Announcement

Collapse

Eschatology 201 Guidelines

This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.


Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.

However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.

End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.

Millennialism- post-, pre- a-

Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.

From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.

OK folks, let's roll!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Special place in hell (for preterists)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by seanD View Post
    Jews and generations..



    And they obviously don't have any sort of eschatological bias. If you have a better source, put up or shut up.
    So you finally quote an actual source instead of assuming modern generation is the same as ancient....

    And, it disagrees with what Darfius posted (unless I misread his meaning). He quoted Scripture where Moses says it's 70 or 80 years. Jesus didn't say it would start "before the next generation begins" he said ..."this generation will not pass away". I take that to mean that it would happen before everyone hearing him passes away. So, again, fits with preterism.
    "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

    "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
      So you finally quote an actual source instead of assuming modern generation is the same as ancient....

      And, it disagrees with what Darfius posted (unless I misread his meaning). He quoted Scripture where Moses says it's 70 or 80 years. Jesus didn't say it would start "before the next generation begins" he said ..."this generation will not pass away". I take that to mean that it would happen before everyone hearing him passes away. So, again, fits with preterism.
      Yes, that was the meaning of what I posted and I agree with what you say here, even that it "fits with preterism". But as I posted elsewhere, Scripture says first tribulation would come "to the Jew" and "then to the Gentile", which means double fulfillment. In support of that:

      Scripture Verse: Jeremiah 25

      12 “But when the seventy years are fulfilled, I will punish the king of Babylon and his nation, the land of the Babylonians, for their guilt,” declares the Lord, “and will make it desolate forever. 13 I will bring on that land all the things I have spoken against it, all that are written in this book and prophesied by Jeremiah against all the nations. 14 They themselves will be enslaved by many nations and great kings; I will repay them according to their deeds and the work of their hands.”

      The Cup of God’s Wrath

      15 This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, said to me: “Take from my hand this cup filled with the wine of my wrath and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it. 16 When they drink it, they will stagger and go mad because of the sword I will send among them.”
      17 So I took the cup from the Lord’s hand and made all the nations to whom he sent me drink it: 18 Jerusalem and the towns of Judah the Jew first], its kings and officials, to make them a ruin and an object of horror and scorn, a curse—as they are today; 19 Pharaoh king of Egypt, his attendants, his officials and all his people, 20 and all the foreign people there; all the kings of Uz; all the kings of the Philistines (those of Ashkelon, Gaza, Ekron, and the people left at Ashdod); 21 Edom, Moab and Ammon; 22 all the kings of Tyre and Sidon; the kings of the coastlands across the sea; 23 Dedan, Tema, Buz and all who are in distant places; 24 all the kings of Arabia and all the kings of the foreign people who live in the wilderness; 25 all the kings of Zimri, Elam and Media; 26 and all the kings of the north, near and far, one after the other—all the kingdoms on the face of the earth. And after all of them, the king of Sheshak [Babylon] will drink it too.
      27 “Then tell them, ‘This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: Drink, get drunk and vomit, and fall to rise no more because of the sword I will send among you.’ 28 But if they refuse to take the cup from your hand and drink, tell them, ‘This is what the Lord Almighty says: You must drink it! 29 See, I am beginning to bring disaster on the city that bears my Name, and will you indeed go unpunished? You will not go unpunished, for I am calling down a sword on all who live on the earth, declares the Lord Almighty.’
      30 “Now prophesy all these words against them and say to them:
      “‘The Lord will roar from on high;
      he will thunder from his holy dwelling
      and roar mightily against his land.
      He will shout like those who tread the grapes,
      shout against all who live on the earth.
      31
      The tumult will resound to the ends of the earth,
      for the Lord will bring charges against the nations;
      he will bring judgment on all mankind

      and put the wicked to the sword,’”
      declares the Lord.

      © Copyright Original Source



      Scripture Verse: Revelation 16

      19 The great city split into three parts, and the cities of the nations collapsed. God remembered Babylon the Great and gave her the cup filled with the wine of the fury of his wrath.

      © Copyright Original Source

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
        So you finally quote an actual source instead of assuming modern generation is the same as ancient....

