Featured Who Gave the Right to Interpret "Spiritually"?

If the literal meaning is clear, allowing for figures of speech, interpretation is unnecessary.

Interpretation uses special knowledge/understanding to explain the meaning. Dreams, parables and foreign languages need interpretation. Do a word search for interpret*

 

Is there anyone other than kyredneck who spiritualizes Ac. 1.11 and does not believe that it refers to a literal coming?

 

To begin, I'm not a full preterist. In fact, my approach to Revelation is as much in the Historicist camp as any other. Whether Christ's NEXT return is physical and visible is an absolute non-issue with me. I know He's coming again. The issue with me is the total disregard by the futurists of a myriad of scripture 'time-indicators' that plainly state that the 'coming of the Son of man' was to occur before that generation that crucified Him passed away. The issue is the total disregard of the immense significance the scriptures place upon 'that generation'.

The Meaning of "parousia" in Greek

 

BINGO!

 

He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return. -Lk. 19.12

Has the nobleman (i.e., Jesus) returned? If he has returned, where do the scriptures teach a next return? Just one verse will be sufficient. When you find a next return, I am sure you will also find how inconsistent you are in your Preterist interpretation of other verses. Furthermore, I do not downplay the significance of that generation.

The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here. -Mt. 12.41, 42

As for the meaning of παρουσία, consider these verses:

Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming (παρουσία) of Titus; -2 Co. 7.6

That your rejoicing may be more abundant in Jesus Christ for me by my coming ( παρουσία) to you again. -Phil. 1.26

 

Is this 'coming'...:

40 When therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do unto those husbandmen?
41 They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those miserable men, and will let out the vineyard unto other husbandmen, who shall render him the fruits in their seasons.
42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, The same was made the head of the corner; This was from the Lord, And it is marvelous in our eyes?
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
44 And he that falleth on this stone shall be broken to pieces: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will scatter him as dust.
45 And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. Mt 21

....the same as this 'coming'?:

21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.
23 But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; then they that are Christ`s, at his coming.
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall deliver up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have abolished all rule and all authority and power.
25 For he must reign, till he hath put all his enemies under his feet. 1 Cor 15

No.

Note that at His NEXT coming (1 Cor 15) , at the resurrection, the kingdom has been already, and He has reigned already. And, no where in this text is it implied that this 'coming' will be visible or physical. We're told in another place that we'll meet Him in the air. No mention of Him actually setting foot on terra firma again. But as I said, that is a non-issue with me.

 

No. In the parable, it is the lord of the vineyard (God the Father) who comes, not his beloved Son. This is a parable. The former has reference to the destruction of Jerusalem, and the latter has reference to the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

When we're in heaven what do you expect to see? Three entities, or one?

So is Lk 19:12

 

Diverting the issue by asking a question that no one can possibly answer is not being honest. Yes, Lk. 19.12 is within the context of a parable, but I fail to see your point. The lord of the vineyard and his beloved Son are two distinct characters in the parable you referenced. Do you not make a distinction?

 

Is Jesus Jehovah? It was Jehovah's anger foretold that was kindled against 'that generation' 'in that day':

16 And Jehovah said unto Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers; and this people will rise up, and play the harlot after the strange gods of the land, whither they go to be among them, and will forsake me, and break my covenant which I have made with them.
17 Then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall come upon them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us because our God is not among us? Dt 31

 

Martin Luther (Table Talk, “On God’s Word,” 11) remarks: “I have grounded my preaching upon the literal word; he that pleases may follow me, he that will not may stay", "The allegorical sense is usually uncertain, and by no means safe to build our faith upon; for it depends for the most part on human opinion only" (Ann. in Deuteronomy, cap. i. fo. 55).

"The Encyclop. Relig. Knowl., Art. 'Sense of Scripture,' affirms that the Reformers, over against the Romish fourfold sense, adopted the grammatical, and that Luther declared it to be 'the only sense that it will do to die by'" (George Peters, The Theocratic Kingdom, Prop. 4, Obs. 1).​

"Take e.g. Calvin (who in many places favors a literal interpretation Inst. ch. 10 B. 2, S. 8, ) speaking of the letter, says: 'The Old Testament is literal, because it was promulgated without the efficacy of the Spirit,' etc., and yet in the same section he admits that under this 'literal' dispensation men were converted, that the work of the Spirit was experienced, that men were moved and spake by Him! He endeavors to palliate his expression by adding that this 'is used by way of comparison.' But this does not remove the difficulty, and it does not inform us how the Old Testament, once literal, now becomes 'spiritual.' And when Calvin was attacked (D’Aubigne’s Reformation, vol. 3, p. 81) by Quinten 'the spiritual,' the latter sought refuge in the following: 'We are not subject to the letter which killeth, but to the Spirit which giveth life…. The Bible contains allegories, myths which the Holy Spirit explains to us.' Calvin replied: 'You make your Scriptures a nose of wax, and play with it, as if it were a ball'" (ibid., Obs. 3).
​

And the reformers didn't pay much attention to eschatology. What would have happened if they did I wonder?

