On the Interpretation of Revelation

When the Stars Fall: A Messianic Commentary on the Revelatoin | 6/21/05 | Michael D. Bugg

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for all of your encouragements!

I especially appreciate your testimony at post 753 - which is why your unspecified dispute to blue-duncan at post 748 leaves me scratching my head.

You and I are often on the same Spiritual wave-length. I have the same impression with blue-duncan. Perhaps something was merely unclear in the development of his point or in your response?

topcat54 at 556: Based on your interpretation how do you know if there is going to be a literal heaven and hell? There is enough mention and description of heaven and hell in the didactic sections of Scripture to make me think they are literal places. Jesus made the reality of those places quite vivid. We may not have all the details, but we know they exist. The "thousand years" on the other hand is mentioned by once in a highly symbolical piece of Scripture that admittedly speaks of reality in terms of signs and visions. It is not pure, straightforward didactic writing like, say, the letters of Paul or the gospel narratives of Jesus. The genre is different, so it requires a different approach within the grammatical-historical framework.

blue-duncan's response at 626: Heaven, by definition is the place where God dwells. God is spirit, omnipotent and omnipresent. Where does he dwell? Jesus said He would be with us always and we are told He is in us, why can't the place He has gone to prepare for us be our hearts and minds? Why does it have to be a physical place? The Psalmist says creation, physical place, can’t contain Him, why then is this not a symbol, a literary device?

Jesus said we have eternal life now, i.e. knowing God and Jesus. He gave us the Holy Spirit to guide and teach us and the scriptures to instruct, correct, and guide us into all truth, the knowledge of God. He is with us always, what more do we need? What else is there to eternal life if the prophecies in Zechariah, Isaiah, and Revelation concerning the last days and beyond are symbols of what has already taken place or abstractions of the battle of good and evil?

It appears you are picking and choosing the prophecies you want to fill the gaps or contradictions in your eschatological scheme, but in doing so you undermine the very foundation of the Hope that lies within the hearts of His bride and leave to subjective interpretation or speculation the fact that one day we will see Him face to face.

your objection at post 748: Picking and choosing arbitrarily? Not from my perspective. Certainly not more than those on the other side. Certainly with not as many logical inconsistencies, either.

[Quix]

I have no idea what you are referring to in this post or the next.

---

It appears you are picking and choosing the prophecies you want to fill the gaps or contradictions in your eschatological scheme, but in doing so you undermine the very foundation of the Hope that lies within the hearts of His bride and leave to subjective interpretation or speculation the fact that one day we will see Him face to face.

626 posted on 06/30/2005 9:47:51 PM MDT by blue-duncan

---

That is the illogic of picking and choosing based on eisogesis.
There are a sizeable number skilled in such activities. You, rather incorrectly, from my perspective; seem to think that all or the bulk of them are on the side of the discussion that includes my perspective.

I fiercely disagree with THAT assumption, perspective!

---

That is the illogic of picking and choosing based on eisogesis.

630 posted on 06/30/2005 10:07:08 PM MDT by blue-duncan

---

I just observe a list of folks on your side of the issues doing exactly what you decried above.

---

[Quix]

THANKS THANKS THANKS.

Much appreciate the encouragement.

Have a blessed rest-up from the all night prayer. Hope it went as God would have most wanted and that it touched you deeply . . .

and that your bod is even more on the mend.

[Quix]

Sadly less artfully, graciously and wisely than you, I am trying to avoid getting caught up in a lot of tedius specifics.

I just observe in the REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY posts etc. an abundance of the--from my perspective--very, very arbitrary picking and choosing and then rationalizing what comes across TO ME as mangling the very words and meaning of the Scriptures to shoe horn them into that perspective.

Then the more consistent, energetic literalists amongst us are the ones accused of arbitrary picking and choosing. Comes across to me as well beyond--"doesn't fit!"

For example, on other threads, we've talked about how Damascus has not been utterly and for all time destroyed. So, it's really impossible for the end time Scriptures to have already been fulfilled on that one prophecit prediction alone.

And, I've been reading recently in the shorter prophetic books in the OT as well as Isaiah and elsewhere. I keep coming across Scripture after Scripture which plainly says things that will happen which have absolutely OBVIOUSLY NOT happened so far in the past and would therefore shoot down the whole REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY house of cards. Guess I need to start making a list of them.

However, I have NO DOUBT that the REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY folks will evidence little trouble in picking and choosing words and phrases rather arbitrarily--and then jury-rigging them into some mangled interpretation to quasi, pseudo-support that perspective.

That's the phenomena I was trying to post a slight to moderate protest against GIVEN THAT the literalists were being rather . . . accused of it. Am reminded of the pot and kettle in spades.

