Prophecy in general

[armylngst]

The subject of this thread is prophecy, and how it should be handled.

Is prophecy literal with symbolism, or is it to be allegorized/spiritualized.

Results of understanding prophecy literally with symbolism. One recognizes Christ as the Messiah, and recognizes that He comes to earth twice, once as the suffering servant, and then as the conquering King. Old Testament is quite plain as to who Jesus would be, that the Jews, who knew the old Testament, had an answer when Herod asked where the King of the Jews was to be born. They knew. However, they did not recognize him through the prophecy because...

Results of understanding prophecy as allegory/spiritualized. The Jews spiritualized the Messianic prophecies, so when Jesus came to Earth as the suffering servant, they did not recognize Him. Not even when He read the passages from Isaiah they knew, and said those passages were being fulfilled that day. They still didn't recognize Him. Why not? Their allegorization and spiritualization of the prophecies completely changed the nature of Christ. They didn't even recognize John the Baptist. Not even when Jesus told them his role. Who were they looking for? The conquering King who would defeat the Romans and set the Jewish people free from their captivity. And that changed depending on who their perceived enemy was. They failed to recognize Christ, because they did not simply view prophecy plainly and directly.

If they had, perhaps they would have understood what Jesus mean when He said that a world looking for a sign would only get one, the sign of Jonah. Even after He died and was dead for 3 days, they still didn't recognize what Jesus was saying. He spoke plainly. The sign was that He would be killed, would be dead for three days, and then the grave would spit Him back out. (It is believed that Jonah was DEAD in the belly of the fish.) There are other prophetic utterances in the New Testament, like that which likens salvation to Noah's Ark. It is all symbolic, not allegorical. It is straight forward. As the serpent was raised up in the wilderness, so to must the Son of Man be raised up. Straight and to the point. It isn't allegorical. They are being compared. The serpent was raised up so that any who looked upon it might be saved from the viper bites. The Son of Man was raised up so that all who look upon Him (believe in Him) might be saved from the sin that was killing them. And that is what Jesus does. No need to spiritualize the passage at all. Cyrus rebuilding Jerusalem. Quite literally prophesied, right down to his name.

Someone said that the beast is Nero. However, what is not known is that a lot of tricks had to be done to get his name to add up to 666. The name Nero doesn't do it. His whole name... doesn't do it. I believe they had to add Caesar in order to get it to work out. So it wasn't actually his name, which is what Revelation requires. What was the image of the beast that he created? How about the mark? Where were the angels that said that anyone who worshiped Nero, his image, and took his mark to blaspheme God, and to blaspheme the very nature of the triune God in himself, would face eternal torment? When did Jesus return to destroy Nero and his armies? When did Jesus return to save Jerusalem?

 

[ReverendRV]

The subject of this thread is prophecy, and how it should be handled.

Is prophecy literal with symbolism, or is it to be allegorized/spiritualized.

Results of understanding prophecy literally with symbolism. One recognizes Christ as the Messiah, and recognizes that He comes to earth twice, once as the suffering servant, and then as the conquering King. Old Testament is quite plain as to who Jesus would be, that the Jews, who knew the old Testament, had an answer when Herod asked where the King of the Jews was to be born. They knew. However, they did not recognize him through the prophecy because...

Results of understanding prophecy as allegory/spiritualized. The Jews spiritualized the Messianic prophecies, so when Jesus came to Earth as the suffering servant, they did not recognize Him. Not even when He read the passages from Isaiah they knew, and said those passages were being fulfilled that day. They still didn't recognize Him. Why not? Their allegorization and spiritualization of the prophecies completely changed the nature of Christ. They didn't even recognize John the Baptist. Not even when Jesus told them his role. Who were they looking for? The conquering King who would defeat the Romans and set the Jewish people free from their captivity. And that changed depending on who their perceived enemy was. They failed to recognize Christ, because they did not simply view prophecy plainly and directly.

If they had, perhaps they would have understood what Jesus mean when He said that a world looking for a sign would only get one, the sign of Jonah. Even after He died and was dead for 3 days, they still didn't recognize what Jesus was saying. He spoke plainly. The sign was that He would be killed, would be dead for three days, and then the grave would spit Him back out. (It is believed that Jonah was DEAD in the belly of the fish.) There are other prophetic utterances in the New Testament, like that which likens salvation to Noah's Ark. It is all symbolic, not allegorical. It is straight forward. As the serpent was raised up in the wilderness, so to must the Son of Man be raised up. Straight and to the point. It isn't allegorical. They are being compared. The serpent was raised up so that any who looked upon it might be saved from the viper bites. The Son of Man was raised up so that all who look upon Him (believe in Him) might be saved from the sin that was killing them. And that is what Jesus does. No need to spiritualize the passage at all. Cyrus rebuilding Jerusalem. Quite literally prophesied, right down to his name.

Someone said that the beast is Nero. However, what is not known is that a lot of tricks had to be done to get his name to add up to 666. The name Nero doesn't do it. His whole name... doesn't do it. I believe they had to add Caesar in order to get it to work out. So it wasn't actually his name, which is what Revelation requires. What was the image of the beast that he created? How about the mark? Where were the angels that said that anyone who worshiped Nero, his image, and took his mark to blaspheme God, and to blaspheme the very nature of the triune God in himself, would face eternal torment? When did Jesus return to destroy Nero and his armies? When did Jesus return to save Jerusalem?

Wow! This is a lightbulb moment...

This is a Positive reason to not prefer Premillenial Dispensational Eschatology. You may notice I am searching for Positive Reasons to accept one Eschatology over another Eschatological Scheme...

What would you say to a Premillenialist who says they are the true Literalists?

 

[armylngst]

Wow! This is a lightbulb moment...

This is a Positive reason to not prefer Premillenial Dispensational Eschatology. You may notice I am searching for Positive Reasons to accept one Eschatology over another Eschatological Scheme...

What would you say to a Premillenialist who says they are the true Literalists?

It depends. Literalism allows for symbolism and figurative speech, however, the actual situation remains the same. For instance, Genesis and creation. There is some symbolism and figurate language involved, however, creationists believe it is literal. There is a lot to be considered. For instance, they believe that Noah had knowledge on how to build a boat, gained over the few hundred years of his life prior to building the Ark. Who knows? Is it possible? Why yes, yes it is.

To allegorize/spiritualize is to change the message. So Satan being bound is not to keep him from deceiving the nations, even though this is what it literally states, it is to stop him from hindering the Great Commission, which is something that must be done, considering he has NEVER been able to hinder the spread of God's word. So of course he must be bound so he can't do what he has never been able to do in the first place. He has never been able to thwart God.

This binding came after Revelation speaks of an army of the world that had been deceived by Satan, through the beast, his prophet, the image, and the mark, into attacking the people of God in Israel. After Jesus comes and defeats these armies, Satan is bound in chains, thrown in a pit, and sealed away, so that he can't deceive the nations again until after the 1000 years is complete. How can anyone in their right mind say that this is so Satan can't hinder the Great Commission? I can't see any connection between the Great Commission, and Satan's horde army led up by the beast, his prophet, his image, and the mark, can you? It makes no sense. And it is followed up by Satan's release so he can... deceive the nations of the world into attacking the people of God at Jerusalem. I mean, it is all very straight forward, unless you allegorize it away.

 

[ReverendRV]

It depends. Literalism allows for symbolism and figurative speech, however, the actual situation remains the same. For instance, Genesis and creation. There is some symbolism and figurate language involved, however, creationists believe it is literal. There is a lot to be considered. For instance, they believe that Noah had knowledge on how to build a boat, gained over the few hundred years of his life prior to building the Ark. Who knows? Is it possible? Why yes, yes it is.

To allegorize/spiritualize is to change the message. So Satan being bound is not to keep him from deceiving the nations, even though this is what it literally states, it is to stop him from hindering the Great Commission, which is something that must be done, considering he has NEVER been able to hinder the spread of God's word. So of course he must be bound so he can't do what he has never been able to do in the first place. He has never been able to thwart God.

This binding came after Revelation speaks of an army of the world that had been deceived by Satan, through the beast, his prophet, the image, and the mark, into attacking the people of God in Israel. After Jesus comes and defeats these armies, Satan is bound in chains, thrown in a pit, and sealed away, so that he can't deceive the nations again until after the 1000 years is complete. How can anyone in their right mind say that this is so Satan can't hinder the Great Commission? I can't see any connection between the Great Commission, and Satan's horde army led up by the beast, his prophet, his image, and the mark, can you? It makes no sense. And it is followed up by Satan's release so he can... deceive the nations of the world into attacking the people of God at Jerusalem. I mean, it is all very straight forward, unless you allegorize it away.

The first Post spoke to me; this one kind of didn't. It's not your fault, Eschatology just ain't my thing. But there is something about the fact that Israel got Prophecy wrong and was deceived, that makes a lot of sense about how and why our Eschatology can be wrong. Maybe that's why I'm having issue with Eschatological Schemes; I'm not easily deceived like Israel was...

 

[Eleanor]

It depends. Literalism allows for symbolism and figurative speech, however, the actual situation remains the same. For instance, Genesis and creation. There is some symbolism and figurate language involved, however, creationists believe it is literal. There is a lot to be considered. For instance, they believe that Noah had knowledge on how to build a boat, gained over the few hundred years of his life prior to building the Ark. Who knows? Is it possible? Why yes, yes it is.

To allegorize/spiritualize is to change the message. So Satan being bound is not to keep him from deceiving the nations, even though this is what it literally states, it is to stop him from hindering the Great Commission, which is something that must be done, considering he has NEVER been able to hinder the spread of God's word. So of course he must be bound so he can't do what he has never been able to do in the first place. He has never been able to thwart God.

This binding came after Revelation speaks of an army of the world that had been deceived by Satan, through the beast, his prophet, the image, and the mark, into attacking the people of God in Israel. After Jesus comes and defeats these armies, Satan is bound in chains, thrown in a pit, and sealed away, so that he can't deceive the nations again until after the 1000 years is complete. How can anyone in their right mind say that this is so Satan can't hinder the Great Commission? I can't see any connection between the Great Commission, and Satan's horde army led up by the beast, his prophet, his image, and the mark, can you? It makes no sense. And it is followed up by Satan's release so he can... deceive the nations of the world into attacking the people of God at Jerusalem. I mean, it is all very straight forward, unless you allegorize it away.

From another perspective, I don't see Rev as a successive chronology from chps 1-22.
I see it as "obsessed" with sevens (a book of completions), starting with the seven churches, on through to the seven bowls poured out.

I see it structured as are the visions in Daniel, where the visions in Daniel were
the sum of prophecy revealed by the Son of Man (Da 10:4-9)
from the book of God's eternal decrees (Da 10:21, 12:1)
regarding the OT church (Da 2:28, 8:26, 10:14) and the end (Da 8:19) .

And the visions in Rev are likewise
the sum of prophecy revealed by the Son of Man (Rev 1:12-18)
from the book of God's eternal decrees (Rev 5:1-5, 6:1, 10:1-4, 8-10, 20:12)
regarding the NT church (Rev 1:19, 10:11) and the end (Rev 10:7, 11:18, 16:17, 21:6).

As the visions in Daniel are not a successive chronology, but four progressive parallelisms (chp 2, 7, 8 10-12),
progressively revealing more details of the same events and persons each time (as are the eight visions in Zec 1-6), so with
the visions in Rev, which are not a successive chronology, but seven progressive parallelisms (chp 1-3, 4-7, 8-11, 12-14, 15-6, 17-19, 20-22)
progressively revealing more details of the same events and persons each time.

And as the numbers and time frame regarding the OT church in Da 9:24-27 (fulfilled) are not literal, but are prophetic riddles,
so the numbers and time frame regarding the NT church in Rev are not literal, but are prophetic riddles.

It is the seeing of Rev as a literal successive chronology that is the basis for much interpretation of prophetic riddles today that is contradictory to clear, unequivocal, authoritative NT apostolic teaching (1 Th 414-17, 2 Th 1:6-10, 21-8).

If anyone is interested, I can give a general outline of the schemata for Rev. as the sum of prophecy in God's book of completions, regarding his decrees, proclamations, revelations and judgments, beginning in eternity past and completed in eternity future.

 

[armylngst]

The first Post spoke to me; this one kind of didn't. It's not your fault, Eschatology just ain't my thing. But there is something about the fact that Israel got Prophecy wrong and was deceived, that makes a lot of sense about how and why our Eschatology can be wrong. Maybe that's why I'm having issue with Eschatological Schemes; I'm not easily deceived like Israel was...

You shouldn't be starting with Eschatology then, because you haven't built a foundation for it. It isn't so much that Israel was deceived, it is that they would not believe what the prophecy was telling them. What do you mean the Messiah is going to be a suffering servant? Why would a King be a suffering servant? Then they saw the prophecies where the Messiah IS the conquering King, so they allegorized all the prophecies and combined them with the conquering King. Yet the simple interpretation, the literal, gave us Jesus the suffering servant. Even the Jews knew what the literal interpretation was because they had no issues answering Herod when he asked where the King of the Jews was to be born. They knew the prophecies, and yet, because they had allegorized all the prophecies, they missed His coming and actually aided in His crucifixion.

You need to understand some of how Old Testament prophecy worked in the Old Testament. Not all of it was Messianic. There are prophecies on how Israel will reject God. (They did.) Occasionally God even said how it was going to happen, and that is how it happened. Cyrus would rebuild Jerusalem. How did they know this? It was prophesied that Cyrus would rebuild Jerusalem. [To note, some believe that the name was added after the prophecy was fulfilled. Only the name was added.]

Start with Genesis. If you believe in a literal 7-day creation, why? Everyone else says that the passages have to be allegorized, even though it is written in historical narrative form. (This is why you can't trust someone who says that we have to figure out what is being said by the style used. They are far from consistent in their handling of scripture. They change methods when the obvious method does not agree with their beliefs.) Consider Noah's ark, and how many people no longer believe it actually happened, even if Jesus and Peter spoke of it as though it was true. Luke 17:26 "Just as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be in the days of the Son of Man: People went on eating, drinking, marrying and giving in marriage until the day Noah boarded the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.” Now, considering how Peter used Noah's Ark, one could try to say that this is basically another way of talking about the rapture. The Christians enter into safety, and the rest of the world is destroyed. That wouldn't even be allegorizing, however, the proper question would be, is that what Jesus was trying to say? Context. Read the rest of the chapter in Luke to see Jesus's point of thought.

Consider Jonah. Jesus basically said that Jonah was prophetic when He said that the only sign that would be given to a generation looking for a sign is the sign of Jonah. Jonah died and was resurrected after three days. The three days in the fish were prophetic of Jesus' three days in the tomb. We know because Jesus told us.

Consider the viper lifted up in the wilderness, which is apparently a dual fulfillment prophecy, and once again we know this because Jesus told us. However, Jesus' fulfillment of this prophecy wasn't an allegory either. He was lifted up, and those who look to Him/come to Him for salvation are saved. Hindsight has shown so many prophecies to be literal, even though at the time the situation may not have been visible to those interpreting the prophecies.

The issue isn't about having a solid foundation in understanding prophecy, but an understanding of the scriptural as a single narrative, where later parts of the story refer back to earlier parts of the story. Consider prophecy to be foreshadowing events to come. Once you see how foreshadowing is used by the one author of the Bible, then you can draw lines from all foreshadowing in trying to figure out what is going to happen next. In the case of Revelation, since it is written in the apocalyptic style, a lot of symbolism was used to hide identities, and figurative language was used to explain things the author may not have understood. (An example given is, how would John explain a helicopter or a tank?) Allegory says that there is some hidden or secret meaning to passages that have to be figured out in order to understand them. It denies a literal interpretation of a passage in favor of a hidden, spiritualized message. An example is in the question I ask. Where does one get the idea that Satan is bound in chains, thrown in a pit, and a seal placed on him so that he can no longer deceive the nations until 1000 years is completed since a war just ended where he had deceived the nations into attacking God's people, means that he is being hindered from stopping the Great Commission? Where does the Great Commission show up anywhere in the context?

 

[Josheb]

Someone said that the beast is Nero. However, what is not known is that a lot of tricks had to be done to get his name to add up to 666.

That's not true at all. It's rather straight-forward.

 

[Josheb]

Old Testament is quite plain as to who Jesus would be, that the Jews, who knew the old Testament, had an answer when Herod asked where the King of the Jews was to be born. They knew. However, they did not recognize him...

This is not true, either. The New Testament states quite plainly the OT was veiled and the things of Christ hidden, and a blindness was upon the Jews. In fact, the entire New Testament can be said to be a clarification of the OT because the OT was NOT quite plain.

