The book of Revelation is a book that tries to make sense of the no-show of the late return/Parousia delay of Jesus Christ (mainly what happened around 70 AD which many would have though Jesus would return when the 2nd temple was being destroyed). It tells faithful Christians to be loyal to Jesus Christ alone and not submit to the Emperor who stands in enmity with Jesus as both individuals declarer themselves Lord and Savior. John the Seer is given several vision from the Christ and it goes into how despite all the evil in the world God will have the final victory.
Revelation isn’t a future time table as many have made it to be but its a book that shows a spiritual drama about good vs evil and how good will always win no matter how strong evil seems to be. It would make no sense for God to give 1st century Christians visions of events bound 2000 years or more into the future that don’t effect to receiving audience. That is unless the original audience believed that the events of Revelation was meant to happen in their life time.
There are also dual fulfillments to some prophesies. For instance, there are multiple references to “the day of the Lord” in the Old Testament prophetic books, and a particular one (some kind of obviously, I think) could be referring to more than one day. I also think there is a distinct possibility that Daniel 2:43 refers to the disunited U.S.A. as well as the traditionally understood Rome.
I find it hard to belive that Daniel 2:43 would make a radicle jump from Rome to the USA, which may I mind you wouldn’t concern the original audience at all (though I’m sure Rome was a far off issue that Daniel wondered why he was given such a detailed vision, that if is Daniel knew what any of the powers he saw were those nations) I understand that all prophecy that was given was set to its local cultural-historical context in the way that the people would have understood it. While the prophecy would have been esoteric and mystical; I don’t think it would need mental gymnastics to solve the issue as many modern dispensationalist/futurist and historicist seem to treat it as.
I share in your skepticism, Quinn, of the enthusiasms that are finding modern day political entities (whether soviet union, or U.S., or modern Israel, etc.) and reading those back into books like Daniel or Revelation.
On the other hand, not to give a defense of the above practice, but to acknowledge perhaps a seeming similarity: isn’t it fair game - even encouraged, to seek to apply prophetic messages to ourselves and our present situations? I still make a clear distinction, though. It is one thing to listen to Amos or Hosea pound the Israelites for their greed and injustice - and rightly apply that message to ourselves as well, and quite another to become obsessed with things like Daniel’s mysterious references to nations and days, and spend our energies (like Isaac Newton) trying to “decode” such things. To my mind, the former is a legitimate contemporary application of ancient prophecy, and the latter not so much.
While there can be a spiritual application to things in the Bible, I agree with you on that. While I’m okay with spiritually applying certain passages to our time in a comparable sense, what I detest is the whole idea that certain Bible prophecies from thousands of years ago some how apply to modern 21st century nations and people (i.e. Israel, Russia, USA, etc…)
Actually partial-preterist. A large majority of Bible prophecy has been fulfilled between 30-70 AD. The only thing to wait for is the Parousia Return of Jesus Christ, the resurrection of the dead and the final judgement. Though a lot of the NT writers assumed that Christ would return within their life time, showing that even they were not without a bit of human error when it comes to the Parousia Return of Jesus Christ which would have been on high since many saw the fall of Jerusalem and the desolation of the 2nd temple and knew this was connected to what Jesus spoke of in prophecy. On the prophecies of Jesus told in the Gospels I understand them as related to events between 30-70 AD. Though some the apocalyptical imagery can be understood to relate with Christian persecutions to the present day, its original context was the events pertaining to the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the 2nd temple in 70 AD. While I do belive that Jesus did speak of His Parousia Return in several passages in the Gospels, He mainly spoke of the fall of Jerusalem which would have been a type of judgement but not the Parousia judgement.
You’d better pray (and pray hard!) that it doesn’t. Because if it does - it is just as likely the U.S. could be the great whore of Revelation 17 or Babylon from chapter 18 as anything else. But I think we need not lose sleep over such an exacting “interpretive scare” as all that - so long as we are losing sleep over the lessons to be drawn from it all.
Very good. And was it the rich man who was ‘fretting not’ while poor Lazarus was lying in need on his doorstep? So long we don’t persist in killing such conscience as we have left, such an admonition remains timely, perhaps.
It’s not our perfect love! It is our Father’s, and he only does what is good for both him and us. So whenever I catch myself being anxious about anything, I can go crawl up on Father’s lap even when court is in session in the throne room, so to speak, and his strong arms will comfort me and shield me.
Amen to all of that! And when the Father has comforted, encouraged, and strengthened us - and calls us to go out and do courageous and needed things (like speaking truth to power) so that others can experience that comforting care also, may we have the courage of His continued presence to obey.
Yes, I gave the example of Ezekiel 23 but there are many examples in the Bible of prophecy interpreting the past. Nevertheless, they don’t reveal new historical events–unlike Gnosticism, Islam, Mormonism, and a thousand other religions and cults that use the Bible (but don’t teach the Bible).
And yes, Revelation was very much for both the 2nd-century churches to whom it was addressed and to the universal church. I’ve only had time to skim y’all’s discussion about prophecy and certainly agree that many US churches have at times had a very myopic interpretation–such as reading in the 7 stages of church history–but I can’t really debate the various schools of thought on it (I don’t even remember what the term preterest means !)
In a nutshell preterism is the idea that a large majority or all of Bible prophecy was fulfilled by 70 AD. There are partial preterist like I who see a large majority of prophecy having been fulfilled by 70 AD except for the return of Jesus Christ and the final judgement. full preterist see ALL Bible prophecy having been fulfilled by 70 AD including the return of Jesus and the final judgement.
I have no trouble with preterism and the imagery it presumes, as long as it allows for the possibility of dual fulfillments to some prophecy and dual noncontradictory meanings to some other scripture, from Genesis 1 through Revelation, not unlike the classic optical illusion of two women – both are true and nonconflicting:
I suggest that the Bible is bigger than we know, penned (metaphorically speaking ) by the ultimate Wordsmith and the Artist of artists.
Well, there are many instances of the NT taking OT descriptions as prefigurations and “predictions.” However, how do we make sure these are true exegetically? The saying “Out of Egypt have I called my son” doesn’t refer to a prediction at all clearly in the original text–it’s not even in that configuration–it’s changed in the NT. While I don’t doubt how the NT describes Christ, really, it doesn’t help me accept Christ based on a prediction.
Also, many Muslims use the prediction of “paraclete” as referring to Muhammad. I don’t think it fits with him; it’s certainly with the Holy Spirit. However, if we use prefigurations to take any description, how do we keep to some sort of orthodoxy?
How many women are in the drawing? Two, and only two. It does not support ‘any description’. Do they conflict with each other? No. That is how we maintain orthodoxy – by testing scripture against scripture and reality against reality.
For instance, I still like the ‘Rossian’ cosmological sequence in Genesis 1 – it does not conflict with an ANE/literary framework interpretation. (I also very much like Michael LeFebvre’s take.)
I never read that part by Joel Duff on Michael Lefebvre till now–I like it. Thanks." My thesis is that the Pentateuch uses dates for liturgical instruction, not to provide a journalistic chronology. Event sequencing, not dates, is the Pentateuch’s method to indicate chronology. ” Page 60"
that is very unfamiliar to my eyes, though. I should read more of Dr Walton.
Forgive my bad memory, but which story of 2 women were we talking about? I scanned back, but am missing it. Thanks.
) by the ultimate Wordsmith and the Artist of artists.