        And, it disagrees with what Darfius posted (unless I misread his meaning). He quoted Scripture where Moses says it's 70 or 80 years. Jesus didn't say it would start "before the next generation begins" he said ..."this generation will not pass away". I take that to mean that it would happen before everyone hearing him passes away. So, again, fits with preterism.
        Okay, then I'm out.
        "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

        Comment


        • Originally posted by seanD View Post
          Okay, then I'm out.
          Why? Because even Darfius disagree's with you? After thinking about it, I don't think how long a generation is, is that important but how long those of the generation hearing it (or seeing it when it happens) live is what the text says to me.
          "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

          "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Darfius View Post
            While Justin Martyr and Irenaeus can provide interesting information about the beliefs and practices of the early church, their beliefs and practices are in no way authoritative independent of Scriptural support. "Tradition" is the way the Jews and Catholics perverted the truth into Babylonian knockoffs.



            "Literally", the Scriptures present both a suffering Messiah and a conquering one. The Jews hoped for and therefore expected the wrong version of the Messiah. Even still, those most educated in Scripture (the Pharisees and Sanhedrin) knew Jesus was the Messiah. They just rejected Him. "It is better for one man to die for the people than that the whole nation perish." Caiaphas was basically saying, "since Jesus will not be the conquering Messiah we desire, we will help Him be the suffering Messiah He appears to want to be."



            God says His "dwelling" will be there (on Mt. Zion in Jerusalem), but He does not specify that a specific building will last forever. Actually, according to Scripture, the rebuilt temple will be defiled by the Antichrist, so I'm not sure where the idea came that it would "last forever."
            God is in the millennial temple in Eze 43. read it closely.

            43:4 And the glory of the Lord came into the house by the way of the gate whose prospect is toward the east.
            5 So the spirit took me up, and brought me into the inner court; and, behold, the glory of the Lord filled the house.
            6 And I heard him speaking unto me out of the house; and the man stood by me.
            7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.

            The saints and martyrs, while not considered inerrant, based their beliefs on the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Not all of Jesus' teachings are in the Bible (John 21:25). The Bible is simply tradition written down. The Ethiopian eunuch needed apostolic teaching (Acts 8). He couldn't understand the OT without apostolic instruction. We shouldn't try that either. Our understanding should be based on Jesus and the apostles (Eph 2:21). The Jews didn't know who Jesus was. The Sanhedrin didn't say anything about Messiah, because he didn't know Messiah would suffer.

            Luke 19:44
            And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

            2 Cor 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.

            Before the written tradition of scripture (special revelation) there was the general revelation of God in nature. (Rom1:20, Psa 19:1)
            Allegory has rules. Philo of Alexandria says the rules of allegory are based on natural philosophy. In the first century, some understood Moses as allegory. Philo wasn't unique. Josephus wrote:

            For all things have here a reference to the nature of the universe: while our legislator speaks some things wisely, but enigmatically; and others under a decent allegory: but still explains such things as required a direct explication plainly and expressly. However, those that have a mind to know the reasons of every thing, may find here a very curious philosophical theory: which I now indeed shall wave the explication of: but if God afford me time for it, I will set about writing it after I have finished the present work.
            Last edited by eschaton; 04-11-2020, 01:16 PM. Reason: emphasis
            The Capitol Insurrection And Religion

            https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...t_bibl_vppi_i0

            Comment


            • Originally posted by seanD View Post
              Jews and generations..

              And they obviously don't have any sort of eschatological bias. If you have a better source, put up or shut up.
              What makes you think a modern scientific estimate of the length of a Jewish generation has anything to do with ancient concepts of generation length?

              Let's see if this link works. If not, it's from the book "Covenant & Polity in Biblical Israel: Biblical Foundations & Jewish Expressions" by Daniel J. Elazar, in the section "The Biblical Organization of Time".
              Source: Daniel Elazar

              The oft-used biblical phrase "forty years" is the idiom for a generation, representing the outer limits of a generation's time span. Empirical studies subsequently have shown that the time span involved in a historical generation is between 25 and 40 years, as the Bible itself frequently suggests.....
              A person's "generation" refers to the generation of his maturity. A normal lifetime, according to the Bible, is essentially two generations in length and a full three generations (120 years) is the Bible's upper limit.

              © Copyright Original Source

              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
              sigpic
              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

              Comment


              • Originally posted by eschaton View Post
                God is in the millennial temple in Eze 43. read it closely.

                43:4 And the glory of the Lord came into the house by the way of the gate whose prospect is toward the east.
                5 So the spirit took me up, and brought me into the inner court; and, behold, the glory of the Lord filled the house.
                6 And I heard him speaking unto me out of the house; and the man stood by me.
                7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.
                I believe a structure will be on Mt. Zion, but what does it matter if it is the same structure? The prophecy is fulfilled so long as there is a structure and He dwells there.

