Addendum 1 - A Word on My Hermeneutics
Concerning my position about “comparing” scriptures: Whenever I disagree with an interpretation of a certain scripture, I always argue from the immediate context of the passage in question. I seldom, if ever, use one scripture to interpret another unless there is a comparison in the text itself. If I cannot ascertain the meaning of the passage from the immediate context, my position is, “I don’t know what this passage means. It’s not clear.” (Get used to ambiguity.) If I ever do use one scripture to interpret another, I make sure that the subject is the same, and ALL other variables are explainable. That is seldom possible. Comparing a scripture that you do understand to a scripture that you don’t understand makes no sense whatsoever, unless the comparison is in the text itself. Conversely, if you understand the meaning of both scriptures, if the immediate contexts of the respective texts make the meaning of each text clear, then what’s the point of comparing them? The only reason I can think of is to support an argument by quantity. That means you understand BOTH scriptures being compared, independently of each other.
When I “compared” scriptures in my John 3:16 exposition above, note my qualifications: “…seems silly to continue…” and “At the risk of confusing the issue…” and also note that I never used my understanding of one scripture to interpret another. I arrived at the meaning of each scripture from its immediate context, not from my understanding of any other scripture. I will demonstrate this further as I deal with Paul Fahy’s paper next.
Addendum 2 - Paul Fahey
Main Index
Site Introduction/Setup
Email: hobbes1_5@hotmail.com
