I have learned that in hebrew schoolarship, where everyone knew the Torah by heart, everyone educated knew the Torah plus the prophets by heart, and the schoolars knew the Torah plus the prophets plus the commentary by heart, quoting one sentence or even one phrase was a common technique for "tagging" the whole context of the quoted phrase into your own argument. Thus, what you would write is a short reference, but what your audience hears is a two page insertion referencing a particular passage of scripture. Maybe a prophecy by Isaiah or a psalm by David or a law of Moses.

Besides, prooftexting is entierly infeasible when your audience knows the correct context of the passage you atempt to misuse. Prooftexting is entierly reliant upon it ignorance of your audience as to what the text is really talking about. (As hearing someone wrench a word you are well familiar with to a purpose which is alien to it makes you uncomfortable and suspicious of the motives and intent of the speaker.)

What's an example of this? I.e., of Paul's using sentences or partial sentences to arrive at conclusions not inherent in the context.

This is an interesting point!

Thomas, how would anyone arrive at new truth if everyone believes the same thing about the context of a passage?

Mike, I didnt realise that you view confusion/missunderstanding to be a conductor of truth.

To clarify myself, believing the false thing about a passage is not expected to facilitate a correct understanding of what it tries to teach. God can still use it to lead a person to the truth, but laying aside our best effort to reach a correct understanding through honest study while expecting God to make up the difference is an approach which is not supported by neither the bible nor by Ellen (who repeatedly refused to let vision replace acctual biblestudy). Therefore learning the right context, understanding the text properly and then puting it in a right relationship with the rest of the biblical teaching seems to be the way to proceed. Taking a view that is foreign to the immediate context and the larger biblical teaching simply because this erronous understanding is "hallowed" by lengthy use and denominational tradition is then the wrong way to proceed. We have yet truths to learn and falsehoods to unlearn, as Ellen once wrote.

Defining prooftexting as a use of selected parts of a source document where knowledge of the context is not assumed and or actively discouraged. Where the context if explored would be found to make the text either irrelevant for the purpose it was used for or sometimes even disprove the point the prooftexter tried to make. Examples of use among authors who assume the audience will not try to explore context, in guided biblestudy where line comes upon line in such a speed that any wish to look at context is rendered impossible, or when the precise source of the prooftext is actively hidden making its use nothing more than elaborate name-dropping.

Defining responsible use of the bible as giving quotes which not only give immediate support for the point being made but where the context if known or researched will strengthen the point further. Opportunity and encouragement to learn the context is also supported and facilitated.

Thomas, could you produce some examples of this?

Rosangela:

http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/bradford/prophet-15.htm

Vaster,

This is an example which shows that we shouldn't accept at face value what other people say. Dr. Graeme Bradford says:


You will notice that he mentions no reference that can be verified by the reader. In which page of the book Sketches from the Life of Paul does Ellen White say that the law in Galatians is the ceremonial law alone? In none that I am aware of.

He still says:

Another unsubstantiated claim. Neither the word schoolmaster nor any allusion to Gal. 3:24 can be found in AA.

What she did say about this:

In 1896 - "In this scripture, the Holy Spirit through the apostle is speaking especially [not exclusively] of the moral law" (1SM 234.5).

In 1900 - "I am asked concerning the law in Galatians. What law is the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ? I answer: Both the ceremonial and the moral code of ten commandments" (1SM 233.1).

About the "daily," we have discussed it in the past here.

As any normal person, she did have her personal opinions, which did grow with time, or simply had no opinion about some doctrinal points. But, when she wrote about doctrinal matters, she didn't express merely her personal opinions.