                The saints and martyrs, while not considered inerrant, based their beliefs on the teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Not all of Jesus' teachings are in the Bible (John 21:25). The Bible is simply tradition written down. The Ethiopian eunuch needed apostolic teaching (Acts 8). He couldn't understand the OT without apostolic instruction. We shouldn't try that either. Our understanding should be based on Jesus and the apostles (Eph 2:21). The Jews didn't know who Jesus was. The Sanhedrin didn't say anything about Messiah, because he didn't know Messiah would suffer.

                Luke 19:44
                And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.

                2 Cor 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
                4Q372 [Dead Sea scrolls](c. 200 BCE) features a suffering, righteous ‘Joseph’ king-figure, who cries out to God in his death-throes as ‘My father’, citing the suffering-messiah Psalms 89 and 22, and predicts that he will arise again to do justice and righteousness.


                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_ben_Joseph

                Before the written tradition of scripture (special revelation) there was the general revelation of God in nature. (Rom1:20, Psa 19:1)
                Allegory has rules. Philo of Alexandria says the rules of allegory are based on natural philosophy. In the first century, some understood Moses as allegory. Philo wasn't unique. Josephus wrote:
                Scripture Verse: 1 Corinthians

                20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

                © Copyright Original Source



                Define "spiritually". Whose "spiritual" interpretation should we take as authoritative and on what objective basis? What's the difference between claiming a "spiritual" interpretation independent of the bounds of the text and claiming revelation from a dream?

                Scripture Verse: Jeremiah 23

                25 “I have heard what the prophets say who prophesy lies in my name. They say, ‘I had a dream! I had a dream!’ 26 How long will this continue in the hearts of these lying prophets, who prophesy the delusions of their own minds? 27 They think the dreams they tell one another will make my people forget my name, just as their ancestors forgot my name through Baal worship. 28 Let the prophet who has a dream recount the dream, but let the one who has my word speak it faithfully. For what has straw to do with grain?” declares the Lord. 29 “Is not my word like fire,” declares the Lord, “and like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces?
                30 “Therefore,” declares the Lord, “I am against the prophets who steal from one another words supposedly from me. 31 Yes,” declares the Lord, “I am against the prophets who wag their own tongues and yet declare, ‘The Lord declares.’ 32 Indeed, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” declares the Lord. “They tell them and lead my people astray with their reckless lies, yet I did not send or appoint them. They do not benefit these people in the least,” declares the Lord.

                © Copyright Original Source



                What about plain old reading comprehension? Some people are stupid. Most are stupid because their own wickedness blinds their vision. "If thine eye be single." There's no need to substitute some imaginary "spiritual" interpretation that goes beyond the bounds of the text--that is, beyond God's very words. He can get His point across without our "help".

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Darfius View Post
                  I believe a structure will be on Mt. Zion, but what does it matter if it is the same structure? The prophecy is fulfilled so long as there is a structure and He dwells there.



                  4Q372 [Dead Sea scrolls](c. 200 BCE) features a suffering, righteous ‘Joseph’ king-figure, who cries out to God in his death-throes as ‘My father’, citing the suffering-messiah Psalms 89 and 22, and predicts that he will arise again to do justice and righteousness.


                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_ben_Joseph



                  Scripture Verse: 1 Corinthians

                  20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

                  © Copyright Original Source



                  Define "spiritually". Whose "spiritual" interpretation should we take as authoritative and on what objective basis? What's the difference between claiming a "spiritual" interpretation independent of the bounds of the text and claiming revelation from a dream?

                  Scripture Verse: Jeremiah 23

                  25 “I have heard what the prophets say who prophesy lies in my name. They say, ‘I had a dream! I had a dream!’ 26 How long will this continue in the hearts of these lying prophets, who prophesy the delusions of their own minds? 27 They think the dreams they tell one another will make my people forget my name, just as their ancestors forgot my name through Baal worship. 28 Let the prophet who has a dream recount the dream, but let the one who has my word speak it faithfully. For what has straw to do with grain?” declares the Lord. 29 “Is not my word like fire,” declares the Lord, “and like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces?
                  30 “Therefore,” declares the Lord, “I am against the prophets who steal from one another words supposedly from me. 31 Yes,” declares the Lord, “I am against the prophets who wag their own tongues and yet declare, ‘The Lord declares.’ 32 Indeed, I am against those who prophesy false dreams,” declares the Lord. “They tell them and lead my people astray with their reckless lies, yet I did not send or appoint them. They do not benefit these people in the least,” declares the Lord.

