What will we take to heaven....?

[QVQ]

Do you believe the Bible should be read literally unless the text is obviously symbolic?

I read the Bible with the greatest respect, realizing the limitations of my own understanding.
I do pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance
It is Literal.
Any literal intepretation I arrive at must be considered in context and consistent with the entire scripture.

Also, it must have a corresponding realtiy. A literal truth, Genesis 2: 16-19 is the reality of everyday life.

Yes I read the Bible as literal. There isn't any "unless."

 

[Josheb]

Thank you for that answer.

Do you believe the Bible should be read literally unless the text is obviously symbolic?

Yes I read the Bible as literal. There isn't any "unless."

That is not exactly an answer to the question asked, but I'll work with it.

Does the literal reading of scripture mean you read scripture as written with the normal meaning of the words in ordinary usage?

 

[QVQ]

Does the literal reading of scripture mean you read scripture as written with the normal meaning of the words in ordinary usage?

I prefer the King James Version. I am not certain that is ordinary usage.
Other than that I am unsure what you are asking.
Please clarify

 

[Josheb]

I prefer the King James Version.

You understand the KJV has many problems, yes?

Take a look at Matthew 13:49, for example. The KJV states, "So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just..." but the Greek world used is "aionos," which means age (G165), not world. In other words, the KJV did not translate Matthew 13:49 literally. The Greek word for "world" is kosmos (G2889). Only those translations that follow the Catholic and/or KJV tradition translate aionos that way.

Read the passage as a whole. Was Jesus talking about the end of the age, or the (literal) end of the (literal) world?

I am not certain that is ordinary usage.
Other than that I am unsure what you are asking.
Please clarify

I am simply asking what the word "literal" means to you. The normal meaning of the word "literal" in its ordinary usage as it applies to the Bible is as I defined it. Is that an amenable definition to you. Is that what you mean when you say you read the Bible to be literal, and the Bible should be read literally. Are we supposed to take the words exactly as written with their normal meaning as used in ordinary speech, or not? If we're not supposed to read the words with their normal mean, the meaning they normally have in everyday usage then what does the word "literal" mean? Surely you understand we cannot have a discussion about reading scripture literally if we're using the same word with two different meanings!

When you read the Bible literally, are you read it with the normal meaning of the words?

 

[QVQ]

Take a look at Matthew 13:49, for example. The KJV states, "So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just..." but the Greek world used is "aionos," which means age (G165), not world.

Matthew 14:39
The etymology of the word "World" is "Woruld or Weorold" meaning literally "Age of Man."

So "end of the world (age of man) and end of the age are literally identical in English.
So I could read either and literally conclude the end of the world is the end of the age (of man)
World is probably more better because it encapsulates both the age and age of man, world, having both meanings.

Literal, yes, exactly as written within the normal meaning of the word, in the ordinary usage of the KJV.

 

[Josheb]

Matthew 14:39
The etymology of the word "World" is "Woruld or Weorold" meaning literally "Age of Man."

So "end of the world (age of man) and end of the age are literally identical in English.
So I could read either and literally conclude the end of the world is the end of the age (of man)
World is probably more better because it encapsulates both the age and age of man, world, having both meanings.

Literal, yes, exactly as written within the normal meaning of the word, in the ordinary usage of the KJV.

No, that is not what it literally means. You've just violated your own standard.

 

[QVQ]

I Knew you were going to say that!
In the "normal meaning" of World is that we are always In the World, not On it.
I am in the world and I certainly not broadcasting from the center of the planet.
And it is a state of being, "off in his own world" "welcome to my world"
This is "normal" for me to know all the permutations and conjugations.

Age of Man, if we correctly understand the English in context, then that adds to the verse, an extra layer of meaning.

If the verse is World" as Earth then it ends with a big bang. The earth is destroyed Boom
If the verse is "Age" then it is a fading away, a fond farewell to past glory while we march through the heavenly gates
If the verse is Age of Man, then it ends with a whimper.
It is somehow more personal
That hurts, Ouch
A time of great tribulation...

 

[QVQ]

No, that is not what it literally means. You've just violated your own standard.

I answered this above but we are not allowed to add or delete from post within 10 minutes so I continue here

Here is my standard:
Literal means "denotation," the specific objective meaning of the word.

For Instance
World means age of man (collective), it also means the span of man (singular), as "born into this world" and "leaving this world."
"Leaving this world" is not a literary device, a figure of speech. The age of the man has begun or ended if he is being born into or passing out of this world, literally.

