Charity and Charles Whisnant, visiting with the Jimmy and Lois Grant. Lois has been a friend of Charity since they both lived in Fort Worth, TX 45 years ago. The Grants moved in to a nice home this last year and we enjoyed our visit with them
Jimmy Grant is has a few collectors guns, and he has some guns and swords.
Bill Bower (Mary) and Dorothy Fields, and Pauline Lemaster had a birthday this month (February) so we on Sunday went out to eat down in Minford, Ohio. February 23 2014 along with Frankie Dawkins and Richard Lemaster. and Charles and Charity.
Bible Study and Bill Bower is teaching the last at Rivers of Joy Baptist Church
Pauline Lemaster, Bill Bower and Dorothy Fields had birthdays in February
Serna and her son
Kevin Vanhoozer contends that the postmodern crisis in hermeneutics---'incredulity towards meaning,' a deep--set skepticism concerning the possibility of correct interpretation---is fundamentally a crisis in theology provoked by an inadequate view of God and by the announcement of God's 'death.'
Part 1 examines the ways in which deconstruction and radical reader--response criticism 'undo' the traditional concepts of author, text, and reading. Dr. Vanhoozer engages critically with the work of Derrida, Rorty, and Fish, among others, and demonstrates the detrimental influence of the postmodern 'suspicion of hermeneutics' on biblical studies.
In Part 2, Dr. Vanhoozer defends the concept of the author and the possibility of literary knowledge by drawing on the resources of Christian doctrine and by viewing meaning in terms of communicative action. He argues that there is a meaning in the text, that it can be known with relative adequacy, and that readers have a responsibility to do so by cultivating 'interpretive virtues.'
Successive chapters build on Trinitarian theology and speech act philosophy in order to treat the metaphysics, methodology, and morals of interpretation.
From a Christian perspective, meaning and interpretation are ultimately grounded in God's own communicative action in creation, in the canon, and preeminently in Christ.
Prominent features in Part 2 include a new account of the author's intention and of the literal sense, the reclaiming of the distinction between meaning and significance in terms of Word and Spirit, and the image of the reader as a disciple--martyr, whose vocation is to witness to something other than oneself.
Is There a Meaning in This Text? guides the student toward greater confidence in the authority, clarity, and relevance of Scripture, and a well--reasoned expectation to understand accurately the message of the Bible.
Is There a Meaning in This Text? is a comprehensive and creative analysis of current debates over biblical hermeneutics that draws on interdisciplinary resources, all coordinated by Christian theology. It makes a significant contribution to biblical interpretation that will be of interest to readers in a number of fields.
The intention of the book is to revitalize and enlarge the concept of author--oriented interpretation and to restore confidence that readers of the Bible can reach understanding. The result is a major challenge to the central assumptions of postmodern biblical scholarship and a constructive alternative proposal---an Augustinian hermeneutic---that reinvigorates the notion of biblical authority and finds a new exegetical practice that recognizes the importance of both the reader's situation and the literal sense.
The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance by Bruce M. Metzger (Mar 6, 1997) - Kindle eBook
The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? by F. F. Bruce and Frederick Fyvie Bruce (Dec 31, 1942) - Kindle eBook
The Canon of Scripture by F. F. Bruce (Aug 20, 2010) - Kindle eBook
Theological Interpretation of Scripture: An Introduction and Preliminary Evaluation: Gregg R. Allison: Professor of Christian Theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (Review of Kevin Vanhoozer TIS Theological Interpretation or Theological Exegesis of Scripture. 9 pages PDF
Spiritual Readiang: A Study of the Christian Practice of Reading Scripture: Durham E. Theses: Durham U. PDF 264 pages Harvey, Angela Lou
In Defense of Proof-Texting: R. Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain ; PDF 10 pages
Parenthetical references or footnote/ endnote references to biblical passages that undergird some doctrinal claim made, whether in a dogmatics textbook, a catechism, or a confession of faith.
