Identify Your View

Glad you asked. I'll finish the first draft of the entire NT within the next couple of weeks. The committee will finish half of the second draft within a few weeks also. In the meantime, I'll finish the trial draft of John's Gospel for publication if I can get my editors to get me back their corrections. :type:

 

Praise the Lord for that work. So you are translating the NT from the Greek into Japanese?

 

You got it! There are other Bible translations here of course, but there is no TR translation in print, and has never been a TR-based NT in modern Japanese.

 

For now, he is only designated as a "beast," Rev 17, then 13.

skypair

 

Welcome to BB, rusty! :wavey: Hope your monicker isn't indicative of your walk lately.

You will be a big help here then and maybe get back to the ministry you once had elsewhere, here. raying:

The "examination" people here put you through will be very edifying to your spirit.

skypair

 

Dispensationalist here, although I do admit that there are covenants
like the Abrahamic Covenant that is still in effect for the Jews, as well as the Christians (we benefit from it), as well as the Noahic Covenant which unbelievers are still bound to - as well as the 5 divine institutions we are all bound to.

Wow! I can't believe there are Preterists on this Forum though as I haven't come across any of them previously. When God first started opening my eyes to the truth, I came upon a few Preterist articles and didn't know what the heck was going on cos they were implying that all the things in Revelation had already happened. ?Huh? I thought it was some kind of joke, until I came upon other articles stating what Preterism was and refuting it. I just can't believe that they think we're currently living in the Millennium - if so, then where is the Lord Jesus Christ who is ruling the nations in righteousness?

Actually I find Preterism to be one big BORE, be it partial preterism or full preterism - it somehow reminds me of "Alice in Wonderland". You should read some of Thomas Ice's refutations on Preterism - they are excellent.

 

John of Japan,

Canadyjd asked you about the Temple and the sacrifices will be re-instituted in the MK, as what dispensationalists' comments on them.

You say:

Ok, if you think these seem not important to you.

Then, tell me, why do you believe there is distinct between Israel and Church in God's program in the end times? What the purpose of them in God's program? Please scriptures to support your belief, why there are distinct between Israel and Church. Thanks.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

I was taught the dispensational view but came to reject it for being too literal and consequently denying the spiritual meaning of the Scriptures. That's the same mistake the Rabbis made and resulted in their developing a Messianic view that demanded an earthly king and kingdom, a view which led the majority (especially the religious leaders) to crucify the very Messiah they were waiting for and eventually led to their bringing upon themselves and their nation their own destruction.

I agree wholeheartedly with the Covenant view, there is only one Covenant that can reconcile a man with God, and that's the covenant which is based on the blood of Christ for atonement of sin, the New Covenant. The New Covenant fulfills every covenant God ever made with any man, people, nation or race.

I am also a partial Preterist, believing as I do that Jesus Christ has already conquered this world and all the powers of hell and even now sits in glory upon his throne reigning over all things.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

Pilgrimer,

Amen. Well saying! :thumbs:

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

Correct Marcia. I am a partial preterist. I believe both Dispensationalism as well as Full Preterism make the same mistake of extremism.

Dispensationalists take the literal interpretation to such an extreme that they deny any spiritual fulfillment.

The Full Preterists take the spiritual interpretation to such an extreme that they deny any literal fulfillment.

I believe the Scripture has both a spiritual and a literal fulfillment.

Therefore I would be a non-Dispensational Partial Preterist Covenant Theology Southern Baptist Pentecostal Evangelical Christian! :smilewinkgrin:

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

Hello, Pilgrimer! Can you give an example of this? I don't know of any disp. view that denies a "spiritual fulfillment," although maybe you mean something by that term that I don't.

.

I do, too, depending on what you mean by "spiritual fulfillment." That could mean anything!

Btw, I disagree that the rabbis were at fault for being too literal - they were misunderstanding scripture and maybe wanting an earthly king -- that's not the same thing as being too literal.

 

TT Thinks He's Different...Well Look at This

I consider myself to be a Pan-dispy-covenant-preterits. My theology has not been gleaned from attending and graduating from Cemetery [I meant Seminary, sorry], so I am a little bit of all three theories. The truth is, we will all be in for a few major surprises when we all get to heaven [hey, isn't that a Sunday School song?]. As I stated in another post theme about theological theories, I believe all preachers, pastors and Bible teachers will have to attend a class where we will all be debriefed as to how far off base we were when we taught and preached while still on earth. Thus, I believe everything "pan" out in the end!

Than, and only than will the really theology behind God's reasoning be revealed. Oh, what a day; glorious day, that will be! Looking forward to that class and day, are you?

Shalom,

Pastor Paul :type:

 

No, it's not true. The passage and my interpretation reveals something precious to me about Christ, but you are not interested in that. You'd rather make snide comments. And so any further discourse with you has become meaningless to me because of your attitude.
Sayonara.

 

If you really are interested, then first of all lose the red letters. It's loud and pushy, and impolite on an Internet forum. If you do that I'll reconsider answering your points.

We can debate with Christian politeness and mutual respect if we want to. Col 4:6--"Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man."

These are snide comments:

 

I'm a linguist. I deal professionally in English, Greek and Japanese meanings every day. Therefore communication is very important to me. Now, why would literal meanings be important to me, but not important to God Who made me?

