Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 1
David says Reformed apologists “mine the early Christian writings” and read penal substitution “back into innocent statements”; what specific habits of reading (quoting, excerpting, assumptions brought to the text) does he warn against, and where do you see yourself tempted to do the same thing—either with the Fathers or with Scripture?
Another way to ask: David says some Reformed writers “mine” early Christian quotes and read penal substitution into lines that don’t clearly teach it. What reading habits does he warn about, and where are you tempted to do the same thing with the Church Fathers or the Bible?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
David warns that people often start with penal substitution already assumed, then hunt for scattered lines that *sound like* it, instead of reading whole passages and the overall framework of the Fathers. Based on his teaching, the same temptation exists with Scripture: proof-texting a preferred system rather than letting the full context speak.
- He says apologists “mine the early Christian writings… finding… quotes here and there,” then claim, “Aha, see, this supports whatever… reform theology.”
- He argues they “already started out with that doctrine in your mind, and you're reading it back into innocent statements.”
- He stresses the need to read “the whole passage,” not just “excerpted” lines; he spent time looking up broader contexts.
- On Chrysostom, he says it’s misleading to quote 2 Cor 5:21 without also reading verse 19 where Chrysostom says God “did not require satisfaction.”
- He compares it directly to Bible misuse: “It’s just like proof texting the scriptures… you need to read the totality.”