So according do my lights, I have not violated my standards,

However, although English is not fascinating to all, I do welcome your explanation of why you state so firmly that I violated my own standard.

 

[Josheb]

I answered this above but we are not allowed to add or delete from post within 10 minutes so I continue here

Here is my standard:
Literal means "denotation," the specific objective meaning of the word.

For Instance
World means age of man (collective), it also means the span of man (singular), as "born into this world" and "leaving this world."
"Leaving this world" is not a literary device, a figure of speech. The age of the man has begun or ended if he is being born into or passing out of this world, literally.

So according do my lights, I have not violated my standards,

However, although English is not fascinating to all, I do welcome your explanation of why you state so firmly that I violated my own standard.

Still wrong. The word "aionos" never means world. It means age. The KJV got it wrong.


BUT..... I will give you credit for the part about denotative meaning. Let's look at an example or two. Revelation 1:3 states, "Blessed is the one reading, and those hearing the words of the prophecy, and keeping the things having been written in it; for the time is near." I've used the Greek transliteration so we do not divide over any English translation. The verse explicitly states the time is near and the word "near" denotatively means close in time or geographic proximity. The word "near" normally means near, near in time, or near in geographic space. Furthermore, there isn't a single example in the entire New Testament where the word "Near" is used to mean anything other than near in either time or space.

Is that how you read the word?

 

[QVQ]

Still wrong. The word "aionos" never means world. It means age. The KJV got it wrong.

The meaning of aionos is lost if it is translated into English "Age."
There is the Golden Age that one group of Robber Barons faded away. And the New Age, all hail the new Robber Barons
There is the Age of Dinosaurs and the New Age of Man. Great for man but kinda tough for the dino's.
So Age in English lacks that element that World, Age of Man adds. I suppose as meaning of "world" gradually shifts to mean primarily "earth" the full meaning of world will be replaced by a word like"reality"

Now I will repost this
IF it is the Earth, as world, then it is the end, destruction of the physical planet Earth
If it is Age then it is merely the end of the Old Age and in with the New Age
If it is World, then it is the End of the Age of Man...a great tribulation

Earth and world are not synonyms (And God so loved the Earth? Clunk, I mean where in the world is the world?)

Now here is where I am corrected by my very literal self. And glad to be so literal and careful to be so.
I much prefer the world end with bang.
Until you drew my attention to the words "world and age" I would just blow off Age as basically meaningless and made the error of defining World as earth.
Thank you for drawing my attention to it because it means that the Age of Man will end.
Don't get to go New Aging with and as the same old robber barons.
It won't be a most interesting and entertaining (for the last split second) bang,
It will be a time of great tribulation. And great loss because there are still a few sins around that we do so love and also some sinners.

And World is correct, as per the KJV

"Blessed is the one reading, and those hearing the words of the prophecy, and keeping the things having been written in it; for the time is near."

Near is literally a point to point measure. Summer is near is a different span than the steak is near done.

So where are the points? There must be two, at least approximately defined by that "near."
There is one defined point, the time of the verse so where is the other end?

As "summer is near" is not the "near done" 2 minutes left on the steak timer....
That second point...
That is not defined so therefore, "near" is whatever the interval is or will be. God knows..literally

 

[Josheb]

The meaning of aionos is lost if it is translated into English "Age."
There is the Golden Age that one group of Robber Barons faded away. And the New Age, all hail the new Robber Barons
There is the Age of Dinosaurs and the New Age of Man. Great for man but kinda tough for the dino's.
So Age in English lacks that element that World, Age of Man adds. I suppose as meaning of "world" gradually shifts to mean primarily "earth" the full meaning of world will be replaced by a word like"reality"

Now I will repost this
IF it is the Earth, as world, then it is the end, destruction of the physical planet Earth
If it is Age then it is merely the end of the Old Age and in with the New Age
If it is World, then it is the End of the Age of Man...a great tribulation

Earth and world are not synonyms (And God so loved the Earth? Clunk, I mean where in the world is the world?)

Now here is where I am corrected by my very literal self. And glad to be so literal and careful to be so.
I much prefer the world end with bang.
Until you drew my attention to the words "world and age" I would just blow off Age as basically meaningless and made the error of defining World as earth.
Thank you for drawing my attention to it because it means that the Age of Man will end.
Don't get to go New Aging with and as the same old robber barons.
It won't be a most interesting and entertaining (for the last split second) bang,
It will be a time of great tribulation. And great loss because there are still a few sins around that we do so love and also some sinners.

