Exegesis - Help!

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
unsafe said:
unsafe says
No one has mentioned relying on the Holy Spirit for direction ----is this important or unimportant when dealing with Spiritual Scripture -----to get the Spiritual meaning that is ---Or are we content just to rely on our own interpretation and present a worldly surface meaning to the Church not caring about the Spiritual meaning to us today ------

We can have all the theological background but is that helping the Spiritual end to the message ------



unsafe says and posted Greek word ------For instance ---this word cleanse in the Greek means to purify ---to prune


2508. kathairó ►
Strong's Concordance
Short Definition: I cleanse, purify, prune
ognate: 2508 kathaírō – make clean by purging (removing undesirable elements); hence, "pruned (purged)"; eliminating what is fruitless by purifying (making unmixed). See 2513 (katharos).



unsafe says---- and posted definition ---------Here is the dictionary meaning of cleansed -----

cleanse
klenz/
verb
past tense: cleansed; past participle: cleansed
  1. make (something, especially the skin) thoroughly clean.
    "this preparation will cleanse and tighten the skin"
    • rid (a person, place, or thing) of something seen as unpleasant, unwanted, or defiling.
      ""cleansing the environment of traces of lead"
    • free (someone) from sin or guilt.


unsafe says
So here we see the worldly meaning and the spiritual meaning ------the Bible is a Spiritual Book with a spiritual meaning -----so if your just preaching from the worldly view of the Leopard skin being cleanses ---Then you miss the whole point of the Spiritual Message ----because Jesus had the authority to free this man of His sins so He could be cleansed and become whole ------


So you have to decide which message you want to present ---the surface message or the real message -----One message glorifies the person ---the other glorifies God ----so which is important to the person preaching ---that is the real question


unsafe says---- and posted Greek ---------This is the word heal in Greek ----

Strong's Greek: 2390. ἰάομαι (iaomai) -- to heal - Bible Hub
biblehub.com/greek/2390.htm
Phonetic Spelling: (ee-ah'-om-ahee) Short Definition: I heal. Definition: I heal, generally of the physical, sometimes of spiritual, disease. HELPS Word-studies. 2390 iáomai (a primitive verb, NAS dictionary) –healing, particularly as supernatural and bringing attention to the Lord Himself as the Great Physician


unsafe says
All up to us as to what we want the Church to hear -----Jesus spoke what His Father told Him to not what He Himself wanted to say -----John 12 :49 and 50 ----

Bible Gateway passage: John 12 - GOD’S WORD Translation
Click to expand...

And screw the Golden Rule ... too much sharing for those wishing greater power ... form of avarice?

Let us sink into thought and wisdom ... despised by much of the overtly desirous ... the egging continues ... OEster approaches ... as a hard shell hiding much internal meanings that may periscope with the foot of Molly's-Que ... a closed, broad-based non-being to realism! Thus Ex ists ... exited in tent ... communication with groan?
People are embarrassed by the gift ...
 
chansen said:
Thanks, but needless surgery is looking like a better option to me.
Click to expand...

The original surgeon was said to be Asclepius, not Caduceus as forfeited by Roman expectations ... after burning all the previous myths of learning ... thus the mystical nature of thought?
 
Pavlos Maros said:
Exegesis is critical examination of a scripture to aid explanation of said scripture, in context and without extrapolations. Else as Chansens said it becomes Eisegesis. However you are taking the scripture from the Bible which has had an abundance of extrapolations additions etc. Since it's first writing, and that came from oral tradition, a long line of chinese whisper/the telephone game. So you do have your work cut out, to try to avoid Eisegesis. Just go with it, say what you think. You wouldn't be the first.
Click to expand...

I'm known for saying what I think lol - thus the attempt at discipline should be interesting........
 
revsdd said:
John has said most of what I would have said. I do note, though, that you say you are going to stress "cleanse" as opposed to "heal." Given that there is apparently healing in the passage - "the leprosy left him" the passage says, if I were listening to you stress cleansing, I'd probably as a congregant want to know why you didn't stress "healing" - or at least give it equal weight. I think you need to be clear with yourself (and perhaps with your listeners) why you choose to stress one over the other.

Otherwise, there's the significance of touch. Jesus touched the man with leprosy; one whom others feared to touch. I cannot read this passage without thinking about the response that many (most?) people used to have to those with AIDS - they didn't want to touch them or even be near them. Remember "you can get AIDS from a toilet seat." It brings to mind Princess Diana and her well publicized visits to AIDS patients - touching them, hugging them - at a time when the common response was fear and even abject terror. The touching implies compassion, thus coming back to John's note about the textual variant.