 

[Josheb]

One recognizes Christ as the Messiah, and recognizes that He comes to earth twice, once as the suffering servant, and then as the conquering King.

Would you please cite that scripture where any prophecy states Jesus comes to earth twice? Would you also please cite the verse in prophecy in which it is stated Jesus comes once as a suffering servant and then (again) as a conquering king?

 

[Josheb]

It is all symbolic, not allegorical.

?????

I don't think you correctly understand the terms you are using because your explanation applied an allegorical reading of the text. Jesus did not literally go inside of a great fish. Jesus' comparison between Jonah's three days in the past with Jesus' future three days in the grave is figurative. metaphorical, allegorical. Yes, Jesus literally died, and was literally buried, and literally came back from the dead, but that does not change the fact his appeal to Jonah was allegorical.

 

[Josheb]

There is a single simple standard to which every Christian can and should subscribe: Treat the Old Testament the same way the New Testament writers treated it! Where they treated it figuratively, we should do the same. Where they treated it literally, we should do the same. It won't solve every problem, but it will prevent the ones present in this op.

 

[armylngst]

That's not true at all. It's rather straight-forward.

I looked it up. They had to use Nero Caesar to get 666. Nero's name by itself did not equal 666.

 

[armylngst]

This is not true, either. The New Testament states quite plainly the OT was veiled and the things of Christ hidden, and a blindness was upon the Jews. In fact, the entire New Testament can be said to be a clarification of the OT because the OT was NOT quite plain.

Of course not. When it says, from out of Egypt I called my Son, His Son was in America, and He called Him from Egypt using His cellphone. It is now clear.

Why did the Jewish leaders know the exact answer Herod wanted when he asked, where is the King of the Jews to be born? Because the Old Testament was clear. When Paul talks about the blindness on the Jews, he is talking about their rejection of Jesus.

 

[armylngst]

Would you please cite that scripture where any prophecy states Jesus comes to earth twice? Would you also please cite the verse in prophecy in which it is stated Jesus comes once as a suffering servant and then (again) as a conquering king?

You could just read Zechariah. For the second question, read Isaiah and then read Zechariah. I mean, I understand you may not believe that God said Jesus was coming twice, in which case we then know Jesus wasn't the Messiah.

 

[armylngst]

?????

I don't think you correctly understand the terms you are using because your explanation applied an allegorical reading of the text. Jesus did not literally go inside of a great fish. Jesus' comparison between Jonah's three days in the past with Jesus' future three days in the grave is figurative. metaphorical, allegorical. Yes, Jesus literally died, and was literally buried, and literally came back from the dead, but that does not change the fact his appeal to Jonah was allegorical.

Definition of allegory "a story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one." What makes this not an allegory. Jonah is dead in a fish. Jesus is dead in the tomb. Jonah is dead for three days. Jesus is dead for three days. Jonah is alive again on the third day. Jesus is alive again on the third day. Is there any special interpretation that needs to be done to here, or is everything a point to point transition from Jonah to Jesus? If you want to make it an allegory, then Jonah dying means that Jesus is going to go far away to where no one can find Him. He'll be alive, but no one can find Him. And as Jonah was dead for three days, Jesus will be unfindable for three days. As Jonah came back to life on the third day, Jesus will be discovered/found on the third day unharmed. That is allegorizing prophecy. Now, since Jesus is basically a carbon copy of what happened to Jonah, it isn't an allegory. Figurative sure, but not allegory.

 

[armylngst]

There is a single simple standard to which every Christian can and should subscribe: Treat the Old Testament the same way the New Testament writers treated it! Where they treated it figuratively, we should do the same. Where they treated it literally, we should do the same. It won't solve every problem, but it will prevent the ones present in this op.

Literal and figurative actually go together in understanding scripture. In Biblical studies, the idea of literal understanding includes symbolic and figurative language, however, it does not include allegory. So if Revelation says the beast went to the store, the beast is symbolic, to the store is the literal event that is being completed by whatever the beast is symbolic/figurative for. Allegory would say that the beast is not actually going to the store, but to some place where he could buy other, ahem, services, to include items he needs.