Protestant theologians were not naive realists. Rather, the assumption weas that theology is a sacred science, whose "first principles" are revealed by God alone and therefore that constructive theological argumentation must proceed on the basis of God's revealved truth, particularly as that revealed truth is communicated through individual passages of Holy Scripture, often understood as sedes doctrinae.
see Daniel J. Treier, "Proof text"
in Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of Scripture" Vanhoozer
"Do we act as if we really believe that the Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written?" Wayne Grudem's ETS presidential address. JETS 43 (2000) 5-26
i.e. that they way forward for evangelical theology is to pursue "whole Bible exegesis." i.e. "not just what one verse says, or one book, but the whole of the Bible, interpreted and applied rightly to the Church today." (That it takes the full panorama of biblical teaching (being not just NT or OT study, but "whole Bible study)
In Grudem's Systematic Theology he offers a directive and then suggests three steps to achieve that goal:
First the directive: "We should study systematic theology by collecting and understanding all the relevant passages of Scripture on any give topic.
Second, he offers the trhee steps:
Two: Read, make notes on and try to summarize the points made in the relevant verses
Three: The teachings of the various verses should be summarized into one or more points that the Bible affirms bouttaht subject.
i.e he does note that some verses may be pertinent even though they do not use particular words keyed to that topic, but the overwhelming push is to base systematic theology upon word studies.
The theologian finds verses with words and phrases related to thatt topic across the biblical canon by using a good concordance. Then they try to state each verse's or section's teaching. Finally, they try to boil down these many summaries into a description of the whole Bible's message. In the end, you have a doctrinal statement capped off with parenthetical references to texts that it summarizes.
And Vanhoozer in reply to this says this minimizes the Bible's deployment in theology, downplaying the systematic links between various topics of theology.
Vanhoozer says too: "It is one thing to know how a bibical author spoke or thought about a particular issue in the context of ancient Israel or the early church, quite another to relate those words and thoughts about a particular issue to the message of the Bible (birth control and gun control for example) as a whole and to the significance of the Bible's teaching for us today."" Voice and the Actor"
Vanhoozer also states: That proof-texting "to force every biblical sentence into the same mold in a kind of "one size fits all" hermeneutic is to read roughshod over the diverse literary genres of Scritpure." "Proof-texting assumes a uniform propositional revelation spread evenly throughout Scripture: one verse one vote. Not only does this approach risk decontextualizing biblical discourse, it also leaves unclear just how text cited in support acutally lend their support to the point in question.
(while at the same he himselves does the same kind of "proof texing" )
"preoccuptation with method is like clearning your through: it can go on for only so long before you lose your audience:" Ethics after Babel: The Languages of Morals and Their Discountents:
Some scholars suffer from what Wayne Grudem calls "exegetophobia". That is evangelical theologians interacted with secular sources and historical theology much more frequently than an biblical texts.
WHO IS ISRAEL? WHO ARE THE JEWS?
2A WHO IS ISRAEL
1B HOW IS A NATION DETERMINED?
2B HOW IS THE NATION OF ISRAEL DETERMINED?
3B DURING WHAT HISTORICAL SPAN IS ISRAEL FORMED?
1C WHEN DID ISRAEL BEGIN TO TAKE FORM?
2C WHEN WILL ITS FORMATION CEASE?
1D Jews will be present on earth during the future Millennium:
2E Will continue to form through the end of the Millennium.
3A WHO ARE THE JEWS?
1B DEFINING "JEW" "ISRAELITE" John 4:9; 18:15; Acts 21:27-28; Philippians 3:5
1C Unbelieving Jews, Jesus disciples, and Jesus Himself
2C A Jew is a member of the nation of Israel and "the Jews" in its biblical sense is identical to the nation of Israel
2B COULD A JEW FOREIT HIS JEWISH IDENTIFY?
