29 March 2007

More on Reading

by Frank Turk

While this is likely to get bumped for the sake of further active theological aggression against Continualists, I just wanted to say a little more about how we read Scripture -- or rather, I wanted to point you to a recent podcast that was a stand-alone gem.

Personally, I run hot and cold on the White Horse Inn. I think Michael Horton and his associates are a little strident and facile, and they have some chatty Cathy tracks that if you listen long enough will probably make you a little, um, grumpy, but then again look who's talking. You could say that about me, I am sure.

At any rate, we've been talking about how to read Scripture, and lo and behold: they gave up 00:37:19 on this very subject last week. I think they made excellent -- top shelf -- comments on the topic as a good primer to those who are trying to figure out, "yeah, but how do you read the Bible?"

I have staged it for easy access at archive.org here.

And here's the bonus: your don't have to worry about whether or not this is the voice of God. It's not. It's just good and Godly advice from some men who have thought about this well.

Back to your regularly scheduled shrill discourse ...









10 comments:

The Doulos said...

Thank you, your shrillness...

Agree on the WHI - sometimes gets a little like a mutual admiration society, but some good stuff if you can stick it out. Haven't listened to the podcast you referred to, it's on my iPod for today. Listened to the previous one yesterday on why do we accept the Bible as true. It was also good, I recommended it to many of my own blog readers.

And hey - I think I'm the first comment! Boo-yah!

centuri0n said...

Booyah indeed.

A_Schultz said...

This is a timely topic for me. Having just visited a "conservative" top-shelf bible school and speaking with the head of the theology department, it has become apparent that the "post modern" relativistic view of the interpretation has infiltrated everywhere.
On the other hand one of my close friends with whom I would agree on nearly all theological topics but who calls to the authority of the Holy Spirit's teaching to back up his positions, in essence saying the Holy Spirit taught ME this and YOU can not possibly argue with HIM.

Either way the overall push is away from a view of the Bible that holds the original intent of the authors and (Author) as understood within their historical & grammatical context. Both points add "I" as the critical pivot on which their interpretations turn.
"I" am the interpretive community or "I" have been taught by the Holy Spirit what this means.

John H said...

"top-shelf comments" - "top-shelf bible school"

I can't tell you how weirdly that reads to a UK reader. No, I mean it, I really can't: I've read the commenting guidelines. ;-)

So I'll just have to leave it to everyone's imaginations to work out what "top-shelf" refers to in England...

centuri0n said...

It's because you Brits all read page 3 all the time. Clean it up, John.




:-)



.

John H said...

Clean it up, John.

Hey, it's not me who keeps suggestively waggling his eyebrow!

Oh, the actual, like, topic?

Well, I've only listened to WHI once. It was... OK. A little disappointing given how helpful I've found Dr Horton's written material over the years. It would help if they identified who the speakers were!

johnMark said...

clownturi0n,

I think I first called you that on C@RM several years ago, but it hasn't stuck yet. :)

Along the lines of reading Scripture Scot McKnight has three posts so far on what people "hear" when they read Scripture. I believe it's a review of a book on this subject. The first post is here. People can find the other two themselves.

Interesting.

Mark

centuri0n said...

jM:

We won't bring up the fact that if you didn;t habe a beautiful wife you'd have nothin' -- you'd have red for a roommate.

Turretinfan said...

I don't know about what it means to the English, but to Presbyterians "top shelf" refers to the more expensive variety of the sort of thing which we are exhorted to use medicinally in one of Paul's letters.

Presumably the author's intent here was just "high quality"?

-Turretinfan

Phil Johnson said...

To the dude who recently made his first blog-comment ever here, only to have it summarily deleted, here are some suggestions:

1. You need to change your user-name to something less offensive if you want to comment here.

2. Please remember that John MacArthur doesn't post here regularly, so comments and criticism targeting his views are usually deemed off-topic in our comment-threads.

3. Your comment was off-topic for this particular post in any case.

Thanks for thinking of us, though.