And World is correct, as per the KJV

You're proving my point: You do not actually read scripture literally. You do not practice your own metrics. When this is pointed out a pile of excuses ensue.

Near is literally a point to point measure. Summer is near is a different span than the steak is near done.

So where are the points? There must be two, at least approximately defined by that "near."
There is one defined point, the time of the verse so where is the other end?

As "summer is near" is not the "near done" 2 minutes left on the steak timer....
That second point...
That is not defined so therefore, "near" is whatever the interval is or will be. God knows..literally

Yes and in none of the cases you've just asserted does the word "near" ever mean "thousands of years from now." The word "near" means near, whether it be measured by days, weeks, or months or measured by a timer counting off a few minutes. Summer never takes thousands of years to come. It comes every year. A steak does not take thousands of years to cook. Three minutes on each side and its done.


And you did not answer the question asked. When you read Revelation 1:3's use of the word "near," do you read that word literally? Do you read that word with its denotative meaning or not (because the word "near" means near; it never means far away)?

Just answer the question asked. I've got a few more to ask you but I will ask them one at a time because I do not want the conversation to get complicated by multiple inquiries all at once.


Do you read Rev. 1:3's "near" to mean near?

 

[QVQ]

Yes and in none of the cases you've just asserted does the word "near" ever mean "thousands of years from now." The word "near" means near, whether it be measured by days, weeks, or months or measured by a timer counting off a few minutes. Summer never takes thousands of years to come. It comes every year. A steak does not take thousands of years to cook. Three minutes on each side and its done.

"Near" must have 2 points. With "Summer" there is a point where it starts and stops . With the steak, there is a start and stop time.
The near of summer and the near of steak is determined by those two points
Please tell us the End Time and then we can discover what God means by "near" in that particular case.

2 Peter 3:8-9 ”But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

You're proving my point: You do not actually read scripture literally. You do not practice your own metrics.

So, dear friends, you have made statements that I am doing something, but you failed to explain exactly what I did and how I did it.
If you mean that I read the verse as "world" is earth as the ordinary meaning and subsequently researched the word, realizing it meant more than earth, then you are right but literal doesn't preclude researching nor does it mean that my understanding is unlimited. You were an agent of expanding my understanding as I hadn't considered that particular "world" before.


Meanwhile, next question....

 

[Josheb]

"Near" must have 2 points. With "Summer" there is a point where it starts and stops .

Yes, and the two points of Rev. 1:3 are the point when John wrote the verse the point when the events subsequently described occurred...... which according to John was going to be near, not far.

Please tell us the End Time and then we can discover what God means by "near" in that particular case.

I am not the arbiter of scripture. That's sort of the point of this conversation. Scripture, not Josh or QVC, dictates the meaning of "near," and you've gone on record stating a literal reading of God's word uses the denotative meaning of words unless they are symbolic.

I am simply and solely asking you if that is what you do with the word "near" in Revelation 1:3 and, so far, you've refused to answer what should be a very easy question to answer. Just answer the question asked. Do you read Rev. 1:3's "near" with its denotative meaning or not?

2 Peter 3:8-9 ”But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

That verse does not use the word near. That is, however, a verse that tells us a "day" may not be a literal 24 hours and a thousand years may not be a literal 360,000 days. You've just, once again, undermined your own argument.

So, dear friends, you have made statements that I am doing something, but you failed to explain exactly what I did and how I did it.

The posts prove otherwise, and the question asked still has yet to be answered.



Do you read Rev.1:3's use of the word "near" to mean near in time or space? Do you read that "near" with its denotative meaning? It's a simple yes or no question that does not require a lot of explanation. Do you read that "near" to mean near? Yes or no?

 

[QVQ]

and you've gone on record stating a literal reading of God's word uses the denotative meaning of words unless they are symbolic.

1) Words are symbols. All words are symbolic Therefore the meaning of words can't be "unless symbolic" We would have to toss the entire book.
2) Word Symbol Elephant, description, habitat, (all word symbols in a book)
3) To discover the literal truth Elephant is a journey, across time and space with careful study of any resource available
4) Any information obtained on the journey would be subject to instruction and correction

IIf I were serious and kept searching for elephant, in the end, if elephant were literal truth, I would come face to face with the literal elephant.