"The neglect of the prophetic Scriptures on the part of theologians is all but complete, except for a limited survey of the intermediate state, the resurrection of the body, a passing reference to the second advent, and the eternal state. Theological writers, in some instances, have confessed their lack of preparation to deal with Bible prediction. In the opening of his treatise on the second advent (Systematic Theology, III, 790), Dr. Charles Hodge states: 'The subject cannot be adequately discussed without taking a survey of all the prophetic teachings of the Scriptures both of the Old Testament and of the New. This task cannot be satisfactorily accomplished by any one who has not made the study of the prophecies a specialty. The author, knowing that he has no such qualifications for the work, purposes to confine himself in a great measure to a historical survey of the different schemes of interpreting the Scriptural prophecies relating to this subject'" (Chafer, Systematic Theology, Eschatology, Ch. XIII).
​

#TROLLTIIIMMEEE Lol had to, sorry folks.

 

Not meaning to flood, but I think many will find this pertinent:

"Another passage often paraded as against us is found in 2Co_3:6 : 'Who also hath made us able ministers of the New Testament; not of the letter, but of the Spirit: for the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life.' While it is impossible to preserve the force and true apprehension of this Scripture without understanding what is meant by the New Testament or covenant (which will be examined Prop. 50, in connection with the Abrahamic covenant), yet, aside from this, sufficient reason can be advanced to rebut its reference to a literal, or any other system of interpretation. Asking what is meant by 'the Spirit,' the answer comes in the very same chapter 'Now the Lord is that Spirit' (2Co_3:17, comp. Barnes’ admissions, etc.), and (in 2Co_3:18, according to Barnes, Beza, Wolf, Locke, Rosenmüller, Doddridge, etc., the Greek is) 'from the Lord the Spirit.' If Christ be the Spirit here denoted, how can it refer to interpretation? Or, if the testimony of the apostle, that by the Spirit Christ is meant, is set aside, we ask then, How comes it, according to the statement of Neander and a host of writers, that the apostles could not rid themselves of the 'materialistic husk' of a literal interpretation of the Word? If the 'literal' application 'killeth' as some declare, how does it come then that God gives His word in such a form? Is it reasonable or credible that He, who is justly lauded for benevolence, mercy, and grace, would give truth surrounded by a deadly covering-truth too indispensable to secure the happiness and peace of man? Is it not the rule of the Divine procedure (uttered by Jesus, Mat_7:8-10, etc.) that even man will not give to an asking son a stone for bread or a serpent for a fish, much less God? Such are a few of the questions that immediately suggest themselves, when making the passage advocate a proceeding that would be inconsistent in man. The simple, unpretending meaning of the verse is this: that the Word of God in its letter (i.e. in its plain, unambiguous written form) cannot give life; that possessing the letter alone would inevitably lead to death, for having only the letter the covenant promises could not be realized, but that having the Spirit, even Christ, the assurance is given that the letter itself-death without Christ or the Spirit-or the promises of God contained in the letter, shall be duly verified and accomplished" (George Peters, The Theocratic Kingdom, Prop. 4, Obs. 3, bold emphases mine).​

 

I think/hope we understand each other, so that accusations of unjustified allegorical/spiritual interpretation will cease. I will allow reference to literal interpretation, though I consider it a misleading term.

Let's move on to see why our methods lead with reference to eschatology. We can understand"interpretation" as systematic study of Scripture. Back to OP.

IMO literal interpretation is used to develop Dispensationalism, with a complex tribulation/rapture/millennium eschatology, distinction between Israel and the Church, etc. For the purpose of this thread the details are not important. The literal basis is OC prophecy concerning Israel.

Spiritual interpretation notes that there is no recapitulation of OC prophecy in the NC Scriptures, but that the Church is the realization of the covenant promises to Abraham. When Jesus returns at the end of time, he will raise the dead, judge the wicked and bring into being a NH&NE.

