Son and father music studio

eejoseph,

Describe the most ambitious DIY project you’ve ever taken on.

Back in 2007 my son and I sat down, me with my acoustic guitar and he with an electronic keyboard plugged in to his computer. Before this we had  worked on songs for Church and sometimes at community and family events. 2007 marked a new pathway. We began writing songs,  the first named “Hello”. This song explored human fear of darkness when in fact darkness is the environment out of which human existence is said to have come.

What is ambitious about making music with your son? Well, when you keep at it for 19 years turning out 19 albums, many of them with more than 15 songs songs, do it yourself music studio may seem  like ambition on steroids, but it is passion and talent harnessed to touch the world.

Haiti came to America and Hell is going to Greenland no time soon

eejoseph, , ,

Greenland, the storied and touched by power on every level, would become the laughingstock of the world were Greenlanders to find the overtures of the American president attractive.  The first reversal of the European colonial plan was in Haiti, and the nations of the world were slow to recognize Haiti’s achievement of independence in 1804.

  • France, 21 years after, then hijacked the nations future
  • The United Kingdom 22 years after
  • The United States, 59 years after, then embarked on a set of manipulative control ventures, culminating in the invasion of the island.

Hell rose up in the United States over the treatment of Africans and no one but deluded pastors and their corrupt sheriffs, law enforcement officers, elected representatives, and judges believe that the United States of America is a sacred and exemplary embodiment of divine government. The United States of America is not even a good example of faithfulness to its own constitution.

As for that desire to take over Greenland, we have the solid resolution of the Greenlandic people and the NATO alliance and the European Union saying “We’re not interested”. When neither apology nor actual takeover of Greenland takes place we will then see exactly how beastly the United States of America is and has always been.

Why should gangs not dominate the American streets, and why is the United States fooling around with oligarchy and dictatorship under the infamous nationalist banner?  So let’s watch them in the coming months – into 2027 – parade their corruption from pulpit, mosque and synagogue as the people’s way, and not be duped again.

Reading and not getting it

eejoseph, ,

Many of us are familiar with reading scripture and getting something from it, while others seem to be quite adept at making scripture say what they want it to say. These two ways of interacting with Scripture are known respectively as exegesis and eisegesis (ex-ee-GEE-sis and ace-ee-GEE-sis).  Almost every experienced Bible reader and practically all the New Testament scholars have concluded that there are no other ways to experience the Word of God, but there are other prepositions beside ek and eis (εκ, εις) that might define the reader’s experience with the Bible.

In and out; εις and εκ/εξ

Both exegesis and eisegesis have disappointed readers because finding meaning can be challenging due to general literacy, translation variations, and the traditions of every denomination or grouping. One of the other alternative ways to gather meaning from the Bible is to have another book

Simple eisegesis can be recognized when people read a passage from the New Testament or Old Testament and try to apply a 21st century environment to the reading. For example when one reads the word candle and pictures the modern candle that is made of tallow and wick instead of an oil container and a wick, one is reading into the scriptures something that is not there.  Another simple example is the reading of the Old Testament that public executions cleanses the land of sin (crime) and lobbying for capital punishment.

The speaking text

While the work of translating the ancient documents into our modern languages continues frantically, aiming for the point where all of the languages on the planet are hosting the word of God, people handicap themselves by creating preferences such as reading only the King James version or reading only modern languages translations, hence readers are not receiving the guidance from their leaders to properly engage with the Scriptures. Here are two examples of the text speaking with precision and inaccuracy.

“For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall IN NO WISE pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:18)

The phrase IN NO WISE is an attempt to bring the reader to recognize the double negative – not not –  in the Greek manuscript, ου μη, ou me.

“For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (Matthew 5:18)

All translations of the Bible have value and some are downright despicable for ignoring grammar. The most egregious example of reading the text and not getting it is when people place entire books as the filters for the glorious words of the Bible. Latter Day Saints, do it. Jehovah’s Witnesses do it.  Seventh-Day Adventists do it.  Is God’s word so obscure that, when translated into our modern languages, you need another book to tell you what God is trying to say to you? The practice makes a joke of the preeminence of Christ as incarnate and written word. Make no mistake the apostolic messaging is not opinion; it is foundational. Nothing compares. Count yourself departed from the faith if you take pride in another supposed source of God’s life giving word.

