Tags

,

Recently, there have been some good discussions concerning the dogmatics/exegesis distinction (or lack thereof). Ben and Phil have convincingly made the point that pre-supposed theological convictions will inevitably color one’s exegetical insight, just as exegesis concludes itself through dogmatic confession. Does this mean that there is no plain meaning of the text of Scripture? Is the Word not perspicuous? Is all supposed “exegesis” really just “eisogesis” with a pretty face? What would our dear Lord have to say on the matter?

isojesus.jpg
Advertisements