Jump to content
Online Baptist

Interpetation of prophecy


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Steve,

Isn't the judgment described in Revelation 20:11-15 the Great White Throne Judgment? Only the unsaved are resurrected to this judgment. As far as I know, this is not a "general" judgment. I don't believe this is a judgment to which anyone would be "looking forward"...because this is a judgment of damnation. And I agree, the Tribulation period precedes this judgment. The 1,000 year reign of Christ also precedes this judgment.

Revelation 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

Revelation 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

Revelation 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Revelation 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.



And those whose names are written in he book of life? Edited by Invicta
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 232
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

WHOA! Wait a minute! Did I miss something? You said above, "The old covenant established at Mt. Sinai...." But it seems to me that whenever we get into this debate about "Covenant Theology" vs D

The intent of the author??? HHHMMMM, I thought that GOD was the Author! How about looking for HIS intent??? God tells us His intent in the verses listed below!!! The Bible should be interpretted a

How come Jesus said this in Matthew 24:22 about the future 7 year tribulation period (speaking of the last 3 1/2 years): Matthew 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no fles

  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Sister, you should know that I'm not "leaning" towards Replacement Theology! Just ask Invicta, Ian, and Anime if they think I'm leaning that way. :-)

While it's true the term "spiritual Israel" is not used in Scripture, the idea is there. Just like Rapture and Trinity. Paul says everything but call the church "spiritual Israel" here:

Romans 2:28-29, "For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29) But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."

Rom. 9:6, "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"

I guess I could say I was an "inward Jew," but it's really just the same as saying I'm a spiritual Jew. I see no problem with saying the church is spiritual Israel as it enjoys the spiritual blessings from the promises made to Abraham. Paul clearly states that there are two Israels, one is the elect and the other is partially blinded.

I do see where your concern comes from though, so I typically only use the term "spiritual Israel" when dealing with subject so as to not confuse folks (or try not to). Any other time I say "the church," or something like that.

Just because someone else hijacks a term and uses it for false doctrine, I don't think we should be afraid to use it. I have no problem using the term the elect, predestination, spiritual Israel, covenant, Holy Ghost, etc.

If you think I'm wrong, that's fine. Let’s not get into it here and now, please consider that this is more of an in-house debate of terminology, whereas what Brother Ian and Invicta is pushing is rampant false doctrine.

Edited by Rick Schworer
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I do not consider that the church has replaced Israel, I have never said it was, What I have said is that the church is grafted in, which is what the scriptures say.


I have no problem with that. The Old Testament promises future Israel a new heart, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, their sins being forgiven, etc. We are very blessed to partake in many of the spiritual blessings promised to Abraham.

That doesn't mean the physical ones are done away with though, and the spiritual promises to the physical seed of Abraham still remain as well to be fulfilled in the future.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member



I have no problem with that. The Old Testament promises future Israel a new heart, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, their sins being forgiven, etc. We are very blessed to partake in many of the spiritual blessings promised to Abraham.

That doesn't mean the physical ones are done away with though, and the spiritual promises to the physical seed of Abraham still remain as well to be fulfilled in the future.


I agree, Paul says that Israel will be graffed in again. tThere will be one complete church then.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

God will kill all the unholy Jews during the tribulation. Read verse 4.

4 And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.
2 In that day shall the branch of the Lord be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.
3 And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem:
—Isaiah 4:1–3 KJV
Isaiah tells us that by the end of the fighting there will be seven women of marrying age for each man in Israel. It is hard enough to keep one wife happy. I don’t envy those Jewish men who have seven of them! On a more serious note, however, think about this. If only 33 percent of the Jews survive and only one of eight adults is a man of marriageable age, there will not be many Jewish men alive after the tribulation or the time of Jacob’s trouble.



4 When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Sister, you should know that I'm not "leaning" towards Replacement Theology! Just ask Invicta, Ian, and Anime if they think I'm leaning that way. :-)

While it's true the term "spiritual Israel" is not used in Scripture, the idea is there. Just like Rapture and Trinity. Paul says everything but call the church "spiritual Israel" here:

Romans 2:28-29, "For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29) But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."

Rom. 9:6, "Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:"

I guess I could say I was an "inward Jew," but it's really just the same as saying I'm a spiritual Jew. I see no problem with saying the church is spiritual Israel as it enjoys the spiritual blessings from the promises made to Abraham. Paul clearly states that there are two Israels, one is the elect and the other is partially blinded.

I do see where your concern comes from though, so I typically only use the term "spiritual Israel" when dealing with subject so as to not confuse folks (or try not to). Any other time I say "the church," or something like that.

Just because someone else hijacks a term and uses it for false doctrine, I don't think we should be afraid to use it. I have no problem using the term the elect, predestination, spiritual Israel, covenant, Holy Ghost, etc.

If you think I'm wrong, that's fine. Let’s not get into it here and now, please consider that this is more of an in-house debate of terminology, whereas what Brother Ian and Invicta is pushing is rampant false doctrine.

All I would ask you to do is to read the articles on those two webapges to which I posted those links, especially the one concerning how "Israel" is used in the New Testament. It was written by Arnold Fruchtenbaum, who is Jewish and a born again Christian. The other one is on dispensationalism.