Words unique to Yeshua of Nazareth

Another critical example of reading the text and not getting it occurs when we fail to realize that the word of God itself has the capacity to transform us, and its effectiveness is not restricted to us reading things into it or us depending on it to speak to us. Consider the use by Jesus of the phrase “my word”or “my words”and how the saying might have led a reader to conclude that Jesus’ words were necessarily the words of the prophets. When Jesus means his own words the Greek indicates it by not using the popular enclitic pronoun mou, μου, meaning “of me” = my.

“For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will also be ashamed of him when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.” (Mark 8:38)

Here Jesus is talking about his own words to his generation, not the words spoken by others in his name. In Mark 8:38 tous emous logous, “my own words” is different from the following which contains tous logous mou.

“He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me. (John 14:24)

Let’s return to the concept that people are able to place entire non- Biblical books as filters on the scripture for an evaluation of how dangerous that approach can be. There is no room for believers to have books of their own production competing with what we have come to recognize as God-breathed or inspired. When it comes to God’s word people will find no leeway or mercy when they revere some other thing(s).

The third way to experience Scripture

Before I introduce approach #3, I invite you to ask your trusted AI app or knowledge base if there are effective alternatives to exegesis and eisegesis. In addition to the resolute negative answer to the question you will find that artificial intelligence reports propose that other approaches to scripture are merely fanciful or speculative.

We habitually put a lot of thought and effort into finding meaning from the Scriptures but the critical achievements of our interaction with the Biblical material are beyond meaning for the purpose of working the word. and may not even be dependent on our understanding of the text. To experience the Word of God one must step out of oneself and allow the Word to do its work.

Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment. (James 3:1)

Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. (1 Timothy 1:5-7)

Reading the Bible for transmitting vs experience

By seeing we gain experience, as Israel did with the bronze serpent and as believers do by looking at the elevated Christ and by seeing the light in Jesus’s face. Experience is more important than knowledge. We must conduct our Bible reading with a goal of a face to face with the author and object of the Scriptures. The more we do the better for our witness. We come to scripture to see Jesus, not the prophet or disciple. How often that happens in the sense that Christ and the reader are transfixed is a matter of looking past the temporal to see the eternal. This is throughgesis: more beneficial than exegesis and the nemesis of eisegesis.

Preface to an unopened frontier

eejoseph 
You will find below two findings by popular Artificial Intelligence apps. 
Each answers the following question in the negative.

Is there an alternative to eisegesis and exegesis?

First Perplexity, then ChatGpt

Perplexity

In technical hermeneutics, there is no single “third thing” alongside exegesis and eisegesis that functions as a standard label in the same way, but there are several alternative frameworks and emphases that move beyond the simple binary. [11]

## Clarifying the binary

– Exegesis: drawing meaning **out** of the text in light of its linguistic, literary, and historical context (authorial intention, original audience, etc.). [1][7][11]
– Eisegesis: reading one’s own ideas **into** the text, often neglecting the original context and letting contemporary assumptions govern interpretation. [3][7][9][11]

Many contemporary hermeneutical discussions view this opposition as a useful pedagogical contrast, but also as an oversimplification of how interpretation actually works. [11]

## Broader categories often proposed

Several approaches function as “alternatives” in the sense that they shift the focus from simply “out of vs. into”:

– Reader‑response and reception‑history approaches: emphasize the role of the reader or community in producing meaning, not just the author or original context. These do not deny exegesis but relativize authorial intention as the single control on meaning. (This is one reason some scholars say the exegesis/eisegesis binary is too simple.) [11]
– Canonical, theological, and ecclesial readings: prioritize the final canonical form and the church’s theological rule of faith; they use grammatical‑historical work, but the controlling horizon is the canon or the Church’s confession, not only reconstructed authorial intention. [11]
– Contextual, liberationist, feminist, and postcolonial readings: explicitly read from a particular social location, with critical awareness that “pure” exegesis is impossible and that all reading entails some form of “bringing meaning to” the text. In this sense, they present themselves as conscious, self‑critical alternatives to naïve exegesis and unconscious eisegesis. [11]

These are not usually framed as “tertium quid” between exegesis and eisegesis, but as different hermeneutical paradigms that reconfigure the whole discussion.

