No sir.............your words have confirmed your stance for Replacement Theology. You claim to not be in a box but your words always fail you.
I agree with you that moving on would be good for all involved.
See ya on another thread!
Allegorical Verses Literal Interpretation Of Scripture
- Thread starter Major
- Start date
- Status
No sir.............your words have confirmed your stance for Replacement Theology. You claim to not be in a box but your words always fail you.
I agree with you that moving on would be good for all involved.
See ya on another thread!
Mistmann takes a peak into the "Replacement Theology" box. Nope, Christ Jesus is not in there. Neither is Mistmann. but Misty is sure Major will keep searching for a box to put Misty in. Seems some people seem to have an aversion to believers running around in the freedom of Christ that no box can contain.
(Sorry Major just had to lighten things up a little)Regards Misty, who is not really here but elsewhere having moved on.
Referring back to my earlier post - this is exactly the reason I do not discuss prophetic interpretation here on the forum. The problem with this kind of interpretation is uderstanding the historical context = something which we have a very narrow view on. Some sciences shed light but we cannot go back in the past to see exactly what was happening.
Our understanding or methods of biblical prophecy does not lead us into heaven or hell, unless we blatently lead people away into a false religion (please read carefully what I stated - I am talking about prophetic interpretation not doctrinal interpretation). What leads us to heaven is our faith in Jesus Christ as the risen Lord, who died for our sins and made us pure before God. We need not only to believe in Him but to obey His commandments to love God and to love our fellow man.
We can discuss how many temples there are or will be - personally I believe there is no need for a third temple because the Holy Spirit now lives in us and we are the living temple of God - but then again there may very well be a third temple or a fourth (depends on what Herod did with the second temple). Point is we cannot change what God has ordained so why argue about which interpretation is correct. Did Jesus preach about a new temple being built after the destruction of the one in 70AD? What He did preach about was His return and the signs which precede His coming - all of which are now upon us.
Lets not be so consumed about who is right and who is wrong about prophetic interpretations lets rather focus on what we do know - Jesus is coming back soon and there are billions of people who will perish if we do not get out there and preach the Gospel.
Third temple or not, 70 weeks literal or not - Jesus is still coming back and He is coming for those who truely believe in Him.
Our understanding or methods of biblical prophecy does not lead us into heaven or hell, unless we blatently lead people away into a false religion (please read carefully what I stated - I am talking about prophetic interpretation not doctrinal interpretation). What leads us to heaven is our faith in Jesus Christ as the risen Lord, who died for our sins and made us pure before God. We need not only to believe in Him but to obey His commandments to love God and to love our fellow man.
We can discuss how many temples there are or will be - personally I believe there is no need for a third temple because the Holy Spirit now lives in us and we are the living temple of God - but then again there may very well be a third temple or a fourth (depends on what Herod did with the second temple
). Point is we cannot change what God has ordained so why argue about which interpretation is correct. Did Jesus preach about a new temple being built after the destruction of the one in 70AD? What He did preach about was His return and the signs which precede His coming - all of which are now upon us.Lets not be so consumed about who is right and who is wrong about prophetic interpretations lets rather focus on what we do know - Jesus is coming back soon and there are billions of people who will perish if we do not get out there and preach the Gospel.
Third temple or not, 70 weeks literal or not - Jesus is still coming back and He is coming for those who truely believe in Him.
Referring back to my earlier post - this is exactly the reason I do not discuss prophetic interpretation here on the forum. The problem with this kind of interpretation is uderstanding the historical context = something which we have a very narrow view on. Some sciences shed light but we cannot go back in the past to see exactly what was happening.
Our understanding or methods of biblical prophecy does not lead us into heaven or hell, unless we blatently lead people away into a false religion (please read carefully what I stated - I am talking about prophetic interpretation not doctrinal interpretation). What leads us to heaven is our faith in Jesus Christ as the risen Lord, who died for our sins and made us pure before God. We need not only to believe in Him but to obey His commandments to love God and to love our fellow man.
We can discuss how many temples there are or will be - personally I believe there is no need for a third temple because the Holy Spirit now lives in us and we are the living temple of God - but then again there may very well be a third temple or a fourth (depends on what Herod did with the second temple
Lets not be so consumed about who is right and who is wrong about prophetic interpretations lets rather focus on what we do know - Jesus is coming back soon and there are billions of people who will perish if we do not get out there and preach the Gospel.
Third temple or not, 70 weeks literal or not - Jesus is still coming back and He is coming for those who truely believe in Him.
Kevin, you are so very right my friend.
I try not to get so involved but when you state .............