I have no problem using the terms "elect, predestination, covenant, Holy Ghost"....all those terms are biblical terms that have been "hijacked", but I do have a problem with the use of the term "spiritual Israel". I don't believe Paul taught that there were two "Israels". He taught that the Church was "one new man" (Ephesians 2:15) and saved Gentiles are the "spiritual SEED" of Abraham (which is, IMO, not synonymous with Israel). There are those in the Church who are ethnic Jews....would you call those born again Jews "spiritual Israel" also? It's a confusing term and if you would like, we can carry this conversation over to a PM.

In Romans 9:6, Paul is here speaking only of a division within ethnic Israel. Some of them are believers and thus truly Israel, whereas others, though ethnically Israelites, are not truly Israel, since they are not elect and believing . . . No Gentiles are found in the statement at all. (‘The Israel of God’: An Exegetical and Eschatological Case-Study” by S.Lewis Johnson, p. 189)

http://www.middletow...ed/israelaf.htm


Invicta,
The church has not been grafted into Israel.


Romans 11:17

God must have branches in keeping with the root. Unbelieving Jews bear no resemblance to father Abraham who "believed God" (Gen. 15:6). The natural branches refer to Israel. The wild branches refer to the Gentiles. The cultivated olive tree refers to the place of God’s blessing. The wild olive tree is not the place of blessing (cf. Eph. 2:11-13) but branches from the wild olive tree are grafted into the cultivated olive tree and are then able to partake of the root and fatness of the olive tree (Rom. 11:17). Some of the natural branches were "broken off," and verse 20 gives the reason why ("because of unbelief"). Wild branches were "grafted in among them" because of faith in Christ--compare Rom. 9:30-32--and thus are in the place of blessing. Believing Gentiles are able to enjoy God’s salvation and God's righteousness and God's Spirit--see Gal. 3:14--that the blessings of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ, that we might receive the Spirit through faith.

http://www.middletow...ns/romans11.htm

Edited by LindaR
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I think we're starting to get off track. The important thing here to realize is that there is a future physical, earthly, Jewish, Millennial kingdom.

The King and this future kingdom are the focus of the Old Testament, and the kingdom is also referred to in the New Testament. The physical promises of a land grant and national salvation for the Jews, given to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David are not done away with in the church. Post #32 clearly lays this all out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I think we're starting to get off track. The important thing here to realize is that there is a future physical, earthly, Jewish, Millennial kingdom.

The King and this future kingdom are the focus of the Old Testament, and the kingdom is also referred to in the New Testament. The physical promises of a land grant and national salvation for the Jews, given to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David are not done away with in the church. Post #32 clearly lays this all out.

I agree 100%!
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Do you disps read & believe Hebrews?

1:
1
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past u
nt
o the fathers by the prophets,
2
Hath in these last days spoken u
nt
o us by his Son,


2:
3
How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed u
nt
o us by them that heard him;

4
God also bearing them witness, b
ot
h with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?


The teaching of Jesus & his Apostles overrides the writings of Moses & the prophets. OT prophecy was fulfilled in & by Jesus. All the many chapters detailing the OC rituals, the tabernacle & sacrifices, the priesthood, monarchy & everything else OC was completed, perfected, fulfilled, etc, by Jesus.

Jesus is the rebuilt tabernacle of David. Christ himself is the NC temple, built with living stones. There can NEVER be a rebuilt temple of God where acceptable animal sacrifices for sin can again be offered by a human priesthood.

The point is this: why would God have Ezekiel write eight chapters of painstaking detail, including exact measurements, if it was all to be fulfilled spiritually in the body of Christ? Why were they told to "measure the pattern" and "keep the whole form thereof" if they weren't actually going to build anything? Why all the explanation of what a cubit is? Why the exact measurement of the wall, sanctuary, and court if in the end it doesn't make any difference because no one is going to actually build anything?

Why indeed? Ezekiel was prophesying from captivity, with the temple in ruins, & its treasures removed. His prophecy is to encourage the faithful who are ina state of abject desolation. They see themselves as dry bones. (37)


11
Then he said u
nt
o me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts.

12
Therefore prophesy and say u
nt
o them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you i
nt
o the land of Israel.

13
And ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,

14
And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the LORD have spoken it, and performed it, saith the LORD.


24
And David my serva
nt
shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd: they shall also walk in my judgme
nt
s, and
ob
serve my statutes, and do them.


27
My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

28
And the heathen shall know that I the LORD do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore.


Rev. 21:
3
And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.


The LORD sees them according to his eternal purposes in Christ. They will return to the land, they will rebuild the temple, and Messiah will come, all the promises will be fulfilled in him. Ezekiel's temple, like the tabernacle is a picture of the heavenly temple, & perfect worship in Christ, in Spirit & in Truth. There will NEVER be an acceptable man-made temple.

Paul wrote to the Galatians who were returning to Judaism:

2:18 For if I
build
again
the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.


As far as it being any historical temple: it's not. This temple has the glory of God, no temple since Solomon has had that. It also has a river flowing under it, or through it somehow; that's a first. From what I've read the dimensions don't match any other temple either.

There I do agree. But that river is the Holy Spirit flowing freely from the throne of God & the Lamb.


Zec. 14:
8
And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem;


John 4:
14
But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up i
nt
o everlasting life.


Rev. 22:
1
And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.


Your idea of the state of affairs after Jesus returns is a mockery of the glorious hope we have in Christ.


2 Peter 3:
11
Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

12
Looking for and hasting u
nt
o the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the eleme
nt
s shall melt with ferve
nt
heat?

