Which is the right way to read a text?

Post Reply New Topic

Reading into it or reading out of it?

eisegesis.
Main Entry: eis·ege·sis
Function: noun
the interpretation of a text (as of the Bible) by reading into it one's own ideas

exegesis
Main Entry: ex·e·ge·sis
Function: noun
: EXPOSITION, EXPLANATION; especially : an explanation or critical interpretation of a text

Last edited by iamnotaparakeet on 13 Sep 2007, 1:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Exegesis, no doubt about it.

Why is there one right way? Sometimes words mean exactly what they say. Sometimes they are parables or metaphors that can be applied in many ways. The context of a statement is sometimes important to understanding it.

Because if you're allowed to MAKE UP THE RULES on the fly while you read something whose intent and message has only one or a few different ACTUAL meanings by the author, then as you read and interpret something, you're CREATING new meanings that the author didn't intend.

This is why liberal religion is such nonsense, and biblical literalism is exactly what the bible and many other holy texts preach.

For instance, in christianity, christ had to be a REAL PERSON and a REAL CHARACTER, now if you read the new testament "allegorically"
and still believe you can just PICK AND CHOOSE which stories or words about what christ said and did, you're making stuff up, and it is essentialy lying and erasing the intent of the author to COMMUNICATE clearly with only one meaning with regards to descriptions and facts.

Jesus believes moses and adam and eve were real people, many of today's "Christians" do not, that's one BIG PROBLEM if you believe in the literality of god being jesus, and jesus being a real person in the real world.

Not sure I agree. The parable of the Good Samaritan is not very useful if it can only be taken literally and in one way ... I have yet to run across a Samaritan. How does that apply to blacks or Aspies or gays or Hindus that we might encounter today? Getting to the spiritual truth of that parable can be done in more than one way - by understanding the historical context of relations between the Jews and their neighbors, or by applying various ideas about how we should treat each other and see if they are consistent with the spirit of the parable. Since the parable doesn't speak directly to modern issues, we must ask if it applies, if it makes sense to read it as applicable to other situations. Or maybe it is a section of the Bible that is irrelevant - something that did apply thousands of years ago in Judea, but no more? I personally don't think so.

Jesus may have believed that Adam and Eve were real people. He may have believed that the Earth was flat, and that the sun rose and set as it orbited an Earth that was fixed in the center of the universe. That really doesn't matter, the scriptures are not science texts, they are spiritual texts.

To believe in 100% of the Bible, it is also necessary to have a very strong faith in the Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nicea. Before that, there were hundreds of letters and books being sent back and forth by Christians in the Mediterranean region. These contained many beliefs and doctrines that different Christians held. Then the Emperor decided that he would control Christianity and consolidate everything into 1 collection of approved letters.

I have only met a handful of Christians that don't pick and choose what to believe or emphasize or practice. Seems those bits about selling everything you have and giving the proceeds to the poor seem to keep most people who proclaim Christianity from becoming complete. The idea that the world's richest nation is truly a Christian nation is about as easy to believe as the notion of 100,000,000 camels dancing through the eyes of needles.

Do you think you can get the intended original meaning from an english translation? Or does the poll assume you're reading the Bible in Greek/Hebrew/Aramaic or whatever the original language of the Bible was?

Read it in your own language referencing the original languages when needed.

Your way?

What way is my way?

What's the context of the question?

If you're reading an historical document, that's one thing.

Reading Lord Byron is quite another.

Exegesis seems to be the best option, that is, getting a more objective analysis from a text.

But then, inside any christian denomination, some might claim to practice exegesis of the Bible, when they are actually practicing eisegesis. That's because they interpret the Bible to their own tradition an dogmatic ways. Which is hardly a real objective thing when it comes to extremists/fundamentalists/conservatives.

Analyzing the Bible free from any dogma and denomination influence, would be the best and real objective way to do it. That is following a real scientific method rather than a religious only way.

I think that might have to do with the difference in views within different sects or churches in christianity.
That is, the catholic view of the Bible against evangelical view of the Bible against some other sect view of the Bible.
So mostly some sort of debate of who from all the denominations have a more accurate interpretation of the Bible, according to them.

I would have to say that the best way to read a text is to not and make stuff up. Reading is evil, and not reading is good. This new form of hermeneutics should be taught to the world!!

Hypothetically speaking, this is true.

However, I've noted that in practice, secular Biblical scholars often fall prey to twisting the evidence to further their own agendas, just like their more religious counterparts. I don't much trust any of them.

Do Evangelicals actually admit to practicing eisegesis?

Forget the Bible, how about a Physics textbook? Should it be read as it presents itself, read and interpreted however the reader feels like, or not read at all because you disagree with the laws of Physics?

Not read at all, physics is icky.