## Within evangelical/grammatical‑historical circles

Inside circles that still strongly privilege grammatical‑historical exegesis, you sometimes see:

– A distinction between exegesis (text‑centered meaning) and application or contextualization (bringing the text to bear on the present), where “good” eisegesis in the sense of creative, pastorally sensitive application is allowed only after rigorous exegesis. [10]
– Critiques of many popular “alternative methodologies” (e.g., playful nicknames like “narcigesis,” “assumegesis,” “likegesis”) to highlight ways people deviate from disciplined exegesis; these are more satirical than formally recognized categories. [5]

Here the “alternative to eisegesis” is not a third interpretive category but a call to responsible exegesis plus carefully distinguished application. [1][7][10]

## If you are looking for a conceptual alternative

If your question is more philosophical—“Is there a category that acknowledges reader involvement without collapsing into pejorative ‘eisegesis’?”—then the closest answers in current hermeneutics are:

– Self‑critical, historically informed exegesis that acknowledges interpreter preunderstanding (Gadamerian “fusion of horizons”) but still aims at responsible constraint by the text’s historical and literary features. [11]
– The various reader‑oriented or theological approaches that explicitly name their controlling horizons (community, canon, doctrine, social location) rather than pretending to be value‑free “pure exegesis.” [11]

So there is no widely accepted, single technical term that simply replaces the exegesis/eisegesis pair, but there are several robust hermeneutical models that attempt to move beyond a strict binary while still resisting arbitrary, uncontrolled eisegesis. [11]

Citations:
[1] EXEGESIS VS EISEGESIS – Have you been studying … https://www.kcbc.org.uk/2021/08/exegesis-vs-eisegesis/
[2] What is your approach to exegesis and share a helpful … https://www.facebook.com/groups/PastorToThePastors/posts/4190131927969827/
[3] What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis? https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/xzf9xk/what_is_the_difference_between_exegesis_and/
[4] Mistakes in exegesis and eisegesis https://donaldboyd.org/2015/08/31/mistakes-in-exegesis-and-eisegesis/
[5] Popular Alternative Methodologies in Biblical Interpretation https://theologicalsushi.blogspot.com/2020/08/popular-alternative-methodologies-in.html?m=1
[6] Exegesis vs eisegesis yes there is a difference, but which one does … https://www.facebook.com/groups/317070118948079/posts/1474584753196604/
[7] What is the difference between exegesis and eisegesis? https://www.gotquestions.org/exegesis-eisegesis.html
[8] Exegesis and Eisegesis – Ways to Learn at Ligonier.org https://learn.ligonier.org/podcasts/simply-put/exegesis-and-eisegesis
[9] Exegesis vs. Eisegesis: What’s the Difference? – GCU https://www.gcu.edu/blog/theology-ministry/exegesis-vs-eisegesis-whats-difference
[10] Exegesis VS Eisegesis and Mark 8:15 https://expedition44.com/2024/02/09/exegesis-of-mark-815/
[11] Exegesis Versus Eisegesis – Nelson University https://www.nelson.edu/thoughthub/bible-and-theology/exegesis-versus-eisegesis/
[12] Exegesis y Eiségesis https://www.indubiblia.org/interpretacion/exegesis-y-eis%C3%A9gesis

ChatGpt

The familiar contrast between exegesis (drawing meaning out of a text) and eisegesis (reading meaning into a text) can feel overly binary. In practice, interpreters across history have developed other ways to describe what is actually happening when we read.

