Prophecy in general

[armylngst]

The problem is not quoting the scriptures.

Then why ignore.

The problem is the inconsistency with which the "whole passages" are then eisegetically rendered, the inconsistency with which the guidelines asserted in the op are applied, the complete failure to address and engage a more scripturally consistent alternative, the gross misrepresentation of others who practice the precedents established in scripture..... and now the ongoing inability to keep the posts about the posts and the false witness born with the ad hominem. I did not ignore anything.

Let us deal with the one you have not responded to, which would be a great place to start in trying to show that allegorical/spiritualized interpretations are valid. Satan being bound. I have been waiting for you to exegete it as well as I have. I didn't even leave the passage to show that there is support for a literal understanding (once again, it includes figures of speech, but the outcome does not change) on both sides of the passage.

1. What was Satan busy doing before he was seized, bound, thrown into the bottomless abyss, and sealed? He just finished pulling off the amazing deception of the whole world to attack Jersualem, through the beast, his image, and his mark. It is the most incredible, earth proliferating deception known to man. Everyone whose name is not written in the Lamb's book of life is there to attack Jerusalem. Everyone. And Jesus wipes them all out in His coming.

2. What does Satan do upon his release from being bound? He is out there deceiving the great nations of the world that exist at that time, into attacking the holy ones, God's people... at Jerusalem. Again. Jersualem attack, take 2. Satan's desperation, take 2. Satan has been trying to destroy Israel and the Jews since time memorium. Why? Salvation is from the Jews. They are God's chosen people, whom God has sworn to protect. If Satan destroys them, Satan wins the war.

3. So how should we interpret, just given the context, the idea that Satan is bound in a chain, thrown into a bottomless pit, and sealed so that he cannot deceive the nations for a time? Does not the context itself dictate that it must have something to do with the fact that Satan has been deceiving the nations of the world into attacking Israel/the Jews, from long before Jesus came on Earth, all the way to where we are now, with some Arabs still trying to destroy Israel, and Arab nations/peoples who have threatened to drive Israel into the sea? (A nice bit of imagery to say their desire is to wipe out Israel, which is God's chosen nation, the thorn in Satan's side.) Consider that the temple mount is not actually a holy place to the Muslims, but was invented so as to keep Israel from rebuilding their temple. To keep Israel's holiest site from Israel. Read the history. It is a real eye opener.

I believe you were the one, correct me if I am wrong, who said that the context dictates how a passage of prophecy is interpreted. (I'm pretty sure that wording does not properly convey all you were saying, so please correct.)

Can you give any scriptural support for the belief that this is speaking of preventing Satan from thwarting God's will? Can God's will be thwarted by Satan, that God would need to essentially "cheat" in order to see His will fulfilled? (I am not saying that this is what you said, but this interpretation seems to say that God and the gospel would get nowhere if Satan wasn't bound. Just who is the great power over all the universe? Is God fighting a war of attrition? Is God on the ropes? Can God be on the ropes?

Thank you for your time.

You're welcome. Realize it is time I will never get back, and I have no issue using this precious commodity to have a conversation with you. Why do you see this as an attack on you? All I ask is that you present your argument that prophecy needs to be interpreted in an allegorical/spiritualized way, regardless of the context within which the prophecy is found. I gave an example above, but you can use whatever prophecy you want. [Not the angel in the sun, because that is not a prophecy. What that angel says, on the other hand, that is. A true declaration of God.]

I will give one example which might be an interesting one to discuss. The two witnesses.

 

[armylngst]

If you cannot keep the posts about the posts and not the posters don't expect further replies.

To be honest, due to how far from the posts you have been, I keep hoping not to see further replies. I'm tired of your attacks. You need to deal with the OP. I already said how you could do that. Present a fulfilled prophecy, and show how the prophecy was not literally fulfilled, taking into account figurative language, simile, etc. It had an allegorical take that was not already interpreted for you. Example: Daniel tells us that the week in the 70 weeks prophecy is not a week, but stands for 7 years. If the prophecy is interpreted already, there is no longer an allegorical take.

• The op is incorrect because it limits the reading of prophecy to only one of only two options.

No. It asks for which is correct, where the author argues for a literal take in how prophecies are fulfilled. It is for discussion. It isn't the authors fault that you started attacking from the get go, instead of discussing.

• The op is incorrect because it fails to consider the possibility of both literal and allegorical reading occurring in various places in prophecy.

It is asking for other people's takes. If you show that a fulfilled prophecy has both a literal and allegorical reading in fulfillment, then you have a point of discussion on the OP. Just saying, well the OP is wrong, just because, without providing any evidence of the error, is not how to discuss the OP. I have already suggested presenting a prophecy and dissecting it, and showing how its fulfillment was allegorical. I joked by saying "Out of Egypt I called My Son" was God on vacation, and He called Jesus using His cell phone... "out of Egypt". That would be an allegorical fulfillment of this prophecy. I am not making fun of you with this, I am using a prophecy that allows me to exaggerate the response enough that you understand what is meant by allegorical.

• The op is incorrect because it does not consider the alternative of the New Testament authors' examples (they used both the literal and the allegorical)

So, why aren't you dealing with the OP and giving these examples?

• The op is incorrect because it confuses, conflates, and confounds "Literal" with "literalness."

