Also found in: Dictionary, Wikipedia.
Graphic Thesaurus  🔍
Display ON
Animation ON
  • noun

Words related to eisegesis

personal interpretation of a text (especially of the Bible) using your own ideas

References in periodicals archive ?
A., <<Introduction: Exegesis, Eisegesis, Intergesis>>, Semeia 69-70 (1995) 7-18, aqui Bauks, Wayne Horowitz y Armin Lange, fruto de un congreso celebrado en la Universidad de Koblenz-Landau (Alemania) en el ano 2009: Between Text and Text: The Hermeneutics of Intertextuality in Ancient Cultures and Their Afterlife in Medieval and Modern Times, Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013.
Midrashim differ in the extent to which they do so, from adding or adjusting minor details to outright and extensive eisegesis. The midrash in the Asatir represents such eisegesis in extremo.
Even if grasping is interpreting, it is not Eisegesis since grasping is something that ordinary people do [10].
Historicism was the only accepted method of interpretation with sound hermeneutics for prophetic Scripture, using applied exegesis and eisegesis, but not without some unknown and unsolved qualities.
Critics argue that through a "predilection for eisegesis" (65) and the practice of a "selective hermeneutic," (66) the new charismatics' creeds represents, in essence, an amalgamation of some Pentecostal beliefs with other ideas and theologies borrowed from different sources.
Wright argues that Luther and generally all Protestants since have been preforming eisegesis instead of exegesis: that is, pushing foreign ideas into the text rather than extracting the true meaning from the text.
Biblical scholars argue that Aslan does not examine the Gospels using the method of exegesis--critical interpretation of a text--but instead he seems to practice eisegesis, using the text to prove one's own theories.
So often is this the case that eisegesis tells us about the times and attitudes of the interpreter more than it reveals new insights into the actual meaning of the text.
While valuing the significance of the dimensions of the creeds and confessions for categorical avenues of understanding to provide a pathway into Jesus' parables, neither allegory (18) nor eisegesis are being attempted here.
Moreover, Koltun-Fromm sets herself up against Elizabeth Clark's Reading Renunciation: Asceticism and Scripture in Early Christianity (1999), because Clark often treats patristic ascetic exegesis as a form of eisegesis, a reading into the texts something that is not necessarily there.
Such a descriptive method obviates any possible claim to theological eisegesis. Indeed, it does more to bolster the "Babette = Christ-figure" verdict.
It resonates deeply with Fernando Segovia's claim that "all exegesis is ultimately eisegesis." For many this will be deeply disturbing, but for Ruiz it represents "the new normal."
Such appropriation of the language conveys the impression that a writer is cleverly pointing out syntactic privilege already embedded in the language (exegesis) when in fact it is actually reading new and specific meanings into the language (eisegesis) or interpreting one possible meaning as being the definitive meaning.