Getting the download link through email is temporarily not available. Please check back later.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Exegetical Fallacies Paperback – March 1, 1996
|New from||Used from|
Frequently Bought Together
Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought
About the Author
If you buy a new print edition of this book (or purchased one in the past), you can buy the Kindle edition for only $2.99 (Save 70%). Print edition purchase must be sold by Amazon. Learn more.
For thousands of qualifying books, your past, present, and future print-edition purchases now lets you buy the Kindle edition for $2.99 or less. (Textbooks available for $9.99 or less.)
Top Customer Reviews
The first chapter deals with word-study fallacies. Here, Carson gives a list of the mistakes related to linguistics studies. All of these fallacies occur when interpreters misunderstand the use of certain words by an author. Some involves reading back into the word the meaning of another word which has the original as its root, though the root did not originally mean what its derivative does. For example, while our word `dynamite' may have the Greek 'dunamous' as its root, Paul certainly was not thinking of blasting powder when he spoke of the 'dunamous' [power] of the gospel. Others involve finding a root to words which simply isn't there. For example, we not should interpret the word `butterfly' based on its apparent root words - `butter' and `fly'!
Chapter two examines grammatical fallacies. These sorts of mistakes many times come from basing arguments on the mood or tense of words when the language is more flexible than the one arguing will allow. For example, the aorist tense is often abused by some who insist that it always means an `once for all action' that occurs in the past. Heikki Räisänen makes this mistake when commenting on Romans 3:27.Read more ›
My criticism of this book (why it loses a star) is that there are times Carson could have been so much simpler while still saying the same thing. Several times I had to read and then reread his writing, and still I came away confused. No, it wasn't the use of the original languages that gave me problems, but rather just his manner of using awkward works or saying too much without properly expounding. (Could this have been because he was condensing? Probably.) One example is on pages 51ff regarding the use of agapao and phleo in John 21. I understand his point on page 53, but he (at least in my opinion) was most difficult to follow in these pages. (I'm still scratching my head.) While I'm no scholar, I believe that many average and even above average readers could have been serviced better with a clearer presentation in several parts of the book. But still, the book is worth fighting through, so don't let that discourage you.
Carson, through a no holds barred approach, draws attention to common exegetical fallacies forcing the reader to examine his own exegetical practice. In almost every instance Carson does not simply write about a particular exegetical fallacy but provides a specific illustration of that fallacy. He also provides some advice on how to avoid it in interpretation. No theological school escapes Carson's critique. His index of authors for the most part looks like a who's who of the theological world. He reveals errors of conservatives and liberals, prominent scholars and less prominent ones, his former dean, and even himself twice.Read more ›
Carson begins by looking at various "word-study fallacies." With words we preach, teach, communicate, and oftentimes confuse, mislead, and destroy. How we use words matters. One of the most common word-study fallacies is what Carson calls "semantic anachronism." This occurs when one takes a modern day use of a word and reads it back into earlier literature. How many preachers have read the meaning of the English word dynamite back into the Greek word dynamis? Such word-study fallacies are all too common in preaching.
Carson continues by examining various "grammatical fallacies." This involves such problems as the ever-abused Aorist tense in biblical Greek. The Aorist refers to an undefined event, which is often misconstrued to refer to an exact moment of time in the past. The meaning and usage of the word must be determined by its usage within the context not through preset categories. As a side note, this chapter is the most Greek intensive. One could follow Carson's thought but much of it would not be extremely helpful unless one knew Greek.
The third chapter looks at common "logical fallacies.Read more ›
Most Recent Customer Reviews
Great points made by the author. We must be alert to people confusing the simple message of the Gospel.Published 10 days ago by Armando Lacerda
The book does indeed point out several types of exegetical fallacies and that is great.
I was disappointed in that it points out exegetical fallacies in one side of an... Read more
I give this book to young pastors to help them avoid these fallacies. I recommend it for anybody who teaches or preaches the Bible.Published 2 months ago by Amazoner
This book is an eye opener for any Biblical scholar and an inspiration for any Bible student. I'm grateful for the purchase.Published 2 months ago by R. J. Thompson
I had several professors insist I have to read this book and sadly I was somewhat disappointed. I thought there was going to be more concrete examples presented. Read morePublished 4 months ago by Amazon Customer
This is a long-standing favorite of mine. Everything Carson writes is spot on.Published 5 months ago by Dr. John S. Waldrip
This is classic work for anyone who does serious Bible study, especially those teaching others. Beyond helping one's individual study, it is the type of material that helps others... Read morePublished 6 months ago by Joseph C. Klope Jr.
Great resource for hermeneutical studies with plentiful and helpful examples.Published 8 months ago by Shannon