John notes the so-called "Messianic Secret" - Jesus acts and then tells others not to tell anyone. Why silence? Jesus seems to express that his teachings are more important than his miracles, or at least that he prefers to be known less for miracles and more for what he teaches. Why? Implications for today's church? How do we keep these things in proper balance in our preaching and in our lives as Christians and as communities of faith?

A very rich text with many directions you could go. Best wishes. I hope you might share your sermon with us at some point.
Click to expand...


Re heal and cleansing...... when I read the passage I was struck with the request to be made clean. Today, we would much more likely say, heal me. Why did the man with leprosy say make me clean? What was the historical implications of being "unclean"? These are the questions I wish to address with the congregation at our mission church. (We have to write the sermon specifically for a particular congregation - in my case a mission congregation that has many struggling with addiction, mental illness, unemployment.) I would then attempt to reset the Biblical scene in today's world - who might feel "unclean" today - that is- not part of mainstream society?

I like what you say about touch and Lady Diana. Touch by Jesus a sign of acceptance - not exclusion - and for the excluded in today's society to know of Jesus's acceptance and lack of fear symbolised by touch would be comforting.

I've noticed that when preaching before that this particular congregation likes me to include a brief story/comment from my own life - as the superintendent minister said to me. 'they listen to you because you've walked the walk." In today's society there is still a stigma about mental illness - particularly in regard to employment.

To conclude, this particular congregation knows first-hand about feeling excluded from mainstream society and , knowing them as I do, this text will resonate with them.
More thoughts - I will stress how the man asked for help - and the importance of seeking others (the hands of God) to help us in those times when it's needed.

Yikes, I'm straying into eisegesis - but, from previous conversations with the course manager, he understands the needs of a mission church.

A good friend, who is a retired minister, said to me not to be tempted to become too academic - as I preach from the heart and that's what this congregation welcomes. (it's also why I preach - to comfort the uncomfortable. I think many suburban churches would find my sermons too confronting -so I feel that preaching in mission churches is where I'm called to be.)

It will be a short sermon - it's limited to eight minutes - but, thank you for your encouragement, and I'll share it here.......
 
revjohn said:
What is the knowledge for though? Is this knowledge for you to share with others about the plight of those with skin diseases during Jesus' day? Is that what you think the intention of the text is? A brief treatment of Jesus as dermatologist?

Or is there something bigger at play?

And if there is something bigger than Jesus as dermatologist what in the text supports that notion?
Click to expand...

Ah, I promise you, Jesus will be more than a dermatologist.......

I intend to show that something bigger is at play -so much so that I will probably stray into eisegesis territory. (Which, I suspect, will be an area where I will need to be cleaned!)
 
I think it might be a bit helpful to appreciate the sheer horror of leprosy before the advent of antibiotics. (I'm not even sure a comment about dermatologists is totally appropriate in the context...) It was a lifetime of absolute isolation except for one's fellow lepers, for fear of contagion, and that lifetime was a lifetime of gradually dying via "bits falling off"... So healing was one part, but convincing your fellow humans that you were non-contagious again was equally important.
 
BetteTheRed said:
I think it might be a bit helpful to appreciate the sheer horror of leprosy before the advent of antibiotics. (I'm not even sure a comment about dermatologists is totally appropriate in the context...) It was a lifetime of absolute isolation except for one's fellow lepers, for fear of contagion, and that lifetime was a lifetime of gradually dying via "bits falling off"... So healing was one part, but convincing your fellow humans that you were non-contagious again was equally important.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've spent two hours in the college library today looking up references to leprosy and 'unclean" laws in Biblical times.
The isolation and the stigma (in different forms) that folks face today will I suspect be part of the sermon.
 
PilgrimsProgress said:
Yes, I've spent two hours in the college library today looking up references to leprosy and 'unclean" laws in Biblical times.
The isolation and the stigma (in different forms) that folks face today will I suspect be part of the sermon.
Click to expand...

Social "stigma" is a big question for those denying mental functions ... especially if they can't see it coming towards them ... like that slick Lilith that may simulate the morning star ... Lucidly!
 
BetteTheRed said:
I think it might be a bit helpful to appreciate the sheer horror of leprosy before the advent of antibiotics. (I'm not even sure a comment about dermatologists is totally appropriate in the context...)
Click to expand...

Given that leperosy was a catch-all term encompassing all manner of skin ailment and that there were mechanisms in place to restore individuals to community we should resist the urge to go worst case scenario.

That unwittingly plays into the elevation of the miraculous and makes it very difficult to hear the text telling us that Jesus was not about the spectacle.

Getting caught up in miracle hysteria puts exegesis at risk. It detracts us from what the text is saying and instead we echo only what we want to hear.
 
That's because you don't believe in JaySus! In the name of JaySus, I command those demon zits to be GONE! Praise JaySus! Praise JaySus for your clear complexion! Thank you, Jaysus!

