Featured Spiritual Interpretation....pt6

Would you accept that it is possible to agree that these phenomena are not to be interpreted strictly literally, and yet still not see that there is any reason to ascribe them to AD 70?

 

I think there is no way all the phenomena can be understood literally, & I don't think it possible even to say that "this prophesied phenomenon corresponds to this historical event."

We have to consider what the overall event is that is prophesied. We understand from the OT prophecies that a real fulfilment did occur with such events as the Babylonish invasion & 70 year captivity. We can therefore look for a real event such as the AD 70 destruction which occurred as prophesied by the Lord Jesus.

We see in Revelation prophecies, warnings, judgments & protection & deliverance of believers. These occurred. We can keep the book open & see the fall of the Roman empire, the rise of the RCC, the rise & conquest of Islam & events down the ages & near our own times. We need to keep our ears open & take to heart what we read.

 

I agree up to a point, but this does not give us open season to make up any weird explanation we may feel like and say, "this is my spiritual interpretation." This chap Chilton says that Revelation is the most 'biblical' book in the Bible inasmuch as there are references to various O.T. books throughout. In this, at least, he is in agreement with most other commentators that I've read. So we need to compare Scripture with Scripture to come to our understanding.

We can, and without a doubt Matthew 24:2 is a prediction of AD 70, and IMO Matthew 24:32-35 is as well, and some of the bits in between, but not all. But when you come to Matthew 24:36-51, you're looking at something quite different. Before AD 70, there will be signs and the approximate time is known. Verse 36 speaks of a time that no one knows and that will be sudden and without warning (v.44; 1 Thessalonians 5:2-6 etc.).

We must be careful not to read in things that we think ought to be there. What we can be sure of is the Gospel being preached throughout the world (Matthew 24:14; Revelation 6:2) and tribulation and persecution (Matthew 24:4-13; Revelation 6:3-11;13:6-10, 15-16 etc.). All this going on constantly until the Lord's Return in glory.

 

I've hardly started my reading of Chilton's book yet, but I cannot see Revelation 6:12-17 as referring to AD 70. I cannot think of anywhere where the phrase 'Kings of the earth' means the rulers of Israel or Jerusalem. In Psalm 2:2, they are the Gentiles (v.1) and enemies of God. Psalm 89:27 refers to the Messiah as higher than the kings of the earth. Verse 15 simply refers to all of unsaved humanity cowering at the return of Christ. There is no attempt to localize it in any way. A greater event than the destruction of Jerusalem is being spoken of here. On that day no one will be able to hide from the presence of the one seated on the throne (Psalm 139:7-12). In AD 70, the folk in Corinth or Thessalonika would have been going about their business blissfully unaware of what was going on in Jerusalem, nor would they have been affected by it.

 

This is baloney. You know I answered this, to my satisfaction if not to yours. Frankly, the non-literalists have more trouble with such passages than I do.

And yet here you are again. Don't you think you've overworked the theme? How about if you go back and answer what my thread (the first one in the series) was about, namely, if all the first advent prophecies were literally fulfilled, why would 2nd coming prophecies not be literally fulfilled? (For the record, Chilton never answered this or even dealt with it. Frankly, I think it's not answerable, which is why "spiritualizers" here on the BB keep avoiding it.)

 

Please list 2 or 3 second coming prophecies you would like comments on.

 

Thanks for posting this, Icon. Very interesting!
I don't think I've read anything by Kenneth Gentry before, but he is quite well-know and well thought-of. I offer a few observations:

First of all, all eschatology is ultimately optimistic; no one actually believes that Satan wins. There is a commentary on Revelation (I forget by whom) called 'The Lamb Wins!' It is from an Amil perspective. So I don't accept the term 'Eschatology of Despair.' However, there is within Amillennialism a Pessimistic viewpoint and an Optimistic viewpoint. I will come to those later.

Two small areas of disagreement: Gentry mentions the 'Dominion Mandate' (Genesis 1:26). That is no problem. Man is given dominion over so many aspects of the world. His problem is that since the Fall he has no dominion over himself, so that Gen. 6, God is contemplating his destruction. Gentry also describes all the covenants as 'covenants of promise.' I disagree. It is the Noahic, Abrahamic and Davidic covenants that are these. The Sinaitic covenant is conditional as are the covenant of works (dependant on Adam) and the covenant of grace (dependant on Christ).

Gentry gives several texts showing optimistic predictions, but he and you will know that there are just as many showing less happy outcomes. And this of course this is where Preterism comes in. If you can shovel all the unsatisfactory texts into AD 70 and leave them there and forget about them, you can enjoy your Postmillennialism without a qualm. However, I don't think this is honest.

