1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Literal vs Spiritual (cont.)

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Aaron, Dec 22, 2017.

Top Posters
  1. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But shouldn't we interpret the Bible spiritually instead of literally?

    JoJ: In reference to my grandfather??? Reductio ad absurdum, absolutely.​

    *sigh* Your point was that your grandad looked regal on a horse, so why not Christ? So if looks is the issue, how does bloody clothes and a stack of hats look? Still regal or absurd?

    JoJ: I see. Then you don't know the difference between "temple" and "tabernacle."​

    *heavy sigh* In regard to Judaism, one was portable and the other was permanent. The one was God's idea, the other David's. But in purpose, there is absolutely no difference, and the terms are used interchangeably.

    JoJ: Um, that is a reference to 1 Peter 2:5, and the dwelling there is "house," not "tabernacle." Those are quite different metaphors--and they are metaphors, as any literalist knows. These are the kind of exegetical difficulties the interpreter gets into when he doesn't interpret with a grammatical-historical method.​

    LOL. And this is where your strife over words won't allow you to see the forest for the trees. The tabernacle and the temple were both referred to as the house of the Lord more times than they were called the tabernacle or the temple. It is beyond doubt that Peter has the temple in mind when he penned those words, speaking of the priesthood and the sacrifices in the very same verse.

    As I said before, one must contradict straightforward, elementary doctrines in the epistles to entertain the notion that Christ is coming to set up a temporal kingdom, a Levitical priesthood, and worst of all . . . the animal sacrifices. Talk of your butchery as if God ever had delight in the blood of bulls and goats.

    ​
     
    #1 Aaron, Dec 22, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. Covenanter

    Covenanter Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    2,206
    Likes Received:
    526
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I begin my reply with a few Scriptures relating to the supposed future millennium temple - a temple for the dwelling of Messiah, and for renewed animal sacrifices.


    God's Leviticus prophecy is seen to be perfectly fulfilled in the NH&NE by God dwelling eternally with his people.

    A simple grammatical-historical interpretation leads to the understanding that sacrificial worship in an earthly tabernacle/temple had a symbolic purpose - a place of worship signifying God's presence with his people, an offering for sin, prefiguring the sacrifice of Christ & his atoning sacrifice for sinners. Signifying the eternal NH&NE where God dwells with his people without a temple.

    It comes as a surprise when we read of a new temple for the dwelling of the LORD - with sacrifices for sin - prophesied in Ezekiel.

    As the prophecy was given after the Babylonians had destroyed Solomon's temple, while the Israelites were in exile, a grammatical-historical interpretation would read this as applying to the temple to be rebuilt on the return from exile, but always looking forward to the Messianic presence that the Old Covenant prophecies prefigured.

    Jesus & the Apostles show that the New Covenant temple is built with his redeemed people, living stones, for the worship of God in the Spirit.

    The grammatical-historical interpretation of the Old Covenant prophecies result in a real fulfilment by Christ in the present Gospel age, & perfect, eternal fulfilment in the NH&NE.
     
    #2 Covenanter, Dec 22, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 4
  3. Covenanter

    Covenanter Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    2,206
    Likes Received:
    526
    Faith:
    Baptist
    But -

    The grammatical-historical interpretation can be understood as rocket science - Newton's second law of action/reaction - light the fuse, the propellant starts to burn & up goes the rocket.

    Who designed the rocket, & who guides it, or does it fall back to earth accomplishing no particular purpose? Does Old Covenant prophecy apply only to the people of Israel referred to in the prophecy, & is literal fullfilment the complete & ultimate fulfilment.

    Those accused of "spiritualizing" or "allegorizing" are simply seeing the fulfilment of OC prophecy by the LORD Jesus Christ in the New Covenant. In the present Gospel age for the born again redeemed people of God from all nations, in the spiritual realm. When Jesus returns for resurrection & judgement, all will be completely & perfectly fulfilled in the NH&NE.
     
    #3 Covenanter, Dec 22, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  4. David Kent

    David Kent Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2017
    Messages:
    2,374
    Likes Received:
    312
    Faith:
    Baptist
    They are not literalist of course. They add to scripture to fit their scolfiedlite teachings.
    We take the take the Dan 9 prophecy literally, but they add to scripture to make it fit their futurist brain washings.
     