Dead horse, meet stick. I already explained my position.

• The op is incorrect because the thread demonstrably proves frequent inconsistency.

How? The only inconsistency I see is in your responses. So, show where there is inconsistency in the thread? I'm not here to make you look bad, though you are trying your best to make me look bad. Have I complained up to now? No. I have been waiting for discussion.

• The op is wrong because it argues strawmen and other fallacies.

Can you present a valid, well presented argument as to what those strawmen are, and what those fallacies are? Perhaps a comment that starts with a 1. The strawman. An accurate paraphrase of the strawman (I'm not going to be nitpicky and say, give me the comment number or I won't believe you.) 2. The fallacy, and an accurate, truthful representation of the fallacy. You know. Discussion.

• The op is wrong because it fails to address with any consistency many matters broached in dissent.

You just saying I am wrong doesn't mean that I have not addressed concerns without consistency.

The better alternative is to treat prophecy the way the New Testament writers treated it. Where they read prophecy literally (not literalistically) then we should do so, too. Where they read prophecy allegorically then we should do so, too. That is what should be addressed in this op.

Should have kept the posts about the posts and not the posters. Enough patient, forbearance, and opportunity has availed itself for this conduct to change.

The attacks are unending. I will put this simply. From your first comment to now, I cringe when your name comes up because I know it will be another attack that doesn't deal with the OP. I just didn't say anything, because it doesn't affect me because it is expected.

I am waiting for you to actually approach the OP with thoughtfulness. You just wasted so many words, and in none of it did you actually address the OP.

The issue I have with the bold above is you are saying it would be better for me to accept your interpretation. That isn't how we argue. There is a whole other thread where this has been discussed. One can't just claim the apostles said something, when it is clear it is how that person is interpreting what they say. (This is the problem with allegorical interpretations. You are adding to what is written, and then claiming one doesn't have to justify it. Accept my interpretation or you are wrong.) Did I even once say that someone who takes an allegorical perspective is wrong, or did I question people who do so, and then present an example of prophecy and give a literal interpretation (including the acknowledgement of forms of speech in the prophecy), and put it in line with the context surrounding it? A decent response would have been to take the same prophecy, and show why the allegorical interpretation, which is not in keeping with the surrounding context, must be the correct one.

 

[Matt5]

God makes mistakes, right?

Thanks. I've learned my lesson: Don't interrupt people with an historical view.

 

[Josheb]

Then why ignore.

I have already answered that question. You do not just quote it; you change its meaning and do not practice what the op asserts. It's not the quoting of scripture that is the problem it is your mishandling of scripture and failure to consistently practice your own standards, and refusal to address a better, more scripturally based alternative that are the problems. Even now you start with a question that has already been answered. There is no integrity in that practice.

To be honest, due to how far from the posts you have been, I keep hoping not to see further replies. I'm tired of your attacks.

Then you know how it feels.

You need to deal with the OP.

I did. YOU are not dealing with what was posted in response to the op.

I already said how you could do that. Present a fulfilled prophecy, and show how the prophecy was not literally fulfilled, taking into account figurative language, simile, etc.

Yep. And were commended for doing so. It is not enough. It is hugely inadequate, and the inadequacy (or the inconsistency of your own renderings) is not being addressed.

It is asking for other people's takes.

Yep, and you got mine and almost instantly began trashing me personally...... and then claiming you were the one being attacked. It's hypocrisy. It's gaslighting. Stop it.

If you show that a fulfilled prophecy has both a literal and allegorical reading in fulfillment, then you have a point of discussion on the OP.

I did. Several times. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM IS SITTING IN THIS THREAD UNATTENDED while you claim to be attacked. Go find the post in which I mentioned Peter's sermon at Pentecost. Then get out your Bible and read BOTH the prophets he's quoting AND how he renders those prophets.

Just saying, well the OP is wrong, just because, without providing any evidence of the error

A plethora of evidence has been provided. That statement is false and misrepresentative. Have you bothered to read the posts, verify them with scripture, and give what was read fair consideration? If so, then that statement is unconscionable. If not, then you have no one to blame but yourself.

Go back and re-read the thread.

Address Peter's rendering of the prophet because it is a New Testament example of what we now call spiritual allegory during a time when a prophecy was actually ("literally") fulfilled but what the prophets wrote did not come true literally. If you can see the clear spiritualization of the prophet(s) then we can discuss the intersection of literal and allegory. Perhaps we can even discuss why it is the Jews (and so many Judaizing Christins in modernity) failed to grasp the true nature of the prophecy and read them literally when they were never intended to be read that way.

Maybe.

Keep the posts about the posts. You do that and we won't have any problem.

 

[Josheb]

No. It asks for which is correct, where the author argues for a literal take in how prophecies are fulfilled. It is for discussion. It isn't the authors fault that you started attacking from the get go, instead of discussing.

Correction is not an attack.

Nothing I posted was about finding fault with any poster. No matter whose "fault," the op is incorrect. Fault is irrelevant. Appeals to fault are red herrings. Red herrings are fallacious. There's a LOT of fallacy in what I've received. This red herring is just another one in a growing list of them. Correct the errors. Don't be concerned with fault. KEEP THE POSTS ABOUT THE POSTS AND NOT THE POSTERS! None of this is about you unless you make it about you.



Now go to the post where Peter (re-)interprets the prophets at Pentecost. What he says doesn't fit well with modern futurist eschatology but the main reason it's a good example for the discussion of this op is because Peter does NOT take the prophets literally. He is directed by the Holy Spirit to provide the true meaning of the prophecy, one that had been veiled and hidden, one that was not normal to a literal reading of the Old Testament.

 

[armylngst]

I have already answered that question. You do not just quote it; you change its meaning and do not practice what the op asserts. It's not the quoting of scripture that is the problem it is your mishandling of scripture and failure to consistently practice your own standards, and refusal to address a better, more scripturally based alternative that are the problems. Even now you start with a question that has already been answered. There is no integrity in that practice.

Then you know how it feels.

There it is. The heart shines through.

I did. YOU are not dealing with what was posted in response to the op.


Yep. And were commended for doing so. It is not enough. It is hugely inadequate, and the inadequacy (or the inconsistency of your own renderings) is not being addressed.

That it true. If you were to address it, then we can consider it. For example, why not deal with the example in the OP?

Yep, and you got mine and almost instantly began trashing me personally...... and then claiming you were the one being attacked. It's hypocrisy. It's gaslighting. Stop it.

I say the same to you, because I will say that your attacks began with your very first comment to me.

I did. Several times. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM IS SITTING IN THIS THREAD UNATTENDED while you claim to be attacked. Go find the post in which I mentioned Peter's sermon at Pentecost. Then get out your Bible and read BOTH the prophets he's quoting AND how he renders those prophets.

I'll consider it.

A plethora of evidence has been provided. That statement is false and misrepresentative. Have you bothered to read the posts, verify them with scripture, and give what was read fair consideration? If so, then that statement is unconscionable. If not, then you have no one to blame but yourself.

What Old Testament prophecy have you brought up (not someone else), and used your interpretation to show that the fulfillment was allegorical, and that the end fulfillment did not follow what the prophecy actually says?

Go back and re-read the thread.

Address Peter's rendering of the prophet because it is a New Testament example of what we now call spiritual allegory during a time when a prophecy was actually ("literally") fulfilled but what the prophets wrote did not come true literally. If you can see the clear spiritualization of the prophet(s) then we can discuss the intersection of literal and allegory. Perhaps we can even discuss why it is the Jews (and so many Judaizing Christins in modernity) failed to grasp the true nature of the prophecy and read them literally when they were never intended to be read that way.

I am asking for you to give an example and for you to interpret it allegorically (it can't be recognizable anymore) and show that that is how it was fulfilled. For instance, I said that with Satan, it is clear that it is the deceiving of nations to attack God's people. The allegorical interpretation is that it is Satan deceiving the nations into not believing the gospel message. You know, the opposite of Calvinism, because it isn't people's choice, it is Satan's actions upon which their salvation lies. If He is bound, then people can choose to follow God.

Maybe.

Keep the posts about the posts. You do that and we won't have any problem.

Stop reading everything as an attack on you. You realize that this is part of the reason why I haven't said anything. I don't seek to make everything personal. (There is a lesson in what I wrote there, not an attack. You don't know my intentions, so don't invent one.) (BTW, this woudln't be the first time I have read what Peter said in his sermon, and it has never bothered me.)

 

[armylngst]

Correction is not an attack.

Um... Correctomundo. So why do you see my corrections as attacks?

Nothing I posted was about finding fault with any poster. No matter whose "fault," the op is incorrect.

You have yet to meet that burden of proof. Your burden of proof is to show that allegorical interpretation is a necessity of messianic and second coming prophecies. To, again, explain my position. The who, when, where, why may be couched in a pattern of speech, but the outcome of the prophecy will literally, actually happen. One will be able to recognize the fulfillment of the prophecy, because the outcome, separate of any symbolism, will be clear. For instance:
"25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:
26 Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:
27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Allegorically, Jesus went to an Al Gore climate rally (hell), but God in His mercy did not allow Jesus to be corrupted by it. Literally, Jesus resurrected and did not remain dead (symbolically, "leave my soul in hell"), and it was quickly that the Holy One did not see corruption. (Notice how I didn't have to change any part of the propehcy? I only used what was there.)

28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance.

29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
***Why did Peter say this?

30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

*** David was literally prophesying what would happen with Jesus, and this is what Peter is telling the people. David, as a prophet, made it figurative of himself, but even Peter did not bring anything new to what David said. He didn't have to. The prophecy was clear.

33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

34 For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

35 Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."

Fault is irrelevant. Appeals to fault are red herrings. Red herrings are fallacious. There's a LOT of fallacy in what I've received. This red herring is just another one in a growing list of them. Correct the errors. Don't be concerned with fault. KEEP THE POSTS ABOUT THE POSTS AND NOT THE POSTERS! None of this is about you unless you make it about you.



Now go to the post where Peter (re-)interprets the prophets at Pentecost. What he says doesn't fit well with modern futurist eschatology but the main reason it's a good example for the discussion of this op is because Peter does NOT take the prophets literally. He is directed by the Holy Spirit to provide the true meaning of the prophecy, one that had been veiled and hidden, one that was not normal to a literal reading of the Old Testament.

17 And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

That happened. Peter saw a vision. Others saw visions. There is nothing not literal about this. Why else would there be a verse that says that these gifts will cease?

18 And on my servants and on my handmaidens I will pour out in those days of my Spirit; and they shall prophesy:

I think it is important to understand what it means to prophesy. It isn't about the future. Yes, there are prophecies that pertained to the future, but prophecy is about judgment, exposing sin, etc. Did you know that one of the definitions of preacher, the guy who preaches in the pulpit, is prophet? And preaching is prophesying. It is pointing out the sins in the midst of the congregation, and condemning it. The futurist part of prophecy is not all that prophecy is. When Jesus went to tarturus to "preach" to the spirits in prison there from the time of Noah, it was a proclamation of His victory over sin.

19 And I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath; blood, and fire, and vapour of smoke:

John saw this, didn't he? Revelation. And it will occur again in connection with Jesus second coming.

20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come:

This is going to happen again, as John saw it, and the recorded this future prophesy that is connected to Jesus return, the day of the Lord.

21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Well, this part may be allegorical. (A little humor, but the possibility of truth. Depends on how you interpret "call on the name of the Lord". Is it simply muttering some words, or is the heart involved?

 

[EarlyActs]

I would write down what is the actual mark unless directed by the Spirit to do otherwise.

What's more important is that when writing to my audience I would write with the knowledge the audience understood what I was writing. In a revelation in which events are "made known" I would not expect more obfuscation, more veiling, more hiding, more confusing, more obliqueness. People reading 2000 years later what God told me to write might not understand, but people reading what was written at the time of the writing would.

This is one of the first and foremost precepts in sound exegesis: Understand the text as the original writer and his original readers would have understood it.

You check any and all books of exegesis, any and all books on the proper interpretation of scripture and they will ALL agree: Understand the text as the original writer and his original readers would have understood it. It will not matter their eschatological position. Their hermeneutical differences are irrelevant. They ALL agree to that precept. Even modern futurists agree. I believe I already posted a list of links from various eschatological points of view to prove this. Your own Google search on "principles of biblical exegesis" will prove the same.

The problem is one of consistency. The problem is modern futurists do not apply this rule with very much consistency. Otherwise well-intentioned, earnest, and sincere Christians fail to apply the rule well. If they did then the "mark" would be read through the eyes of a first century Christian and NOT through the eyes of a 21st century one. Even modern futurists can abide by this rule to understand the mark might be a tattoo or a scar but NOT a computer chip. Computer implants would directly contradict the precept of original audience. That contradiction precludes the interpretation from being true.

A good text on original meaning is Barnett's BEHIND THE SCENES OF THE NT.

 

[EarlyActs]

Then why ignore.

Let us deal with the one you have not responded to, which would be a great place to start in trying to show that allegorical/spiritualized interpretations are valid. Satan being bound. I have been waiting for you to exegete it as well as I have. I didn't even leave the passage to show that there is support for a literal understanding (once again, it includes figures of speech, but the outcome does not change) on both sides of the passage.

1. What was Satan busy doing before he was seized, bound, thrown into the bottomless abyss, and sealed? He just finished pulling off the amazing deception of the whole world to attack Jersualem, through the beast, his image, and his mark. It is the most incredible, earth proliferating deception known to man. Everyone whose name is not written in the Lamb's book of life is there to attack Jerusalem. Everyone. And Jesus wipes them all out in His coming.

2. What does Satan do upon his release from being bound? He is out there deceiving the great nations of the world that exist at that time, into attacking the holy ones, God's people... at Jerusalem. Again. Jersualem attack, take 2. Satan's desperation, take 2. Satan has been trying to destroy Israel and the Jews since time memorium. Why? Salvation is from the Jews. They are God's chosen people, whom God has sworn to protect. If Satan destroys them, Satan wins the war.

3. So how should we interpret, just given the context, the idea that Satan is bound in a chain, thrown into a bottomless pit, and sealed so that he cannot deceive the nations for a time? Does not the context itself dictate that it must have something to do with the fact that Satan has been deceiving the nations of the world into attacking Israel/the Jews, from long before Jesus came on Earth, all the way to where we are now, with some Arabs still trying to destroy Israel, and Arab nations/peoples who have threatened to drive Israel into the sea? (A nice bit of imagery to say their desire is to wipe out Israel, which is God's chosen nation, the thorn in Satan's side.) Consider that the temple mount is not actually a holy place to the Muslims, but was invented so as to keep Israel from rebuilding their temple. To keep Israel's holiest site from Israel. Read the history. It is a real eye opener.

I believe you were the one, correct me if I am wrong, who said that the context dictates how a passage of prophecy is interpreted. (I'm pretty sure that wording does not properly convey all you were saying, so please correct.)

Can you give any scriptural support for the belief that this is speaking of preventing Satan from thwarting God's will? Can God's will be thwarted by Satan, that God would need to essentially "cheat" in order to see His will fulfilled? (I am not saying that this is what you said, but this interpretation seems to say that God and the gospel would get nowhere if Satan wasn't bound. Just who is the great power over all the universe? Is God fighting a war of attrition? Is God on the ropes? Can God be on the ropes?


You're welcome. Realize it is time I will never get back, and I have no issue using this precious commodity to have a conversation with you. Why do you see this as an attack on you? All I ask is that you present your argument that prophecy needs to be interpreted in an allegorical/spiritualized way, regardless of the context within which the prophecy is found. I gave an example above, but you can use whatever prophecy you want. [Not the angel in the sun, because that is not a prophecy. What that angel says, on the other hand, that is. A true declaration of God.]

