Thanks for posting Tomes' treatise, UntoHim.
Quote:
|
Examining LSM’s publications we have illustrated cases of the etymological root fallacy, invalid word-dissections, the reverse etymological fallacy, illegitimate totality transfer, the selective evidence fallacy, the word-concept fallacy and the unwarranted associative fallacy. Illustrative examples include key Greek words—ekklesia, parakletos, oikonomia, dunamis, proginosko, Laodicea, Nicolaitans, oida/ginosko, logos/rhema & agapao/phileo. These cases are merely the ‘tip of the iceberg;’ we could add many more examples. W. Lee’s exposition of Revelation’s 7 churches is rife with etymologizing. The etymological root meaning of each city’s name is used to characterize the church in that city—a tenuous expositional procedure. Moreover this case demonstrates that such errors are far from innocuous. LSM’s diatribe against democracy in the church is based largely on the etymology of the names “Laodicea & Nicolaitans.” Based on this W. Lee asserts,166 “democracy in the church is a wind of teaching, a devilish blowing of the evil one.” Yet there is nothing in the biblical text to suggest that the Apostle John intended his readers to draw these inferences. These exegetical fallacies and etymological errors undermine the value of LSM’s NT Recovery Version and Life-study commentaries. Readers are advised to treat every comment by LSM regarding Greek words with a high degree of skepticism..
|
Tomes demonstrates that much of Lee's Bible scholarship is fallacious. Thus, his treatise provides a detailed though not comprehensive answer to HERn's question , "How much to throw out? and suggests that the question ought to be whether there is anything we should keep.
Tomes also opens a can of worms. For he "evaluates LSM’s works in terms of recent linguistic research." We have entered the land of linguistics! And what are linguistics but the scientific study of language. Like all science, linguistics is a matter of probability, not absolute truth.
So it's not surprising that,"50 years ago a revolution occurred which “shook the foundations of…attempts to do theology in the form of word studies." That's a paradigm shift which is, according to Thomas Kuhn, in his influential book
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), a change in the basic assumptions, or paradigms, within the ruling theory of science.
" The standard reference tools used in New Testament studies were written before the advent and certainly before the development of modern linguistics”. As a science, modern linguistics is progressive. It's methods change over time.
Even now, different methods in the hands of different experts lead to different results. So it's not like you can expect a unanimity of expert opinion on these issues. It's a land of dueling expert opinions.
With linguistic analysis Tomes has brought Lee out of the LRC where he was the absolute authority and last word on Bible truth, into the land of more or less, where absolute certainty is unattainable and the next big paradigm shift may shake the foundations of the way they are doing Bible interpretation today yet again. And he has brought us with him.