Exegetical Fallacies

`Exegetical Fallacies' by research professor of New Testament, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, D. A. Carson, is a marvelous book for professionals and serious amateurs who wish to make a mark for themselves in the fields of Biblical research, exegesis, hermeneutics, and pastoral service. With some caveats, it is also invaluable for anyone who simply wishes to study the Bible for themselves, and does a lot of reading in commentaries on scripture.For the casual reader, please be prepared for some heavy duty study, thinking, and travelling to your best dictionary. It is not for naught that the author describes the book as a supplement to seminary level courses on Biblical exegesis. The author deals in some of the more arcane points of very technical subjects such as New Testament Greek vocabulary and grammar, theories of historicism, logic, rhetoric, and last but certainly not least, the Christian faith. As a rank amateur in the study of Greek, the author lost me at several points, and I did not fully appreciate his observations on the theory of writing history. However, I have serious academic credentials in the study of philosophy and logic, so I was in an excellent position to weigh his statements in those areas.In spite of that rather heavy caveat, I still think this is a worthwhile book for practically anyone who reads works on the Biblical exegesis, since there are many points which any intelligent layman can easily understand. The author cites the danger of `distanciation' when doing a critical study of the Bible. This is the problem of weakening or losing faith by studying the scriptures with the same critical eye and the same analytical methods one may apply to the writings of Homer, Plato, or Euripides. I can appreciate the problem, but I own experience is that critical Bible study is not only necessary for correct understanding; it is actually a far stronger catalyst to faith than almost any other spiritual exercise. With some reservations, this is one of the things at which our Jewish friends really excel. So, the risk is there, but the rewards to faith for critical diligence far outweigh the risks.The first chapter, `Word Study Fallacies', deals with cases which the lay reader, unfamiliar with Greek, will find easiest to understand. A simple example from a modern language may illustrate this `type'. If one took the translation of the German word `kindergarten' literally, one would assume it was a place where children were put to work raising carrots, pansies, and zucchini. The word is a compound of the German words for `children' and `garden'. And, in their inimitably poetic manner, the Germans turned this into a word for where children, not vegetables, are raised. One of the most distressing lessons from this chapter is the suggestion that some of the most authoritative theological dictionaries (compiled in Germany, of course) are guilty of some of these errors. Carson's description of these fallacies will not enable you to spot them immediately, but he does offer hints at how to sniff them out. One of my favorites, which I actually encountered in a class on `Matthew' is the meaning of the Greek word for `hypocrisy'. The instructor seriously warned us that this word simply did not mean for the ancient Greeks what it means to us today. It was actually a term, she said, from Greek drama, where the chorus or narrator presents an interpretation of the action on the stage. This is all true, but it is not how Matthew used the term. The evangelist used the term in a sense which is very similar to what we understand today. Of course, I was delighted to find that a good theological dictionary actually spelled this out, distinguishing classic Hellenic Greek usage from later Hellenistic usage in the New Testament.The second chapter, `Grammatical Fallacies' gets far deeper into that Greek sentence construction and some of the more arcane facets of that great mystery, the aorist tense. Up until now, I have had not a clue about this construction, yet I constantly see Biblical commentators basing interpretations on the fact that a verb is `in the aorist tense'. Carson does not fully explain this technical subject, and this is one reason why the book is a supplement to course material which does explain the matter. Of course, we poor laymen must do what we can to catch up.The third chapter, `Logical `Fallacies', is my cup of tea. This is what we study in a philosophy curriculum. Carson does a pretty good job of distinguishing formal from informal fallacies, although I suspect his language is borrowed from the linguistic discipline, rather than from the texts of the Logic teachers. I thought his description of four different meanings of `logic' may be slightly misleading. My unabridged dictionary has but one principle meaning of `logic' and one distinctly minor one. But this possible lack of rigor does little to reduce Carson's excellent descriptions of some of the more interesting formal in informal fallacies. To be clear, an introductory logic course DOES cover `informal' fallacies which are not purely the realm of `mathematical logic'. These are things like `ad hominom' arguments and arguments from authority. Interestingly enough, Carson does not mention `ad hominom', so I may conclude writers of exegesis do not indulge in them.The fourth chapter `Presuppositional and Historical Fallacies' enters the world of historical writing, where I am again out of my element, but I found them illuminating anyway. I even found Carson's name of a fallacy, `cavalier dismissal' someone committed in a comment one of my reviews.The author is humble about minimal scholarly notes, but I found they were quite good. My only regret is that the author did not offer suggestions on texts for studying Greek lexicography and grammar and symbolic logic.

