3 ways not to use greek in bible study

[Revmitchell]

1. Usage Trumps Etymology: Avoiding the Root Fallacy

"...No one does this in their native language, but many Christians do this very thing when studying the Bible. They look up Greek words in their Strong's Concordance, find the original Greek root, and conclude that they have found the word's "real" meaning. This is what Carson calls the "root fallacy."

2. Scholars Are Necessary: Avoiding the Cult of the Amateur

"...Baptist theologian John Dagg put it:

Translations, though made with uninspired human skill, are sufficient for those who have not access to the inspired original. Unlearned men will not be held accountable for a degree of light beyond what is granted to them; and the benevolence of God in making revelation has not endowed all with the gift of interpreting tongues. . . . God has seen it wiser and better to leave the members of Christ to feel the necessity of mutual sympathy and dependence, than to bestow every gift on every individual. He has bestowed the knowledge necessary for the translation of his word on a sufficient number of faithful men to answer the purpose of his benevolence. And the least accurate of the translations with which the common people are favored is full of divine truth and able to make wise to salvation."

3. Context Is King: Avoiding the Overload Fallacy

"...Here's what I mean by "reading it in its context": don't just zero in on one word. Read the entire sentence. Then read the entire paragraph. As a teacher once noted in a Sunday school class at my church, "Words shouldn't be read with blinders on." Most words don't have a "literal meaning" at all—rather, they have a range of possible meanings (the technical term is "semantic range"). That's why a dictionary usually lists several possible options. Only when a word is used in context does the precise meaning becomes clear."

http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/3-ways-not-to-use-greek-in-bible-study

 

[Zenas]

Good advice, although I'm not sure what John Dagg meant by "the inspired original."

 

[Van]

Folks who wish to dissuade actual bible study seemingly abound on this forum. For example, word meanings can change over time, so the initial meaning of a word may not be the intended meaning as used. But, on the other hand, to claim an inspired author uses the same word for various meanings is just as dubious a practice. When we look up the meaning or range of meanings in a lexicon, scholars have endeavored to present how the word is used in scripture. Thus to claim one of these historical meanings is not the intended meaning is simply liberalism 101.

Next, we have the claim we (non-experts) should not study what the experts say and decide which expert or school of thought seems most valid. The idea seems to be just listen to me, which is cultist and without merit.

When studying a verse or passage, one step is to identify the "key" words and phrases, and determine, as best we can what is the intended meaning. This is derived in part by looking at how the word is used elsewhere in scripture, particularly by the same author in the same book. In all cases, the word is considered as used contextually. What is not done is to say a word must mean this here and that there in order to support a man-made doctrine. That is not bible study, that is bible manipulation.

Bible study is not only good, it is commanded, and more study is even better.

 

[Revmitchell]

There is not one person on this board who "dissuades" bible study.

 

[Van]

Why not address what I actually said? Folks who wish to dissuade actual bible study seemingly abound on this forum.

The OP indicated the use of etymology was a root fallacy. Note that Strong's provides a summary of the meanings as found in scripture, but not a word suggested its value.

Next, independent study, just the person, prayer, and God's words, was poo pooed.

Next, the idea that words do not have inherent meanings was put forth.

All in all, bogus premises in my humble opinion.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

The OP indicated the use of etymology was a root fallacy. Note that Strong's provides a summary of the meanings as found in scripture, but not a word suggested its value.

It also provides other places the word is used in different forms.

 

[Revmitchell]

Why not address what I actually said? Folks who wish to dissuade actual bible study seemingly abound on this forum.

I did address what you actually said. And thanks for repeating it for me. You started your post with a misrepresentation of people on this board. That is untrue and outlandish as well an attack. Your arrogance abounds, especially in light of the author of the op. You seem to think you are more knowlegdeable than they are. I would suggest you find some humility and actually read what these theologians have said. When everyone else in the world is wrong but you you should realize there is a problem.

Since you have begun your post with an attack of the abounding board the rest is a non starter. You need to cool your jets.

 

[go2church]

I'm with Rev, who on this board is dissuading bible study.? Even when there is disagreement, the conversation usually ends with "you need to go read your bible".

Is the premise actually that people should study differently?