 

I agree that metaphors are used to describe things that are literal....but that which is spiritual has a literal truth to it also.
I believe some of the fulfillments were not according to the strict literalism that you would still hold.
The nature of the Kingdom that Jesus instituted has literally began, but not in literal Jerusalem on earth. There is no rebuilt temple, neither will there be. The temple is the living stones that comprise the NT.Church, local churches now, on the Last Day, ONE true Church fully assembled.

You and other premill men are looking hyper literally, so you have to have some kind of rebuilt temple on earth, David's Throne on earth-
Postmill, Amill require no such thing.
They go with the assembly of living stones as the believers....we are individually spoken of as being the temple of God individually, then...
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.

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.

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,

 

I looked up "allegorical" in the dictionary and found out that it means a metaphor based on a true, tangible story. Did Abraham's son by Hagar really exist?

 

Well, I will put my head on the chopping-block and give you part of a Bible Study I lead some years ago on Revelation 13. I wrote up my notes and put them on the Marprelate Blog. You can tell me whether it is literal, spiritual or allegorical:

In Rev. 12, we saw Satan being defeated and cast down to earth. We saw that he is filled with hatred and malevolence against the people of God and at the end of the chapter we read that he, ‘Went off to make war with the rest of [the woman’s] offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ’ (12:17). In Chapter 13, we shall discover how Satan carries on that war.

v.1. ‘Then I stood on the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rise out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and on his horns ten crowns, and on his heads a blasphemous name.’

John stands on the seashore, the border between the land and the sea and he sees two amazing creatures, literally thuria, ‘wild beasts.’ The first beast has a close resemblance to the dragon (12:3), having the same number of heads and horns. It is interesting to conjecture why the dragon (Satan) wears his crowns on his heads, while the beast wears them on his horns. It seems that the Spirit is saying that Satan’s power comes from his great intelligence and cunning, whilst the beast’s power comes from brute force. We shall see (v.2) that Satan is the mind behind the beasts and they operate at his behest to aid him in his quest to destroy God’s people.

Two details will enable us to identify this beast. Firstly, it rises out of the sea. I certainly do not expect to see such a creature appearing off Exmouth sea-front! The sea represents the mass of unsaved humanity. ‘But the wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt’ (Isaiah 57:20. cf. Jude 13). John himself likens the sea to humanity in 17:15. Secondly, the creature ‘Was like a leopard, his feet were like the feet of a bear, and his mouth like the mouth of a lion’ (v.2). The reference here is to Daniel 7:3ff, where Daniel sees a vision of four beasts; one like a lion, one like a bear, one like a leopard and one which was ‘dreadful and terrible.’ These animals are readily identified as representing the four ancient empires of Babylonia, Persia, Greece and Rome. By combining the creatures into one composite beast, John pictures for us all the world powers down the ages that are hostile to Christ. The bear symbolizes strength, the leopard speed, and the lion, savagery. Such are the forces that oppose the people of God. Satan has invested these nations with all his false authority and with great power. This beast therefore represents secular world power as it stands opposed to God.

v.3a. ‘And I saw one of his heads as if it had been mortally wounded, and his deadly wound was healed.’

Obviously this is in some sense Satan’s parody of Christ who was slain and yet is alive for ever more (cf. 1:18). I think there is more to it than that however. Early Christians would undoubtedly have associated this beast with the Roman Empire, and, as they faced persecution from the authorities, it would not be surprising if they were thinking of Daniel 2:44 and asking, “If the kingdom of God has come, why hasn’t the Roman Empire been broken into pieces, why hasn’t it received a mortal wound?”

The message here in Rev. 13 is that Satan’s kingdom has indeed received a mortal wound. In Chapter 12 we saw that he was ‘cast down’ and that he knew that his time was short. When Christ came, the whole kingdom of the devil received its death-wound. Consider Matt. 12:28-29. “But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the kingdom of God has come upon you. Or how can one enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he firsts binds the strong man? Then He will plunder His house.” Satan has been defeated and is bound, and The Lord Jesus Christ is busy plundering his goods by bringing men and women out of his clutches into the kingdom {2}. Yet as we are looking at the power of the beast from an earthly perspective it seems that his power is as great and as malignant as ever. The Roman Empire finally fell in the Fifth Century, but other manifestations of the beast have arisen down the ages, and unless the Lord comes soon no doubt others will arise; but this does not change the fact that the beast has received a mortal wound and that his time is short. ‘And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly’ (Rom. 16:20).

vs.3b-4. ‘And all the world wondered after the beast. So they worshipped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and the worshipped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war against him?”’