1C JEWS WHO LIVE OUTSIDE THE LAND: Acts 2:10
2C IDOLATROUS JEWS: Judges 8:33-34
3B "THE JEWS" AS USED BY JESUS AND HIS DISCIPLES
1C PASSAGES IN QUESTION: John 2:18,20; 5:16,18; 11:55; 13:33
2C CLARIFICATIONS: Jesus and disciples did not deny their Jewishness.
3C OTHER EVIDENCE AND USEAGE: Philippians 3:5; Galatians 2:11-13; John 11:31
4B WERE GENTILES WHO JOINED THEMSELVES TO Israel CALLED JEWS? Ruth.
5B WERE GENTILE CONVERTS TO JUDAISM CALLED JEWS?
1C Biblically, Gentiles who converted to Mosaic, Pharisaic or any other from of Judaism were called proselytes. Matthew 23:15. Acts 13:43, Acts 13:43; Acts 2:10 and 6:5.
2C A Gentile who had previously converted to Judaism and then became a believer in Jesus was not called a Jew, but a proselyte:
6B ESTHER 8:17
1C WHICH TRANSLATION IS BEST:
4A WHO ARE THE HEBREWS?
1B Genesis 14:13; Genesis 39:14; Exodus 1:16, Jonah 1:9; Exodus 21:2, Acts 6:1
2B Only those in the covenant line of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob by natural descent are
5A ISRAEL, JEWS, HEBREWS SUMMATION AND RAMIFICATIONS
1B BIBLICAL DEFINITIONS
1C Every man and woman who is a descendant of A, I, and J by male lineage is an Israelite, a Jew and an Hebrew.
2B "I WAS BORN A JEW, AND I'LL DIE A JEW" ?
6A WHAT IS THE BODY OF CHRIST OR MESSIAH?
2B IDENTIFYING THE BODY OF CHRIST
1C THE BODY OF MESSIAH OR CHRIST: Colossians 1:18
2C THE BODY OF MESSIAH DIFFER FROM LOCAL CONGREGATIONS
1D Many congregations or churches but only one body of believers: Romans 7;4; I Corinthians 10:16; 12:27; Ephesians 4:4-6,12.
3C THE COMPOSITION OF THE BODY: I Corinthians 12:13
4C THE BODY IS A "NEW MAN": Ephesians 2:11-15
1D Believing Jews and Believing Gentiles have bee brought together.
5C THE BODY IS NEITHER ISRAEL NOR THE GENTILES: I Corinthians 10:32
6C HOW WERE THE GENTILES, WHO WERE EXCLUDED FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF ISRAEL, BROUGHT NEAR
7A MEMBERS OF THE BODY RETAIN THEIR NATIONAL IDENTITES
1B The "New Man" is distinct from Isreal and the Gentiles, but becoming a member of the "new man" does not obliterate one's Jewish or Gentile identity. Romans 11:13; Philippians 3:5; Galatians 3:29; Revelation 21:24, 26; I Corinthians 15:43,44,48;
8A DURING WHAT HISTORICAL SPAN IS THE BODY FORMED?
1B WHAT DID ITS FORMATION BEGIN
1C Day of Pentecost Acts 2
We were living in Roanoke VA when our Dad died in February 1966. He entered the hospital when he said to me "Charles I think I need to go to the hospital, I have had an heart attack" That is all I remember when he said that. I was in high school, my last year at Jefferson High. I can't remember if Mom went with me, I am sure she did, and Dad entered the hospital for the next two weeks, where he died. Now my girl friend and whom I was going to marry was working at the hospital I believe every day for the next two weeks I was up there by his side every day.
Now I didn't know that he would die two weeks later, but Dad did, he had all his funeral arrangement made and we didn't know it. We talked to him every day and he seemed fine and we didn't know.
On the day that Dad died we got a phone call about dad, and they said he was near death, which was a shock to me, I remember going to the hospital with Sandra Gale Richardson and she knew that dad was going to die. I didn't.
When we got to the hospital dad was in the ICU and they wouldn't let me see him, but they let Mom see him, and while she was in there Dad died. That was such a shock that it took several months to recover.