13
Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

14
Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be dilige
nt
that ye may be found of him in peace, without sp
ot
, and blameless.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

When reading the description of the temple described in Ezekiel 41-47, this temple is vastly different than previous standing temples. Plus, there are sacrifices offered...

Ezekiel 43:18-27
18 And he said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon.
19 And thou shalt give to the priests the Levites that be of the seed of Zadok, which approach unto me, to minister unto me, saith the Lord GOD, a young bullock for a sin offering.
20 And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the settle, and upon the border round about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it.
21 Thou shalt take the bullock also of the sin offering, and he shall burn it in the appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.
22 And on the second day thou shalt offer a kid of the goats without blemish for a sin offering; and they shall cleanse the altar, as they did cleanse it with the bullock.
23 When thou hast made an end of cleansing it, thou shalt offer a young bullock without blemish, and a ram out of the flock without blemish.
24 And thou shalt offer them before the LORD, and the priests shall cast salt upon them, and they shall offer them up for a burnt offering unto the LORD.
25 Seven days shalt thou prepare every day a goat for a sin offering: they shall also prepare a young bullock, and a ram out of the flock, without blemish.
26 Seven days shall they purge the altar and purify it; and they shall consecrate themselves.
27 And when these days are expired, it shall be, that upon the eighth day, and so forward, the priests shall make your burnt offerings upon the altar, and your peace offerings; and I will accept you, saith the Lord GOD.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

When reading the description of the temple described in Ezekiel 41-47, this temple is vastly different than previous standing temples. Plus, there are sacrifices offered...

Ezekiel 43:18-27
18 And he said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord GOD; These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon.....
....

That is exactly the problem - any future blood sacrifices would be a gross affront to our Saviour & his FINISHED work.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

That is exactly the problem - any future blood sacrifices would be a gross affront to our Saviour & his FINISHED work.



Maybe, maybe not. I think Calvinism is a gross affront to Jesus Christ, but you have no problem with it. Either way, you bsically sidestepped the first question in post #6 and completely ignored post #32.

I'm glad you agree that the Ezekiel's temple isn't historical.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Steve,

Isn't the judgment described in Revelation 20:11-15 the Great White Throne Judgment? Only the unsaved are resurrected to this judgment. As far as I know, this is not a "general" judgment. I don't believe this is a judgment to which anyone would be "looking forward"...because this is a judgment of damnation. And I agree, the Tribulation period precedes this judgment. The 1,000 year reign of Christ also precedes this judgment.


Linda
Yes, I agree with you that Revelation 20 is the "Great White Throne Judgment" and I also agree that there will be a resurrection of Israel at the beginning of the 1,000 year reign of Christ. I don't know if Martha understood that distinction in John 11. I know from the Gospel accounts that the Jews believed in a general resurrection and judgment, but it seems as if their understanding of it put those two events together.
Also, the Great White Throne Judgment would include all those who are born during the Kingdom Age, so there will be SOME saved people there, but the vast majority of those at this judgment are the lost from Genesis 4 up to the end of the Kingdom Age.

In Christ,
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I am seeking to establish principles of interpretation of prophecy - reasons for believing as we do.
Replies in blue, in loc.

My "position" is with an open Bible, word studies using Strong - not taking his definitions as definitive, but using the occurences & usage as a guide. If Scripture has to be interpreted, rather than read in a literal sense & understood, we need sound principles for understanding, as Peter wrote:


Why can't we read it in a literal sense and understand it that way?

Peter immediately directs us to a Christ centred interpretation, rather than an Israel centred interpretation, underlined in the next chapter when he quotes Exodus 19 & Hosea:

Jesus Christ is a JEW - the Lion of the tribe of JUDAH, and KING over Israel, sitting on DAVID's Throne in JERUSALEM. We simply cannot overlook the direct references to Israel just because it is an inconvenience.

There are plenty of OT Scriptures prophesying a glorious & eternal future for Israel, which the NT writers apply to all the redeemed, not reserved for national Israel, e.g. Romans & Galatians.

There are a lot of things that I APPLY to my congregation that are not necessarily DOCTRINALLY pointed at them, particularly when I preach or teach from the OT. The NT writers quoted extensively from the OT, as we would expect them to. This does not deny what we believe from a dispensational point of view.



Daniel certainly records the Medes taking the kingdom of Babylon. That is the prophecy in Isa. 13. That is stated by the LORD, & is the simple, literal meaning of the prophecy. Daniel also prophesies a succession of kingdoms. He further prophesies in response to Nebuchadnezzar's dream, his great humbling & reinstatement. That will take us on to Isa. 14. The "extravagant" language of prophecy is not (necessarily) to be understood literally, but to be understood in context. A possible significance of the heavenly signs will be seen in Joshua's victory when the sun stood still. Or that while God looked on Neb. as head of gold he was to an extent ruling in God-given light, but that light would be extinguished (but I don't have to provide a literal interpretation):


37
Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.

38
And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given i
nt
o thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.


The point is, of, course, that the interpertation of Is. 13 is stated. Why look for an interpretation nearly 3,000 years away which would be meaningless to Isaiah & his hearers. Sure Assyria was the immediate threat, but that did not stop other specific references to Babylon. After all, Assyria would be driven back, while Babylon would overwhelm Judah & destroy the temple - a much greater threat. Isaiah later names Cyrus as the man ordering their return from Babylon.

