Why is it wrong to proof-text when making an argument? Proof-texting is when someone simply quotes a verse from the Bible, out of context, to make a point. This can be in a book, a conversation, an essay, or a sermon, to give some examples. I just did a quick read of some other blogs on this topic, and none of them wowed me, so I thought I'd write my own. Then I had an even better idea: why not get you to tell me why proof-texting is problematic? In other words, I want to crowd-source the problem, and get lots of input. Since it is my suggestion, and I already did some research, let me get the ball rolling. Proof-texting is problematic because: It ignores the original context of the verse. There are actually two types of context: The literary context of the verse, that is, the verse is situated in a passage (that might be making an entirely different point) of Scripture that has a certain genre. For instance, the book of Acts is narrative, which means it is descriptive of what hap...
Image by Juanita Mulder from Pixabay In the TV show 'Top Gear' one of my favourite parts of each episode was the 'star in reasonably-priced car' where the Stig would race round the track and a star (e.g. Tom Cruise - good name for a car prog) would try to beat his time (and all the other stars who had recently raced). In Bible translation, according to Hill, Gutt, Unger, Floyd & Hill,* we are often driving the equivalent of a Land Cruiser, rather than a reasonably-priced car. That is, we want to do a full Bible translation (BT) and produce a print Bible, with all the extras, a full audio recording, and several videos (perhaps of the gospels). This is all very well, but what might actually be needed is the reasonably-priced car. The authors then go onto explain two approaches to Bible translation and Scripture engagement (SE). This approach encourages communities to consider producing products that meet their needs in the short term. This will allow them to focus ...