Thanks for your kind and gracious reply. Sorry for my obtuseness. Just hate the tedious back and forth which so easily gets into tense, strife sorts of exchanges--which you have ALMOST taught me to avoid like the plague. LOL.

Alas, I'm still me.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you oh so very much for your explanation! Then you were actually agreeing with blue-duncan who has been consistently arguing against replacement theology.

You were not at all being obtuse, dear Quix, merely cryptic. Thus I misunderstood your post.

[Quix]

Sorry Dear Heart Angel-Gal. You are right.

THX for your kind words.

I can also be faulted for skipping or lightly reading a lot of the longer, more tedius back and forths over what seem like minutae or at least . . . lesser meaningful points of such issues in long posts.

Sorry blue-duncan.

[blue-duncan]

If you think that I am of the "Replacement Theology" system then you have not read my posts in any of the threads concerning eschatology. My replies have been that all prophecy has not been fulfilled as far as Israel or the church is concerned and reading prophecy to morph Israel into the church is to choose and pick just the scriptures that fit that system and ignoring all of the other scriptures that contradict that system or "spiritualizing" them to fit. That is eisogesis.

[blue-duncan]

My post #767 crossed in the mail. No need to apologize. These threads take on a life of their own and one has to really be interested in the topic, which often times diverges greatly from the original thought, to be able to read and follow the different arguments.

[Quix]

Well said.

Now that I've finished my shredded tweet, I hope to get back to some of your long posts and cheer you on.

Sorry.

Guilty as charged.

[Quix]

Have been wearied and bloodied [and threatened] enough in such threads . . .

that I often--rightly or wrongly--and wrongly in this case--

end up trying to scan for a sentence or paragraph or even phrase that I feel I can somewhat safely offer a perspective or comment on which might be thought provoking.

I utterly failed miserably in your case. Sorry.

[Seven_0]

”That being the case, my argument is simply that we also need to be intimately familiar with the source material that he is expositing from in order to correctly understand Sha'ul's writings.”

The New Testament forms a pentateuch. The gospels, then Acts, then Paul’ letters which is Leviticus. Next the general epistles(Peter James John and Jude), then Revelation. For this discussion, lets look at the 3rd section.

Leviticus takes us into the earthly sanctuary and Paul’s epistles take us into the heavenly sanctuary. Paul’s letters are not a group, randomly chosen by men. There are fourteen of them, that divide into two pentateuchs, each having the same structure as all pentateuchs in scripture. Each of the letters gives a different perspective. The laws governing the sacrifices and the office of the priest are given for the earthly tabernacle in Leviticus. Paul’s writing, teaches us how these things apply to the heavenly tabernacle. The outline of each of Paul’s epistles, also, has the same numerical structure that all scripture, and only scripture, has.

Please don’t think that I am limiting Paul’s letters to a study on Leviticus, there are many other themes running through them. Things that are hard to see like the “Pentateuch of David,” which is the book of Psalms. Another comparison that could take many years

Anyone who claims to have intimate knowledge of ALL of scripture has underestimated its scope. It is simply too large and too deep. It is not likely that you will find anything new in Paul’s writing if you do not think something is there.

[Alamo-Girl]

I am sooo very glad to see the issue is resolved! It is an honor for me to call you both my brothers in Christ.

[Quix]

AMEN!

[Quix]

I "presume" a third physical Temple because Ezekiel describes a third physical Temple, and both he and Jeremiah describe sacrifices taking place there. I take all the Scriptures seriously, both the Tanakh and the New Covenant, not just selected sections. If I find two passages that appear to be in conflict, I don't just dismiss the one I'm not comfortable with out of hand, but keep studying them until both are shown to be true in reconcilliation.

AMEN! AMEN! AMEN! My habit, too. Seems minimally logical and Christian to do so.

I also tend to believe that God said what He meant and meant what He said. And, that while He delights in hiding things for us to discover--most key points are in plain sight.

I can't wrap my mind around the idea that the extensive and specific detail of the yet to be revealed/built new Temple would have NOTHING to do with a tangible literal temple. What a waste of words! There are likely meanings associated with the literal temple's dimensions. Doesn't mean the temple goes poof just because the dimensions of it's walls have some hidden meanings!

In this case, I've found that if you remove some anti-Torah bias, Hebrews does not actually say that the Levitical priesthood is abolished, just that it is limited and that there is a new and better priesthood that serves God in their Spiritual temples.

Absolutely. Seems like the MOST logical and most obvious meaning possible. Of course, if some want to do mental gymnastics with . . . . Bibles, I can't stop them. But I don't believe the text even hints at such being valid, much less necessary.

