FSSL said:
Just because they called it grammatical-historical does not mean that the method did not exist prior.
They bastardized history and came up with fanatical source documentary hypotheses.
Yes, we all know how bad they were. The problem is that your "grammatical" and your "historical" is influenced by them rather than from the believing tradition. Your "grammatical" is what some of them did exactly, treat the Bible words like any other book, claim to look at the natural or literal meaning based upon a direct grammatical understanding, but then do so in the Greek and read in modern day meanings into those Greek words/constructions. This is because RATIONALISM rather than believing is the primary basis of the approach. Again, likewise, with the "historical context" view.
You might say that you disagree with the documentary hypotheses, but then, not all the German Critics/Rationalists/Theologians were like that. Half their tradition is no less unbelieving, though it rejected documentary hypotheses. E.g. Ernesti, etc. Then, you find ones like Schleiermacher who attempted to create a middle ground between those two views, and he is the father of liberal theology. So then, all your hermeneutical heroes follow locked step behind them, such as, Germar, Klausen (1841), Wilke (1843), Davidson (1843), Cellérier (1852), Fairbairn (1859), Doedes (1862), Immer (1877) and the reissuance of Cellérier’s work by Charles Elliott (1881). On that foundation came forth Farrar (1886), Terry (1890), Tenney (1957), Mickelsen (1963), Ramm (1967), Berkhof (1969), Kaiser (1981), Fee (1983), Carson (1984), Moo (1986), Osborne (1991), Tate (1991), Zuck (1991), Klein (1993), Silva (1994), etc.
FSSL said:
KJVOs bastardize history by denying the legitimacy of using Geeek and Hebrew.
This is fake, since (1) the KJB was translated from those languages which God originally used, and (2) there is nothing in the Scripture to say that greater authority is locked with those languages today, in fact, (3) we find indications that the Scripture is to go forth in other tongues (not just talking about Pentecostal tongues).
FSSL said:
Which leaves us wondering why you do not expose your own method...
It is all plain and clear. I state openly and continually, and also I have a website with information on the subject, as I said, I have even written about the subject in some detail.