These are only partial fulfillments. Reaching all the way back to Joshua as part of that fulfillment is a huge stretch, and simply doesn't fit the context, which is what you are demanding from us. The verses were not COMPLETELY AND ENTIRELY fulfilled with the Median destruction of Babylon, and you did not answer the issue raised concerning Lucifer in the passage.
The fact that Lucifer is mentioned should alert us to the idea that there is something else being pointed to other than Nebuchadnezzar.


We don't know if Isaiah's prophecies are in chronological order. He prophesied through the reign of Hezekiah who had dealings with the rising power of Babylon. (39) His prophecies make sense in their immediate time context, though many prophecies look on to the Messiah & the eternal kingdom. I don't know how you can claim that prophecies for the next 50-100 years referring to warring nations"were meaningless to the common man in Israel" & yet make sense 2,500 - 3,000 years hence.

The point is that there should have been some OBVIOUS clues to a future fulfillment beyond what they knew from a physical perspective....(i.e. Lucifer...i.e. the Virgin Birth of Isa. 7:14...etc)


Are there any clear references in the OT to Babylon that "CLEARLY pointing to something/somebody else?" Let us assume initially that Isa. 14 is referring to the literal king of Babylon - and compare with his dream in Dan. 4:


10
Thus were the visions of mine head in my bed; I saw, and behold a tree in the midst of the earth, and the height thereof was great.

11
The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached u
nt
o heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth:

16
Let his heart be changed from man's, and let a beast's heart be given u
nt
o him; and let seven times pass over him.


Neb. was humbled - but graciously spared - but soon Belshazzar was humbled & destroyed, & Babylon was never again a power. Babylon's great wickedness & wars against Israel remained legendary, so the NT writers & we can see in Babylon the war of Satan a\against the people of God. It is true that the powers that be are ordained by God. Neb. acknowledged that, but their hearts are satanic, & once they have ruled, they perish as recorded in Isa. 14. We can see Satan destroyed in Isa. 14 - the great power against Israel brought down to the grave.

The problem with putting such prophecy into a distant future "dispensation" is that it is not useful to its immediate hearers, nor people living in the time of Christ, nor even to us. How can we read & profit, unless of course we write best-seller futuristic fiction like Tim & Jerry?

No. The futuristic interpretation robs Scripture of its meaning, & Christians of its real blessings.

Finally, compare Isa. 13 with Psal 137.




16
Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.


8
O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.

9
Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.


Brother, this is the ALLEGORICAL method. Overlooking the SPECIFIC wording of the passage, and trying to force generalities into a specific that don't fit. This is why I simply cannot accept the Covenant Theologian's position. It denies a LITERAL interpretation of any passage, and seeks to impose partial fulfillments as complete fulfillments.....it doesn't work!
The view you describe above does not account for LUCIFER in Isaiah 14.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Do you disps read & believe Hebrews?

1:
1
God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past u
nt
o the fathers by the prophets,
2
Hath in these last days spoken u
nt
o us by his Son,


2:
3
How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed u
nt
o us by them that heard him;

4
God also bearing them witness, b
ot
h with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?


The teaching of Jesus & his Apostles overrides the writings of Moses & the prophets. OT prophecy was fulfilled in & by Jesus. All the many chapters detailing the OC rituals, the tabernacle & sacrifices, the priesthood, monarchy & everything else OC was completed, perfected, fulfilled, etc, by Jesus.

Jesus is the rebuilt tabernacle of David. Christ himself is the NC temple, built with living stones. There can NEVER be a rebuilt temple of God where acceptable animal sacrifices for sin can again be offered by a human priesthood.

It only works out this way if you DENY a LITERAL interpretation of Scripture! I reject that proposition!


Why indeed? Ezekiel was prophesying from captivity, with the temple in ruins, & its treasures removed. His prophecy is to encourage the faithful who are ina state of abject desolation. They see themselves as dry bones. (37)


Oh, I see - just get rid of the LITERAL interpretation that comes from simply reading the passage, and then spiritualize it all away - or should I say Allegorize?



The LORD sees them according to his eternal purposes in Christ. They will return to the land, they will rebuild the temple, and Messiah will come, all the promises will be fulfilled in him. Ezekiel's temple, like the tabernacle is a picture of the heavenly temple, & perfect worship in Christ, in Spirit & in Truth. There will NEVER be an acceptable man-made temple.

I don't see what your problem is with their being a temple built in Jerusalem for use in the 1,000 year reign of Christ. At the END of that 1,000 years, the entire UNIVERSE is destroyed - including the Ezekiel temple - and an entire new universe is "created" where sin has no place. II Peter. 3:9-13, Revelation 21.
P.S. - THEN it comes to pass as you say, that Jesus Christ becomes the Temple of God (Rev. 21)


There I do agree. But that river is the Holy Spirit flowing freely from the throne of God & the Lamb.




Zec. 14:
8
And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem;


John 4:
14
But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up i
nt
o everlasting life.


Rev. 22:
1
And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.


The connection between John 4 and Zech/Revelation is not the right connection. Zechariah and Revelation are describing specific PHYSICAL events, while John 4 is referring to the new birth. The contexts of these passages are not even remotely related. So there you go, stretching things again to find an allegorical interpretation, instead of "rightly dividing" the word of truth to see the DIFFERENCES between the passages.


Your idea of the state of affairs after Jesus returns is a mockery of the glorious hope we have in Christ.


2 Peter 3:
11
Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

12
Looking for and hasting u
nt
o the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the eleme
nt
s shall melt with ferve
nt
heat?

13
Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

14
Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be dilige
nt
that ye may be found of him in peace, without sp
ot
, and blameless.



Strong words - mockery, anti-semitic, etc.
And it is based upon two faulty assumptions.
1. We do believe in an entirely sin free/Satan free FUTURE, as recorded in Revelation 21-22. How does this "mock" the glorious hope we have in Christ?
2. Your treatment of Scripture is abhorent to me - stretching things to fit that don't fit, overlooking obvious LITERAL references, and allegorizing things instead of simply believing what it says, where it says it, to whom it is said. Not everything in the Bible is directed to NT Christians. In fact, the vast majority of the Bible is directed at Israel. Furthermore, your treatment of Scripture denies several specific promises made to Abraham, the land, and his offspring.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member


It only works out this way if you DENY a LITERAL interpretation of Scripture! I reject that proposition!




Oh, I see - just get rid of the LITERAL interpretation that comes from simply reading the passage, and then spiritualize it all away - or should I say Allegorize?




I don't see what your problem is with their being a temple built in Jerusalem for use in the 1,000 year reign of Christ. At the END of that 1,000 years, the entire UNIVERSE is destroyed - including the Ezekiel temple - and an entire new universe is "created" where sin has no place. II Peter. 3:9-13, Revelation 21.
P.S. - THEN it comes to pass as you say, that Jesus Christ becomes the Temple of God (Rev. 21)


The connection between John 4 and Zech/Revelation is not the right connection. Zechariah and Revelation are describing specific PHYSICAL events, while John 4 is referring to the new birth. The contexts of these passages are not even remotely related. So there you go, stretching things again to find an allegorical interpretation, instead of "rightly dividing" the word of truth to see the DIFFERENCES between the passages.



Strong words - mockery, anti-semitic, etc.
And it is based upon two faulty assumptions.
1. We do believe in an entirely sin free/Satan free FUTURE, as recorded in Revelation 21-22. How does this "mock" the glorious hope we have in Christ?
2. Your treatment of Scripture is abhorent to me - stretching things to fit that don't fit, overlooking obvious LITERAL references, and allegorizing things instead of simply believing what it says, where it says it, to whom it is said. Not everything in the Bible is directed to NT Christians. In fact, the vast majority of the Bible is directed at Israel. Furthermore, your treatment of Scripture denies several specific promises made to Abraham, the land, and his offspring.


I am amazed at your continued claim that you read prophecy literally. In Eric's interpretation of Dan 9, he adds to scripture and misquotes it several times to get it to agree with his point pf view. Scripture prophecy is continually interpreted. Try Joseph's interpretation of dreams and Daniels interpretations.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist


That is exactly the problem - any future blood sacrifices would be a gross affront to our Saviour & his FINISHED work.



The future sacrifices that will be offered in the "Tribulation Temple" will be a gross affront to the finished work of Jesus...

However, let's keep this in mind...

Hebrews 10:4
For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Hebrews 10:11
And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:


All of those sacrifices offered in the Old Testament were a foreshadowing of Christ's ultimate sacrifice of himself...they were not a means of salvation in and of themselves...yet, God required them.

Why?

Hebrews 10:3
But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

Those sacrifices showed the awfulness of sin's consequences. Imagine what that must have been like. Time after time...killing...the blood flowing...time and time again...year after year...killing...the blood flowing.

Just as the law couldn't save...

Galatians 2:16
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

...nor could the Old Testament sacrifices take away sin. Yet, God required them.

Now, there will be a future temple during the millennial reign of Jesus Christ on earth (Ezekiel 41-47)...complete with animal sacrifices. Why?

Just as the Old Testament sacrifices showed the awfulness of sin and the consequences of sin...without taking away sin, these future sacrifices will do the same.

Imagine with me a moment...

Jesus is reigning on earth...a time of perfect peace. Yet, he will rule with a rod of iron. No democracy in his kingdom; it will be a Theocracy. Rebellion will be dealt with swiftly.

During Christ's millennial reign, there will be multitudes of people born...with a sin nature...a heart of rebellion. They will hear of Christ's sacrifice for their sin, yet they still have a heart of rebellion. They won't like "the rules". They won't appreciate the perfect world they live in. Just as those of us in America take what we have for granted, these "kingdom citizens" won't appreciate what they have.

However, they will be pointed to those sacrifices taking place at the temple. They will be shown sin's consequences through those sacrifices. Just as the Old Testament sacrifices couldn't take away sin, neither will those; however, they will show their fulfillment in the sacrifice that Jesus made for their sins.

Are future sacrifices an affront to Christ's finished work? Tribulation sacrifices - yes. Millenial sacrifices - NO! They will be a compliment to Christ's finished work by showing what he did to pay for man's sin.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I am amazed at your continued claim that you read prophecy literally. In Eric's interpretation of Dan 9, he adds to scripture and misquotes it several times to get it to agree with his point pf view. Scripture prophecy is continually interpreted. Try Joseph's interpretation of dreams and Daniels interpretations.

I am not sure what you are getting at here. Joseph and Daniel received direct revelation about DREAMS directly from the LORD Himself. I make no similar claim, and we are not dealing with DREAMS.
We are now dealing with a WRITTEN BOOK. The Bible gives us the rules for how it is to be interpretted:
1. Rightly Divided - II Timothy 2:15
2. Not privately interpretted - II Peter 1:20-21
3. Comparing Spiritual things with spiritual - I Cor. 2:13
4. Seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit - John 14:26, John 16:13, I Cor. 2:13
And that is just for starters.