 

[Revmitchell]

I'm with Rev,

I won't tell anyone.

who on this board is dissuading bible study.? Even when there is disagreement, the conversation usually ends with "you need to go read your bible".

His argument seems to be that if you do not misuse word studies that bring people to fallacious conclusions then you are trying to "dissuade" any and all study of the Bible. In other words it is either his way or not at all and everyone else including all theologians have it wrong.

Is the premise actually that people should study differently?

The premise is that word studies can be done incorrectly and lead to a misunderstanding of scripture.

 

[go2church]

Sure you can emphasize a particular word beyond its importance but that isn't a fault of word study but a problem of the word study-er. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

 

[go2church]

Oh Rev...I won't tell anyone!

 

[Revmitchell]

Sure you can emphasize a particular word beyond its importance but that isn't a fault of word study but a problem of the word study-er. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

Did you read the op? Have you ever heard of Dr. Carson's book on "Exegetical Fallacies"?

 

[Rippon]

You started your post with a misrepresentation of people on this board. That is untrue and outlandish as well an attack. Your arrogance abounds, especially in light of the author of the op. You seem to think you are more knowledgeable than they are. I would suggest you find some humility and actually read what these theologians have said. When everyone else in the world is wrong but you you should realize there is a problem.

You need to cool your jets.

You are spot-on in your observations of that poster.

 

[go2church]

Did you read the op? Have you ever heard of Dr. Carson's book on "Exegetical Fallacies"?

Yes, I liked ending paragraph

I'm not saying that Greek word studies are bad, or totally unnecessary (after all, we are not native Greek speakers). But unless you do them properly, they'll simply give you the illusion of knowing something when you really don't. Most of the time you'll do better to simply compare a number of solid translations like the NASB, ESV, NIV, and NLT. After all, the people who translated these Bible versions understand Greek far better than you or I ever will. So don't throw away their expertise. And as you read, pay attention to the context. An ounce of good contextual analysis is worth a pound of poorly done Greek word studies.

Know of Carson, can't say I'm familiar with that title.

 

[Revmitchell]

Yes, I liked ending paragraph

I'm not saying that Greek word studies are bad, or totally unnecessary (after all, we are not native Greek speakers). But unless you do them properly, they'll simply give you the illusion of knowing something when you really don't. Most of the time you'll do better to simply compare a number of solid translations like the NASB, ESV, NIV, and NLT. After all, the people who translated these Bible versions understand Greek far better than you or I ever will. So don't throw away their expertise. And as you read, pay attention to the context. An ounce of good contextual analysis is worth a pound of poorly done Greek word studies.

Know of Carson, can't say I'm familiar with that title.

It is one I would recommend to every serious student of the Bible.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0801020867/?tag=baptis04-20

 

[Van]

I see lots of posts denying Bible study is attacked on many fronts. Don't do word studies, why they result in root fallacies. Don't read multiple scholars, just stick with Calvinist apologists. On and on it goes, with no one offering anything positive. They are fault finders.

Did I misrepresent the OP? Nope. Did it encourage bible study? Nope. Did the naysayers then disavow the purpose of the thread, saying why we were only trying to help people do bible study. ROFLOL

 

[Revmitchell]

No one, I repeat no one said don't do word studies. If you are going to address the topic of this thread please do so with integrity.

 

[Van]

Folks, just ask yourself, what did the OP say? Revmitchell likes to suggest others lack integrity, but how would he know? I say bible study is attacked on many fronts and he suggests I said someone said "don't do bible study. Integrity is a word with inherent meaning. Those that mischaracterize what others say project the antitheses of integrity. This thread is a joke. The study of key words in a verse or passage is important. The use of exhaustive concordances, lexicons, and commentaries helps us gain a deeper and more accurate understanding of God's intended message. I say, in quotes, "Do Bible Study."

 

[Rippon]

I say bible study is attacked on many fronts and he suggests I said someone said "don't do bible study.

You are fibbing big time. In post 3 you said many on the BB "dissuade actual Bible study."

In post #16 you claimed that many posts here deny Bible study or word studies.

Those that mischaracterize what others say project the antitheses of integrity.

You not only routinely mischaracterize what others say, you deny your own words regularly.

 

[Rippon]

Don't read multiple scholars, just stick with Calvinist apologists.

Why do you make stuff up? Is the truth that scary for you?