Ask and ye shall receive, that is the first step of that journey.
The question is: Is the Bible the literal truth?
Do the symbols in the Book have a corresponding reality?

The meaning of the symbol "near" is not revealed. It is an elephant not yet face to face.
That point is still far to us, but near to God, perhaps.

 

[Josheb]

1) Words are symbols. All words are symbolic Therefore the meaning of words can't be "unless symbolic" We would have to toss the entire book.
2) Word Symbol Elephant, description, habitat, (all word symbols in a book)
3) To discover the literal truth Elephant is a journey, across time and space with careful study of any resource available
4) Any information obtained on the journey would be subject to instruction and correction

IIf I were serious and kept searching for elephant, in the end, if elephant were literal truth, I would come face to face with the literal elephant.

Ask and ye shall receive, that is the first step of that journey.
The question is: Is the Bible the literal truth?
Do the symbols in the Book have a corresponding reality?

The meaning of the symbol "near" is not revealed. It is an elephant not yet face to face.
That point is still far to us, but near to God, perhaps.

Still not answering the question.


Do you read Revelation 1:3's use of the word "near" to mean near? Do you read that "near" with its denotative meaning? Do you read that "near" to mean close in either time or space? Do you read that "near" literally?

 

[QVQ]

o you read Revelation 1:3's use of the word "near" to mean near? Do you read that "near" with its denotative meaning? Do you read that "near" to mean close in either time or space? Do you read that "near" literally?

Exactly what is the your point?
"Near" as in "near" as Alpha Centauri to Sun or "near" as your next heartbeat?
If you are asking, is "near" literally an absolute measure, with set perameters? ("Near" Denotation Literal Definition time equalling 10 seconds or less)
"Near" is a relative term, literally. It means the proximity in time and/or space of two points.
It could be any amount of the time and space depending on the relative position of the two objects and the postion of the observer.

If you are asking if "near" in Revelation 3 means literally "near" then yes, but "near" could be any time from here to there and anything in between and still be the absolute literal truth, denotation, definition and corresponding reality.

 

[Josheb]

If you are asking if "near" in Revelation 3 means literally "near" then yes,

Thank you for that answer. In the future, as I ask other questions, please just answer the question and don't waste time and effort with multiple posts that do not answer the question. You won't like it if I spend multiple posts not answering a simple question that could be answered in a single post, especially if it can be answered with a single word, yes or no.

but "near" could be any time from here to there and anything in between and still be the absolute literal truth, denotation, definition and corresponding reality.

No, it cannot have such a meaning if you subscribe to the denotative meaning of the word. You posted the literal meaning of a word is its denotative meaning. I quoted the denotative meaning of the word "near" from the dictionary. This puts you in an awkward position because you either meant what you said when you posted the literal meaning of a word is its denotative meaning or you did not mean what you posted. You will, therefore, either abide by what you posted and stick to the denotative meaning of a word or betray your own post and contradict yourself by not reading the word denotatively. You cannot have it both ways. You do not get to obfuscate the denotative meaning of a word with sophistry and ambiguity. The reason a denotative meaning exists is to preclude sophistry and ambiguity, not facilitate it.

Which is why I asked the question I asked.

If you are asking if "near" in Revelation 3 means literally "near" then yes,

Now that I have you on record stating the word "near" means literally near......


Would you mind telling me to what eschatological point of view do you adhere? Historic Premillennialism? Amillennialism? Postmillennialism? Idealism? Dispensational Premillennialism? And if it is something other than those five, would you please briefly describe your personal eschatological point of view?

Please do not take five posts to answer. Please do not prompt me to ask again because the question asked was not answered. Please answer the question asked and move the conversation forward.

 

[QVQ]

I adhere to the Nicene Creed.
He will come again in glory
to judge the living and the dead
and His kingdom will have no end.

and I look forward to the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

 

[QVQ]

@Josheb
Here is another multiple post. I forget to alert you to the answer so here is the alert. See Post 118 above

 

[Josheb]

@Josheb
Here is another multiple post. I forget to alert you to the answer so here is the alert. See Post 118 above

That is great but that is not an answer to the question asked. Most Historicists, Amils, Postmils, Idealists, as Dispies adhere to the Nicene Creed. So too do many, if not most, Panmillennialists. I subscribe to the Nicene Creed. You're not furthering the discussion by posting an affirmation of the Nicene Creed in a conversation about reading the Bible literally.

Do you have an end-times point of view, or not? If so, what is it?