Because these powers and governments seem so powerful and indestructible, people put their faith in them rather than in God, and when they do that they are worshipping Satan whether they realise it or not. ‘Who is like the beast?’ They ask in unconscious parody of Exod. 15:11, and of course these governments claim power that belongs only to God. The present British Prime Minister makes a show of going to church, and political parties will sometimes make a show of courting the Christian vote, but in legislating for same-sex ‘marriage,’ the government is showing itself to be anti-Christ in that it is claiming to be wiser than God. It forgets that ‘Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people’ (Prov. 13:34).

v.5. ‘And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months.’

So the beast is allowed to continue for 42 months which, as we saw when we looked at Chapter 11, is identical to 1260 days (11:2) and ‘Time, times and half a time’ (12:14), and represents the entire Gospel age, from the first coming of Christ until His second. All through this time, says John, governments will be boasting of their powers and abilities and claiming prerogatives that belong to God (cf. Daniel 7:8, 11, 20). Yet God has put a limit upon their authority and that of Satan, and in His good time will bring both to an end (cf. Isaiah 37:23-29). God rules, even in the midst of His enemies.

It is noteworthy that the 42 months that are allotted to the beast are the same time that the Two Witnesses are preaching and witnessing in 11:3, and the beast is unable to prevent them. This is what we see in places like China, India and Iran; the Church is growing in spite of all that governments can do. The beast’s kingdom continues in parallel, if you will, with God’s kingdom.

[continued]

 

v.6. ‘Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe and language and nation.’

There are two ways to read these verses. The word translated ‘Then’ by the NKJV is the Greek word kai, the usual meaning of which is ‘and,’ though ‘then’ is certainly within its semantic range. So perhaps verse six is simply an expansion of verse 5: ‘and he was given a mouth…….and he opened his mouth.’ In this case the blasphemy, the war that the beast wages, his victory and his authority are things that go on all through the present age (cf. Luke 21:16-19; 1 John 5:19). We have seen that there is suffering for God’s people all the way through Revelation and Church history tells us that they suffer many defeats.

The alternative view is to read verse 6 as following on after the 42 months. If we adopt this view, we need to read these verses in conjunction with 11:7-10. Both extracts seem to indicate an increase in the beast’s power and insolence, and a time of greatly increased persecution for God’s people just before Christ's return. Note that the beast’s blasphemies are now directly against God, the Church and heaven. This is ‘Satan’s Little Season’ when he is given free reign for a very short time (three days and a half, according to 11:9). We might look at Rev. 20:7 and 2 Thes. 2:7-8 to see the same teaching. In the Old Testament we should consider Zech. 14:2-3, where Judah and Jerusalem stand for the Church. Zechariah isn’t portraying a literal attack upon modern-day Israel, but an increase in deception and persecution that will almost destroy God’s people. Some people think it’s already started. It is noteworthy that of the 30 million or so Christian martyrs down the ages, more than half of them have given their lives during the past century. Whether this is Satan’s time, or whether that is still to come, it does not affect our position. Our job is to stand firm and to preach the Gospel.

v.8. ‘All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.’

There is a difference of opinion as to whether it is the Lamb who was slain from the foundation of the world, or the names that have been written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world. Either reading is possible; the latter seems the more likely. At all events, the fact is that most people love the world with all its excitements and opportunities more than they love Christ. ‘Demas has forsaken me, having loved this present world’ (2 Tim. 4:10). Many professing Christians try to love both the Lord Jesus and the world, but they will find, as Demas did, that ultimately it cannot be done (cf. Luke 16:13). One or other will always win out, and without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the heart, it will always be the world that wins. ‘If anyone has an ear, let him hear’ (v.9). We need to understand these things. We have a choice to make. In Bunyan’s famous word portrait of a godly preacher, the world is portrayed as being firmly behind his back. So should it be for all Christians.

v.10. ‘He who leads into captivity, shall go into captivity; he who kills with the sword must be killed with the sword {1}. Here is the patience and faith of the saints.’

We are reminded of our Lord’s words in Gethsemane (Matt. 26:52). There is a day of judgement coming for the men of violence and the persecutors. The consolation of the saints all through this age is that the Lord will avenge His saints (cf. 6:10). Christians should never avenge themselves upon their enemies. ‘”Vengeance is mine, I will repay,” says the LORD’ (Rom 12:19 etc.). Patience and faithfulness are what is required of us.

[Taken from Revelation (9). Chapter 13: The Two Beasts which also contains my interpretation of the beast out of the earth, the 'mark of the beast' and 666]