How to Read the New Testament

Everyone I know seems to be reading the Bible these days in search of answers. That is usually a good thing but not always. In fact, too many of the Biblical discussions I get into with friends and family members relate to the “End Times” and whether they are upon us. That is a shame because reading the Bible can enrich one’s daily life provided one is not obsessed with using it as a device to decipher the future.

Because of one relatively simple error in dating one book of the New Testament, author Tim LaHaye has misled tens of millions of people into thinking that a great time of tribulation is near. He has Christians everywhere looking for signs of an emerging anti-Christ and, ultimately, in a cowardly fashion, looking forward to a time when Christ will rapture his church away from earthly troubles.

If Christians would simply study the New Testament themselves – instead of relying upon 21st Century “prophets” writing fictional books for 21st Century profits – they would arrive at a few very simple conclusions:

2. The anti-Christ was Nero, not some world figure yet to emerge in the 21st Century.

3. The tribulation occurred in the First Century around the time of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD.

5. The words of Jesus in Matthew 24 plainly reveal that most of the discourse in The Revelation to John is based on events in the First Century.

Once an individual realizes he is stuck here on earth and will not be raptured away from all of his troubles, he can begin to read the Bible the way it was intended to be read. I have a word of advice for those who have never really thought about reading the Bible as an end in itself rather than as a means to some goal such as predicting the future. My advice is actually borrowed from a friend who received a moving card from his wife just a few months ago.

After receiving the cherished card from his wife, my friend would sneak into their bedroom late at night (she always fell asleep while he was finishing his last TV show). After giving her a kiss while she was sleeping, he would take the card off his dresser and go into the spare room to read it by the light of a small lamp.

There were certain lines he would read three and four times over: “It is a privilege to know you, to share myself with you,” “I never knew such a person could exist until I met you,” and “You lift my spirits to places where my troubles seem so much farther away.”

Be the first to read Townhall.com. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

It was wonderful to hear that a dear friend had found his “soul mate” and all of the joy that comes from lifelong companionship. But, at the same time, I could not listen to his story without thinking of all the other friends I know who have suffered through a painful divorce or, in some cases, never even met someone with whom they share a special bond of love. And some are growing older and lonelier by the day.

But, recently, I received a new insight into what seems to be an unfair distribution of soul mates among God’s children. It came as I was listening to a pastor named “Mike” whose last name I do not even know. His message was broadcast from Port City Church in Wilmington to a theater rented out to handle the overflow of his growing congregation.

He urged each member of his church to read the First Letter of John during the coming week. He also urged them to read it as if it were written just for them by someone who is madly in love with them.

I was so intrigued by this take on the proper approach to reading the New Testament epistle that I immediately bought a copy of the English Standard Version – a version I’ve been meaning to read for quite some time. Later that night I opened it and started reading by the light of a small lamp:

“…Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness. Whoever loves his brother abides in the light, and in him there is no cause for stumbling… I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven for his name’s sake … Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. And everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure… We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him…”

After reading those lines, it occurred to me that I had only been skimming through this great epistle on my last several runs through the New Testament. My zeal to get to The Revelation to John has been such that I have hardly noticed those great words in the years following the attacks of 911.

We all need to learn to read the Word as if it were written for us personally by someone who could not love us more. When we cannot get enough of it in the here and now, the future seems so much less important. And a little uncertainty is hardly the end of the world.

You’ve already been called out for your dishonest use of the term “secret rapture”. Why use it again? You’re not going to pin that one me.

Do you deny that you teach such a doctrine? Again, there is a distinction in theology between a clear and open catching up of God's people (the dead in Christ rising first) to meet Christ in the air and return with him to judge the earth so that "Every eye shall see him" and the "secret" coming which is seen only by the church, when he surreptitiously whisks away the church, leaving behind only the befuddled heathen watching the "left behind" series, and frantically searching through Hal Lindsey and Tim Lahaye's works for a clue as to what happened. The HISTORICAL church has always taught the first. The latecomers to the game have taken the phrase and twisted it to mean something the scriptures simply do not teach. If you DENY teaching a "secret" coming of Christ that only his church sees, then I will retract the use of the word "secret." As it is, I can see you are a dispensationlist, so I am assuming you teach it. So, again, I ask, where is the biblical evidence for it?

Here’s support for the physical state of Israel in the end times...

Actually, no it isn't Let's look at it.

“They will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive among all nations, and Jerusalem will be trampled underfoot by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.

Actually, this says nothing about a geopolitical state of Israel. It MIGHT (I believe it does) point to a return of Jews to Jerusalem, but that is a far far far cry from the restoration of a theonomic state in covenant with God.

As to the "signs in sun moon and stars" stuff, I fail to see how this references a geopolitical state of Israel at all. I don't have my charts in front of me, though.

