User talk:StudentoftheWord

Notable Quotes:

"A fool tells me his reasons. The wise man persuades me with my own." -Aristotle

Truth

An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it. Truth stands, even if there be no public support. It is self sustained. —Mohandas Gandhi

What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof. —Christopher Hitchens

Reason has built the modern world. It is a precious but also a fragile thing, which can be corroded by apparently harmless irrationality. We must favor verifiable evidence over private feeling. Otherwise we leave ourselves vulnerable to those who would obscure the truth. —Richard Dawkins

On Words

We are aware that nothing is more unsafe and treacherous than the guidance of etymology. An ounce of usage is worth a pound of it. Etymology is theory, usage is fact. -John Westley Hanson

The Root Fallacy

"Presupposes that every word actually has a meaning bound up with its shape or its components".

Example: Nice comes from the Latin nescius, which means "ignorant"

Words should not be defined by their etymology but instead by their context and use.

Not all words are referential, a sentence cannot be analyzed into the things each word in the sentence 'names.' It follows that the meaning of words in a grammatically coherent array, as in a, is different from the theoretical referent of each word"-Dr. Fesko, Hermeneutics

The Word Study Fallacy

Word studies are popular, easily obtained from available resources, and an easy way to procure sermon content. However, word studies are also subject to radical extrapolations and erroneous applications. It is not always possible to strike exegetical gold by extracting a word from the text for close examination. Word studies alone will not suffice. Indeed, over-occupation with word studies is a sign of laziness and ignorance involved in much of what passes for biblical exposition in our times. While we might decry over-emphasis on philology or etymology, we must recognize that the choice of individual words was significant to the writers of Scripture. It is legitimate for the exegete to ask, "Why did the writer choose this term as opposed to one of its synonyms?" Study of the words alone will not present us with a consistent interpretation or theology. This is one of the misleading aspects of theological dictionaries/wordbooks. Any linguistic aids are virtually useless apart from the author's context. -William D Barrick, Exegetical Fallacies.

Universal Reconciliation

Greetings. Your contributions since 2007 are on one subject area universal reconciliation. And changes to Universal reconciliation (Talk:Universal reconciliation), Universalism, Trinitarian Universalism, List of early Christian Universalists, Christian Universalism are based primarily on antiquated Universalist histories (1890s) by Universalist writers. Time/historiography has moved on. If you want to find Universalists in history before Jane Leade (1624-1704) then by all means do so, Gregory of Nysa may be one, etc. but modern academic sources are required. Any source that names Hans Denck etc. is clearly not reliable. As for Origen, see recent researches on Origen. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:14, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, most of my research does not come from sources written in 1890's. Please refer to the references I provide for my information.

Incidentally your quote "We are aware that nothing is more unsafe and treacherous than the guidance of etymology. An ounce of usage is worth a pound of it. Etymology is theory, usage is fact" is from the Universalist John Wesley Hanson not Westley (1875). Cheers.In ictu oculi (talk) 23:17, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Christian terrorism

I noticed you contribute to WP:Chritianity, I'm calling for your urgent attention to matters discussed on Christian terrorism's talk page, thank you.Eli+ 20:20, 21 February 2011 (UTC)