I will give one example which might be an interesting one to discuss. The two witnesses.

The original meaning is still the 1st cent. setting; cp. Barnett BEHIND THE SCENES OF THE NT chapter on Patmos.

re the Jews; remember, the book itself has its own complaint to distance itself from your 'Satan trying to destroy the Jews'. You are trying hard to work out a 2- program scheme, and it will clunk, I promise you.

The word prophecy usually meant to speak with ethical force and threat. The prognostication has been detached from this to make it sound like Nostradamus.

 

[EarlyActs]

Jesus did refer to Satan being cast out; not a good sign for the guy. At the crucifixion lead-up. Actually if Satan had power, the church would never have survived its opposition.

 

[armylngst]

The original meaning is still the 1st cent. setting; cp. Barnett BEHIND THE SCENES OF THE NT chapter on Patmos.

re the Jews; remember, the book itself has its own complaint to distance itself from your 'Satan trying to destroy the Jews'. You are trying hard to work out a 2- program scheme, and it will clunk, I promise you.

The word prophecy usually meant to speak with ethical force and threat. The prognostication has been detached from this to make it sound like Nostradamus.

Paul speaks of the two pronged plan in Romans 11. The Jews rejected the Messiah. The times of the Gentiles are due to God dealing with the Gentiles and the Gentiles accepting. According to Paul, it is going to go full circle when, due to the mercy God had on the Gentiles, the Jews too will be saved.

 

[armylngst]

Actually if Satan had power, the church would never have survived its opposition.

That is because Satan has made it a practice to constantly thwart God's will. A little more power and he would destroy God when he was done with the church. Satan is no joke. God needs to be car.... Okay, enough of that. Satan exists at the behest of God. Satan cannot do anything unless God allows him. God has spoken when he said that not even the gates of hell can prevail against his church. Why? God is the defender. The idea that you think that with a little power, Satan could overcome God Himself. That's a real stretch.

 

[TATII]

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.

I am interested Eleanor

 

[Eleanor]

I am interested Eleanor.

The Book of Completions (7's) -- THE SUM OF PROPHECY -- for the Church age

the figurative Completion of God's four-part plan: God's decrees, proclamations, revelations, judgments,
in four completions: of Christ's satisfaction, of God's mercy, of God's wrath and judgment, and of God's inheritance in the saints.

I. Plan begins in eternity. . .(Eph 1:4, Rev 17:8, Ac 15:18--KJV)
Completion of Christ's Satisfaction
---a) Chp 1-3 = shepherding from beyond time of 7 churches by the Good Shepherd

II. Plan continues in time. . .
Completion of God's Mercy (Church age)
---b) Chp 4-7 = completion of trial, persecution of church under 7 seals (decrees)
---c) Chp 8-11 = completion of protection, victory of church under 7 trumpets (proclamations)
---d) Chp 12-14 = completion of conflict of two spiritual kingdoms under 7 signs (revelations)

Completion of God's Wrath (end of Church age)
---e) Chp 15-16 = judgment of Satan's kingdom under 7 plagues and bowls poured out (judgments)
---f) Chp 17-19 = destruction of Satan's kingdom
---g) Chp 20 = summary of Church age

III. Plan ends in eternity. . .
Completion of God's Inheritance in the Saints (Ps 33:12, 28:9, 74:2; Eph 1:18):
---h) Chp 21-22 = exaltation of Church (OT and NT saints) in heavenly city of glory

 

[Eleanor]

Clean-up of post #94.

I am interested Eleanor.

See post #5 for Introduction to following Structure of Revelation:

The Book of Completions (7's) -- THE SUM OF PROPHECY -- for the Church age

the figurative Completion (Rev 10:7, 16:17, 21:6) of God's four-part plan: God's decrees, proclamations, revelations, judgments,
in four completions: of Christ's satisfaction, of God's mercy, of God's wrath and judgment, and of God's inheritance in the saints.

I. Plan begins in eternity. . .(Eph 1:4, Rev 17:8, Ac 15:18--KJV)
Completion of Christ's Satisfaction
---a) Chp 1-3 = shepherding from beyond time of 7 churches by the Good Shepherd (2 Tim 2:3, Eph 6:11, 2 Tim 6:12)

II. Plan continues in time. . .
Completion of God's Mercy (Church age) for the Seed of the Woman (Ge 3:15)
---b) Chp 4-7 = completion of trial, persecution of church under 7 seals (secret decrees)
---c) Chp 8-11 = completion of protection, victory of church under 7 trumpets (proclamations)
---d) Chp 12-14 = completion of conflict of two spiritual kingdoms under 7 signs (revelations)

Completion of God's Wrath (end of Church age) for the Seed of the Serpent (Ge 3:15)
---e) Chp 15-16 = judgment of Satan's kingdom under 7 plagues and bowls poured out (judgments)
---f) Chp 17-19 = destruction of Satan's kingdom
---g) Chp 20 = final judgment and end of time

III. Plan ends in eternity. . .
Completion of God's Inheritance in the Saints (Ps 33:12, 28:9, 74:2; Eph 1:18):
---h) Chp 21-22 = exaltation of Church (OT and NT saints) in heavenly city of glory

 

[TATII]

Clean-up of post #94.