The Levites are part of that system that was "ready to disappear," and indeed did disappear with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
That's not what the author of Hebrews is referring to. Actually read the quote from Jeremiah 31 in full, and you'll see that he's speaking specifically of the covenant Israel made in Ex. 24:7, in which they promised in their own power, "Everything that ADONAI has spoken, we will do and obey." They could not, of course, keep the Torah in their own power, so the prophet looked forward to the day that God would write the Torah in their hearts.

For sure. Another rather obvious case of one of God's BOTH/AND things. After all, GOD HIMSELF NOTED IN THE BEGINNING that even the Tabernacle as well as The Temple were patterned AFTER THE HEAVENLY ONE. Sometimes it seems like some folks would even spiritualize Heaven away from any substantive anything at all--perhaps a kind of vain ethereal imagination for the super sanctified?

You have to go through some real verbal and theological gymnastics to suppose that if God writes the Torah on men's hearts that it somehow ceases to be the Torah.

LOVE IT. Certainly a logical consequence of such Scriptural and mental gymnastics as are necessary to pretend that Scripture supports no new Temple yet to be built in the end times.

In any case, the Levite priesthood was given to the sons of Aaron as "a perpetual (eternal) statute" (Ex. 29:9), not just "until the Messiah comes." Jer. 33 confirms that their office is as eternal as that of the Messiah. Ergo, either Hebrews is wrong, or you are misunderstanding the author's point because you don't know the Tanakh as well as you should. I'm opting for the latter.

For sure! LOL.

THX.

[topcat54]

If you think that I am of the "Replacement Theology" system then you have not read my posts in any of the threads concerning eschatology.

Just a reminder that "replacement theology" is a bogey-man designed to frighten those ignorant in the faith from considering the implications of Jesus Christ's work on behalf of His body, the Church.

"Supersessionism [the accurate term] is the traditional Christian belief that Christianity is the fulfillment of Biblical Judaism, and therefore that Jews who deny that Jesus is the Messiah fall short of their calling as God's Chosen people" (from Wikipedia). The stress is only fulfillment, not replacement. It is Jews and gentiles together, the true sons of Abraham that make up Christ's body as co-equal members that are the "holy nation" of God. Not gentiles replacing Jews as the body of Christ, as some would imagine.

"In conclusion, I will state my opinion that the attempt to limit the meaning of "Israel of God" to the carnal sons of Judah betrays a fundamentally wrong approach to biblical interpretation, and to New Testament theology in particular. I give below some excerpts from writers whom I believe to be more in touch with the meaning of Paul's expression. Even in these authors I find, however, an insufficient appreciation of Paul's expression. "Peace be ... upon the Israel of God" is not so much a polemical or ironic usage directed against the Judaizers (Luther and Calvin) as a positive blessing and affirmation of the Church as the true spiritual Israel. It is a mistake to see bitterness in this blessing." (Michael Marlowe, The Israel of God)

"The recognition of a distinctive people who are the recipients of God’s redemptive blessings and yet who have a separate existence apart from the church of Jesus Christ creates insuperable theological problems. Jesus Christ has only one body and only one bride, one people that he claims as his own, which is the true Israel of God. This one people is made up of Jews and Gentiles who believe that Jesus is the promised Messiah." (Palmer Robertson, The Israel of God: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow, quoted in The Israel of God)

[blue-duncan]

"Thus, according to supersessionism, the Jews are either no longer considered to be God's Chosen people, or their proper calling is frustrated pending their acceptance of Jesus as the promised Messiah.
Critics of a complete replacement theory, the first alternative just mentioned"

"In addition, many fundamentalist Christian groups, including conservative Evangelical Protestants and Anabaptists, have renounced replacement theology, though these groups still hold that faith in Jesus Christ is the only way to God (citing usually John 14:6). Other conservative and fundamentalist Christian groups hold supersessionism to be valid and replacement theories are sometimes held, however, and the debate continues"

The article you first quoted seems to confirm a replacement theology; that Israel has been supplanted by the church and is no longer considered "God's Chosen People". It may be a pejorative label but it seems to accurately explain the theory.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you both for the pings to your discussion and for the links!

As you probably both know, I'm not into the doctrines and traditions of men so terms like "replacement theology" and "supersessionism" do not carry water with me either.

For me, the Spiritual bottom line is the God keeps every promise, every judgment - every single one.

[blue-duncan]

Amen and amen! That is a good final thought for this evening. Thank you.

[Alamo-Girl]

You are quite welcome! Thank you for the encouragement. Sleep well my dear brother in Christ.

[topcat54]

For me, the Spiritual bottom line is the God keeps every promise, every judgment - every single one.

Indeed, that is the beauty of Christ's Body, the Church. Every blessing that God's promised to His people has been fulfilled in Christ and is being poured out on the Church. And other theory is a denial in the sufficiency of Christ's promises to the Church.