    #4 David Kent, Dec 22, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This will be a lengthy post, so I will start with the point. Covenanter started with the Scriptures. I want to show that one need not be enlightened by the Spirit to discern the fact that Word was indeed made flesh and dwelt among us. In other words, became the tabernacle ( . . . the veil, that is to say, His flesh; Heb. 10:20)

    Commenting on Matthew 12:1-8, one of the foremost authorities on Judaism in the first centuries of Christianity and prolific writer, Jacob Neusner, said this:

    When, therefore, Jesus says that something greater than the Temple is here, he can only mean that he and his disciples may do on the Sabbath what they do because they stand in the place of the priests in the Temple: the holy place has shifted, now being formed by the circle made up of the master and his disciples.*
    ​
    The fact that the Church is Christ's body, the Temple, the House of the Lord on earth, the Holy Land, is so obvious as to be gleaned from one of Christ's earliest teachings. Most of us in the West miss it, and we rely on the teachings in the epistles to see it. Those steeped in Judaism in the first centuries would see it right away. But none of us need to study the Talmud. We need only to believe the things that were told us by Peter, James and John and Paul. And so also the Jews. They don't need the Spirit to see what Christ was saying, but they did need the Spirit to believe it.

    It's the historical-grammatical teaching. And it's the teaching that needs to be denied to assert a Premillennial eschatology.

    ​
    Neusner's book is one of two books I own written by a rabbi. I bought it because I wanted to see his arguments with the doctrines of Jesus, and to try to counter them. I was surprised to see that each of his points of difference with Christ's teaching on the law was answered decisively by Paul. I did gain some insights into rabbinical tradition and other modes of Jewish thought by reading the book, and I often quote from it.

    The other book I own is also Neusner's, Children of the Flesh, Children of the Promise: A Rabbi talks with Paul.

    *A Rabbi Talks with Jesus: an Intermillennial, Interfaith Exchange
     
    #5 Aaron, Dec 22, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. kyredneck

    kyredneck Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2009
    Messages:
    19,581
    Likes Received:
    2,893
    Faith:
    Baptist
    OUTSTANDING! ....and it's a Jew, a Judaistic Jew, that sees this.

    Another outstanding point. Thanks Aaron.
     
    #6 kyredneck, Dec 23, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Aaron

    Aaron Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    1,381
    Faith:
    Baptist
    And isn't this the crux of the argument being made by the literalists?* That the Scriptures need to be interpreted with the meaning one would get looking over the shoulder of Matthew as he wrote it?

    *They're not the real literalists, because they don't interpret symbols as literal symbols.
     
    #7 Aaron, Dec 23, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Covenanter

    Covenanter Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    2,206
    Likes Received:
    526
    Faith:
    Baptist
    IMO the argument isn't really literal vs spiritual, but a question of interpretation.

    "Literal" is used to justify a premil interpretation of OT prophecy centred on the nation of Israel. "Spiritual" is rejected because it sees the Church as the fulfilment of OT prophecy.

    That argument is seriously wrong. Christ is the supreme fulfilment of all prophecy. The present Gospel age is the time during which all nations are being called into the Kingdom of God which is an invisible, spiritual, heavenly Kingdom. Citizens of that Kingdom pass into the presence of God at death, and into the glorious NH&NE when Jesus returns for resurrection and judgment.
     
    #8 Covenanter, Dec 24, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Scripture is MOSTLY-LITERAL, as proven by literally-fulfilled prophecy and accurate description of historical events, such as the destruction of Sodom & Gomorrah.

    God had Moses prophesy that if Israel sinned & kept sinning, God would send terrible punishment upon them, which He did.

    daniel's vision of the four kingdoms which would rule Israel came true right down the line. And his narration of the prophecy about the Ptolemaic & Seleucid kingdoms that followed Alexander The Great's empire was spot-on & literal. Same with Nebuchadnezzar's statue that the Kingdom of God brings down. So far, it's been fulfilled li

    Let's look at Jesus' Olivet Discourse. The parts of it that HAS cometa pass has done so LITERALLY-the destruction of J & the temple, etc. There's simply no valid reason to believe the rest won't cometa pass JUST-AS-LITERALLY, & the same goes to the Revelation. All the eschatological prophecies are tied together, and they're LITERAL.
     
    #9 robycop3, Dec 28, 2017
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. David Kent

    David Kent Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2017
    Messages:
    2,374
    Likes Received:
    312
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Yes and it is literal that Herod was in those prophecies but you don't accept that, ypu jump past him to an imaginative future personage . It is also literal that the AOD was the Roman armies surrounding Rome

    It is also a literal 70 prophetic week prophecy, "70 Weeks IS determined."

    Don't pretend you are a literalist. You are not.
     
    #10 David Kent, Dec 28, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 3
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...