                  © Copyright Original Source



                  What about plain old reading comprehension? Some people are stupid. Most are stupid because their own wickedness blinds their vision. "If thine eye be single." There's no need to substitute some imaginary "spiritual" interpretation that goes beyond the bounds of the text--that is, beyond God's very words. He can get His point across without our "help".
                  My point is that He was standing in the millennial temple. If He was standing in a spot forever, and the whole heaven and earth flee away, does God flee away too? If there is a new heaven and earth is there a new God too. I'm saying it makes no sense.

                  I don't believe the Sanhedrin was an Essene.

                  1 Cor 2:8 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

                  1 Cor 1:20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

                  Spiritually means allegorically based on the philosophical wisdom of God. That is an ethical way of life. The answer to your question is general revelation, God revealing Himself in nature (Rom 1:20). Philo names his predecessors in the view as well as his contemporaries. He is talking about the Theraputes, Josephus, and the like. Not all Jews shared the same spiritual view. Jesus shows it in His parables like the one I gave earlier. Paul explains it in the spirit and law. Paul shares quite a bit with Philo.


                  Paul’s emphasis on the singular “seed’ in Gal. 3:16 finds a parallel in Philo’s stress on the singular “child” in Gen. 17:16 (Demut. nom. 145); again, both Paul and Philo find hidden meanings in names, especially the names of persons important in biblicalhistory. Both Paul and Philo allegorize the name of Hagar (Galatians 4; Leg. ulleg. 3.244). A more important example is to be found in Paul’s identification of the miraculous rock with Christ; Philo identifies it with Wisdom or the Logos (Leg. alleg. 2.86; Quad det. pot. 118) p.26

                  A Short History of the Interpretation of the Bible
                  by Robert McQueen Grant, David Tracy
                  What you say about some people is true. That's the reason the scriptures say:

                  1 John 4
                  Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. ...

                  I made a post about that in the other thread.
                  Last edited by eschaton; 04-13-2020, 08:42 PM. Reason: wrong source
                  The Capitol Insurrection And Religion

                  https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...t_bibl_vppi_i0

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by eschaton View Post
                    My point is that He was standing in the millennial temple. If He was standing in a spot forever, and the whole heaven and earth flee away, does God flee away too? If there is a new heaven and earth is there a new God too. I'm saying it makes no sense.
                    If heaven and earth are renewed to their pre-fall conditions, that would mean the old heaven and earth had "fled away." Meanwhile God's in the same spot like a bawss.

                    I don't believe the Sanhedrin was an Essene.
                    I believe the Sanhedrin were educated scholars familiar with Essene doctrine. I also believe the Essenes, if indeed they were responsible for the Dead Sea scrolls, preserved documents reflecting widespread Jewish beliefs of the Second Temple period.

                    1 Cor 2:8 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
                    Paul was clearly referring primarily to the devil, who believed he was defeating Jesus by killing Him.

                    1 Cor 1:20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.
                    A stumbling block because being crucified was the opposite of a sign which bestowed glory. Crucifixion bestowed humiliation. To the proud and warlike Jews, following a crucified Messiah would have required them to overcome a lot of that pride. Most were not willing. To the Greeks, the idea of God dying was absurd. Also, Jesus said we must become like children and the Greeks prided themselves on being "wiser" than everyone else. In both cases, pride was a (usually) insurmountable obstacle.

                    Similarly, your pride at having found the super-secret-decoder-ring to the Scriptures prevents you from grasping the meaning of the plain text.

                    Spiritually means allegorically based on the philosophical wisdom of God. That is an ethical way of life. The answer to your question is general revelation, God revealing Himself in nature (Rom 1:20). Philo names his predecessors in the view as well as his contemporaries. He is talking about the Theraputes, Josephus, and the like. Not all Jews shared the same spiritual view. Jesus shows it in His parables like the one I gave earlier. Paul explains it in the spirit and law. Paul shares quite a bit with Philo.
                    "Nature" sure as heck doesn't include Justin Martyr. I am aware the writers of the New Testament employed Philonic Logos imagery to describe Jesus and were obviously familiar with his writing, but just as obviously they did not agree with him on certain things, namely and most importantly that Jesus was the Christ. Ironically, the man you are holding up as a paragon of "spiritual interpretation" missed the boat on the whole Jesus is the Messiah thing.