I do agree with Gentry that the Last days, and indeed the Kingdom of God, begin with Christ. At the cross, Satan is bound; at Pentecost, the Spirit is poured out. However, the fact is that the Gospel goes out against a dark background.

I want to look at Revelation 6, where the Lamb opens the seals of the scroll. The scroll represents the decree of God for the period between the first and second comings of our Lord. Now here, in verse 2, we see the difference between optimistic and pessimistic amillennialism. Who is the Rider on the white horse? IMO, it is Jesus Christ, and all through the age He is riding out as a conqueror, sacking the borders of hell, taking the goods of the strong man (Matthew 12:29), building His Church (Matthew 16:18).

But these things happen against a sombre background. We see war, scarcity and inequality, disease and death, and a steady flow of martyrs throughout all this time (vs. 3-11). And of course this is exactly what we see in the world all down the years; the Gospel going into all the world, but experiencing defeats here and there and people dying for the sake of Christ. while the love of many grows cold.

The sixth seal (vs.12-17) is the Return of Christ. I cannot see this as a local event. Yes, the language is poetic and figurative but it is also universal; every mountain and every island is moved out of place. Judgement is coming on all the world. The seventh seal (8:1) is Judgement.

I hope that gives some food for thought. Let me know what you think. If you want more detail, see my blog post Revelation (3). Chapter 6: The Seven seals

 

What I see is this:
First of all I must live in the light of Christ's imminent return. 'Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming' (Matt. 24:42). 'And you yourselves be like men who wait for their master.....that when he comes and knocks they may open to him immediately. Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes will find watching' (Luke 12:36-37). I think there is a danger in believing that the Lord cannot come until certain conditions have been met. We need to be working while it is day, bringing the Gospel before the lost while there is time. As well as my duties as an elder in my church, I am involved with door-to-door evangelism and with Gideons International, bringing the word of God before the people in the 'traffic lanes of life.'.
Secondly, if it is not too disrespectful, I like to think of God as keeping a diary or calendar. There is a date ringed round and marked with the words, "Return of Christ. End of Age," But is it not possible that there is another, earlier date marked, "Send revival on Britain and the USA"? When we pray, "Your kingdom come," we may have in our mind the Return of Christ, but also that God's kingdom, which is already in the world (Luke 17:20-21) will be manifested in greater power (Isaiah 64:1-5).

So briefly, Amils neither think that the world can only get worse and worse until Christ returns, nor that many years must pass before He does so. They believe that now is the time to work, for who knows what God may do in these last days?

 

Then don't say again that no one answered you.

I say this as an encouragement for you to study further: in these threads you have been essentially negative. Your goal seems to be to tear down literal interpretation rather than present positive things about your own scheme of interpretation.

Now, all Scripture is "profitable" (2 Tim. 3:16-17), and we are to live by "every word" of Scripture (Matt. 4:4). So, please interpret Acts 2 yourself; I don't remember you doing this yet, but only challenging literal interpreters to do so. So, how were these words and phrases from Acts 2 fulfilled in your scheme:

"blood"
"and fire,"
"and vapour of smoke:"
"The sun shall be turned into darkness"
"and the moon into blood"

This is all irrelevant to me. Joseph's dreams were interpreted by the Lord Himself in the text of Scripture.

Great. Then stop criticizing literal interpretation and interpret the Joel 2 prophecy for us.

I never, ever skip over Scripture.

I'm not really interested in this guy's commentary. And your comments, once again, are negative and not positive.

Not just many, but all prophecies of the incarnation were literally fulfilled.

I agree absolutely.

And your positive point is?

Absolutely.

And He showed them the literal fulfillment of those prophecies.

Great! Then Christ will literally reign on earth for 1000 years!

So again, Chilton interpreted Revelation "spiritually." Let me ask, do you agree with his hermeneutics, specifically his "interpretive maximalism"?

 

That is precisely what I conceded, and then after you concede that, there is no response to the many reasons I gave that they do not apply to A.D. 70.

 

Would you care to show where I have ridiculed anything? I could ridicule Philo (a Jew) and Origen (a "Christian" with bizarre teachings) for their insertion of spiritualizing into Christianity, but I don't recall ridiculing that position here on the BB.

This is a false charge. I have not dismissed any passage.

According to Jesus in Matt. 4:4, every word is important. I have asked you to interpret the individual words and phrases of Joel 2 as quoted by Peter in Acts 2. Can you do that?

The thread is not about you, even though you started it, because you keep putting other people and their opinions up here. Surely you have your own position and can defend it without Chilton, Gentry (who I was in college with), et al.

"Not the most proficient" in Greek? That's a huge understatement. Anyway, glad to see you understand that somewhat. Sorry you still think him and his fake degrees to be relevant.

I think it does. Wait until next week when I discuss Chilton's awful hermeneutics.