The first chapter deals with word-study fallacies. Here, Carson gives a list of the mistakes related to linguistics studies. All of these fallacies occur when interpreters misunderstand the use of certain words by an author. Some involves reading back into the word the meaning of another word which has the original as its root, though the root did not originally mean what its derivative does. For example, while our word `dynamite' may have the Greek 'dunamous' as its root, Paul certainly was not thinking of blasting powder when he spoke of the 'dunamous' [power] of the gospel. Others involve finding a root to words which simply isn't there. For example, we not should interpret the word `butterfly' based on its apparent root words - `butter' and `fly'!

Chapter two examines grammatical fallacies. These sorts of mistakes many times come from basing arguments on the mood or tense of words when the language is more flexible than the one arguing will allow. For example, the aorist tense is often abused by some who insist that it always means an `once for all action' that occurs in the past. Heikki Räisänen makes this mistake when commenting on Romans 3:27.

Logical fallacies are the focus of the third chapter of this book. Here, Carson attacks the erroneous ways in which one justifies the way he or she may interpret Scripture. These can come in one's inability to recognize distinctions, or perhaps draw distinctions where none exist. Still yet, another fallacy can come when one improperly frames the question he is trying to answer. For example, "When did you stop beating your wife?" is a mis-framed question, for almost any answer will get the innocent man in trouble!

The fourth chapter outlines some presuppositional and historical fallacies that often plague exegetes. Some of these mistakes result when one ignores the Bible's storyline. For example, some today would see the Song of Songs as pornographic literature. Obviously, they have missed the point of the book, in part because they have failed to take the plot-line of the Scripture in mind. Some of the historical fallacies that Carson speaks of involve uncontrolled reconstructions of ancient settings, attempted explanations of an author's motive, and the desire to relate the Bible to other disciplines (e.g. sociology or psychology).

Carson has put together an excellent handbook on mistakes to avoid in interpreting Scripture. And while Carson himself sees this book as only being supplemental reading, I think that it should be required reading for anyone who studies (or practices!) hermeneutics and Scripture interpretation. The only critique I have to offer is the book's brevity. I would love to see Carson do yet another revision of the book, elaborating further on the various fallacies he has outlined along with adding a comparable section on positive elements for interpreting Scripture.

Overall, I found Carson's book to be an excellent read. Granted this is not light reading that one would want to take on vacation with him or her, it is a book that repays serious study and contemplation. On a personal note, I was fortunate enough to meet Carson once. When I did, I told him how much this book sacred me when I read it. He made the comment that he supposed the book was not all that "edifying." After reflecting on the short conversation, I think he was wrong. In fact, the book is very edifying because it teaches the reader that he or she is not interpreting just another book, he is handling the Word of God and great care must be taken. The book is edifying in that it reinforces the value of God's Word.


Not impressed   April 10, 2004
 5 out of 41 found this review helpful

D.A. Carson is overly biased. He uses most of this book to bash views he doesn't like. Some of his categories are good but the examples he provides ought to be less polemical.


Be Careful What You Read!!!   March 1, 2004
 7 out of 8 found this review helpful

This was my first encounter with the writings of D.A. Carson, and it was a memorible one. This is a "no nonsense" book. Very detailed and very careful.
One thing that D.A. Carson does well is make a distinction between a "scholar" and an "exegete." He greatly criticises many scholars and gives us a "wake up call" as to what we are reading. Furthermore, he reminds us that not everyone who has written a book is an exegete. Even some people who have written exegetical works before can, thorough changing needs, make an increasingly large number of errors if they are not careful.
However, he does not leave the whole thing doom and gloom. Daniel Wallace, for instance, takes an opposite position to D.A. Carson on many issues. However, that is the fun of New Testament Exegesis. If you can avoid the pitfalls, the discussion of the text becomes incredibly interesting indeed.
Kudos to D.A. Carson! Every pastor, author, layman, and even sunday school teacher should read!


Good basic handbook   February 21, 2004
 5 out of 8 found this review helpful

Pinned to the wall of my cubicle is an inspirational postcard with the dazzling picture of the bow of a sunken ship sticking out of the water. The caption reads, "Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others."

Carson's short selection of exegetical mistakes should be required reading for anyone attempting to interpret Scripture, for he gives one a taste of the kinds of mistakes that can be made by both rank amateurs and seasoned scholars. The work is in no way (nor was it intended to be) exhaustive, but gives some small tastes of bad exegesis.

It's not quite a classic, but it's a useful little handbook of what not to do when exegeting the Word. It should be on every pastor, seminary student, and bible study leader's shelf, dog-eared and fingerprinted from use.


A good but flawed work   June 27, 2003
 13 out of 25 found this review helpful

D.A. Carson has done a great job of labeling and categorizing each and every common exegetical fallacy. I recommend this book for that specific reason. You must be careful however as you go through, because in a near funny (it would be downright hilarious if it weren't so tragic) method, Carson uses many of his own fallacies to bash exegetes that he doesn't like. There is one exegete that he continually bashes that I have in mind but won't mention because I think you'll find it obvious if you look for it. I don't know why he would harp on the importance of context in the Bible and then completely ignore context in extra-biblical literature (and even misquote someone!!). This being said, get this book, read the exegetical fallacies he lists along with their definitions and be aware of them in your own studies and in works of those theologians and exegetes you like or don't like. But don't by any means just take his word for who does what fallacy. Carson is too theologically biased to be objective in this area.