As to your final reference, it is just a repeat of the first time you said it. Again, this is NO compelling evidence at all of a restoration of the Jewish nation state, and may well fit within the HISTORICAL view of the section that does not refer to such a nation state at all. These verses you cite fit equally well within the historical orthodox view of the end times, and cannot be cited as "proof" of anything. To qualify as evidence, they have to clearly teach "this is true and this is not true." These verses REQUIRE you to adopt your view of the end times and then you can pull them out and say "see, it says it right here!" Kind of like saying that I Thess 4 teaches a secret rapture, when it "teaches" no such thing. It is just a verse among many dispensationalists have hijacked and crammed into a system that NO ONE would ever come up with from Scripture itself. Again, that is why no one ever did until Darby came along, and he had help from Margaret McDonald.

Rev13:5-7 The beast was given a mouth to utter proud words and blasphemies and to exercise his authority for forty-two months. He opened his mouth to blaspheme God, and to slander his name and his dwelling place and those who live in heaven. HE WAS GIVEN POWER TO MAKE WAR AGAINST THE SAINTS AND TO CONQUER THEM.

If the saints were all in Heaven, then how could he make war on them and conquer them?

Rev13:10 If anyone is to go into captivity, into captivity he will go. If anyone is to be killed witht he sword, with the sword he will be killed. This calls for patient endurance and faithfulness on the part of the saints

Since John is CLEARLY addressing the saints, then why is he telling them to not resist the beast when they are led away in captivity or put to the sword if they had already been taken up into Heaven? Why bother with the Revelation at all if not to prepare the saints for the tribulation? /p>What does this have to do with the Rapture (rhetorical question)? When the rapture is mentioned in Thessalonians, it does not GIVE THE SEQUENCE of events as Revelations does. It is perfectly consistent that the rapture will occur AFTER some part of the tribulation has passed. Which part? Since John's account is hardly sequential, I don't think we can know that. It seems at the very least the saints will endure the coming of the beast and persecution at his hands. What about the bowls and trumpets, and God's final wrath? I don't know; it doesn't seem likely, but Revelations doesn't SAY that Christians had been taken up into Heaven at some concrete time point. John does have the vision of those in white robes in heaven, and is told that, "These are those who have come out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." and "...never again will they hunger, never again will they thirst..." So at some point after the start of the great tribulation, the Lord brings them to Heaven, but again we don't know when. One might argue, and I wouldn't disagree that those who yet live throught whatever extent of tribulations that the church will endure will be taken up at that moment when Jesus finally reveals himself in triumph.

As John tells us, "Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near." May God bless you all.

I think you are absolutely correct. Those that teach rapture seem to forget those verses completely.

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition,

What will happen to those that are completely unprepared for the man of sin when he gets here. He'll look and act like Christ and will deceive many. Jesus foretold us all things. Never did He tells us we would be taken away before the tribulation. Rather, He told us what to do during it.

The futurist position is not tied to any specific date for Revelation. The preterist position completely falls apart if the book was written after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD. So the preterist will grasp at any straw to attempt to prove that Revelation was penned before 70 AD. Yet all contemporaneous evidence and the evidence of the early church all points to 96 AD or thereabouts for the book of Revelation.

The preterist's position is belied by the empirical evidence. The futurist position is confirmed by the internal evidence of scripture itself.

Carry on.

Granted, but remember two things. Biblical scholars are tyring to correct or argue against/for other interpretations rather than scripture itself. There are quite a lot of interpretations of scripture that have become so ingrained into Christian culture that they have attained the status of scripture itself. And that IS man made.

Secondly, remember that the bible in your hand is not the actual scripture. Its a translation. A very good translation, made by Godly men who did their very best, but it is a translation and ideas and concepts are distorted in that translation. Inevitably.

I never mentioned dispensationalism. You brought it up.

From what I can see on this thread (and I might be wrong), there’s a strange idea floating around that nothing outside Catholic teaching is to be considered part of the ‘historical church.’ Let me know if I’m wrong.

Also, I have never pulled out any timecharts, and don’t intend to.

Neither did I mention anything about “secret raptures” of Ms. Margaret What’s-her-name. Trying to paint me into her corner is sloppy or just plain dishonest.

Sorry, but you’re making a ton of assumptions about what I believe, or deliberately trying to distort it. And you’re not going to paint me as a Darbyist, because I’ve never listened to his teaching.

What I would really like to know is the religious background and beliefs of the guy who wrote this article (the guy who listened to Mike). I have a lot of problems with his article.

Also, I’d like to see the data supporting your view that American Christians are probably the most ignorant group. Deep Christian study, serious study, has a very strong history in America. It still does. It may not be your brand of Christianity, however. (What is your brand, by the way? I am a generic believer in Jesus Christ and his Gospel. I am a non-Catholic, but that is about all I will specify.)

We need to be very careful about letting sectarian schisms take over our study and discussion of God’s word. It is very easy and reasonable to read about “the living” being caught up and come up with some sort of explanation of what that means. Darby and McDonald aside, I would be very surprised if similar ideas have not been around for much, much longer than their particular brand of eschatology.

