It is NOT mary and the Catholic Church, thats for sure
How would you understand 'and then will all Israel be saved?"
- Thread starter YeshuaFan
- Start date
2 extremes to avoid regarding national Israel, even though hold to Covenant theology proper, also see God still has future dealings with the Jewish people, but also do not go as far to say they still have a valid Coveant to God still in effect, as ANY jew right with god must received Jesus as their promised messiah to get saved period
What is secondary doctrine? Do you mean alternative private interpretation, vs undebatable 'essential' doctrine?
2 Peter 1:20 doesn't forbid having different personal interpretations on some Scripture, but we shouldn't preach or teach them as undebatable, unless we have 'essential?' Scripture, that plainly says so.
Such as, there is no room to teach Jesus Christ isn't God, by virtue of John 1:1, and Heb 1:8.
There's room to differ on events in the last days of Jesus' return.
I applaud your loyalty to being literalcy.
Rev 12:1
And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:
However, you're not being literal about the Scripture saying the sun and the moon, not a bright yellow entity and moon-like object.
No one is denying the image did not appear. However, once again it's an image appearing, not the natural sun, moon, stars, and a mortal woman giving birth amongst them.
Nor is anyone denying that spiritual visions are not literal. Afterall, the spiritual eternal things are more literal than natural temporal things.
However, the normal understanding of Scripture being 'literal', is that it's speaking of natural things, both celestial and terrestrial...
This is certainly true as a rule, but there are exceptions, where Scripture immediately says what they are. Such as the candlesticks and stars in Rev 1, being the churches and angels of Jesus Christ. Otherwise, we can only search the Scriptures for hints of interpretation, which can be in prophecy and doctrine. For instance,
Gal 4:25
For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
This can certainly be used to interpret the wondrous vision of Rev 12:1, is the ministry of God in the Old and New Testament, by which Jesus came in the flesh, and all them now born of God in Christ.
I certainly agree, that it's not a natural woman giving birth amidst the sun, moon, and stars. I don't know of anyone arguing for natural literalcy here.
However, the fact that it is a sign, does not by itself forbid it being natural.
Isa 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
The prophecy of this sign is Jesus Christ coming in the flesh, and fulfilled when the virgin Mary gave birth to her firstborn son, Jesus.
Agreed.
So, there's a change. This sign in the NT is not the same as the Old.
Agree again.
Who was certainly born of the Jews after the flesh. However, the sign is in the NT, not the Old, where the Israel of God is now the holy nation of Christ on earth, both Jews and Gentiles.
Gal 4:25
For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
So, I'd say the woman is a spiritual vision of New Jerusalem as the ministry of God from the Old to the New testament, of whom was firstborn Jesus after the flesh, and now are born all the sons of God by the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Well said. I think I am a hopeless case.
Reformed- Soteriology (but not RT)
Lutheran-Law/Gospel
Dispensational-Eschatology (otherwise, I shy away from dispensationalists because of their emphasis on free will).
Evangelical-Inspiration/Authority/Sufficiency of Scriptures
Do you think there is any hope for such? lol
You do not appear to understand a "literal" interpretation. With the literal interpretation method, there are spiritualized texts, visions, grammatical idioms (put your money where you mouth is, is an example in English), parables, hyperbole, allegory (Gal 4.24, Paul made sure that nobody took it as wooden literal), these are not exceptions to the rule, this is common in the literal interpretation method.
Revelation talks about a 1,000 year reign of Christ. I am bound to take this literally unless taking literally is nonsense.
I think you mean No one is denying the image did appear
Another issue may help, no doctrines originate with parables. Parables are design to ILLUSTRATE truth, not teach it as a doctrine. As my professor use to say, You don't make a parable walk on all fours.
Of course, it is entirely possible that I misunderstood your reply. If so, I apologize.
I have absolutely no idea what you are saying here.
Well.....I am not sure that you are a hopeless case, however......I have done about all I can do for you!!!!!
If you mean Paul literally meant, that 4:24 is an allegory, then we agree.
