snow]

Stay with the OP! Again, an example please where I have violated the rule stated in the OP. You did charge that every single one who holds to Calvinism is guilty of violating this rule - example where I have done this please or recant your universal charge.

I will recant nothing!

 

[The Biblicist]

I will recant nothing!

Then stop lying because what you are claiming is a lie which you cannot demonstrate. Either give an example where I have been guilty of your claim or recant your claim because it is a self-evident lie if you can't support it.

 

[Robert Snow]

Then stop lying because what you are claiming is a lie which you cannot demonstrate. Either give an example where I have been guilty of your claim or recant your claim because it is a self-evident lie if you can't support it.

Are you unable to read? I stand by what I said.

I will not waste time proving what any student of the Bible should know, Calvinism is grounded in gnosticism introduced by Augustine.

It is obvious that anything I post will not be believed by you or those who agree with you. Therefore, I will not waste my time. If you want to think I am a liar, I really don't care.

 

[The Biblicist]

Are you unable to read? I stand by what I said.

I will not waste time proving what any student of the Bible should know, Calvinism is grounded in gnosticism introduced by Augustine.

Neither I or anyone on this forum quotes Ausgustine or his sources. We quote scripture period and provide unanswerable exegetical based facts. You guys run from my exegetical exposition of Romans 8:7-8. I cannot get any of you to simply deal with EXEGETICAL FACTS of the text. The same is true concerning my thread on Romans 7:15-25. No Augustinian quotations, gnostic sources but PURE UNDEFILED BIBLE GRAMMAR AND CONTEXT. So stop your lying.

 

[The Archangel]

Neither I or anyone on this forum quotes Ausgustine or his sources. We quote scripture period and provide unanswerable exegetical based facts. You guys run from my exegetical exposition of Romans 8:7-8. I cannot get any of you to simply deal with EXEGETICAL FACTS of the text. The same is true concerning my thread on Romans 7:15-25. No Augustinian quotations, gnostic sources but PURE UNDEFILED BIBLE GRAMMAR AND CONTEXT. So stop your lying.

You expect too much. Really, though, what should we expect from those who only argue from their indoctrination?

The Archangel

 

[The Biblicist]

You expect too much. Really, though, what should we expect from those who only argue from their indoctrination?

The Archangel

Yeah, but he full well knows he is being dishonest because he can't even supply an example and yet demand a universal application. That is simple dishonesty.

In contrast I give him TWO examples on this forum, TWO THREADS that demonstrate he is lying. No honesty, no objectivity which are both traits of a "seared conscience."

 

[DHK]

I will recant nothing!

1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

Then back up your charge with Scripture or bow out of the discussion.

 

[DHK]

Are you unable to read? I stand by what I said.

I will not waste time proving what any student of the Bible should know, Calvinism is grounded in gnosticism introduced by Augustine.

It is obvious that anything I post will not be believed by you or those who agree with you. Therefore, I will not waste my time. If you want to think I am a liar, I really don't care.

That's like saying all non-Cals have their doctrine based in the doctrine of the Albigenses (some of which is aberrant).
Prove your case that this is true of today's Calvinists.

 

[Iconoclast]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Snow View Post
I will recant nothing!

1 Peter 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

Then back up your charge with Scripture or bow out of the discussion.

Thank You DHK...!!:applause::applause:

Well C'mon RS.... help us out by actually proving what you protest and say that we do. DHK and I clash on several topics and yet he always man's up and makes a scriptural case for his point of view.
If anything...DHK would probably like to see you succeed in your quest.

if you make a valid case, we might disagree, but you might be surprised to find biblical agreement on more than you think. TRY using some scripture RS it might be good for your soul:thumbsup: