Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Interpretation of Prophecy Redux


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Granted, there are portions of prophecy that are "symbolic and allegorical"; however, those portions are symbolic and allegorical of things that will actually happen. Some refer to this as "apocalyptic language".

There are those who believe that all prophecy was fulfilled in 70 A.D.; therefore, any prophetic references that don't fit into that time frame are symbolic and allegorical only; therefore, they should only be interpreted as "symbolic". However, why does that viewpoint not include what happened in 70 A.D.? Well, we can look back and see what happened in 70 A.D. Obviously, parts of Jesus' prophecy came true then; such as, not one stone from the temple would be left on top of another. That happened! So, we have evidence that the prophecy was fulfilled. That's one reason why that date is so important. Why then must all other prophecy be "symbolic"?

If all was fulfilled in 70 A.D., why did Jesus include these words when speaking of the coming tribulation?

Luke 21:35-36
35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Here, we have a coming tribulation that will affect EVERYONE on the WHOLE earth. Did that happen in 70 A.D.? Not even close! Also, those accounted worthy (through salvation) will escape the coming tribulation. How? By being caught up (otherwise known as the rapture).

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

I leave you with a couple of thoughts...

God says what he means, and he means what he says...

Isaiah 45:18-19
18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
19 I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth: I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain: I the LORD speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.

God isn't trying to give hidden meanings and obscure details; when God speaks, he says what he means. Such as, an EVERLASTING covenant means just that...it's everlasting. He made this everlasting covenant with Abraham and Israel...not the church.

Genesis 17:7
7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

If we, as "spiritual seed" can claim this, then who's going to be first in line to go take your land away from the Arab Islamists who are occupying your land? If it belongs to you as "Abraham's seed", go get it...I don't think that will go over too well. We're talking Jihad city!!!

No, that land will go to Israel one day when Jesus sets up his literal kingdom here on earth.

Next...Jesus says what he means and means what he says...

John 18:19-20
19 The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine.
20 Jesus answered him,I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.

Nor is Jesus trying to give hidden meanings or obscure details. He spoke openly and hid nothing. He said what he meant. If he said that a tribulation is coming that will affect the whole world, that's what he meant. There's nothing symbolic about that. It's plain language.

It's been said that I've "misquoted scripture" in the Interpretation of Prophecy thread; however, not once did I misquote scripture! I laid the scripture out exactly as it appears in the King James Bible. Rather, I think the problem is with how you viewed how I interpreted what the scripture said. I interpreted what the scripture said literally. I interpreted it according to the context of what the scripture says...but not once did I misquote scripture. :eusa_naughty:

:)

Edited by No Nicolaitans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Granted, there are portions of prophecy that are "symbolic and allegorical"; however, those portions are symbolic and allegorical of things that will actually happen. Some refer to this as "apocolyptic language".

There are those who believe that all prophecy was fulfilled in 70 A.D.; therefore, any prophetic references that don't fit into that time frame are symbolic and allegorical only; therefore, they should only be interpreted as "symbolic". However, why does that viewpoint not include what happened in 70 A.D.? Well, we can look back and see what happened in 70 A.D. Obviously, parts of Jesus' prophecy came true then; such as, not one stone from the temple would be left on top of another. That happened! So, we have evidence that the prophecy was fulfilled. That's one reason why that date is so important. Why then must all other prophecy be "symbolic"?

If all was fulfilled in 70 A.D., why did Jesus include these words when speaking of the coming tribulation?

Luke 21:35-36
35 For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.
36 Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.

Here, we have a coming tribulation that will affect EVERYONE on the WHOLE earth. Did that happen in 70 A.D.? Not even close! Also, those accounted worthy (through salvation) will escape the coming tribulation. How? By being caught up (otherwise known as the rapture).

1 Thessalonians 4:16-17
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

I leave you with a couple of thoughts...

God says what he means, and he means what he says...

Isaiah 45:18-19
18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
19 I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth: I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain: I the LORD speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.

God isn't trying to give hidden meanings and obscure details; when God speaks, he says what he means. Such as, an EVERLASTING covenant means just that...it's everlasting. He made this everlasting covenant with Abraham and Israel...not the church.

Genesis 17:7
7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

If we, as "spiritual seed" can claim this, then who's going to be first in line to go take your land away from the Arab Islamists who are occupying your land? If it belongs to you as "Abraham's seed", go get it...I don't think that will go over too well. We're talking Jihad city!!!

No, that land will go to Israel one day when Jesus sets up his literal kingdom here on earth.

Next...Jesus says what he means and means what he says...

John 18:19-20
19 The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine.
20 Jesus answered him,I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.

Nor is Jesus trying to give hidden meanings or obscure details. He spoke openly and hid nothing. He said what he meant. If he said that a tribulation is coming that will affect the whole world, that's what he meant. There's nothing symbolic about that. It's plain language.

It's been said that I've "misquoted scripture" in the Interpretation of Prophecy thread; however, not once did I misquote scripture! I laid the scripture out exactly as it appears in the King James Bible. Rather, I think the problem is with how you viewed how I interpreted what the scripture said. I interpreted what the scripture said literally. I interpreted it according to the context of what the scripture says...but not once did I misquote scripture. :eusa_naughty:

:)

Amen! :goodpost: Edited by LindaR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

When it's all said and done, the full truth of the prophecy won't be known until it's all said and done.

For about two thousand years Christians have debated, discussed, argued, fought and divided over what the right interpretation of prophecy is.

Does anyone believe that everyone here, even in this small forum of believers, will come to a consensus that has eluded the rest of Christianity all these centuries?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

J.C. Ryle believed in the "literal" interpretation of biblical prophecy...he was not a Preterist!



Literal Interpretation of Prophecies

J. C. Ryle and the





J. C. Ryle (1816-1900) was a famous English preacher. Spurgeon considered him the best man in the Church of England. He is highly esteemed among Reformed men, and rightly so. He wrote more than one hundred tracts and pamphlets on doctrinal and practical subjects. He published a number of books of sermons and devotional literature, much of which is still widely read today.

For a compilation of quotations from Ryle on prophecy and in particular his position on the future of the nation Israel, see the excellent book, Future Israel--Why Christian Anti-Judaism Must Be Challenged, by Barry E. Horner, Appendix B, "J. C. Ryle and the Future of Israel" (pages 339-348).

Here are some of J. C. Ryle's comments on the importance of interpreting prophecy literally, according to the normal and natural sense of language:

I believe that the literal sense of the Old Testament prophecies has been far too much neglected by the Churches, and is far too much neglected at the present day, and that under the mistaken system of spiritualizing and accommodating Bible language, Christians have too often completely missed its meaning. [J. C. Ryle, Are You Ready For The End Of Time? (Fearn, Scotland: Christian Focus, 2001) p. 9; reprint of Coming Events and Present Duties.]

I believe we have cherished an arbitrary, reckless habit of interpreting first advent texts literally, and second advent texts spiritually. I believe we have not rightly understood "all that the prophets have spoken" about the second personal advent of Christ, any more than the Jews did about the first. [J. C. Ryle, Are You Ready For The End Of Time? (Fearn, Scotland: Christian Focus, 2001) p. 46; reprint of Coming Events and Present Duties.]

Ryle then envisions a situation where a Christian is witnessing to a Jew. The Christian tells his Jewish friend how the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah (such as Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, Micah 5:2, etc.) were literally fulfilled by Christ. He then continues:

But suppose the Jew asks you if you take all the prophecies of the Old Testament in their simple literal meaning. Suppose he asks you if you believe in a literal personal advent of Messiah to reign over the earth in glory, a literal restoration of Judah and Israel to Palestine, a literal rebuilding and restoration of Zion and Jerusalem. Suppose the unconverted Jew puts these questions to you, what answer are you prepared to make? Will you dare to tell him that Old Testament prophecies of this kind are not to be taken in their plain literal sense? Will you dare to tell him that the words Zion, Jerusalem, Jacob, Judah, Ephraim, Israel, do not mean what they seem to mean, but mean the Church of Christ? Will you dare to tell him that the glorious kingdom and future blessedness of Zion, so often dwelt upon in prophecy, mean nothing more than the gradual Christianizing of the world by missionaries and gospel preaching? Will you dare to tell him that you think it "carnal" to expect a literal rebuilding of Jerusalem, "carnal" to expect a literal coming of Messiah to reign? Oh, reader, if you are a man of this mind, take care what you are doing! I say again, take care. [J. C. Ryle, Are You Ready For The End Of Time? (Fearn, Scotland: Christian Focus, 2001) p. 47; reprint of Coming Events and Present Duties.]

Ryle continues to plead for a literal interpretation of the Old Testament prophecies:

It is high time for Christians to interpret unfulfilled prophecy by the light of prophecies already fulfilled. The curses of the Jews were brought to pass literally; so also will be the blessings. The scattering was literal; so also will be the gathering. The pulling down of Zion was literal; so also will be the building up. The rejection of Israel was literal; so also will be the restoration. [J. C. Ryle, Are You Ready For The End Of Time? (Fearn, Scotland: Christian Focus, 2001) p. 49; reprint of Coming Events and Present Duties.]

What I protest against is, the habit of allegorizing plain sayings of the Word of God concerning the future history of the nation of Israel, and explaining away the fullness of the contents in order to accommodate them to the Gentile Church. I believe the habit to be unwarranted by anything in Scripture, and to draw after it a long train of evil consequences. [J. C. Ryle, Are You Ready For The End Of Time? (Fearn, Scotland: Christian Focus, 2001) p. 107-108; reprint of Coming Events and Present Duties.]

J. C. Ryle had some concluding words about the importance of literal interpretation:

Cultivate the habit of reading prophecy with a single eye to the literal meaning of its proper names. Cast aside the old traditional idea that Jacob, and Israel, and Judah, and Jerusalem, and Zion must always mean the Gentile Church, and that predictions about the second Advent are to be taken spiritually, and first Advent predictions literally. Be just, and honest, and fair. If you expect the Jews to take the 53rd of Isaiah literally, be sure you take the 54th and 60th and 62nd literally also. The Protestant Reformers were not perfect. On no point, I venture to say, were they so much in the wrong as in the interpretation of Old Testament prophecy. [J. C. Ryle, Are You Ready For The End Of Time? (Fearn, Scotland: Christian Focus, 2001) p. 157-159; reprint of Coming Events and Present Duties.]

http://www.middletow...med/rylelit.htm



Bolding is mine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do wonder sometimes why spiritual things are considered not literal by dispensationalists. There literally is a spiritual world out there. It's not figurative or fantasy.


Ephesians 6:12
12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.


You're right. There is a literal spritual realm (or world) out there, and the angelic and demonic forces will be working overtime during the future great tribulaton. :(

Here's just one example...

Revelation 16:12-14
12 And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.
13 And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet.
14 For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

I've never heard that dispensationalists don't believe in the spiritual realm...it's in the word of God. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I do wonder sometimes why spiritual things are considered not literal by dispensationalists. There literally is a spiritual world out there. It's not figurative or fantasy.


To be honest, I have wondered why some use that term as well. I just figure they mean it's not physical. For instance, I believe in the Kingdom of God now is spiritual, but the Kingdom of Heaven later is spiritual. They are both just as literal and real as the other though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



To be honest, I have wondered why some use that term as well. I just figure they mean it's not physical. For instance, I believe in the Kingdom of God now is spiritual, but the Kingdom of Heaven later is spiritual. They are both just as literal and real as the other though.


While I am amil, I do like this post. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Members



To be honest, I have wondered why some use that term as well. I just figure they mean it's not physical. For instance, I believe in the Kingdom of God now is spiritual, but the Kingdom of Heaven later is spiritual. They are both just as literal and real as the other though.


I was commenting on your separating the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Heaven into two separate entities when Matthew, 19:23 and 24, uses both names for the same event, but half of my post disappeared.

And in similar passages the other evangelists use Kindom of God when Matthew uses Kingdom of Heaven.

Matt 18:3, Mark 10:14-15
Matt 3:2, 4:17,Mark1:15.
Matt. 5:3, Luke 6:20. Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
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.



×
×
  • Create New...