But the common understanding of taking Scripture literally, is that it's a literal event. Parables are not literal events. Hell is.
The woman is not naturally delivering a child, amidst the celestial sun, moon, and stars.
Absolutely.
Correct. It's a spiritual image literally seen by John, while in the Spirit.
True. However doctrine does play a part in understanding parables, as well as prophecy.
Such as, the vision of Rev 12:1, cannot be confined to the OT, since it is revealed in the NT for present understanding.
We still agree on taking Scripture literally wherever possible. However, by our talk, I've mended it to include spiritual events, and not only natural.
Rev 5:6
And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.
This is literally a spiritual event in the throne room of God, not symbolic nor a parable.
.
The woman is certainly a "spiritual" vision.
I would not argue your idea in any way.
Another important thing to consider is that the woman of Revelation 12 symbolizes literal Israel is that the Book of Revelation does not distinguish between Israel and the church but merges one into the other.
Agreed. Being in the NT, there is a slight change, so as to make Jesus Christ the center of attention, no more Joseph. As you say, he's now 'just' another star among his brethren. And Jesus came by Judah.
Just a brief clarification: I do NOT believe in this last statement
Romans 2:28 , Philippians 3:3 says differently.
Read Ephesians 2 from vs 11.
11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Christ Our Peace
14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.
This is not a separation of church and Israel but bringing together those who are called the circumcision and those are called the uncircumcision.. vs 11.
Read Ephesians 2 from vs 11.
11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 12 that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Christ Our Peace
14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.
This is not a separation of church and Israel but bringing together those who are called the circumcision and those are called the uncircumcision.. vs 11.
Correct. Jews and Gentiles make up the church and are made in to ONE IN Christ.
I probably did not word that correctly for the purpose of our discussion.
Just so we are all on the same page, allow me to say that the Church does not replace Israel and should not expect a symbolic fulfillment of the promises of the Old Covenant. As one reads Scripture, it is necessary to keep Israel and the Church separate.
The fulfillment of the promise is Christ and Him crucified. The whole point of the old covenant is Christ. And He came and was crucified, died, was buried and on the 3rd day rose again. There is no separation, you are either in Christ or not, there's no inbtween.
The Israel today is not the Israel (country and people) of the old testament. God doesn't not distinguish between Jew or gentile. You cannot reject Christ and somehow still be in a covenant with Him.
And its weird that Christians think that Israel or Jewish people are in some sort of twilight spiritual state. The Bible doesnt say that.
Paul says in Galatians 6 :15 -16
New King James Version
15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation. 16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.
This is what I found on line by simply typing Is the covenant with Israel still valid?
God's eternal covenant with Israel is still valid—meaning the Jewish people remain His chosen instruments. Every promise of God will be accomplished. Believers from every nation have been beautifully grafted into Abraham's family by faith in Jesus—through the provision of the new covenant.
The way I look at this/ my belief on this matter is that I am SO GRATEFUL that I was grafted in because of JESUS.
The point is that GOD made a covenant with ISRAEL.... and I guess the DILEMMA with
Christians is whether or not they believe the covenant was replaced/nil and void after Christ's death.
I don't want to meddle or tamper with the WORD of GOD.... I was taught that the covenant is STILL VALID.
God's eternal covenant with Israel is still valid—meaning the Jewish people remain His chosen instruments. Every promise of God will be accomplished. Believers from every nation have been beautifully grafted into Abraham's family by faith in Jesus—through the provision of the new covenant.
The way I look at this/ my belief on this matter is that I am SO GRATEFUL that I was grafted in because of JESUS.
I don't think that anyone believes that ISRAEL is in some sort of twilight spiritual state.
The point is that GOD made a covenant with ISRAEL.... and I guess the DILEMMA with
Christians is whether or not they believe the covenant was replaced/nil and void after Christ's death.
I don't want to meddle or tamper with the WORD of GOD.... I was taught that the covenant is STILL VALID.
His covenant would be ONLY towards the spiritual heirs of Abraham, saved jews who call upon Jesus as their promised Messiah, no hope for any Jewish person apart from that