"Our understanding or methods of biblical prophecy does not lead us into heaven or hell, unless we blatently lead people away into a false religion"................
That is my only concern here. To make sure that Literal, Biblical teaching is used to counter any false teaching that may come about.
Thank you for your imput!
To take the Christian Bible at its plain sense means that expressions and context of each passage are to be understood by its simple face value translation. It also means that any biblical passages that in the plain sense indicate a symbolic or spiritual meaning by word and context are to be understood accordingly--not literally.
However, if one uses the allegorical method of interpretation, passages that are truly symbolic or spiritual in context and application may at times be interpreted literally instead--depending upon the predisposition of the individual making the interpretation.
As we have seen on this thread, a reader of the Bible must either be open to believing that nothing they read in Bible means what it actually says, or believe that it means exactly what it says and nothing else.
Again, as we have seen, when we use the ALLAGORICAL method, anyone can ADD to what the Scriptures actualy say to make their opinions valid. Therein lies the problem.
However, if one uses the allegorical method of interpretation, passages that are truly symbolic or spiritual in context and application may at times be interpreted literally instead--depending upon the predisposition of the individual making the interpretation.
As we have seen on this thread, a reader of the Bible must either be open to believing that nothing they read in Bible means what it actually says, or believe that it means exactly what it says and nothing else.
Again, as we have seen, when we use the ALLAGORICAL method, anyone can ADD to what the Scriptures actualy say to make their opinions valid. Therein lies the problem.
God bless you mistmann, but in all honesty, when you speak of inconsistency, I must tell you that you are a strange individule who seems to get confused very easy.
I am not going to go back and investigate for you, you can do that yourself, but very quickly please read comments #12 and #43.
I as well as most everyone else would greatly appreciate it if you would focus on the threads in question and lets stay away from personal comments that you seem to make regularily.
I am only going to address this in order to correct a misunderstanding. The comments you refer to (#12 and #43) do not have anything to do with the discussion I was making reference to. The relevant comments are #40 where I made certain observations that you thoroughly disagreed with at length in #42. Calvin in #45 CONCURRED with my observations in #40 and you AGREED with him 100% in #49.
But contrary to being a personal comment of no relevance it is very relevant. It is impossible to have a meaningful discussion with any person who radically changes their position depending on who they are talking to. If a person genuinely holds a view they will hold to it regardless of who they are talking to. If a person keeps changing their position it raises the legitimate question of whether or not they are just opposing for the sake of opposing. Arguing for the sake of arguing. Inconsistency of position is always of extreme relevance to any discussion.
But having clarified the relevant comments I shall leave it there.
The only thing I can find that I agree with here is your comment of..........
"Arguing for the sake of arguing. Inconsistency of position is always of extreme relevance to any discussion."
That speaks well of what I already stated.
Now, instead of hijacking another thread and useing it to make personal comments.............shall we focus on this thread??
LITERAL vs ALLAGORICAL interpretation of Scriptures.
Clearly, not all of the Bible is to be taken literally, and clearly not all of it is to be taken as metaphor. The real question is: How do we determine from any given context when the text is to be taken literally or figuratively?
True, only CHRIST who speaks parables is the sole authority to expound on His words. And this is to His Disciples (chosen) ONLY:
Mark 4:34 But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.
WHO are Christ's DISCIPLES (chosen)?
Matthew 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Lu 10:21In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.
It should never be taken for granted that today, there is easy access to the Scriptures. About the time of the reformation William Tyndale literally translated the Bible into English while on the run and being pursued by those trying to take his life for doing so. Thomas Cranmer was burnt alive for his defense of the same and today people attempt to edit sections of the Holy Bible that they are uncomfortable with or that they perceive to not be authentic.
In this day and age liberals and higher critics literally meet together in an attempt to determine the meaning of scripture and which portions should be interpreted literally, which parts should be removed and which segments were supposedly written at a later date. The date of the writing of the book of Daniel was questioned for the above reason as it provides such an accurate depiction of the Empires that succeeded the Babylonian one.
Bible passages should be read literally in their common sense plain meaning unless it is obvious that it relates to a symbolic truth. For example, it is apparent that Jesus isn't a literal lion or a lamb but two of His titles are 'Lamb of God' and the 'Lion of Judah' as they are descriptive of His character and can be understood more easily if read in context.
Since the creation story provides a systematic non-allegorical description of the Garden of Eden, surely it should be understood that way. Each day of creation is treated literally, morning passed and evening came. Adam is listed in a literal chronological framework in Genesis 5:1 Chronicles 1, Matthew 1 and Luke 3. The Tree of Life in Genesis concurs with the Tree of Life in Revelation Chapter 22.
