Spiritual Interpretation....pt3

"Generation" means "generation." I agree with John Calvin on Mt.. 24.34:

Though Christ employs a general expression, yet he does not extend the discourses to all the miseries which would befall the Church, but merely informs them, that before a single generation shall have been completed, they will learn by experience the truth of what he has said. For within fifty years the city was destroyed and the temple was razed, the whole country was reduced to a hideous desert, and the obstinacy of the world rose up against God. Nay more, their rage was inflamed to exterminate the doctrine of salvation, false teachers arose to corrupt the pure gospel by their impostures, religion sustained amazing shocks, and the whole company of the godly was miserably distressed. Now though the same evils were perpetrated in uninterrupted succession for many ages afterwards, yet what Christ said was true, that, before the close of a single generation, believers would feel in reality, and by undoubted experience, the truth of his prediction; for the apostles endured the same things which we see in the present day. [155] And yet it was not the design of Christ to promise to his followers that their calamities would be terminated within a short time, (for then he would have contradicted himself, having previously warned them that the end was not yet but, in order to encourage them to perseverance, he expressly foretold that those things related to their own age. The meaning therefore is: "This prophecy does not relate to evils that are distant, and which posterity will see after the lapse of many centuries, but which are now hanging over you, and ready to fall in one mass, so that there is no part of it which the present generation will not experience." So then, while our Lord heaps upon a, single generation every kind of calamities, he does not by any means exempt future ages from the same kind of sufferings, but only enjoins the disciples to be prepared for enduring them all with firmness.

I responded to your posts, but you did not receive the response you wanted. You want someone to tell you that the coming of the Lord and the resurrection of the dead were fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem, and I will not tell you that. Anyone is free to look at your posts in the other thread. You are the one who failed to answer the objections to your erroneous view.

 

...and I am not a Dispensationalist. The new covenant is just as much a Jewish covenant as the Abrahamic, Davidic, etc. Gentiles are grafted in (Rom. 11).

 

Thanks, but how can I use it on line, like I can with Strong in the Blue letter Bible?

My only uses now for my printed Strong are -
To look up related words,
To offer JWs when they quote Greek.

 

Iconoclast,

It's good to see that you're doing research about dispensationalism. This book addresses the new covenant issue quite well.

Three Central Issues In Contemporary Dispensationalism: A Comparison of Traditional and Progressive Views: Herbert W. Bateman: 9780825420627: Books - Amazon.ca

I remember concluding from reading this that this issue is divided in dispensationalism. Scofield believed the church participates in the new covenant right now. Chafer believed it was strictly for Israel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Do you see them as being actual or symbolic numbers, and when did that happen?

 

It is much superior to the system used by Strong...

 

You are correct that there are many different flavors of Dispy theology

 

Actually, he can just use the tools that use the GH numbering system, as that pretty much allows for one to access to a degree the Greek and Hebrew texts!

 

The question that

The question that always have is when did history record the Second Coming event, as that would have be seen worldwide!

 

You know, I wish you would distinguish between figures of speech and "spiritual" interpretation. They are different, you know. There are quite a few figures of speech in these passages (including the dreams), which as a literalist I would interpret as--wait for it--figures of speech!! By not distinguishing figures of speech from spiritual interpretation, you truly hurt your position.

 

Meteors can do incredible damage. Usually what we see in meteor showers are small ones that burn out in the atmosphere. A large one can do huge damage and be extremely scary.

 

I said hyperbole before, after just glancing at the passage, but I'm admitting an error and changing that to say it's a metaphor. Just look at the language in Rev. 14:12-17. The Greek word hos (ὡς), meaning "like" or "as" (translated "as" or "even as" in the KJV of this passage) occurs four times in the passage, meaning there are four metaphors.

The earthquake, the "stars" (meteors) falling, the sun going dark, the fear, the hiding--these are not depicted as metaphors, so in grammatical-historical interpretation they refer to literal events.

Yes, but it's not spiritual interpretation. It's dreams and their interpretation. Those two are apples and oranges.

In the first place, you'll never persuade me (I don't discount the possibility) until you can present your case for spiritual interpretation complete with an understanding of figures of speech. Secondly, you need to show me what I asked for in the first thread: some way of telling when I should "spiritualize" prophecy, since all prophecies of the incarnation were fulfilled literally. Thirdly, you need to show how we can tell which spiritual interpretation is the right one--yours or mine? With literal interpretation, the actual, literal meaning of the words take precedence, and that's how we prove our interpretation to be correct. What safeguard is there in spiritualizing for that purpose? How do I know when you are right?

I'm sorry, where in Is. 13 is the star falling from Heaven? And where in Is. 34 is Babylon and Edom? The context there says "all nations" in v. 2, so it is obviously a prophecy of the Tribulation period, not events contemporary to Isaiah. In other words, Isaiah prophesied the same thing John did in Rev. 6.

Thanks. You too.

P. S. Many modern languages also use the same general word for "star" and "meteor." The Japanese word for "star" is hoshi, with nagare boshi ("falling star" being the word for asteroid. For that matter, "falling star" in English means "asteroid." A similar comparison may be made in Chinese.

 

Icono, if you'd like my belief about the new covenant, I'm not entirely settled on the issue, but I know there's a great exegesis of the issue by George Peters in his phenomenal work, The Theocratic Kingdom. Greater than Chafer, Scofield, Pentecost and Darby I would even dare to say. It's too long to simply summarize and you'd have to read it yourself (I can copy paste the section if you're interested). I don't take the covenantal or amillennial view because they make the covenants of God with Israel nothing and base it off of Hebrews 8 and 10, while said passages don't explicitly teach that God has cancelled these covenants: it is only an inferred interpretation. There are multiple interpretations of Hebrews 8 and 10, and I don't believe that choosing the interpretation that makes God out to be a covenant breaker is the correct interpretation to take. Anyways, have a good one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Holding to the literal meaning of the bible does not mean ignore the genre or manners of speech, as we would not call Jesus a literal door!

 

The destruction in both he prophets, day of the Lord, Time of Jacobs folly, and in Revelation is seem to be experienced world wide, and not just symbolic in nature? As there will be massive loss of life on a world wide scale, and that was NOT in AD 70!