See post #5 for Introduction to following Structure of Revelation:

The Book of Completions (7's) -- THE SUM OF PROPHECY -- for the Church age

the figurative Completion (Rev 10:7, 16:17, 21:6) of God's four-part plan: God's decrees, proclamations, revelations, judgments,
in four completions: of Christ's satisfaction, of God's mercy, of God's wrath and judgment, and of God's inheritance in the saints.

I. Plan begins in eternity. . .(Eph 1:4, Rev 17:8, Ac 15:18--KJV)
Completion of Christ's Satisfaction
---a) Chp 1-3 = shepherding from beyond time of 7 churches by the Good Shepherd (2 Tim 2:3, Eph 6:11, 2 Tim 6:12)

II. Plan continues in time. . .
Completion of God's Mercy (Church age) for the Seed of the Woman (Ge 3:15)
---b) Chp 4-7 = completion of trial, persecution of church under 7 seals (secret decrees)
---c) Chp 8-11 = completion of protection, victory of church under 7 trumpets (proclamations)
---d) Chp 12-14 = completion of conflict of two spiritual kingdoms under 7 signs (revelations)

Completion of God's Wrath (end of Church age) for the Seed of the Serpent (Ge 3:15)
---e) Chp 15-16 = judgment of Satan's kingdom under 7 plagues and bowls poured out (judgments)
---f) Chp 17-19 = destruction of Satan's kingdom
---g) Chp 20 = final judgment and end of time

III. Plan ends in eternity. . .
Completion of God's Inheritance in the Saints (Ps 33:12, 28:9, 74:2; Eph 1:18):
---h) Chp 21-22 = exaltation of Church (OT and NT saints) in heavenly city of glory

So do you have a "body of work" that you have :fleshed" out this outline with?

 

[Rev. Man Ron]

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.

You are mostly correct, only things God wishes to keep bound up until the very end are given unto us in a fashion or riddle which men can not understand until God wishes to reveal it, and men can only see certain things by being so advanced in time the riddle becomes clear, like getting to a certain point in a 10,000 piece puzzle.

Should we believe 100 percent in the flood? Yes, Satan tainted the DNA of mankind and a New Beginning (8) had to be brought forth, Demons who crossed this line of demarcation had to be bound. Should we believe 100 percent that there was a Tower of Babel? No, because a building to the heavens did not worry God in the least. What did confusing the languages bring? Separation of the masses ability to communicate. The Tower was KNOWLEDGE, in these end times knowledge has increased so much evil can now flourish greatly, the computer helped men overcome the barriers the commo man had worldwide, basically it made us one again.

Anther example is 666, the number 6 represents mankind anytime God TIMES a Number He is emphasizing something, like the 7000 men He saved (7 x 10 x 10 x 10 = Divine Completion x Completion or All Israel who repents). The 144,000 is 12 x 12 x 10 x 10 x 10 or Fulness x Completion or All Israel who repents. At the very end we know the number God has kept secret from Satan and mankind, we know that 1/3 repent, so that is like 5 million Jews. So, 7000 is correct (a Code) the 144,000 is correct (a Code) and the 1/3 or 5 million is also correct, a proper ratio, and only those of us living in the end times could know that real number !!

Likewise 666 simple refers to a man, who as "A NAME" and why is this important info? Well, all of the other Beasts were Beast Kingdoms, only the last beast never passes his kingdom on, the he is THE BEAST himself. This is why in Rev. 17 we get the riddle of the Mountains (Powers) that arise (not 7 hills but 7 Powers) as in Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome AND one who will come soon the Anti-Christ power. We also get 7 Kings who fall, 5 had already fallen, Rome WAS (but of course eventually fell) and the last beast (A.C.) will of course fall, he has only a short 42 month reign as the Beast. So, what is the riddle? Why did God give it to us? Well, which is the ONLY Beast that both ARISES (Mountain Power) and FALLS ? The Anti-Christ, thus he is the Beast that is cast into hell in both Daniel 7:11 and Rev. 19:20. What God is doing in Rev. 17 AND with the number 666 is telling us the last Beast over Israel will be ONE MAN, not a kingdom. 666 simply represents man, the times (x) simply emphasizes this.

The 1335, 1290 and 1260 are the key unto all end time understandings, literally no one understands it, everyone guesses with different guesses. Doing my Dan. 11 & 12 exegesis (had work and prayer) God showed me that these numbers are EVENTS. We all know the 1260 is the Anti-Christ don't we? But we can't seem to grasp the other two. The key is the question Gabriel/Michael asks the Man in Linen (pre incarnate Jesus) in vs 6, he said "WHAT WILL BE THE END OF THESE WONDERS?" And Jesus pre incarnate answered, basically this, after 1260 days of being conquered or scattered by this entity seen in Dan. 11:36-45, ALL OF THESE WONDERS WILL END !! But how? Well, now we know what Daniel could not see or understand, Jesus' 2nd Coming will end the Beasts rule.