So on February 20, 1966 my Father died. The saddest day of my life. Dad was my life and I loved him so much.
Charles e Whisnant, crossing the street on Tazewell Ave in Roanoke VA in 2011 at the formal Roanoke Baptist Temple, which is Mission in Roanoke
Churches that Everette Whisnant was the pastor while in Roanoke VA>
Indiana Ave Victory Baptist Church, first and second
Williamsroad Baptist Church
Roanoke Baptist Temple Airport church
How many of you have attended an Amillennial prophecy conference?
- Mhyla Tamayo Tamayo likes this.
- Cale John Bunch I did. We spoke in symbols while there. Marvelous experience. · Like · 6
- Caleb John Bunch I mean, I literally had a blast!
- Charles E. Whisnant Explain how? Where? Caleb John Bunch
- Marty Swearingen Amillenial prophecy conferences do exist btw. I believe Kim Riddlebarger has hosted a few.
- Charles E. Whisnant If you don't believe a millennial exists why would you have one I guess. · 1Marty Swearingen Cause we still believe in interpreting prophecy, even if we disagree on how to interpret it. That's why.
- Marty Swearingen And we believe the millennium exists. We just disagree on the nature of it (whether it is a literal thousand years).
- Payton Dooley You have to go to one, so you can learn how to help the Dispys understand the Bible. LOL ;-)
I'm a former (recovering) Pre-Mill by the way. I saw Jimmy DeYoung in person one time. I ate that stuff up back then. But in retrospect I just shake my head.
- harles E. Whisnant What Amill conference have you attended to explain there is not one?
- Payton Dooley I don't think there is such a conference to disprove Premillennialism. Most folks I know have come to the conclusions they come by reading the Bible. No conference needed.
- Joe Vusich "Prophecy conferences" have been the specialty of Dispensationalist churches for about 150 years. They're generally attended by folks who've already been indoctrinated in Dispensationalist presuppositions and teachings. Most attendees know very little of the eschatological understanding of the church through the ages (as summarized in the historic creeds and confessions) and are therefore unaware how novel and unorthodox Dispensationalism truly is. Typically these conferences emphasize the following:
1) refresher courses in the Dispensationalist method of reading the Bible (Israel and the Christian Church are completely separate entities; Dispensationalist teachers are the only ones who interpret the Bible "literally;" Christ comes first to "rapture" His church and then comes again in glory seven years later; Christ will reign in Jerusalem for 1000 years while memorial animal sacrifices are being performed in the earthly temple, etc.)
2) updates on Dispensationalist variations like the "pre-wrath Rapture," Posttribulationism, Progressive Dispensationalism, who's teaching what, etc.
3) inoculate and warn the attendees against those teachers (especially if they're Reformed and Calvinistic) who "spiritualize" and "allegorize" the Bible, and who allegedly promote "Replacement Theology"
4) teach myths about church history -- e.g., "the early fathers were all premillennial;" "Augustine spiritualized and ruined the church's understanding of eschatology;" "the Reformers didn't reform enouh and simply adopted Roman Catholic eschatology;" "Reformed eschatology is antisemitic," etc.
5) stir up enthusiasm about current events in the Middle East, the European Union, "signs of the times," and so on
6) sell lots of books and recorded messages to bring all of the above back to the local churches
Amillennialist churches don't typically host a lot of prophecy conferences. We emphasize biblical eschatology in our Gospel preaching and teaching, as we seek to advance a more straightforward, accessible, and universally-received understanding of the coming of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, the final judgment, and the age to come. We do occasionally organize special events in which guest speakers who have dedicated themselves to eschatological studies (e.g., Kim Riddlebarger, G.K. Beale) come to minister the fruits of their labors.
- Charles E. Whisnant I would agree that many "Last things:" conferences are so abused. And you are so right that many of the books and movies are so wrong. But with that said, John MacArthur's at the Shepard's' Conference there were 3500 preachers and many were Reformed preachers laid out his position rather clearly. By the way thanks for this site. Then John had a series of six sermons on this topic.
