1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

"a thousand generations" : mere hyperbole?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by LarryN, Jun 15, 2005.

Top Posters
  1. LarryN

    LarryN New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    0
    In I Chron. 16:15, and also in Psalms 105:8, the Bible speaks of the covenant as being given to "a thousand generations". Given that a Biblical generation is nominally expressed as being 40 years, what should we infer regarding the duration of time remaining post-covenant?

    Since 1,000 X 40 years = 40,000 years, what (if anything) does this mean in regards to the timing of the Second Coming? Are these references to be taken literally in regards to the duration of time they imply, or are they instead merely figurative?

    Eschatology experts, please chime in here.
     
    #1 LarryN, Jun 15, 2005
  2. jdcanady

    jdcanady Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    It means nothing relating to the Second coming because that is not its context. Israel broke the convenant by worshipping other gods. They were taken into captivity by Assyria and Babylon. They lost the land given to them in the convenant. The remnant remained and ushered in the New Covenant with Messiah Jesus. The New Convenant is in effect.
     
    #2 jdcanady, Jun 15, 2005
  3. LarryN

    LarryN New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    0
    O.K., I'm clearly out of my element in this area, but I'm trying to grasp this:

    Yes, the old covenant was broken- but when God established it did He really not intend it to last "a thousand generations"? In His omniscience, He certainly knew it would not. So when under the Holy Spirit's guidance the authors of I Chron. & Psalms wrote that phrase, was it's original intent literal, or figurative? Did God originally establish the covenant to endure for at least "a thousand generations" (although He knew beforehand that it would not), or was this merely a figurative number?

    If intended as literal, would the implication be that there then remained at least 1000 generations left worth of covenant time? And then by extension, since the covenant was broken, would/did that fact then invalidate or alter that duration of time? If one accepts 40 years as a Biblical generation, since Abraham's time we've only seen approx. 100 generations elapse.
     
    #3 LarryN, Jun 15, 2005
  4. Grasshopper

    Grasshopper Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2002
    Messages:
    3,385
    Likes Received:
    23
    Hyperbole, the OT is full of it.
     
    #4 Grasshopper, Jun 15, 2005
  5. jdcanady

    jdcanady Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2005
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    The convenant was conditional, according to their obedience. Yes, God was sincere in the offer. Yes, God knew they would disobey. It was all part of God's predetermined plan for the cross of Christ. Remember, God is revealing Himself to His creation. God has the power and authority to give them everything He promised, and He demonstrated His power by delievering them from Eygpt. And yet, even with His presence among them, they rejected Him for other gods. They would not keep the Law of Moses. They would not follow His commands. They would not be faithful to the convenant. But God remained faithful. He kept a remnant, through which the Messiah came and fullfilled the Law and the fullfilled the promises of God.

    Please don't get caught up trying to figure out the time of the "second coming". Jesus was clear that no one knows but God alone. The whole purpose of apocolyptic literature found in scripture is to convince believers they should live their lives expecting Jesus to return at any moment.
     
    #5 jdcanady, Jun 15, 2005
  6. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since the covenant was with a physical nation on the physical earth, that covenant is not voided when we enter the new heaven and new earth, it is just moot.
     
    #6 Paul of Eugene, Jun 16, 2005
  7. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    So God exaggerates? The OT is full of exaggeration?

    Sad to see something like this posted on the Baptist Board. [​IMG]
     
    #7 LadyEagle, Jun 16, 2005
  8. LarryN

    LarryN New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    0
    So God exaggerates? The OT is full of exaggeration?

    Sad to see something like this posted on the Baptist Board. [​IMG]     </font>[/QUOTE]I'm guessing/assuming that Grasshopper isn't suggesting that God exaggerates, but that God's Word uses figurative imagery in places. The example that comes to my mind is one verse which every sermon I've heard or commentary I've seen regarding it categorizes it as being figurative:

    Isa 55:12 (KJV)-
    For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands.
     
    #8 LarryN, Jun 17, 2005
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...