Phoenix is Resurrected

[Kevin H]

On ‎2‎/‎28‎/‎2019 at 11:11 AM, Lone Ranger said:

 Andreasen, though a capable (means able to do the job) Biblical scholar (or student) in Adventism, relied too heavily on EGW for a world view, (a world view is how you understand the world)  and as such was (as most SDA scholars) an eiseget  (one who interprets a text in such a way that it supports their presuppositions, agendas, and biases) rather than an exegete (one who seeks to understand what the text is actually saying)

Actually I wish that Andreasen relied more heavily on Mrs. White for a world view. Sadly, he was a mixture of Mrs. White and traditions that developed over the years 1844 through 1888, and which was not very open to Mrs. White's emphases after 1888. Now he did break with the trend by actually going to visit Mrs. White to find out if she did indeed become a trinitarian and from this visit he too became a trinitarian. But his views on trinity were hierarchal while Mrs. White's  is based on God's law of self sacrificing/self renouncing love, where the law is a reflection of God's character and thus each member of the trinity submits to the others. He thus ended up with a God the Father who is independent from his character, who is independent and contrary from the law.

A second field is Mrs. White did indeed believe in a last generation righteousness. Andreasen's view is a mixture of Mrs. White's view and a theory held by John Wesley. Wesley, who had a wonderful understanding of sanctification, did add to this a theory. He believed that there was a level of sanctification above what he experienced. He never met anyone who reached it. The Pentecostals adapted this theory by seeing the Charismatic movement and speaking in tongues as this level. What Adventists, including Andresen have done is mix this theory with Mrs. White's view of a last generation righteousness and sees the last generation as reaching that level that Wesley theorized existed. Seeing the last generation as a different QUALITY of righteousness then ever before. This includes seeing Jesus as having the sinful nature.

Mrs. White saw and quoted authors who pointed out that Jesus had his own unique nature, unlike Adams before the fall and unlike us with our dispensation to think we are for ourselves by making less of the outside world. This balanced view has been thrown out of balance when people like Andresen saw Jesus as having our sinful nature and the book questions on doctrine trying to avoid the semi-arian view that several of our pioneers held (but did not impose as a test of fellowship) said things that could be interpreted as going to the other extreme. And Satan is joyfully gathering us into his two folds on the nature of Christ.

Also, for the last generation righteousness, Mrs. White disagreed with Wesley's theory. She understood each generation of having a few people who have reached this level of sanctification. It has been noticed that her descriptions of perfection is a description of the level that Wesley himself reached, rather than a supposed one that he thought existed but was out of his reach. Mrs. White's view of last generation perfection is not a difference in QUALITY as Andresen taught, and as taught by the so called "Historic Adventists" today but a difference in QUANTITY. Rather than a few people reaching this, and a few people reaching the unpardonable sin, she sees the whole world as split between this level of sanctification or the unpardonable sin.

[Kevin H]

As for questions on exegesis and eisegeses, we have to remember that the science of exegesis was extremely limited prior to the mid 1800s. The break through came when the two events of the understanding of the Rosetta stone lead to understandings of ancient languages and cultures and when Edward Robinson explored the middle east in 1838, and his findings published in 1841, which lead to the rediscovery of Biblical Geography and the role of geography on the text, and what lead to archaeology. Exegesis was not possible before these events coming together and the work that grew from these events. Now the Jublee as this was just starting to spread and slowly getting into sermons happened to begin on the day of Atonement 1844. The investigative judgment is the dawning of the age of exegesis.

Too often, we hold to traditions rather than exegesis. Even by the time of Andresen exegesis was limited. Mrs. White did not see exegesis as her job. She loved the little exegesis she did get to do. She loved looking at the archaeological finds in the museums of Europe, but had to sadly rip herself away from these to go and do her job. She kept saying that her writings are NOT to be used to answer questions such as "What is the meaning of the daily in Daniel" and other questions of exegesis. When ever she was asked questions of exegesis she consistently had two reactions, either she would ignore the question or else she would tell people that it was THEIR job to do not hers. My opinion from reading these quotes is that she appeared jealous that exegesis was our job and not hers, and amazed that people wanted just to get an exegetical answer from her instead of doing the work of exegesis themselves.  

Of course Mrs. White lived so early in the age of exegesis that she would have continued with an unquenchable thirst even if she exhausted the evidence of her day. Tools such as the Ebla tablets and Dead sea scrolls are needed

Exegesis is a developing field. But we sit back smugly calling our theories exegesis and other's eisegesis.

Seventh-day Adventism and Mrs. White is to pull our focus and to send us down the road of exegesis. However instead of going down this path we tend to want to set up camp and have a feeling of "I have arrived" at exegesis, instead of seeing how our knowledge develops.

Archaeologist Dr. Jim Fleming said "I am often asked if I will give the same final exam that I gave last semester. my reply is 'answering that question won't help because the questions remain the same, but the answers might have changed as we learn more evidence and make new discoveries."   

Of course we run into the dilemma that both non-Adventists and many other Christians face, probably even more so, but how many Adventists does it take to change a light bulb?...… Adventists change???

[Lone Ranger]

You missed the point.

An EXEGETE seeks to discover what the Bible says.

An EISEGETE seeks to make the Bible support what they already believe.

Andreasen (like most Adventist scholars of his time) is an EISEGETE.

It don't matter a whit 'bout no 1838s or Rosetta Stones. It describes their APPROACH to Scripture.

 

[Kevin H]

5 hours ago, Lone Ranger said:

You missed the point.

An EXEGETE seeks to discover what the Bible says.

An EISEGETE seeks to make the Bible support what they already believe.

Andreasen (like most Adventist scholars of his time) is an EISEGETE.

It don't matter a whit 'bout no 1838s or Rosetta Stones. It describes their APPROACH to Scripture.

 

Without what started and grew with Robinsons trip in 1838 and the Rosetta stone we would be very limited in our tools to discover what the Bible says and have to depend on the words of scripture and what we guess they mean, and can end up with my views are exegesis and your views are eisegesis.

[Gregory Matthews]

The approach that one takes to Scripture is very important.  Yet, as Kevin said, the Rosetta stone has given us critical information that has allowed us to understand the language of Egyptian hieroglyphs.  This has contributed considerably to Biblical knowledge.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosetta_Stone

 

Quote

The

Rosetta Stone is a granodiorite stele, found in 1799, inscribed with three versions of a decree issued at Memphis, Egypt, in 196 BC during the Ptolemaic dynasty on behalf of King Ptolemy V. The top and middle texts are in Ancient Egyptian using hieroglyphic script and Demotic script, respectively, while the bottom is in Ancient Greek. As the decree has only minor differences between the three versions, the Rosetta Stone proved to be the key to deciphering Egyptian hieroglyphs, thereby opening a window into ancient Egyptian history.

[B/W Photodude]

23 hours ago, Lone Ranger said:

You missed the point.

An EXEGETE seeks to discover what the Bible says.

An EISEGETE seeks to make the Bible support what they already believe.

No, no, and no! You got it all wrong.

An EXEGETE is someone who you agree with.

An EISEGETE is someone you disagree with and need to put down.

[B/W Photodude]

2 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

that works very well too!

I have noticed that trend in the discussions!

[B/W Photodude]

https://medium.com/christian-intellectual/discernment-is-a-noble-thing-phil-johnson-5078971903d2