The best teachers I have listened to on the book of Revelation almost ALWAYS predicate their teaching by admitting they might be wrong, and encouraging the student to think for themselves, prayfully and with careful study, and to not allow a study of end times to distract them from our business at hand — preaching the Gospel to every creature, and baptizing them and bringing them up in the faith.

Just a couple of questions...why is it that everyone except preterist are misinterpreting the Bible and not "reading the Bible for all it's worth"? Who are you to say that you aren't reading scripture for what you're worth and not what God has to say. You don't know absolutely sure that your belief of eschatology is any more correct than mine is. Fact is...I don't know for sure. I do know that Jesus is my Savior and I'll truly know when I'm in His presence. I have just one favor to ask of you preterist, please stop being so arrogant and mean spirited with this discussion. I do want to discuss and learn, but you do nothing but push people away.

In Christ, Wiley

Dan 9:25 So know and understand: From the issuing of the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until an anointed one, a prince arrives, there will be a period of seven weeks and sixty-two weeks. [(7 + 62) * 7 = 483 years = 173,880 days the decree to rebuild Jerusalem was given by King Artaxerxes of Persia on March 14, 445 B. C. 173,880 days later… April 6, A. D. 32 was the day Jesus entered Jerusalem. It will again be built, with plaza and moat, but in distressful times. Dan 9:26 Now after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one will be cut off and have nothing. The Messiah will come, be rejected As for the city and the sanctuary, the people of the coming prince will destroy them. But his end will come speedily like a flood. Until the end of the war that has been decreed there will be destruction. Dan 9:27 He will confirm a covenant with many for one week. He = Antichrist. One Week = the last 7 years remaining. Revelation describes this time period But in the middle of that week he will bring sacrifices and offerings to a halt. On the wing of abominations will come one who destroys, until the decreed end is poured out on the one who destroys."

There is no reading the New Testament prophecies without also including the Old Testament to go along with them.

Well Said --- but try these dates instead:

458 BC --- the command to rebuild Jerusalem given to and by Ezra.

483 years later is 26 AD --- when Jesus is baptized by John and enters the synagogue to announce the acceptable year of the Lord.

3 and a half years later --- Nisan 14, 30 AD is the Crucifixion and the Messiah is "cut off".

Thus there are actually only 3 and a half years remaining of that 70th week of Daniel. The last days of the week are the final 3 and a half.

My Friend,

I’m happy you studied under R C Sproul. I was given a free ticket to a week at the Ligonier Study Center in the winter of 1980. I lived in NJ at the time and we had a storm so I couldn’t make it. To ease my guilt about wasting this, I bought a few of his (RC) books. This was at a time when I couldn’t care less about pre-mil or any mil for that matter.

I’m sure that RCS in a great guy in person. I’m not doubting his faith. However, one of his book in particular, Knowing Scripture, I read this several times over the years. A few short months ago, I re-read it and have come to the opinion that is is worthless. There is nothing of value in those pages. Zero.

It is a huge mistake to get wrapped up in the falable teaching of man. I don’t care what or who say’s so, if it isn’t taught in the Bible it isn’t counting towards heaven. My opinion of RCS is that he holds a weak view of Scripture. That is my opinion and since we have freedom of religion in the US and individual soul liberty in in eyes of God we are free to choose to belive what we want to believe. The truth, no matter who utters it is the truth and a lie, no matter who utters it is a lie.

I have no malace towards you or RCS. If you say you went from dispensations to Amil due to the teaching of someone like RCS, more power to you. I did the opposite, went from Amil to disp., do you care?

NO promises were EVER made to those who were physical descendants only of Abraham. It is improper to say God "changed his mind" about the promises made to anyone, and no promises were made to those who were only of the physical lineage of Abraham. Again, this is the clear and unmistakeable message of Romans 4.

Preterists try to make a distinction between physical and spiritual Israel, as if it is one or the other, but the Israel of God is both. Those who are just physical descendants with out concomitant faith in the Word of their God will find themselves outside of the Kingdom of God.

Paul tells us in Galatians that the Abrahamic Covenant was the foundation of the Gospel --- and the promise of the Land of Israel to the descendants of Abraham is an integral part of that foundation.

It is the clear and unmistakable message of Acts 1 and Acts 15 and the prophets that Jesus will return to restore the Kingdom to Israel, as promised, and to reign over that Kingdom from Jerusalem, as promised.

It is a huge mistake to get wrapped up in the falable teaching of man.

Amen and well said! We all tend to have our opinion of certain aspects of the Bible. But when someone tells me that I'm not reading it Correctly, or that I should study some other teacher for his opinion, or better yet that I'm weak minded and simply ignorant because of my beliefs, that's when I reckon it's time for me to go straight to the Bible. The scriptures are being manipulated by some to say what they want them to say. I choose to listen to the Holy Spirit and what He has to say.

In Christ, Wiley

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.