Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Matthew McMahon  Yes, agreeing heartlity with the Westminster Confession, exegesis will always lead us down a particular path. We go there first. Then we have to walk down the "comrehensive" avenue of the setting and context. (Are we dealing with Jesus feeding the five thousand, or a list of geneologies, or a poem in the Song of Solomon.) We really have to be sure we understand everything goin on behind the text. Then we have to travel down the road of Biblical theology (where that passage fits into the sscheme of progressive revelation) and then think through systematic theology on that subject. Lest we forget, we shoudl always set our "hypothesis" in the context of the church and historical theology. We don't believe things in a vaccuum, and there have been lots of people before us, much smart than us, who have already thought through these things. |
and beautifully written! Perhaps you could add to the imagery by ending, "Lest we forget, we should always set our 'hypothesis' in context as we cruise down the broadway of historical theology."
You are a born writer, Rev McMahon!
Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Matthew McMahon We should be able to, if we are looking at Scripture hemeneutically, to figure out what it says and means. Extrabiblical sources help, but they are not the reason we conclude certain things about Scripture. Scripture, understood properly, will enable us to come to conclusions on thier own. |
Can we use Josephus to determine the fulfillment of Matt 24?