Interpretation by Summarizing
To summarize is to state the most important points. We might try to summarize the Bible. We might try to summarize some scientific observations. We might try to summarize our experiences. We might try to summarize this book.
Many of our statements are summaries. It would be nice if we could interpret our observations and experiences by pure objective summarizing. It’s very difficult though. Our worldviews get in the way.
Anytime we summarize, we leave out information that we consider minor. We only include information that we consider the most important information. That makes it very easy to distort reality into something that looks real but isn’t real. There are several problems with summaries. These
…show more content…
During analysis, we tend to unconsciously add elements of the worldview and create an illusion. What we’ve built in our worldviews seems real. When we add unreal elements from our worldviews, we think those unreal elements are real. Worldviews give that illusion. During analysis, we often unconsciously filter some elements out if those elements aren’t part of our worldviews. In addition, we don’t have a way of knowing that we have identified all the elements unless God reveals such a thing to us. The worldview is a deceitful filter. For this reason, Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to guide us in the process. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to correct us when we get it wrong.
Interpretation can’t add information. It’s not a source of new knowledge. It can give us a better understanding of the information that exists. Without the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the human mind is deceitful and will automatically distort the interpretation.
Explanations as a Way of Knowing
During the Q&A session, Bill made the following statement:
We challenge you; tell us why the universe is accelerating. Tell us why these mothers were getting sick. And we found an explanation for it.
Explanations aren’t found. Explanations are made up. The word “explanation” exposes wrong thinking about how we can know. Bodie Hodge gives this example:
“Now I want the readers to understand that just because someone has an explanation for something, that doesn’t make it true. The Greeks
that we could use reason to find certain truth if we used it correctly, while
mind to give explanations to the unexplainable? If this is true then humans created god.
Summarizing is one of the most efficient ways to formulate. Summarizing gives the reader a better understanding of the text. To
(AGG) Have you ever thought of something to be more than just how it’s described; have you searched under the surface for a meaning that could potentially change your perspective on something so simple?
Summarize: Write a summary of the article that represents its argument and concerns as accurately as possible.
Using this analysis as an example, we will never get to really comprehend people if we do not
that we could use reason to find certain truth if we used it correctly, while
Internal summaries and Foreshadowing help the receiver to follow up the point which they are in the message;
One’s understanding always comes with their experience in life, and because some wonders are too far-stretched to fathom, everyone ends up with different rationales for these wonders—and no definite conclusion can be
I will be now arguing the importance of the Theogony, in prompting rational thought in the later sixth century B.C.E. Historians will argue that the Greeks change in thought was a sudden shift from a mythical explanation, to a rational one, or the ‘Greek miracle’, as it often labelled. I however, will contest that there was no sudden, complete shift away from their mythical explanation. No, it was far too entrenched in their mind to have suddenly disappeared when a small number of
Although it is seen that everyone has similar opinions from time to time, not everyone’s opinions correlate. I was able to see this during the discussion of the Weekly News Analysis’. Different students in my class were able to dissect the same article but in different ways. I realized that everyone has lived through different life experiences and have diverse opinions and points of views on various topics. It was amazing for me to realize that if everyone helped one another, we could learn a lot due to the different perspectives and mindsets.
Your example of the disciples and apostles misinterpretation shows how important it is to determine the true meaning in the correct
Biblical Interpretation is important and necessary so that we can understand what the text is saying, what the intended theological message is, and how to personally apply and teach these Scriptural truths to carry forward the Gospel in rescuing others from despair and death to hope and life, thus displaying His glory and growing His Kingdom. It is about finding what God is revealing about Himself and His Son Jesus Christ. Moreover, it is for us to know that God desires to have a relationship with us and for us to be set apart in a covenant relationship with Him to display holy lives that bring Him glory. Interpretation, using hermeneutical principles, help guide us in proper boundaries for interpreting Scripture so that we can reveal the intended meaning of the text. Without this, we run the risk of imposing our own ideas on the text, therefore misinterpreting. Misinterpreting can cause us to miss theological truths, administer the wrong application, and neglect or overlook the meaning of the text which weakens the impact of God’s truth in our personal lives as well as others we are teaching.
In “The Refutation of Skepticism”, Jonathan Vogel establishes an “Inference to the Best Explanation” (hereafter, “IBE”) as a means to refute skepticism about the external world. In this refutation, Vogel acknowledges that skepticism about IBE still remains a possibility, but that this kind of skepticism would be rather outlandish in character and thus could be ignored. This paper shall both establish and evaluate Vogel’s reasoning as to why he confidently dismisses any skepticism pertaining to his IBE, and furthermore will illuminate some points as to why Vogel may have mischaracterized potential threats to his method, leaving his refutation of skepticism vulnerable to doubt that is not as