- Kenan Plunk I've never attended one, but I have listened to this weekend lecture series by Kim Riddlebarger which was part of the Westminster Conference Series:
I have also listened to his Amillennialism 101 lectures. Reformed Amillennialism Series www.sermonaudio.com 7
- Doug McDonald I have never heard of an amil conference; but then I don't look for them. I have heard of many pre-trib over the years; 'they compass land and sea to make one convert' to their pre-mil dispensational schemes. Doug McDonald Kenan, thanks for sharing that link. I will listen to a few of those. And if I listen to all 5 I'll say I've been to an amil conference. Maybe they will inoculate me against all attempts at making one a MacArthur-ite.
- Stephen Barton I once was going to a pre mill one but it was canceled due to the impending rapture.
- Doug McDonald For decades and decades they have been preaching an 'any moment' rapture. That alone should cause many pre-mil people to rethink this scheme.
I heard one of their popular preachers teach that Paul taught an 'any moment' rapture. He took a part of one verse out of context of course.
- Stephen Barton Macarthur convinced me that the pre mill position wasn't biblical by over doing it. Not sure he would appreciate that but it's true
- Doug McDonald Causes you to wonder if he doesn't have a problem with the fact that he can't convince everyone to believe all that 'he' says. Too many call him father, forbidden by scripture.
- Stephen Barton when he is good he is very good but when he's bad he's horrid.
- Doug McDonald Amen!
- Charles E. Whisnant I could say about Kim Riddlebar what some of you are saying about John MacArthur. I have listen to his position, and to give him credit, he did present his view correctly and he did present the other views correctly. Now with that said, you then have to ask which one do you agree with.
- Stephen Barton I like MacArthur a lot Charles it was one of 5 big churches to visit on my bucket list, but every time the word Kingdom comes up off he goes, in his sermons and in written form. I stopped listening to him for about 10 years because of it. I'd agree with him on the charismatics but in his latest book the first two chapters he just poured scorn on them before dealing with his (our) issues with them. The end of the book is excellent as he finally shows a pastoral concern and shows that he understands continuatists and charismatics to be two different groups.
- Charles E. Whisnant I listen to him every Sunday, and have for the last 30 years. He was in the Gospel of Luke for 10 years, now in John and Acts and he seems to stay in the text. Of course as he as said there are those who come and stay awhile and leave. Which is normal for any church. His books are from his sermons, and Phil Johnson is the editor of his books.
- Stephen Barton yes I know when I went to Grace Community Church Phil Johnson was "preaching" it was then that I realised that you can be excellent at theology and not very good at preaching- so I understand why he is an editor and not a preacher.
- 5 LikeStephen Barton I listen to MacArthur most weeks too I benefit from it but like you and me he has errors. I've probably read most of his books, excluding his commentaries and I have read a fair few of them too.
- Doug McDonald If someone presents 'his' view then he WILL present it correctly since he is presenting 'his' view. But his presenting the other views correctly is impressive. I have not personally heard a pre-trib-er present amil well, although I am sure it has been done.
I listened to one of Kim's tapes, and I will listen to more of them. I like his teaching but I care nothing for 'his' view.
- Doug McDonald Wondering if J Mac presents 'Leaky Dispensationalism' correctly or if he is just presenting 'his' view. Or if he goes back and forth.
Here is an example why I look elsewhere for theology, from J Mac: 'Is the Sabbath Binding on Christians Today?' point ...See More
- Doug McDonald I do appreciate a lot about J Mac. Just a little annoyed with those who anytime anything comes up, they want to take you to 'their father', as if the world has been waiting for 'him' for 6000 years. I am not going to write about him again on this thread. Charles E. Whisnant David Jeremiah then would also be good, or Charles Stanndly or Church Swindoll, or Charles Whisnant, or Charles Prince, or Hershel York or Oliver B. Greene, or John R. Rice, or S. Lewis Johnson, and a few others could be mention, Stepen Lawson, or W.B. Robinson.