If we fail to take Old Testament prophecy literally, that God is speaking of something that is literally going to happen, then we lose Jesus. Yes, let's lose Jesus by not considering God's words literally. And no, the world wasn't created in 7 days, because that is impossible, however Peter in the New Testament says of God that a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as a day. Therefore God meant extended periods of time when He said day in the Old Testament, using this New Testament understanding. This makes Adam and Eve a morality tale, and not actually two people who existed. Do you see where this takes you? And many do this simply to support their eschatology, or, in the case of day-age theory, to support their belief in evolution, without completely getting rid of God.

 

[Josheb]

I looked it up. They had to use Nero Caesar to get 666. Nero's name by itself did not equal 666.

lol

That is not "a lot of tricks." You explicitly stated it took "a lot of tricks" to render Nero as the 666 of Revelation. A Hebrew transliteration of the Greek is nrwn qsr. Add in the vowels and then apply the very common first century practice of gemartia, and 666 is the results. That is a lot of steps. Not a lot of tricks.

What is a trick is this op twisting the methods used to arrive at 666 into "tricks." Logically this is called an "appeal to ridicule." It is a fallacious way of arguing.

The fact is no one knows who is the 666, so everyone is speculating. What we do know is the book of Revelation opens and closes with the unequivocal statements the events described would happen quickly because the time was near (or at hand). If that prophecy is read literally then the 666 guy has long ago died. If that prophecy is not read literally then he could be anybody. More importantly, however, anyone who espouses reading prophecy literally had better be consistent doing so. Otherwise, they open themselves up to criticism for either being hypocritical or having double standards (or fools, or liars). The fact is there isn't a single example in the entire Bible where the word "near" is used to mean "2000 years from now".

So I hope that's not what you believe . I definitely hope that's not what you're trying to persuade everyone in this forum to believe .

 

[Josheb]

Of course not. When it says, from out of Egypt I called my Son, His Son was in America, and He called Him from Egypt using His cellphone. It is now clear.

Why did the Jewish leaders know the exact answer Herod wanted when he asked, where is the King of the Jews to be born? Because the Old Testament was clear. When Paul talks about the blindness on the Jews, he is talking about their rejection of Jesus.

lol

They didn't know. The Jewish leader had to ask the priests and they had to go look it up, and even then Herod thought he could circumvent prophecy by killing all the kids even though the Old Testament precedent in Moses' day told him it would be fruitless.

You are using the word "know" pretty loosely.

And you are not addressing the specifics of my posts. The NT tells us the OT was veiled. Your answer to that should be an instant "Amen," and then either a modification of your original statement or discarding it because as written the claim is incorrect. You've done neither. The same holds true for the NT's assertion things were hidden. Presuppositionally, this should be a no-brainer because the fundamental fact of the new revelation is that it reveals things in the older revelation that either weren't made clear or were not correctly understood.

Why doesn't the op contain that information? And why are these facts now being resisted?

 

[Josheb]

You could just read Zechariah. For the second question, read Isaiah and then read Zechariah. I mean, I understand you may not believe that God said Jesus was coming twice, in which case we then know Jesus wasn't the Messiah.

I could. I have. many, many times. I know what scripture states.

What I do not know is whether or not you have any evidence for any of the claims made in this opening post and the rest of the thread. I do not know whether or not you know how to answer questions, or answer them when they are asked. I do know I just asked two questions and they were both dodged with an attempt at shifting the onus away from your own op to me.

Shifting onus is a burden of proof fallacy.

So let's try it again:

Would you please cite that scripture where any prophecy states Jesus comes to earth twice? Would you also please cite the verse in prophecy in which it is stated Jesus comes once as a suffering servant and then (again) as a conquering king?

Remember: There may lurkers reading this exchange. They may be looking to see if you can make the case for this op. Show us because two questions were asked and then dodged with a fallacious response..... and not answered.


Would you please cite that scripture where any prophecy states Jesus comes to earth twice? Would you also please cite the verse in prophecy in which it is stated Jesus comes once as a suffering servant and then (again) as a conquering king?

 

[Josheb]

@armylngst ,

Would you please, for my sake and the sake of those entering the thread later, tell me as succinctly as you can whether or not you think prophecy should be read literally, figuratively, or if there is some other specific "rule" or guideline you're trying to assert with this op? What is the metric by which prophecy should be read?

Thx