Some things the Lord never gives us permission to do:
1. Add to the word of God
2. Subtract from the word of God
3. Change the word of God
4. Allegorize the word of God

All I attempt to do is believe what it says - without changing it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The bible ought to be interpreted according to the intent of the author. Passages which are written in a literal fashion should be interpreted literally. Passages which are written in poetic form are to be interpreted as poetry which represent a literal truth. Symbolic passages are to be interpreted as symbols of something else real. Otherwise you get seven-headed monsters running around, but for some reason dispensationalists allegorize that one and he ends up looking like nicolai carpathia instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sister, you should know that I'm not "leaning" towards Replacement Theology! Just ask Invicta, Ian, and Anime if they think I'm leaning that way. :-)


Thank you for the acknowledgement. I used to be a dispensationalist when I joined this board, but it was hard to remain one when I didn't see it in the bible. As for replacement theology, I can testify to the fact that you indeed do not lean towards it. However, I doubt that Ian, David, or I actually believe there is a replacement. We believe that spiritual Israel has existed from day 1, consisting of all the elect, from Adam to whoever the last person who will be saved by the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ. During the old covenant, established at mt Sinai, and destroyed at Christ's death, most, but not all, of the spiritual Israel was made up of ethnic Israelites. The covenant with Abraham, however, which promised that he would become the father of many nations through the seed (Jesus Christ) was fulfilled in the New covenant, which brought in the gentiles, and made of two, one new man. So, there was nothing to replace, other than the old covenant.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I think we're starting to get off track. The important thing here to realize is that there is a future physical, earthly, Jewish, Millennial kingdom.

You seem to acknowledge in #32 that Jesus & his Apostles have little to say that can be interpreted as a future millennial kingdom inhabited by a mixed population of believers, unbelievers, resurrected saints, changed saints, unregenerate, Jews & Gentiles, ruled in person by Jesus from Jerusalem, with all the tribes owning territory, & renewed sacrifices for sin.

The King and this future kingdom are the focus of the Old Testament, and the kingdom is also referred to in the New Testament. The physical promises of a land grant and national salvation for the Jews, given to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David are not done away with in the church. Post #32 clearly lays this all out.

I have looked at #32 & note your attempt to "shoe-horn" the millennium into the NT. That's reading in, not literal reading.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Are all the Old Testament prophecies concerning the Israel’s future restored 1,000 year kingdom symbolic or literal?

Is “Zion” symbolic of the Church rather than the city of Jerusalem?

Is the “desert blooming as a rose” (Isaiah 35) a picture of the present fruitfulness of the gospel rather than a literal future condition on earth during the Millennium?

Is the temple (Ezekiel 40:1-48) a symbolic representation of the church rather than a literal future temple?

Is your interpretation of the book of Revelation totally symbolic? Are the judgments (seals, trumpets and vials) upon the earth, the wars, the Two Witnesses, the sealing of the 144,000 Israelites, the binding of Satan, and the 1,000 year earthly rule of Christ symbolic? Is there anything in the book of Revelation which you would interpret as "literal"?

Did Jesus return in 70AD? Which prophecies were fulfilled in 70AD? Are we living in the Millennium now? And if so, is Satan already bound?

Edited by LindaR
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I hope we all agree that there can be no true temple of God, & if the Jews were to build a temple, it would be built in unbelief & go against the unique once-for-all sacrifice of Christ, & the universality of worship in Spirit & in truth.



The Tribulation period temple will be built by the Jews...they are preparing for it now...they have the implements, the priestly robes, a school for priests, etc...

I agree that this future temple will be built in "unbelief" and go against the once-for-all sacrifice of Christ; however...

Jesus, himself, will build the Millennial Temple...

Zechariah 6:12-13
12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:
13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

____________________________________________________________________________________________



I'm not trying to be argumentative or rude, but I'm interested...

If 70 A.D. is when all was fulfilled, how is this explained (v. 21)?

Matthew 24:15-21
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Was not WW1, WW2, and other wars much worse than what happened in Jerusalem in 70 A.D.? The answer of course is yes. Would not this make Jesus a liar?

Respectfully,
No Nicolaitans

Edited by No Nicolaitans
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

We believe that spiritual Israel has existed from day 1, consisting of all the elect, from Adam to whoever the last person who will be saved by the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ.

There is no such thing as "spiritual Israel"....the term is nowhere found or even implied in Scripture. The Apostle Paul called the Body of Christ/the Church, "one new man" (Ephesians 2:15) and saved Gentiles are the "spiritual SEED of Abraham" (Galatians 3:28-29)

Israel is the nation chosen and created by God to preserve His truth in the world and to prepare the way for Christ’s coming. The first mention of Israel is in Genesis 32:28 where God renamed Jacob Israel. Therefore, Israel didn't "exist from day 1 consisting of all the elect, from Adam to whoever the last person saved by the sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ." It began with the calling out of Abraham. (Genesis 12:1-3)
During the old covenant, established at mt Sinai, and destroyed at Christ's death, most, but not all, of the spiritual Israel was made up of ethnic Israelites. The covenant with Abraham, however, which promised that he would become the father of many nations through the seed (Jesus Christ) was fulfilled in the New covenant, which brought in the gentiles, and made of two, one new man. So, there was nothing to replace, other than the old covenant.

