Eisegesis: 'Eisegesis is the act of imposing one's own subjective interpretations or pre-conceived ideas onto a text, rather than drawing out the meaning from the text itself.'

The spreadsheet's definition of eisegesis is accurate and is a real, important interpretive error that responsible Christian exegetes actively guard against (see Gordon Fee & Douglas Stuart, *How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth*, on avoiding it methodologically). But the blanket charge that traditional christological or typological readings of the Old Testament are simply eisegesis conflates two very different things: arbitrary imposition of meaning absent from the text, versus recognized, textually-grounded literary phenomena like inner-biblical exegesis, typology, and sensus plenior, which even non-evangelical, critical scholars document as intentional features of how biblical texts were composed and read within their own tradition. Richard Hays's *Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul* and *Echoes of Scripture in the Gospels* demonstrate, using standard literary-critical method (not confessional apologetics), that New Testament authors' scriptural allusions and typological readings track genuine intertextual patterns already present in how later biblical books read earlier ones (e.g., how the prophets themselves re-read the Exodus, or how Chronicles re-reads Samuel-Kings), rather than being arbitrary impositions invented from outside the tradition. Whether any *particular* traditional Christian reading crosses the line into eisegesis has to be argued exegetically, text by text, on grounds of grammar, genre, and context — the term names a real error but does not, by itself, settle which readings commit it, and using it as a blanket dismissal of typological or messianic reading strategies is itself methodologically question-begging.

Careful grammatical-historical exegesis (Walter Kaiser, *Toward an Exegetical Theology*) combined with attention to a text's place within the canon's own developing self-interpretation (Brevard Childs's canonical approach) allows typological and christological readings that are textually disciplined rather than imposed — distinguishing legitimate sensus plenior (a fuller sense intended by the divine author and confirmed by later canonical development) from illegitimate eisegesis is a live, careful discipline within serious biblical scholarship, not a blind spot.