Home | 1 Corinthians and Tongues in Private Devotions >> |
---|
March, 2006 |
âGot Fishâ or âFish Fightâ or âTo Fish or Not To Fishâ |
IM Smack-down |
Posted by Brian Beers at 3/29/2006 1:49:00 PM (0 comments left) |
Sam and I just had a big smack-down over my spot-on fisherman post. Surprisingly, we both made cogent arguments. Early on Sam appeared to be hung up on a point about exegesis, but in the end he came to a rather startling conclusion. Below is the transcript of the exchange, edited slightly to make us sound even more cogent. What do you think of Samâs conclusion? |
The big S says: did you see my scathing comments? Brian Beers says: ! Brian Beers says: You do seem to be missing my point: we interpret fishing in terms of recreational fishing which is completely invalid, and as a result of this we understand evangelism incorrectly the big S says: i guess i feel like you're trying to make a point out of the fisherman passage that wasn't valid then and thus shouldn't be taken out of it now. Brian Beers says: My target is to dismantle our unjustified model of evangelism which is based on recreational fishing rather than the kind of fishing that the disciples were familiar with. the big S says: if you run across people citing the fishing passage and talking about using lures, then yes, you have a right to contradict them, but not on the basis that these guys are commercial fishermen, but on the basis that that isn't how they fished.... Brian Beers says: The over-application of the fishing model for evangelism is a related issue, but I was taking that as a given since it is so widespread the big S says: in bringing up commercial vs. recreational, you are encouraging interpreting scripture by experience. Brian Beers says: You seem to be splitting fishing lines here: I characterized the disciples method of fishing as commercial (and justifiably) to give us a framework for comparing how we interpret and use that passage the big S says: it is only justifiable as far as you make the correct distinction, namely that it was a profession... Brian Beers says: Yes. I was not discussing exegesis. I am discussing application and Interpretation, and that the methods were vastly different than those that we usually think of than we think of fishing the big S says: you have to discuss exegesis âby ignoring exegesis, we develop right actions from wrong texts... Brian Beers says: exegesis isn't the point there the big S says: exegesis must always be the point. the big S says: everything you've said is right, but it doesn't come from the fishing passage. Brian Beers says: Aaahhâ¦Yes. that is a different point of attack on the fishing/evangelism model that pervades Evangelicalism. Brian Beers says: My exegesis of the passage agrees with yours the big S says: thank goodness Brian Beers says: my attack is on the ideas of evangelism that stem from recreational fishing Brian Beers says: My point is that they are so far off that they don't even interpret *fishing* correctly - let alone evangelism the big S says: the best thing to do is to jettison the idea of being fishers-of-men as an evangelistic model, it draws too much attention to means... which was not the point. |