But, when Daniel asks the exact same question in verse 8 "WHAT WILL BE TE END OF THESE THINGS?" we see all kind of guesses (LOL) and some are way out there, I guess the most popular guess is it means God extends a time period into the New Millennium for 45 days and 75 days, which not only makes no sense, but it changes the Symmetry of Daniel 12 all-together, Daniel asked the exact same question thus the answer we get should be in the exact same symmetrical mode should it not? The 1335 should come 1335 days before "all of these wonders end" or as Daniel stated before "all of these things end".

So, now that we know the 1335 comes first, the 1290 next and the 1260 30 days after the 1290 we can put it all together via study and prayer. The 1335 is the Blessing, or Two-witnesses showing up BEFORE the DOTL (1260) to turn Israel back unto God. That is why they know to flee Judea at the 1290, which is not the Anti-Christ who only conquers Israel 30 days later at the 1260, which makes sense right? Why would an all knowing perfect God give Israel a sign to flee Judea AFTER they have been conquered, sound like a Biden mover (LOL). So, the 1290 is the 2nd Beast, a Jewish High Priest who forbids Jesus worship in the temple I can hear it now, Jesus worship? The Jews don't worship Jess en masse.

Well, they do after the Two-witnesses show up, at least 5 million or 1/3 do. See how it all fits? The thing is via my Dan. 11 & 12 exegesis I saw the False Prophet archetype, a man named Jason (real name Yeshua) who was pro Hellenization of the Jews, he bribed Antiochus to become the High Priest, having his Pious High Priest brother Onias III killed, he then welcomed Antiochus into the temple to sacrifice a pig unto Zeus (the AoD forerunner) and he mandated all the Jews become Hellenized, leading unto the Maccabean Revolt. So, this end time False Prophet will forbid Jesus worship in the temple (takes away the [REAL] sacrifice) and places the Image of the Beast up in the temple, as Rev. 13 says he does, it says the 2nd beast gets men to make an image of the 1st Beast !!

Only when we get the order of the 1335, 1290 and 1260 correctly do we have a shot at seeing what they are.

On my spelling guys, I do three or four things at one, in speedo mode, then I usually go back and edit, but with the 15 minute limit here you guys will have to just read it as is. Sorry, I just type (or try to) way too fast.

 

[Eleanor]

[/QUOTE]

So do you have a "body of work" that you have :fleshed" out this outline with?

Well, there is William Hendrikson's "More Than Conquerors."
It's a form of interpretation of prophecy.

Do you know how to Google it? Progressive Parallelism

 

[armylngst]

You are mostly correct, only things God wishes to keep bound up until the very end are given unto us in a fashion or riddle which men can not understand until God wishes to reveal it, and men can only see certain things by being so advanced in time the riddle becomes clear, like getting to a certain point in a 10,000 piece puzzle.

With Daniel, God was specific. Keep it bound, don't tell anyone. You aren't really speaking in riddles when you interpret everything. (Those seventy weeks.. they aren't actually weeks. Each weeks stands for 7 years... If God wanted it to be a mystery, why did He explain everything to Daniel and tell Daniel to tell us?)

Should we believe 100 percent in the flood? Yes, Satan tainted the DNA of mankind and a New Beginning (8) had to be brought forth, Demons who crossed this line of demarcation had to be bound. Should we believe 100 percent that there was a Tower of Babel? No, because a building to the heavens did not worry God in the least. What did confusing the languages bring? Separation of the masses ability to communicate. The Tower was KNOWLEDGE, in these end times knowledge has increased so much evil can now flourish greatly, the computer helped men overcome the barriers the commo man had worldwide, basically it made us one again.

Should we believe in the flood? Yes. Should we believe in the tower of Babel? Yes. What was God speaking to with the tower of Babel? The capability of man to stand against God united. Not that man would win. He was basically saying, imagine what man could do if they are united and of one mind. It is also the only biblical understanding of where languages come from that stands against evolution. God confused the mind and the languages. Why? Languages are a result of a mindset. There is a reason why western logic and eastern logic don't line up. The thought process is different. And that different thought process is borne out through the language. Besides, some archaeologists believe they found evidence for the existence of the tower. Strange how God keeps dropping hints. And, actually, computers through social networking has DIVIDED us more than ever, more by ideology than language.

Anther example is 666, the number 6 represents mankind anytime God TIMES a Number He is emphasizing something, like the 7000 men He saved (7 x 10 x 10 x 10 = Divine Completion x Completion or All Israel who repents). The 144,000 is 12 x 12 x 10 x 10 x 10 or Fulness x Completion or All Israel who repents. At the very end we know the number God has kept secret from Satan and mankind, we know that 1/3 repent, so that is like 5 million Jews. So, 7000 is correct (a Code) the 144,000 is correct (a Code) and the 1/3 or 5 million is also correct, a proper ratio, and only those of us living in the end times could know that real number !!

Irenaeus says it speaks to Nebuchadnezzar's statue in Daniel. Each number deals with a different measure. It isn't 666, it is 600, 60, and 6.