Here are several significant alternatives or expansions.
—

1. Hermeneutics – the broader discipline

Rather than posing exegesis vs. eisegesis as a moral contrast, many scholars speak more broadly of hermeneutics, the theory of interpretation itself.

Modern philosophical hermeneutics, especially in the work of Hans-Georg Gadamer, reframed interpretation as a fusion of horizons—the meeting of the historical world of the text and the historical world of the reader. Meaning is neither purely extracted nor imposed; it arises through engagement.

Likewise, Paul Ricoeur described interpretation as a dialectic of explanation and understanding. One moves from grammatical-historical analysis to existential appropriation.

In this model, eisegesis is not the only danger; naïve objectivism is also suspect. The interpreter is always situated.
—

2. Midrash – disciplined re-application

Within Jewish interpretive traditions, especially in rabbinic literature, midrash does not pretend to neutrality. It often re-reads earlier texts for new historical moments.

The Torah is not simply explained; it is extended, dialogued with, even imaginatively reconfigured. The result is neither strict exegesis nor careless eisegesis, but a covenantal rereading within a living community.

Early Christian interpretation—especially in the Gospel of Matthew—often operates in a similar mode when citing Hebrew Scripture.
—

3. Typology – historical correspondence

The early church distinguished allegory from typology. Typology insists that earlier historical events prefigure later ones in God’s providence.

For example, Paul’s treatment of Adam and Christ in Epistle to the Romans 5 functions typologically. The earlier event is real and historically grounded, yet also anticipatory.

This is not merely reading into the text; it is reading along a canonical trajectory.

—

4. Canonical criticism

Developed in the twentieth century (notably by Brevard Childs), this approach asks not only what a text meant in its original setting, but how it functions within the final form of Scripture.

Meaning emerges from placement, juxtaposition, and communal reception.
—

5. Reader-response criticism

Here the reader’s role is foregrounded. Meaning happens in the act of reading. While this approach can drift toward subjectivism, its strength lies in honesty about the interpretive event.

In postcolonial and liberation readings, this method has been used constructively—especially in communities recovering agency after oppression.

—

6. Spiritual reading (Lectio Divina)

In monastic traditions, the goal is not historical reconstruction but transformation. The text reads the reader.

In such settings, the distinction between exegesis and eisegesis becomes secondary to formation.
—

My perspective
The exegesis/eisegesis dichotomy was useful in Protestant polemics, especially against allegorical excess. But historically it oversimplifies what interpreters actually do.

Every reading involves:

1. Grammatical-historical analysis

2. Canonical awareness

3. Theological judgment

4. Communal location

The real question is not whether one influences the text (we always do), but whether the influence is disciplined, transparent, and accountable to linguistic and historical constraints.

[Here’s an opinion from this intelligence library]


If I may venture an opinion: the most fruitful alternative is not abandoning exegesis, but enlarging it into critical hermeneutics—where historical rigor and ethical responsibility meet.



My proposal for a third method or approach gets wings from the fact that there are more than two prepositions in the Greek understanding of relationships.
Into εις and out of εκ(εξ) are just the two that observers have seen in inoperation. My approach has nothing to do with abandoning exegesis or redefining eisegesis. The third ‘gesis is not a replacement: it was there all the time, unrecognized and functioning.



—
You are witnessing Glimpses of more than eisegesis and exegesis

So, there you have it, no alternative to exegesis or eisegesis.

The old page turns

eejoseph, , ,

The new page of my blogging life is for my comfort and conscience. It should not be a surprise that people find strength in their polarity. Diversity and divergence are essential for what this blogger calls fun, but what is popular political and religious fun is an unambiguous wild rampage by people whose stage should be exclusively their shower and breakfast table. Many people are not accustomed to learning by asking questions. I have not wanted to answer questions, and many people are loath to ask certain questions.  That is why my destination is that patch of green grass where I bend low to talk to the minors and those ready to depart.