If allegorical or symbolic explanations are given for the creation story or the flood, interpreting the Bible can degenerate into guesswork. The rest of the Bible consistently treats these as literal historic events.
Major,
You wrote:
Christians certainly do not always agree on what is obvious metaphor in the Bible. Your comments concerning the creation accounts serve as a case in point, for whereas you see it as being obviously literal, I see it as being obviously metaphorical. Hence the need to dig deeper and find where exactly we differ. FYI, I don't consider the tree of life in Revelation to be any more literal than the seven-headed beast.
You wrote:
Christians certainly do not always agree on what is obvious metaphor in the Bible. Your comments concerning the creation accounts serve as a case in point, for whereas you see it as being obviously literal, I see it as being obviously metaphorical. Hence the need to dig deeper and find where exactly we differ. FYI, I don't consider the tree of life in Revelation to be any more literal than the seven-headed beast.
I have to disagree with you on that comment and leave at that for your consideration.
Nice to talk with you.
God speaks parables (Eze 20:49, Psa 78:2, Mark 4:34). Let alone guide us on the "interpretation through divine revelation of His words" from His very words.
As regards "healing" in the following this cannot be literal-physical:
Mark 16:17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
Mark 16:18 They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
Because Jesus Christ definitely stated, "The flesh (or body) profiteth not from His words, for His words are spiritual":
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
This is clearly demonstrated by Jesus Christ when "opened the eyes of the man born blind."
John 9:37 And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee.
John 9:38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.
John 9:39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.
John 9:40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?
John 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
Before I clearly and truly recognized JESUS CHRIST "by divine revelation," like the "man born blind," at birth I was also blind!
The foregoing truth is confirmed in the following:
2 Corinthians 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.
Conclusion:
Spiritual healing in the Holy Bible is not literal-physical, but SPIRITUAl that heals the sickness of the soul, like: "spiritual blindness," "spiritual lameness," "spiritual deafness," and so forth.
Major, what is your take on the lake of fire? Do you think it is literal, physical fire?
Let alone God reveal His "intended message" from His word. Distinction should be made on the purpose of God:
a. For the PHYSICAL LIFE of man (for the body) - this will end in the cemetery
b. For the SPIRITUAL LIFE of man (for the soul) - this will end in eternal life which is the primary purpose of God for His WORD and in creating MAN.
a. For PHYSICAL LIFE
Example 1 - Benefit from the WORD intended for EVERYBODY, literal "sun and rain"
Matthew 5:45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
Example 2 - Benefit from the WORD intended for BIBLE-believers (great multitudes that followed Jesus)
5,000 men, excluding women and children, fed with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fishes
Matthew 14:19 And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude.
4,000 men, excluding women and children, fed with 7 loaves of bread and few little fishes
Matthew 15:34 And Jesus saith unto them, How many loaves have ye? And they said, Seven, and a few little fishes.
Matthew 15:35 And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the ground.
Matthew 15:36 And he took the seven loaves and the fishes, and gave thanks, and brake them, and gave to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude.
Great illustrations for the "letter" or literal word and for the "spirit" or spiritual word. Let us remember the following:
2 Corinthians 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
Yes I do because that is what the Scriptures say.
Luke 16:19-25
“There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and fared sumptuously every day. 20 But there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, full of sores, who was laid at his gate, 21 desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell[ from the rich man’s table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. 23 And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
24 “Then he cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented.
Now, before we say that the above is a "parabel" please note that Jesus used a PROPER name for Lazarus which means it can not be a parabel nether can it be an allagory.
Notice the LITEREAL words used by Dr. Luke......"TORMENTED". Means on-going, never ending.
Same meaning with COMFORTED.
Rev. 20:10
King James Version (KJV)
10And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
Major,
Some points for your consideration, brother.
1. The place Jesus spoke of in the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus is Hades. Hades cannot be the lake of fire, because Hades itself will be cast into the LOF (Rev. 20:14).
2. Allegories certainly can include proper names, as is the case in Gal. 4:22-25.
"Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar." (v.24)
3. It is evident that the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus is a parable for a few reasons. For starters, it begins the same exact way that the previous parable of the Unjust Steward: "There was a certain rich man..."
4. How can the lake of fire be a physical place of literal fire when death and Hades will be cast into it? You can't literally throw death into a fire. Evidently, the fire is symbolic.
Major,
You said:
The word tormented does not imply endless duration. If I told you that the desert heat today is tormenting me, would you conclude that I will be tormented in the desert heat forever?
You said:
The word tormented does not imply endless duration. If I told you that the desert heat today is tormenting me, would you conclude that I will be tormented in the desert heat forever?
- Status