Imagine if being a Christian would clear up your skin? *That's* how you get teens in church.
 
If you dunk the enlightened in a heavy pool ... does the water develop a hole ... through displacement ... Archimedes?

Thus thoughtful bode is floated ... and sol cognizance cannot assume anything without entangled stories ... thus entanglement theory ... and strings!
 
PilgrimsProgress said:
Yes, I've spent two hours in the college library today looking up references to leprosy and 'unclean" laws in Biblical times.
The isolation and the stigma (in different forms) that folks face today will I suspect be part of the sermon.
Click to expand...

The isolation and the stigma or Christ's response to it?

What is the text labouring to teach?

Is it the isolation and the stigma that it focuses on or is it Christ's response to that isolation and stigma that matters?

Which is where the conflict between Christ being indignant and Christ being full of compassion take the text in different directions.

The miraculous healing/cleansing does that element lessen or further the sense of isolation and stigmatization?
 
revjohn said:
The isolation and the stigma or Christ's response to it?

What is the text labouring to teach?

Is it the isolation and the stigma that it focuses on or is it Christ's response to that isolation and stigma that matters?

Which is where the conflict between Christ being indignant and Christ being full of compassion take the text in different directions.

The miraculous healing/cleansing does that element lessen or further the sense of isolation and stigmatization?
Click to expand...

Good point..... Christ's response is the key - but I just think that the social isolation is important -to understand Christ's response. Which brings up the question for today's society - as followers of The Way what should our response be to social isolation of groups in our own society?

The conflict between indignant and compassionate is a puzzle for me. Is Jesus indignant because he knew that if the man told of the cure Jesus would face a kind of isolation himself -(as he could no longer preach in the towns) and his message of the Kingdom would reach fewer ears? Or is Jesus indignant that he would be seen as a miracle worker, rather than a carrier of the "Good News"? Does there just have to be one reason for being indignant, could both be possible?
It seems to me that seeing Jesus was aware of the negative implications of the cure, the fact that he did cure -and touched - the leper, shows that his compassion overrode his indignation.
 
Just a general thought.....

The library manager placed this huge Biblical dictionary in front of me -and lesbianism followed on after leprosy -so, curious, I read that too.
Seems there's black theology, queer theology, feminist theology, Asian theology etc etc.

I'm beginning to think that exegesis is an impossible task. I can't see how these different ways of looking at the text don't veer off into eisegesis?
Then we have literalists, progressives, Protestants, Catholics, Calvinists etc etc.....

Do all these different groups agree on exegesis?
 
chansen said:
That's because you don't believe in JaySus! In the name of JaySus, I command those demon zits to be GONE! Praise JaySus! Praise JaySus for your clear complexion! Thank you, Jaysus!

Imagine if being a Christian would clear up your skin? *That's* how you get teens in church.
Click to expand...

A PRAYER
Loving God,
Is it okay with you to love Hansen's sense of humour?
Have you sent him to show those of us of faith
Not to take ourselves too seriously?

I note with irony that leprosy in now called Hansen's disease,
Is that your doing?
In Jesus name,
Amen.
 
DEAR PILGRIMSPROGRESS,

THIS IS GOD. YOU KNOW I'M GOD BECAUSE I'M TYPING IN ALL CAPS. CHANSEN IS TOO NICE TO ASSAULT YOUR EYES LIKE THIS, BUT I'M GOD, SO DEAL. I'VE JUST TAKEN OVER HIS ACCOUNT. HIS PASSWORD IS REALLY SIMPLE. TELL THE ADMINS TO GET HIM TO CHANGE IT.

CHANSEN IS PLEASANT ENOUGH. I SENT HIM TO MAKE FUN OF FUNDAMENTALIST ASSHATS WHO MAKE ME LOOK STUPID. UGH, GROUPIES. I HATE THEM. I WISH THEY WOULD FIND ANOTHER GOD. THAT WHOLE "THOU SHALT HAVE NO OTHER GODS BEFORE ME?" YEAH, THESE PEOPLE CAN TOTALLY FIND ANOTHER GOD AND I'D BE COOL WITH IT. THEN THEY'LL BE HOT. GET IT? BECAUSE I'M SENDING THEM TO HELL! LMAO!

NO, I DIDN'T RENAME THE DISEASE. SOME GUY NAMED HANSEN FIGURED OUT WHAT WAS HAPPENING. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS STUFF. I HAVE A STAFF FOR THAT. A LITERAL STAFF. IT LOOKS GREAT WHEN I CARRY IT. EVERYBODY SAYS SO. VERY GOD-LIKE.

IN, UM, MY NAME,
GOD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top