If the answer to that question is `yes, it IS the Word of God' and we REALLY believe that, how concerned should we be at interpreting and exegeting a Biblical passage correctly?! Would we not readily invite correction to avoid fallacies in our reasoning, whether obvious or subtle? D.A. Carson has written this helpful little book so that teachers of God's Word accurately handle the word of truth (2 Tim 2:15). Carson presents useful real-life examples (including himself!) to explain each fallacy. We might be guilty of an exegetical fallacy if we:1. approach the text as if we know what the text means already, but actually we are imposing our own thoughts on the text. (pg 24)...when we select the evidence to say what we want to say (pg 54, 93-94)2. investigate and determine a meaning of a Greek or Hebrew word based exclusively on etymology, by the root(s) of the word. (pg 28-32)3. read a late or modern use of a word back into earlier literature. (pg 33-35)4. read an earlier word meaning (such as in classical Greek) into a later rendering of the word (pg 35-37)5. read an unlikely, obscure meaning back into a word (pg 37-44)6. assume that a word always has a certain technical meaning (pg 45), that synonyms are always identical (pg 49), or that a word has a certain meaning without appreciating its full semantic range (pg 55-56)7. select a meaning of a word based its entire semantic range and reading it back into a specific context. (pg 60-61)8. fail to appreciate the Semitic background of the Greek New Testament. (pg 61-62)9. assume that one author's use of a word is equivalent, in all cases, to another author's. (pg 62-63)10. assume that profound understandings of a text is possible by simple word studies alone. (pg 64)11. fail to appreciated that "semantics, meaning, is more than the meaning of words. It involves phrases, sentences, discourse, genre, style." We must see how words relate to words & why one word is used instead of another word. (pg 64)12. fail to appreciate the use of the aorist tense - it is undefined action with a poorly defined "semantic shape" compared to other tenses (pg 68-75)13. assume that every middle voice is reflexive or suggests that the subject acts on itself (pg 75-77)14. assume that classed conditions or definite articles exclusively dictate meaning (pg 77-84)15. assume an "either/or" requirement for meaning when a "complementarity" approach might be acceptable (pg 90-92)16. assume that, because `x' and `y' are alike in certain respects, they are alike in all respects (i.e. we fail to recognize distinctions) (pg 92-93)17. fail to logically develop thought that necessarily and sufficiently leads to the conclusion (pg 95-101). It includes conclusions that do not follow from the evidence and arguments presented (pg 117-118)18. assume that if a proposition is true, a negative inference from that proposition is also true (pg 101-102)19. Think that one's own experience and interpretation of reality is the proper framework for interpreting the biblical text. (pg 103-105)20. Fail to appreciate lack of precision in the Biblical text. (pg 106)21. Appeal to emotion as a substitute for reason (pg 106-108) or make cavalier statements (pg 118) or abuse expressions such as "obviously." (pg 122)22. overgeneralize or overspecify a text and, thus, go beyond that which is written. (pg 108-115)23. use ideas, concepts, or experience that has no close relation to the text. (pg 115-116)24. use arguments that may not technically be wrong, but are nevertheless faulty, equivocal, and unsatisfying. "They claim to deliver more than they can." (pg 118-121)25. use an inadequate analogy (pg 121-122)26. simply appeal to some authority (pg 122-123)27. make arguments on meaning based on presuppositions. This includes the belief there is no real or single meaning. It also includes reading ones own personal theology into the text. (pg 125-130)28. ignore the bible's obvious story line and "givens." (pg 130-131)29. attempt to reconstruct the history behind the text in an uncontrolled fashion. (pg 131-133)30. attempt to attribute causation or motivation. (pg 133-134)In the last chapter, Carson briefly introduces other areas for further discussions of fallacy: Literary genre, New Testament use of the Old, arguments from silence, juxtapositions of text, statistical arguments, and figurative vs literal language. He concludes the book by encouraging the reader with a healthy balance of self-doubt and confidence (pg 142).

What DA Carson does is very very helpful. Although piecemeal but nevertheless brings great awareness and thought of the various fallacies we can avoid in order to preach and handle the word of truth correctly. It is short but powerful.

An approachable, understandable and informative look at how easy it is to make a hash of bible interpretation and how a little caution, humility and knowledge can keep you safe from distorting God's word.I read it for my own enlightenment and have found it extremely useful.

For those who are not experts in Biblical Greek, this book is an invaluable tool. It is easy to misinterpret or misuse the original texts, and this book gives clear guidelines regarding pitfalls to avoid and examples of faulty exegesis. Those of us who are not experts in Greek but want to be faithful preachers and teachers of God's Word should have a copy of this book, and refer to it often.

Good book, Dr Carson approaches these subjects with humility. A knowledge of Greek will be helpful when tackling this book

Needs time and thought to chew over the details! Introduces many fallacies I have never given much thought to. Mind stretching.