Jmouse007 says that Sproul’s interpretation of Revelation is ridiculous. What is more ridiculous is Jmouse007’s ignorance about how to interpret the Bible. Let us take with caution anyone who says that the Bible, especially apololyptic literature, should be taken literally.
Dispensationalists say that they interpret it literally, but let’s see. When Jesus said that he is the vine (John 15:5) did he meant that he is a woody plant? Should we literally hate our mother and father to be Jesus’ disciples (Luke 14:26)? If your eye causes you to sin, should you pluck it out (Mark 9:47)? Must we sell everything we have an give it to the poor to inherit eternal life (Luke 18:18-22)? Did the mountains and the hills really break into song and the trees clap their hands (Isaiah 55:12)? Did God hold out his hands literally to an obstinate people (Isaiah 65)? Does God have hands?
Would the moon literally turn to blood before the Day of the Lord (Joel 2:31)? Aren’t such statements about actual worldly judgments by God that are expressed in poetic or astonomical language rather than literal language? When God judged Babylon, an event in actual history, did the stars and sun stop giving their light (Isaiah 13:10) and the heavens tremble (Isaiah 13:13)? Given this last passage and numerous others like it in the Bible (for example, Is 24:23, Ez 32:7, Amos 5:20, 8:9, Zeph 1:15) can’t we see that the language of Revelation is of the same type as other events in covenantal history that have already been fulfilled?
In Revelation 1:4, did Jesus literally have eyes like a flame of fire? Did he literally hold seven stars (v. 16)? Did the Beasts of Rev 19 literally eat the flesh of kings and all men (v. 18)? Did the angel in Rev 20:1 have a literal key to the literall bottomless pit? The Book of lIfe in Rev 20:12, 15 literal—with paper or parchment pages?
Concerning the dating of Revelation, the 95 AD date is taken from a single statement from a single early church father that can be interpreted different ways. The fact is that many theologians are convinced that the book was written prior to 70 AD as the book nowhere mentions the destruction of Jerusalem in the past tense and is suggested in Rev 11 that in fact it was still standing when the book was written.
Here are a couple of links:
www.faithfacts.org/bible-101/interpreting-the-bible
www.prophecyquestions.wordpress.com
“Jmouse007 says that Sproul’s interpretation of Revelation is ridiculous. What is more ridiculous is Jmouse007’s ignorance about how to interpret the Bible. Let us take with caution anyone who says that the Bible, especially apololyptic [sic] literature, should be taken literally.”
__________________________________
In fact, what’s ridiculous is to paint Dispensationalists as advocates of wooden literalism.
“The primary way in which critics of our prophecy views attack what we believe the Bible teaches is to distort our view of literal interpretation. They like to paint us as ones who believe in ‘wooden literalism,’ which they now label as simply literalism. This is assumed by them to be a naïve, sophomoric understanding of biblical literature. Many have answered these claims and tried to set the record straight, but they are increasingly falling upon the deaf ears of opponents who simply refuse to listen...”
More here:
LITERAL VS. ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION
http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/Ice-LiteralvsAllegorical.pdf
Having taught Hermeneutics along with Systematic Theology, Eschatology as well as the the book of Revelation on the graduate and undergraduate level on numerous occasions since 1994 I take serious offense at the uneducated, ignorant and dubious statements you made within your post. You have impugned my character and qualifications. In the future you would be well advised to keep your mouth shut until you have your facts straight before you speak or post.
As for your post, you failed to sight one instance in which any of the plagues clearly stated within my post have ever taken place in all of recorded human history.
Regarding the book of Revelation, I would strongly recommend you read Robert L. Thomas's exegetical commentary on Revelation. He is no exegetical novice, he has no axe to grind and does a masterful job of simply looking at the text and the original languages. He deals with all of the interpretational positions on the subject and lets the chips fall where they may.
http://www.amazon.com/Revelation-1-7-Commentary-Wycliffe-Exegetical/dp/0802492657/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1306283488&sr=8-2
http://www.amazon.com/Revelation-8-22-Commentary-Wycliffe-Exegetical/dp/0802492673/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1306283488&sr=8-1
One more thing; should you impugn my character or qualifications again I will report you to the FR moderator.