Likewise 666 simple refers to a man, who as "A NAME" and why is this important info? Well, all of the other Beasts were Beast Kingdoms, only the last beast never passes his kingdom on, the he is THE BEAST himself. This is why in Rev. 17 we get the riddle of the Mountains (Powers) that arise (not 7 hills but 7 Powers) as in Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome AND one who will come soon the Anti-Christ power. We also get 7 Kings who fall, 5 had already fallen, Rome WAS (but of course eventually fell) and the last beast (A.C.) will of course fall, he has only a short 42 month reign as the Beast. So, what is the riddle? Why did God give it to us? Well, which is the ONLY Beast that both ARISES (Mountain Power) and FALLS ? The Anti-Christ, thus he is the Beast that is cast into hell in both Daniel 7:11 and Rev. 19:20. What God is doing in Rev. 17 AND with the number 666 is telling us the last Beast over Israel will be ONE MAN, not a kingdom. 666 simply represents man, the times (x) simply emphasizes this.

I don't think God gave us Relevation to assume so much. An interesting point is that preterists state that it is Nero Caesar who is the beast because his name is 666. Irenaeus puts a huge spike through that idea when he clearly states that the name is calculated using Greek, not any other language. With Nero Caesar they used Hebrew and Aramaic. Irenaeus was the student of John's disciple Polycarp and heard John speak, so he may know a lot of things we don't have a clue about. Also, he was a premillennialist. (Like Polycarp and Papias, who was Polycarp's other student.)

The 1335, 1290 and 1260 are the key unto all end time understandings, literally no one understands it, everyone guesses with different guesses. Doing my Dan. 11 & 12 exegesis (had work and prayer) God showed me that these numbers are EVENTS. We all know the 1260 is the Anti-Christ don't we? But we can't seem to grasp the other two. The key is the question Gabriel/Michael asks the Man in Linen (pre incarnate Jesus) in vs 6, he said "WHAT WILL BE THE END OF THESE WONDERS?" And Jesus pre incarnate answered, basically this, after 1260 days of being conquered or scattered by this entity seen in Dan. 11:36-45, ALL OF THESE WONDERS WILL END !! But how? Well, now we know what Daniel could not see or understand, Jesus' 2nd Coming will end the Beasts rule.

That is true. Jesus returns to destroy the armies of the beast and his kingdom that have come to destroy Jerusalem, the symbol of God's ultimate covenant with mankind, the promise to destroy Satan through the seed of Eve. If Satan could destroy Jerusalem as the symbol of the Nation of Israel, God fails.

But, when Daniel asks the exact same question in verse 8 "WHAT WILL BE TE END OF THESE THINGS?" we see all kind of guesses (LOL) and some are way out there, I guess the most popular guess is it means God extends a time period into the New Millennium for 45 days and 75 days, which not only makes no sense, but it changes the Symmetry of Daniel 12 all-together, Daniel asked the exact same question thus the answer we get should be in the exact same symmetrical mode should it not? The 1335 should come 1335 days before "all of these wonders end" or as Daniel stated before "all of these things end".

So, now that we know the 1335 comes first, the 1290 next and the 1260 30 days after the 1290 we can put it all together via study and prayer. The 1335 is the Blessing, or Two-witnesses showing up BEFORE the DOTL (1260) to turn Israel back unto God. That is why they know to flee Judea at the 1290, which is not the Anti-Christ who only conquers Israel 30 days later at the 1260, which makes sense right? Why would an all knowing perfect God give Israel a sign to flee Judea AFTER they have been conquered, sound like a Biden mover (LOL). So, the 1290 is the 2nd Beast, a Jewish High Priest who forbids Jesus worship in the temple I can hear it now, Jesus worship? The Jews don't worship Jess en masse.

Well, they do after the Two-witnesses show up, at least 5 million or 1/3 do. See how it all fits? The thing is via my Dan. 11 & 12 exegesis I saw the False Prophet archetype, a man named Jason (real name Yeshua) who was pro Hellenization of the Jews, he bribed Antiochus to become the High Priest, having his Pious High Priest brother Onias III killed, he then welcomed Antiochus into the temple to sacrifice a pig unto Zeus (the AoD forerunner) and he mandated all the Jews become Hellenized, leading unto the Maccabean Revolt. So, this end time False Prophet will forbid Jesus worship in the temple (takes away the [REAL] sacrifice) and places the Image of the Beast up in the temple, as Rev. 13 says he does, it says the 2nd beast gets men to make an image of the 1st Beast !!

Only when we get the order of the 1335, 1290 and 1260 correctly do we have a shot at seeing what they are.

On my spelling guys, I do three or four things at one, in speedo mode, then I usually go back and edit, but with the 15 minute limit here you guys will have to just read it as is. Sorry, I just type (or try to) way too fast.

The Jews worship Jesus at the end of Zechariah 12. This is after Jerusalem is saved at the end. Don't get lost in the weeds. Watch and pray. Consider that technology is catching up to a literal fulfillment of Revelation. Should we ignore the possibility of literal fulfillment, so that the church (not God) be magnified? That the church saves God's creation, not God?

 

[TATII]

With Daniel, God was specific. Keep it bound, don't tell anyone. You aren't really speaking in riddles when you interpret everything. (Those seventy weeks.. they aren't actually weeks. Each weeks stands for 7 years... If God wanted it to be a mystery, why did He explain everything to Daniel and tell Daniel to tell us?)

"Although I heard, I did not understand. Then I said, "My lord, what shall be the end of these things?" And he said, "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end." (Dan 12:8-9 NKJV)

Daniel did not understand...so he asked...he was told its not for you at this time Daniel. Was he aware of who this man clothed in linen was? Are you armylngst aware of who spoke those things that were considered "the fulfillment of these wonders?