No more Mr Niceguy

I have steered clear of using my blog as a conversation portal. You may have noticed that the major purveyors of news and information quickly close the comment section after publishing their items or articles, for the simple reason that a flood of unhinged and uninformed comments will be posted, and will include the most despicable sentiments. In the current situation of public interaction we have powers that we attempting to muzzle the expression of people’s opinions, and use both the courts and extrajudicial means to obscure heterodox opinion. I have decided to toe one line, with no interest in giving an inch to the competing dogmas and cultural heritages.

To word 500

Pretty or disheveled, whatever your political or religious bent, you matter, and it is great that bloggers and readers are not necessarily acquaintances, because seeing what you look like, hearing your thoughts, may pressure us to contend, compare and compete.  It is remarkable to me that there is a thing between us that is so valuable to me that I am certain that change in any direction will be felt in diverse ways. Thanks for following my blog and for subscribing and let’s raise a glass to the next and necessary elevations on our journey.

Where I am going

People can be convinced of almost anything, given the right amount of time and the appropriate circumstances. In my field we are able to amass a massive amount of information, and a variety of sources to make a point.  Unlike a lot of colleagues across all the religions I let what I read speak to me with finality. Where my thoughts and attitudes settle is not subject to anyone’s opinion. Typically though, after hearing three or four opinions, most people end up just shrugging off any final answer or conclusion. That is a waste of energy and a sign of chameleonitis. If you land on a place where no one else agrees with you, everyone who knows you should respect that place. So I want to let “yes”  and “no”, my “yes yes” and my “no no” be the hallmark of my Life is Fun Blog, because as much as I want noone trampling on my pearls I will not trample on yours, seeing that I do not know them. Turn!

Under arrest and cross-bound

eejoseph,

Many people are familiar with the saying that if you read the scriptures there’s a blessing, and further, if you give heed to the scriptures you are blessed, and then a third blessing comes to those who keep the sayings of the scriptures. This particular model comes from the book of Revelation, but we can take it that all of the writings preserved for us from the eyewitnesses of Jesus and his immediate servants will render the same layers of blessing.

Misinformation short circuits blessings

Take the verses that follow, Philippians 3:10-11, and characterize (1) the knowledge and (2) the metamorphosis

  • Knowledge: that I may know him
  • Being conformed to his death

that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. (Philippians 3:10-11)

The conclusion from the context and the contending

The context of this knowledge of resurrection power and the conformity to his death is a teaching that lays Pharisee [self]righteousness to rest.  There is a conclusion that everything that preceded our introduction to Christ will fall into the category of rubbish. No group or tradition can claim to have that which Christ brings to the table of righteousness and power.  Knowing him and resurrection power is often thought to be the rites of conversion (REGENERATION – paliggenesia – confession, repentance, baptism, church membership), and the operation of  powers (dunamis – miracles and Spirit fruit).  Some however have chosen to follow the reasoning that knowledge of Christ takes a lifetime. Every convert meets the same Jesus, and Jesus has not designed every one to be teachers, miracle workers, evangelists, etc. It would be a waste of creative power if he did. We are subsequently never at the same level of memory text retention, never at the same volume of Bible knowledge and definitely never at the same level of diligent searching the Scriptures.

Our contending, our combat, compels us to accept intimacy with Christ as the starting point of experiencing resurrection power, and the continuing daily shaping of OUR LIVES to agree with HIS DEATH, something infinitely beyond church membership.

Neither expertise nor learning

You only delude yourself that all believers have a vast treasury of knowledge of Christ. True religion is not talk. It is not telling ourselves that we ought to obey because each one has the same Father, and no believer has the power to talk another into long hair, short hair, improved sight or hearing. We are all dependent on God to, with our surrender, move us to the next level of faith. The next level of our advancement is not something we earn, because our growth and productivity are outcomes of grace; from faith to faith.  Let our thanksgiving repeatedly silence any pride that we have cooperated with the Divine Majesty.

