Here’s an interesting video from Carson and Piper on the necessity of studying the historical background of a particular biblical book for preaching and teaching. You can see all three of the videos at The Gospel Coalition.
Here’s an interesting video from Carson and Piper on the necessity of studying the historical background of a particular biblical book for preaching and teaching. You can see all three of the videos at The Gospel Coalition.
I strongly disagree with what John Piper is saying here for a few reasons: 1) I have spent some time reading and studying the variation of human cognition since the dawn of history in some way or another. It is daunting, colorful, and vast. It is my firm belief that to avoid anachronisms that theologians too often make, socio-rhetorical context is key. 2) John Piper’s response is a blatant false dichotomy and a strawman: “Someone who spends 10hours in Scripture is going to know more about the section than someone who spends 10hours in context and 1 hour in Scripture (I understand that he probably does not hold to this either/or view, but he spoke). 3) Anytime John Piper goes into the Greek meanings, or any extra information to set the context, he has already shifted slightly towards the position he is trying to refute. 4) He forgets that the modern English translations have the contextual work partially done for us when the scholars use contextual information to best translate the modern English word equivalents.