No, not memorials of sin. Memorials of His sacrifice at Calvary, similar to the Lord's Table.
HankD
"Allegorical" and "Spiritual" Hermeneutics
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by John of Japan, Dec 14, 2017.
Page 8 of 10
-
-
David Kent Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
- Luke 22:15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:
- 16For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
- 17And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
- 18For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.
- 19And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
- 20Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.
The church is the temple now, do you not understand that? No need for any future temple.
. -
HankD -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Question: Was Peter talking about a literal 1000 years versus a literal one day? Of course he was, otherwise the whole logical progression is suspect. And just because to God, 1000 years is as a day, does not mean that to us the same thing is true. Just because God, existing outside of the space-time continuum which He Himself created, can look at the whole scope of history at once, does not mean that we can do the same.
You say you interpret Rev. 20 according to the context. Look again. In the context, the term "a thousand years" occurs no less than six times!! So you are ignoring the context completely when you say, "The day, the thousand years, will amount to 35-40 years." There is no basis whatsoever in the context to say that 1000 = 35-40.
Again, Robertson's point: there are many different interpretations of the 1000 years, if you are amil or postmil. Why is that? Because every interpreter who interprets allegorically/spiritually interprets not from the text but from his own opinion. My point: if you interpret literally, there is only one possible meaning to the 1000 years: 1000 years!!
I've dealt with many dozens of new believers in Japan, America, and other countries. Not a single one ever said to me, "But shouldn't we interpret the Bible spiritually instead of literally?" No, they interpret literally until some Internet dingaling tells them otherwise.
Patient--"Doc, tell it to me straight. Do I have cancer?"
Doctor--"Verily, there is an evil scourge within you. I say unto you, thou must repent and receive succor for thy temple, or face judgment upon thy temple." -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Easy! Scripture says the new heavens/earth will come after the millenuim. I didn't use any hermeneutical system, but merely read Scripture & put 2 and 2 together. -
-
OK, then, let's get back on it!
Preterists, can you provide ANY proof that the eschatological events your doctrine SAYS have happened, have REALLY already happened???????????????????????
If not, can you give us any AUTHORITY for your belief????????????????????????????? -
Covenanter Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
"Allegorical" and "Spiritual" Hermeneutics
You are obsessed with preterism so you force every thread to stray from its intention. If we all decided to ignore you, we could have more meaningful, on-topic discussions. -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Covenanter Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Covenanter said: ↑Roby the thread title is :
"Allegorical" and "Spiritual" Hermeneutics
You are obsessed with preterism so you force every thread to stray from its intention. If we all decided to ignore you, we could have more meaningful, on-topic discussions.Click to expand...
And "ignore" is a COWARD'S tool, used by those who can't answer questions in a given forum or thread. -
Squire Robertsson AdministratorAdministrator
Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 1500 Pacific\2300 GMT. -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite SupporterCovenanter said: ↑No - you threatened me with being locked up. Your understanding according to context is limited.Click to expand...
Now will you please actually interact with what I have written?
Again, here is just one question out of my points you have not answered: Was Peter talking about a literal 1000 years versus a literal one day? Or something else? -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite SupporterJohn of Japan said: ↑Was Peter talking about a literal 1000 years versus a literal one day? Or something else?Click to expand...
-
Rhetorician AdministratorAdministratorJohn of Japan said: ↑Wow, has this thread strayed from the OP. :(Click to expand...
Email me or PM me and let us talk about help I might be on the John R. bio, when possible please.
rd -
This thread has been an encouragement to me.
More then once I reflected, “oh, yes, that’s right, I remember that now,” as a Scripture was quoted and proper evidences shown. -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite SupporterMartin Marprelate said: ↑I know you weren't asking me, but I think we're looking at a figure of speech called an antithesis: the use of an opposite to highlight a point. He's contrasting a very long time with a very short time to make the point that God is not bound by time. He could have said, "A year to God is like a second;" he certainly did not intend to be taken literally IMO.Click to expand...
Granted, Peter was making the point that God is not bound by time, and using antithesis to do that. But antithesis must be based on things that actually exist. So I disagree that Peter did not intend to be taken literally. The antithesis he gave could not exist if there were not a real, literal thing as 1000 years, and a real, literal thing called a day. Otherwise, the antithesis has no meaning.
If I were to say, "A ganglof is as a fiple to God," then that would be meaningless because those two items do not exist. I made them up. -
prophecy70 Active MemberJohn of Japan said: ↑Wow, has this thread strayed from the OP. :(Click to expand...
I apologize. -
John of Japan Well-Known MemberSite Supporterprophecy70 said: ↑Seriously John, I know, Its mostly my fault for derailing it, by responding to Robycop3.
I apologize.Click to expand...
I am a thread orphan. :(Click to expand...
Page 8 of 10