The Abrahamic Covenant was not fulfilled in the New Covenant. The national physical aspects of the Abrahamic Covenant have not yet been fulfilled. That will happen at the Second Advent of Christ when He sets up His earthly 1,000 year Kingdom in Jerusalem.

Every New Testament believer partakes of the spiritual blessings of the New Covenant through Christ, but there is nowhere in Scripture that states that this covenant has been transferred from national Israel to the church.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

I'm not trying to be argumentative or rude, but I'm interested...

If 70 A.D. is when all was fulfilled, how is this explained (v. 21)?

Matthew 24:15-21
15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)
16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:
17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:
18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.
19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!
20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.

Was not WW1, WW2, and other wars much worse than what happened in Jerusalem in 70 A.D.? The answer of course is yes. Would not this make Jesus a liar?

Respectfully,
No Nicolaitans

WW1 and WW2 were much worse than what happened in Jerusalem in 70AD....BUT the Tribulation, especially the last 3 1/2 years (called the Great Tribulation or Time of Jacob's Trouble - Jeremiah 30:7) will be much much worse than both World Wars. In fact, WW1 and WW2 will look mild compared to what is going to happen during those 7 years when God pours out His wrath upon the Christ rejecting world. I believe that there will be a period when people will want to die but will be unable to do so.

Revelation 9:4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
Revelation 9:5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.
Revelation 9:6 And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.

Men will also ask that the rocks fall on them to hide them from God's wrath:

Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
Revelation 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Much worse than 70AD and both World Wars combined.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Re: post 32 – RS

The various refs to the kingdom do not imply a millennial kingdom after the Gospel age & before the eternal NH&NE state. You quote 1 verse from the Kingdom parables, & we need to look at all of these.

Mat. 25 follows on from the general injunction “watch & pray” to teach aspects of Christian living in the Gospel age.

You begin by acknowledging that the letters are concerned with living in the present age, looking forward to our Lord's return, but with no emphasis on future millennial details. That honest appraisal indicates that you have to look for millennial support from the OT & Revelation.

It is perhaps possible to read a millennium in 1 Cor. 15 in bewteen 23 & 24:

22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.


24Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.


26The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

However the literal reading is that Jesus will put down all rule and all authority and power at his coming. Paul says he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. That means that he is presently reigning. When he comes he will raise the dead & so our last enemy will be destroyed.

You previously raised the question about Jesus reigning over the present mess. That we must consider.

II Tim. 4:1, “I charge [thee] therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;”


You state - “Two things here: the appearing and the kingdom. Both come later!” The general judgement is to take place when Jesus appears, & then his eternal kingdom is seen. It's not a millennial kingdom with another resurrection, judgment & kingdom.

Mat. 13 has 7 parables:
The sower shows various responses to Gospel preaching of the word.
The tares shows a kingdom populated by children of God & children of Satan, with both growing together until the harvest – resurrection & judgment. Again the Gospel age.
The mustard seed & leaven show the growth & progress of the small & insignificant.
The treasure & the pearl show the tremendous value of our relationship with Christ worth everything.
The drag net teaches that many will be drawn by the Gospel, but not all will be saved. At the judgment, separation will take place.

It is possible to see a kingdom comprising believers & unbelievers, as at present, with a great separation at his appearing and his kingdom. What is not apparent is a future millennium comprising saints & sinners.

Acts 1:6, “When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?”


RS - After spending three and a half years with Christ, the apostles ask if the kingdom is going to come now to Israel. This is either because they were stupid and didn't listen to Jesus trying to tell them over the course of three and half years that there is no kingdom for Israel (what kind of teacher does that make Jesus out to be?) or they had every right to ask that question because one day there is going to be a wonderful kingdom for Israel. You decide.

Not at all – the concept of a future kingdom for Israel was clearly missing from his teaching, or they would not have asked. He repeats the great commission. When the Holy Spirit is poured out, they understand that membership of his kingdom is dependant on repentance & faith in Christ. The question is not again considered, & as you have acknowledged, absent from their writings.

Acts 3 shows their inspired thinking:
ntntntnt
23And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will n
ot
hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.


25Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covena
nt
which God made with our fathers, saying u
nt
o Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.

<a name="en-
KJV
-27023">
26U
nt
o you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, se
nt
him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.


Note v. 24 – these days. These Gospel days.

Revelation is for another posting.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member


WW1 and WW2 were much worse than what happened in Jerusalem in 70AD....BUT the Tribulation, especially the last 3 1/2 years (called the Great Tribulation or Time of Jacob's Trouble - Jeremiah 30:7) will be much much worse than both World Wars. In fact, WW1 and WW2 will look mild compared to what is going to happen during those 7 years when God pours out His wrath upon the Christ rejecting world. I believe that there will be a period when people will want to die but will be unable to do so.

Revelation 9:4 And it was commanded them that they should not hurt the grass of the earth, neither any green thing, neither any tree; but only those men which have not the seal of God in their foreheads.
Revelation 9:5 And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months: and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.
Revelation 9:6 And in those days shall men seek death, and shall not find it; and shall desire to die, and death shall flee from them.

Men will also ask that the rocks fall on them to hide them from God's wrath:

Revelation 6:15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
Revelation 6:16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
Revelation 6:17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

Much worse than 70AD and both World Wars combined.


WQhy don't you take notrice of what the scripture says? It does not say it will be the worst, but there will not be any "SUCH AS."