                    I made a post about that in the other thread.
                    Would you please cite it here? I don't intend to go hunting for it.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Darfius View Post
                      If heaven and earth are renewed to their pre-fall conditions, that would mean the old heaven and earth had "fled away." Meanwhile God's in the same spot like a bawss.



                      I believe the Sanhedrin were educated scholars familiar with Essene doctrine. I also believe the Essenes, if indeed they were responsible for the Dead Sea scrolls, preserved documents reflecting widespread Jewish beliefs of the Second Temple period.



                      Paul was clearly referring primarily to the devil, who believed he was defeating Jesus by killing Him.



                      A stumbling block because being crucified was the opposite of a sign which bestowed glory. Crucifixion bestowed humiliation. To the proud and warlike Jews, following a crucified Messiah would have required them to overcome a lot of that pride. Most were not willing. To the Greeks, the idea of God dying was absurd. Also, Jesus said we must become like children and the Greeks prided themselves on being "wiser" than everyone else. In both cases, pride was a (usually) insurmountable obstacle.

                      Similarly, your pride at having found the super-secret-decoder-ring to the Scriptures prevents you from grasping the meaning of the plain text.



                      "Nature" sure as heck doesn't include Justin Martyr. I am aware the writers of the New Testament employed Philonic Logos imagery to describe Jesus and were obviously familiar with his writing, but just as obviously they did not agree with him on certain things, namely and most importantly that Jesus was the Christ. Ironically, the man you are holding up as a paragon of "spiritual interpretation" missed the boat on the whole Jesus is the Messiah thing.



                      Would you please cite it here? I don't intend to go hunting for it.
                      You're supposed to be the literalist, not me. Heaven and earth fleeing away don't sound like returning to a garden like condition. That's why the literalism that the pre-mill is founded on doesn't make any sense to me. It sounds more subjective than allegory founded on philosophical principles. You show your subjectivity by making declarations about what the scriptures mean without any resort to the literalism you claim. I'm talking about what the Sanhedrin knew or not, and Paul really meant this and that. It sounds more subjective than Dee Dee Warren's Olivet commentary. I see more eisegesis than exegesis from a self-proclaimed literalist. I see no plain text understanding in what you say. Pre-mills have set themselves up as masters over scripture to declare that it means whatever they say it means. That's the reason there have been so many false date-setting and prophecies over the last few hundred years. Philo says men with such an attitude were as evil as those before the flood.

                      The nature I am talking about is the old and the new man that Paul is talking about. Its the difference between materialism and spirituality.
                      The Capitol Insurrection And Religion

                      https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...t_bibl_vppi_i0

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by eschaton View Post
                        You're supposed to be the literalist, not me. Heaven and earth fleeing away don't sound like returning to a garden like condition. That's why the literalism that the pre-mill is founded on doesn't make any sense to me. It sounds more subjective than allegory founded on philosophical principles. You show your subjectivity by making declarations about what the scriptures mean without any resort to the literalism you claim. I'm talking about what the Sanhedrin knew or not, and Paul really meant this and that. It sounds more subjective than Dee Dee Warren's Olivet commentary. I see more eisegesis than exegesis from a self-proclaimed literalist. I see no plain text understanding in what you say. Pre-mills have set themselves up as masters over scripture to declare that it means whatever they say it means. That's the reason there have been so many false date-setting and prophecies over the last few hundred years. Philo says men with such an attitude were as evil as those before the flood.
                        I've never claimed to be a "literalist", only a "plain textualist". Rather than say exactly how the death and corruption which has infected this world would be cleansed, God said "flee away". I understand you're upset over the ease with which I bat aside your Gnosticism under the guise of "spirituality", but only valid arguments concern me and this isn't one.

                        And "what the Sanhedrin knew or not" and "whether Paul really meant this or that" is called context. That matters to those of us who want to know what God meant and don't merely wish to assign our own meaning to the text.

                        The fact that you still cite Philo as authoritative when he rejected Jesus Christ says all that needs to be said about you.

                        The nature I am talking about is the old and the new man that Paul is talking about. Its the difference between materialism and spirituality.
                        This is as Gnostic as it gets. God made matter and called it "very good". Refute that, if you dare. The nature God talks about is the difference between sin and life.

