tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post5521744703013754169..comments2024-01-18T05:22:44.503-05:00Comments on Duke Newt: The deus ex machina of contextUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post-35385633197072652352009-10-25T20:22:57.454-04:002009-10-25T20:22:57.454-04:00BWIII just made a similar move in his recent blog ...BWIII just made a similar move in his recent blog post <a href="http://blog.beliefnet.com/bibleandculture/2009/10/why-arguments-against-women-in-ministry-arent-biblical.html" rel="nofollow">Why Arguments against Women in Ministry Aren't Biblical</a> (Oct. 25, 2009) in his analysis of 1 Cor 14.33b-36 and 1 Tim 2.8-15.<br /><br />I could not figure out the exegetical basis for his particularization of these verses and his generalization of friendlier other verses.Stephen C. Carlsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18239379955876245197noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post-61228246676873089982009-10-23T12:33:26.992-04:002009-10-23T12:33:26.992-04:00A lecture by E. P. Sanders at Villanova, just post...A lecture by E. P. Sanders at Villanova, just posted on Goodacre's blog, presents one quite specific approach to historical context and the question of its constraint upon modern appropriation. It's vintage Sanders...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05422449064195047621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post-20027357839725327712009-10-23T10:32:20.887-04:002009-10-23T10:32:20.887-04:00I agree.
I don't know why it's on Pacific...I agree.<br /><br />I don't know why it's on Pacific time.Nathan Eubankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13930202683520173941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post-9255652693952037882009-10-23T10:25:20.953-04:002009-10-23T10:25:20.953-04:00Why is this blog on Pacific time?Why is this blog on Pacific time?Celianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post-83733417919782505682009-10-23T10:23:59.716-04:002009-10-23T10:23:59.716-04:00Yes, specific disanalogies exist in every possible...Yes, specific disanalogies exist in every possible case, and the point of noting what they are may be to show *how* a text speaks differently now than it did originally, not necessarily that it doesn't address our current context at all. Disanalogy shouldn't be grounds to dismiss a text as irrelevant; rather, disanalogy should serve the "translation" every text for a new context.Celianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post-20825917184743276872009-10-22T22:14:35.081-04:002009-10-22T22:14:35.081-04:00I think I agree with you, Celia. I would only add ...I think I agree with you, Celia. I would only add that disanalogy cannot, of itself, entail the inapplicability of a passage because every biblical context is disanalogous from every contemporary context (disanalogy being a necessary element of every analogy). Thus, I would argue that one must do more than highlight specific ways in which our context is disanalogous with the context of a biblical author if one wishes to demonstrate the inapplicability of a passage without special pleading – after all, specific disanalogies exist in every possible case.Nathan Eubankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13930202683520173941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post-24813486900136461562009-10-22T20:42:03.744-04:002009-10-22T20:42:03.744-04:00Nathan, I think you're obviously right that th...Nathan, I think you're obviously right that the Bible's authors did not write with us in mind. But the point of a present day reader invoking a different historical context for the writer and for us is not always just to say, "that was then, and this is now," and that's enough of a difference to limit the text's meaning to "back then." If one highlights the specific ways that our context is not analogous with the context of the author and his audience, such an argument need not involve special pleading. But you're right: a simple, blanket claim of present non-applicability purely on the basis of a text's referring to a different place and time leads to problems of special pleading elsewhere. Good readings of Scripture demand more careful analysis of history in order to make the connections between the text's context and our own, and to make appropriate disconnections as well.Celianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post-8864026603342024732009-10-22T15:53:02.106-04:002009-10-22T15:53:02.106-04:00If I were more optimistic about our ability to sep...If I were more optimistic about our ability to separate the kernel from the husk I would agree.Nathan Eubankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13930202683520173941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2241950500211730661.post-91712874360537963592009-10-22T01:58:25.817-04:002009-10-22T01:58:25.817-04:00I know what we need. We need a method. A comprehen...I know what we need. We need a method. A comprehensive method. To explain everything. Let's call it demytholoigization.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com