The impatient patient

We cannot wait to declare ourselves free from all the identifying marks of humanity, so we talk about victory in all circumstances, we talk about being delivered from all troubled. Meanwhile, many of us are wretched, poor, miserable and blind, and do not know it. We want to have an abundant life with no death in sight and that is the tragedy of trying to be something we are not. Christ came to save us; all the apostles tell us that he saved us yet, we are telling ourselves “Not so: we’re not saved”.   The purpose of the Cross is not to make all the people of the world israelites, following the law of Moses and the levitical system. The purpose of the Cross is to bring us to the Crucified Life; a life that mirrors the life of the Risen Lord. Eternal life without the cross as the center, the source and the flow, is completely fake.

Responsive Reading: No Shrine But Christ

eejoseph, ,


Leader: 
Lord, You have been our refuge… in all generations; 
no shrine of stone… but Yourself. 

People: 
You are our dwelling place, our καταφυγή… our shelter and sanctuary. 

Leader: 
Christ Jesus, You are the ἱλαστήριον…  the mercy seat where atonement was accomplished once for all. 

People: 
And You are the ἱλασμός… 
the sacrifice itself—both priest and offering… altar and temple. 


Leader: 
According to the pattern of Melchizedek… 
Your priesthood follows sacrifice. 

People (slow, deliberate emphasis): 
Its focus is the distribution of benefits… 
bread and wine… the staples of the Christ Event. 


Leader (crescendo on verbs): 
You tore the veil… opened the door… 
and made fellowship permanent. 

People: 
We enter boldly… not by ritual schedule… 
but by Your living presence. 


Leader (solemn, slower pace): 
No shrine but Christ—our temple… our communication… our communion. 

People: 
No shrine but Christ—our bread… our wine… our eternal refuge. 


Leader: 
The Lamb is our sanctuary; 
the Lord is our dwelling place. 

People: 
Forever we proclaim: No shrine but Christ! 

Strange songs of Zion

eejoseph

You may recall that the Hebrew people in exile were invited to sing one of the songs of their homeland, to which they responded by asking “How can we sing the Lord’s song In a strange land?

How can we sing the Lord’s song In a foreign land? (Psalms 137:4)

Sometimes we find ourselves at an even stranger intersection and realize there is neither road map nor traffic cop here.

If a song’s refrain is “We Have an Anchor that Keeps the Soul” it will surely help the singers to know what that anchor is, and it should not take very long to realize that the Bible has ANCHOR in two narratives and ANCHOR appears once in a portrait of God’s sure promises. 

Will Your Anchor Hold?

The title of a song should address the subject, but not the song “Will your anchor hold?”. It goes off on a tangent.  For comparison here is the anchor verse in two translations.

This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and steadfast and one which enters within the veil, (Hebrews 6:19 NASB)

Which [hope] we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; (Hebrews 6:19 KJV)

We can see that hope is the anchor, as the King James version supplies the word hope In italics) and 18b shows the divine purpose, namely that we … would have strong encouragement to take hold of the hope set before us… (Hebrews 6:18b).  Furthermore, the discussion of the certainty of God’s promise and his oath (verses 13 to 17) together help to show how hope serves as an anchor. So it is strange that this song never says “hope”.

The 5-verse version of the song has one reference to hope, or more precisely, it refers to HOPES. Not exactly the same thing as hope.  But poetic license aside, I would reckon that few people singing that song realize that the celebrated anchor is hope.

It will surely hold in the floods of death,
When the waters cold chill our latest breath;
On the rising tide it can never fail,
While our HOPES abide within the veil.

These days the script has flipped. We are singing strange songs in the Lord’s land.  Are you singing songs these days that float away from the truth and from the affirmation in the refrain or the title? How many songs have what sounds like a biblical theme – anchor for the soul – but have no recognizable lines about the theme?  The refrain of the song says we are grounded firm and deep in the savior’s love, but it never says a word about the hope that we are being invited to lay hold of.  Strange huh? You can continue this discovery by examining “Redeemed! How I love to proclaim it” and see exactly how many of the sentiments in the song are your settled belief.

We are singing strange songs in the Lord’s land, but life gets even stranger when we settle for the tinsel objects that are popular these days as eternal and present truth.