Why would God say "Israel" but mean the church? Is He trying to fool us? We have so much about the church in the Bible. Why all of a sudden just in prophecy would God say Israel but mean the church?

When diplomats communicate they use literal interpretation. When scientists communicate literal interpretation is extremently important. Literal interpretation is a matter of life and death in the medical professions It is also important to chefs, mechanics, and about every other human profession.

How would you like your mechanic to use allegorical communication? You say, "Fix my brakes," but he thinks, "This guy didn't really mean brakes. He meant his life is careening out of control. I'll paint his car and give him a pyschological boost so that he can get his life under control." So you die in a crash.

The only profession that seems to think "spiritual" or allegorical interpretation is okay is theology. Well, I happen to believe that God means what He says and says what He means. Israel means Israel and nothing else. Here's my Scripture for that: "Let God be true, but every man a liar." (Rom. 3:3)

 

You're linking to Gary DeMar. Are you aware of how radical he is? Did you know that as a leader of Christian Reconstructionism he wants a theocracy in America? As a Baptist, you should be for the separation of church and state.

 

Hello Marcia,

The most glaring example is the hyper-literal interpretation of the Kingdom of Christ as an earthly kingdom. It is not, it is a heavenly kingdom.

Another glaring example is the hyper-literal interpretation of the reign of Christ as a world-wide forced obedience to an earthly, geo-political rule. It is not. The reign of Christ is the power and authority He exercises in this world every time he reaches down and breaks the chains of sin and death that bind the soul to hell and lifts us up to walk in His Kingdom, stand in His presence, and worship before His Throne. The victory is won, Jesus Christ reigns!

Understanding that there is a spiritual meaning to the Scripture, even to prophecy, doesn’t mean the interpretation of the Scripture is wide open to whatever fanciful imaginings a person can concoct. Even a spiritual or figurative interpretation of the Scriptures has to be rooted in the Scripture itself, for example, we have no problem understanding in what way Jesus is “the Lamb of God,” and we certainly don’t take that literally. Jesus wasn’t literally a four-footed, wooly lamb, he was a man. But we understand it is speaking spiritually of Jesus being a lamb, ergo we see him described in Revelation 4:6 as “a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes . . .”

Now I doubt that even the most ardent literalist would suggest that this be understood literally, that Jesus was literally a lamb with seven horns and seven eyes. And yet they will insist that everything else must be understood literally, according to the normal and natural sense of a word, such as, a star must be a star . . . but then again, a locust might be a helicopter and a woman might be the Roman Catholic Church! Those who insist on a literal interpretation are never consistent in applying it, and yet they will insist on their particular interpretation being the only correct interpretation because it is a “literal” interpretation.

On the subject of the error of Rabbinic Judaism, their misunderstanding of the Scriptures rose from their inability to see beyond the letter of the Law to the spirit of the Law, or what the Law was pointing to. This was taught by Paul in 2 Corinthians 3. The “letter of the law,” refers to a strict literal (grammatical/historical) interpretation of the Law. The “spirit of the Law” refers to the spiritual things that those literal things teach us. For example, how much would we really understand about Jesus’ role as the “Lamb of God,” if it were not for all those literal lambs that were sacrificed according to the Law, which we can study and read about and learn from?

But the problem for Rabbinic Judaism is that it is the very glory of the earthly things of the Old Covenant that blinds them to the greater glory of the spiritual things of the New Covenant. In other words, they can’t see the what the Law teaches about the spiritual things of God because their eyes are fixed on the earthly things of the Law.

“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. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.”

The hyper-literalist falls into the same mistake, and not surprisingly winds up in the same place, which is why Pre-Millennial Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism find common ground in their Messianic expectations of a future, earthly kingdom, earthly temple, earthly king and the reinstitution of Old Covenant worship.

In Christ,
Pilgrimer

 

Some comparisons!

Because God, in His wisdom, progressively revealed the Gospel in that way, (1Cor 2) and went about “fulfilling” His plan to save all those that would believe the Truth. The church is the body of Christ, one people of faith. All men are saved by faith, both OT and NT; the blood of bulls and goats wasn’t what saved the OT people and neither will it save any in the futurists’ view.

Although certainly we could do little more here than only scratch the surface on these issues, (which I usually avoid debating) because of the flying sparks that all too often cause smoldering fires with my beloved brothers. Frankly, I am replying because I resent to my position being referred to as “allegorical interpretation” by what I could only describe as an opposing position that only flies (escapes) through a misguided development of systematic intellectual principles which result in nothing more than “selective” force to fit literalisms, and this with a dogma that others don’t compare scriptures to scriptures literally. I take ALL the following literal which address whether or not “He is trying to fool us?”:

(Rom 1:16) For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

(Rom 10:12) For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

(Gal 3:28) There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

(Col 3:11) Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.



(1Co 10:1) Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

(1Co 10:2) And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

(1Co 10:3) And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

(1Co 10:4) And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.



(Eph 4:4) There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

(Eph 4:5) One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

(Eph 4:6) One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

(Gal 3:23) But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

(1Co 2:7) But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

(1Co 2:8) Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

Moreover, I take “rightly dividing” literally to mean making a straight clean cut into the Word and examining it as a whole, rather than to systematically chop it to pieces and force separations.