                        Comment


                        • old man

                          Originally posted by Darfius View Post
                          I've never claimed to be a "literalist", only a "plain textualist". Rather than say exactly how the death and corruption which has infected this world would be cleansed, God said "flee away". I understand you're upset over the ease with which I bat aside your Gnosticism under the guise of "spirituality", but only valid arguments concern me and this isn't one.

                          And "what the Sanhedrin knew or not" and "whether Paul really meant this or that" is called context. That matters to those of us who want to know what God meant and don't merely wish to assign our own meaning to the text.

                          The fact that you still cite Philo as authoritative when he rejected Jesus Christ says all that needs to be said about you.



                          This is as Gnostic as it gets. God made matter and called it "very good". Refute that, if you dare. The nature God talks about is the difference between sin and life.

                          Premillienialism is founded on literalism. That's what you call plain textualism. When I Google plain textualist I get info about the constitution and legal terms. I didn't get anything about the Bible, although if I go 20 pages deep maybe I would find something. Plain textualist seems to be something you pull off the top of your head like the Bible interpretations you give. Every point I've made I'ved proved from scripture and then given extra-biblical sources as well. What you call context I've given scripture to refute, such as 1 Cor 2:8.

                          You're lack of knowledge is overwhelming. The Jews didn't preserve Philo's writings. The Christian church did. There is historical testimony that Philo became a Christian, although many scholars doubt that he ever heard of Jesus.

                          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philo

                          2 Corinthians 4:18
                          While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

                          God created the seen and the unseen, the heaven and the earth and called it good. The spiritual man looks for those things that are not seen. The old plain textualist looks at things temporal. The old man is under the Law.

                          1 Corinthians 2:14
                          But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
                          The Capitol Insurrection And Religion

                          https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...t_bibl_vppi_i0

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Darfius View Post
                            Sounds legit to me, sean, how about you? "I'm not sure what the truth is on this, but I'm sure someone more concerned with the truth than me has covered it." *handwave flourish at the end*



                            "I know Revelation is highly symbolic because I know it is. Besides, if we take it literally, that would make John a crazy religious freak and us for believing him. Sure, I love Christ. Whatever."



                            "I don't believe what I believe because I hunger and thirst for righteousness. I follow the traditions of my fathers. I believe what I believe because when I spent what little time I have spent looking into the most important matters in this world or the next through half-opened eyes, meh, good enough. Ttyl, it's hard to change my toddler's diaper, hold my phone and defend the claims I somehow had time to make in the previous posts before this one."
                            The OP said none of that last paragraph.

                            The book of Revelation is symbolic - it is an apocalypse, and apocalypses are full of symbolism. That is the manner in which they convey their meaning. *All* texts - including Rev - need to be “taken literally”. All that means is, that what the author meant by what he wrote in his time and place, needs to be found out, as fully and accurately as possible. The literal sense/meaning of a text, is the one the human author intended. To that extent, the human authors of Scripture are no different from any other human author - complications arise when one tries to discover what God, the Primary Author of all Scripture, meant.

                            The dragon falling from the sky is a symbolic being - Rev 12 is not saying that Heaven is spatially located above Earth, or that satan fell down by force of gravity to Earth beneath. Rev 12 is not a treatise on celestial mechanics or biology. The truth of the text is not in the narrative details about the falling dragon, but in what the narrative is pointing to. The truth symbolised by the details in the narrative, is the truth of the passage. The truth about the “seven heads and ten horns” (for instance) does not consist in the cataloguing of those details purely for their own sake, but, in what those heads, horns, and the numbers of them are pointing to, & symbolising. Numbers in Rev are an important means of getting the meaning across - they all serve a purpose.

                            And to see what the dragon symbolises, we have to follow the clues the texts gives us. There are echoes of Genesis 3, of the *tannin*/“dragon”-passages in the OT, of St Luke 10.18, of Isaiah 14.12-29 & 27.1, of St John 12.31-32, of Jeremiah 51.34, among others.

                            Dragons played a significant part in Babylonian religion and culture; and that may be important to this passage.
                            There may be an astronomical allusion, to the constellation Draco.
                            There may - if chronology permits - be an allusion to the dragon-banner.
                            The contest between a god/demi-god/hero & and a dragon/monster, is very ancient, and very widespread. This episode can be seen as a God-breathed, consecrated, instance of that motif.
                            Last edited by Rushing Jaws; 04-21-2020, 10:56 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Rushing Jaws View Post
                              The OP said none of that last paragraph.

