Featured David Chilton's Hermeneutics

So....what does it mean when it says the stars fall to earth?

 

yes, in that he got to pretierism by using them...

 

Can you give an example of him using a bad hermeneutic....or are pulling that out of your ear like usual?

 

Learn to spell!!!!!

 

He seems to see the second coming as happening AD 70, yet the Orthodox church always sees it as still a future event!

 

I will, but do remember something about having charity?

 

That is not what I asked....i asked.....can you give an example?

 

Haven't read the whole thread, but Augustine is right.

The history between Isaac and Ishmael, and Sarah and Hagar were real events that happened on the face of the earth. They're still an allegory of the children of faith and the children of the flesh, and of Judaism and the Church.

The law about not muzzling the ox that treads the corn was a real law, but it's true application is about paying those who labor in the Gospel. Paul seemed to imply it was silly to think that God was concerned primarily with oxen.

There are more examples, but this will suffice to establish the fact that practically every verse of the OT has it's true interpretation and application in Christ and His Church.

I think it's silly to think that Christ is going to return on a flesh and blood white horse.

 

This is exactly right. The Lord Jesus Himself did not use a literal hermeneutic in John 3:3 and totally bamboozled poor Nicodemus.

As Aaron says, Paul in 1 Corinthians 9:7-9 and Timothy 5:17-18 gives the true 'spiritual' meaning of Deuteronomy 25:4. 'Is it about oxen that God is concerned?' Of course not.

So when we come to a verse like Proverbs 22:28, 'Do not remove the ancient landmark which your fathers have set,' are we going to limit the application to ancient landmarks and thereby invalidate the verse for almost all of us, since we have no ancient landmarks to move? Or are we going to allow the verse to warn us against moves to change church constitutions or confessions of faith?

Finally, I'd like to show the inconsistency of many Dispensationalists in their interpretation of Revelation 4:1. ".......Come up here and I will show you things which must take place after this." Some at least interpret this 'Come up here' as being the 'Rapture' and shove the whole of the rest of the book way into the future thereby making it virtually useless in application for those who read the book for the first 2,000 years. A true interpretation of Revelation must have relevance both to its earliest readers and for Christians all through the ages. That is one reason why I can be neither a Preterist nor a Dispensationalist.

Got to run along now. I'm meeting up with Squire Robertsson in an hour at his church.

 

A horse?... I thought it was a cloud... or was it a bolt of lightning...?

 

It's downright deceitful what you do. He denied neither.

You too.

 

Likewise it is often a characteristic of those who hold to a literal (grammatical-historical) method to dismiss those who hold to a SPIRITUAL method guided by Jesus (John 8:52-59 2 Corinthians 3:1-6 ) to dismiss our teaching as allegorical - without Biblical understanding.

Everyone, saved or unsaved, can basically read & understand the Scriptures by the literal (grammatical-historical) method. Read it like a history book, or even a novel. The Scribes & Pharisees excelled at that, & never heard its message.

We need the guidance of the New Covenant Scriptures to lead us into a right understanding of the Old Covenant Scriptures, and particularly Old Covenant prophecy as it is fulfilled in & by our Lord & Saviour Jesus Christ.

The OC prophets were very clear on the Messianic hope of a glorious future for Israel, which those who insist on the literal (grammatical-historical) method postpone to a yet future millennium.

However the New Covenant writers, guided by Jesus himself in his last week teaching & parables, hold out no such hope for for the carnal nation, instead teach a glorious hope for all who repent & believe in Jesus regardless of ethnicity.

The literal (grammatical-historical) method which focuses on the promises to national Israel, rather than Christ & his redeemed church of all nationalities, is WRONG.

 

You still didn't answer Icon's question.

 

There is still a lot of futurist events yet to happen in Revelation though!

 

He did not know the original languages it would seem, and ended up denying essentials of the faith, so why even bother with him as an authority as some do?