There was never any treibulkation such as when the city was surrounded by an 'enemy' who was pleading with them to save their city and temple, and those in the city were fighting a civil war with three factions fighting between theirselves, and all the priests were murdered and those who had lately worn the robes and vestments of the priesthood had their bodies thrown naked into the streets and trampled upon. The house of archives holing the Jewish genealogies was burnt down and the sacrifice failed because no one could prove their right to be a priest. No there never was a triobulation SUCH AS that, never.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

Oh. So Jesus just meant that there would never be a time in which all those details would happen ever before or after.

He didn't mean that the Great Tribulation would be the worst period of time in which the world has ever seen?

He didn't mean that the trouble the Jews would go through at 70 A.D. would be the worst they've ever seen, before or after?

He only meant that the situation would be unique, sort of.

That's convenient.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Oh. So Jesus just meant that there would never be a time in which all those details would happen ever before or after.

He didn't mean that the Great Tribulation would be the worst period of time in which the world has ever seen?

He didn't mean that the trouble the Jews would go through at 70 A.D. would be the worst they've ever seen, before or after?

He only meant that the situation would be unique, sort of.

That's convenient.


Show me where it says, "The Worst", please.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

How come Jesus said this in Matthew 24:22 about the future 7 year tribulation period (speaking of the last 3 1/2 years):

Matthew 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Apparently this didn't happen in 70AD.....but there will be a future period that will be much worse than 70AD, because Jesus said that "except those days should be shortened, there should be no flesh saved: ... " The word "worse" is definitely implied here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

How come Jesus said this in Matthew 24:22 about the future 7 year tribulation period (speaking of the last 3 1/2 years):

Matthew 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Apparently this didn't happen in 70AD.....but there will be a future period that will be much worse than 70AD, because Jesus said that "except those days should be shortened, there should be no flesh saved: ... " The word "worse" is definitely implied here.


You nailed that one, sister! Good job.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The bible ought to be interpreted according to the intent of the author. Passages which are written in a literal fashion should be interpreted literally. Passages which are written in poetic form are to be interpreted as poetry which represent a literal truth. Symbolic passages are to be interpreted as symbols of something else real. Otherwise you get seven-headed monsters running around, but for some reason dispensationalists allegorize that one and he ends up looking like nicolai carpathia instead.


The intent of the author??? HHHMMMM, I thought that GOD was the Author! How about looking for HIS intent??? God tells us His intent in the verses listed below!!!
The Bible should be interpretted according to how the Bible tells us how to interpret it. Please give us Scripture to support your "system" of interpretation that you have outlined above!
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Notice that the first thing mentioned here is DOCTRINE.
Notice that we are NEVER told to "symbolize" or "allegorize" ANYTHING.
Notice that this extends to ALL Scripture, including poetry.

The system you gave us simply dismisses the doctrinal content and importance of the largest book in the Bible (Psalms) which has a great deal of prophetic material relating to the Tribulation period, the Millenial Kingdom, the 2nd Coming of Christ, etc.
It also dismisses the single most important chapter describing the Devil (Job 41).

I said it before, and I'll keep saying it until the Lord Jesus Christ returns for us. I CANNOT accept the "Covenant" position because it DENIES THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION of Scripture!!! Your post just proved my point!!! So, thank you for helping my cause! Edited by Steve Schwenke
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member



The intent of the author??? HHHMMMM, I thought that GOD was the Author! How about looking for HIS intent??? God tells us His intent in the verses listed below!!!
The Bible should be interpretted according to how the Bible tells us how to interpret it. Please give us Scripture to support your "system" of interpretation that you have outlined above!
2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Notice that the first thing mentioned here is DOCTRINE.
Notice that we are NEVER told to "symbolize" or "allegorize" ANYTHING.
Notice that this extends to ALL Scripture, including poetry.

The system you gave us simply dismisses the doctrinal content and importance of the largest book in the Bible (Psalms) which has a great deal of prophetic material relating to the Tribulation period, the Millenial Kingdom, the 2nd Coming of Christ, etc.
It also dismisses the single most important chapter describing the Devil (Job 41).

I said it before, and I'll keep saying it until the Lord Jesus Christ returns for us. I CANNOT accept the "Covenant" position because it DENIES THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION of Scripture!!! Your post just proved my point!!! So, thank you for helping my cause!


The whole dispensational theory is an interpretetion based, not on scripture but on the teaching of the Plymouth Brethren of J N Darby and continued and added to by Scofield.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Independent Fundamental Baptist

The whole dispensational theory is an interpretetion based, not on scripture but on the teaching of the Plymouth Brethren of J N Darby and continued and added to by Scofield.


Dispensationalism is just an offshoot of historical PreMillennialism, which has been around since John wrote Revelation. Justin Matyr, Tertullian, Irenaues, Polycarp... all Premillenial. The only real difference is that Dispensationalists take it a little further than PreMills do, but we BOTH believe in a future, literal, earthly reign of the Lord Jesus Christ.

If Amillennialism was around before the third century, it wasn't a very strong teaching. Everyone's favorite church father, Origen, who gave us our corrupt Alexandrian texts changed all that of course. PostMillennialism came from Augustine and his City of God book in the fourth century where he taught that Rome was New Jerusalem.

I haven't figured out if you're a Post-Millennial or an A-Millennial, but either way those are your roots.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 19 Guests (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×
×
  • Create New...