                              The book of Revelation is symbolic - it is an apocalypse, and apocalypses are full of symbolism. That is the manner in which they convey their meaning. *All* texts - including Rev - need to be “taken literally”. All that means is, that what the author meant by what he wrote in his time and place, needs to be found out, as fully and accurately as possible. The literal sense/meaning of a text, is the one the human author intended. To that extent, the human authors of Scripture are no different from any other human author - complications arise when one tries to discover what God, the Primary Author of all Scripture, meant.

                              The dragon falling from the sky is a symbolic being - Rev 12 is not saying that Heaven is spatially located above Earth, or that satan fell down by force of gravity to Earth beneath. Rev 12 is not a treatise on celestial mechanics or biology. The truth of the text is not in the narrative details about the falling dragon, but in what the narrative is pointing to. The truth symbolised by the details in the narrative, is the truth of the passage. The truth about the “seven heads and ten horns” (for instance) does not consist in the cataloguing of those details purely for their own sake, but, in what those heads, horns, and the numbers of them are pointing to, & symbolising. Numbers in Rev are an important means of getting the meaning across - they all serve a purpose.

                              And to see what the dragon symbolises, we have to follow the clues the texts gives us. There are echoes of Genesis 3, of the *tannin*/“dragon”-passages in the OT, of St Luke 10.18, of Isaiah 14.12-29 & 27.1, of St John 12.31-32, of Jeremiah 51.34, among others.

                              Dragons played a significant part in Babylonian religion and culture; and that may be important to this passage.
                              There may be an astronomical allusion, to the constellation Draco.
                              There may - if chronology permits - be an allusion to the dragon-banner.
                              The contest between a god/demi-god/hero & and a dragon/monster, is very ancient, and very widespread. This episode can be seen as a God-breathed, consecrated, instance of that motif.
                              You had to read between the lines to understand that "OP" said my caricature. I know reading between the lines is difficult for you preterists. Your eyes fall off the page to a blackboard nearby where you start scribbling weird stuff and patting yourselves on the back.

                              I agree with everything else you said. Do you agree that when John said "the whole world" would worship the beast, he meant the whole world? Or even the whole Roman empire? Haha. Lecturing me when you don't have a friggin clue.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Rushing Jaws View Post
                                The OP said none of that last paragraph.

                                The book of Revelation is symbolic - it is an apocalypse, and apocalypses are full of symbolism. That is the manner in which they convey their meaning. *All* texts - including Rev - need to be “taken literally”. All that means is, that what the author meant by what he wrote in his time and place, needs to be found out, as fully and accurately as possible. The literal sense/meaning of a text, is the one the human author intended. To that extent, the human authors of Scripture are no different from any other human author - complications arise when one tries to discover what God, the Primary Author of all Scripture, meant.
                                I think the idea that the literal sense has something to do with author intent was brought in by some of the Reformers who disliked traditional allegorical interpretation. It is part of some modern theological theories. It implies that the author couldn't use a metaphor to express himself. Or else any metaphor the author uses has to be considered literal. If metaphor is literal, then all writing is literal and there really isn't such a thing as a metaphor. Some of the later Reformers said that symbolic writing was "double literal."

                                If we have to understand metaphor as literal because that is what the author intended, then Nicodemus was right about re-entering his mother's womb (John 3:4). I prefer the biblical explanation that wisdom is expressed in parable and simile.

                                Proverbs 1:5-7 (ESV)
                                5 Let the wise hear and increase in learning,
                                and the one who understands obtain guidance,
                                6 to understand a proverb and a saying,
                                the words of the wise and their riddles.

                                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allego...n_of_the_Bible
                                The Capitol Insurrection And Religion

                                https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...t_bibl_vppi_i0

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by eschaton, 03-11-2021, 10:51 AM
                                22 responses
                                211 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Faber
                                by Faber
                                 
                                Started by Darfius, 03-30-2020, 03:34 PM
                                136 responses
                                9,183 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Rushing Jaws  
                                Started by seanD, 03-26-2020, 11:05 AM
                                75 responses
                                5,279 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post seanD
                                by seanD
                                 
                                Started by seanD, 05-29-2019, 06:07 AM
                                201 responses
                                23,290 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post seanD
                                by seanD
                                 
                                Working...
                                X